Trump is complaining about Emails....

That's what the counter scandal boils down to. Trump in his infinite wisdom is complaining about Emails supposedly being sent to the FBI illegally. Oh the irony... This is called Karma buddy. Get used to it.

NeverTrumpGOP said:

That's what the counter scandal boils down to. Trump in his infinite wisdom is complaining about Emails supposedly being sent to the FBI illegally. Oh the irony... This is called Karma buddy. Get used to it.

Click to expand...

And nobody can quite seem to say why this was "illegal" in the first place.

NeverTrumpGOP said:

That's what the counter scandal boils down to. Trump in his infinite wisdom is complaining about Emails supposedly being sent to the FBI illegally. Oh the irony... This is called Karma buddy. Get used to it.

Click to expand...

Point of information.

Wasn't a major issue with the Hillary private email server investigation the fact that the FBI, contrary to all normal evidence search and seizure practices, notified the Clinton team of the projected seizure and allowed unsupervised access so they could "delete and scrub" any emails the team deemed "private" or "privileged" before turning the server over?

That after the "hacking" of the DNC computers was reported, the FBI let a third party "computer forensics service" hired by the DNC "analyze" what happened rather than using FBI investigation assets?

But when it comes to the "collusion" investigation, the information is subpoenaed without either "privilege" being extended?

Just saying. :coffeepap:

Captain Adverse said:

Point of information.

Wasn't a major issue with the Hillary private email server investigation the fact that the FBI, contrary to all normal evidence search and seizure practices, notified the Clinton team of the projected seizure and allowed unsupervised access so they could "delete and scrub" any emails the team deemed "private" or "privileged" before turning the server over?

That after the "hacking" of the DNC computers was reported, the FBI let a third party "computer forensics service" hired by the DNC "analyze" what happened rather than using FBI investigation assets?

But when it comes to the "collusion" investigation, the information is subpoenaed without either "privilege" being extended?

Just saying. :coffeepap:

Click to expand...

Yeah, but that's different!

/sarcasm

NeverTrumpGOP said:

That's what the counter scandal boils down to. Trump in his infinite wisdom is complaining about Emails supposedly being sent to the FBI illegally. Oh the irony... This is called Karma buddy. Get used to it.

Click to expand...

I had to laugh to myself when I saw, on the side of the screen where it shows new threads, the title of this one was shortened to "Trump is complaining about" and I laughed because that could literally be anything with the frequency that he complains about....well everything.

Anyhow, it's par for the course. He complained about Obama golfing, then golfs at a record pace. Complains about e-mails after being obsessed about e-mails.

NeverTrumpGOP said:

That's what the counter scandal boils down to. Trump in his infinite wisdom is complaining about Emails supposedly being sent to the FBI illegally. Oh the irony... This is called Karma buddy. Get used to it.

Click to expand...

Karma for what, specifically?

Captain Adverse said:

Point of information.
Wasn't a major issue with the Hillary private email server investigation the fact that the FBI, contrary to all normal evidence search and seizure practices, notified the Clinton team of the projected seizure and allowed unsupervised access so they could "delete and scrub" any emails the team deemed "private" or "privileged" before turning the server over? That after the "hacking" of the DNC computers was reported, the FBI let a third party "computer forensics service" hired by the DNC "analyze" what happened rather than using FBI investigation assets? But when it comes to the "collusion" investigation, the information is subpoenaed without either "privilege" being extended?
Just saying.

Click to expand...

Point of information,

The Transition team used GOVERNMENT facilities to send those emails in question, NOT a PRIVATE server. The government agency turned the emails over to the investigation. Reminds me of an employee using his company's equipment to invent a new product and then being pissed the company thanks him very much and takes the product as their own.

Was the GSA hacked to obtain the thousands of Emails??? NO, then your use of the DNC hack is irrelevant...

To sum it up, the emails were sent on a GOVERNMENT agency's equipment so comparing to a PRIVATE server and a hacking is ignorant at best.

But the courts will decide this, as another point of information Nixon tried this several times during Watergate...

Just saying... eace

NeverTrumpGOP said:

That's what the counter scandal boils down to. Trump in his infinite wisdom is complaining about Emails supposedly being sent to the FBI illegally. Oh the irony... This is called Karma buddy. Get used to it.

Click to expand...

during the campaign candidate Trump was asking Russia to produce the 30K HRC emails; he did that on TV ........... irony must be like a hammer between the eyes ..........

Captain Adverse said:

Point of information.

Wasn't a major issue with the Hillary private email server investigation the fact that the FBI, contrary to all normal evidence search and seizure practices, notified the Clinton team of the projected seizure and allowed unsupervised access so they could "delete and scrub" any emails the team deemed "private" or "privileged" before turning the server over?

That after the "hacking" of the DNC computers was reported, the FBI let a third party "computer forensics service" hired by the DNC "analyze" what happened rather than using FBI investigation assets?

But when it comes to the "collusion" investigation, the information is subpoenaed without either "privilege" being extended?

Just saying. :coffeepap:

Click to expand...

Was the "privilege" required? Remember, the FBI is normally very careful...and in an investigation of this magnitude - quite possibly the most important investigation in FBI history - do you really think they're not going to cross every t and dot every i? Sure, there's always the possibility that they did something wrong - they're human, too - but hanging your hopes on the possibility that the FBI didn't follow standard legal procedure is a very thin thread indeed:

“When we have obtained emails in the course of our ongoing criminal investigation, we have secured either the account owner’s consent or appropriate criminal process,” Special Counsel’s Office spokesperson Peter Carr told BuzzFeed News,

Trump has cried like a victim about nearly everyone in the world so far, I'm surprised there are people left for him to blame.

WeeKeeLeaks! Wait, oh, it's my emails and the FBI legally obtained them? Let's just say they did it illegally, my base will love it, they will believe anything the morons!

notquiteright said:

Point of information,

The Transition team used GOVERNMENT facilities to send those emails in question, NOT a PRIVATE server. The government agency turned the emails over to the investigation. Reminds me of an employee using his company's equipment to invent a new product and then being pissed the company thanks him very much and takes the product as their own.

Was the GSA hacked to obtain the thousands of Emails??? NO, then your use of the DNC hack is irrelevant...

To sum it up, the emails were sent on a GOVERNMENT agency's equipment so comparing to a PRIVATE server and a hacking is ignorant at best.

But the courts will decide this, as another point of information Nixon tried this several times during Watergate...

Just saying... eace

Click to expand...

Apparently you are not familiar with search and seizure procedures. :shrug:

A criminal investigation by the FBI into possible foreign interference via illegal hacking still follows normal rules of evidence, and would apply to the DNC hack. Especially if one wanted to insure there is no "tampering" with the evidence.

In regards to government servers, there are different requirements, but they would still allow for supervised review to determine no attorney-client privilege is violated, just as it would involve supervised examination to make sure no classified information was improperly released.

However, I agree that it will be up to the court to determine if any misconduct occurred. Right now it is still simply allegations of improper conduct.

Glen Contrarian said:

Was the "privilege" required? Remember, the FBI is normally very careful...and in an investigation of this magnitude - quite possibly the most important investigation in FBI history - do you really think they're not going to cross every t and dot every i? Sure, there's always the possibility that they did something wrong - they're human, too - but hanging your hopes on the possibility that the FBI didn't follow standard legal procedure is a very thin thread indeed:

“When we have obtained emails in the course of our ongoing criminal investigation, we have secured either the account owner’s consent or appropriate criminal process,” Special Counsel’s Office spokesperson Peter Carr told BuzzFeed News,

Click to expand...

Here are some citations. You figure it out.

Attorney–client privilege

Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attorney–client_privilege

The Attorney-Client Privilege

Click to expand...

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/lawyers-lawfirms/attorney-client-privilege.html

Attorney-Client Privilege

Click to expand...

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/attorney-client_privilege

IMO a determination needs to be made whether use of a government email system automatically trumps attorney-client privilege, or does it still append a requirement to allow supervised review and sequestering of content that would clearly fall under such privilege.

It would revolve around whether such an email is automatically a record available to the public in general (ex. subject to FOIA release) with no expectation of privacy in communications, or could it fall under the aegis of the same kinds of rules that might apply to classified information or other information covered by privilege.

If it does turn out to be "privileged," then a supervised review consisting of both the defendant's and the government's legal representatives to determine and remove what might be covered under privilege, and any dispute will be resolved by binding arbitration, or the Court.

It is an extension of a client's Fifth Amendment right against the possibility of self-incrimination; allowing a client to speak freely with his attorney so that the attorney can develop the best defense while being immune to compulsion to reveal that information to anyone else. This also typically applies to all records of the communication (work product), which only exist as a result of the expectation of immunity.

The transition documents should've gone through the proper channels: first to Putin, then Wikileaks & finally to Mueller.

NeverTrumpGOP said:

That's what the counter scandal boils down to. Trump in his infinite wisdom is complaining about Emails supposedly being sent to the FBI illegally. Oh the irony... This is called Karma buddy. Get used to it.

Click to expand...

After claiming that Hillary's emails should be public property, President Trump's lawyers claim that their emails can only be obtained illegally.

... I can't make up **** this stupid...

Captain Adverse said:

Here are some citations. You figure it out.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attorney–client_privilege

https://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/lawyers-lawfirms/attorney-client-privilege.html

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/attorney-client_privilege

IMO a determination needs to be made whether use of a government email system automatically trumps attorney-client privilege, or does it still append a requirement to allow supervised review and sequestering of content that would clearly fall under such privilege.

It would revolve around whether such an email is automatically a record available to the public in general (ex. subject to FOIA release) with no expectation of privacy in communications, or could it fall under the aegis of the same kinds of rules that might apply to classified information or other information covered by privilege.

If it does turn out to be "privileged," then a supervised review consisting of both the defendant's and the government's legal representatives to determine and remove what might be covered under privilege, and any dispute will be resolved by binding arbitration, or the Court.

It is an extension of a client's Fifth Amendment right against the possibility of self-incrimination; allowing a client to speak freely with his attorney so that the attorney can develop the best defense while being immune to compulsion to reveal that information to anyone else. This also typically applies to all records of the communication (work product), which only exist as a result of the expectation of immunity.

Click to expand...

Does attorney-client privilege apply between father and son if neither one is an attorney representing the other? I don't think so.

And when it comes to the emails, as I pointed out, it's highly unlikely that the FBI did anything illegal to acquire them. CA, your defenses of Trump are becoming a bit desperate. You already know that his team lied to the FBI and to Congress, that his NSA pick was a paid Turkish agent and had significant ties to Russia, that Trump's first (and longest-serving) campaign manager apparently engaged in money-laundering with money paid to him by a Kremlin-connected politician in the Ukraine, that Trump has publicly and repeatedly taken an ex-KGB colonel's word over that of the FBI, NSA, and CIA, and that regardless of everything that Putin has done, Trump refuses to even hint at criticism of Putin.

What does it take for you to even acknowledge that there's so much damn smoke that maybe, just maybe the FBI is doing its doggone job by checking to see if there just might be a serious fire causing all that smoke?

Glen Contrarian said:

Does attorney-client privilege apply between father and son if neither one is an attorney representing the other? I don't think so.

And when it comes to the emails, as I pointed out, it's highly unlikely that the FBI did anything illegal to acquire them. CA, your defenses of Trump are becoming a bit desperate. You already know that his team lied to the FBI and to Congress, that his NSA pick was a paid Turkish agent and had significant ties to Russia, that Trump's first (and longest-serving) campaign manager apparently engaged in money-laundering with money paid to him by a Kremlin-connected politician in the Ukraine, that Trump has publicly and repeatedly taken an ex-KGB colonel's word over that of the FBI, NSA, and CIA, and that regardless of everything that Putin has done, Trump refuses to even hint at criticism of Putin.

Click to expand...

I'm not talking about his son's claim. Neither his son, nor his son-in-law are attorneys. :roll:

I never said they did anything illegal to obtain them. The issue is whether or not any of the emails contained information falling under the attorney-client privilege, and if so would they be protected.

No, my "defenses" are fairly straight-forward. You are seeing frustration rather than desperation, as I am frustrated by all the arm-chair lawyers in this Forum pontificating on the basis of their social media knowledge.

Despite citations to law, and rules of evidence, etc., all I keep getting is "no you are wrong cuz we feel it." :shrug:

Glen Contrarian said:

What does it take for you to even acknowledge that there's so much damn smoke that maybe, just maybe the FBI is doing its doggone job by checking to see if there just might be a serious fire causing all that smoke?

Click to expand...

The fact that "blowing smoke" does not mean there is a fire. It could be a lot of hot air, or merely fog.

I don't bother with smoke...I need to see the fire itself and then determine who set it and how it was constructed.

Captain Adverse said:

I'm not talking about his son's claim. Neither his son, nor his son-in-law are attorneys. :roll:

I never said they did anything illegal to obtain them. The issue is whether or not any of the emails contained information falling under the attorney-client privilege, and if so would they be protected.

No, my "defenses" are fairly straight-forward. You are seeing frustration rather than desperation, as I am frustrated by all the arm-chair lawyers in this Forum pontificating on the basis of their social media knowledge.

Despite citations to law, and rules of evidence, etc., all I keep getting is "no you are wrong cuz we feel it." :shrug:

Click to expand...

If those emails were obtained in a legal manner from a third party, there is no attorney-client privilege between Trump and Junior. What's more, the emails were all under a .gov server...which makes them government property, and anyone who has ever used a government server knows - or is supposed to know - that any expectations of privacy on a government server are limited at best. If Trump et al had used a private server, then they might have a leg to stand on...but with a government server, not so much.

The fact that "blowing smoke" does not mean there is a fire. It could be a lot of hot air, or merely fog.

I don't bother with smoke...I need to see the fire itself and then determine who set it and how it was constructed.

Click to expand...

So the FBI needs to come to you personally to get your permission before they begin an investigation? The apparent money-laundering (of money paid by a Kremlin-connected politician) by Trump's longest-serving campaign manager isn't enough of a fire to get your attention? And Trump's NSA pick (our nation's TOP SPY, remember) was a paid Turkish agent and had significant ties to Russian oligarchs, but that's not enough of a fire to get your attention? Add to that the meeting between the Trump campaign team (which included the above-mentioned money-laundering Manafort) with MORE Russians who were directly connected with the Kremlin...

...DUDE! Just how much freaking fire do you have to see before you start thinking that maybe, just maybe you oughta start investigating what's going on here????

But I get it - you just don't care. I strongly believe that in your view, federal law and patriotism be damned, you simply don't care what Trump and his team have done in order to get in power, as long as they do what you want them to do. That, sir, is why you're defending them so vociferously - it's got to be, because you've demonstrated your level of intelligence, and that tells me that you're not stupid enough to actually believe Trump's lies and excuses.

Captain Adverse said:

Apparently you are not familiar with search and seizure procedures. A criminal investigation by the FBI into possible foreign interference via illegal hacking still follows normal rules of evidence, and would apply to the DNC hack. Especially if one wanted to insure there is no "tampering" with the evidence. In regards to government servers, there are different requirements, but they would still allow for supervised review to determine no attorney-client privilege is violated, just as it would involve supervised examination to make sure no classified information was improperly released. However, I agree that it will be up to the court to determine if any misconduct occurred. Right now it is still simply allegations of improper conduct.

Click to expand...

Apparently you want to make-up the rules/laws as you think they apply. The Hack was by an outside party- there was ZERO question as to legality of content but the criminal act of invading a server. There was ZERO question about if the content was collusion with foreign parties. The server was PRIVATE property of the user- think a homeowner being burgled and the cops demanding to search the entire house- not warranted to use a turn of phrase.

The Trump team used a THIRD party GOVERNMENT server so the right to exclusive ownership is questionable at best. In this case there is a high probability the Trump team could scrub emails that would incriminate the transition team or Trump himself- remember almost daily 'forgotten' meetings were being discovered where Transition team members had infact met with Russian operatives.

I agree right now it's just Trump's lawyers trying to suppress evidence- like mob Lawyers try to do all the time... it will be interesting to see to what lengths the administration that attacked Hillary's team for using their Constitutional rights as 'why would innocent people hide behind the Constitution?' will go now that Flynn and others use the snot out of it...

Watergate started with just such a dance... eace

cuban smokes said:

during the campaign candidate Trump was asking Russia to produce the 30K HRC emails; he did that on TV ........... irony must be like a hammer between the eyes ..........

Click to expand...

You are still keeping this lie going? You need to give it up. It's not good for you.

But Trump didn’t get to delete yoga emails, that isn’t fair.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

holbritter said:

You are still keeping this lie going? You need to give it up. It's not good for you.

Click to expand...

LOL ......................... it is really sad that so many have no grasp of reality, yourself included ................

holbritter said:

You are still keeping this lie going? You need to give it up. It's not good for you.

Click to expand...

What's the lie?

"Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

Captain Adverse said:

I'm not talking about his son's claim. Neither his son, nor his son-in-law are attorneys. :roll:

I never said they did anything illegal to obtain them. The issue is whether or not any of the emails contained information falling under the attorney-client privilege, and if so would they be protected.

No, my "defenses" are fairly straight-forward. You are seeing frustration rather than desperation, as I am frustrated by all the arm-chair lawyers in this Forum pontificating on the basis of their social media knowledge.

Despite citations to law, and rules of evidence, etc., all I keep getting is "no you are wrong cuz we feel it." :shrug:



The fact that "blowing smoke" does not mean there is a fire. It could be a lot of hot air, or merely fog.

I don't bother with smoke...I need to see the fire itself and then determine who set it and how it was constructed.

Click to expand...

Not really on topic, but why do you have to constantly use super smug emojis like :roll: :coffeepap: and :shrug: ? I personally get the feeling you are really condescending when you write which isn't a good form of communication.
But hey it's only my opinion which I realize is a very poor currency on the internet.

tres borrachos said:

What's the lie?

"Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing. I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press.”

Click to expand...

That was some GRADE A snark right there....trying to make that a crime is GRADE A desperation.

NeverTrumpGOP said:

That's what the counter scandal boils down to. Trump in his infinite wisdom is complaining about Emails supposedly being sent to the FBI illegally. Oh the irony... This is called Karma buddy. Get used to it.

Click to expand...

Can you tell me about the illegal emails? I know something up.

Sent from my Z833 using Tapatalk