• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

Dangers of a Trump Presidency--Part 7

caseyedwards

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,763
Ratings
2,281
From what I've read the concern for privileged information is why a search warrant is rarely issued for a lawyer's office and why the standards for obtaining a search warrant for a lawyer's office are higher than those for a regular search warrant.

I don't believe for a second that any judge would even so much as consider the request Trump has made (to see documents that could incriminate him before the prosecution and decide what the prosecution gets to see) if you or me were making that request. His request sounds like the equivalent of a suspect asking investigators with a search warrant to wait by the door while he goes through his house and throws out everything he doesn't want investigators to see and only then invites them in.
No it’s more like reading a search warrant that says common areas and locking things like bedrooms.
 

ballettmaus

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,434
Ratings
11,010
No it’s more like reading a search warrant that says common areas and locking things like bedrooms.
Trump is not asking that evidence gets thrown out because the agents were looking where they weren't supposed to look. (At least not that I'm aware of). Trump is asking to see evidence that has already been seized and have a say in what the investigators get to see. He is asking that he can make a decision as to which evidence be withheld under the disguise of attorney-client privilege and despite the criminal exemption.

If you can't find fault with the subject of an investigation getting to decide what evidence against him or a close friend investigators get to see there is no use in discussing further as we'll just turn in circles.
 
Last edited:

ballettmaus

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,434
Ratings
11,010
The Department of Commerce has already received 1,200 applications for steel and aluminium tariff waivers https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-and-aluminum-tariffs/?utm_term=.039d6b90ad65



https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/2018/04/13/how-companies-spend-tax-windfall/505122002/
After U.S. corporations got a big tax cut in December, a flurry of announcements touting bonuses and pay raises for hourly employees raised hopes that the cash windfall would keep flowing down to American workers.

...

But the number of companies letting workers know they are getting a bonus, raise or other form of financial compensation has slowed to a trickle. Most of the extra cash from tax savings is going into the pockets of stock shareholders through dividend increases and companies buying back their own stock in hopes of boosting its price.
 

Susan1

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,079
Ratings
3,370
Just turned on MSNBC - Sean Hannity is Cohen's 3rd client. I will post the link as soon as it becomes available. This is getting interested.

Carol
This should probably be in the James Comey Fired thread, but since Sean Hannity was mentioned here, I wanted to post part of a yahoo article I only saw the headline of earlier. (He must be sweating bullets now, huh?)

"Judging by his Twitter activity, Sean Hannity was among those glued to the television during James Comey's ABC interview on Sunday. The Fox News commentator, a fierce critic of Comey and an unwavering supporter of President Donald Trump, live tweeted the broadcast and, predictably, slammed the former FBI director and host George Stephanopoulos.

Hannity, who has more than 3 million followers on Twitter, said he was "stunned" by the interview, writing that it was "the worst interview I have ever watched in my life." He added the hashtag. #Journalismisdead," for good measure.
"
 

nylynnr

Well-Known Member
Messages
595
Ratings
319
Just what the country needs :scream:
In post #5285, you write, "I know nothing of finances." Yet here, you sarcastically insinuate banks loaning to credit-worthy corporations is a bad thing. On what do you base this? Do you have any economic training? Or are you just lumping an FT analysis in with criticism of the Trump administration?
 
Thread starter #5,317

Prancer

Strong and stable
Staff member
Messages
46,384
Ratings
25,068
Do you trust any prosecutor in America not to use evidence that will help them even if it’s found by violating rights? No one should because that’s why death penalty has been found to have been applied to innocent people. Prosecutors in America can’t be trusted. Congress can impeach and remove trump based on his own interviews like with nbc and Holt.
You do realize that a) the process of discovery requires the prosecution to share all its raw evidence with the defense before a trial; b) Trump's defense team is going to mount a vigorous defense against the use of everything and anything that could even remotely be considered privileged; c) there will be a judge to decide whether said evidence can be used in court or not.

Or maybe you don't realize this.
 

ballettmaus

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,434
Ratings
11,010
In post #5285, you write, "I know nothing of finances." Yet here, you sarcastically insinuate banks loaning to credit-worthy corporations is a bad thing. On what do you base this? Do you have any economic training? Or are you just lumping an FT analysis in with criticism of the Trump administration?
I'm basing this on history and all of the other articles and analysis that I've read in the past couple of years and the country's general state. In itself, the loans wouldn't worry me. But combined with everything else they do.
 
Last edited:

caseyedwards

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,763
Ratings
2,281
Trump is not asking that evidence gets thrown out because the agents were looking where they weren't supposed to look. (At least not that I'm aware of). Trump is asking to see evidence that has already been seized and have a say in what the investigators get to see. He is asking that he can make a decision as to which evidence be withheld under the disguise of attorney-client privilege and despite the criminal exemption.

If you can't find fault with the subject of an investigation getting to decide what evidence against him or a close friend investigators get to see there is no use in discussing further as we'll just turn in circles.
I don’t think trump should have the info! I said that. I don’t want anyone in trump Organization to see anything. I am talking about the persecution saying they will have a Chinese Wall that will work. Many times Chinese walls don’t work. No one in the prosecutors office should have any looks at all the materials and determine what they can use. You and I don’t want trump to see everything but you have not commented on the prosecutors seeing everything.

Here is something about Chinese walls not working.

http://www.newyorklegalethics.com/revisiting-kassis-do-chinese-walls-still-work/
 

caseyedwards

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,763
Ratings
2,281
You do realize that a) the process of discovery requires the prosecution to share all its raw evidence with the defense before a trial; b) Trump's defense team is going to mount a vigorous defense against the use of everything and anything that could even remotely be considered privileged; c) there will be a judge to decide whether said evidence can be used in court or not.

Or maybe you don't realize this.
It should never be assumed prosecutors will act honestly.
 

Vagabond

Well-Known Member
Messages
9,569
Ratings
13,534
Because he needed to prove to the court that he was a practicing lawyer?

I think both Cohen and Hannity would benefit from lying in that case.
Get real.

Cohen's status as a practicing attorney is a matter of public record, easily checked on the Interne.

The only reason this was an issue was that Cohen's attorneys claimed that the seized material was protected by the attorney-client privilege and, when asked, couldn't back up the assertion with a client list.

Cohen's attorneys have asserted that the material seized includes privileged material exchanged between their client and Hannity. If Hannity isn't a client, Cohen and his attorneys risk being held in contempt and being subjected to professional disciplinary proceedings. They have no reason to say anything other than the truth.
 

ballettmaus

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,434
Ratings
11,010
Get real.

Cohen's status as a practicing attorney is a matter of public record, easily checked on the Interne.
Maybe I misunderstood but from what I read, I understood that the prosecution was arguing that there was little evidence that Cohen had many clients and was doing much actual legal work (hence there was little concern about attorney-client privilege to begin with) and the judge asked that Cohen present evidence of such today. So, it sounded like her ruling about attorney-client privilege would depend (in part) on the evidence Cohen provided about his legal work.
 
Thread starter #5,326

Prancer

Strong and stable
Staff member
Messages
46,384
Ratings
25,068
It should never be assumed prosecutors will act honestly.
Okay; now explain how that will work in light of what I posted.

Trump is Trump, not some indigent criminal represented by an overworked public defender.

ETA: Hannity denies being Cohen's client? Why would Cohen lie about such a thing? :rolleyes:

:watch:
Every day, there is some new bizarre thing that makes no sense that should bring everything to a screaming halt, and yet...every day there is some new bizarre thing. :confused:
 

Vash01

Fan of Yuzuru, Medvedeva, T&M, Shibs, P&C
Messages
42,869
Ratings
28,140
Just saw this on CNN (article). Judge Wood orders prosecution to turn over evidence to Cohen's team. It is over. Cohen, et al. Will choose what evidence will be allowed. This is a mockery of justice.
 

caseyedwards

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,763
Ratings
2,281
Okay; now explain how that will work in light of what I posted.

Trump is Trump, not some indigent criminal represented by an overworked public defender.



Every day, there is some new bizarre thing that makes no sense that should bring everything to a screaming halt, and yet...every day there is some new bizarre thing. :confused:
I disagree. Trump can’t hire good lawyers. His representation is very much like public defender level.

https://www.cnn.com/2018/03/28/politics/donald-trump-lawyer/index.html

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/04/06/opinion/trump-lawyers-elites.html

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amph...03/20/trump-didnt-hire-the-very-best-lawyers/

Not an indigent criminal but being trump is worse than being indigent Criminal
 
Thread starter #5,329

Prancer

Strong and stable
Staff member
Messages
46,384
Ratings
25,068
Just saw this on CNN (article). Judge Wood orders prosecution to turn over evidence to Cohen's team.
NYT is reporting the opposite?

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/16/nyregion/michael-cohen-court-hearing.html

I disagree. Trump can’t hire good lawyers. His representation is very much like public defender level.
Okay then. I guess that somehow the President of the US will get off scot-free because of prosecutorial misconduct and incompetent counsel. One more bizarre thing among others.
 

VIETgrlTerifa

Well-Known Member
Messages
24,511
Ratings
36,635
And this posted like 15 minutes ago:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/judge...nd-cohen-over-fbi-raid-youve-miscited-the-law

"President Donald Trump and his longtime attorney Michael Cohen both lost a court challenge related to the FBI’s seizure of Cohen’s documents they both claim are protected by attorney-client privilege.

Cohen had asked a federal judge for a temporary restraining order to stop federal prosecutors in Manhattan from viewing the information seized by the FBI until an independent third party, called a “special master,” be allowed to sort out what is protected by attorney-client privilege.

Similarly, Trump’s own legal representation in this case, Joanna Hendon, filed a letter on Sunday night asking the judge to give Cohen’s team first-access to the material.

U.S. District Court Judge Kimba Wood denied the requests and ruled that prosecutors will get first access to the information, followed by Cohen’s defense team ten days later. Wood noted that she has not yet decided whether she will appoint a special master in the case at all.

“It’s not that you’re not good people,” Wood told Cohen’s attorneys on Monday afternoon, near the end of the two-hour proceeding. “It’s that you’ve miscited the law.”"
 

nylynnr

Well-Known Member
Messages
595
Ratings
319
I'm basing this on history and all of the other articles and analysis that I've read in the past couple of years and the country's general state. In itself, the loans wouldn't worry me. But combined with everything else they do.
FWIW -- and I know posting even moderately positive things about the United States' economy is a no-no on this board -- many publications and analyses indicate otherwise. The Fed's stress tests cleared banks to issue payouts to shareholders last year, several (Citi, BAC, etc.) have gone through a few rounds of buybacks and history as I learned it indicates an uptick in lending is the next logical step. Corporate lending was practically nil 2008-2011, and lagged last year and the first half of this year. Really curious to hear how you think further choking off of credit to creditworthy businesses helps anyone.
 

Susan1

Well-Known Member
Messages
4,079
Ratings
3,370
Maybe I misunderstood but from what I read, I understood that the prosecution was arguing that there was little evidence that Cohen had many clients and was doing much actual legal work (hence there was little concern about attorney-client privilege to begin with) and the judge asked that Cohen present evidence of such today. So, it sounded like her ruling about attorney-client privilege would depend (in part) on the evidence Cohen provided about his legal work.
He stated that he had three "clients" -
#1 Slimeball - trump
#2 Scumbag - Elliott Broidy "A major donor with close ties to the White House resigned on Friday as deputy finance chairman of the Republican National Committee after the revelation that he had agreed to pay $1.6 million to a former Playboy model who became pregnant during an affair."
#3 Secret Sleaze - (don't tell them my name) Sean Hannity (I'm not a client but I claim attorney-client privilege)
:watch:
 
Thread starter #5,335

Prancer

Strong and stable
Staff member
Messages
46,384
Ratings
25,068
I wonder if I misread the CNN article? I will have to read it again later today.
If I am reading it correctly, Cohen's team will be given the files, but the prosecutors will get them first.

IOW, the prosecutors get to see what's there before Cohen's team gets to make arguments about what is and is not covered by attorney-client privilege. I expect that such arguments will drag on for some time.
 

once_upon

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,831
Ratings
14,714
Momentarily interrupting the talk. One of my Trump supporter friend posted a meme with Hillary in a sombrero saying still nacho president....it's taking all my self control to NOT post "yes imagine having a president under investigation by the FBI"
 

ballettmaus

Well-Known Member
Messages
8,434
Ratings
11,010
FWIW -- and I know posting even moderately positive things about the United States' economy is a no-no on this board
I think giving all the credit to Trump is what is a no-no because the economy started to recover under Obama.


-- many publications and analyses indicate otherwise. The Fed's stress tests cleared banks to issue payouts to shareholders last year, several (Citi, BAC, etc.) have gone through a few rounds of buybacks and history as I learned it indicates an uptick in lending is the next logical step. Corporate lending was practically nil 2008-2011, and lagged last year and the first half of this year.
I'm not against lending. I'm against it in an environment that is compared to the years before the Great Depression and Great Recession.

http://www.businessinsider.de/feds-...g-lessons-of-the-2008-crisis-2018-4?r=US&IR=T

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...-straight-out-of-1929/?utm_term=.db1ced51bac1

Then there is the USA Today article which I posted above which says that trickle down hasn't worked so far and the majority of the tax cut went to shareholders and this poll which says that the tax cuts have gotten less popular https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/16/gop...-voters-nbc-wsj-poll.html?cid=sm_npd_nn_tw_ma
and Congress is losening Dodd-Frank and it's all making me nervous. Debt needs to be paid back but in order to do that, companies need to make money. In order to do that consumers need to spend money. From what it looks like now, I'd say they either won't spend it because they don't have it/aren't confident enough that they will have it and others might take out a loan hoping that they'll have. And we all know what happened in 1929 and 2007/8 when everyone was borrowing a lot of money/there was a lot of debt and speculation.


Really curious to hear how you think further choking off of credit to creditworthy businesses helps anyone.
As I said, I'm not against them in general. I just wish there was a way to guarantee that the money is used smartly so that the company will actually make a bigger profit and can pay the loan back. But there isn't a guarantee and we don't know what they'll actually do with the money. And if the money doesn't go to the employees as it should so that employees can buy stuff which brings in revenue so that the company can pay back the loan where will the money to pay back the loan come from? Investors or additional loans.
It looks like the government is currently in a loan to pay off loan spiral and now private companies seem to be joining them and I'm afraid of where this spiral will end.
 

caseyedwards

Well-Known Member
Messages
10,763
Ratings
2,281
I understand your desire to be done with Trump but you really are not making sense with this post. :confused:
It was posted that judge wood did a wedding ceremony of George Soros! So if this is a conspiracy against trump is one of those Soros conspiracies that right wingers like orban of Hungary like to talk about then why not go bigger! If George Soros controls American judges like kimba wood why wouldn’t Soros have used his power to buy electoral college people?!? Or try to convince obama to jail trump?! So this just had to do with people talking about Soros and judge Wood
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 1, Guests: 2)