SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,398
|
Post by SSHoya on Sept 14, 2018 12:08:17 GMT -5
The huge downside is that a senior, the most senior, campaign adviser for a time is pleading to crimes directly tied to Russian interests while he was running the campaign. “Manafort is effectively admitting to being an instrument of the Kremlin — something that didn’t stop when he was in charge of the Trump campaign,” says Max Bergmann, who heads the Moscow Project at the Center for American Progress. “This is what collusion looks like.” And once again, it reveals that the president’s assurance that no one from the campaign had Russian contacts was flat-out false. www.washingtonpost.com/news/opinions/wp/2018/09/14/mueller-snares-more-pleas-look-at-what-manafort-will-be-admitting/?utm_term=.ce1d0c99c6f7According to countless media accounts and President Trump’s own lawyers, Special Counsel Robert Mueller is writing some kind of report on allegations of presidential obstruction of justice. Exactly what sort of report this may be is unclear. But to the extent that Mueller is contemplating a referral to Congress of possible impeachment material, he has two historical models of such documents to draw on. One, the so-called Starr Report, is famous and publicly available. The other is a document most people have never heard of: the “Road Map” that Watergate Special Prosecutor Leon Jaworski sent to Congress in 1974 and that informed its impeachment proceedings, which were already underway. www.lawfareblog.com/watergate-road-map-and-coming-mueller-report
|
|
njhoya78
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,775
|
Post by njhoya78 on Sept 14, 2018 13:14:44 GMT -5
Is it burning at the stake or drowning? Seems archaic... We need to have a consultation with Theodoric of York, Medieval Judge, regarding the applicability of the Trough of Justice.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,398
|
Post by SSHoya on Sept 14, 2018 14:32:43 GMT -5
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,398
|
Post by SSHoya on Sept 14, 2018 14:55:50 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2018 14:57:13 GMT -5
|
|
tashoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 12,331
|
Post by tashoya on Sept 14, 2018 17:45:53 GMT -5
This is to the Trump presidency what "yada, yada, yada" was to Seinfeld.
|
|
hoyarooter
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,224
|
Post by hoyarooter on Sept 14, 2018 19:18:42 GMT -5
I hear that MacTrump has actually been consulting with the witches. Look for them to be the next domino to fall.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,398
|
Post by SSHoya on Sept 15, 2018 5:48:52 GMT -5
White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders hastily sought to put distance between the plea agreement and the president, stating: “This had absolutely nothing to do with the President or his victorious 2016 Presidential campaign. It is totally unrelated.” As it was with the president’s tweet three weeks ago, the White House is once again way out on a limb. The grain of truth in Sanders’s claim is that most, though not all, of the criminal conduct to which Manafort admitted preceded his work for the Trump campaign, and none directly implicates the campaign itself or Trump. But it is only a grain. For one thing, Trump constantly boasted of hiring the “best people”—and even in March 2016, when Manafort first joined the campaign, it was clear that he was superlative chiefly in influence peddling on behalf of unsavory characters close to Russian President Vladimir Putin. His questionable reputation and murky relationships with former Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych and Russian oligarch Oleg Deripaska were matters of public knowledge long before the campaign began. www.lawfareblog.com/manafort-guilty-plea-mueller-investigation-and-president
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2018 9:47:24 GMT -5
I guess it's smart, but it seems pretty inappropriate that Trump has a joint defense agreement with a multiple felon who just pled guilty to "Conspiracy against the United States" among other things..
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,398
|
Post by SSHoya on Sept 16, 2018 10:40:19 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2018 10:56:12 GMT -5
Thx SS. So this is no longer true? Do you know how the severance of this agreement works regarding privilege between the conversations his team had with Trump's?
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,398
|
Post by SSHoya on Sept 16, 2018 11:28:50 GMT -5
Thx SS. So this is no longer true? Do you know how the severance of this agreement works regarding privilege between the conversations his team had with Trump's? 1. Off the top of my head, it would seem that if you are entering into a cooperation agreement with the special counsel it is a conflict of interest to remain in the joint defense agreement (hereinfafter "JDA") as your interests are or may become adverse to those of the remaining members of the JDA. While I guess it may be hypothetically possible to waive any conflicts, it still seems fraught with ethical issues. (Other attorneys on Hoya Talk may have a differing opinion and the NYMAG article does not give further information regarding the continued participation of Manafort in the JDA but it would seem logical to me -- and Mariotti's tweet seems to agree.). 2. Re: privilege between Manafort's counsel and the others in the JDA, the various privileges arguably still survives the subsequent cooperation agreement/plea deal: A joint defense agreement (also known as a common interest agreement) is a way for clients and their lawyers to share privileged information with third parties without waiving otherwise applicable privileges. The joint defense privilege, often referred to as the common interest rule, is an extension of the attorney-client privilege that protects from forced disclosure communications between two or more parties and/or their respective counsel if they are participating in a joint defense agreement. It permits a client to disclose information to her attorney in the presence of joint parties and their counsel without waiving the attorney-client privilege and is intended to preclude joint parties and their attorneys from disclosing confidential information learned as a consequence of the joint defense without permission.United States v. Hsia, 81 F.Supp. 2d 7, 16 (D.D.C. 2000) (citations omitted). “It protects communications between the parties where they are ‘part of an on-going and joint effort to set up a common defense strategy’ in connection with actual or prospective litigation.” Minebea Co. v. Papst, 228 F.R.D. 13, 15 (D.D.C. 2005) (citations omitted). “[T]he rule applies not only to communications subject to the attorney-client privilege, but also to communications protected by the work-product doctrine.” Id. at 16 (quoting In re Grand Jury Subpoenas, 902 F.2d 244, 249 (4th Cir. 1990)). “Although occasionally termed a privilege itself, the common interest doctrine is really an exception to the rule that no privilege attaches to communications between a client and an attorney in the presence of a third person.” United States v. BDO Seidman, LLP, 492 F.3d 806, 815 (7th Cir. 2007). www.dcbar.org/bar-resources/legal-ethics/opinions/opinion349.cfm
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 17, 2018 11:57:09 GMT -5
Just like the time when... Ummm...
I'm drawing blanks...
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,398
|
Post by SSHoya on Sept 18, 2018 4:17:25 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2018 11:18:51 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2018 8:40:08 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 20, 2018 8:41:52 GMT -5
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,398
|
Post by SSHoya on Sept 20, 2018 15:26:20 GMT -5
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,398
|
Post by SSHoya on Sept 21, 2018 10:26:22 GMT -5
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 18,398
|
Post by SSHoya on Sept 21, 2018 16:55:49 GMT -5
Survivable for Rosenstein?? (Others who know Rosenstein say he has such a dry sarcastic wit, that if such a statement was made re: recording, it was made in jest). The Times reports that Rosenstein suggested that “he secretly record President Trump in the White House to expose the chaos consuming the administration” and that he “discussed recruiting cabinet members to invoke the 25th Amendment to remove Mr. Trump from office for being unfit.” Rosenstein also reportedly told Acting FBI Director Andrew G. McCabe “that he might be able to persuade Attorney General Jeff Sessions and John F. Kelly, then the secretary of homeland security and now the White House chief of staff, to mount an effort to invoke the 25th Amendment.” As Drudge summarizes it, with only a tad of unfairness: “Rosenstein Wanted to Wear Wire; Plot To Remove Trump.” As the Times makes clear, “None of Mr. Rosenstein’s proposals apparently came to fruition.” www.lawfareblog.com/quick-notes-rosenstein-revelationsMemos written by Andrew McCabe, then the acting FBI director, say deputy attorney general Rod J. Rosenstein suggested he secretly record his talks with President Trump, and that Rosenstein discussed possibly trying to remove him from office, according to people familiar with the matter. www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/mccabe-memos-say-rosenstein-considered-secretly-recording-trump/2018/09/21/f4aa9a62-bdca-11e8-8792-78719177250f_story.html?utm_term=.e8d7dcdc7306
|
|