Liberal Hypocrisy

[Dos Equis]

We agree. Who would of thought?

lol.  Not the first time. 

[Yamcha]

give shit jobs to shit people from shithole countries? that's not racist at all NYT...

[Dos Equis]

Dershowitz is absolutely right.  Where is the ACLU?  Where are all those leftists who supposedly care about privacy and individual rights? 

Alan Dershowitz: Today is a 'very dangerous day for lawyer-client relations'
by Pete Kasperowicz
April 09, 2018

Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz warned Monday that special counsel Robert Mueller's decision to raid President Trump's personal lawyer's office is an assault on the privileged lawyer-client relationship.

Dershowitz said on Fox News that he believes the decision to raid Michael Cohen's office would be a sign that Mueller is trying to turn Cohen against Trump.

"This may be an attempt to squeeze Cohen," he said. "He's the lawyer, he's the guy who knows all the facts about Donald Trump, and to get him to turn against his client."

"This is a very dangerous day today for lawyer-client relations," he added.

Dershowitz, who has drawn the ire of Democrats for defending Trump, said Mueller's move is also dangerous because it gives the FBI the option of deciding what information seized from Cohen to pursue.

"I tell [clients] on my word of honor that what you tell me is sacrosanct," he said. "And now they say, just based on probable cause ... they can burst into the office, grab all the computers, and then give it to another FBI agent and say, 'You're the firewall. We want you now to read all these confidential communications, tell us which ones we can get and which ones we can't get.'"

"If this were Hillary Clinton being investigated and they went into her lawyer's office, the ACLU would be on every television station in America, jumping up and down," he added.

"The deafening silence from the ACLU and civil libertarians about the intrusion into the lawyer-client confidentiality is really appalling," Dershowitz said.

The famed law professor said Mueller's move will only convince more people not to cooperate and said he believes Mueller has "lost perspective" in the case.

Dershowitz recommended that Trump make a motion in court to take Cohen's materials away from the FBI and make a judge decide what evidence can be used and which cannot.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/alan-dershowitz-today-is-a-very-dangerous-day-for-lawyer-client-relations

[illuminati]

Dershowitz is absolutely right.  Where is the ACLU?  Where are all those leftists who supposedly care about privacy and individual rights? 

Alan Dershowitz: Today is a 'very dangerous day for lawyer-client relations'
by Pete Kasperowicz
April 09, 2018

Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz warned Monday that special counsel Robert Mueller's decision to raid President Trump's personal lawyer's office is an assault on the privileged lawyer-client relationship.

Dershowitz said on Fox News that he believes the decision to raid Michael Cohen's office would be a sign that Mueller is trying to turn Cohen against Trump.

"This may be an attempt to squeeze Cohen," he said. "He's the lawyer, he's the guy who knows all the facts about Donald Trump, and to get him to turn against his client."

"This is a very dangerous day today for lawyer-client relations," he added.

Dershowitz, who has drawn the ire of Democrats for defending Trump, said Mueller's move is also dangerous because it gives the FBI the option of deciding what information seized from Cohen to pursue.

"I tell [clients] on my word of honor that what you tell me is sacrosanct," he said. "And now they say, just based on probable cause ... they can burst into the office, grab all the computers, and then give it to another FBI agent and say, 'You're the firewall. We want you now to read all these confidential communications, tell us which ones we can get and which ones we can't get.'"

"If this were Hillary Clinton being investigated and they went into her lawyer's office, the ACLU would be on every television station in America, jumping up and down," he added.

"The deafening silence from the ACLU and civil libertarians about the intrusion into the lawyer-client confidentiality is really appalling," Dershowitz said.

The famed law professor said Mueller's move will only convince more people not to cooperate and said he believes Mueller has "lost perspective" in the case.

Dershowitz recommended that Trump make a motion in court to take Cohen's materials away from the FBI and make a judge decide what evidence can be used and which cannot.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/alan-dershowitz-today-is-a-very-dangerous-day-for-lawyer-client-relations

Alan Dershowitz says a lot of very interesting things in that statement
And he’s likely very right how this could pan out in the long run for
Every one & the future of client / lawyer confidentiality

It not just trump all politicians etc are now vulnerable if the lawyers are raided.

[Dos Equis]

Alan Dershowitz says a lot of very interesting things in that statement
And he’s likely very right how this could pan out in the long run for
Every one & the future of client / lawyer confidentiality

It not just trump all politicians etc are now vulnerable if the lawyers are raided.

Dangerous precedent. 

[Primemuscle]

In reference to the Don Equis post regarding Alan Dershowitz comments on Fox News.

Hillary Clinton was never accused of having extra-marital affairs which she covered up by paying off her lovers hush money. Why even bring up Hillary. She was not elected President, at least not by the Electoral College.

Rob Rosenstein personally signed the FBI's order to raid Michael Cohen's office. Armed with court-approved search warrants, FBI agents fanned out across Manhattan and reportedly seized computers, tax documents, emails, communications and business documents from Cohen's home, his office at a law firm in Rockefeller Center and his hotel room on Park Avenue.

The raids were carried out by FBI agents working with the U.S. attorney's office in Manhattan, which is headed by a Trump administration appointee, Geoffrey S. Berman.

FYI not everything discussed between a client and their lawyer is protected by attorney client privilege.  This suggests Dershowitz either lies to his clients or he's intentionally omitting the exceptions. It's interesting to note that not all attorney's seem to understand the complexities of laws.

[illuminati]

Dangerous precedent. 

Agreed
I don’t see how anyone can argue that it isn’t a dangerous precedent

Though I’m sure Some will be along to say we’re wrong & this is all for the best...

[Dos Equis]

Agreed
I don’t see how anyone can argue that it isn’t a dangerous precedent

Though I’m sure Some will be along to say we’re wrong & this is all for the best...

I'm really concerned about the overall climate.  I have some very smart friends who are off the reservation.  They hate Trump so much they don't care what it takes to injure him or get him impeached.  What do they think is going to happen if a Democrat ever wins the White House again? 

[Primemuscle]

I'm really concerned about the overall climate.  I have some very smart friends who are off the reservation.  They hate Trump so much they don't care what it takes to injure him or get him impeached.  What do they think is going to happen if a Democrat ever wins the White House again? 

What do you think will happen when a Democrat is elected President? More to the point, what do you think will happen in the 2018 midterm elections when Democrats out number Republicans in the House?

Should Trump be impeached, Pence will become president. Mike Pence is known to be much more conservative than Trump. If Pence was impeached, Paul Ryan becomes president.

[Skeletor]

Dershowitz is absolutely right.  Where is the ACLU?  Where are all those leftists who supposedly care about privacy and individual rights?  

Alan Dershowitz: Today is a 'very dangerous day for lawyer-client relations'
by Pete Kasperowicz
April 09, 2018

Harvard Law professor Alan Dershowitz warned Monday that special counsel Robert Mueller's decision to raid President Trump's personal lawyer's office is an assault on the privileged lawyer-client relationship.

Dershowitz said on Fox News that he believes the decision to raid Michael Cohen's office would be a sign that Mueller is trying to turn Cohen against Trump.

"This may be an attempt to squeeze Cohen," he said. "He's the lawyer, he's the guy who knows all the facts about Donald Trump, and to get him to turn against his client."

"This is a very dangerous day today for lawyer-client relations," he added.

Dershowitz, who has drawn the ire of Democrats for defending Trump, said Mueller's move is also dangerous because it gives the FBI the option of deciding what information seized from Cohen to pursue.

"I tell [clients] on my word of honor that what you tell me is sacrosanct," he said. "And now they say, just based on probable cause ... they can burst into the office, grab all the computers, and then give it to another FBI agent and say, 'You're the firewall. We want you now to read all these confidential communications, tell us which ones we can get and which ones we can't get.'"

"If this were Hillary Clinton being investigated and they went into her lawyer's office, the ACLU would be on every television station in America, jumping up and down," he added.

"The deafening silence from the ACLU and civil libertarians about the intrusion into the lawyer-client confidentiality is really appalling," Dershowitz said.

The famed law professor said Mueller's move will only convince more people not to cooperate and said he believes Mueller has "lost perspective" in the case.

Dershowitz recommended that Trump make a motion in court to take Cohen's materials away from the FBI and make a judge decide what evidence can be used and which cannot.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/alan-dershowitz-today-is-a-very-dangerous-day-for-lawyer-client-relations

While the ACLU has often defended causes and people that the left might not agree with, they have not yet released any announcement on this issue. I often disagree with Dershowitz but he does make some good points and it is indeed a troubling precedent. Also, let's not forget the case of Cheryl Mills who appeared as Hillary Clinton's lawyer and sat with her in FBI interviews under that guise even though she was also a fact witness in that investigation:

The FBI's Labor Day weekend document dump regarding its investigation of Hillary Clinton gives those who thought the result was predetermined much to complain about. The FBI's notes confirm that her former chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, was among the several lawyers representing Clinton in her FBI interview. Mills was hip-deep in the events at the heart of the FBI's criminal investigation and was herself a material witness who had previously sat for her own interview. Yet not only was she allowed by the Department of Justice to participate as counsel in Clinton's interview, her communications with Clinton and other material witnesses also were actively protected by the Department of Justice throughout the criminal and civil investigations.

Typically, the DOJ would look askance where a material witness sought to act as a lawyer for the subject of a federal criminal investigation. In Mills's case, Justice lawyers went out of their way to accommodate this highly unusual dual-hat role. For those who wonder whether Clinton's FBI interview was all for show, Mills's participation as a lawyer should be Exhibit A.

Mills, who was a regular correspondent with Clinton on Clinton's home-brewed email, testified as a fact witness about her personal knowledge of Clinton's email setup in both the FBI investigation and related civil depositions. At the same time, Mills purported to represent Clinton as her lawyer. Mills was not, however, a lawyer for Clinton during her tenure at the State Department. Her title was "Chief of Staff and Counselor." But the "counselor" position was, according to Mills's testimony in one of the many Clinton email FOIA cases, "not a lawyer role"; it was a "policy role." Mills contends that, after leaving the State Department in 2013, she was hired by Clinton as her personal lawyer to coordinate the response to State's demand for return of her emails.


Mills's dual role as fact witness and lawyer posed considerable obstacles to uncovering the truth about Clinton's email scheme. In a civil deposition ordered by a federal judge, Mills frequently invoked the attorney-client privilege to avoid answering questions about Clinton's email setup. When asked about the email setup and in particular conversations that she might have had with Clinton's IT specialist, Bryan Pagliano

https://www.weeklystandard.com/the-curious-case-of-cheryl-mills/article/2004156


and:

If you remember back in May, the Washington Post reported that Mills and her attorney walked out of her FBI interview after an agent apparently asked about a topic that was “off-limits.”  The article stated:

The questions that were considered off-limits had to do with the procedure used to produce emails to the State Department so they could possibly be released publicly, the people said. Mills, an attorney herself, was not supposed to be asked questions about that — and ultimately never was in the recent interview — because it was considered confidential as an example of attorney-client privilege, the people said.

The article did note that Mills was an attorney, but never really explained the circumstances surrounding what happened and why that topic was protected by attorney-client privilege. We found out more information a few weeks after Mills’ gave a separate deposition in a FOIA lawsuit brought by Judicial Watch.

During the deposition, Mills’ attorney, Beth Wilkinson, objected to a number of questions on the basis of attorney-client privilege and instructed Mills not to answer various questions.  It was further explained that Clinton left the State Department in 2013, she then hired Mills to serve as part of her personal legal team.  In that capacity, Mills claimed she helped coordinate Clinton’s response to the demand that she return her emails to the State Department. Therefore, Mills would claim attorney-client privilege prevented her from answering questions about how they decided to turnover documents.

However, Mills could not claim attorney-client privilege covered information she learned during her time as Clinton’s Chief of Staff.  So, as Shannen Coffin, a former DOJ attorney, recently explained in an article at the Weekly Standard, “To fix that problem, Mills conveniently claimed that she did not know anything about Clinton’s email setup during her tenure at the State Department and only learned of relevant facts in her later capacity as Mrs. Clinton’s personal lawyer.”

For example, during the FOIA deposition, Mills was asked a question about why Clinton started using the clintonemail.com system.  Her attorney objected to question, saying that was also covered by attorney-client privilege.

“[Mills] — she learned this — refreshed her recollection — when she was acting as the Secretary’s lawyer, producing documents to the State Department,” Wilkinson said.

This essentially allowed Mills to claim attorney-client privilege covered any question, so long as Mills either first learned the information or refreshed her recollection about the information in her capacity as part of Clinton’s legal team, after leaving the State Department.

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/heres-what-probably-led-to-blow-up-during-cheryl-mills-fbi-interview/

[Dos Equis]

What do you think will happen when a Democrat is elected President? More to the point, what do you think will happen in the 2018 midterm elections when Democrats out number Republicans in the House?

Should Trump be impeached, Pence will become president. Mike Pence is known to be much more conservative than Trump. If Pence was impeached, Paul Ryan becomes president.

I think the next Democrat president (if any) will be viciously attacked using any means necessary, regardless of merit, which is precisely what is happening now. 

I have no idea what will happen in 2018.  I don't trust the polls.  I also don't discount the effect of two years of 90 percent negative news coverage, Republican voter apathy, etc. 

Trump isn't going to be impeached or removed from office.  That is crazy talk.   

[Primemuscle]

I think the next Democrat president (if any) will be viciously attacked using any means necessary, regardless of merit, which is precisely what is happening now. 

I have no idea what will happen in 2018.  I don't trust the polls.  I also don't discount the effect of two years of 90 percent negative news coverage, Republican voter apathy, etc. 

Trump isn't going to be impeached or removed from office.  That is crazy talk.   

Are you calling me crazy? 

Another question, do you think Trump will pardon those who are implicated and criminally charged in this mess, including possibly himself?

[Dos Equis]

In reference to the Don Equis post regarding Alan Dershowitz comments on Fox News.

Hillary Clinton was never accused of having extra-marital affairs which she covered up by paying off her lovers hush money. Why even bring up Hillary. She was not elected President, at least not by the Electoral College.

Rob Rosenstein personally signed the FBI's order to raid Michael Cohen's office. Armed with court-approved search warrants, FBI agents fanned out across Manhattan and reportedly seized computers, tax documents, emails, communications and business documents from Cohen's home, his office at a law firm in Rockefeller Center and his hotel room on Park Avenue.

The raids were carried out by FBI agents working with the U.S. attorney's office in Manhattan, which is headed by a Trump administration appointee, Geoffrey S. Berman.

FYI not everything discussed between a client and their lawyer is protected by attorney client privilege.  This suggests Dershowitz either lies to his clients or he's intentionally omitting the exceptions. It's interesting to note that not all attorney's seem to understand the complexities of laws.

If we are being intellectually honest, and looking at all of the facts and circumstances, this has to start with Hillary Clinton and the DNC.  Some facts:

1.  Hillary Clinton and DNC paid for the Russia dossier. Varying reports, but apparently more than $10 million.

2.  The dossier includes information obtained from Russian operatives.

3.  The dossier, according to Comey, is "salacious and unverified."  

4.  The dossier was used by the Obama administration to obtain a warrant to spy on the Trump campaign.  In other words, Hillary Clinton paid for a warrant to spy on her political opponent.

5.  McCabe confirmed that without the dossier, there would be no warrant.

6.  The dossier was used as the basis to start an investigation into Trump conspiring with Russia to win the presidential election.  

7.  To date, there is zero evidence of collusion.  

8.  All of the criminal charges and convictions to date have nothing to do with collusion or implicate Trump in any wrongdoing.  

9.  Mueller made a "referral" to the U.S. Attorney's office to seize the files of Trump's personal attorney to investigate whether his lawyer's payment to a porn star violated campaign spending laws.  This, obviously, has nothing to do with collusion.

10.  No Clinton/DNC $10+ million dollars, no Russia dossier.  No Russia dossier, no investigation or appointment of a special counsel.  No special counsel, no warrant, no seizure of files.

So yes, Hillary Clinton is at the center of all of this.  

Also, you should read up on Mueller's history of accusing innocent people of crimes.  It's very disturbing.  

[Dos Equis]

Are you calling me crazy? 

Another question, do you think Trump will pardon those who are implicated and criminally charged in this mess, including possibly himself?

You crazy?  Actually, if the Democrats take the House in November I think it's a foregone conclusion they will impeach Trump for something.  Anything.  But will the Senate remove him?  Absolutely not.  So, if you believe Trump will be impeached AND removed from office, yes you are crazy and should be fitted for your tinfoil hat immediately.   

I hope Trump pardons every American citizen who was caught up in this witch hunt.  He doesn't need to pardon himself, because you cannot criminally indict a sitting president.

[Primemuscle]

If we are being intellectually honest, and looking at all of the facts and circumstances, this has to start with Hillary Clinton and the DNC.  Some facts:

1.  Hillary Clinton and DNC paid for the Russia dossier. Varying reports, but apparently more than $10 million.

2.  The dossier includes information obtained from Russian operatives.

3.  The dossier, according to Comey, is "salacious and unverified."  

4.  The dossier was used by the Obama administration to obtain a warrant to spy on the Trump campaign.  In other words, Hillary Clinton paid for a warrant to spy on her political opponent.

5.  McCabe confirmed that without the dossier, there be no warrant.

6.  The dossier was used as the basis to start an investigation into Trump conspiring with Russia to win the presidential election.  

7.  To date, there is zero evidence of collusion.  

8.  All of the criminal charges and convictions to date have nothing to do with collusion or implicate Trump in any wrongdoing.  

9.  Mueller made a "referral" to the U.S. Attorney's office to seize the files of Trump's personal attorney to investigate whether his lawyer's payment to a porn star violated campaign spending laws.  This, obviously, has nothing to do with collusion.

10.  No Clinton/DNC $10+ million dollars, no Russia dossier.  No Russia dossier, no investigation or appointment of a special counsel.  No special counsel, no warrant, no seizure of files.

So yes, Hillary Clinton is at the center of all of this.  

Also, you should read up on Mueller's history of accusing innocent people of crimes.  It's very disturbing.  

You're off on another distracting tangent, I see.

Will you provide me the link to Mueller's history of accusing innocent people of crimes. I'd like to find out for myself how disturbing it is.

[Dos Equis]

You're off on another distracting tangent, I see.

Will you provide me the link to Mueller's history of accusing innocent people of crimes. I'd like to find out for myself how disturbing it is.

You asked this question:

In reference to the Don Equis post regarding Alan Dershowitz comments on Fox News.

Hillary Clinton was never accused of having extra-marital affairs which she covered up by paying off her lovers hush money. Why even bring up Hillary. She was not elected President, at least not by the Electoral College.

I responded by explaining why Hillary Clinton is at the center of this.  You can disagree, but I gave you facts.

Regarding Mueller, check out this story:

Robert Mueller Has Been Botching Investigations Since The Anthrax Attacks
By Daniel Ashman
FEBRUARY 8, 2018

http://thefederalist.com/2018/02/08/robert-mueller-botching-investigations-since-anthrax-attacks/

[Skeletor]

You're off on another distracting tangent, I see.

Will you provide me the link to Mueller's history of accusing innocent people of crimes. I'd like to find out for myself how disturbing it is.

Look up Steve Hatfill (also Bruce Ivins for more context). Mueller remains unrepentant.

[Dos Equis]

Look up Steve Hatfill (also Bruce Ivins for more context). Mueller remains unrepentant.

Yep.  Both addressed in the link I just posted. 

[Dos Equis]

Media Matters Says No Boycott for Joy Reid, Blasts ‘Right-Wing Chicanery’
Jon Levine | April 25, 2018
https://www.thewrap.com/media-matters-says-no-boycott-for-joy-reid-ad-pressure-campaigns-are-rare-for-us/

[Dos Equis]

Joy Reid Blog Mocked ‘Chubbed-Out Shrew’ Rosie O’Donnell, Backed ‘Kick-Ass Funny’ Donald Trump
BY: Alex Griswold    
April 25, 2018
http://freebeacon.com/uncategorized/joy-reid-blog-mocked-chubbed-shrew-rosie-odonnell-backed-kick-ass-funny-donald-trump/

[Primemuscle]

You asked this question:

I responded by explaining why Hillary Clinton is at the center of this.  You can disagree, but I gave you facts.

Regarding Mueller, check out this story:

Robert Mueller Has Been Botching Investigations Since The Anthrax Attacks
By Daniel Ashman
FEBRUARY 8, 2018

http://thefederalist.com/2018/02/08/robert-mueller-botching-investigations-since-anthrax-attacks/

I've already read that article, it is not worth wasting my time on again.

The Federalist....what a laugh! https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-federalist/. You should think about finding some new sources because currently the ones you use are too bias. 

[Dos Equis]

I've already read that article, it is not worth wasting my time on again.

The Federalist....what a laugh! https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-federalist/. You should think about finding some new sources because currently the ones you use are too bias. 

 

[Yamcha]

We go from "Occupy wall street" to this in the matter of one presidential election:

[Primemuscle]

https://d2l0v4hxjnvcrz.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/15/ajQYnOSeCjqS9wxIsq2c-480x336.jpg

I like the way you've portrayed yourself in this post. 

[Primemuscle]

We go from "Occupy wall street" to this in the matter of one presidential election:

This is an excellent question.