F.B.I. Raids Office of Trump’s Longtime Lawyer Michael Cohen

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: shooterbrody

Ok. Waa waa. And they call liberals snow flakes.

That's the view from where I'm sitting.
Your mileage may vary.

as usual no sources for your bs opinions just your secondhand spew from msnbc

originally posted by: Sillyolme
a reply to: Xcathdra

As if any of that changes anything he said.
Oh my god...

Way to miss the legal problem raised by that action.

RE-read and try again.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
First. If there's communications in there that implicates trump in a crime the N.Y. feds will certainly get it. There's no block of anything trump. That's why the judge didn't let trump sort through it. What is blocked is private unrelated to this case innocent communications where trump is getting legal advice from his lawyer. Since Cohen didn't do too much actual lawyering I don't imagine there will be too many exclusions.

The judge did grant Cohens motion to assign a special master who will review the documents and determine which ones meet the search warrant criteria. Anything else is protected and wont be released to the FEDs.

Secondly its already been established to investigation into Cohen has nothing to do with Trump. Because of that legality nothing Trump related can be used by the SDNY.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
Second if there is anything found that relates back to stuff Mueller is investigating that will be turned over to him.

and will be immediately challenged since you now have a scenario where the Feds got a search warrant and indictments, misleading the court, in an effort to obtain privileged material relating to Trump. Mueller is the one who did the referral. Good luck explaining that to the judge.

originally posted by: Sillyolme
Mueller referred this case based on evidence he had but obviously... he believed there was way more to be found within these records. He may even believe they will find something that will help him. Nothing wrong with that. He passed the criminal case to the N.Y. feds because that's where it belongs but that doesn't shield other evidence that may be found there from being used by Mueller. That's the way this works. Even if it doesn't sound fair to you.

Well Mueller made the referral to the SDNY because what they are investigating related to Cohen is outside Muellers jurisdiction. Making a referral to obtain evidence is a legal mine field.

Especially when the intent is to gain access to privileged communications between client and attorney. So your comment about not being able to shield evidence is not accurate.

The easiest way to shut all of this crap down is for Trump to just issue pardons all around. Democrats made a blundering error when they announced some time back about referring certain charges to New York state for local prosecution. Had they not rushed their end run around the Constitution they might have realized New York state law prohibits a state prosecution if the person was already charged at the federal level. The law considers it double jeopardy (even though they are separate sovereigns).

That same law also applies to Presidential pardons. Their push now is to change the law however I dont seen that being constitutional since it violates no ex post facto laws.

Good luck though.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Secondly its already been established to investigation into Cohen has nothing to do with Trump. Because of that legality nothing Trump related can be used by the SDNY.

So? Hypothetically, if there is documentation of Cohen and Trump discussing engaging in transactions which involve money laundering, Trump slides? That doesn't seem right.

The easiest way to shut all of this crap down is for Trump to just issue pardons all around.

Too bad the current administration shut down that White House petitition thing. You could have expressed your opinion directly to the White House. You still can, actually.

a reply to: Phage

I just asked a similar question.
If Muellers investigation finds wrong doings but not to do with his original mandate should he pass the info on or should he not? Because I thought everyone would want criminal activity found out no matter who did it.

originally posted by: Phage
So? Hypothetically, if there is documentation of Cohen and Trump discussing engaging in transactions which involve money laundering, Trump slides? That doesn't seem right.

Anything unrelated to the parameters of the search warrant or anything deemed privileged is not disclosed and cannot be used. Since this action is against Cohen and does not include anything Trump related any documents between Cohen and Trump wont be turned over by the special master. Only documents that are specifically related to the prosecutions case and only if they are not privileged communications, IE relevant, are turned over.

Because this is a criminal case discovery is restricted (unlike a civil case where discovery is broad). The prosecution has to establish direct relevance to their case (civil requires might be relevant - 2 different standards).

Using an end run around by using another prosecutor and a separate criminal prosecution of a separate person not involving Trump for the purpose of gaining access to privileged communications they could not have gotten on their own wont fly with the court.

originally posted by: Phage
Too bad the current administration shut down that White House petitition thing. You could have expressed your opinion directly to the White House. You still can, actually.

For explaining an opinion on how to end the SC witch hunt and explaining how New York law prevents the state from filing charges as well?

This is common knowledge to the White House and anyone else paying attention.

I am not really in the mood to play your game tonight.

originally posted by: testingtesting
a reply to: Phage

I just asked a similar question.
If Muellers investigation finds wrong doings but not to do with his original mandate should he pass the info on or should he not? Because I thought everyone would want criminal activity found out no matter who did it.

Discovery of wrong doing can go either way. If it is within Muellers jurisdiction he can deal with it. If it is not within his jurisdiction he can make a referral to the appropriate federal district for them to deal with it. A referral does not automatically mean charges and prosecution.

The other consideration is how the info in question was discovered.

An example would be the Anthony Wiener mess. That criminal investigation was by the New York City police. The warrant they had allowed them to search Wieners electronic devices (phones / computers / etc) and the warrants were defined as to what they were looking for - child porn crap / improper messages / etc. Because the warrant listed electronic communications the NYPD could search through the emails. If the warrant said nothing about emails / electronics then the search would be illegal and any evidence obtained for their case would not be admissible.

The feds would run into a similar problem. Since the discovery of the evidence was unlawful it would be challenged if used by a federal prosecutor.

When NYPD searched the laptop they located emails that were linked to the FBI investigation into Clinton. The NYPD notified the FBI and the FBI had to obtain a new warrant for their agents to review the files the NYPD located. None of those files (the Clinton stuff) was directly linked to the NYPD's case so they made the referral. To the best of my knowledge the info provided to the FBI was we found a lot of emails dealing with your Clinton investigation.

It is up to the FBI to get a warrant (based on NYPD discoveries by their warrant) to lawfully review the contents.

The goal is to investigate crimes and prosecute people. When the government goes beyond norms and use illegal methods to circumvent constitutional rights / evidentiary procedures / brady violations / giglio violations the remedy from the criminal side is to dismiss all charges with prejudice (cant be refiled) and have the prosecutors / investigators / etc be held in contempt / refer a complaint to their supervisors / refer a complaint to the ethics review / bar association for lawyers etc.

The injured party's remedy, aside from having all charges dismissed with prejudice, is to file a lawsuit for prosecutorial misconduct, deprivation of rights while acting under color of law etc etc etc.

Search warrants must be defined and specific. The address to be searched, a description of the location, what it is you are wanting (again specifics and not generalities IE documents related to instead of just any document we come across). Warrants are time restricted in addition once you execute a search warrant the warrant is only good for as long as the location is under law enforcement control.

When a search warrant is executed police can only look in areas that can contain the items sought. If you are looking for a 6 foot tall by 4 feet wide by 4 feet deep gun cabinet you cant search areas where that item would not fit.

If a search warrant is executed and everyone clears the scene police cant just go back to next day and do another search. They would be required to obtain a new warrant with new justification for the new search.

a reply to: Xcathdra

So. Trump (and/or other accomplices) skates no matter what.

Heh. Sure thing, barrister.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Xcathdra

So. Trump (and/or other accomplices) skates no matter what.

Heh. Sure thing, barrister.

Feel free to point out where I said that.

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: Sillyolme
First. If there's communications in there that implicates trump in a crime the N.Y. feds will certainly get it. There's no block of anything trump. That's why the judge didn't let trump sort through it. What is blocked is private unrelated to this case innocent communications where trump is getting legal advice from his lawyer. Since Cohen didn't do too much actual lawyering I don't imagine there will be too many exclusions.

The judge did grant Cohens motion to assign a special master who will review the documents and determine which ones meet the search warrant criteria. Anything else is protected and wont be released to the FEDs.

No, Cohens motion asked for Cohen and Trump to review evidence and determine what was relevant.

Prosecutors wanted their cleaning team to do it.

The Judge split the difference with a Special Master.

Secondly its already been established to investigation into Cohen has nothing to do with Trump.

NOPE.

Michael Cohen search warrant documents mentioned Trump by name
www.cbsnews.com...

a reply to: soberbacchus

No, Cohens motion asked for Cohen and Trump to review evidence and determine what was relevant.

Wrong. Cohen's team motioned for a special master a few weeks ago.
Link

The odd thing is, woods appointed someone not named by either the DoJ or Cohen's team in their recommendations.

a reply to: Xcathdra

Whether you said it or not, it's likely true. The president can't be tried criminally while president and were he removed, you could expect a pardon from pence. Anyone below trump that goes down will find themselves with a pardon or commutation.

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: soberbacchus

No, Cohens motion asked for Cohen and Trump to review evidence and determine what was relevant.

Wrong. Cohen's team motioned for a special master a few weeks ago.
Link

The odd thing is, woods appointed someone not named by either the DoJ or Cohen's team in their recommendations.

First they asked for Cohen+Trump to review evidence, but yes you are correct, they said they would accept an independent special master as a second choice. Prosecution still wanted the filter team, but did not object to the Special Master as a compromise.

I think she chose someone neither recommended as a way of threading the needle.

originally posted by: soberbacchus
No, Cohens motion asked for Cohen and Trump to review evidence and determine what was relevant.

Prosecutors wanted their cleaning team to do it.

The Judge split the difference with a Special Master.

Then you need to reread the motion because it also requested a special master if the judge denies the request to review by the 2 parties (Cohen and Trump). Hence the reason the judge ordered both sides to submit their names for a special master. In the end the judge appointed a special master, however the former judge she appointed was not on either sides list.

You cant just take bits and pieces that support your position and just ignores the ones that dont. You also cant take articles that are weeks old while ignoring the latest info because the new info doesnt support your agenda.

originally posted by: soberbacchus
NOPE.

Michael Cohen search warrant documents mentioned Trump by name
www.cbsnews.com...

From your own source -

sources familiar with the documents tell CBS News' Jeff Pegues. Sources who've seen the warrants told Pegues it appeared to them that the real target of the raids was Mr. Trump. One source called it a "search and destroy mission."

A search and destroy mission he says... interesting you ignored that part. Not to mention the complete lack of verifiable sources.


Since you are ok with blind sources, and the fact your article is from April 11th 2018. The CNN article below is from April 20 2018. Tell me, who is lying - Rosenstein and Mueller or the unverified sources in your article?
Rosenstein told Trump he's not a target in Cohen investigation

(CNN)Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein told President Donald Trump at a recent meeting that he's not a target in the investigation of his personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, a source familiar with the matter told CNN.
Rosenstein's comment was not about special counsel Robert Mueller's investigation into Russian meddling in the 2016 election and potential collusion by Trump associates, the source said, noting that Mueller's team had informed Trump's lawyers previously he was not considered a target at that point in the Mueller probe.

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: Xcathdra

Whether you said it or not, it's likely true. The president can't be tried criminally while president and were he removed, you could expect a pardon from pence. Anyone below trump that goes down will find themselves with a pardon or commutation.

The premise is sound and I agree however I never said what Phage claimed.

That is my point.

As I stated before.. If this referral by Mueller to the SDNY was nothing more than an end run to obtain privileged documents between lawyer and client (Trump Cohen) because Mueler could not make the case to get the documents on his own then there is going to be a massive uproar and legal blowback over the behavior.

a reply to: Xcathdra

After all this time, you still don't seem to understand the difference between a "Target", "Subject" and "Witness".

Trump is not a Target.

He still could have been named in the Search Warrant for Cohen as obviously Cohen's activity regarding the payment to Stormy Daniels was on Trump's behalf (even though Cohen claimed otherwise).

As a matter of fact Trump said in a FOX interview that Cohen "represented him" in regards to Stormy Daniels.

Cohen is a "Target", what Trump is a "Subject".

It can go either way depending on what is uncovered, but every "Target" is a "Subject" first.

a reply to: shooterbrody

As usual you don't realize that the source of my opinion is..


wait for it...


Me !
And it's not bs, it's my opinion.

a reply to: Xcathdra

I don't have to. It doesn't change anything.

a reply to: Xcathdra

You're so hopeful. You don't know what they're going to find in that mess and it will only exclude actual atty/client communique which I understand was very little. I hope you're right. He has enough problems already.
Good luck to you too.