Posted on 10/07/2017 3:16:14 PM PDT by bitt
GREAT posts; thread. BTTT!
I hadn’t thought about that. A “phone booth” — only in our hallowed halls of Congress!
What a flaming pile of nonsense. Awan is not an attorney nor was acting as an attorney and the data on the HDD was not generated in any such context.
I feel strongly that Awan feels strongly that going to prison is a less preferred option than returning to Pakistan with $2-3 MM in funds the DNC gave him or that he stole.
“This guy thinks Americans are stupid.”
This guy has absolutely convincing proof that Democrat congresspeople are stupid. They hired him, didn’t they? And they hired his brother, the one whose prior work history included working at McDonalds. Oh yeah, for $145K a year. And they hired his wife, too. And another Awan. The Dems had a total of four Awans working for them. Why, they were probably just trying to reproduce the Kennedy dynasty, yeah, that’s it.
source / wiki
Attorney–client privilege or lawyer–client privilege is a “client’s right privilege to refuse to disclose and to prevent any other person from disclosing confidential communications between the client and the attorney.”[1]
The attorney–client privilege is one of the oldest recognized privileges for confidential communications.[2] The United States Supreme Court has stated that by assuring confidentiality, the privilege encourages clients to make “full and frank” disclosures to their attorneys, who are then better able to provide candid advice and effective representation.[3]
Contents [show]
General requirements under United States law[edit]
Although there are minor variations, the elements necessary to establish the attorney client privilege generally are:
1.The asserted holder of the privilege is (or sought to become) a client; and
2.The person to whom the communication was made: 1.is a member of the bar of a court, or a subordinate of such a member, and
2.in connection with this communication, is acting as an attorney; and
3.The communication was for the purpose of securing legal advice.[4]
There are a number of exceptions to the privilege in most jurisdictions, chief among them:
1.the communication was made in the presence of individuals who were neither attorney nor client, or was disclosed to such individuals,
2.the communication was made for the purpose of committing a crime or tort,
3.the client has waived the privilege (for example by publicly disclosing the communication).
A corollary to the attorney–client privilege is the joint defense privilege, which is also called the common interest rule.[5] The common interest rule “serves to protect the confidentiality of communications passing from one party to another party where a joint defense or strategy has been decided upon and undertaken by the parties and their respective counsel.”[6]
An attorney speaking publicly in regard to a client’s personal business and private affairs can be reprimanded by the bar and/or disbarred, regardless of the fact that he or she may be no longer representing the client. Discussing a client’s or past client’s criminal history, or otherwise, is viewed as a breach of fiduciary responsibilities.
The attorney–client privilege is separate from and should not be confused with the work-product doctrine.
When the privilege may not apply[edit]
When an attorney is not acting primarily as an attorney but, for instance, as a business advisor, member of the Board of Directors, or in another non-legal role, then the privilege generally does not apply.[7]
The privilege protects the confidential communication, and not the underlying information. For instance, if a client has previously disclosed confidential information to a third party who is not an attorney, and then gives the same information to an attorney, the attorney–client privilege will still protect the communication to the attorney, but will not protect the communication with the third party.
The privilege may be waived if the confidential communications are disclosed to third parties.
Other limits to the privilege may apply depending on the situation being adjudicated.
==SNIP==
Nothing says “PRIVATE - FOR EYES ONLY” like leaving secret info in a phone booth for a pickup!!
bbb
I am sure he would not want it reviewed.
Unfortunately, a large percentage of what remains USAians, are sound asleep. Soundly sleeping.
I GUARANTEE you're right as rain on that statement.
That’s all these being charged with.
I will just deal from phone booths! Now, if only I can find one....
the lawyer is flinging ideas and seeing if any of them stick.
Millions of Americans want this bastard Awan on trial!
Bttt
I wonder if Little Debby Wasserman ever saw Awan’s hard drive? Investigators should ask her directly.
The scandal here, as headlined by the NY Daily News or Post could be “A Pak in the Sak for Little Debbie’s cookies?”
She’s more disgusting that the tarantulas I show in the jungle.
It’s a shame that our press is so corrupt in their love for Dems that they won’t say a word about the biggest political scandal of our lifetime. Watergate is nothing compared to this, this is a huge event with the average American never having heard of it.
Asinine.
Yet Imran and his edgy lawyers are almost paranoic, moving hell and high water to prevent the contents of the laptop Imran left in a phone booth from seeing the light of day.
We can safely conclude the laptop under dispute is highly evidentiary and contains intricate details that Imran, Debbie and Democrat IT employers are loathed to have revealed.
Debbie Wassermann Schultz, herself, went ballistic. She told two diametrically different stories about the laptop: first she said she owned it and threatened Capitol Hill Police w/ "consequences" if she didn't get it back. She then turned tail and said she never saw it before....it belonged to Imran.
The contents of the laptop must contain all the printed (not heresay) evidence judges and juries love to have to convict defendants.
<><> List of wire-transfers (tax dollars Imran sent to Pakistan).
<><> Lists of Democrats' numbered offshore bank accounts.
<><> Lists of Imran's multiple identities.
<><>Lists of ghost employees cashing US govt checks Imran put on Democrats' payrolls.
<><> Instructions on how to falsify official govt forms.
<><> Names and addresses of co-conspirators.
<><>Details of conspiracies to steal tax dollars.
<><> The significant financial details.
<><> Details of the various cover-ups.
<><> Scope and dimension of US intel now in the hands of America's global enemies.
Thank you for your work here, Liz.
BTTT
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.