Posted on 02/27/2019 5:54:24 AM PST by SoFloFreeper
The attorney-client privilege is a rule that preserves the confidentiality of communications between lawyers and clients. Under that rule, attorneys may not divulge their clients’ secrets, nor may others force them to. The purpose of the privilege is to encourage clients to openly share information with their lawyers and to let lawyers provide effective representation.
Generally, the attorney-client privilege applies when:
an actual or potential client communicates with a lawyer regarding legal advice
the lawyer is acting in a professional capacity (rather than, for example, as a friend), and the client intended the communications to be private and acted accordingly.
Lawyers may not reveal oral or written communications with clients that clients reasonably expect to remain private.
(Excerpt) Read more at nolo.com ...
Nor is he a Clinton.
Cohen must be broke. That’s why he did some of the shady stuff he was convicted of—lying on bank applications about the value of the leveraged taxi medallions he was using for collateral.
So, suing a disbarred lawyer who is broke and going to jail is pointless. He will never work as an attorney again. No one would ever hire him, knowing that he is probably recording them “just in case.”
There are many subtle Sicilian ways to neutralize people without doing them any physical harm.
Once upon a time the quintessence of evil was “a Philadelphia lawyer.” That has not been applicable for decades. Instead, the real bottom-crawler is the New York City lawyer.
President Trump need not do anything but let cohen continue to dig his own hole. We’ve seen the President let his enemies step on their own rakes before.
Seems like attorney/client privilege would be a factor, at least in some instances with Cohen’s testimony.
Problem is, when it comes to dealing with anything involving President Trump, the law doesn’t seem to matter in the minds of judges and politicians. Nor does the Constitution seem to be of concern.
All that matters is that they somehow ‘get Trump’.
The attorney-client privilege has a crime-fraud exception. Under the exception, conversations between an attorney and a client are not privileged if the purpose of the conversation was to discuss the commission or concealment of a crime. Generally, the client can prevent disclosure of conversations with the attorney by filing a motion asking the court to rule that the privilege applies and has not been waived by the client. Since Cohen is about to divulge information to Congress, and not a court, this might require the President to seek a temporary restraining order to enjoin Congress from proceeding. The President may not want to go down that road since it could require a hearing and an opinion by the court as to the likelihood of the President’s success on the issue. If Cohen does testify about alleged crimes, then, unless he invokes his right to remain silent, he may be implicating himself and could be exposed to prosecution if the statute of limitations has not run out.
I can tell you, if I do qualify as a legal eagle, it astounds me he is being allowed to give this testimony. While it’s possible a court could make some exceptions,I think a court would order him to stop. The idea that I could be representing a client and then testify about his instructions to me and his various comments is just wildly inappropriate. The client owns that privilege and it survives even the client’s death.
Attorney-client privilege is inoperative when an attorney is prosecuted for crimes he commits while working on behalf of a client. But it sounds like most of Cohen’s testimony has nothing to do with any of the issues related to the crimes that landed him in prison.
“From what I’ve seen, Trump hasn’t even made any public statement objecting to Cohen’s testimony before Congress at all.”
Trump did (rightly) raise a stink about A/C priviledge. Now we have to let it play out. Further foot-stomping about it would, of course, be spun as the President throwing a tantrum, and would “raise questions”.
****************
I’ve read elsewhere that for Trump to challenge Cohen for the A-C Privilege violation would be an admission that what Cohen is saying is the truth.
I question whether this is correct.
If an attorney discloses truthful information about his client, that is a violation, but if he LIES about what his client is supposed to have said/done/communicated, that is not a violation? Give me a break.
I had a legal settlement that included a gag order. It was a payoff for damages from a utility company, and they did not want other parties to whom they also had to pay a settlement finding out what the terms of their deal with me was. I made sure that they were not allowed to make false claims to others about what their settlement was to me, and that was the case. They were also covered by the gag order agreement, and even making false claims about what was in the settlement would be a violation.
So it would seem to me that an attorney making false claims about his client would also be in violation of the attorney client privilege.
While I agree, most of Cohen’s testimony does not involve crimes, though he or rather his handlers are claiming some of it could be crimes. A lawyer doesn’t sit with his client and then have the right to tell others about his client’s comments on race, business, etc. It’s not a game lawyers can play. They would also rely on some of Trump’s statements minimizing Cohen’s lawyer role, but again lawyers don’t go down this road. Cohen’s whole testimony is just a political hit job it doesn’t reveal crimes, it’s laughable like a high school kid who turns on a former friend and starts gossiping.
Cohen wasn't hired for his legal skills. He was hired for a role that is actually pretty common in real estate circles -- to make deals behind the scenes for his client, while using attorney-client privilege to shield his client from scrutiny even for totally legitimate matters. The legal profession is filled with sh!tty, borderline criminal actors like this. In a place like New York City it's the only way to get anything done.
Yes if the lawyer is lying it’s even worse. He’s still talking about matters and communications relating to his representation, and throwing in defamatory material as he lies. Even if true, he’s using his special role as an attorney to subject his client to public ridicule. 100% inappropriate.
There's another angle to this that I picked up on at the very beginning of the Cohen saga.
It's looking more and more like Cohen took normal, innocent conversations and dealings ... and fabricated "crimes" out of them for the sole purpose of supporting a crime-fraud exception. He has basically pled guilty to things that aren't even crimes.
The irony is that Cohen gives Trump a high level of deniability here. If a person like Trump suggests a course of action in a matter that involves criminal behavior (even unknowingly), it is the lawyer's legal and ethical obligation to inform the client that the proposed course of action is a crime.
Trump's best defense in all of these matters is going to be: "I did exactly what he advised me to do. He's my lawyer, and I never imagined he would advise me to commit a crime!"
Seems like a pretty crappy way to have to conduct business.
The Democrats don’t care about what is admissible or even what is likely not criminal behavior. They merely want enough that the media can plaster on the front page, as well as discuss endlessly on news shows that will make the President “appear” to have engaged in misdeeds. It is ALL optics at this point. Especially now that he is out of the country negotiating with North Korea. They would rather burn the country down than allow him a win of any kind. And THAT is the scary part.
What a FARCE...........
well I have some ideas for targets to be neutralized without any physical harm
Well, the guy is already burnt toast so, dont know what ansuit would accomplish...
Seems to me there ought to be a way to Mueller for compelling this 1bit error in a 64bit world...
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.