Posted on 01/24/2018 12:57:10 PM PST by detective
Shortened title.
Full title: Why is it problematic that @Comey is now claiming Columbia Professor Daniel Richman is his lawyer? Here's why:
Richman received 4 of the seven memos Comey took with him after he was fired as FBI Director by President Trump.
When you're fired, you're not allowed to take documents containing classified information with you as 'personal papers'.
The Hill reported FOUR of the seven memos Comey took with him contained classified information.
(Excerpt) Read more at threadreaderapp.com ...
Two questions:
1) Does the professor have a current license to practice law?
2) Comey testified before Congress that the professor was a personal friend, not his legal counsel. Is Comey subject to a criminal referral for perjury?
How did Comey get his memos to leak? He was fired en route to.LA when Trump crew cleared his office at F-I HQ.sounds like he’d already leaked them to his friends before.
As I understand attorney-client privilege, it does not apply if: (a) the communication was made in the presence of individuals who were neither attorney nor client, or was disclosed to such individuals, (b) the communication was made for the purpose of committing a crime or tort, or (c) the client has waived the privilege (for example by publicly disclosing the communication).
If I understand correctly, (allegedly) Corrupt Comey does not have that privilege with his lawyer/publicist under (a) and under (c).
No court would allow him to represent Comey in a criminal trial because he would be the star witness.
The lawyer also committed a criminal act. Charge them both.
The only reason Comey would call him his "lawyer" was that he wants to protect the confidentiality of his communications with the guy.
I laughed, but it would make sense from a litigation perspective...
I wish I had thought to say “awkwardly tall, gay man”
My kingdom for an edit button!
How CONVENIENT!!! We are INFESTED with CORRUPTION in the FBI!!!!! INFESTED!!!
The protection they’re fabricating is to enable Richman to provide cover for Comey. It’s not really to protect Comey directly.
If Nunes for example asks Richman, “what did Comey say to you or what did you do based on your discussions with him”, Richman can claim the communication was in the course of attorney-client relationship and refuse to answer.
Without the privilege he can be forced to answer that question under threat of contempt.
Comey sent Richman the information for the specific purpose of leaking it to the media. So Richman was, in fact, a co-conspirator in the matter. There is no attorney-client relationship when the attorney is complicit in a crime.
P.S. -- Richman is probably in a position now where he'd rather not even admit that he was Comey's lawyer anyway.
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.