Posted on 07/26/2018 8:45:37 AM PDT by Kaslin
It starts with the raid, followed by the revelation of what they found in the raid.
NY state will not bar Cohen from practicing law.
It is far more likely the NY branch of the American Bar Association, with the NY governor and attorney general on hand, will host Cohen at a big gathering and give him a “humanitarian” award.
Maybe some question about recording...but I would think none about releasing said recordings.
What if your doctor taped your meeting with him, or disclosed your medical records to the public. Why is this any different. IF they can do this to the president of the US and get away with it, how are we all not safe from the same thing?
Exactly so.
Tapping lawyer client calls is not at all unusual, I can be hard to remember all the details of a long involved discussion. ALL should be covered by attorney client privilege, except if it is a Democrat inspired witch hunt.
Tapping lawyer client calls is not at all unusual, I can be hard to remember all the details of a long involved discussion. ALL should be covered by attorney client privilege, except if it is a Democrat inspired witch hunt.
“...What Kind of Lawyer Would Tape a Client?...“
The kind of lawyer who won’t get many more clients.
> > > WHO would hire him for dog walker?
CNN
MSNBC
ABC
NBC
CBS
New York Times
Washington Post
Harvard
Yale
Berkley
I smell a big, fat Lanny David ugly rat involved. Manny doesn’t give a flying frack what happens to Cohen and Cohen is too butt hurt and/or stupid to see it.
It really depends on whom is hurt by the sharing, doesn't it?
Here’s the part I’m popping corn for: What about this jackhole’s other clients?
I’d be suing this guy’s pants off for malpractice over this. I’d be demanding some sort of arbitrator go in and review every shred of work this guy ever did to ensure there was nothing recorded that could ever be PROFFERED to ANYONE for ANY REASON.
I agree.
So, has anyone actually asked this guy why he records?
I could think of a couple reasons. One, it’s good for transcribing so you can be sure of direction and instructions. Also, if he’s been one to get threats over the phone in the past, he may also do it for that reason.
Conversations between a lawyer and client are considered priviledged communications. It is not supposed to be shared by the lawyer even if nobody is hurt. It is clearly over the line when the intent of the lawyer is to divulge information that the client doesn’t want shared.
My doctor had a picture of me which was taken by another physician after a surgery. He hesitated to send it to ME since it would be exposed in open email due to similar HIPAA restrictions. (In the photo, I was sticking out my tongue, in jest, which made the other physician start to laugh while she was taking the picture.)
My point is this unauthorized, over-the-line disclosure of information will result in NO CONSEQUENCES for Cohen because they disclose information about a Republican, and Republicans are considered fair game.
“It starts with the raid ...”
Oh yes, I remember. How dumb of him to keep recordings in a raid target location. He probably had them on his computer or phone.
Well, maybe he transferred them to a safer place and deleted them from the computer, but snoopers can get hold of deleted data, right?
The raid itself was a relatively rare occurrence. And the release that they even existed was a big no-no.
“And the release that they even existed was a big no-no.”
Someone thought there was a benefit to releasing the recordings. What would be such a benefit that would outweigh the downside of releasing?
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.