The Trump Investigation(s) Thread

[tjg_marantz]

https://twitter.com/kyledcheney/status/ ... 3003009025

[Holman]

Somehow I don't think Don Jr is holding up as well as HRC.

[Scoop20906]

I’m sure he keeps telling them to bring it on.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[GreenGoo]

Somehow I don't think Don Jr is holding up as well as HRC.

That was the toughest thing I've ever seen. I sometimes feel the hatred for HRC is because she's stronger than the hater and they are afraid of her. Especially Rip.

I'm confident historians will treat her better than the American people did, just as I'm confident Drumpf is going to be infamous. He will replace every reference to Nixon as the butt of every political joke.

[Sepiche]

So... this just happened...

Trump Jr. cites attorney-client privilege in not answering panel's questions about discussions with his father

Donald Trump Jr. on Wednesday cited attorney-client privilege to avoid telling lawmakers about a conversation he had with his father, President Donald Trump, after news broke this summer that the younger Trump — and top campaign brass — had met with Russia-connected individuals in Trump Tower during the 2016 campaign.

Though neither Trump Jr. nor the president is an attorney, Trump Jr. told the House Intelligence Committee that there was a lawyer in the room during the discussion, according to the committee’s top Democrat, Rep. Adam Schiff of California. Schiff said he didn’t think it was a legitimate invocation of attorney-client privilege.

[GreenGoo]

So... this just happened...

Rep. Adam Schiff of California. Schiff said he didn’t think it was a legitimate invocation of attorney-client privilege.

Ya think?

Did they at least get the name of the lawyer?

[Holman]

So... this just happened...

Rep. Adam Schiff of California. Schiff said he didn’t think it was a legitimate invocation of attorney-client privilege.

Ya think?

Did they at least get the name of the lawyer?

I'll bet good rubles it was Natalia Veselnitskaya...

[GreenGoo]

If I were a lawyer (or doctor!) I'd walk around listening in on random conversations, then complain about privilege every time someone tried later to talk about the details of the conversation.

I have nothing but a vague idea about how attorney-client privilege works, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't just turn on because a lawyer is nearby. Also, the privilege only applies to conversations between the client and the attorney, I've always assumed. How is talking to your dad privileged?

[Jolor]

Well, you see, Billy, the kind of privileges that only apply to a certain segment of the population - like lawyers - is what our great country must rise against. Privilege and confidence and privacy of conversations is part of what makes us free. Limiting this privilege to attorneys is just, plain wrong. If I tell my dad something in confidence, it should be held in confidence. I don't want to have to tell some lawyer and sign some complicated forms just because I don't really like Mom's rhubarb pie (just kidding - it's the best) just to spare her feelings. It's as simple as that.

[YellowKing]

And that's what makes this whole thing so indefensible.

All I hear from the right is that there's nothing to see here, this is politically motivated, there were no crimes, etc. So if everyone's innocent, why all the lying? Why all the refusals to talk? Why all the pleading the fifth and attorney client privilege? I would think the Trump campaign, being truly innocent, would be more than happy to cooperate fully and clear the air about this giant misunderstanding.

And while they're at it, I'm sure Trump could release his tax returns since there's certainly nothing to hide there either.

[Rip]

The White House is denying that Mueller subpoenaed bank records specifically relating to Trump, not that he subpoenaed bank records at all.

I'm hearing the report has been corrected to indicate it wasn't Trump but affiliated person(s) and/or organizations. Word on the street is it was Manafort and some of his dealing, perhaps including Podesta Group.

[ImLawBoy]

If I were a lawyer (or doctor!) I'd walk around listening in on random conversations, then complain about privilege every time someone tried later to talk about the details of the conversation.

That's not how it works. The privilege is client's (or patient's) privilege, and not the attorney's (or doctor's).

I have nothing but a vague idea about how attorney-client privilege works, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't just turn on because a lawyer is nearby. Also, the privilege only applies to conversations between the client and the attorney, I've always assumed. How is talking to your dad privileged?

If it was a joint discussion among the three parties (Trump, Jr., and the attorney), then it could conceivably be attorney-client privileged. I'm not an expert on this (I really don't represent clients in the traditional sense, so this doesn't apply to me day to day), but I think the attorney would need to be representing both parties for their communications to be privileged. If he's only representing one of them, then the privilege is waived by the presence of (and necessary disclosure to) the unrepresented party. (All of that may be changed by the terms of a non-disclosure agreement that may be in place, but I don't know how that would work.)

[Skinypupy]

In my head, I'm envisioning Trump Jr. invoking attorney client privilege the same way Michael Scott declares bankruptcy.

[Kurth]

If I were a lawyer (or doctor!) I'd walk around listening in on random conversations, then complain about privilege every time someone tried later to talk about the details of the conversation.

That's not how it works. The privilege is client's (or patient's) privilege, and not the attorney's (or doctor's).

I have nothing but a vague idea about how attorney-client privilege works, but I'm pretty sure it doesn't just turn on because a lawyer is nearby. Also, the privilege only applies to conversations between the client and the attorney, I've always assumed. How is talking to your dad privileged?

If it was a joint discussion among the three parties (Trump, Jr., and the attorney), then it could conceivably be attorney-client privileged. I'm not an expert on this (I really don't represent clients in the traditional sense, so this doesn't apply to me day to day), but I think the attorney would need to be representing both parties for their communications to be privileged. If he's only representing one of them, then the privilege is waived by the presence of (and necessary disclosure to) the unrepresented party. (All of that may be changed by the terms of a non-disclosure agreement that may be in place, but I don't know how that would work.)

Yes to all of this good law-splaining. One clarification: If two separate parties want to have a joint conversation with a lawyer representing one (or both) of those parties, they need to rely on the common interest doctrine to maintain the privilege. In order to invoke common interest, they really must have nearly identical interests in the matter. A written agreement setting out the terms of the common interest (or, better yet, a joint defense agreement "JDA") is a smart thing to have in place before those joint discussions take place, but isn't actually necessary to establish common interest.

So, depending on what Trump, Jr. and mystery lawyer were talking about, the substance of those conversations may very well have been privileged. But remember, the attorney client privilege doesn't immediately protect everything that's said or done in the presence of your attorney. The substantive communication must be one between a lawyer and a client and has to be taking place for the purpose of providing legal advice.

[Jaymann]

So "locker room" talk is not protected?

[malchior]

One clarification: If two separate parties want to have a joint conversation with a lawyer representing one (or both) of those parties, they need to rely on the common interest doctrine to maintain the privilege. In order to invoke common interest, they really must have nearly identical interests in the matter.

I'd say he and his father have a common interest in not getting financially destroyed by Russian kompromat. Does that qualify?

[Remus West]

Assuming that Trump is guilty as hell like everyone thinks and gets caught like everyone hopes, what happens when Putin discards his now useless toy with an injection of poison? Do we get angry and armed or send him a thank you note?

[Rip]

It would seem the toll on the FBI is pretty steep so far as well.

A senior Justice Department official was demoted this week amid an ongoing investigation into his contacts with the opposition research firm responsible for the anti-Trump “dossier,” the department confirmed to Fox News.

Until Wednesday morning, Bruce G. Ohr held two titles at DOJ: associate deputy attorney general, a post that placed him four doors down from his boss, Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein; and director of the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF), a program described by the department as “the centerpiece of the attorney general’s drug strategy.”

Ohr will retain his OCDETF title but has been stripped of his higher post and ousted from his office on the fourth floor of “Main Justice.”

Additionally, House investigators have determined that Ohr met shortly after the election with Glenn Simpson, the founder of Fusion GPS – the opposition research firm that hired Steele to compile the dossier with funds supplied by the Hillary Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee. By that point, according to published reports, the dossier had been in the hands of the FBI, which exists under the aegis of DOJ, for some five months, and the surveillance on Page had been commenced more than two months prior.

The contacts between Ohr and Steele, and between Ohr and Simpson, have not been publicly disclosed nor shared with HPSCI staff.

The panel has issued numerous subpoenas for documents and witnesses related to the dossier but claims DOJ and FBI have “stonewalled,” an assertion that House Speaker Paul Ryan, R-Wis., seconded in a rare public statement in October.

While the agencies say they have cooperated extensively with Nunes and his team, including the provision of several hundred pages of classified documents relating to the dossier, it was only last weekend that DOJ and FBI agreed to make available to the committee for questioning Peter Strzok, the high-ranking FBI official who was disciplined in July for having sent-anti-Trump texts to a colleague while playing a decisive role in last year’s investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s private server.

Strzok was removed from the staff of Special Counsel Robert Mueller, who is probing allegations of collusion between the Trump campaign and the Russian government, and demoted to a position on the FBI’s human resources division. The agencies’ decision to make Strzok available to House investigators came on the same day the New York Times and Washington Post disclosed the existence of the anti-Trump text messages, and Fox News disclosed that Strzok’s conduct in the Clinton case was under review by the FBI’s Office of Inspector General.

The demotion of Ohr thus marked the second time within a matter of months that the Justice Department and the FBI have disciplined for misconduct a senior official connected in some form or fashion to the Trump-Russia case.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/12 ... -firm.html

The investigations are breeding investigations.

[hepcat]

That just tells me that the FBI is doing their job and trying to protect Americans.

Keep up the good work!

[ImLawBoy]

Just saw that Popehat has a nice lawspaliner on the Don Jr. attorney-client privilege issue. Worth a read if you're interested in the issue.

[malchior]

Sounds like the guy might be a victim of politics versus bad conduct; hopefully the investigation is run by someone as fair as Mueller.

[malchior]

At the hearing this morning - it partially featured a review of the Mueller investigation

https://twitter.com/NatashaBertrand/sta ... 2375557120

[Captain Caveman]

Adam Schiff is raising the alarm that he suspects the House Investigation is about to be shut down and that the Mueller investigation is in peril. First tweet starts a thread that ends with the next tweet warning about what's coming soon for Mueller:

https://twitter.com/RepAdamSchiff/statu ... 6807769088

https://twitter.com/RepAdamSchiff/statu ... 0201416705

[Octavious]

If they close the investigation and start investigating Clinton I will lose my mind.

[Zaxxon]

Given your avatar, that's especially concerning.

[Octavious]

Every day that avatar is more and more accurate to my mood. Seriously every god damn day there is something horrible this piece of crap is doing.

[Holman]

FBI Deputy Director McCabe sscheduled to testify Tuesday to House Intelligence -- but will he? "If McCabe is still there," says one panel Republican. And another, Gowdy, tells FoxNews he'd a"be a little bit surprised if he is still an employee of the FBI this time next week."

I wonder if Trump will take advantage of the holiday recess to try out a Saturday Night Massacre?

[GreenGoo]

How does being employed or not affect his ability to testify?

[em2nought]

If they close the investigation and start investigating Clinton I will lose my mind.

There is now a shotgun made specifically for this disease

[Vorret]

[Rip]

If they close the investigation and start investigating Clinton I will lose my mind.

There is now a shotgun made specifically for this disease

If you are saying what I think you are, that shit ain't cool.

Fix it!

[Max Peck]

How does being employed or not affect his ability to testify?

As the new head of the FBI, Jared Kushner would be the one giving testimony.

[GreenGoo]

Wouldn't the person with the information and/or specifically involved at the time of the events in question be the one to testify? Hiring a new deputy head and then asking them to testify a week later seems too obviously a scam to me.

[Scoop20906]

If they close the investigation and start investigating Clinton I will lose my mind.

There is now a shotgun made specifically for this disease

If you are saying what I think you are, that shit ain't cool.

Fix it!

I'll back up Rip on this. This post is inappropriate, isn't funny or cool. I don't think anyone on OO wants you making these kinds of posts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Holman]

Wouldn't the person with the information and/or specifically involved at the time of the events in question be the one to testify? Hiring a new deputy head and then asking them to testify a week later seems too obviously a scam to me.

I don't think it's about preventing him from testifying so much as teasing the idea of a purge at the FBI.

He's signaling acceptance of Trump's claim that the Russia Investigation is all Deep State lies.

[Enough]

If they close the investigation and start investigating Clinton I will lose my mind.

There is now a shotgun made specifically for this disease

If you are saying what I think you are, that shit ain't cool.

Fix it!

I'll back up Rip on this. This post is inappropriate, isn't funny or cool. I don't think anyone on OO wants you making these kinds of posts.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As someone who has lost friends to suicide I wholeheartedly agree.

[Hamlet3145]

If Mueller is fired, that is my take it to the streets moment.

[Kraken]

If Mueller is fired, that is my take it to the streets moment.

It looks like the House intelligence (hah) committee is getting the bum's rush. Not that I ever had any faith in the House to begin with...but that does make Mueller even more important.

WASHINGTON — The House Intelligence Committee is racing to complete its investigation of Russia’s interference in the 2016 presidential election, scheduling a host of witness interviews in Washington and New York for next week as Congress heads for its break, and, Democrats said, leaving other leads unfollowed.

Some of the most important witnesses are to be interviewed in New York by committee staff early next week, possibly leaving Democrats to choose between attending those depositions or voting on the massive tax bill coming before the House.

And in an indication that Republicans hope to wrap up their inquiry, the House committee has yet to schedule a single interview after the holidays, according to two committee officials familiar with the schedule.

[pr0ner]

Trump's lawyers are supposed to meet with Mueller next week.

That will be...interesting. Especially if Mueller winds up fired shortly thereafter. Which is a current rumor.

[em2nought]

If they close the investigation and start investigating Clinton I will lose my mind.

There is now a shotgun made specifically for this disease

If you are saying what I think you are, that shit ain't cool.

Fix it!

Actually, I wasn't saying what you thought I was as that didn't even occur to me until just now. I was saying basically the opposite in a "What would Octavious' avatar do?" manner. I apologize if people took it the wrong way, like I say hadn't even occurred to me at the time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E73RM9gS7bU