FBI raids Cohen's office, seizes Stormy Daniels documents

[James Madison]

That would depend on what the seized documents indicate.

Republicans top to bottom signed off on this ... I'm fairly certain that they were certain that a crime was committed and that evidence thereof would be obtained via these searches.
Or, the fact that they're all Republicans speaks to the VAST extent of the anti-trump conspiracy.

They may not have been “certain” a crime was committed and yet seek a search warrant.

I concur with your point “they” did believe they had PC for a crime and PC to believe specific evidence existed at a specific location.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

My question is, who is privy to the seized documents? Is it the Southern NY District Attorney's office or do these go to the Special Prosecutor? Both?

 

[Elixir]

That would depend on what the seized documents indicate.

Republicans top to bottom signed off on this ... I'm fairly certain that they were certain that a crime was committed and that evidence thereof would be obtained via these searches.
Or, the fact that they're all Republicans speaks to the VAST extent of the anti-trump conspiracy.

They may not have been “certain” a crime was committed and yet seek a search warrant.

I concur with your point “they” did believe they had PC for a crime and PC to believe specific evidence existed at a specific location.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wouldn't you expect the bar to be a bit higher in a case where it's the POTUS' lawyer they are asking permission to raid?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

My question is, who is privy to the seized documents? Is it the Southern NY District Attorney's office or do these go to the Special Prosecutor? Both?

Right now, it's the DA. They executed the search warrant based off of info they got from Mueller, but it's their own investigation. If they find something relevant to his stuff, they'll likely turn it over, though.

 

[hurtinbuckaroo]

He's correct. The attorney-client privilege cannot attach regarding communications about a crime "jointly undertaken" by attorney and client.

If, as 45 claims, the Stormy Daniels actions were done without his knowledge, then there's no attorney-client privilege because there was no client involvement/approval/knowledge of what Cohen was doing. So any attorney-client argument is void. The team handling the documents can screen out anything unrelated to Daniels, and Cohen's lawyer would have to come up with some other argument against admissibility.

Maybe they'll raid Cohen's lawyer's office, and then Cohen's lawyer will need a lawyer too.

 

[James Madison]

They may not have been “certain” a crime was committed and yet seek a search warrant.

I concur with your point “they” did believe they had PC for a crime and PC to believe specific evidence existed at a specific location.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wouldn't you expect the bar to be a bit higher in a case where it's the POTUS' lawyer they are asking permission to raid?

Not necessarily. At least not in an instance where “they” have PC, but lack certainty, that a crime was committed, but can perhaps augment their belief, or dispel it, as to whether a crime was committed.

What’s more persuasive for me is the fact they are raiding a lawyer’s files. Lawyer’s files are sacrosanct. So, if I’m inclined this had to be sold on the basis of something more than PC, it isn’t because it potentially involves the President, but because a lawyer’s files, paperwork, etcetera, is involved.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[poster]

There should be no question in anyone's mind that we all are living in a police state at this point.

WTF is a voice of reason doing posting in this thread?

 

[laughing dog]

There should be no question in anyone's mind that we all are living in a police state at this point.

Because police should not get a warrant and search evidence?

 

[Elixir]

There should be no question in anyone's mind that we all are living in a police state at this point.

Because police should not get a warrant and search evidence?

Not unless the subject is HILLAREEMAILS!

 

[poster]

Thank you for the info, James Madison, I've enjoyed reading your posts.

 

[Ford]

There should be no question in anyone's mind that we all are living in a police state at this point.

WTF is a voice of reason doing posting in this thread?

I know, right? There's an old saying that goes "whenever an Assistant Attorney General signs off on a raid of the offices of the lawyer of the President who appointed him, surely it has become a police state."

Why...next thing you know a Special Counsel appointed by the AAG will come out and say the President has committed crimes and should be removed from office! Because police states always hold their leaders accountable!

 

[James Madison]

My question is, who is privy to the seized documents? Is it the Southern NY District Attorney's office or do these go to the Special Prosecutor? Both?

Right now, it's the DA. They executed the search warrant based off of info they got from Mueller, but it's their own investigation. If they find something relevant to his stuff, they'll likely turn it over, though.

If they follow the procedure of some federal attorneys' offices, a team of screeners is utilized to examine the records seized to determine whether they constitute as attorney-client privilege before the prosecutors are given the documents. If some material constitutes as attorney-client privilege, then the procedure is to request a judge permit the privileged information to be given to prosecutors. This team is not likely a team of prosecutors in the DA's office or the DA.

 

[James Madison]

He's correct. The attorney-client privilege cannot attach regarding communications about a crime "jointly undertaken" by attorney and client.

If, as 45 claims, the Stormy Daniels actions were done without his knowledge, then there's no attorney-client privilege because there was no client involvement/approval/knowledge of what Cohen was doing. So any attorney-client argument is void. The team handling the documents can screen out anything unrelated to Daniels, and Cohen's lawyer would have to come up with some other argument against admissibility.

Maybe they'll raid Cohen's lawyer's office, and then Cohen's lawyer will need a lawyer too.

You are correct. Merely having an attorney does not necessarily mean the seized documentation/evidence is protected by the privilege. In addition, "facts" are generally not protected.

 

[Artemus]

FWIW, the raid was reportedly to gain documents on both the Stormy Daniels payout and the Karen McDougal hush money via the National Enquirer.

 

[poster]

My question is, who is privy to the seized documents? Is it the Southern NY District Attorney's office or do these go to the Special Prosecutor? Both?

Right now, it's the DA. They executed the search warrant based off of info they got from Mueller, but it's their own investigation. If they find something relevant to his stuff, they'll likely turn it over, though.

If they follow the procedure of some federal attorneys' offices, a team of screeners is utilized to examine the records seized to determine whether they constitute as attorney-client privilege before the prosecutors are given the documents. If some material constitutes as attorney-client privilege, then the procedure is to request a judge permit the privileged information to be given to prosecutors. This team is not likely a team of prosecutors in the DA's office or the DA.

Are members of the defendant's legal team also present to argue for the defendant's case of supressing documents?

 

[blastula]

Watching MSNBC, Rachel Maddow. It may not be all about Stormy Daniels. Cohen has been involved in a lot of stuff, including Russian Felix Sater, and has been investigated for bank fraud, campaign finance violations and more. There are long involved procedures when involving seizure of records that may involve lawyer - client privileges. This is only done after requests and subpoenas may not be been complied with properly. And any records seized will be scanned by a separate team that will prevent abuses of any lawyer - client privilege. But this will still be squealed and barked at by the right wing press. It is obvious that this was not done without a lot of planning and thought, and with good reason.

I've never seen Rachel Maddow so happy.

 

[repoman]

Does anyone think there is a significant amount of "Parallel Construction" happening in this investigation?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction

Parallel construction is a law enforcement process of building a parallel—or separate—evidentiary basis for a criminal investigation in order to conceal how an investigation actually began

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Does anyone think there is a significant amount of "Parallel Construction" happening in this investigation?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction

Parallel construction is a law enforcement process of building a parallel—or separate—evidentiary basis for a criminal investigation in order to conceal how an investigation actually began

Mueller's mandate (written by Rosenstein) is very broad. So, no. Any criminal act he discovers during his investigation is "how an investigation actually began."

 

[Elixir]

Does anyone think there is a significant amount of "Parallel Construction" happening in this investigation?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parallel_construction

Parallel construction is a law enforcement process of building a parallel—or separate—evidentiary basis for a criminal investigation in order to conceal how an investigation actually began

Mueller's mandate (written by Rosenstein) is very broad. So, no. Any criminal act he discovers during his investigation is "how an investigation actually began."

And with (how many?) guilty pleas already entered, it's hard to construe that no criminal acts have been discovered. Nevertheless, the howls and whining from the right will be deafening for some time to come.
As witch hunts go, this one is already booking record numbers of witches...

 

[repoman]

I am just thinking that with all the information that government agencies dragnet that they are NOT supposed to, that the chance that they don't ALREADY know what exact law have been broken by what exact people seems far fetched.

If there end up being (for example) 100 laws broken by 25 people when this investigation is complete, thinking that the feds ALREADY knew about maybe 12 laws broken by 5 people does not seem crazy.