Agree about Snell and I didn't read the article (late at night). Always a nagging sense someone wanted tfg in the White House. Also, I recall that staff didn't show him certain things, or didn't want to.
Hay! My Uncle Bill used to teach Business Law at that podunk college.
Off Topic
My Uncle Bill owns a still on the hill,
An' he puts up a gallon or two.
An' the birds in the sky,
Get so high they can not fly
Just from sniffin' that good old Mountain Dew
Somewhere I saw a couple of folks lauding Nicolle Wallace's show on Friday. I'm rewatching it now. I think it's damn good stuff. So if you're interested:
ETA: Hang on for Brandon Van Grack, former Senior Justice Department Lawyer and Federal Prosecutor who previously investigated Michael Flynn under the Espionage Act, at the top of the second hour. Boy howdy.
Well, my Uncle Mort,
He is sawed off, and short,
Only measures about 5'2",
But he thinks he's a giant,
If you give him a pint,
Of that good ol' mountain dew!
Bob Costa does a 5-minute catch-up this morning from West Palm.
Robert Costa @costareports 38m
Good morning from West Palm Beach. Our report this morning @CBSMornings: federal investigators were highly alarmed that documents derived from human intel sources risked being compromised at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago storage facility.
Watching yesterday's Deadline WhiteHouse again, one bit from Andrew Weisman that went over my head yesterday - as shocked as everyone is about the number of secret documents listed in the affidavit (which was written PRIOR to the search) does not include what they removed after the search. We don't yet know the quantity and the classifications of those items yet.
Think about that.
Another part of the discussion was if the documents are so sensitive that prosecuting someone for them might be impossible without exposing super sekrit stuff. Frank Figluzzi (sp?) pointed out that might be why they're focusing on the obstruction charges, since that could be easier to prove without exposing classified info.
I do recommend spending as much of the two hour show as you can, but definitely the first segment.
Also, putting on the devil's advocate hat here, is it possible that Trump was the useful idiot here and someone else has been manipulating him and THAT person is the DOJ's target subject. Or tfg is a target, but there's other targets as well. Kash Patel I'm it's you.
Kendra wrote: ↑Sat Aug 27, 2022 11:19 amWatching yesterday's Deadline WhiteHouse again, one bit from Andrew Weisman that went over my head yesterday - as shocked as everyone is about the number of secret documents listed in the affidavit (which was written PRIOR to the search) does not include what they removed after the search. We don't yet know the quantity and the classifications of those items yet.
You and me both.
Agree about the first hour, which is amazing. Then there's a brief bit on Biden, then back to Mara-Fuckup. Again I recommend listening to Brandon Van Grack--I had to listen three times to get what he was saying what he has gleaned from the placement of some redactions and from the level of the people who are backing this.
Donald Trump could stand in the middle of Fifth Avenue and hand a list of American spies to Vladimir Putin and not lose any supporters, but tell me again how this isn't some fucked up cult. what in actual fuck
I was reading the article, and it's talking about the large number of captures and kills being in "the last few years." So it isn't something that only arose since Trump took the docs.
Here is my question regarding the taint team and privileged communication between lawyer and client.
I think I understand the basic premise that all communications between lawyers and client are privileged with some notable exceptions. Criming by either party is one. I also believe that if an uninvolved person is present, that this also fouls privilege.
I would have to assume that any written correspondence between tfg's counsel and him would be emblazoned with something like, "PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION BETWEEN LAWYER AND CLIENT." On the other hand if a letter from counsel omits this heading then it is not subject to privilege.
Which government lawyers are the lawyers for tfg? The AG and his staff? The Solicitor General? White House counsel? Is communication privileged from all government lawyers--even some low-level advisory counsel for the USDA (as an extreme example).
I presume that Roodles, Squidney, Eastman Kodak, Ellis, Habbibi, and the rest are his lawyers even if someone else pays their fees.
Finally, if I am correct regarding the loss of privilege if a stranger is privy to discussions between lawyer and client, does this principle extend to written communications that tfg keeps affixed with a magnet to his refrigerator so that anyone in the kitchen can see it when they have a midnight snack?
How do we know that tfg kept all privileged communications private and not out in the open?
The talking heads on the teevee need to explain this lawyer-client privilege thingy more better to us plebs.
Trump-appointed Judge issues Order that she is preliminarily indicating an intent to grant Trump’s request for appointment of Special Master, but sets hearing for next week to hear argument. Also Orders list of documents seized be provided to her under seal for review.
Fun fact: by the time of the hearing all relevant private documents will already have been separated by the FBI and their reviewer, many of them have already been returned. The potential assignment of a Special Master will be tricky, the person will have to carry a very top security clearance. Does the former guy really claim he has letters to or from his private attorneys intermingled in all his messy office?
I didn't read the article (late at night). Always a nagging sense someone wanted tfg in the White House. Also, I recall that staff didn't show him certain things, or didn't want to.
it's you.
Presidential Records!
