Special counsel seeks testimony from Trump lawyer as prosecutors allege evidence of crime

[berg80]

The special counsel investigating Donald Trump’s handling of classified documents is seeking to compel a lawyer for the former president to testify before a grand jury, a source familiar with the matter said. Prosecutors allege in a sealed filing that they have evidence that some of Trump’s conversations with the attorney were in furtherance of a crime, the source said.


In a sign of an aggressive new legal strategy, first reported by The New York Times, the source said special counsel Jack Smith has asked a judge to allow prosecutors to invoke what’s known as the crime-fraud exception, which would let them sidestep protections afforded to Trump lawyer Evan Corcoran through attorney-client privilege. The source did not say what questions the government is trying to force Corcoran to answer.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/ju...mp-lawyer-prosecutors-allege-eviden-rcna70711

For those unfamiliar with the term "crime fraud exception" it's exactly what the name implies. Attorney client privilege is waved if the advice the client is getting is in service of a crime. It doesn't take much to connect the dots here. Corcoran is the lawyer who wrote the letter claiming there were no more classified docs in Trump's possession. Ooops.

If Corcoran wrote the letter at Don's direction or with his knowledge that is obstruction of justice. Something Don is well practiced at according to Mueller's report.

Obstruction of Justice in the Mueller Report: A Heat Map

The Mueller report describes numerous instances in which President Trump may have obstructed justice. A few days ago, I threw together a quick spreadsheet on Twitter to assess how Special Counsel Robert Mueller seemed to assess the evidence.

www.lawfareblog.com

 

[pknopp]

Waste of taxpayers dollars. With all we have learned the last few months on how politicians routinely mishandle classified information, nothing is going to be done here.

 

[theHawk]

The special counsel investigating Donald Trump’s handling of classified documents is seeking to compel a lawyer for the former president to testify before a grand jury, a source familiar with the matter said. Prosecutors allege in a sealed filing that they have evidence that some of Trump’s conversations with the attorney were in furtherance of a crime, the source said.


In a sign of an aggressive new legal strategy, first reported by The New York Times, the source said special counsel Jack Smith has asked a judge to allow prosecutors to invoke what’s known as the crime-fraud exception, which would let them sidestep protections afforded to Trump lawyer Evan Corcoran through attorney-client privilege. The source did not say what questions the government is trying to force Corcoran to answer.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/ju...mp-lawyer-prosecutors-allege-eviden-rcna70711

For those unfamiliar with the term "crime fraud exception" it's exactly what the name implies. Attorney client privilege is waved if the advice the client is getting is in service of a crime. It doesn't take much to connect the dots here. Corcoran is the lawyer who wrote the letter claiming there were no more classified docs in Trump's possession. Ooops.

If Corcoran wrote the letter at Don's direction or with his knowledge that is obstruction of justice. Something Don is well practiced at according to Mueller's report.

Obstruction of Justice in the Mueller Report: A Heat Map

The Mueller report describes numerous instances in which President Trump may have obstructed justice. A few days ago, I threw together a quick spreadsheet on Twitter to assess how Special Counsel Robert Mueller seemed to assess the evidence.

www.lawfareblog.com

In other words they have nothing, so they are trying to force the lawyer to testify against his own client, which is illegal in this country.

 

[mak2]

Trump is above the law. He will probably be our next President. Our country might not be able to withstand the second four years of Trump, but he will be back and we deserve what we get if he is.

 

[Chillicothe]

With all we have learned the last few months on how politicians routinely mishandle classified information, nothing is going to be done here.

Well, let's let the cake bake.
It seems clear from a wide spectrum of media reports that there are marked differences between the wayward docs under Trump's control, and those discovered in Biden's and Pence's files. Cooperation, for one.

And I would conjecture the old adage -- 'it ain't the crime, it's the cover-up'... that may have a nudge in here too..

Time will tell.
And I'll give credit to Smith for keeping his cards tight to his vest.

 

[pknopp]

Well, let's let the cake bake.
It seems clear from a wide spectrum of media reports that there are marked differences between the wayward docs under Trump's control, and those discovered in Biden's and Pence's files. Cooperation, for one.

All still mishandled.

And I would conjecture the old adage -- 'it ain't the crime, it's the cover-up'... that may have a nudge in here too..

Time will tell.
And I'll give credit to Smith for keeping his cards tight to his vest.

Nothing is going to happen. NY might get Trump but not here.

 

[kyzr]

All still mishandled.
Nothing is going to happen. NY might get Trump but not here.

Biden didn't "mishandle classified documents" he stole them.

If they didn't get Trump by now they aren't going to.

I'm waiting to see if/when the Biden Crime Family gets thrown under the bus to keep him from running ion 2024, tick-tock.

 

[Chillicothe]

All still mishandled.

--------------------------------------------------
Oh yeah. So stipulated.

But there are defining differences. To wit: quantity, level of classification, honesty, forthcomingness, cooperation, and defiance of a lawful subpoena.

Again, to over-drive the nail: 'It ain't the crime, it's the cover-up.

The cake bakes. Patience, Grasshopper.

 

[pknopp]

--------------------------------------------------
Oh yeah. So stipulated.

But there are defining differences. To wit: quantity, level of classification, honesty, forthcomingness, cooperation, and defiance of a lawful subpoena.

Again, to over-drive the nail: 'It ain't the crime, it's the cover-up.

The cake bakes. Patience, Grasshopper.

Just because I admit I robbed a bank doesn't let me off any more than the one who has to get convicted in a court of law.

 

[kyzr]

Just because I admit I robbed a bank doesn't let me off any more than the one who has to get convicted in a court of law.

1. Trump had the authority to declassify the documents he took. So Trump may not have taken classified documents.

2. Biden had NO such authority. He clearly stole classified documents. Did he sell them for profit?

 

[pknopp]

1. Trump had the authority to declassify the documents he took.

But he didn't.

 

[berg80]

Waste of taxpayers dollars. With all we have learned the last few months on how politicians routinely mishandle classified information, nothing is going to be done here.

But not in the same ways. I would go so far as to say the classification system is broken and that many docs are classified that don't need to be. The thing is, Trump's problem is the concealment of the docs he took and then lying about not having any more. That where the crime comes in.

 

[1srelluc]

Meh, another dem "dry hole".

 

[pknopp]

But not in the same ways.

It doesn't matter.

I would go so far as to say the classification system is broken and that many docs are classified that don't need to be. The thing is, Trump's problem is the concealment of the docs he took and then lying about not having any more. That where the crime comes in.

Bidens have been concealed in his garage for years.

 

[kyzr]

But he didn't.

That needs to be decided in court.

 

[DGS49]

There is no crime here, and every single story about this whole caper, from the raid at Mar a Lago to today is just another manifestation of TDS. The laws and regulations concerning the handling of classified information were created and intended to criminalize MIS-handling of classified information by EMPLOYEES of Government, mainly DoD. They were NEVER intended to apply to a President or VP, about whom it is literally INCONCEIVABLE to suppose that they would use these documents or the information contained in them for nefarious purposes. Those claiming otherwise are out of their fucking minds.

Grow the fuck up.

 

[Chillicothe]

Just because I admit I robbed a bank doesn't let me off any more than the one who has to get convicted in a court of law.

Not a good enough analogy.

Let's tweak it a bit: You rob a bank and get caught and you acknowledge you did it and promptly go to trial where you plead guilty to the judge, no jury empaneled, and accept your sentence.

Whereas, the next guy robs a bank, runs, hides, resists arrest, denies he did it, pleads innocent in court, and requires a month long jury trial while continuing to deny he had anything to do with it. There is no regret expressed.

Prosecutors....and courts, it seems.....would likely view both perps differently.

 

[berg80]

It doesn't matter.




Bidens have been concealed in his garage for years.

There is no evidence I'm aware of that Joe knew the docs were there. That is not the case with Trump, who directed that the docs be taken from the WH to MAL.

 

[berg80]

There is no crime here, and every single story about this whole caper, from the raid at Mar a Lago to today is just another manifestation of TDS.

You're saying the magistrate judge who authorized the search has a make believe mental disorder?

 

[pknopp]

Not a good enough analogy.

Let's tweak it a bit: You rob a bank and get caught and you acknowledge you did it and promptly go to trial where you plead guilty to the judge, no jury empaneled, and accept your sentence.

Of guilty.

Whereas, the next guy robs a bank, runs, hides, resists arrest, denies he did it, pleads innocent in court, and requires a month long jury trial while continuing to deny he had anything to do with it. There is no regret expressed.

Prosecutors....and courts, it seems.....would likely view both perps differently.

Maybe so BUT both are guilty and were prosecuted. Hence why nothing will be done.