Moet hij vooral doen, megaslimme zet zou dat zijnquote:Op dinsdag 10 april 2018 00:09 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:twitter:CNNSitRoom twitterde op maandag 09-04-2018 om 23:54:18 A source close to the White House says Mueller’s decision to raid the offices of Michael Cohen could well push the President in the direction of taking action against the special counsel’s office, @acosta reports https://t.co/hcNsBbjpr1 https://t.co/mjsuWBKjfR reageer retweet
He's a stable genius!quote:
Campaigne finance violations is me duidelijk, ik ben benieuwd wat de redenen voor bankfraud zouden zijn. Witwassen waarschijnlijk.quote:BREAKING: Trump attorney Cohen is being investigated for possible bank fraud, campaign finance violations, according to a person familiar with the case.
Ja dat betekent dat er wel iets heel belangrijks in moet staan.quote:
quote:The Search of Trump Lawyer Michael Cohen's Office: What We Can Infer Immediately
APRIL 9, 2018 BY KEN WHITE LEAVE A COMMENT
The Very Big News of the day: FBI Agents raided the law office of Michael Cohen, President Trump's lawyer who was involved in payment of $130,000 to adult performer "Stormy Daniels" for a nondisclosure agreement.
Recently I've been listening to the Podcast "Slow Burn," about Watergate. There's a fascinating theme throughout it: when you're living a historical event, how do you know? How can you tell when a development is a Big Deal?
This is a big deal. It's very early on, but here's some things we can already tell.
1. According to Cohen's own lawyer, the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York (widely regarded within itself as being the most important and prestigious U.S. Attorney's Office in the country) secured the search warrants for the FBI. Assuming this report is correct, that means that a very mainstream U.S. Attorney's Office — not just Special Counsel Robert Mueller's office — thought that there was enough for a search warrant here.
2. Moreover, it's not just that the office thought that there was enough for a search warrant. They thought there was enough for a search warrant of an attorney's office for that attorney's client communications. That's a very fraught and extraordinary move that requires multiple levels of authorization within the Department of Justice. The U.S. Attorney's Manual — at Section 9-13.320 — contains the relevant policies and procedures. The highlights:
The feds are only supposed to raid a law firm if less intrusive measures won't work. As the USAM puts it:
In order to avoid impinging on valid attorney-client relationships, prosecutors are expected to take the least intrusive approach consistent with vigorous and effective law enforcement when evidence is sought from an attorney actively engaged in the practice of law. Consideration should be given to obtaining information from other sources or through the use of a subpoena, unless such efforts could compromise the criminal investigation or prosecution, or could result in the obstruction or destruction of evidence, or would otherwise be ineffective.
Such a search requires high-level approval. The USAM requires such a search warrant to be approved by the U.S. Attorney — the head of the office, a Presidential appointee — and requires "consultation" with the Criminal Division of the U.S. Department of Justice. This is not a couple of rogue AUSAs sneaking in a warrant.
Such a search requires an elaborate review process. The basic rule is that the government may not deliberately seize, or review, attorney-client communications. The USAM — and relevant caselaw — therefore require the feds to set up a review process. That process might involve a judge reviewing the materials to separate out what is privileged (or what might fall within an exception to the privilege), or else set up a "dirty team" that does the review but is insulated from the "clean team" running the investigation. Another option is a "special master," an experienced and qualified third-party attorney to do the review. Sometimes the reviewing team will only be identifying and protecting privileged material. Sometimes the reviewing team will be preparing to seek, or to implement, a court ruling that the documents are not privileged. (Robert Mueller is aggressive on this sort of thing; he already sought and obtained a court ruling that some of Paul Manafort's communications with his lawyers were not privileged because they were undertaken for the purpose of fraud — the so-called "crime-fraud exception" to the attorney-client privilege.
3. A Magistrate Judge signed off on this. Federal magistrate judges (appointed by local district judges, not by the President) review search warrant applications. A Magistrate Judge therefore reviewed this application and found probable cause — that is, probable cause to believe that the subject premises (Cohen's office) contains specified evidence of a specified federal crime. Now, Magistrate Judges sometimes are a little too rubber-stampy for my taste. But here, where the Magistrate Judge knew that this would become one of the most scrutinized search warrant applications ever, and because the nature of the warrant of an attorney's office is unusual, you can expect that the Magistrate Judge felt pretty confident that there was enough there.
4. The search warrant application (the lengthy narrative from the FBI agent setting for the evidence) is almost certainly still under seal, and even Michael Cohen doesn't get to see it [yet]. But the FBI would have left the warrant itself — and that shows (1) the federal criminal statutes they were investigating, and (2) the list of items they wanted to seize. Much can be learned for those. Assuming Michael Cohen doesn't release it, watch for it to be leaked.
Again: this is a Big Deal.
I'll follow up with more as it becomes available.
twitter:SethAbramson twitterde op dinsdag 10-04-2018 om 00:17:07 CNN is confirming that that FBI seized electronic Cohen-Trump communications, so if the feds are investigating Michael Cohen for possible bank fraud and campaign finance violations, as the Washington Post alleges, Trump is at best a witness and at worst a possible co-conspirator. https://t.co/6FAf4PhjLE reageer retweet
Gelijk heeft hij.twitter:jdawsey1 twitterde op dinsdag 10-04-2018 om 00:20:16 "It's a disgraceful situation," Trump says of Cohen raid, per pool. "I have this witch hunt constantly going on... It's an attack on our country, what we all stand for." Says the special counsel is the "most conflicted group of people I have ever seen." reageer retweet
Vlak voor de meeting waarin hij met John Bolton gaat bespreken wat er met Syrie moet gebeuren.twitter:costareports twitterde op dinsdag 10-04-2018 om 00:23:26 WH POOL REPORT 6:19 P.M.Trump addressed the Cohen raid at the top of the military leadership meeting.Quick comments: “it’s a disgraceful situation.”“I have this witch hunt constantly going on.”“It’s an attack on our country... what we all stand for.” reageer retweet
Gesproken als een onschuldige man.twitter:
Dit grapje gaat hem waarschijnlijk wel zijn promotie kostenquote:While Berman currently serves as U.S. attorney on an interim basis, it has been reported that President Donald Trump intends to nominate him to permanently serve in the position.
Moet hij vooral doen. Als hij sneller dan snel een mega probleem wil hebben.quote:Op dinsdag 10 april 2018 00:36 schreef clumsy_clown het volgende:Gesproken als een onschuldige man.twitter:
Ik heb het twee minuten volgehouden. Dat verdient een compliment..quote:Op dinsdag 10 april 2018 00:53 schreef Kijkertje het volgende:
Alsof je een toilet hoort doortrekken.quote:Op dinsdag 10 april 2018 00:53 schreef Kijkertje het volgende: