Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 169: Check Your (Attorney-Client) Privilege

(+) Yeah! (+)

Jakyl25 posted...

Corrik posted...

Jakyl25 posted...

No one on Earth has ever been as skilled and awesome as the most confident white people think they are.

What

And why do you insert race into so many of your posts.

I speak truth to power

No. You race bait like a large portion of liberals because you think it extends you some moral superiority.
---

Corrik posted...

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Corrik posted...

No reason for him to hire an attorney tbqh.

"A lawyer who represents himself is a fool for a client."

There are a million reasons a smart lawyer wouldn't represent themselves, tbh.

There are millions ($$$$) reasons why he should just defend himself.

Mostly because he is guaranteed to be pardoned afterwards even if he fails.

wow you're really just laying the corruption out there and not even trying to hide it, huh?
---

If Cohen were pardoned, wouldn't he lose the right to remain silent, since he could no longer incriminate himself?
---

Forceful_Dragon posted...

Inviso posted...

Trump can't pardon state crimes.

But isn't he under federal investigation at the moment? Or is there a state led component as well? Because I was under the impression it was all federal.

I don't see how it couldn't be. He was told to be looked at by a federal investigation. The FBI raided him and the DOJ is building a case.
---

Forceful_Dragon posted...

Inviso posted...

Trump can't pardon state crimes.

But isn't he under federal investigation at the moment? Or is there a state led component as well? Because I was under the impression it was all federal.

Oh. New York federal prosecutors. I thought that meant New York state, but nope. I was wrong.
---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Corrik posted...

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Corrik posted...

No reason for him to hire an attorney tbqh.

"A lawyer who represents himself is a fool for a client."

There are a million reasons a smart lawyer wouldn't represent themselves, tbh.

There are millions ($$$$) reasons why he should just defend himself.

Mostly because he is guaranteed to be pardoned afterwards even if he fails.

wow you're really just laying the corruption out there and not even trying to hide it, huh?

Again. I speak in common sense while you all just dance around it and act oblivious. Ofc Cohen would be pardoned if he were convicted of something.
---

MalcolmMasher posted...

If Cohen were pardoned, wouldn't he lose the right to remain silent, since he could no longer incriminate himself?

yes
---

MalcolmMasher posted...

If Cohen were pardoned, wouldn't he lose the right to remain silent, since he could no longer incriminate himself?

Yes.
---

NFUN posted...

MalcolmMasher posted...

If Cohen were pardoned, wouldn't he lose the right to remain silent, since he could no longer incriminate himself?

yes

The answer is actually no. Not that it matters.
---

I thought we had seen peak Lawful Neutral Corrik before, but I was wrong!
---

Corrik posted...

Again. I speak in common sense while you all just dance around it and act oblivious. Ofc Cohen would be pardoned if he were convicted of something.

But do you think it would be RIGHT for that to happen?

I'm not saying you are wrong and that it's not a thing that could happen, but is it a thing that SHOULD happen?

If Cohen is convicted on crimes he may have committed on behalf of Trump then why should Trump be able to pardon those crimes?
---

Oh wait thats right, Im supposed to add something racial to my posts...

The severe systemic bias against Native Americans is often overlooked because they are a relatively small part of our population.
---

Forceful_Dragon posted...

Corrik posted...

Again. I speak in common sense while you all just dance around it and act oblivious. Ofc Cohen would be pardoned if he were convicted of something.

But do you think it would be RIGHT for that to happen?

I'm not saying you are wrong and that it's not a thing that could happen, but is it a thing that SHOULD happen?

If Cohen is convicted on crimes he may have committed on behalf of Trump then why should Trump be able to pardon those crimes?

I mean, the pardon really isn't right in 99% of its uses. It is obviously letting the president assert his personal choice over the law.
---

I like how he just won't say "no".

How very Pence-like.
---

Corrik posted...

NFUN posted...

MalcolmMasher posted...

If Cohen were pardoned, wouldn't he lose the right to remain silent, since he could no longer incriminate himself?

yes

The answer is actually no. Not that it matters.

Can I get a link? Because I'm seeing conflicting stuff on this all over the place. The consensus being that as long as you wouldn't be incriminating yourself in a state-level investigation of the same crimes you would be compelled to testify. Also that immunity could be granted in some cases which would further compel someone to testify even more strongly than a federal pardon.

But I've yet to find a clear cut and definitive piece on the issue.
---

Corrik posted...

I mean, the pardon really isn't right in 99% of its uses. It is obviously letting the president assert his personal choice over the law.

Forceful_Dragon posted...

But do you think it would be RIGHT for that to happen?

I want to you know your personal opinion. With reasoning if possible.
---

Forceful_Dragon posted...

Corrik posted...

NFUN posted...

MalcolmMasher posted...

If Cohen were pardoned, wouldn't he lose the right to remain silent, since he could no longer incriminate himself?

yes

The answer is actually no. Not that it matters.

Can I get a link? Because I'm seeing conflicting stuff on this all over the place. The consensus being that as long as you wouldn't be incriminating yourself in a state-level investigation of the same crimes you would be compelled to testify. Also that immunity could be granted in some cases which would further compel someone to testify even more strongly than a federal pardon.

But I've yet to find a clear cut and definitive piece on the issue.

Corrik is simply wrong here.
---

I was assuming that Corrik was implying that, if Trump is willing to pardon Cohen from his current crimes, he would also be inclined to pardon him for refusing to testify (thus earning a new conviction for contempt or obstruction or whatever charge it is.)
---

Forceful_Dragon posted...

Corrik posted...

I mean, the pardon really isn't right in 99% of its uses. It is obviously letting the president assert his personal choice over the law.

Forceful_Dragon posted...

But do you think it would be RIGHT for that to happen?

I want to you know your personal opinion. With reasoning if possible.

I think almost every pardon is wrong. I cannot comment on the supposed conviction of someone who hasn't even been charged yet. I will say that it is very unlikely that it would be right. However, there is zero chance it wouldn't happen if convicted.
---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Forceful_Dragon posted...

Corrik posted...

NFUN posted...

MalcolmMasher posted...

If Cohen were pardoned, wouldn't he lose the right to remain silent, since he could no longer incriminate himself?

yes

The answer is actually no. Not that it matters.

Can I get a link? Because I'm seeing conflicting stuff on this all over the place. The consensus being that as long as you wouldn't be incriminating yourself in a state-level investigation of the same crimes you would be compelled to testify. Also that immunity could be granted in some cases which would further compel someone to testify even more strongly than a federal pardon.

But I've yet to find a clear cut and definitive piece on the issue.

Corrik is simply wrong here.

I am not wrong here. You are just saying what you want the answer to be.
---

Inviso posted...

I was assuming that Corrik was implying that, if Trump is willing to pardon Cohen from his current crimes, he would also be inclined to pardon him for refusing to testify (thus earning a new conviction for contempt or obstruction or whatever charge it is.)

You cannot be tried twice for the same crime.

However, you can be tried for the same charge if different situations. For example, if tried for perjury in one case, you could be tried for it again in another.

Just because someone pardoned you for a crime doesn't mean you could not be incriminating yourself in another way. That said, I have no reason to believe that is relevant at this time anyways so it doesn't matter like I said.
---

Corrik posted...

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Forceful_Dragon posted...

Corrik posted...

NFUN posted...

MalcolmMasher posted...

If Cohen were pardoned, wouldn't he lose the right to remain silent, since he could no longer incriminate himself?

yes

The answer is actually no. Not that it matters.

Can I get a link? Because I'm seeing conflicting stuff on this all over the place. The consensus being that as long as you wouldn't be incriminating yourself in a state-level investigation of the same crimes you would be compelled to testify. Also that immunity could be granted in some cases which would further compel someone to testify even more strongly than a federal pardon.

But I've yet to find a clear cut and definitive piece on the issue.

Corrik is simply wrong here.

I am not wrong here. You are just saying what you want the answer to be.

Corrik, literally all 10 links on the first page of Google for "pardon lose the right to 5th amendment" say you're wrong, and reading the first 3 they cite multiple court cases.

The ball is in your court to prove you're not talking directly from your anus.
---

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Corrik posted...

ChaosTonyV4 posted...

Forceful_Dragon posted...

Corrik posted...

NFUN posted...

MalcolmMasher posted...

If Cohen were pardoned, wouldn't he lose the right to remain silent, since he could no longer incriminate himself?

yes

The answer is actually no. Not that it matters.

Can I get a link? Because I'm seeing conflicting stuff on this all over the place. The consensus being that as long as you wouldn't be incriminating yourself in a state-level investigation of the same crimes you would be compelled to testify. Also that immunity could be granted in some cases which would further compel someone to testify even more strongly than a federal pardon.

But I've yet to find a clear cut and definitive piece on the issue.

Corrik is simply wrong here.

I am not wrong here. You are just saying what you want the answer to be.

Corrik, literally all 10 links on the first page of Google for "pardon lose the right to 5th amendment" say you're wrong, and reading the first 3 they cite multiple court cases.

The ball is in your court to prove you're not talking directly from your anus.

I love how people once again think if they Google something for 10 seconds that they are experts.
---

Corrik posted...

Inviso posted...

I was assuming that Corrik was implying that, if Trump is willing to pardon Cohen from his current crimes, he would also be inclined to pardon him for refusing to testify (thus earning a new conviction for contempt or obstruction or whatever charge it is.)

You cannot be tried twice for the same crime.

However, you can be tried for the same charge if different situations. For example, if tried for perjury in one case, you could be tried for it again in another.

Just because someone pardoned you for a crime doesn't mean you could not be incriminating yourself in another way. That said, I have no reason to believe that is relevant at this time anyways so it doesn't matter like I said.

I didn't say he was being tried for the same crime twice. I said he was pardoned once, compelled to testify, refuses to testify (thus nailing him with a new obstruction/contempt charge), and gets pardoned again.
---

Corrik posted...

I love how people once again think if they Google something for 10 seconds that they are experts.

well, google does often provide answers to questions
---

Corrik posted...

I love how people once again think if they Google something for 10 seconds that they are experts.

So are you dropping the ball?
---

Inviso posted...

Corrik posted...

Inviso posted...

I was assuming that Corrik was implying that, if Trump is willing to pardon Cohen from his current crimes, he would also be inclined to pardon him for refusing to testify (thus earning a new conviction for contempt or obstruction or whatever charge it is.)

You cannot be tried twice for the same crime.

However, you can be tried for the same charge if different situations. For example, if tried for perjury in one case, you could be tried for it again in another.

Just because someone pardoned you for a crime doesn't mean you could not be incriminating yourself in another way. That said, I have no reason to believe that is relevant at this time anyways so it doesn't matter like I said.

I didn't say he was being tried for the same crime twice. I said he was pardoned once, compelled to testify, refuses to testify (thus nailing him with a new obstruction/contempt charge), and gets pardoned again.

Hold on. Let me see what you are talking about because I think we are on different pages.
---

Corrik posted...

I love how people once again think if they Google something for 10 seconds that they are experts.

"No one can find evidence to support my position and I refuse to provide it, I'm right by default."

K.
---

Inviso posted...

Corrik posted...

Inviso posted...

I was assuming that Corrik was implying that, if Trump is willing to pardon Cohen from his current crimes, he would also be inclined to pardon him for refusing to testify (thus earning a new conviction for contempt or obstruction or whatever charge it is.)

You cannot be tried twice for the same crime.

However, you can be tried for the same charge if different situations. For example, if tried for perjury in one case, you could be tried for it again in another.

Just because someone pardoned you for a crime doesn't mean you could not be incriminating yourself in another way. That said, I have no reason to believe that is relevant at this time anyways so it doesn't matter like I said.

I didn't say he was being tried for the same crime twice. I said he was pardoned once, compelled to testify, refuses to testify (thus nailing him with a new obstruction/contempt charge), and gets pardoned again.

Okay. Let me explain what I am saying. Because I think we are on different pages.

If Cohen went to trial and he was eventually convicted of something, let's say wire fraud.

Trump pardons him for wire fraud. Then they afterwards try to question him in regards to another trial or investigation, he can still plead the 5th and refuse to answer.

Even if granted full immunity he could refuse.

There is nothing they can do to stop it.

The president has a literal pardon Trump card on anything they could do.

That said, I do not think any of this actually applies.
---

top shelf discussion going on here I see
---

The Mana Sword posted...

top shelf discussion going on here I see

The only thing I can think of is that they are talking about preemptive unlimited (full) pardons or something.
---

Then they afterwards try to question him in regards to another trial or investigation

This is the part you're losing the thread on. They're saying he'd be questioned about the wire fraud again in this case, and because he'd already been pardoned he cannot incriminate himself, thus cannot plead the fifth.
---

JeffreyRaze posted...

Then they afterwards try to question him in regards to another trial or investigation

This is the part you're losing the thread on. They're saying he'd be questioned about the wire fraud again in this case, and because he'd already been pardoned he cannot incriminate himself, thus cannot plead the fifth.

He can't be tried again for the same case. He was alrdy convicted. Then pardoned for it afterwards.
---

Right, but he could be questioned about other parties to the same crime. It wouldn't be about convicting him, it'd be about him being forced to expose other conspirators.
---

Corrik posted...

JeffreyRaze posted...

Then they afterwards try to question him in regards to another trial or investigation

This is the part you're losing the thread on. They're saying he'd be questioned about the wire fraud again in this case, and because he'd already been pardoned he cannot incriminate himself, thus cannot plead the fifth.

He can't be tried again for the same case. He was alrdy convicted. Then pardoned for it afterwards.

ok but testifying doesn't mean you're being tried??
---

JeffreyRaze posted...

Right, but he could be questioned about other parties to the same crime. It wouldn't be about convicting him, it'd be about him being forced to expose other conspirators.

He hasn't even been charged with anything yet.

Most think it is some wire fraud thing in regards to Story Daniels or something.

What does that have to do with a Russian collusion probe? But, yes, if he is not fully pardoned and only pardoned for what he is convicted for he can still plead the 5th because he could be incriminating himself against other crimes not pardoned already despite the pardon for that specific crime. The prosecution has no way to prove he is not because he doesn't have to state what he is pleading the 5th in regards to.
---

The connection to the Russian probe is that if he's aware of collusion between Trump and Russia and he participated in some way, a pardon would leave him in a position where he could be forced to testify about Trump's involvement. As for whether this is possible, there's precedent for it working that way, so the prosecution wouldn't need to prove anything about what he was pleading the 5th about.
---

JeffreyRaze posted...

The connection to the Russian probe is that if he's aware of collusion between Trump and Russia and he participated in some way, a pardon would leave him in a position where he could be forced to testify about Trump's involvement. As for whether this is possible, there's precedent for it working that way, so the prosecution wouldn't need to prove anything about what he was pleading the 5th about.

That would only work in a Full Pardon. That is why I said he will be pardoned if convicted. And, why I said I doubt it is even relevant.

What is really going on is they are trying to likely extract a plea so he will betray Attorney-Client privileges to aid the investigation. And, it is why quite a few have come out and said this Cohen case could have repercussions for American law.

Edit: This is why I said he is probably better off defending himself. Because they could bleed him dry in legal fees while dragging it out otherwise.
---

I don't know enough to comment further on this, but hopefully you understand what people here were saying whether or not you agree with it.
---

JeffreyRaze posted...

I don't know enough to comment further on this, but hopefully you understand what people here were saying whether or not you agree with it.

I think we were on different pages. I think they were referring to preemptive full pardons.
---

I think we were pretty much all thinking of regular pardons.

-person is convicted regarding crime A
-person is pardoned for crime A
-person can no longer refuse to answer questions regarding crime A for reasons of implicating oneself.

I don't think anyone was implying that Cohen would get pardoned for jaywalking and would then have to confess to everything else.

Now there are still other ways to refuse to testify. Cohen could potentially marry Donald Trump and then refuse to implicate his spouse, for example.
---

Forceful_Dragon posted...

I think we were pretty much all thinking of regular pardons.

-person is convicted regarding crime A
-person is pardoned for crime A
-person can no longer refuse to answer questions regarding crime A for reasons of implicating oneself.

I don't think anyone was implying that Cohen would get pardoned for jaywalking and would then have to confess to everything else.

Now there are still other ways to refuse to testify. Cohen could potentially marry Donald Trump and then refuse to implicate his spouse, for example.

You can still claim the 5th because answering questions regarding that could incriminate you against other crimes and you don't have to state what they were. So, it is hard to hold you in contempt because they do not know what you are pleading the 5th against.
---

As long as Cohen swats Donald's hand away, this becoming canon would be okay.
---

Corrik posted...

Forceful_Dragon posted...

I think we were pretty much all thinking of regular pardons.

-person is convicted regarding crime A
-person is pardoned for crime A
-person can no longer refuse to answer questions regarding crime A for reasons of implicating oneself.

I don't think anyone was implying that Cohen would get pardoned for jaywalking and would then have to confess to everything else.

Now there are still other ways to refuse to testify. Cohen could potentially marry Donald Trump and then refuse to implicate his spouse, for example.

You can still claim the 5th because answering questions regarding that could incriminate you against other crimes and you don't have to state what they were. So, it is hard to hold you in contempt because they do not know what you are pleading the 5th against.

That's only true as a defendant. He'd be a witness, and witnesses can be forced by law to testify.
---

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/986432143189512192

Um.
---

I see Spy!
---

Donald in the past week:
"They call him a Spy, but I am more a Spy than he is."
"No Collusion or Obstruction (other than I fight back)"
---

This set amused me

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/986357228306354178?s=21
https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/986357230219022342?s=21

Todays Court decision means that Congress must close loopholes that block the removal of dangerous criminal aliens, including aggravated felons. This is a public safety crisis that can only be fixed by....
....Congress House and Senate must quickly pass a legislative fix to ensure violent criminal aliens can be removed from our society. Keep America Safe!

The entire point of the court ruling was that just saying violent criminal aliens was too vague
---

https://twitter.com/jonbershad/status/986423652269940737?s=21

Is Hannity going to disclose that he is the Hannity referred to in this story?
---

4/17/2018
ABC - Former first lady Barbara Bush dies at age 92

"A former first lady of the United States of America and relentless proponent of family literacy, Barbara Pierce Bush passed away Tuesday, April 17, 2018, at the age of 92," reads a statement from the office of former President George H.W. Bush.

Mrs. Bush served as the country's first lady from 1989 to 1993. She passed away shortly after deciding to forgo further medical treatments for her failing health.

Mr. Bush is "broken-hearted to lose his beloved Barbara, his wife of 73 years," according to Jean Becker, chief of staff at the former president's office. "He held her hand all day today and was at her side when she left this good earth."

While it's a "challenging time ... it will not surprise all of you who know and love him that he also is being stoic and strong, and is being lifted up by his large and supportive family," Becker said.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/lady-barbara-bush-dies-age-92/story?id=54490037

Rest in peace -- I never knew her well. I hope Donald can be more respectful here than he was with her children.

Have we got examples of Donald addressing deaths and funerals?
---