Take them all down Stormy.
It looks like stormy weather is coming.
President Trump has said quite publicly that he did not know what Cohen was doing with respect to the alleged payments to Stormy Daniels—payments that appear to be at the core of the SDNY investigation. He has said he was unaware of the payments and did not know why they were made. If this is true, then it seems that Trump could not have had an attorney-client relationship with Cohen regarding the Daniels payment in the first instance—one hallmark of an attorney-client relationship is agreement as to its scope and the attorney’s obligation to keep the client advised as to all significant material matters (of which settlement would surely be one). Thus, by his own testimony, it seems that the Daniels matter is outside the scope of matters in which Cohen has represented Trump—and thus there is no attorney-client privilege in this instance.
You’re probably right, and I don’t give a duck fart about Trump, but this is scary. I would feel better if a judge was going through this material instead of prosecutors. Judge Wood has a lot more faith in prosecutors than I do. Will this case become a precedent for future cases about attorney- client privilege, or lack of privilege ?
Swamp slime spreading super sour speedy, sigh.
A person’s ignorance of a lawyer’s action does not, without more, preclude the protection of the (misnamed) privilege. One does not even have to be a client of the lawyer to have the protection of the privilege apply. Any communication seeking legal advice, with a person known to be a lawyer, is protected.
And I agree with ReconFire. What is in a given instance bad for Trump is not necessarily good for peace and individual liberty.
For any who may be unaware of this song:
Ella Fitzgerald & Joe Pass (1975)