backintexas2013 said:

---

I have said from the beginning that I want everyone that broke the law to get theirs. Right now that isn't happening. That's why I am so against the Trump investigation. Let's go after everyone not just Trump

---

It's so bizarre how it appears Hillary and her people were handled with kids gloves and Trumps are getting their doors kicked in with no knock raids for very similar "crimes". I don't know what to believe anymore. I just want this **** to be public and transparent.

Because one was run by Comey who was a ***** and hack. Nobody can deny those two things.

1112

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Apr 9 2018 18:23:54 (EST) Anonymous ID: 18808b 973390
>>973381

POTUS SAID THEY BROKE IN

---

Apr 9 2018 18:27:43 (EST) Q !xowAT4Z3VQ ID: d9b428 973468
>>973390

They broke in during the fire.
Distraction.
Q

---

Only posting here to ask the question in context... when was the no-knock raid executed?

Cohen's office is roughly in the vicinity of Trump Tower. Close enough that a 4-alarm response would have been plenty distracting.

Forgive the Q reference, and please help me keep it Mueller related.

Don't know but I call bs.
But we can't say that it's untrue just that it's unverified.

backintexas2013 said:

---

Don't know but I call bs.
But we can't say that it's untrue just that it's unverified.

---

Thank you, and that's all I'm looking for is verification. Definitely need a source other than a digital ghost.

B2Ag05 said:

---

1112

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

Apr 9 2018 18:23:54 (EST) Anonymous ID: 18808b 973390
>>973381

POTUS SAID THEY BROKE IN

---

Apr 9 2018 18:27:43 (EST) Q !xowAT4Z3VQ ID: d9b428 973468
>>973390

They broke in during the fire.
Distraction.
Q

---

Only posting here to ask the question in context... when was the no-knock raid executed?

Cohen's office is roughly in the vicinity of Trump Tower. Close enough that a 4-alarm response would have been plenty distracting.

Forgive the Q reference, and please help me keep it Mueller related.

---

Fire was Saturday? Raid was early morning, today, Monday.

Okay, I really should have re-read the article to answer the question myself. The "break in" might be different than the raid, but I'll save that for a more speculative thread.

This was all about Stormy and her payment. Will be interesting to watch. He could just say he paid and was going to get reimbursed later. Remember the most important thing is intent. Thanks Comey.

Did the FBI and DOJ ever investigate the Kennedy crime family? Or the Clintons or Jarrett and Holder?

oysterbayAG said:

---

Even a blind person can see that the USA has two systems of Justice !

---

Not liberals who are blind, deaf, and dumb, and by the latter I don't mean unable to speak.

Too many rumors and 'rumors of rumors' to follow

So if he paid it and Trump didn't know then they are saying it's campaign finance but then Trump is in the clear.

If he paid and Trump paid him back then that's a big nothing other than Trump lying to American people which is no big deal.

Trump needs to immediately fire the Three Stooges : Mueller, Rosenstein & Sessions !

It's all a big nothing.

Quote:

---

WASHINGTON The special counsel is investigating a payment made to President Trump's foundation by a Ukrainian steel magnate for a talk during the campaign, according to three people briefed on the matter, as part of a broader examination of streams of foreign money to Mr. Trump and his associates in the years leading up to the election.

Investigators subpoenaed the Trump Organization this year for an array of records about business with foreign nationals. In response, the company handed over documents about a $150,000 donation that the Ukrainian billionaire, Victor Pinchuk, made in September 2015 to the Donald J. Trump Foundation in exchange for a 20-minute appearance by Mr. Trump that month through a video link to a conference in Kiev.

Michael D. Cohen, the president's personal lawyer whose office and hotel room were raided on Monday in an apparently unrelated case, solicited the donation. The contribution from Mr. Pinchuk, who has sought closer ties for Ukraine to the West, was the largest the foundation received in 2015 from anyone besides Mr. Trump himself.

The subpoena is among signs in recent months that the special counsel, Robert S. Mueller III, is interested in interactions that Mr. Trump or his associates had with countries beyond Russia, though it is not clear what other payments he is scrutinizing.

---

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/09/us/politics/trump-mueller-ukraine-victor-pinchuk.html

WAit you can't pay appearance fees during a campaign

backintexas2013 said:

---

WAit you can't pay appearance fees during a campaign

---

It was in 2015.

Ok, Hawg, blindey, I'm sure Trump has other personal lawyers, but what does this do to Trump's professional realtionaship with Cohen? Obviously, it's over as of today, but could it ever be restarted, so to speak?

I'm asking for general curiousity, but also the fact that it's my understanding that Cohen has been with Trump for quite a while. Clearly, he was satisfied with Cohen's legal service, and results.

I don't like Mueller, but I viscerally dislike Weismann, and have a strong suspicion he's along for the brainstorming as to how far Mueller can go. I suspect Weismann would break down the WH door if he could.

fasthorses05 said:

---

Ok, Hawg, blindey, I'm sure Trump has other personal lawyers, but what does this do to Trump's professional realtionaship with Cohen? Obviously, it's over as of today, but could it ever be restarted, so to speak?

I'm asking for general curiousity, but also the fact that it's my understanding that Cohen has been with Trump for quite a while. Clearly, he was satisfied with Cohen's legal service, and results.

I don't like Mueller, but I viscerally dislike Weismann, and have a strong suspicion he's along for the brainstorming as to how far Mueller can go. I suspect Weismann would break down the WH door if he could.

---

Why would it be over? Unless he's double crossed Trump, it in no way should be over. If he ends the professional relationship, he opens himself up for them to then pressure Cohen.

Well, I wasn't sure, but two things come to mind. ASSUMING the feds took what they were supposed to, and left the files they had no right to (which I'm a tad cynical), then what would keep them from coming back anytime to review any other privileged attorney-client comments? They appear to have layed claim to all of Cohen's records.

Secondly, when the feds (SDNY) invade someones business, don't they tell the target they can't talk to anyone about this situation, or some such language? I have no clue, it would just seem to injure his realtionship with Trump.

fasthorses05 said:

---

Ok, Hawg, blindey, I'm sure Trump has other personal lawyers, but what does this do to Trump's professional realtionaship with Cohen? Obviously, it's over as of today, but could it ever be restarted, so to speak?

I'm asking for general curiousity, but also the fact that it's my understanding that Cohen has been with Trump for quite a while. Clearly, he was satisfied with Cohen's legal service, and results.

I don't like Mueller, but I viscerally dislike Weismann, and have a strong suspicion he's along for the brainstorming as to how far Mueller can go. I suspect Weismann would break down the WH door if he could.

---

You raise an interesting question.

Trump has been denied the legal counsel of his choice. And Mueller (indirectly) has made it clear that any other counsel will be be subject to a pre-dawn raid, thus limiting other counsel from being willing to risk existing client's confidential communications from such discovery.

I know, I know, there's supposed to be some kind of separate "filter team" that reviews the illegally obtained materials and keep them to themselves. Who in the world would believe that? SCIFs aren't even secure these days.

The system as it exists, is broken. There can be no "filter team" that corrects the original deliberate breach of the Fourth Amendment...ever.

This is a very good point

Wasn't deals with Ukrainian politicians and lots of mutual meddling a Democrat thing during the Obama administration?

Cepe said:

---

It's clear to me that the all out war has started.

---

I'm not there yet.

Trying to keep an open mind. There's still the real possibility that Berman took credible information for <something> to a Federal judge for permission to conduct a raid for <something>. Both Berman and the judge knew what was at risk if they got it wrong.

Stay tuned.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/to-search-michael-cohen%E2%80%99s-home-and-office-the-fbi-had-to-clear-a-higher-than-normal-bar/ar-AAvH2ba?li=BBnb7Kz

Quote:

---

To search Michael Cohen's home and office, the FBI had to clear a higher-than-normal bar

Here's what we don't know: We don't know specifically what the FBI was looking for when it raided the office of Michael Cohen, high-profile attorney for the Trump Organization. We don't know what they found; we don't know what investigations might be bolstered or curtailed by the evidence they seized.

What we do know, though, is interesting enough. The raid, which covered Cohen's office and, according to the Wall Street Journal, his home and a Manhattan hotel room, included the seizure of information about the payment made to porn star Stormy Daniels shortly before the 2016 election and that it included communications between Cohen and President Trump meaning it included communication between an attorney and his client.

That last point also means that the bar for obtaining a warrant was higher than normal.

An attorney for Cohen told The Post that the search was related to an investigation referred to the Justice Department by special counsel Robert S. Mueller III. In March, The Post reported that Cohen's had caught Mueller's eye, with the special counsel's team questioning witnesses about Cohen's actions and requesting documents from Trump's attorney.

Monday's raid, though, was conducted at the direction of the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York, not the special counsel. Last week, Mueller's team revealed in a court filing that deputy attorney general Rod J. Rosenstein (who, in May 2017, appointed Mueller to serve in his current position) had outlined in a memo last August particular areas for the special counsel's team to investigate. Mueller could expand those boundaries, but only after getting Rosenstein's approval. In this case, it seems, Rosenstein referred the question to the U.S. attorney instead.

There are specific rules that come into play before the U.S. attorney would be granted a subpoena, as outlined in the U.S. Attorneys' Manual. A section titled "Searches of Premises of Subject Attorneys" details six additional safeguards to ensure that the Department of Justice isn't unjustly violating attorney-client privilege. It applies to subject attorneys -- people who are "suspect(s), subject(s) or target(s)" of an investigation. That distinction was highlighted last week when The Post reported that Mueller had informed Trump that the president wasn't a target of the investigation, but only a subject of it. "Prosecutors view someone as a subject when that person has engaged in conduct that is under investigation but there is not sufficient evidence to bring charges," we wrote at that point. In other words, Trump wasn't necessarily about to face charges, but he was under investigation. The same, it seems, applies now to Cohen.

To obtain that search warrant, then, the U.S. attorney would have had to meet six conditions, according to the manual.
[ol]

Before obtaining a search warrant, investigators had to try to obtain the evidence in another way, such as by subpoena.

The authorization for the warrant had to come from either the U.S. attorney or an assistant attorney general. (Rosenstein is deputy attorney general, a higher position than assistant attorney general.)

The prosecutor had to confer with the criminal division of the department before seeking the warrant.

The team conducting the search had to "employ adequate precautions" to ensure that they weren't improperly viewing privileged communications between the Cohen his clients.

The search team would have included a "privilege team" including lawyers and agents not working the case which would work to ensure that investigators conducting the search didn't see privileged communications.

The investigators had to develop a review process for the seized material.

[/ol]The question of what qualifies as privileged communication is complex. Not every communication between an attorney and a client is included. One type of communication that's excluded: communications between an attorney and a client that might be predicated on committing or covering up a crime.

Even with those checks in place, the U.S. attorney wasn't guaranteed a warrant. Search warrants granted to U.S. attorneys are approved by magistrate judges serving in U.S. District Court.

In other words, the Cohen search warrant almost certainly included decision-making or approval on the part of the second-highest-ranking person at the Department of Justice (Rosenstein), a federal judge and the U.S. attorney or an assistant attorney general. Before it was executed, the team would have needed to check a number of boxes meant to reduce the likelihood of improperly seizing privileged material.

We know, too, that this was an exceptional move by the government.

---

The person who wrote this piece, Philip Bump, is not an attorney.

Anyone who thinks Rosenstein is a 'white hat' better think again. Now we know why there were large areas redacted on Rosenstein's secret Memo to Mueller of August 2, 2017 outlining specific areas to investigate regarding Manafort.

So by this thinking, the SDNY filters through all the seized info, removes any attorney-client privilege info, and then sends the rest to Mueller. But of course, as Aggiehawg noted, if the attorney is part of or assisting in the commission of a crime, then it isn't privileged info.