Conservative Musings

Our goal is to have intelligent discussion of the topics of the day. We realize everyone has their opinion and they should be allowed to express it in a discussion forum without calling each other names. We learn from discussion and not from name calling or argument.We use cookies to personalise content and ads, to provide social media features and to analyse our traffic. We also share information about your use of our site with our social media, advertising and analytics partners. See details

Showing posts with label Michael Cohen. Show all posts

Friday, August 24, 2018

Is Mueller Investigation Same As Starr's?

Dick Morris: The Cohen/Daniels Scandal Will Backfire on Mueller

By Dick Morris
August 23, 2018 at 10:45am

A curious parallel is emerging between Kenneth Starr’s ill-fated prosecution of Bill Clinton and Robert Mueller’s attempts to get Donald Trump.

Both special prosecutors initially pursued serious allegations: The Whitewater scandal and Russian collusion with Trump. Both indicted, convicted, and sent important ancillary figures to prison: Jim Guy Tucker, governor of Arkansas and Paul Manafort, Trump’s campaign manager.

And then, when their investigations stalled, they sidetracked into a sex-related scandal: Lewinsky and Michael Cohen’s payments to porn actress Stormy Daniels.

The public reacted angrily to Starr’s focus on Monica. They questioned why tens of millions of tax dollars were being spent on a sex scandal. As hard as Republicans tried to make the case that it was about perjury, the public still believed it was about sex.

Despite impeaching the president, Republicans scored no gains in the 1998 midterm election.

Now, I believe, Americans may question why Mueller is spending our tax money to go after Cohen for his payments to Daniels. As much as the Democrats try to say it’s about election law violations, the public will say it’s about payments to cover up sex. And it may backfire on Mueller and the Democrats.

The reason for the backlash in 1998 and, possibly, in 2018 is the same: American parents do not want sex scandals to play out in front of their children on the nightly news. They don’t want to see it, read it, or hear about it.

The mainstream media does not understand their point of view. To them, such scandal is daily fare and nothing unusual or repellent. They report the developments with a straight face.

But, in flyover country, they don’t treat it that way.

Do you think these scandals will backfire on Mueller?

They understand that Trump may have cheated on his wife (wives) and that he might pay to try to keep it quiet. They don’t think its a big deal and are not about to change their opinion of a president who is so manifestly succeeding because of these changes, anymore than they were willing to turn their backs on Bill Clinton’s record of economic achievement because of his involvement with Lewinsky, no matter how much Republicans shouted perjury.

The same may be happening now.

Monday, April 16, 2018

The More The Democrats, Mueller And Media Go After Trump, The Higher His Ratings Go

FBI’s Raid of Trump Lawyer’s Office Has Backfired Spectacularly on Mueller

BY JOE SAUNDERS
APRIL 14, 2018 AT 1:06PM

For Democrats, these numbers are going in the wrong direction.

In the wake of the FBI’s raid of the home and office of Michael Cohen on Monday, President Donald Trump’s personal attorney, a poll released by Rasmussen finds American voters are growing increasingly suspicious of the motivations behind the “Russia collusion” investigation.

And Trump’s consistent characterization of special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe as a “witch hunt” might be starting to sink in.

A poll of 1,000 likely voters found less than half of those surveyed think Mueller’s investigation is an “honest attempt to determine wrongdoing” according to Rasmussen.

Meanwhile, significantly more of those polled consider it a “partisan witch hunt” than the percentage who thought so during a similar survey in October.

Neither number bodes well for the ongoing Democrat-media campaign to discredit the Trump White House.

“The latest Rasmussen Reports national telephone and online survey finds that 46% of Likely U.S. Voters still believe Mueller’s investigation is an honest attempt to determine criminal wrongdoing, but that’s down from 52% last October,” Rasmussen reported. “Forty percent (40%) now consider Mueller’s probe a partisan witch hunt, an eight-point increase from 32% in the earlier survey. Fourteen percent (14%) are undecided.”

In other words, the hoopla surrounding Monday’s raid in New York – executed by the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York but instigated by Mueller’s investigation — is backfiring badly.

Do you think President Trump should fire special counsel Robert Mueller?

Despite an incessant drumbeat of negative news and opinions about Trump, the percentage of Americans who believe the Mueller probe is the pursuit of justice has dropped considerably in the past six months.

By contrast, the percentage of those who think it’s politically motivated has increased by an even greater percentage.

In what could be even more galling for left, Trump’s performance in Rasmussen’s Daily Presidential Tracking Poll, the only poll measuring Trump’s approval rating on a daily basis, showed him at 50 percent approval on Friday, a number he’s rarely reached in his presidency.

While having the approval of half the country might not sound like a huge accomplishment for the president, Trump supporters understand exactly what kind of opposition Trump is facing to get that. As The Daily Wirepointed out:

“… (A)fter record lows in the polls for most of his first year in office, Trump saw significant improvement by December and for the entirety of 2018 has been polling around where President Obama polled at the same time during his presidency.”

Most readers will remember that Obama, at the same point of his presidency, had been treated for more than a year by a virtual deity by the bootlicking mainstream media and his gushing fans in Hollywood.

For a president to have the kind of personality cult Obama was surrounded by and still poll only 50 percent approval is a testament to the good sense of the American electorate. Voters who were disgusted by the passage of Obamacare and its signature in March 2010 saw right through the endless glorification of the media.

Likewise, Americans who’ve watched as Trump has been attacked on a daily, even hourly, basis by alleged “news” outlets like CNN and the sneering celebrity elite of late-night “comedy” know full well what kind of resistance Trump has faced (it even calls itself “the Resistance” for crying out loud).

Well-publicized dramatics like the Mueller-instigated raid on the home and office of the president’s private lawyers might be intended to turn Americans against Trump, but the Rasmussen poll shows the tactic is backfiring — badly.

What do you think?

Thursday, April 12, 2018

The Lawbreaking By The Law Enforcers Is Becoming Outrageous

Alan Dershowitz argues 'Hollywood Access' tape was recorded illegally

by Daniel Chaitin

| April 11, 2018 10:32 PM

Alan Dershowitz, a professor at Harvard Law School, often appears on television. — Alan Dershowitz warned on Monday that the FBI raid was an assault on the privileged lawyer-client relationship.

Famed lawyer Alan Dershowitz discussed a "theory" Wednesday, one day after meeting with President Trump, about how the "Hollywood Access" tape was illegally recorded.

In that tape from 2005, which surfaced during the 2016 election, Trump could be heard talking with former “Today” show host Billy Bush on a bus, via hot mic, about groping women without their consent.

Dershowitz said during a panel on CNN that because California, where the exchange took place, is two-party consent state, the taping was illegal.

Host Anderson Cooper noted that they were wearing microphones, but Dershowitz dismissed that as being a disqualifier.

"But they didn't know it was on. That was the question," he said.

The "Hollywood Access" tape was dredged up again this week after FBI agents raided the hotel room and office of Trump's lawyer Michael Cohen. Among the documents they took, agents confiscated records related to the tape as well as adult film star Stormy Daniels, who alleges she had an extramarital sexual encounter with Trump.

Dershowitz imagined a hypothetical conversation about what Trump may have said to Cohen about the "Access Hollywood" tape and may be in the documents obtained by FBI agents.

"I can imagine the conversation," he said. "Trump calls his lawyer, Cohen, and says, 'Stop this tape. It's illegal. I didn't consent to it. I didn't know the microphone was on. Stop it. Use all legal means.'"

He said the documents would now go through a government "taint team," which would determine if some of the material is, for example, protected by attorney-client privilege.

The prospect of a lawsuit over the "Access Hollywood" tape has been raised before, by Trump himself.

Back in 2016, during an interview with former Fox News host Bill O'Reilly, Trump said NBC releasing the tape was an "illegal act" and expressed a willingness to sue.

Robert Barnes, California-based attorney, said at the time Trump may have a case and explained how the hot mic audio could be illegal.

Dershowitz warned on Monday that the FBI raid was an assault on the privileged lawyer-client relationship and served as a sign that special counsel Robert Mueller, who is investigating whether the Trump campaign colluded with the Russians, is trying to turn Cohen against Trump.

Dershowitz met with Trump and other White House officials on Tuesday. He claims his visit was prearranged and regarded the ongoing peace process in the Middle East, but has refused to open up on any other matters that may have been discussed.

Dershowitz has been one of Trump's staunchest defenders on TV in recent months.

During the CNN panel on Wednesday, Norman Eisen, a one-time Obama White House ethics lawyer and chairman of Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, offered counter-points to Dershowitz's comments, but did concede Dershowitz might be right about the raid.

"You just heard the world's smallest violin playing for Alan's argument," he said. "Why? We can have confidence that this seizure of records was reviewed at the Justice Department, at the staff level. Then by [Deputy Attorney General] Rod Rosenstein, then it was sent over to the U.S. Attorney's office and reviewed again by the public corruption unit here. It could be that Alan is right."

Cooper interjected: "And a judge would have signed off on this search warrant."

Eisen added that judicial permission would be needed and that the "prosecution has powerful reasons" for the raid.

Prosecutors are looking at a "pattern of illegal conduct," including allegations of threats made against Daniels to keep silent about her alleged tryst, Eisen said.

Eisen also argued that he doesn't expect any leaks from the FBI raid, to which Dershowitz scoffed: "Boy I got a bridge to sell you in Brooklyn. No leaks? Oh my God, a leak? It sounds like a scene from 'Casablanca.' Leaking is pervasive."

Law

FBI

Wednesday, April 11, 2018

Trump's Lawyer Office Raided--Is This The End Of The Rule Of Law?

Dershowitz: Targeting Trump's lawyer should worry us all

BY ALAN M. DERSHOWITZ, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR — 04/10/18 11:45 AM EDT 4,394

THE VIEWS EXPRESSED BY CONTRIBUTORS ARE THEIR OWN AND NOT THE VIEW OF THE HILL

Autoplay: On | Off

There is much speculation as to the significance of the search of the offices and hotel room of President Trump’s lawyer, Michael Cohen. To obtain a search warrant, prosecutors must demonstrate to a judge that they have probable cause to believe that the premises to be searched contain evidence of crime. They must also specify the area to be searched, the items to be seized and, in searches of computers, the word searches to be used.

At least that’s the constitutional requirement in theory, especially where the Sixth Amendment right to counsel is involved, in addition to the general Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable searches. Yet, in practice, judges often give the FBI considerable latitude, relying on the “firewalls” and “taint teams” they set up to protect the subject of the search from violation of his or her constitutional rights.

But the firewalls and taint teams are comprised of government agents who themselves may not be entitled to read or review many of the items seized. It is an imperfect protection of important constitutional rights. That’s why Justice Department officials must be careful to limit the searching of lawyers’ offices to compelling cases involving serious crimes. We don’t know at this point what the prosecutors are looking for but, if it relates to payments made to porn star Stormy Daniels, that would not seem to justify so potentially intrusive a search of Cohen’s confidential lawyer-client files.

There are, of course, exceptions to the lawyer-client privilege. First, the lawyer must be acting as a lawyer, not as a friend or business associate. But the scope of a lawyer’s work is quite broad, encompassing much more than merely giving legal advice. It includes settling cases by making payments to potential litigants. Second, the lawyer must be engaged in lawful activities on behalf of the clients. Illegal or fraudulent activities are not covered by the privilege. Nor are communications with third persons, such as the lawyer for the other side, though such communications may be covered by the much weaker “settlement privilege.”

Civil libertarians should be concerned whenever the government interferes with the lawyer-client relationship. Clients should be able to rely on confidentiality when they disclose their most intimate secrets in an effort to secure their legal rights. A highly publicized raid on the president’s lawyer will surely shake the confidence of many clients in promises of confidentiality by their lawyers. They will not necessarily understand the nuances of the confidentiality rules and their exceptions. They will see a lawyer’s office being raided and all his files seized.

I believe we would have been hearing more from civil libertarians — the American Civil Liberties Union, attorney groups and privacy advocates — if the raid had been on Hillary Clinton’s lawyer. Many civil libertarians have remained silent about potential violations of President Trump’s rights because they strongly disapprove of him and his policies. That is a serious mistake, because these violations establish precedents that lie around like loaded guns capable of being aimed at other targets.

I have been widely attacked for defending the constitutional rights of a president I voted against. In our hyperpartisan age, everyone is expected to choose a side, either for or against Trump. But the essence of civil liberties is that they must be equally applicable to all. The silence among most civil libertarians regarding the recent raid shows that we are losing that valuable neutrality.