Image 01 Image 03

Michael Cohen court hearing: Judge considers Special Master to review seized evidence, Sean Hannity revealed as Cohen client

Michael Cohen court hearing: Judge considers Special Master to review seized evidence, Sean Hannity revealed as Cohen client

“If the government can obtain a search warrant for particular items but then seize and review everything in an attorney’s office, the protections of the Fourth Amendment are meaningless.”

The federal court in the Southern District of New York is continuing today the hearing on the objections of Donald Trump’s personal attorney Michael Cohen regarding records seized from his law office and home. For the background and court pleadings, please see the prior post, Trump attorney Michael Cohen goes to Court to get back seized records.

Last night we reported that Trump’s attorney’s had filed a Letter Motion objecting to the feds doing a privilege review of the seized materials, Trump court filing in Michael Cohen case: Objects to DOJ/FBI “taint team” deciding what is attorney-client privileged.

Among other things, Trump argued that his legal team should be provided a copy of the seized materials so that they can do the first privilege review:

The President objects to the government’s proposal to use a “taint team” of prosecutors from the very Office that is investigating this matter to conduct the initial privilege review of documents seized from the President’s personal attorney, Michael D. Cohen. The cases upon which the government relies do not authorize this extraordinary measure, and, to our knowledge, no court in this Circuit has ever forced a privilege-holder, over his objection, to rely on government lawyers to protect his attorney-client privilege as to materials that were seized from his own lawyer’s office.

For the reasons detailed below, the Court should enter an order enjoining the government from proceeding with any review of the seized materials, and directing the government to provide a copy of the seized materials to Mr. Cohen so that our firm and the President may review for privilege those seized documents that relate to him.

This morning Cohen’s lawyers made an additional filing (pdf.)(full embed at bottom of post)

The main legal thrust of Cohen’s filing is to argue for the appointment of a Special Master to protect not only attorney-client materials and the identity of clients, but also to sort out what records grabbed even are responsive to the search warrant.

As the Court is surely aware, there is a growing public debate about whether criminal and congressional investigations by the government are being undertaken impartially, free of any political bias or partisan motivation. It is in this climate that the Government executed an unprecedented search warrant – instead of using its less onerous subpoena power – upon the personal attorney of the President of the United States. In the process, the Government seized more than a dozen electronic devices and other items that include documents and data regarding topics and issues that have nothing to do with the probable cause upon which the search warrant was granted in the first place.

Mr. Cohen’s application for a temporary restraining order, preliminary injunction, and the appointment of a Special Master to conduct a review of materials seized by the Government for both responsiveness and privilege should be granted because, as described below, it is merited under existing Second Circuit case law. But, just as importantly, Mr. Cohen’s application should be granted so that even the appearance of impropriety is avoided, by appointing a Special Master to conduct the review of Mr. Cohen’s data, including any documents relating to communications with the President of the United States covered by the attorney-client privilege. The choice here is between allowing the Government to make an end run around the Fourth Amendment by scooping up and viewing all of the communications seized in the search of a lawyer’s office (in this case, all of the documents and data of the President’s personal attorney) regardless of whether the documents seized were the subject of the judge’s original probable cause determination, or appointing a neutral third party to conduct that review. If the government can obtain a search warrant for particular items but then seize and review everything in an attorney’s office, the protections of the Fourth Amendment are meaningless. We therefore respectfully request that the Court either allow Mr. Cohen’s counsel and counsel for the privilege holders to conduct the initial review, or appoint an independent third party – a Special Master – to do so.

Cohen went on to describe, in response to a court request Friday, his legal practice. The government had argued that Cohen effectively didn’t practice law. Cohen’s lawyers wrote:

In terms of relevant names to be submitted for a privilege review, the Court will recall that although almost all of the discussion in court on Friday, April 13, 2018, related to Mr. Cohen’s clients, our application also covers law firms representing and providing advice as well as work-product to Mr. Cohen. The relevant law firms and attorneys that have advised and provided work-product to Mr. Cohen and may be contained in documents and data seized in relation to the search warrants at issue here include: [list]

From approximately 2007 to January 2017, Mr. Cohen worked at the Trump Organization in the role of Executive Vice President and Special Counsel to Donald J. Trump. In that capacity, Mr. Cohen served as legal counsel to the Trump Organization, Donald J. Trump. Mr. Cohen worked predominantly on real estate, contract, and litigation matters for the Trump Organization.

In the period of 2017 to 2018, Mr. Cohen maintained a solo law practice. There were at least ten clients during this period. Mr. Cohen’s role varied for these clients. For seven clients the work appears to be providing strategic advice and business consulting, for which privilege would not attach. In any event, none of these seven client files are likely to have any responsive information on the issues sought in Attachment A of the search warrant. If necessary, we would be willing to provide the names of the business clients if a Special Master is appointed so the Special Master can determine responsiveness.

For at least three other clients that we have identified in the period of 2017 to 2018, the work was more direct legal advice or dispute resolution–more traditional legal tasks. All of these clients are individuals. One of these legal clients is Donald J. Trump. Another legal client is Elliot Broidy. The third legal client directed Mr. Cohen to not to reveal the identity publicly. Upon information and belief, the unnamed legal client’s matters are not responsive to any matter covered by Attachment A of the search warrants.

Cohen’s lawyers then sum up, after a discussion of various legal precedent, with a request for a Special Master:

As detailed herein, we believe that the most proper and practical solution to this unprecedented question and attendant circumstances is for this Court to appoint a Special Master. First and foremost, the appointment of a Special Master will provide for the fair administration of justice here and avoid even a hint of impropriety here in the review of Mr. Cohen’s data and documents. Second, the appointment of a Special Master will protect the integrity of the Government’s investigation from the toxic partisan politics of the day and attacks on the impartiality of the Justice Department and the USAO. Frankly, we hoped that the USAO would join this application and work with us to devise an expedient set of rules and procedures for a Special Master’s review of the seized materials that also takes into account the interests of the various privilege holders, as described in detail in the letter submitted on behalf of Intervenor, Donald J. Trump, on April 15, 2018. Third, the appointment of a Special Master will allow Mr. Cohen to observe his ethical obligations to his clients as well as protect the identity of his clients by providing them, when necessary, to the Special Master on an in camera basis.

We will update this post, or have a new post, depending what happens at today’s hearing.


I think the internet is going to break. The judge required Cohen’s counsel to reveal the unnamed third client of Cohen. It is Sean Hannity.

While there is obvious joy among #TheResistance about Hannity being a client of Cohen, this goes to show the damage the Mueller’s tactics have done, via the outsourced seizure of Cohen’s law office files. Clients, including but not limited to Hannity, who consulted Cohen with the expectation of privacy both as to the content and fact of the legal advice, have had their privacy violated. It may not be a violation of the attorney-client privilege yet, because the substance of the advice has not been revealed, but the fact of representation is a secret an attorney is obligated to maintain in the normal course.

Contrary to what a lot of reporters are tweeting, it doesn’t matter that Hannity never retained Cohen in a matter, signed a retainer, or paid attorney’s fees. He still was, for legal purposes, a client if he consulted even informally for legal advice.

Court Hearing Over

The Court hearing now is over. From tweets by reporters in the courtroom, it appears that the feds are not currently reviewing the materials pending a court ruling, so the request for a Temporary Restraining Order prohibiting them from doing that was denied as moot. The request for a preliminary injunction was not ruled upon. The judge seems to be considering appointing a Special Master, but hasn’t ruled yet. The parties were asked to come up with names in case she appoints a Special Master.

[This post and title were updated multiple times]


Michael Cohen v. USA – Cohen Letter Re Seizure of Electronic Devices Etc. 4-16-2018 by Legal Insurrection on Scribd


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


Details on the speculated LL threat to NYPD?

Something. This guy had something on them and they wanted it.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to blah deblah. | April 16, 2018 at 12:38 pm

    The Clinton’s Dirty Toy Boy Mueller is going to get “his” whole gang hung. Everything he has done (illegally) is ripping off the alibis of the Clintons and the Obamas and their administrative assistants.

    Lookee here, just one example!

    “Trail of James Comey’s Dirt on Loretta Lynch Discovered Within IG Report on Andrew McCabe…”

    “On page six of the IG report (point number 4) we find a conference call between Loretta Lynch, Andrew McCabe and the FBI field office in New York where the subject of the Weiner/Abedin/Clinton laptop findings overlap with: the Clinton Foundation (CF) investigation; the Clinton Email investigation; pressure for Asst. Director McCabe to recuse himself, and Washington DC via Loretta Lynch using DOJ Main Justice leverage from the Eric Garner case against the NY FBI office and New York Police Department.

    From the OIG report:

    4. The Attorney General Expresses Strong Concerns to McCabe and other FBI Officials about Leaks, and McCabe Discusses Recusing Himself from CF Investigation (October 26)….”

      Yep, I have been following Treehouse for awhile. Great work over there. Milhouse has a problem with them. Not sure why? Treehouse has been good to LI,too. I’ve seen links back to LI by Sundance.

      There is almost 1200 responses to that posting. There is a huge up tick in trolls there, but the crowd sourcing is very good. Just like here, we know who the trolls are.

      Another link I have recently found is Thomas Paine’s tweeter account.

      Here is the latest one:

      Weiner’s Child Pornography Victim Turns Nasty Against FBI: Comey “Victimized Me” and “Helped Abuse to Continue”

      It is starting to look like the FBI has a bombshell coverup ready to explode. IG report should blow the lid off of everything and I think the SDNY is going to be exposed. It is a race to see who gets there first.

        Tom Servo in reply to MarkSmith. | April 16, 2018 at 2:11 pm

        The writer “Sundance” at CTH has been on top of this more than anyone else on the web over the last few months, and almost everything he has predicted in his various pieces is coming true.

        My only complaint about CTH is that the comments section is kinda whack, and not my cup of tea – I’m a lot more comfortable with the Morons over at AoSHQ.

        Ratbert in reply to MarkSmith. | April 16, 2018 at 2:39 pm

        That’s because Milhouse is a moron.

          Barry in reply to Ratbert. | April 16, 2018 at 4:37 pm

          No, he’s pretty smart. He can be contrarian even when wrong, but that is a failing many of us suffer from.

        Milhouse in reply to MarkSmith. | April 17, 2018 at 4:53 am

        Nuthouse regularly makes up stories with absolutely no foundation in fact. You just can’t trust content from there, so there’s no point in reading it. If a story is true it will appear elsewhere. If it doesn’t appear anywhere else, then it must not be true.

        Nuthouse was the source for the crazy story circulated in the murkier parts of the right-wing swamp that the items on Little Saint Trayvon’s shopping list — Skittles™ and Arizona™ Watermelon Drink were two of the (inactive) ingredients in purple drank (which they’re not), and that this somehow put a sinister spin on his whole outing.

        It was also the source for the stupid idea that Martin’s alleged girlfriend did not call Zimmerman a “crazy-ass cracker” but rather a “crazy ass-cracker”, which she meant as a homophobic slur.

          MarkSmith in reply to Milhouse. | April 17, 2018 at 8:05 am

          You mean this:


          “Nuthouse was the source for the crazy story circulated in the murkier parts of the right-wing swamp that the items on Little Saint Trayvon’s shopping list — Skittles™ and Arizona™ Watermelon Drink were two of the (inactive) ingredients in purple drank (which they’re not), and that this somehow put a sinister spin on his whole outing.”

          Trayvon was admittedly, according to his Facebook conversations, a user of DXM and Purple Drank/Lean since at least June 2011.

          I fail to see the issue. So Treehouse crowd sourced the ideal based on martin’s youtube subscriptions and facebook postings. Not sure what the problem is? Not to argue about it here, but I think it was part of the process to figure things out. I never got the take away that this whole case revolted around Purple Lean from the Treehouse. Just another point to consider in the matter.

          Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | April 18, 2018 at 4:44 am

          No, MarkSmith, the Nuthouse made a “huge discovery” that Martin’s shopping trip was not an innocent quest for candy for himself and his brother, but a sinister quest for eeevil drugs. It made a gargantuan deal of accusing other media of deliberately covering this up by reporting that he’d gone for iced tea rather than the watermelon drink he’d actually got. But there was never any basis for any of this. First of all, without the active ingredient the inactive ingredients do nothing but taste good. No, whatever Martin may have been told, Robitussin™ can’t have the same effect as codeine, any more than you can make meth from Riccola™. Second, the usual inactive ingredients in purple drank are not Skittles™ and Arizona™ watermelon drink but Jolly Rancher™ and Sprite™. Third, the brother specifically said he’d asked for the Skittles™ and there’s no reason to suspect him of lying. Fourth, supposing he had been out to get the ingredients for this concoction, how would that be relevant, or make him out to be a worse person than we already know he was?

        lgbmiel in reply to MarkSmith. | April 17, 2018 at 11:07 am

        CTH is good; Sundance is usually right – and before anyone else; the comments are worth reading, but you have to skim through for the good ones.

        I was banned from commenting months ago — Sundance was wrong on a Constitutional point and I pointed out the error (and I wouldn’t back down).

        I still read it, though. 🙂

      I am betting there are some NYPD people ready to whistle blow too. The revenge of Eric Garner still has not played out. I wonder how cases they messed with.

Mueller probably knows at this point there is no Russian collusion. But he knows Trump is a hothead and he knows how to push Trump’s buttons. So he pulls all this stuff in the hopes of getting fired … because he knows that is what will stoke the impeachment fires.

    oldgoat36 in reply to walls. | April 16, 2018 at 2:11 pm

    I think that Mueller is a zealot against Trump, which means he is willing to use anything he can to bring him down. It’s why he chose all Hillary donors for his associates in this. Its scorched earth tactics, and if they can’t find a crime, they can tarnish Trump and use illegally obtained material to mysteriously leak out.

    I don’t think it’s to get fired, though he will leak like a bucket with no bottom if he does get fired, and do the talk show circuit to cry about it like Comey, all in an effort to cover up his abuses.

    Rosenstein is his enabler, and with all his involvement with the shady past, he is part of the cover up. Nice. Hire a guy with no ethics for staying within the law to bring down the President to continue hiding the crimes committed. If you wrote a book like this, with this kind of plot and ties between the powers, you would be laughed out of the editors office, it is that unbelievable.

      MarkSmith in reply to oldgoat36. | April 16, 2018 at 4:10 pm

      He is going to leak like a bucket with holes no matter what. Need to can him after the IG report than turn the tables. Focus on Clinton and the House of Cards will start falling.

        notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to MarkSmith. | April 16, 2018 at 6:53 pm

        Methinks Mueller is afraid of being “Arkancided.”

        Mueller needs to be investigated as a “blackmail” victim in this case.

4th armored div | April 16, 2018 at 1:06 pm

everything seized is already in FBI searchers – too late to do anything about that.

if the american people left/right/center leave this as it is then w are in a banans republic and those who have the ability to leave need to do so.

stick a fork in it – it is finished!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

If this was happening to a lefty lawyer ( no way ) cough cough, some Federal judge somewhere would have already ruled, probably within a day to claim some serious threat to the rule of law and seal everything.

That never happens when the left are the ones doing the raiding. ( in a Jersey accent…

“That 4th amendment looks real nice. Real nice. Be a shame if somethin’ was to happen to it..”

The more that is learned from this the worse it gets. Mueller is the one who gave the NY people something to get a judge to sign off on this warrant, and then they over step that as well.

This is like the FBI turned into the Gestapo or the GRU or the Stasi. We seem to only pretend now that we have constitutional rights and boundaries, a lot of thanks for that goes to Duh One who did it regularly and no one said one word against him (or rather no one of power, plenty commented on it and were outraged by it but had no means to do anything.)

I wonder how they bought off the judge. What needs to happen is people need to be brought up on charges and prosecuted for these things. The only way to reel this stuff in through those who are doing it need to spend time in jail, and lose their cushy jobs.

    That is one of the reasons why respect for the rule of law is at such a low ebb. The common man sees the wealthy and well-connected get away with anything – up to and arguably including treason – while suffering no consequences of any severity.

      notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to Rusty Bill. | April 16, 2018 at 6:58 pm

      If they are not trustworthy in the little things, then there’s no way they’ll be trustworthy in the big things.

Bucky Barkingham | April 16, 2018 at 2:15 pm

In answer to: “I wonder how they bought off the judge.” Lawyers, in this case prosecutors, and judges are opposite sides of the same coin; that ones that says “Heads I win, tails you lose”. There is no justice for those not in power or in the deep state (the same thing really).

    The judge is Kimba Wood, a nominee for Slick Willie’s AG. She had an illegal nanny and had to withdraw. Do you honestly think that she will find for Trump in this case? trump beat SlickWillie’s wife in the election.
    She should recuse or DOJ should tell her to recuse.

casualobserver | April 16, 2018 at 2:47 pm

I’m not easily led into conspiracies. Something about this has the feel of “grab first – worry later” where people within law enforcement whether in NYC or DC get a chance to “review” every morsel they obtained. Law enforcement has used similar tactics before to at least get enough information to know how to continue investigations. They know which trails to follow and which to avoid, etc.

In this era of unlimited leaks, it’s easy to imagine a scenario where copies are kept even on any item ultimately deemed to be unlawfully obtained. Just to be used later in a way to continue personal attacks with a media hyperventilating for every new anonymous thing they can exploit for clicks and ratings and to satisfy their urge to dethrone.

Has anybody seen the alleged crime? I haven’t read every article but neither her, Breitbart, or fox have I seen what the probable cause is…

This smells of Wisconsin John doe all over again. An investigation in search of a crime

    Tom Servo in reply to stl. | April 16, 2018 at 4:31 pm

    Exactly – and that’s what bother’s me so much about this revelation about Hannity. It isn’t that I care about him one way or the other, but it’s this idea that if the prosecutor is mad because a lawyer is fighting against them (which every defense lawyer does in every case they have) then that prosecutor can gin up a warrant, grab the lawyers files and release the names of all of his clients to the press, even if they have no relation to the case at hand whatsoever.

    That’s what 3rd world dictatorships do. That’s what Banana Republics do, to let everyone know that they better only do business with someone who’s on the Prosecution’s good side. This, this leaking of the name, is one of the most blatant pieces of open legal corruption I’ve seen so far. Yes, I know the Judge did it – but the Judge erred in that it should have been done in closed chambers; there was no possible legal necessity for a clients privacy to be breached publicly.

    It is a gross violation of the concept of attorney-client privilege, and if that is allowed to fall apart, out entire system of legal defense against prosecution will fall apart.

      The Packetman in reply to Tom Servo. | April 16, 2018 at 4:40 pm

      With regards to 3rd world dictators and banana republics, an uncomfortable truth: If the law won’t protect us from them, it also won’t protect them from us.

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to stl. | April 16, 2018 at 7:03 pm

    More like a FBI Crime in search of an Innocent Victim?

Henry Hawkins | April 16, 2018 at 3:07 pm

Sounds a bit like Minority Report’s PreCrime Unit.

Close The Fed | April 16, 2018 at 3:38 pm

The judge’s ruling will show us what she’s made of.

    mathewsjw in reply to Close The Fed. | April 16, 2018 at 9:29 pm

    Obama Appointed Federal Judge Kimba Wood officiated George Soros’ Wedding I Kid you Not

      Milhouse in reply to mathewsjw. | April 17, 2018 at 5:21 am

      1. 0bama didn’t appoint her to anything.
      2. So ***ing what?

        MarkSmith in reply to Milhouse. | April 17, 2018 at 9:30 am

        In 1993 President Bill Clinton nominated her to become the first female Attorney General. But she withdrew from the nomination after the White House learned she had hired an undocumented immigrant as a baby-sitter.

        Wood, who was Clinton’s second choice for AG post…..

          Milhouse in reply to MarkSmith. | April 17, 2018 at 12:08 pm

          How does that in any way support mathewsjw’s BS claim? And yes, so what if she performed Soros’s wedding? Soros has nothing at all to do with this case.

          Some paranoids here seem to think Soros is the Devil, and any connection with him is disreputable. Which is exactly as ridiculous as the paranoids on the left who think the same thing about the Kochs.

          MarkSmith in reply to MarkSmith. | April 17, 2018 at 6:17 pm

          How does that in any way support mathewsjw’s BS claim?

          It doesn’t. But it does point out the fact that there is a connection between Clinton and Wood that is too close. I think that is what mathewsjw is getting at.

          Soros has nothing at all to do with this case. Do you really believe that? Do you really believe there is no connection between Soro and Clinton?

          Some paranoids here seem to think Soros is the Devil, and any connection with him is disreputable.

          Well….what about him is reputable? I think his background speaks otherwise.

          Which is exactly as ridiculous as the paranoids on the left who think the same thing about the Kochs.

          Well I think the Koch brothers are just as evil and I consider myself on the right.

          Milhouse in reply to MarkSmith. | April 18, 2018 at 4:46 am

          What exactly about Soros’s background is disreputable? And seriously? You think the Kochs, two of the loveliest and most respectable people alive today, are evil?! Why?

        MarkSmith in reply to Milhouse. | April 17, 2018 at 9:37 am


        <i2. So ***ing what?</i

        More like WTF! The fix is in for the FBI.

” the Fourth Amendment are meaningless.”

We’re dealing with the left and their corrupt allies, the Swamp and the GOPe.

They have not use for the 4th Amendement. Nor the First or Second – except when they are in power.

Shy of gunfire and mass arrests, this abuse of power is as bad as it gets.

Trump should fire that rat Sessions and get it over with.

regulus arcturus | April 16, 2018 at 4:05 pm

Is the judge on the hook here at all?

I can’t see how forcing disclosure of nonpublic identity (protected by a/c privilege) unrelated to the case is legal…

    no way to unring the bell, and he’s unlikely to be impeached by Congress, so there’s no punishment.

    According to CNBC article, the Judge is Kimba Wood.

    Officiated at George Soros wedding.

    Nominated by The Rapist for AG, had to step down due to hiring of illegal nanny. Then we got j]Janet Reno.

    Hannity might have grounds to make a Judicial Conduct complaint as to the outing of his name as a privileged communication in open Court proceedings.

    Cohen may have grounds himself to make a Judicial Conduct complaint for the forcing of him to reveal the privileged party’s name as a political bias, on the grounds that the Judge knew, or should have known, that there may be a hostile political motive claim against her by doing so in open Court.

    Section 3(h)(1)(E) (Hannity)
    Section 3(h)(1)(D) (Cohen)

    Clients’ identities are not privileged.

      Yes and no.

      “If the disclosure of the client’s identity will also reveal the confidential purpose for which he consulted an attorney, we protect both the confidential communication and the client’s identity as privileged.” In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 926 F.2d 1423, 1431 (5th Cir. 1991).

        Milhouse in reply to Chuck Skinner. | April 18, 2018 at 4:48 am

        And how could it have done that? Even now that we know Hannity asked Cohen some legal questions, none of us has a clue what they might have been about.

        Ragspierre in reply to Chuck Skinner. | April 18, 2018 at 12:43 pm

        For a lawyer, the relationship is confidential.

        For nobody else. If someone sees a client’s car in my parking lot, they have no duty to NOT reveal that.

        If someone sees a potential divorce client enter my office, they have NO duty to NOT publicize that.

johnny dollar | April 16, 2018 at 4:15 pm

What possible reason can the judge have given for forcing Cohen to reveal the name of another client? It is not possible to divulge a reason from the twitter excerpts I have seen.
Unless there is some prima facie evidence that Sean Hannity is involved in committing a crime, which is being investigated by Mueller, then this is an outrageous breach of legal ethics by this judge. Even if that is so (which i don’t believe for a moment), there is simply no justification for forcing Cohen to divulge this information.
This entire matter is starting to seem like a “Twilight Zone” episode.

    Subotai Bahadur in reply to johnny dollar. | April 16, 2018 at 5:34 pm

    Unless there is some prima facie evidence that Sean Hannity is involved in committing a crime, which is being investigated by Mueller, then this is an outrageous breach of legal ethics by this judge.

    What are these “legal ethics” of which you speak? In the absence of a rule of law applicable to everybody, it is an oxymoron. Neither Mueller, nor any judge appointed by any Democrat accept that they are bound by anything but the quest for tyrannical political power. If this is not quashed forcefully with severe consequences for the perpetrators, there are new rules for the game.

      johnny dollar in reply to Subotai Bahadur. | April 16, 2018 at 6:07 pm

      Well, you make a reasonable point. When they are “interpreting” the Constitution, they ignore the parts they don’t like (such as the second and tenth amendments), and make things up that were never intended by the framers (such as abortion and gay marriage).
      So I guess it is a little naive to expect them to have any respect for legal ethics.

      Actually, there are de facto _no_ rules for the game.

        oldgoat36 in reply to Rusty Bill. | April 16, 2018 at 7:43 pm

        As Representative Alcee Hastings said “there are no rules here, we make them up as we go along.”

        We are in a very dark period of time. I’m thinking “we, the people” have let Benjamin Franklin down big time, we are not keeping our Republic.

    The claim, as near as I can tell, was that Cohen wasn’t actually “practicing law” and therefore his communications with anyone other than President Trump and the Trump organization are not actually privileged, and thus by seizing ALL of the documents, that the Prosecutors from SDNY were unlikely to run over anything that qualified as a “privileged communication.”

    The claim further is that Cohen’s communications with President Trump and the Trump Organization are part-and-parcel to some criminal enterprise engaged in by President Trump, and thus THOSE communications while claimed to be “privileged” have lost their privileged character because they were an attempt by legal counsel to assist President Trump in engaging in a crime.

    It’s a entirely BS claim by the SDNY prosecutors, because they KNEW that he actually WAS still practicing law, and that not all individuals with whom an attorney-client privileged is formed become retained clients. It SHOULD be slapped down, with sanctions of dismissal of all evidence seized as fruit of the poisonous tree, and sanctions personally for the attorney’s involved in the prosecution (aka recommendation of disbarment).

    On the OTHER HAND, if this is going to stick, I expect that we’ll see a raid on Bill and Hillary Clinton’s personal and foundation offices in NYC VERY shortly. (Oh, wait, they’re Democrat party members…).

johnny dollar | April 16, 2018 at 4:16 pm

Make that “discern a reason”, not divulge a reason. Sorry.

i’ve seen it reported elsewhere that the crimes alleged as basis for this warrant were redacted…

how is that even possible?

So this now has nothing to do with Mueller, it is the Judicial branch that has decided there is no such thing as a secret or informal attorney-client relationship where Michael Cohen is concerned, something that might fairly be taken as lethal to his practice of law should he actually be found innocent of other charges. I’m not going to shed a tear for Cohen, but can someone explain why this is okay? I see no sign Hannity was consulted or warned before his identity was revealed. What law requires such measures?

It sounds like all you need to utterly destroy a man’s practice of law is to engage in a search of his documents and then he is required to reveal all his “clients”, making him unsafe for past and future clients alike.

    oldgoat36 in reply to JBourque. | April 16, 2018 at 7:48 pm

    I wouldn’t shuffle Herr Mueller out of all this, his hands might not be directly on this, but his tactics and methods certainly are.

And some people wonder why I say the whole damn government is corrupt.

Why would this session not be closed? Isn’t the public disclosure of Hannity a violation of Attorney Client?????

This could damage Trumps ability to retain legal services. What attny wants to risk getting raided for simply representing Trump?

    Subotai Bahadur in reply to Yippy. | April 16, 2018 at 5:38 pm

    Or representing anyone else that may be declared an “Enemy of the State”, a “Counter-Revolutionary”, or “Rightist Deviationist”.

    Barry in reply to Yippy. | April 16, 2018 at 9:53 pm

    That is partly what this is designed to do.

    Juba Doobai! in reply to Yippy. | April 17, 2018 at 10:39 am

    Trump is likely to wind up represented by Dershowitz, Toensing, and DiGenova. I’m thinking that the Scooter Libby pardon is part of the deal Trump made to get Toensing and DiGenova. Dershowitz will come on board because his legal ethics appear to be impeccable.

Kimba Wood. Kimba Wood. Kimba Wood. Oh yes, Kimba Wood is Bill Clinton’s bimbo.

    Milhouse in reply to natdj. | April 17, 2018 at 5:28 am

    Um, no. There has never been any such allegation. Kimba Wood is a highly respected federal judge, appointed by Ronald Reagan, whom Clinton nominated for AG because he wanted a woman and thought she’d be easy to get confirmed. The nomination fell through over a silly nanny problem, as if everyone wasn’t doing exactly the same thing.

    Juba Doobai! in reply to natdj. | April 17, 2018 at 10:52 am

    This allegation has never been made before you said it. What is your evidence?

    What is true is that Wood appears to have a relationship with the Clintons because she was Hillary’s choice for the job. She did not get the job because of an illegal alien employee.

    Wood’s release of Hannity’s name is suspect, IMO, why not take issue with that?

“… it appears that the feds are not currently reviewing the materials pending a court ruling…” Oh sure. The feds have already copied everything and leaked the salacious parts to the Washington Post and the NY Times.

Has the legal profession not discovered encryption?

Trump or a conservative third party just needs to take a page out of the Democrats’ playbook here and file a federal injunction in another state (say Florida) on 4th and 5th amendment grounds.

Have this go to the Supreme Court if need be.

I was a client of Cohen’s as well. So what?