Friday, June 16, 2023
Trump Prosecution Violates Attorney-Client Confidentiality by Targeting 3 Trump Lawyers
By Daniel Greenfield
Five lawyers have had attorney-client privilege violated to get Trump.
As I wrote earlier this week…
It wasn’t all that long ago that the liberal legal establishment was attacking the FBI for listening in on chats between terrorists and their lawyers. Defenders of Lynne Stewart, who was passing messages to terrorists on behalf of the Blind Sheikh, claimed that the government had violated attorney-client privilege and the Fifth Amendment by catching her in the act.This began with Michael Cohen and Rudy Giuliani. Clinton Special Counsel Jack Smith is now escalating by going after 3 Trump lawyers.
Stewart’s indictment was described as the ‘death knell’ for the right to counsel. Meanwhile, Democrats repeatedly violating attorney-client privilege to go after a sitting and former president is no big deal.
Those lawyers are M. Evan Corcoran and Jennifer Little, both of whom were subpoenaed for testimony and records, nearly all of them possessed by Mr. Corcoran, by Mr. Smith’s team during the investigation. According to the indictment, Mr. Trump told Mr. Corcoran that he wanted to be at Mar-a-Lago when Mr. Corcoran did a search, and that Ms. Little did not have to be there.
Mr. Corcoran, in particular, could prove to be a pivotal witness should the case go to trial, given that he recorded extensive audio notes about his dealings with Mr. Trump concerning both the receipt of the subpoena and the search of boxes in a storage room at Mar-a-Lago undertaken in an effort to comply with it.
A federal judge allowed prosecutors to pierce attorney-client privilege and obtain testimony and most of Mr. Corcoran’s notes. Several damning excerpts from them were quoted in the indictment, apparently showing Mr. Trump trying to get around the demands set forth in the subpoena.
The indictment also mentions a third lawyer — Trump Attorney 3 — who signed an attestation, at Mr. Corcoran’s request, certifying that a “diligent search” of “the boxes that were removed from the White House to Florida” had been conducted and that “any and all responsive documents” had been found. Prosecutors say the attestation signed by that lawyer, Christina Bobb, was false because Mr. Trump had already directed Mr. Nauta to move several boxes in a way that kept them from being searched.
So we’re up to five lawyers now. Five.
The junta didn’t just do this with one lawyer, they did it with five and there’s no reason to think that they’ll stop there.
I don’t believe that there’s a single case where five attorneys for the same defendant had attorney-client privilege violated. This is likely unprecedented in American history.
Apart from the illegitimately obtained evidence, fruit of a poisoned tree, the idea here is to intimidate lawyers.
There are now stories about how Trump can’t find top-drawer legal help. Not surprising when lawyers who take him on as a client know that they will be investigated, their notes seized, possibly prosecuted and certainly forced to...
The 90 Miles Mystery Video: Nyctophilia Edition #1417
Before You Click On The "Read More" Link,
Suggestions For Future Videos?
Email me.
Combine These Three Lines:
Line1: mikemiles
Line2: @
Line3: protonmail.com
Are You Digging The Mystery Vtext-align: center;">
Please Only Do So If You Are Over 21 Years Old.
If You are Easily Upset, Triggered Or Offended, This Is Not The Place For You.
Please Leave Silently Into The Night......
The 90 Miles Mystery Box: Episode #2113
You have come across a mystery box. But what is inside?
It could be literally anything from the serene to the horrific,
from the beautiful to the repugnant,
from the mysterious to the familiar.
If you decide to open it, you could be disappointed,
you could be inspired, you could be appalled.
This is not for the faint of heart or the easily offended.
You have been warned.
Thursday, June 15, 2023
Amazon Locks Man Out Of Smart Home Devices Over False Racism Claims
According to a June 4 blog post on Medium, Brandon Jackson found himself locked out of his Amazon Echo Show on May 25. When he contacted customer service, he was given the number of an Amazon executive - which he thought was a scam.
"When I connected with the executive, they asked if I knew why my account had been locked," he wrote. "When I answered I was unsure, their tone turned somewhat accusatory. I was told that the driver who had delivered my package reported receiving racist remarks from my ‘Ring doorbell.'"
Jackson, who is black, said that the accusation was improbable, as many of the delivery drivers in his area are the same race - thus, the racial slur was "highly unlikely."
Jackson tracked down the time that the driver would have dropped off his package (May 24 at 6:05 p.m.), and compared it to footage from his home at the time of the incident - revealing that nobody was home at the time of the delivery. Instead, Jackson thinks that his Eufy automated doorbell said to the driver "Excuse me, can I help you?"
"The driver, who was walking away and wearing headphones, must have misinterpreted the message," wrote Jackson, adding that even after he shared the evidence with Amazon, his account remained locked.
"Despite numerous calls and emails, it wasn’t until Friday afternoon [on May 26] that I received confirmation that the investigation had started," he wrote, adding that it wasn't until May 31 that access was finally restored.
In a statement to NTD News, Amazon said: "we learned through our investigation that the customer did not act inappropriately, and we’re working directly with the customer to resolve their concerns while also looking at ways to prevent a similar situation from happening again."
While he was locked out of the Amazon account he typically used for his smart home devices, Jackson said he had already thought ahead about alternate ways to control his devices.
“I already had everything set up so if something did fail I have fallbacks so I wasn’t truly in the dark,” Jackson explained in a subsequent video post about the experience. “But I wrote [my blog post] from the perspective of someone who—what if they didn’t do all that.”
Jackson, who is an engineer at Microsoft and is relatively tech savvy, shared his concerns for owners of smart home devices who don’t have the same knowledge base and find themselves locked out in a similar incident.
He said the incident led him to lose trust in Amazon due to how it kept him locked out through the duration of the ordeal.
“I fully support Amazon taking measures to ensure the safety of their drivers. However, I question why my entire smart home system had to be rendered unusable during their internal investigation,” he wrote.
Jackson also argued that Amazon or other companies shouldn’t be able to block people from using the products they purchased because they expressed the wrong opinions.
“If you bought a toaster right, it doesn’t matter what you did, how bad of a person you were how good of a person you are, you still own the toaster at the end of the day right?” Jackson said. “And if you really did do something that was so horrible and bad that shouldn’t be Amazon or Google or Apple’s call to do anything about that. You know, we already have a system set up for that and that’s...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)