December 02, 2018, 10:39 PM
wrightdThe FBI raided the home of whistleblower on Clinton Foundation
quote:
Originally posted by John Steed:
quote:
... to seize copies of the same documents after being told at the house door that he is a legally protected whistleblower who gave them to Congress, is an outrageous disregard of the law,” ... “Knowingly bypassing the lawyer of a represented client is serious misconduct.”...
Any penalty for this? Or are some in the FBI "above the law"?
yes they are absolutely above the law, their job is to exercise the law anyway they see fit to anyone whom they choose. and i've said it before whisleblowers always lose.
December 02, 2018, 11:04 PM
Dallas239quote:
Originally posted by DMF:
quote:
Originally posted by olfuzzy:
“After the raid, and having received my name and phone number from Mr. Cain as his lawyer, an FBI agent actually called my client directly to discuss his seized electronics,” Socarras told TheDCNF. “Knowingly bypassing the lawyer of a represented client is serious misconduct.”
Not necessarily true. If the client is not in custody 5th amendment right to counsel doesn't prevent LE from talking to the suspect (since it was a phone call it's hard to claim it's a custodial situation), and 6th amendment right to counsel hasn't "attached" if the "criminal proceedings" (most often by indictment) against the client haven't begun. So it's very likely there was nothing improper in the agents calling the guy to chat.
My guess is there is a lot more to this story than just what the suspect and his client say happened.
Interesting that they somehow got a search warrant then. Regardless, they know he's represented.
December 03, 2018, 05:08 AM
DMFquote:
Originally posted by Dallas239:
quote:
Originally posted by DMF:
quote:
Originally posted by olfuzzy:
“After the raid, and having received my name and phone number from Mr. Cain as his lawyer, an FBI agent actually called my client directly to discuss his seized electronics,” Socarras told TheDCNF. “Knowingly bypassing the lawyer of a represented client is serious misconduct.”
Not necessarily true. If the client is not in custody 5th amendment right to counsel doesn't prevent LE from talking to the suspect (since it was a phone call it's hard to claim it's a custodial situation), and 6th amendment right to counsel hasn't "attached" if the "criminal proceedings" (most often by indictment) against the client haven't begun. So it's very likely there was nothing improper in the agents calling the guy to chat.
My guess is there is a lot more to this story than just what the suspect and his client say happened.
Interesting that they somehow got a search warrant then.
I'm not sure what you find interesting about it, as search warrants are issued prior to the beginning of "criminal proceedings," in many cases ( probably most, but I don't have good stats on that).
quote:
Regardless, they know he's represented.
Which means nothing. If it's non-custodial, and "criminal proceedings" have not begun, then law enforcement officers are not required to communicate through counsel.
December 03, 2018, 09:31 PM
sdyNate Cain tweeted:
Friends, I have just been contacted by Fox News and informed that due to HW Bush’s funeral, many segments including mine have been cancelled for tonight. I will update you when I know more.