Why not also criminal or unethical conduct that he observed but was not a direct participant in?
Why not also criminal or unethical conduct that he observed but was not a direct participant in?I agree that anything which would constitute work he performed as an attorney should remain confidential. That's a no-brainer. Him disclosing any valid legal work for Trump without consent would be actionable against him. I really don't think Cohen would do that. Note: if you commit crimes with someone, there is no privilege.
So let's clear that hurdle and set things very narrowly. If Cohen writes only about illegal activity that he committed with Trump's involvement or direction, do you think that is wrong? If not, why not?
Why not also criminal or unethical conduct that he observed but was not a direct participant in?
It was never a "joint venture", Cohen was paid to cover up, scare people off, ect. Cohen is in jail making zero income for his family's needs, we'll see if the book sells well or he gets a publishing advance of some type.Should he notify the public?
Who he should notify is the Justice System along with all supporting evidence.
As you stated in one of your prior post "If anything, Cohen owes him a nice fuck you right back. "
That is what this is all about and we all know it. Cohen is sending a FU to Trump because he feels like he got screwed on their alleged illegal joint venture and is going to make a mint off of it.
I agree that anything which would constitute work he performed as an attorney should remain confidential. That's a no-brainer. Him disclosing any valid legal work for Trump without consent would be actionable against him. I really don't think Cohen would do that. Note: if you commit crimes with someone, there is no privilege.
So let's clear that hurdle and set things very narrowly. If Cohen writes only about illegal activity that he committed with Trump's involvement or direction, do you think that is wrong? If not, why not?
I love how pcgeek's apparent solution if you see wrongdoing is to take it to the authorities. If they don't do anything about it then the appropriate action is to give up and never speak of it again.
Lol. It's kind of insulting that he expects us to think he actually believes that.
It was never a "joint venture", Cohen was paid to cover up, scare people off, ect. Cohen is in jail making zero income for his family's needs, we'll see if the book sells well or he gets a publishing advance of some type.
1) The article describes his book as a 'tell all', not Cohen.
2) If you think people actually write everything they know in tell all books... well... lol. I can't believe anyone is actually that naive.
You were criticizing him for things you have no idea if he will do or not. That's dumb.
What part do you think is defending him?I find it funny how you are defending Cohen.
It’s exactly what you said. You don’t get to lie about what I said and then lie about what you said.That isn't what I said, no more than you called for us to lynch Trump for his alleged crimes.
What part do you think is defending him?
It’s exactly what you said. You don’t get to lie about what I said and then lie about what you said.
You’re doing the same thing you always do, never defend a position because you know you can’t.Nope. Please Quote where I said this exactly:
"if you see wrongdoing is to take it to the authorities. If they don't do anything about it then the appropriate action is to give up and never speak of it again."
You can quote me or admit you were incorrect.
What I have said in so many words is the correct path for illegal actions would be impeachment and removal from office, then allow the justice system to proceed. Or wait until he is out of office and then allow the justice system to proceed.
Rumor, hearsay, inuendo in a tell all book written for revenge for Cohen being thrown under the bus by Trump ( IAW what you said earlier in the thread) is not the way for justice to be served.
Isn't it great he is writing a tell all book to expose Trump and get revenge!
You’re doing the same thing you always do, never defend a position because you know you can’t.
Reference my previous post.OK, so you can't quote the made up crap you posted.
What a joke.
I will ask you again, what part of defending people’s right to speak means defending him?
I can’t wait to use your moronic reasoning to say your support of the right to assembly makes you a Nazi.
did you not think this through? Maybe it was a secret.
Reference my previous post.
I didn’t, I just asked you to actually explain your point.Your comprehension is horrid.
I voiced my opinion on his "tell all book" he is reported to be releasing. I also stated that he may have to be careful about the Attorney-client privilege laws.
The you rushed in to defend his revenge book. We disagree ( shocking I know ). You think he should be allowed to go around the Attorney-client privilege laws and I don't. You think he should be able to use this book as a tool for justice in spite of the law. I don't.
Get over yourself.
I am.
I wouldn't have an issue with your suggestion with the addition that the illegal activity is backed by verifiable facts.
You can only tell the truth if you can prove it?
You should only be able to print a book with derogatory information that is verifiable.
He isn't going to understand that. Here let me try:Wow, talk about a horrendous violation of the first amendment. This is not how our country works, at all.
Imagine if Trump raped someone and there were no witnesses. According to you they shouldn’t be allowed to tell anyone.
If it's not verifiable and if the target of that book can prove that they've suffered a loss because of the book's publishing, the author and publisher can be sued for writing and publishing it.You should only be able to print a book with derogatory information that is verifiable.