General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWhen Cassidy Hutchinson 1st testified, she was represented by lawyer *paid for* by Trump folk
So this lays out that (as he did in the Russian investigation) 1) Trump was providing lawyers to key witnesses and getting reports back and 2) Trump was pressuring Hutchinson to limit her testimony.
This is a fascinating video for many reasons:
WOW. BIG revelation from
@Alyssafarah
this morning on
@newday
: when Cassidy Hutchinson first privately testified, she was represented by a lawyer *paid for* by folks in Trump world. Then, she decided she wanted to share way more, so she changed lawyers and testified publicly.
EVERY TIME that a reporter gets told that she is being treated like some "Coffee Boy," they should instead repeat these facts: Trump knew her testimony could be sufficiently damaging to pay for her defense.
Link to tweet
?s=20&t=rbE2OetAsZnKaHa4udjY_A
Link to tweet
?s=20&t=Y8xH6mXo6oAEYOYlTDclXQ
Link to tweet
?s=20&t=Y8xH6mXo6oAEYOYlTDclXQ
spanone
(135,838 posts)Lars39
(26,109 posts)now a lawyer? Not having much to do with Trump and siblings until she was in college, going to be a lawyer.
Totally Tunsie
(10,885 posts)she can join the rest of her family in the pokie.
Hugin
(33,148 posts)Is built on the flimsy lawyer client privilege concept. Maybe he heard it in a movie somewhere.
Ask Michael Cohen about it.
It only works if the lawyer doesnt also participate in these or other crimes. I think TFG got really sloppy when his sister was a judge.
Hugin
(33,148 posts)Wasnt one of the SS agents involved suddenly promoted to a position in the Trump campaign?
Was this to buy their silence on the events?
Hugin
(33,148 posts)Far too incriminating.
The heavy lifting was most likely done by a member of the perpetual clean-up crew.
It is hard to believe it was done on initiative, though. Thats not how this hive rolls.
mopinko
(70,111 posts)thank ja for john tester, but yeah. exactly how they roll.
They seem to fall into a couple of categories.
To do them a favor which will need to be reciprocated upon demand (some justices come to mind) and to buy their silence.
Same old Quid Pro Quo, though.
Deminpenn
(15,286 posts)He was also a political adviser. He's and was a major Trumper.
Maraya1969
(22,480 posts)It's like Jeffery Epstein paying for the lawyers of everyone around him against the girls he molested. "Conflict of interest" sounds like an appropriate label.
ARPad95
(1,671 posts)The Governor said law school could be done in one year, potentially.
Gov. Ron DeSantis continued his recent tradition of unsolicited critiques of higher education, saying Friday that current three-year law school tracks are a waste.
You dont need three years for law school, DeSantis, a Harvard Law product, said in Naples Friday, where he was rolling out a job growth grant award to expand vocational offerings.
Some of these degrees you see. You know, I went to law school; you dont need three years for law school, DeSantis divulged. I mean, seriously, you dont. You could do it probably in one. Definitely in two. You dont need three.
Its a waste, DeSantis continued. And theres other degrees where they make you do more years than you need to. We dont want them toiling for no reason. Get the skills and go out there and put them to use.
Full article at this link:
https://floridapolitics.com/archives/465049-ron-desantis-says-three-years-of-law-school-is-a-waste/
Hmmm, you think Ron wants to create an "army' of homegrown incompetent and ignorant lawyers for his fascist goals?
Good luck passing the State Bar with only one or two years of law school.
AND, Ron, how about YOUR brain surgeon only going a couple of years to complete his neurosurgical degree.?????????
thenelm1
(854 posts)Whiskeytide
(4,461 posts)Response to kpete (Original post)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
fierywoman
(7,683 posts)intheflow
(28,476 posts)So is Cheney paying for her lawyer now? Because that would be an ethical clusterf*ck.
wnylib
(21,468 posts)The reason for putting Hutchinson in touch with Cheney was to let Cheney know that Hutchinson had more that she wanted to say to the committee. I don't know when Hutchinson changed lawyers, whether before or after talking to Cheney. If after, she might have asked for a referral to a lawyer not connected with Trump. Cheney would know some good lawyers outside of the Trump circle.
But that's a far cry from paying for lawyers.
intheflow
(28,476 posts)In the context of talking about Trump paying for Hutchinson's lawyers, someone is quoted saying that they put Hutchinson in touch with Cheney, then Hutchinson got a new lawyer. It is probably as you say (Cheney is a very capable lawyer, as we all see now, who would be unlikely to jeopardize her own investigation), but the phrasing - the order in which it is laid out - sounds like Hutchinson wanted to talk but didn't think to get herself a new lawyer until after she talked to Cheney? Just... weird.
Deminpenn
(15,286 posts)and said she had more to say. The inference is that her Trump recommended lawyer kept her from saying more in some way or another. F-G put her in touch with Cheney because Hutchinson said she had more information. Then Hutinson got a new lawyer, one associated with Jeff Sessions, not with Trumpworld.
That would explain the "new information" reason used by the committee for the unscheduled hearing on Tuesday as well.
wnylib
(21,468 posts)that it happened that way. Hutchinson might have realized that she needed a change of lawyers in order to give more testimony. She seems like an intelligent enough woman to realize that she was being constrained by Trump lawyers. Likely threatened, too, since threats were mentioned by Cheney at the hearing, albeit without specific names.
If you want to say more but your lawyers discourage you from it because they have your boss's interests ahead of your own, you would not trust their advice. You would want someone that represents your interests. You would seek advice on finding a lawyer for yourself.
CaptainTruth
(6,592 posts)Some of the "legal folks" I follow on Twitter were talking about it the morning before she testified, with one saying something like "it's never good for the boss when a former staff member switches to their own attorney."
Looks like they were right.
gratuitous
(82,849 posts)Hutchinson either consulted with someone or figured out for herself that there was a danger to having her legal representation yoked to the former guy. That danger being that everything she talked about with her lawyer was immediately relayed to the former guy's legal team. All the better for the former guy to betray her (and others he had this arrangement with) if the day ever came when the investigators were getting too close to him.
What's best for Hutchinson wasn't and isn't always what's best for the former guy, and as long as her own lawyer was operating in cahoots with the former guy's lawyers, she couldn't trust that she was getting best advice and representation for herself. Change lawyers, testify publicly at a special committee hearing, and the former guy melts down.
Response to gratuitous (Reply #17)
Chin music This message was self-deleted by its author.
gab13by13
(21,348 posts)but I am betting that domestic oligarchs paid the money into the fund. With Citizens United we don't know who owns our government.
I'm sure the Federalist Society is a part of this.
kentuck
(111,098 posts)Scary.
Like a Godfather, he will take care of their legal bills and their families.
Despicable asshole!
LetMyPeopleVote
(145,274 posts)IcyPeas
(21,872 posts)it's always: Follow the Money.
Recipients include $25,000 to Brand Woodward Law, which has represented Trump aide Dan Scavino, and $29,500 to Abel Bean Law, which represents Trump aide Taylor Budowich.
Save America PAC paid $50,000 to JP Rowley Law PLLC, which represents attorney Cleta Mitchell, who advised Trump on how to attempt to overturn the November 2020 election results.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/01/politics/trump-pac-mark-meadows-january-6-investigation/index.html