“I’m not a lawyer nor do I play one on TV”
After the election of President Trump in 2016 there are many legal nuances that I had no idea existed. This according to experts from the Director of the FBI, The Department of Justice, and “real” lawyers (bah humbug) on the news programs.
One of these nuances I’ve already written about. This is the notion of INTENT as a requirement to determine if I law has been violated. You can read about INTENT using “lawyer logic” HERE. This was the INSANE logic that Showboat Comey used to defend Hillybob’s innocence in the email scandal, even though she OBVIOUSLY committed multiple FELONIES.
The next interesting nuance in the law is that written plans prior to committing a crime is not evidence of premeditation. This is the argument that the defenders of Showboat Comey use to PROVE that his writing of the Hillybob exoneration memo prior to his interviewing of her is not evidence that he “prejudged” her innocence. Using he “Comey-protection Logic” the defenders of Counselor Showboard argue that his writing of the memo is unconnected to his months later verdict of her innocence and therefore his testimony to Congress that he did not decide her innocence prior to the completion of all interviews, IS NOT PERJURY. Yeah, right.
Let’s follow the logic.
If we follow this lawyerly “Comey-protection Logic“, just because a murderer had at his home a hand written shopping list that included duct tape, rope, a tarp, a hammer, and a shovel, that written list DOES NOT DEMONSTRATE PREMEDITATION even IF a body is discovered wrapped in a tarp which was tied up with rope, hands and mouth duct taped, bludgeoned with a hammer, and buried in a shallow grave. According to “Comey-protection Logic“, a document written prior an act is not proof of any PREMEDITATION or PLANNING. “Comey-protection Logic” says, premeditation of a crime cannot exist, which implies that there can almost never be a case for First Degree Murder, which requires PREMEDITATION. The only way to charge First Degree Murder is if the defendant confesses to premeditation of the murder! This according to the logic from “Real” LAWYERS.
A third interesting nuance that the DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE is presenting is that IF a lawyer only has one client, he is not a lawyer. The DOJ is applying to this arguments as to why they are “entitled” to all documents seized from President Trump’s personal attorney Michael Cohen. IF Cohen only has ONE client (employed soley by Donald Trump as his personal attorney) he is NOT a lawyer. They go on to argue that if he is NOT a lawyer then NO attorney-client privilege exists. Without attorney-client privilege the DOJ believes they can use ALL seized documents as they see fit.
Once more let’s follow the logic.
Think about how this applies to corporate lawyers. They only have one client, their employer. The DOJ “one employer, not a lawyer logic” means that the DOJ can willy-nilly seize any corporate attorney’s documents as NO corporate lawyer can ever be a “real” lawyer. Applying the one-employer logic to those of us who are in the great unwashed, it means that if you have only one employer, you actually are not working at the job that you think you are getting paid for. In all my working life, I’ve ONLY had ONE employer at a time, therefore I must not have ever worked a “real” job. I can conclude in over 45 years of employment, I’ve never worked a day in my life! Sheesh I feel like quite the slacker, now that the DOJ has shown me that having only one employer makes me a “non-real” worker.
And they say those in the millennial generation are slackers.
It looks as if you charge $700 per hour and wear $5000 suits, you can say with confidence anything you want, whether is makes LOGICAL SENSE or NOT.
Okay, now I’ll say it, “All of these LAWYERS are full of SHIT!“
