Forces were available to help americans in benghazi

#26
#26
BearCat204 said:
Its on the internet.................has to be solid
Click to expand...

images
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#30
#30
VOLinthaNATI said:
If I hire you to represent me, would you then be considered my counsel?
Click to expand...


Again, she is the "Republican counsel." And look at what else she has done in her career, going after Plame, Clinton, etc.

She's a partisan operative who is violating attorney-client privilege, disclosing things to Fox that her client told her, and then even worse from a new perspective simply refusing to give any detail by which any of her claims could be looked into.

Fox love it. They get to quote her and ask whether the administration is "threatening" people, but they base it purely on rank hearsay that intentionally cannot be verified.

This is the worst kind of journalism.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#31
#31
lawgator1 said:
She went to Fox News and said her client had been threatened, which is something she would learn only from her client.
Click to expand...

So every attorney in high profile cases giving interviews, proclaiming "my client is innocent, he wasn't there" is breaking attorney client privilege?
 
#33
#33
lawgator1 said:
Again, she is the "Republican counsel." And look at what else she has done in her career, going after Plame, Clinton, etc.

She's a partisan operative who is violating attorney-client privilege, disclosing things to Fox that her client told her, and then even worse from a new perspective simply refusing to give any detail by which any of her claims could be looked into.

Fox love it. They get to quote her and ask whether the administration is "threatening" people, but they base it purely on rank hearsay that intentionally cannot be verified.

This is the worst kind of journalism.
Click to expand...

Sounds like a smart attorney, I know hard for you to recognize, trie the case in the press, garner public support for your client. Once it's public it will be hard for them to fire her client without a bunch of questions.
 
#34
#34
lawgator1 said:
Again, she is the "Republican counsel." And look at what else she has done in her career, going after Plame, Clinton, etc.

She's a partisan operative who is violating attorney-client privilege, disclosing things to Fox that her client told her, and then even worse from a new perspective simply refusing to give any detail by which any of her claims could be looked into.

Fox love it. They get to quote her and ask whether the administration is "threatening" people, but they base it purely on rank hearsay that intentionally cannot be verified.

This is the worst kind of journalism.
Click to expand...

You keep making this assertion but you have no idea if it is true without knowing what the client has authorized the attorney to disclose (and it likely is not true).
 
#39
#39
lawgator1 said:
So a lawyer, who works for the Republican party, says she represents an unnamed official and then discloses attorney-client communications to Fox News and declines to give any specifics with which any of it could be confirmed?

Hmmmm .....
Click to expand...

I like this new standard you have set. We cannot trust individual who work for a Party. Waiting to hear you denounce these folks.

1. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., said that he's heard that Romney did not pay any taxes for 10 years.

2. Members of the Democratic group Progress Kentucky were behind a leaked recording of a private conversation among Sen. Mitch McConnell.

3. Debbie Wasserman Schultz By advocating new requirements for voters to show ID cards at the polls, Republicans "want to literally drag us all the way back to Jim Crow laws."
 
#42
#42
lawgator1 said:
Yet another thing never to be verified.
Click to expand...

Well if the attorney ends up still representing the client in this matter and/or a malpractice suit is not filed against her, I think it will be a pretty safe assumption that she had the consent of the client.
 
#43
#43
#44
#44
volmaverick said:
FORCES WERE AVAILABLE TO HELP AMERICANS UNDER ATTACK IN BENGHAZI

Explosive Report Contradicts the Obama Administration’s Benghazi Story in a Big Way

Explosive Report Contradicts the Obama Administration’s Benghazi Story in a Big Way | Video | TheBlaze.com

Clinton and Obama let our Ambassador die. Sounds just like Boston.

Pray for America to Wake Up
Click to expand...

When The Blaze reports on things and misspells an acronym in which the correct spelling obviously points to a pretty intelligible and specific concept, I have a hard to lending credibility to their "exclusive reports".

It's EUCOM, not "UComm". Jackassery.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#45
#45
volmaverick said:
Allred Claims Ex-Porn Star Afraid Of Weiner ‘Threats’

An attorney for a former porn star linked to Congressman Anthony Weiner said on Friday that her client has been “threatened” by an as-yet unidentified party.

Allred Claims Ex-Porn Star Afraid Of Weiner ‘Threats’ « CBS Los Angeles
Click to expand...


Let's compare the two journalistic efforts here, shall we?

In the Allred story, the person making the claim is identified, allowing the person accused (and identified) to respond to the allegation.

In the story you posted, we have an attorney saying she has a client, who she won't name, making accusations of something vague, against unidentified people.

Its ridiculous.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#46
#46
lawgator1 said:
Let's compare the two journalistic efforts here, shall we?

In the Allred story, the person making the claim is identified, allowing the person accused (and identified) to respond to the allegation.

In the story you posted, we have an attorney saying she has a client, who she won't name, making accusations of something vague, against unidentified people.

Its ridiculous.
Click to expand...

I think it's probably nothing, but if somebody is being threatened they may want their name to be withheld. Isn't it possible the client wants his/her name withheld?

I really don't see this issue. Journalists use anonymous sources all the time. Quit acting like it's a fox thing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#47
#47
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#48
#48
lawgator1 said:
Again, she is the "Republican counsel." And look at what else she has done in her career, going after Plame, Clinton, etc.

She's a partisan operative who is violating attorney-client privilege, disclosing things to Fox that her client told her, and then even worse from a new perspective simply refusing to give any detail by which any of her claims could be looked into.

Fox love it. They get to quote her and ask whether the administration is "threatening" people, but they base it purely on rank hearsay that intentionally cannot be verified.

This is the worst kind of journalism.
Click to expand...

She is not violating client-attorney privilege. Sheeesh man.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top