Trumps lawyer is completely out of his depth and giving bad legal advice: NYT report

[babylonsister]

Trump’s lawyer is completely out of his depth and giving bad legal advice: NYT report
David Ferguson
11 Jun 2017 at 18:53 ET


President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer has stepped in to defend the president in what appears to be shaping up into an obstruction of justice investigation, but sources close to the White House say that attorney Marc Kasowitz is out of his depth and dispensing bad legal advice to the president and his aides.

The New York Times said on Sunday that Kasowitz has told White House personnel that they will not need to obtain legal representation of their own and urged them not to speak to the media about the investigation into Trump and his campaign’s ties to Russian meddling in the 2016 election.

“His visits to the White House have raised questions about the blurry line between public and private interests for a president facing legal issues. Mr. Kasowitz in recent days has advised White House aides to discuss the inquiry into Russia’s interference in last year’s election as little as possible, two people involved said. He told aides gathered in one meeting who had asked whether it was time to hire private lawyers that it was not yet necessary, according to another person with direct knowledge,” wrote the Times‘ Rebecca R. Ruiz and Sharon LaFraniere.

For the president’s private lawyer to address administration officials — who are government employees — in such a manner and in an open setting is highly unusual, said lawyers from previous administrations to the Times. In doing so, Kasowitz bypassed the White House’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) and more than one attorney has reportedly been deterred from working with the White House by Kasowitz’ inexperience and lack of knowledge with cases of this kind.

more...

http://www.rawstory.com/2017/06/trumps-lawyer-is-completely-out-of-his-depth-and-giving-bad-legal-advice-nyt-report/#.WT3U-LEB-Dc.facebook

[TeamPooka]

1. Never take legal advice from someone else's lawyer.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

8. Bingo. Especially when their actual client is a fucking snake.

[leftstreet]

2. My Cousin Vinny the Sequel

[enough]

3. What I got out of reading that NYT article is a bit different.

That lawyer is trying to harm the other potential witnesses at the White House and undermine their possible testimony by legally tainting it.

[Justice]

4. This is basic 101 legal ethics - knowing who your client is and who it is not

What Marc should say to White House personnel is that they need to consult a lawyer to determine whether they need to obtain legal representation of their own and he is not their lawyer.

He can urge them not to speak to the media about the investigation into Trump and his campaign’s ties to Russian meddling in the 2016 election - but he has to be careful not to say it in a way that again suggest he is providing legal advice.

[Princess Turandot]

5. From the NY Times actual article...

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/11/us/politics/trump-lawyer-marc-kasowitz.html?_r=0

His advice is potentially quite self-serving. I hope the lower level employees who might get caught up in this read this article.

*********************************************************

"...Jane Sherburne, a White House special counsel who managed ethics issues during Mr. Clinton’s first term, said Mr. Kendall [David Kendall was Bill Clinton's personal attorney for the Whitewater bullshit] was not allowed to meet with White House staff members until “we had gone through a whole exercise of having conversations with employees ourselves, talking to them about whether they wanted to retain their own counsel and telling them they didn’t have to talk to Kendall.”

Under ethics rules, Mr. Kasowitz could not interview any official who had hired a lawyer without that lawyer’s permission, meaning it would be in his interest if administration aides did not hire their own lawyers, experts said. “It is probably easier for him to represent Trump if he doesn’t have to deal with a bunch of other lawyers,” Ms. Sherburne said, adding that she believed it was inappropriate for Mr. Kasowitz to discourage aides from hiring their own counsel.

Richard Painter, the White House ethics lawyer under President George W. Bush who now teaches at the University of Minnesota’s law school, said that in a worst-case scenario, a staff member might listen to Mr. Kasowitz’s advice and “end up thrown under the bus.” "

[Kaleva]

7. Trump is reported to be very unhappy with his staff. Maybe he's setting them up to take the fall?

[Leith]

12. That's What I Thought, Too

But if I were one of the people he said that to and I had additional legal trouble because of it, you better believe that I would get some payback by putting Dolt 45 in the worst possible light I could. This could backfire on shitgibbon and his hired mouthpiece.

[Kaleva]

13. I hope members of his staff turn on him soon.

Even if it's just to save themselves.

[thecrow]

14. But.... the WH ethics rules were removed for the senior staff

https://www.democraticunderground.com/10029142880

Ethics? Who needs them?

[CentralMass]

6. Good. I hope that he continues to get shitty legal advice

[rurallib]

9. I second that

Trump probably not paying him, anyway, so it kind of evens out

[SunSeeker]

10. Those staffers better confirm that Kasowitz has malpractice insurance.

Not that winning a malpractice suit against the turd will get them their old lives back when this all ends very badly.

[Jim Lane]

16. That wouldn't help the staffers.

There can be no malpractice absent an attorney-client relationship. Kasowitz is Trump's lawyer, not the staffer's. If Kasowitz gives Trump bad legal advice (bad enough to be malpractice, which most bad legal advice is not), and Trump and the staffer both suffer as a result, then Trump might be able to win a malpractice case against Kasowitz, but the staffer could not.

Caveat: I'm admitted only in New York and I'm sure of this statement only for New York law, but I'd be very surprised if any other U.S. jurisdiction allowed a non-client to sue a lawyer for malpractice.

[SunSeeker]

18. He told them they don't need to get their own lawyers and is giving them legal advice on this.

Of course he's Trump's lawyer, but nothing is stopping him from also being the lawyer for other potential defendants (well, except for ethics and common sense, but those ships have sailed). Lawyers represent multiple parties in a matter all the time, either groups of defendants or groups of plaintiffs, often with signed conflict waivers. If he's giving the staffers legal advice, whether they're paying him or not, and they're listening to him, doesn't that make him their lawyer? I am not aware of any case law that says there must be some sort of formal signed retention agreement. Indeed, lawyers are instructed to take steps to make clear to a potential client whether an attorney-client relationship exists, so that the lawyer can avoid the "surprise attorney-client relationship":

"The relationship begins when there is a mutual understanding that the client is going to confide in the attorney and the attorney is going to listen. The attorney-client relationship may commence even if there is nothing in writing. The relationship may commence even if no money has changed hands. Although there must be a mutual understanding that the client has engaged the lawyer and the lawyer has accepted representation, it is the attorney’s responsibility to make it clear to the potential client when this has occurred, and when it has not."
https://www.americanbar.org/newsletter/publications/gp_solo_magazine_home/gp_solo_magazine_index/solo_lawyer_ethics_attorney_client_relationship.html

[Jim Lane]

19. I agree that a written retainer is not necessary, but that's not my argument.

Obviously I haven't reviewed a transcript of the meeting. All I can tell you is that the facts presented in this thread are, to my mind, clearly insufficient to establish an attorney-client relationship.

Actually, the more interesting hypothetical malpractice suit is the one by Trump. Suppose Kasowitz gives him a combination of good advice (such as to stop tweeting) and bad advice, Trump tweets anyway, things go badly, and Trump sues Kasowitz. It's not typical for a malpractice case to involve a defense by the lawyer to the effect that the client played a key role in getting a bad result because the client ignored the lawyer's advice. Trump and Kasowitz would both be deposed, under oath, and a compilation of those transcripts might hit the best-seller lists. (BTW, "deposed" here refers to the taking of pretrial testimony, not ousting Trump from office.)

And if the case ever went to trial, hoo boy, they'd have to hold it in RFK Stadium if they wanted to accommodate all the would-be spectators.

[unitedwethrive]

11. They should put every one in the White House staff under oath and ask them "Were you ever asked

to pledge loyalty to Trump." I know it is not illegal, or even unethical to do this for staff members, but it would go to Trumps claim of, "What kind of a person would do that? I would never do that!"

Then each staff member then has to decide if it is worth it to lie under oath.

[Initech]

15. Is there anyone connected to Trump that isn't grossly incompetent?

[Jim Lane]

17. Alas, I don't think Pence is grossly incompetent.

He's why I'm not in the Impeach Trump camp, at least not yet. Pence is competent enough that, as President, he could push an extreme right-wing agenda more effectively than Trump can.

[Foamfollower]

20. Actually, he's pretty brilliant. Trump is his client, not any of the aides.

Kasowitz to WH Aides: "Nah, you don't need a lawyer."

TRANSLATION: "My client needs scapegoats who don't have representation."

[cwydro]

21. They'd have to be fools to listen to him. nt