So Trump has joint defense agreements with 32 people (Incl. Jerome Corsi). What's that mean?

[ck4829]

"In October, Giuliani told Politico that Team Trump had 32 joint defense agreements with others being investigated by the special counsel’s office. The issue of such deals re-emerged in the Mueller probe this week after the Caller story and a New York Times report that former Trump campaign boss Paul Manafort’s lawyers were still communicating with Trump’s legal team even after Manafort’s conviction and agreement to cooperate with the government."

https://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=11483779

Now I know there is a such thing as a joint defense agreement, but I'm curious about the specifics and how it relates to Trump and company.

To me, it sounds like this whole slippery grip on what the law means... Whether it's Sean Hannity giving 5 bucks to Cohen and suddenly he enjoys attorney-client privilege or the fact that the Trump White House made people sign NDAs and they were just words on paper with no legal power.

From what I know, the burden that there is privilege will be on people asserting they have privilege... Trump, Corsi, etc.

But what exactly is Corsi's common interest with Trump? Conspiring to do something that could break civil or criminal law doesn't sound like grounds to even entertain this privilege.

Wait... Did... did they all just get together with crayons and sign a paper saying "Now none of us have to testify against each other, heh heh heh"?

[RockRaven]

1. The fact that Mueller is busting people for lying ought to have clued these guys in to the fact that

coordinating your lies (which is the purpose of these agreements, in this case) is not sufficient when you're dealing with experienced organized crime prosecutors. There are other sources of evidence, and not only are those sources used to prove your crimes, they are used to prove you are lying to the investigators/prosecutors.

[TheBlackAdder]

9. Wow! The American Bar says this can be a risky proposition.

.

http://apps.americanbar.org/litigation/committees/energy/articles/winterspring2011-joint-defense-agreement-risks.html

.

[onenote]

11. More specifically, the ABA printed an article by two practitioners outlining some of the risks to

the parties and their attorneys of a badly drawn or executed JDA, while also noting that "Despite the risks, joint defense agreements remain valuable tools for reducing costs through coordinating and spreading work among defendants, improving strategies through sharing ideas and work product, and improving the efficiency of the dispute resolution process through coordinated joint discovery and filings."

[Fuzzpope]

2. It means..

That Trump knows everything that the others do regarding every case brought against them.

How such a thing is even legal is beyond my understanding entirely.

[Claritie Pixie]

3. I think it means that his attorneys can meet and share info with the attorneys of those 32 people.

So....if Donny's written answers to Mueller were based on what Manafort's attorneys said he told Mueller (to keep the lies straight), then Manafort's plea deal was revoked for lying to Mueller....Donny's screwed.

[FakeNoose]

6. It helps Cheeto in his own defense, and virtually no other person in the deal

By the time Cheeto goes on the hotseat, these other guys will already be convicted and (presumably) in prison. Trump and his attorneys will have gotten the insider info on their trials and investigations and will be able to use it to Trump's advantage. But none of these other guys will have gotten anything out of it. Obviously they're thinking they'll get pardons, but that isn't worth the paper it's written on if Cheeto resigns or gets impeached.

[C_U_L8R]

4. That sure sounds like a conspiracy

[FakeNoose]

7. It's conspiring with Cheeto to help save his ass

... and nobody else's.

[Iliyah]

5. Not a damn thing.

Do the crime do the the time in prison. They will keep each other company.

[TheBlackAdder]

8. I thought to have a joint defense agreement, one has to be charged with a crime.

.

Oh, I see it's also potential litigation.

.

[CozyMystery]

10. The payback to those who are not Trump is a pardon. So it is worth the risk to all of them. nt

[UTUSN]

12. K&R

[ProudLib72]

13. Sounds similar to that "loyalty oath" crap

Only slightly more serious and involving people who knew "things".

What is humorous is that Paulie seems to be earnest in keeping to the agreement. Shouldn't the slipperiest of all slippery weasels know better than to take Donnie at his word?