clsbluesky.law.columbia.edu/2025/08/05/d...
clsbluesky.law.columbia.edu/2025/08/05/d...
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
He could be El Chapo. He could be Charles Manson. He could be the Dalai Lama.
It doesn't matter. What has happened to him and others is clearly a violation of America's core laws and principles.
He could be El Chapo. He could be Charles Manson. He could be the Dalai Lama.
It doesn't matter. What has happened to him and others is clearly a violation of America's core laws and principles.
If a lawyer was inadvertently included in an attorney-client privileged communication, they would have a clear ethical obligation to immediately sign-off and alert the other lawyer as to what had happened. (Not so for journalists, and properly so, but riddle it).
If a lawyer was inadvertently included in an attorney-client privileged communication, they would have a clear ethical obligation to immediately sign-off and alert the other lawyer as to what had happened. (Not so for journalists, and properly so, but riddle it).
If a lawyer was inadvertently included in an attorney-client privileged communication, they would have a clear ethical obligation to immediately sign-off and alert the other lawyer as to what had happened. (Not so for journalists, and properly so, but riddle it).
If a lawyer was inadvertently included in an attorney-client privileged communication, they would have a clear ethical obligation to immediately sign-off and alert the other lawyer as to what had happened. (Not so for journalists, and properly so, but riddle it).
open.spotify.com/episode/0g88...
open.spotify.com/episode/0g88...