Michael Cohen and related issues Master Thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sean Hannity says he just called Cohen for “advice.” He says Cohen never retained him. If that’s the case, he’s not a client. You are either a client or you are not. He says he’s not.

Problem: Michael Cohen’s lawyers just named Hannity as Cohen’s client UNDER OATH.

Also said no matters ever involved a third party.

That’s what Hannity said. I smell a rat. Something is being covered up here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Judge Wood, to Cohen's attorneys: "It’s not that you’re not good people. It’s that you’ve miscited the law, at times."

You forgot "REAGAN-APPOINTED Judge Wood ..."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And it's only Monday

Dear God -- it's not infrastructure week again, is it?!?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sean Hannity says he just called Cohen for “advice.” He says Cohen never retained him. If that’s the case, he’s not a client. You are either a client or you are not. He says he’s not.

Problem: Michael Cohen’s lawyers just named Hannity as Cohen’s client UNDER OATH.

\

So Cohen's lawyers lied in court?

That must be it!

[Anonymous]

As you folks wet your pants with this “revelation,” the rest of us will wait for the evidence or proof that Hannity’s connection to Cohen is anything nefarious or unethical. He has just stated on his radio show that he has never had him on retainer, he never represented Hannity in any court filings, and any dealings he had with him did not involve a third party.

I think this will go down as another instance of news that gets liberals all worked up in a hot mess, but turns out to be a nothing burger.

[Anonymous]

It sounds like there is a dispute as to whether they have a lawyer-client relationship or not. I would trust the lawyer over the client to determine that. Even a lawyer like Cohen. And Cohen’s lawyers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sean Hannity says he just called Cohen for “advice.” He says Cohen never retained him. If that’s the case, he’s not a client. You are either a client or you are not. He says he’s not.

Problem: Michael Cohen’s lawyers just named Hannity as Cohen’s client UNDER OATH.

Also said no matters ever involved a third party.

That’s what Hannity said. I smell a rat. Something is being covered up here.

One CAN contact a lawyer for advice and not have him on retainer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: It sounds like there is a dispute as to whether they have a lawyer-client relationship or not. I would trust the lawyer over the client to determine that. Even a lawyer like Cohen. And Cohen’s lawyers.

The Govt prosecutor should take Hannity's tweet and press for clarification. It is possible that Cohen's legal team is lying and Cohen does not have an attorney-client relationship with trump either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:As you folks wet your pants with this “revelation,” the rest of us will wait for the evidence or proof that Hannity’s connection to Cohen is anything nefarious or unethical. He has just stated on his radio show that he has never had him on retainer, he never represented Hannity in any court filings, and any dealings he had with him did not involve a third party.

I think this will go down as another instance of news that gets liberals all worked up in a hot mess, but turns out to be a nothing burger.

Except that Cohen's lawyer told the judge that Hannity IS his client.

[Anonymous]

Sean Hannity is such a dummy. “Cohen never represented me, but all our conversations are privileged.”
Sorry, Sean. That’s not how it works.

If there is no relationship, there is no privilege. Congratulations, Sean. YOU JUST SCREWED COHEN. LOLLLOL. Idiots.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sean Hannity says he just called Cohen for “advice.” He says Cohen never retained him. If that’s the case, he’s not a client. You are either a client or you are not. He says he’s not.

Problem: Michael Cohen’s lawyers just named Hannity as Cohen’s client UNDER OATH.

Also said no matters ever involved a third party.

That’s what Hannity said. I smell a rat. Something is being covered up here.

One CAN contact a lawyer for advice and not have him on retainer.

Sure, but wouldn't the lawyer know that you aren't actually his client in that case?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sean Hannity says he just called Cohen for “advice.” He says Cohen never retained him. If that’s the case, he’s not a client. You are either a client or you are not. He says he’s not.

Problem: Michael Cohen’s lawyers just named Hannity as Cohen’s client UNDER OATH.

Also said no matters ever involved a third party.

That’s what Hannity said. I smell a rat. Something is being covered up here.

One CAN contact a lawyer for advice and not have him on retainer.

“On retainer” does not mean what you think it means. There is either an established relationship or there isn’t. There is no gray area. Hannity or Cohen’s lawyers are lying. Either way, Cohen is in deep shit.

[Anonymous]

Hannity just tweeted https://twitter.com/seanhannity/status/985970632201564161

Michael Cohen has never represented me in any matter. I never retained him, received an invoice, or paid legal fees. I have occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective.

So, as I read this, Hannity is waiving any potential privilege and gambling that any communications he had with Cohen are not responsive to the search warrant.

[Anonymous]

Also Cohens attys said in court, to the judge, there were “thousands and thousands” of potentially privileged documents. For three clients?? One of whom only asked him friendly lawyerly questions on occasion?

Hard to believe, unless those three have been up to their eyeballs in hush agreements for decades.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As you folks wet your pants with this “revelation,” the rest of us will wait for the evidence or proof that Hannity’s connection to Cohen is anything nefarious or unethical. He has just stated on his radio show that he has never had him on retainer, he never represented Hannity in any court filings, and any dealings he had with him did not involve a third party.

I think this will go down as another instance of news that gets liberals all worked up in a hot mess, but turns out to be a nothing burger.

Except that Cohen's lawyer told the judge that Hannity IS his client.

Haha, this is so funny. Hannity can not stop lying. It just comes so naturally to him.

The reason why Cohen's attorney says under oath that there is a client-attorney relationship between Cohen and Hannity? Because the Southern District just seized the documents proving so. The same documents Cohen and Trump want to keep sealed.

Here's what probably happening: the Cohen documents for Hannity are under a pseudonym, similar to how Donald Trump = David Dennison. Therefore, Hannity thinks he's being "smart" by stating that he doesn't have a formal relationship with Cohen but all his conversations with Cohen should still be protected.

These guys are more inept than the 3 Stooges.