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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:And it's only Monday
Dear God -- it's not infrastructure week again, is it?!?
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."
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.