Cohen should have told Hannity that it’s likely come out in court or that IF it did he shouldn’t say anything! Just not make a statement on the fly and not discuss it. How bad are the lawyers these people are retaining?!

Given that Cohen says there are only 3 clients, wouldn't he have let those 3 know that they were going to be mentioned in open court?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

Exactly. Hannitys too dumb to understand that. He just inadvertently handed all the material about himself over to the feds, and contradicted Cohen’s lawyers courtroom statements to the court. #stupidWatergate

But then this is what he said on his radio show -

https://twitter.com/dmartosko/status/985973771818491906

Hannity would ask Cohen a question, say "attorney-client" and sometimes hand him 10 bucks and say "I want attorney-client privilege on this."

Good luck with that, man.

If it weren't Hannity, I'd call that a joke.

Anonymous wrote:Questions for lawyers on this thread:

Can trump claim attorney-client privilege for all communications with cohen? Doesn't he need some sort of retainer in some case? Why did the prosecutor not asks for a list of cases where trump and cohen have attorney-client privilege? This privilege cannot be open ended, can it be?

A retainer isn't necessary. But all communications with a lawyer are not necessarily for the purpose of seeking legal advice.

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.

It’s very odd that Cohen didn’t want to reveal that hannity is his client. If it was, for example, that hannity was seeking legal advice about purchasing an apartment in nyc that hardly seems worth invoking the judge’s ire with a refusal to name hannity as the client. Generally, the identity of one’s counsel is not a big deal. So, then we have to ask, why the desperate desire to conceal the relationship.

And, as others have said, if hannity is saying that Cohen is not his attorney, then no privilege attaches.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Daaaaaaaaaaaaamn. This is huge.

How does Fox react? Did Fox even know?

Does Hannity apologize to his audience, take a "planned vacation," or go into nuclear meltdown tonight on his show?

Why is this an issue at all?

Hannity was offering opinions on Cohen without disclosing that he was up to his neck, personally, in the situation.

Questions for lawyers on this thread:

Can trump claim attorney-client privilege for all communications with cohen? Doesn't he need some sort of retainer in some case? Why did the prosecutor not asks for a list of cases where trump and cohen have attorney-client privilege? This privilege cannot be open ended, can it be?

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.

If that is the case then why was he named by Cohen as a client?

I just keep thinking of that scene in Ruthless People where the police officer says, "This could very well be the stupidest person on the face of the earth."

Anonymous wrote:Daaaaaaaaaaaaamn. This is huge.

How does Fox react? Did Fox even know?

Does Hannity apologize to his audience, take a "planned vacation," or go into nuclear meltdown tonight on his show?

Why is this an issue at all?

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.

If there weren't a problem with it, Cohen wouldn't have tried to hide it. Hannity already has an ethical problem in that he has been defending Cohen without revealing that Cohen is his lawyer.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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.

Exactly. Hannitys too dumb to understand that. He just inadvertently handed all the material about himself over to the feds, and contradicted Cohen’s lawyers courtroom statements to the court. #stupidWatergate

But then this is what he said on his radio show -

https://twitter.com/dmartosko/status/985973771818491906

Hannity would ask Cohen a question, say "attorney-client" and sometimes hand him 10 bucks and say "I want attorney-client privilege on this."

Good luck with that, man.

Anonymous wrote: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.

Exactly. Hannitys too dumb to understand that. He just inadvertently handed all the material about himself over to the feds, and contradicted Cohen’s lawyers courtroom statements to the court. #stupidWatergate

Can someoneclear something up for me? If the FBI taint group goes through the files and finds something g incriminating on Hannity, but Hannity is claiming he never hired Cohen, then any Information that is criminal can be used to charge Hannity with, correct? Wouldn’t it have been in Hannity’s best interests to not deny the relationship, even just in case?

Anonymous wrote:

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?

I guess if he is "lawyer" , he should know what a "client" and not to lie under oath...if he is not a lawyer its a totally different matter