If he wants to waive it or if he says it doesn't exist, then it doesn't exist.

He's also on TV saying he didn't have an attorney-client relationship then right after saying he'd hope those conversations were protected by attorney-client privilege.

I'm kinda thinking Fox's attorneys might not be advising him.

that Hannity wants it both ways. he said on the air today that he never hired Cohen, never paid him. BUT he is also claiming attorney client privilege.

he is saying he's not a official client but he deserves client privilege simply because he was getting advice from a lawyer

Sean won't be able to complain because he blew off the privilege

Enough -republicans really need to stop already with their sordid republican sexual perversions.

Hey morally bankrupt repubes: Think of the children.

“Blew off the privilege “
Well played.

Cohen is not doing much lawyering, is he?!

And now the third client is saying he's not "really" a client, then there are only two clients.

Also, if Hannity never "used" Cohen as an actual attorney, why would he be on the list if he isn't in any of the records? 🤔

and is trying to shield them. Of course, that wouldn't be covered by priv even if he was a client. priv doesn't work that way, but cohen isn't a very good attorney.

I suspect eventually we'll know exactly what it was.

So what?

So??

SO?????

he probably doesn't have a good working idea of what privileged comms are.

Just because hannity is a client doesn't mean that everything they discuss is privileged. It has to be a legal discussion concerning the client, not a third party, even if that third party is also a client.

Cohen thought he was smart enough to cover for him. Now, everybody knows Cohen is not a lawyer. Hannity screwed his buds!

He is only digging his hole deeper.

Cohen is arguing that Hannity's name shouldn't have even been released because of attorney/client privilege...

While at the same time... Hannity is saying there isn't even an attorney/client relationship.

To me, that sounds like Hannity just gave the court permission to review anything and everything. Im I wrong in this thinking? The two arguments they are using seem to completely contradict themselves.

Ironically the "taint team" would have normally excluded any info on Hannity. Cohen's legal incompetence is why we all know about this.

Considering it is Hannity and there are only 3 clients of which two are sexual in nature there may be a tie in. Especially with that special account Cohen created.

I could SWEAR I read something this morning to the effect of Hannity saying he and Cohen had been friends for a long time and he had asked him for legal advice. Of course I can't find it now. Did I dream that?

You make my problem disappear and I will advocate for your other client like nothing ever known in media history.

This is getting quite delicious.

he can't deny his ties to Cohen.

If hannity has never formally retained cohen, and never received an invoice from cohen, it sounds less and less like an attorney-client relationship.

ETTD: everything trump touches dies.

You said:

If hannity has never formally retained cohen, and never received an invoice from cohen, it sounds less and less like an attorney-client relationship.

So whatever his legal problem was,it was with himself?

Doesn't set the bar very high does it?

and funnier. I can't help doing cartwheels in my mind.

...Hannity perhaps has the least amount of intellectual prowess. He really isn't very smart, as far as I can tell.

....that I think fully believes every ounce of his own bullshit.

He is the epitome of the typical Republican: a middle aged, white male know-nothing, barely educated blowhard that thinks he knows everything and will be more than happy to tell you about it whether you want to hear it or not.

Last edited Mon Apr 16, 2018, 08:58 PM - Edit history (1)

That's one of my favorite new words.

Hopefully Cohen’s files will become public sooner rather than later.

with cash (presumably to sweeten him up to talk nice about our now pee-Resident Spanky?)

He thinks aggressive talkiness makes him look smart.

===========

(Disclaimer: I am not now nor have I ever been a lawyer) The question of privilege seems to be a somewhat complicated one. From what I have hard various lawyers say:

1. If I am at a party and see a casual acquaintance who happens to be a lawyer. If I engage him in conversation and ask him a legal question and he give me his legal opinion and no one else is around to hear our conversation, then privilege.

2. If I swing by the office of a friend who is a lawyer and we go out to lunch and chat about our families, our vacations, blah, blah, then no privilege attaches.

Money does NOT have to change hands for privilege to attach nor does there need to be anything in writing. Like I say, from what I have heard, it's complicated.

Re:

1) If you ask your friend a question that is generic and non personal "I have a question about the law in this state. If someone does X would that be illegal?" would not invoke privlege

If however you said "I need some direction because yesterday I did something I think may be against the law" there would be privilege.

If your friend says "before I answer that give me $ 10 so that you engage me" there would be privilege.


Hannity's comments seem to undermine any claim of privilege but what is really going to matter is what is in the files because anything that is in the furtherance of a crime is not privileged.

That he may have given him $10, last night on his show.

It can't get any stranger, can it?

Hope you're feeling better

Hope you're takin' it easy.

affectionately,
Bright

just having to get used to this new bizarre reality that is "Trumpworld". Perhaps it will be a new part of Disneyland for descendants to come.

And I am very happy to see you here and commenting. I hope you're feeling better!

It's a good news day here at DU, but seeing you post is the best news of all.

means you're on the mend? Hope all is well.

There's some sort of bizarre Lewis Prothero analagy in there.... just a wonderful twist to our reality.

First he talks about a 10 Dollar de minimus payment, now he says he talked to Cohen about some real estate deals.

Good old food for thought! Squirm Hannity.

Hannity basically called Cohen a liar. He said Cohen never represented him. Somebody is a liar. I hope it`s Hannity.

that is all he knows. That is why he makes 36 million dollars a year.

Based on Cohen not being a "lawyer with clients"?

If his clients believed he was acting as their attorney and he was a licensed lawyer, I don't see how they can just open them all up and have a hey day with them, if they weren't part of the search warrant.

Of course that concern won't prevent me from enjoying the acute discomfort of everyone involved.

Which inserts itself to review the documents for attorney-client privilege before law enforcement gets to see them.

That would, presumably, weed out any actual protected documents.

They had to jump through some serious hoops to even get those documents. Ordinarily, they would have had to subpoena them and Cohen would have had to produce them. So in this case they had to convince a magistrate that (1) there were crimes being committed, as evidenced by those documents, and that (2) Cohen would likely destroy the documents after he was served with a subpoena.

Attorney-client privilege is a serious matter. It becomes less serious if the lawyer is not actually practicing as a lawyer. Attorney-client privilege applies when a lawyer is dispensing legal advice, NOT when he's committing crimes with his clients.

You can see how you wouldn't want someone to, say, go to one of the worst ABA-rated law schools in the country just so that he became a licensed attorney and everything he did would automatically be subject to attorney-client privilege, even criminal conspiracies.

Clearly there is plenty that we can't know about the Cohen raid and its aftermath. It wouldn't surprise me at all if Cohen was facilitating criminal activities on behalf of Trump and Hannity both.

On edit - I knew most of what you wrote, since I've been following this, but I appreciate the effort you took to explain it.

More of the shitshow that is the Trump presidency

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

This is what I've been saying since I heard.

They're hiding something, but as usual they're doing it in the most asinine, backward way possible.

Because Cohen is too shameful to be associated with, but don't look at any records with Hannity's name attached!

Speak of a tangled web.

Please, please, please, please!

Trump: "He was a covfefe boy."

Well what if Cohen was paying off Hannity?

Next excuse heh

If I had to venture a guess, Hannity and Cohen were probably coordinating messaging. My guess is that Cohen thought that if he said Hannity was a client, then their discussions would fall under attorney-client privilege.

I doubt anything will come of this unless there is also evidence that Hannity or Fox news knows of legal wrongdoing and are actively collaborating to sow disinformation. Even then, I don't know if running a disinformation campaign would be enough to convict Hannity of anything.

However, I do believe that Trump and Rupert "struck a deal" in July-August 2015 (around the time Trump made those disparaging remarks about Megan Kelly). If Mueller uncovered any sort of deal/payment for favorable coverage on Fox during the primaries, then things could get interesting.

He wants to assert attorney-client privilege AND try to protect whatever integrity he has left by distancing himself from Cohen. Not gonna happen

had client attorney privilege. His mouth has two sides.

hanging out between the two.

He also tweeted that he "ASSUMED those conversations were confidential."
(link)

...makes an ass out of you and me.

Oh Lord, why ya doin this 2 is? A lot of us didn’t grow up/live on easy street and this is like the last indignity. Damn. It’s like when Willy Wonka was gonna kick out Charlie & his grandpa. It sucks. Bad.

Sorry, I had to. God that feeling. You are correct, it sucks.

But I love seeing these criminals get what they deserve. I'll be screaming my title for this post at them as they are hauled off to prison.

Attorney-client privilege is limited to when there's, you know, an attorney and a client. If Sean says Cohen wasn't his lawyer, that should settle the privilege (or lack of) question. Chats Cohen & Hannity may have had about real estate or whatever don't count.

I would imagine Cohen isn't too happy with Hannity right now!

No stay has been granted?

But Cohen not being a full-time lawyer is only part of the government's position. The no-knock warrant acknowledges the likelihood that Cohen is and has been committing crimes, the investigation of which supersedes attorney-client privilege.

Trying to put this all in context.

- The FBI raids Cohen.
- Cohen claims atty/client privilege protects some or all of the seized material.
- Judge says who are your clients so we can decide.
- He names three: Trump (pants problem), Broidy (pants problem), Hannity (real estate advice?).
*Presumably this means Cohen has had some contact with Hannity that he thought he couldn't avoid admitting that he had.
- Hannity inexplicably and quickly appears to distance himself from Cohen.

Why would Hannity do that? What's wrong with just agreeing and saying that yes, we have a relationship and I want whatever records there are to be protected?

1. If what Hannity says is true and it's just some real estate advice, then fine, let the taint team see the file and move on. More support for the witch hunt meme I suppose.

2. Did Hannity just overreact? Seeing Cohen going down in flames and wanted to run the other way? But why? I thought they were friends? And they are both certainly supporters of Trump. Hannity (apparently) has been pretty much driving the "witch hunt" bandwagon for weeks or months now. Why would he suddenly cut and run in this case? It sounds as if he didn't even expect to be named, publicly or not. He didn't even really consider himself a client. Did he unexpectedly hear his name in court and have a panic attack? Took some oxycontin and it clouded his judgement?

3. Or is there more? Both of Cohen's other named clients had pants problems. As far as we know, that is what Cohen does, takes care of that. And he apparently does it in a way in which (he thinks) money is hard to trace. Interesting in light of Hannity's
quick statement that he hadn't paid Cohen anything, except, well, maybe $10.

I think I'll take door #3, Monty. Which means; If #1 and #2 seem unlikely, the judge is unlikely to let them protect the Hannity Files?

Like, Cohen took out a home equity loan to pay Stormy 'real estate' advice?
Did Cohen do it for Hannity too?

any type of monetary exchange (like say use of a private jet maybe) would qualify as payment for services rendered.