that he wanted "fixed"? Maybe his "problem" wanted some real estate, like a condo, in exchange for keeping quiet about an affair, a child, something like that. So what everyone has said may be true.

...you have three individuals represented by Trump lawyers as clients of Cohen.

Two used him as a fixer for sexual matters. The other claims to have used him for advice he says he likely paid $10 for.

No matter. No apparent receipt, no signed agreement means there's a very limited number of things now that could possibly fall under some stretch of privileged communications between Cohen and Hannity, I would guess they would have to involve 'real estate.'

Link to tweet

...Cohen and the PIs would be operating as businessmen in these instances, not attorneys.

None of those communications should be privileged.

..he's a fixer and a dirty trickster.

At any rate, there doesn't seem to be any documentation of an attorney client relationship. My guess would be that he hired Cohen to do what Cohen does best, and that wouldn't be providing this multi-millionaire with legal advice.

Hannity had Cohen hire private investigators to dig dirt instead of Hannity hiring PIs directly.

Maybe in doing so, if called out, the investigators could say they worked for Cohen, thus keeping Hannity looking as innocent as a little baby lamb.

he probably has a publicist on his payroll. But say you did want a lawyer for this. Wouldn't a lawyer that specializes in public image, not sweeping potential sex scandals under the rug? Unless that was the reason your public image needed protecting, in the 1st place.

Cohen has claimed in court that Hannity was a client. That is the equivalent, I believe, of sworn testimony. Cohen probably has paperwork or recordings of his interactions with Hannity.

In contrast, Hannity's responses to this revelation have been weak sauce on Twitter and lame excuses on his broadcasts.

Before this is over, we'll know the nature of the Hannity/Cohen relationship.

...I would have expected one of them to have produced something by now, a contract, a receipt... something.

That would allow anything found to be placed on the evidence pile.

It would be up to Hannity to keep it quiet. If he wanted that, he would never say he wasn't a client.

...I think to preserve a right to claim some sort of privileged communications that may be uncovered in the evidence pile.

dirty tricks, too. Anything too shady for a real attorney.

Hannity likely has an existing relationship with a lawyer to handle contract matters, estate planning, his will, etc. Why wouldn't he consult with that person about real estate issues?

Something stinks in his explanation...er, excuse.