Another Cohen client!!!

#101
#101
McDad said:
Someone, OuterBanks(?), posted something which said Hannity gave him $10. Which is it?
Click to expand...

Hannity is saying a lot on his cult radio show and tweeting like little Donnie.

He has tweeted they discussed having attorney client privilege.
 
#102
#102
evillawyer said:
Hannity needs to stop tweeting. He's basically just denied there was an attorney-client relationship between him and Cohen, which would mean no claim of privilege over those communications.

Twitter
Click to expand...

For people who go on about how garbage Fox News et al is y’all sure seem to know a lot about what’s on there.
 
#103
#103
There's a lot here that's not making much sense. Cohen only had to disclose his clients today in order to determine which communications were potentially privileged. If Hannity is not a client--which seems to be what Hannity's tweets are now indicating--why identify him as a client? Further, Cohen's attorney indicated to the Court that Cohen's mystery third client (i.e., Hannity) did not want his identity disclosed. This means that Hannity was consulted about all of this prior to today's hearing and was on board with being labeled a client. Once he learned that his identity had to be disclosed, he went into denial mode and claimed nothing of significance was discussed.

Seem like if there was nothing to hide, he should have told Cohen not to identify him as a client and since his communications would be unrelated to the criminal investigation (presumably), there would be no reason to think that they would ever be disclosed because they would have never been passed on to the prosecutors.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#106
#106
evillawyer said:
There's a lot here that's not making much sense. Cohen only had to disclose his clients today in order to determine which communications were potentially privileged. If Hannity is not a client--which seems to be what Hannity's tweets are now indicating--why identify him as a client? Further, Cohen's attorney indicated to the Court that Cohen's mystery third client (i.e., Hannity) did not want his identity disclosed. This means that Hannity was consulted about all of this prior to today's hearing and was on board with being labeled a client. Once he learned that his identity had to be disclosed, he went into denial mode and claimed nothing of significance was discussed.

Seem like if there was nothing to hide, he should have told Cohen not to identify him as a client and since his communications would be unrelated to the criminal investigation (presumably), there would be no reason to think that they would ever be disclosed because they would have never been passed on to the prosecutors.
Click to expand...

you are a true Sherlock Holmes. Mueller should hire you.
 
#107
#107
1972 Grad said:
As a supposed Fox watcher 24 hours a day, I haven't seen 1/10 of the stuff these idiots talk about. I think they make it up.
Click to expand...

I don’t have cable or listen to the radio so I’m kind of reliant on the haters to tell me what’s on there.
 
#108
#108
evillawyer said:
There's a lot here that's not making much sense. Cohen only had to disclose his clients today in order to determine which communications were potentially privileged. If Hannity is not a client--which seems to be what Hannity's tweets are now indicating--why identify him as a client? Further, Cohen's attorney indicated to the Court that Cohen's mystery third client (i.e., Hannity) did not want his identity disclosed. This means that Hannity was consulted about all of this prior to today's hearing and was on board with being labeled a client. Once he learned that his identity had to be disclosed, he went into denial mode and claimed nothing of significance was discussed.

Seem like if there was nothing to hide, he should have told Cohen not to identify him as a client and since his communications would be unrelated to the criminal investigation (presumably), there would be no reason to think that they would ever be disclosed because they would have never been passed on to the prosecutors.
Click to expand...
I think that when the truth finally comes out, that Hannity will be the missing link between Trump and the Russian oligarchs, whatever that is. He could also be involved sexually with Ivanka.
 
#112
#112
I would not expect LG to know this but attorneys have a duty to protect confidential information with respect to "prospective clients." If the prospective client is seeking legal advice and the prospective client expects the information to be confidential, the attorney client privilege should apply.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#113
#113
People keep asking if Hannity was a client of Cohen's. Cohen is calling him that for purposes of supporting his pending motion.

But Hannity seems to be staking out inconsistent positions, so I'm not sure what he thinks he is. And its not just a question of what he thinks, its a question of the reality of it. Never billed. Never paid. No retainer. No nothing other than an occasional question.

By that standard I have roughly 80,000 clients.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#114
#114
vols4sure said:
I would not expect LG to know this but attorneys have a duty to protect confidential information with respect to "prospective clients." If the prospective client is seeking legal advise and the prospective client expects the information to be confidential, the attorney client privilege should apply.
Click to expand...

but but but....Trump!
 
#115
#115
Will you guys ever come to grip with reality and realize that Republicans and Liberals are one in the same?

Why do you continue to rip each other apart over two groups of people who continually show they don’t give a rip about you?

They show it through policy and through their actions behind the scenes that they all typically get away with.

Plus why does no one care that these slime balls in Congress constantly bend the rules anytime it may potentially benefit them?

At the end of the day it’s regular people like us that get screwed over and instead of doing something about it we let the media divide us with trivial matters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#116
#116
vols4sure said:
I would not expect LG to know this but attorneys have a duty to protect confidential information with respect to "prospective clients." If the prospective client is seeking legal advise and the prospective client expects the information to be confidential, the attorney client privilege should apply.
Click to expand...


That's true.

But you can't say "One day I may ask for legal advice, so every bad action I contemplate and discuss with you is forever an anticipatory client matter."
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#117
#117
FleeceItOut said:
Will you guys ever come to grip with reality and realize that Republicans and Liberals are one in the same?

Why do you continue to rip each other apart over two groups of people who continually show they don’t give a rip about you?

They show it through policy and through their actions behind the scenes that they all typically get away with.

Plus why does no one care that these slime balls in Congress constantly bend the rules anytime it may potentially benefit them?

At the end of the day it’s regular people like us that get screwed over and instead of doing something about it we let the media divide us with trivial matters.
Click to expand...

Amen. If your not getting a check based on your party involvement, you're the sucker.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#120
#120
vols4sure said:
I would not expect LG to know this but attorneys have a duty to protect confidential information with respect to "prospective clients." If the prospective client is seeking legal advice and the prospective client expects the information to be confidential, the attorney client privilege should apply.
Click to expand...

To clarify in case anyone wants to use a "fixer" like Cohen, the identity of a client or perspective client is typically not privileged which is probably why the court required Cohen to disclose Hannity's identity.
 
#123
#123
lawgator1 said:
That's true.

But you can't say "One day I may ask for legal advice, so every bad action I contemplate and discuss with you is forever an anticipatory client matter."
Click to expand...

If what Hannity is saying is true, it sounds like he would be considered a perspective client and the privilege attaches. It does not matter how long that relationship lasts so long as the consultation is about possibly forming an attorney client relationship. I am sure Cohen always took his call hoping to ultimately be hired to do something.
 
#125
#125
lawgator1 said:
People keep asking if Hannity was a client of Cohen's. Cohen is calling him that for purposes of supporting his pending motion.

But Hannity seems to be staking out inconsistent positions, so I'm not sure what he thinks he is. And its not just a question of what he thinks, its a question of the reality of it. Never billed. Never paid. No retainer. No nothing other than an occasional question.

By that standard I have roughly 80,000 clients.
Click to expand...

Maybe one day one of them will pay you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top