It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Sean Hannity ID’d as Trump Lawyer Michael Cohen’s Mystery Client

page: 4
20
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 16 2018 @ 06:55 PM
link   
Bizarro world I am in tabloid stories saturate mainstream media outlets.

We are slumming now folks..

The media is no longer serving the people of AMERICA. no doubt left in 2018. Zero.

edit on 16-4-2018 by Bicent because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 16 2018 @ 06:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: scraedtosleep

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: scraedtosleep
a reply to: Metallicus

Where is attorney-client privilege listed as a right in the bill of rights?



It's part of due process. That said, privilege is not absolute, it can be breached. In this case it hasn't but likely will be soon.


I am honestly ignorant of this. Could you give more detail. Quote the part of the bill of rights that deals with client privilege.




The process by which something is claimed in the Constitution or it's Amendments is defined in later cases. For example, part of due process has been defined subsequently as requiring privilege in most cases. Or for other amendments, what does and doesn't count as arms, what is meant by documents and effects, the definition of the press and religion, cruel and unusual punishment, and so on.

The Constitution is merely a framework.The exact laws must adhere to that framework but can be much more expansive and precise/general in scope. To make an analogy, the frame of a building is the Constitution. Everything relies on it, but the exact configuration of rooms is much more malleable and can be modified as needs and cause arise so long as those rooms still fit within the buildings frame.



posted on Apr, 16 2018 @ 07:03 PM
link   
And yet the escapades of Lisa Bloom and Gloria Allred go unnoticed.

It's amazing what is worthy of 'news' in todays world.



posted on Apr, 16 2018 @ 07:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: crtrvt
Could it be that Trump has been feeding Hannity talking points through Cohen, and using his attorney-client privilege to shroud the fact that he's the source?


Unlikely as journalists already have the ability to protect their sources, and for as much as Hannity claims he's not a journalist he meets every definition as being a member of the press.

If they were communicating it was the communications themselves and not the source that they're trying to keep secret.


Can't wait to find out what those communications are which needed to be kept so secret between a cable news show host, who also happens to be the president's mouthpiece, and also happens to share the president's personal lawyer could possibly be?



posted on Apr, 16 2018 @ 07:04 PM
link   

edit on 4/16/2018 by Phage because: (no reason given)


Wait a minute...
www.washingtonpost.com... 82
edit on 4/16/2018 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 16 2018 @ 07:09 PM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

If it's trending at #2 in the twitterverse it has to mean something.
Some very...very big people put a lot into twatter ..not for nothing. It's hugely informative.



posted on Apr, 16 2018 @ 07:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6

originally posted by: Scrubdog
What if he was being paid to pass along certain "favorable" views of certain candidates, or what if he was paid to pile on dirt on certain organizations that are investigating certain politicians?


Media personalities are paid to skew reports all over the place. Media endorses candidates every year. Again to my initial point, WaPo, CNN, MSNBC... even FOX at times was certainly pushing more favorable views of Hillary Clinton than Trump, so as I said, if they were to accuse Hannity of this, I can only imagine the bloodbath media floodgates that would open.


No, you're just wrong about this, 100%.

"Media personalities" are not paid to skew reports all over the place, you are simply saying that to cover for your guy.

Rachel Maddow, Chris Hayes, Paul Krugman, George Will, Jennifer Rubin, and Jake Tapper are paid by their employers to report and - in certain areas, opine upon the news, by their employers.

They are not paid by the Clintons, George Soros, Russia, the FBI or whomever else you may want to throw out there as a false equivalency. IF THEY EVER WERE it would be a massive scandal and I would stand beside you and demand that they lose their jobs, (they would, obviously), and - if taken from a private company or for personal gain - pursue criminal charges.

You are doing nothing but rationalizing this, and it is embarrassing. What happened to "American exceptionalism"? It's now ok to sell out the country's media to a world adversary?

You're just wrong. It actually doesn't work that way, and I am not saying that it necessarily DID with Hannity. I am saying that his "support" has been SO over the top, so unequivocal, that it would not shock me if he were under the control of Russian agents.



posted on Apr, 16 2018 @ 07:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
Since Hannity didn't pay Cohen anything for the occasional advice, nothing to see here. Even if he did pay him for advice, nothing to see here.

But it's always nice seeing how easily distracted MSM and Democrats are from learning how to WIN.


You do realize that at this point Hannity has acted as a mouthpiece and defender of Trump, all while receiving free legal advice from Trump's lawyer, who was being paid by Trump?

In fact, Hannity has been reporting and defending Trump on this Cohen issue.



posted on Apr, 16 2018 @ 07:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

An " opinion journalist "

so not a journalist..ergo no reason to worry about ethics
Figures



posted on Apr, 16 2018 @ 07:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: cosmickat
a reply to: Phage

An " opinion journalist "

so not a journalist..ergo no reason to worry about ethics
Figures


Or perhaps he is/was Trump's personal in-house propagandist.



posted on Apr, 16 2018 @ 07:19 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

I don’t want to get sucked into the quagmire but hannity, has always been republican biased not just for trump..

Just saying.



posted on Apr, 16 2018 @ 07:21 PM
link   

originally posted by: carewemust
Since Hannity didn't pay Cohen anything for the occasional advice, nothing to see here. Even if he did pay him for advice, nothing to see here.

But it's always nice seeing how easily distracted MSM and Democrats are from learning how to WIN.


You realize it was COHEN who said Hannity was his client, right? Not the "leftists" and not Hillary or Obama, it was Trump's personal lawyer making that claim and bringing him in.

And, if Hannity had nothing to see here, why was this some "rush to the court of appeals if revealed" problem if disclosed?

"Nothing to see here, just the guy who is on the TV every night talking about how the FBI is corrupt, that Robert Mueller is corrupt, is one of TWO people ever to have used Trump's personal "fixer" - but yeah, it's all nothing.

I do wish we'd learn how to win, all this "winning" is killing the country.

Know who isn't yawning? Trump. He's terrified, and thus I suspect there is a reason for him to be terrified.



posted on Apr, 16 2018 @ 07:21 PM
link   
a reply to: cosmickat

Please, for us not into the Mytwitface thing, what of this is newsworthy? Especially as it pertains to politics?



posted on Apr, 16 2018 @ 07:22 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert

Hmmm good point....free legal advice
No wonder he wanted it kept on the DL ! Hehe

Anyhoo..who goes to a NDA specialist fixer kinda lawyer for real estate advice ? Even if it is free...

Free legal advice in exchange for complete devotion and constant faux news swill
Sounds legit



posted on Apr, 16 2018 @ 07:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bicent
a reply to: introvert

I don’t want to get sucked into the quagmire but hannity, has always been republican biased not just for trump..

Just saying.


Being biased is not the issue here.

The issue is that he is one of the most popular TV hosts in America, has been one of the biggest defenders of Trump in the media and come to find out he may have been receiving free legal advice from a lawyer that is personally paid by Trump himself.

It is reasonable to suggest or question whether Hannity may be a paid propaganda mouthpiece for the president of the United States.

That's completely different than being biased.



posted on Apr, 16 2018 @ 07:24 PM
link   
a reply to: Scrubdog

You're wrong "because I say so" is not a valid argument.

A little reading comprehension also goes a long way to addressing a point.



posted on Apr, 16 2018 @ 07:26 PM
link   
a reply to: introvert




It is reasonable to suggest or question whether Hannity may be a paid propaganda mouthpiece for the president of the United States.


It is reasonable. In fact, if there is truth to that, it should be the bigger focus. However, will we finally begin to apply this in all media aspects or simply continue to shine light only on one 'side?"



posted on Apr, 16 2018 @ 07:26 PM
link   
a reply to: JinMI

Same thing that makes anything newsworthy throughout social media...clicks and likes and entertainment value

Welcome to 21st century news....where everything is political and everything gets spun till you can't tell up from down.

Serious answer.....it's entertainment news. Just like Fox.



posted on Apr, 16 2018 @ 07:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: cosmickat
a reply to: introvert

Hmmm good point....free legal advice
No wonder he wanted it kept on the DL ! Hehe

Anyhoo..who goes to a NDA specialist fixer kinda lawyer for real estate advice ? Even if it is free...

Free legal advice in exchange for complete devotion and constant faux news swill
Sounds legit


I just read that Hannity said on his show that he may have slipped the lawyer some money, for the sake of attorney-client privilege.

Not sure what that means, but it will be interesting to see how this develops.



posted on Apr, 16 2018 @ 07:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: JinMI
a reply to: introvert




It is reasonable to suggest or question whether Hannity may be a paid propaganda mouthpiece for the president of the United States.


It is reasonable. In fact, if there is truth to that, it should be the bigger focus. However, will we finally begin to apply this in all media aspects or simply continue to shine light only on one 'side?"


What do sides have to do with this? I would be willing to hold any politician's/media member's feet to the fire if it was found they had a shady relationship taking place.



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join