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

a reply to: crtrvt

Ummmm... clinton and her IT guy that wiped her computer shared one (I wonder how he could afford the clinton's lawyer... He was asking for professional advice on reddit...). The clinton lawyer gets around... Also has something to do with the seth rich family iirc.

And of course there's a big difference, obama was a Senator and maddow a puppet. Trump is a businessman and hannity is a businessman. So it's not odd that hannity would seek advice from a business attorney.

It looks like Sean Hannity's job at FoxNews is now locked-in and safe, because Democrats (the ones who voted against tax cuts for Americans) are demanding that Fox News fire Hannity.

thehill.com...

a reply to: carewemust

Fire hannity because he talked with a lawyer? LOL they're ridiculous.

originally posted by: TruthJava
a reply to: cosmickat

So Sean Hannity was client and said he wasn't. I am really starting to wonder about myself lately...I don't think it's illegal to have a lawyer now? I am sorry but I am still waiting to hear what was on the emails that had been on HRC's computer, yada yada and the whole story as to why she is still walking free. If Sean Hannity was covering that up, then I would be all for this investigation.

Nobody on here..or anywhere else I have seen..has said it is illegal to have a lawyer.

No idea what this topic has to with HRC email...computer..or liberty either ..are you just dropping that in for a splash of whataboutism ?

What investigation ? Why would you link Hannity to a Clinton cover - up ? He works for the other guys..doesn't he ?

Hannity is caught with his metaphorical pants down pushing his rhetoric about Cohen / Trump, while there was a secret conflict of interests........or.... this shady " better call Saul " lawyer is lying about Hannity being a client, perhaps in an attempt to contain certain seized documents or recordings.
( speculation only )

Who knows ? Who really cares ?
It's just incredibly amusing watching it unfold, karma is running over Hannity's dogma

originally posted by: Bicent
Just a serious question....

Does anyone feel this story is a distraction from what the real stories are right now?

Just saying no need to respond or get intellectual.. just wondering...

Like for instance what is our strategy to fix our looming debt? Or North Korea or our bismall imigration problem, just asking, don’t misunderstand me from being a troll either.. just a serious question fellow members..

At your service,
Bic

but every great tragedy needs a touch of humor spread throughout it to take the bite out of it...
this was a non-story for me when the news broke that hannity was the "mystery client" it was okay, whatever.. it wasn't till hannity spoke out and said he wasn't a client that I found the story interesting.....
and humorous as all heck really!!!
I mean, you'd think that one of the most important aspects of the attorney/client relationship would be that they agree that that relationship exists!! but, no, not in this alternate universe I find myself in...

a reply to: dawnstar

Well...he does have a right to deny and retain his assertion of privilege.

I just wonder wyat the dealings are. Although i believe i have no right to know.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

we don't have any right to know, really it's none of our business,
but someone is gonna have to know enough about them, other than trump and his lawyers, to know weather those dealings and conversations fall under attorney client protections.

but here's the whole "clients" that cohen claims to have...
trump....
elliot broidy..

www.nytimes.com...

en.wikipedia.org...

and hannity...

the republican savior, the republican top fundraiser, and the republican mouthpiece of fox news....

two of which have a shadow of overseas shady deals hanging over their head.

it's an interesting triangle to say the least...

Judge who ordered Sean Hannity's name to be released performed wedding ceremony for billionaire George Soros

Soros and Bolton, a health care consultant, will exchange vows in a small ceremony on Saturday morning at the Bedford, New York estate, which Soros bought in 2003 from “Jurassic Park” author Michael Crichton.

Kimba Wood, a federal judge, will perform the non-denominational ceremony, which will be attended by members of the couple’s families, including his five children, a source familiar with the arrangements told Reuters.

It's amazing how connected the players are in plain sight.

www.cnn.com...

New York (CNN)A US judge said President Donald Trump's personal attorney Michael Cohen could review materials seized when the FBI raided his home, office and hotel room last week for any communications with the President, but held off on deciding how prosecutors will ultimately be able to use the evidence.

"I'm denying the motion for a (temporary restraining order) because it's currently moot. The government is not accessing anything," the judge declared. "With respect to a preliminary injunction, that, I think, is premature at this point. We have to wait and see what the volume is and how you can argue."

Looksa lika the president gets a pass but shawn does not...

a reply to: howtonhawky

well, according to what hannity said, there probably isn't anything in that mass of material that will be of interest to anyone anyways!! the bulk of it probably deals with trump's business dealings.

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: howtonhawky

well, according to what hannity said, there probably isn't anything in that mass of material that will be of interest to anyone anyways!! the bulk of it probably deals with trump's business dealings.

Well that is what shawn is hoping.

I purpose that shawn went to cohen and did not pay in order to keep his questions off the books.So as to not get caught up in such but if cohen was a true lawyer then he recorder every conversation in some fashion with hannity. Perhaps he did not record such but it is very telling to me yesterday during the first hour of the shawny show he came out and specifically said he asked cohen first if attorney client privilege would apply to their conversations even if he did not retain him financially.

a reply to: Dfairlite

Wow, if the tables were turned and this was Maddow and Obama you all would be crying about freedom of the press and getting fed news because Obama was paying for it through his 'lawyer'.

Come now hypocrites see this for what it is. On the surface it is nothing, below the surface it says everything. Also stop trying to 'party' this. This transcends political parties and if you think that either of the Clintons didn't have media spouting for them you have totally denied ignorance. In this case it is just getting shoved into our face.

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: carewemust

Fire hannity because he talked with a lawyer? LOL they're ridiculous.

I don't get why I should care that Hannity sought legal advice from a lawyer to the president of the United States. I mean the guy was respected enough to be a lawyer to a president why wouldn't he seek his advice or even hire him.

I just don't understand the crime or big deal. I've sought advice from a lawyer without hiring them.

I just feel like this is the democrats tactics of whatever needed to take down trump and also distract us for another 3 years over petty nonsense

originally posted by: mzinga
a reply to: Dfairlite

Wow, if the tables were turned and this was Maddow and Obama you all would be crying about freedom of the press and getting fed news because Obama was paying for it through his 'lawyer'.

Come now hypocrites see this for what it is. On the surface it is nothing, below the surface it says everything. Also stop trying to 'party' this. This transcends political parties and if you think that either of the Clintons didn't have media spouting for them you have totally denied ignorance. In this case it is just getting shoved into our face.

It's common knowledge that the media had a love affair with Obama and its well documented the guy is seen as a Saint that could do no wrong while spying on allies, numerous drone strikes, toppling legit governments, proxy wars etc.

But the perfect president

a reply to: JDmOKI

But there wasn't any proof that Obama was essentially controlling the message that you were hearing. Big difference. There were some faint lines drawn to Hillary for sure, but nothing concrete like this.

originally posted by: JDmOKI

originally posted by: mzinga
a reply to: Dfairlite

Wow, if the tables were turned and this was Maddow and Obama you all would be crying about freedom of the press and getting fed news because Obama was paying for it through his 'lawyer'.

Come now hypocrites see this for what it is. On the surface it is nothing, below the surface it says everything. Also stop trying to 'party' this. This transcends political parties and if you think that either of the Clintons didn't have media spouting for them you have totally denied ignorance. In this case it is just getting shoved into our face.

It's common knowledge that the media had a love affair with Obama and its well documented the guy is seen as a Saint that could do no wrong while spying on allies, numerous drone strikes, toppling legit governments, proxy wars etc.

But the perfect president

Ok. But did Obama have a high-profile member of the media, that acted as his number one apologist and defender, take free legal advice (or paid advice...Hannity has said both) from Obama's personal lawyer, while that media member was reporting on an investigation Obama was a potential target of and dismissing the entire investigation as a conspiracy against the president?

This seems to be a very unique situation that I have not seen comparable to what we have seen in the past.

originally posted by: JDmOKI

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: carewemust

Fire hannity because he talked with a lawyer? LOL they're ridiculous.

I don't get why I should care that Hannity sought legal advice from a lawyer to the president of the United States. I mean the guy was respected enough to be a lawyer to a president why wouldn't he seek his advice or even hire him.

I just don't understand the crime or big deal. I've sought advice from a lawyer without hiring them.

I just feel like this is the democrats tactics of whatever needed to take down trump and also distract us for another 3 years over petty nonsense

Because Hannity had access to Fox News law team at no cost, so why would he then engage with Cohen for 'legal advice' at his own cost? The implication is that Hannity did something unpalatable that he wanted kept hushed and something that Cohen was good at (paying illegal funds to keep sex scandals under wraps). The fact that he 'reported' on Trump and the associated sex scandals continuously while failing to disclose his own involvement (you know, basic honesty - that sort of thing) is also really bad optics (not that its a concern to Hannity fans).

originally posted by: JDmOKI

originally posted by: Dfairlite
a reply to: carewemust

Fire hannity because he talked with a lawyer? LOL they're ridiculous.

I don't get why I should care that Hannity sought legal advice from a lawyer to the president of the United States. I mean the guy was respected enough to be a lawyer to a president why wouldn't he seek his advice or even hire him.

I just don't understand the crime or big deal. I've sought advice from a lawyer without hiring them.

I just feel like this is the democrats tactics of whatever needed to take down trump and also distract us for another 3 years over petty nonsense

Not so much the presidents lawyer but he is his self described fixer...
www.thedailybeast.com...

a reply to: Wayfarer

I think most of us are less concerned with what legal snafu's he got himself in, and are more concerned with how he spins all Trump information. It is like he was a paid employee for Trump with this association and that is pretty disturbing. It confirms what we already understood, he will spin any negative information about Trump. He isn't a reporter, he is a paid shill.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: JDmOKI

originally posted by: mzinga
a reply to: Dfairlite

Wow, if the tables were turned and this was Maddow and Obama you all would be crying about freedom of the press and getting fed news because Obama was paying for it through his 'lawyer'.

Come now hypocrites see this for what it is. On the surface it is nothing, below the surface it says everything. Also stop trying to 'party' this. This transcends political parties and if you think that either of the Clintons didn't have media spouting for them you have totally denied ignorance. In this case it is just getting shoved into our face.

It's common knowledge that the media had a love affair with Obama and its well documented the guy is seen as a Saint that could do no wrong while spying on allies, numerous drone strikes, toppling legit governments, proxy wars etc.

But the perfect president

Ok. But did Obama have a high-profile member of the media, that acted as his number one apologist and defender, take free legal advice (or paid advice...Hannity has said both) from Obama's personal lawyer, while that media member was reporting on an investigation Obama was a potential target of and dismissing the entire investigation as a conspiracy against the president?

This seems to be a very unique situation that I have not seen comparable to what we have seen in the past.

YES he had very many