• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  
Hard On The Wind

Cohen reveals Sean Hannity as a client. Hannity denies it.

Recommended Posts

WOW WHAT DOES THIS MEAN????

 

CNN host Jake Tapper on Monday opened his show “The Lead” with exasperation that President Trump's personal attorney Michael Cohen’s previously undisclosed client has been revealed as Fox News host Sean Hannity.

“The judge forced Michael Cohen to admit in court that he has a third client and the third client is Sean Hannity,” Tapper said at the start of his show. “Go home 2018, you're drunk.”

An attorney representing Cohen, whose office and hotel room were raided by the FBI a week ago, made the announcement in court on Monday after a federal judge ordered the identity of the client to be revealed.

Hannity — who was minutes away from beginning his radio show when the announcement was made — said in a statement that Cohen has never represented him and that he never retained him or paid legal fees.

“I have occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective,” Hannity wrote in the statement. “I assumed those conversations were confidential, but to be absolutely clear, they never involved any matter between me and a third party.”

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can someone be a client if they haven't retained the lawyer or paid him anything? If you ask a lawyer a question are you automatically their client?

Either Cohen is lying to the court or Hannity is lying to his viewers. 

I bet Hannity's wife is asking a lot of questions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He could be a client in the sense that Trump's simply said to him  "any problems Sean, my lawyer will deal with it"

Payment in kind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael Cohen seems such a decent guy, paying $130K to Stormy without reimbursement, giving Hannity legal advice and whatnot else for free...one wonders how he made a living.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, VhmSays said:

Can someone be a client if they haven't retained the lawyer or paid him anything? If you ask a lawyer a question are you automatically their client?

Either Cohen is lying to the court or Hannity is lying to his viewers. 

I bet Hannity's wife is asking a lot of questions.

It wouldn't be the first time Hannity has lied to his viewers. Hell, it would be the first time TODAY that Hannity has lied to his viewers.

I'm inclined to think that there is little reason for Cohen to perjure himself to ADD a client relationship. I could see him doing it to cover one up, but why would he pretend Hannity is his client? It makes no sense. Cohen obviously thought he had an attorney-client relationship with Hannity, no matter how much he'd been paid.

The client handing the attorney a dollar bill shtick may be more Hollywood fiction than binding legal reality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Ishmael said:

Michael Cohen seems such a decent guy, paying $130K to Stormy without reimbursement, giving Hannity legal advice and whatnot else for free...one wonders how he made a living.

Ever read Money by Martin Amis?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Mismoyled Jiblet. said:

Ever read Money by Martin Amis?

Nope. That was published around the time I stopped reading fiction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hannity says he's not a client but he still wants to assert attorney client privilege. I guess that makes sense in the Fox News Dimension.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So... according to HANNITY, he's not a client, but proclaims attorney-client privilege, and Cohen perjured himself to invent a client. You can't make this shit up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An attorney that has 3 clients, never bills one and takes a line of credit on his house to pay hush money to another’s flings.    I want one like that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Lark said:

An attorney that has 3 clients, never bills one and takes a line of credit on his house to pay hush money to another’s flings.    I want one like that.  

I think you'd be better off calling Saul.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Mike G said:

https://twitter.com/brianklaas/status/985980626028388352

 

Just imagine how Sean Hannity would respond if it were true that Obama’s personal lawyer, the target of a criminal investigation, was also secretly the lawyer for Rachel Maddow—and she had been using her show to defend the lawyer without disclosing that relationship. Just imagine

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, RKoch said:

I think you'd be better off calling Saul.

Saul would set the moral high ground in this circus.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Hard On The Wind said:

“I have occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective,” Hannity wrote in the statement. “I assumed those conversations were confidential, but to be absolutely clear, they never involved any matter between me and a third party.”

I've hired a few lawyers over the years. Three are working for me right now.

I've never hired one, nor even asked one advice, about matters that do not involve a third party.

What kind of legal question involves me and only me? I can't think of one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, RKoch said:

So... according to HANNITY, he's not a client, but proclaims attorney-client privilege, and Cohen perjured himself to invent a client. You can't make this shit up.

well, yes you can......Michael Cohen just did :P

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Uncooperative Tom said:

...

What kind of legal question involves me and only me? I can't think of one.

In Hannity's case, drafting his political/employment Last Will and Testament would be my guess.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/17/politics/sean-hannity-michael-cohen-donald-trump/index.html?sr=twCNN041718sean-hannity-michael-cohen-donald-trump0853AMVODtop

1. If this is no big deal, why did Hannity work to keep his name out of the case?
We knew that Cohen had represented at least three people on legal matters over the last few years. One was Trump. The second one, we learned last week, was Elliott Broidy, a major Republican donor who used Cohen to make $1.6 million payment to a former Playboy Playmatewith whom he had allegedly fathered a child. The third client remained a mystery because, according to Cohen's lawyers, that client didn't want to be named.
In the hearing in New York City on Monday, Cohen's attorney -- Stephen Ryan -- made the same case. Here's how The New York Times wrote it:
"Before the name was revealed, Mr. Ryan argued that the mystery client was a "prominent person" who wanted to keep his identity a secret because he would be 'embarrassed' to be identified as having sought Mr. Cohen's counsel.
Tweeted CNN crime and justice reporter Shimon Prokupecz: "I was in court yesterday and if it wasn't for the attorney representing the press, Sean Hannity's name would have been filed under seal. Judge Kimba Wood was ready to accept the name under seal, when the attorney representing the press stood up and argued successfully against it."
If his relationship with Cohen was a total nothingburger -- as Hannity says it was -- then why would he be embarrassed about it or so worried about it becoming known to the broader public?
2. Why would Cohen's lawyer say Hannity was a client?
Hannity says he "might have handed him ten bucks" and told Cohen "I definitely want attorney-client privilege on this" at times -- but he also says he never paid "legal fees" to Cohen and never sought his aid in connection with any sort of legal work involving any third party. In Hannity's telling, Cohen was just a guy he knew who was smart about real estate so he talked to him.
But, why then would Cohen's lawyer -- in open court! -- disclose that Hannity was the mysterious third Cohen client? Why would Cohen have told his legal representation that Hannity was a client if he had never received any significant money from the talk show host and never done any actual legal work for Hannity either?
The only answer I can think of is that Cohen liked the idea of being so closely tied to such a prominent person as Hannity. But, the President of the United States was already a client! And, if Cohen wanted to brag about his client list, why would his lawyers work to keep Hannity's name a secret and only disclose it when directed to do so by Judge Kimba Wood?
3. If Hannity never paid Cohen anything, is he entitled to attorney-client privilege?
On his show Monday night -- and on his radio show earlier in the day -- Hannity made the case that he was entitled to his right to privacy and that he had assumed his conversations with Cohen were confidential.
That would seem to indicate that Hannity believed his conversations with Cohen were protected by attorney-client privilege -- or at least he wanted them to be. But, if he never paid Cohen anything -- as Hannity has repeatedly asserted -- then he was not a client of Cohen's. In which case, attorney-client privilege doesn't hold. (I have been corrected on this. Attorney-client privilege can be invoked even if no money is exchanged. The issue, however, is if Hannity is denying he was ever a client of Cohen's, then how does that influence their relationship, legally speaking?)
4. Why didn't Hannity disclose -- on air -- his ties to Cohen?
The debate over whether Hannity is an activist or a journalist -- he kind of, sort of, identifies as both depending on which is more convenient at any given time -- is beside the point here.
Take it out of the political context. And remove Hannity from it. Let's say that once a week, I appear on national cable television. Every third appearance I find a way to work in the fact that Potbelly makes a really delicious sandwich. Would you consider it a problem if, at some point in the near future, it comes out that I am childhood friends with the guy who founded Potbelly?
OF COURSE YOU WOULD.
Because, whether I am a journalist or just someone who talks on TV --in Hannity's case, to millions of people every night -- I would want to disclose to everyone watching that I have something of a vested interest in making sure you know I like Potbelly sandwiches.
Hannity talked about the FBI raid of Cohen's home and law offices repeatedly. He never once mentioned that he even knew Cohen, much less that Cohen would describe him as a client in a legal proceeding.
5. Why was Cohen doing pro bono work for Hannity?
Remember that Cohen took out a home equity line of credit to make the $130,000 secret payment to porn star Stormy Daniels as part of a hush agreement to keep her from talking about allegations of an extramarital affair with Trump. That doesn't suggest someone who is awash in cash.
Then there is Hannity who, according to Forbes, made $36 million in 2017 alone.
Given that seeming financial disparity between the two men, why would Hannity never pay Cohen a dime for his services? Was the legal work -- and real estate advice -- so minor that Cohen wouldn't accept money for it? And, if so, why would Cohen's lawyer refer to Hannity as a client? And, if no money was exchanged but the men did have a business relationship, was there some other sort of payback offered by Hannity to Cohen?
CLARIFICATION: This story has been updated to clarify the point about attorney-client privilege.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why is Hannity still employed at Fox News? Any other news/reporting agency would have canned anyone with that kind of conflict of interest. This speaks volumes as to Fox News Corps integrity.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IDK where the line is crossed between merely giving free legal advice (such as at a cocktail party) and representing a client occurs. Certainly an attorney-client relationship can occur without money changing hands. 

Cohen's reputation was as a fixer, not a hotshot real estate attorney. He'd probably be the last lawyer a person would want to go to for real estate law. Besides, why would HANNITY be "embarrassed" about consulting an attorney regarding a real estate matter?  If Cohen regarded Hannity as a client, then a relationship exists. Most likely records and communication between the two will be regarded as Attorney-Client Privilege. If it's a nothing-burger like Hannity claims, he has nothing to worry about. It does expose his conflict of interest in commenting on Cohen on FOX, and it does open the door for journalists to probe deeper. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you go to bed with a dog, you wake up with fleas. Hannity and Cohen are the latest loyal supporters to reap the whirlwind. Their fealty to the flea bitten disgrace currently occupying the Oval Office is poetic justice. And I expect , and hope, it will not end with them. Every day the toxicity surrounding Trump increases and spreads like a cancer to his lick spittles. It’s natural selection at its best. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That thing that just swooshed over your head and went splat against the wall was called 'irony '.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael Cohen’s Clients are certainly a lucky bunch. He enters into agreements supposedly on their behalf but without their knowledge. He, by all accounts, doesn’t raise invoices or get paid. Hell, he pays settlements for them out of his own pocket. He’s the ultimate benevolent uncle.....or godfather.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, BillDBastard said:

Not sure why a judge would order an attorney to reveal who his clients are. WTF is going on in this country?

We are doomed as a nation if every freakin' thing is viewed through partisan lenses.

I KNOW!  Republicans investigating Republicans is so damn partisan!  It's the DEFINITION of partisan!  

The LEEBRULS are watching, and laughing. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, BillDBastard said:

Not sure why a judge would order an attorney to reveal who his clients are. WTF is going on in this country?

We are doomed as a nation if every freakin' thing is viewed through partisan lenses.

Because if he wants to claim attorney-client privilege, the judge wanted proof he was an attorney, and had clients. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Atlantic has an interesting article.

Sean Hannity’s Ties to Two More Trump-Connected Lawyers 
The Fox News host denies that Michael Cohen was ever his lawyer—but Hannity was represented by a pair of legal advisers who also have close links to the president.
 

On May 25, 2017, KFAQ, a radio station based in Tulsa, Oklahoma, received a cease-and-desist letter signed by two lawyers for Hannity: Victoria Toensing and Jay Alan Sekulow. Toensing’s signature sits above her name and that of her husband Joseph E. diGenova, the members of diGenova and Toensing LLP, who are identified as “Counsel for Sean Hannity,” according to a copy of the letter obtained by The Atlantic. Sekulow is also identified in the letter page as a “Counsel for Sean Hannity.” 

The letter was sent in response to accusations against Hannity made by the controversial conservative activist Debbie Schlussel. During an appearance on the Pat Campbell show on KFAQ last April, Schlussel said Hannity had been “creepy” towards her and had invited her to his hotel room. 

Hannity responded at the time by calling the allegations “100 percent false and a complete fabrication,” and said that he had hired lawyers to plan a response. “This letter provides notice that Ms. Schlussel’s statements are false and defamatory,” the letter read. “Continued publication will result in further exposure to liability because of continued harm to Mr. Hannity’s impeccable reputation.” 


MORE: 
https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/04/sean-hannity/558272/

 

Hannity also hired Jay Sekulow — Trump’s top lawyer in the Russia probe: report 
In late May of 2017, a radio station in Oklahoma received a cease and desist from two lawyers representing Fox News personality Sean Hannity: Jay Sekulow and Victoria Toensing. The former is best-known as President Donald Trump’s lawyer for the Russia probe, and the latter is married to attorney Joseph diGenova, who along with her husband was announced as two additions to the president’s legal team last month only to be taken off of it after conflicts of interest were revealed. 
https://www.rawstory.com/2018/04/hannity-also-hired-jay-sekulow-trumps-top-lawyer-russia-probe-report/




Updated: Digging (as i do) and found this from: 


 
@MattGertz 
Hey, everyone knows about this audio of Sean Hannity saying he hired Jay Sekulow and Joseph diGenova to pursue a civil action over the CIA supposedly wiretapping him, right?


 

 

Hey, everyone knows about this audio of Sean Hannity saying he hired Jay Sekulow and Joseph diGenova to pursue a civil action over the CIA supposedly wiretapping him, right? https://www.mediamatters.org/embed/clips/2017/08/21/55560/prn-hannity-20170410-hiredlawyers1 https://www.mediamatters.org/blog/2017/11/15/what-s-hannity-s-bizarre-comment-about-being-illegally-surveilled/218568 

MaOTAYGn?format=jpg&name=144x144_2

 

 
 



https://www.mediamatters.org/blog/2017/11/15/what-s-hannity-s-bizarre-comment-about-being-illegally-surveilled/218568

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tapper to Avenatti on The Lead a few minutes ago.

Tapper: You've suggested that Michael Cohen is going to flip... 

Avenatti: No, I didn't "suggest" that. I stated it as a fact. 


Mark Geragos said earlier today that you can check all the boxes on the likeliness of Cohen flipping. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Dex Sawash said:

Don't mind seeing Hannity sweat but why do we give a fuck about this relationship? TV are sure wanking themselves dry over it. 

Because Fox News wants to be known as a NEWS organization, not Trump Propaganda Network 2. (Network 1 is our asymmetric Press Secretary). In fact, if it turns out that Hannity is a Trump Shill - with crazy conflicts of interest, don't be surprised if a whole slew of lawsuits are filed with regards to campaign finance.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://talkingpointsmemo.com/edblog/good-grief-cohens-gets-mobbier-the-closer-i-look 
 

In today’s podcast, we look into the background of Michael Cohen. TPM first reported last year that Cohen was actually a childhood friend of Felix Sater, whose father was himself a reputed capo in the Mogilevich organized crime syndicate, said to be Russia’s largest and most dangerous. Filling out this picture of how Cohen fell into this milieu we’ve always been focused on the fact that Cohen’s uncle, Morton Levine, owned and ran a Brooklyn social club which was a well-known meeting spot for members of Italian and Russian organized crime families in the 1970s and 1980s. (Levine, a medical doctor has never been charged with a crime.) But now it turns out there’s a bit more to this story. 

I came across this in a January AP article about Boris Nayfeld, one-time organized crime boss in Brooklyn, who now wants to go home to Russia to start a new life. Nayfeld is 70 and he just finished his latest prison sentence. The whole story is a bit low energy and a sad sack in a nonetheless menacing and predatory way. According to published reports, in the 70s and early 80s, the boss of the Russian mob in the U.S. was a man named Evsei Agron. Things ended badly for Agron when was gunned down in a mob hit in 1985. 

After Agron was assassinated, his organization was taken over by Marat Balagula. Law enforcement apparently believed Balagula was behind Agron’s killing. But he was never charged with the crime. Balagula ran things until 1991 when he was convicted of gasoline bootlegging. Nayfeld had been the bodyguard and enforcer for both Agron and Balagula, one would say more successfully in the latter case than the former. He took over the organization when Balagula went to prison. 

What I didn’t realize until now is that both Agron and his successor Balagula ran their operations out of an office in the El Caribe social club. So the El Caribe wasn’t just a mob hang out. From the 70s through the 90s at least, the bosses of the Russian mafia in the U.S. literally ran their crime organizations out of the El Caribe. 

snip 

The AP article includes another detail. According to Levine, who is apparently still alive, all his nieces and nephews owned shares of the El Caribe and still do. Levine told the AP that Michael Cohen owned his stake in the club until Donald Trump was elected President when he “gave up his stake.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Raz'r said:

Because Fox News wants to be known as a NEWS organization, not Trump Propaganda Network 2. (Network 1 is our asymmetric Press Secretary). In fact, if it turns out that Hannity is a Trump Shill - with crazy conflicts of interest, don't be surprised if a whole slew of lawsuits are filed with regards to campaign finance.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, BillDBastard said:

Not sure why a judge would order an attorney to reveal who his clients are. WTF is going on in this country?

We are doomed as a nation if every freakin' thing is viewed through partisan lenses.

Are you so fuckin' clueless that you don't realize that this entire circus is staffed by Republicans?

All other parts of the political spectrum are merely viewers in the peanut gallery.

You right wingers own it in its entirety.

Thank God there are still a few like Mueller who have some brains and integrity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/16/2018 at 6:41 PM, SloopJonB said:

Saul would set the moral high ground in this circus.

The moral high ground is still well below grade........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, madohe said:

The moral high ground is still well below grade........

 

26 minutes ago, madohe said:

The moral high ground is still well below grade........

The current crowd is so low that it plays handball against a street curb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/16/2018 at 4:02 PM, Lark said:

An attorney that has 3 clients, never bills one and takes a line of credit on his house to pay hush money to another’s flings.    I want one like that.  

No, you don’t.  Unless you think you can extricate yourself in the nick of time. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, jerseyguy said:

The current crowd is so low that it plays handball basketball against a street curb.

Corrected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/17/2018 at 4:07 PM, badlatitude said:

Tapper to Avenatti on The Lead a few minutes ago.

Tapper: You've suggested that Michael Cohen is going to flip... 

Avenatti: No, I didn't "suggest" that. I stated it as a fact. 


Mark Geragos said earlier today that you can check all the boxes on the likeliness of Cohen flipping. 

Could well be they aren't even after Trump, they are after Cohen and McDougle's fake lawyer. My lawyers says that is NOT small potatoes, quite the opposite, it's about as much trouble as a lawyer can get him or herself into.

 If they can prove that lawyer worked with the opposition to the detriment of his or her's own client, somebody is going to serve big time. In his opinion it is to be expected that the legal community goes apeshit. If any judge saw evidence of that happening nary a rock will be left un-turnable. It threatens the entire industry. Hence: Things like this very rare instances of judge signing off on warrants for doc grabs on a high-profile lawyer should seem perfectly natural. 

 

 IOW, if this is what is going down there would be nothing Cohen and the other guy could give up which could save their skins to any significant degree, and it will be in state courts so Trump can't pardon them out of it either. 

 fucked-you-are.jpg

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now