(04-17-2018 09:29 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(04-17-2018 08:41 AM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(04-17-2018 06:10 AM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  I'm just trying to figure out why Hannity says Cohen isn't his lawyer, and Cohen in court under oath says the opposite. But then again, Hannity's background is as shaky as Trump so he's another you can believe never to be telling the truth.

In a sports analogy, Hannity's weak sauce of a response reminds me of the denials you would get from Barry Bonds, Sammy Sosa, Roger Clemens, etc., when they were denying their steroid use. No sensible person believes him. Cohen has all of 3 clients, and 1 of the 3 claims he's not really a client, just someone who gets occasional legal advice before he goes on the air?

It could be (and has happened to me before) that the level of advice I have given in my mind 'crosses the line' where I need to shut up with respect to the third parties (i.e. enough has happened that I need to regard that recipient of helpful information as a client with regards to the legal ramifications). And, the person with whom I have engaged is not aware that in my mind the attorney/client relationship has been established. But think what you will....

I still dont understand why Hannity being a client is such earth-shattering news or subject to this level of speculation.....

Three big reasons: Hannity has been discussing Cohen and reporting on him without disclosing his close, personal connection of him being Hannity's personal lawyer. That's a major conflict of interest and it should have been disclosed to his viewers since he may have ample reasons to not want Cohen's office raided, which would obviously color how he covers the news.

And in my situation above, none of the people I would 'shut my mouth' on would realize the fact that this has occurred. They have no reason to suspect it. I think this is a case where the advice Cohen gave 'crossed the line of being a client' in his mind, yet to Hannity it would seem that they were just chatting. In that case, kind of hard to slam Hannity for a 'conflict' if he never knew of it. Cmon man....

Quote:Hannity has been one of Trump's biggest and loudest supporters, and since Hannity and Trump make up 2/3 of Cohen's clients, this provides some speculation that perhaps they tried to use attorney client privilege to shield conversations.

And finally, as mentioned above, Hannity is a huge mouth piece for the admin right now - rather coincidental that he shares a lawyer with Trump.

Interesting that my outrage at the raid on Cohen is pooh-poohed as based on nothing but speculation, yet that is entirely what your construct is based on.

From what Hannity's response was, I am positive in my own mind as to what transpired. And I have laid it out here.

Edited to add: just read your your last post : [emily latella mode on] Never mind [/emily latella]

Edited further: it very well could be that Cohen 'served as an attorney for Hannity' -- that line is not set in black and white. The sole issue is if, in the attorney's mind, enough transpired to warrant that line being crossed. As I said, more than one friend of mine has earned that label in my mind due to the amount/level of stuff that has transpired. They may not realize it.

I recently had to correct someone with whom I had had a conversation with, since he was telling a third party what the content of that discussion was. I had to make an aside telling him that I considered those conversations to be privileged and he should be careful about relating to anyone what the contents were. To be honest, it was somewhat uncomfortable, but at the end of the day the friend thanked me for that further advice.