Sean Hannity was Michael Cohen’s “I don’t want to name him” client

cornflake said:

I love Hannity protesting he never paid Cohen legal fees -- ok, he maybe paid him $10!

First, who the hell pays a lawyer $10? You either pay legal fees or you don't, or, if you're fake retaining your friend to be able to claim privilege or whatever, you give them $1.

Second, Cohen says he had three whole clients, and an office in Manhattan. One of those clients is Trump, who doesn't like to pay people. That'd leave one client and Hannity, who says he paid a grand total of $10.

That doesn't seem likely!

I get they're all fucking dumbasses but the daily demonstrations of how correct Dunning and Kruger were is amazing.

Click to expand...

It does seem likely. Cohen is a negative-income lawyer. There is a reason he moonlighted as a taxi-driver. He went to Cooley Law School, perhaps the worst law school in the United States (and it is heading further south) so he likely graduated without getting a job and barely met the bar standard. His moon-lighting as a taxi driver got him jobs with the Russian mob and that is perhaps how he ended up being the personal attorney of Trump and still put a suit on his frame.

I don't think Hannity's relationship with Cohen is about covering up any extramarital affairs. Instead, I think he is the one feeding Hannity his big stories: Seth Rich, Uranium One, etc.

So the russians get the leverage on trump via Cohens slush pile?

Beanie5 said:

So the russians get the leverage on trump via Cohens slush pile?

Click to expand...

No, Trump's relationship with the Russian mob is older than Trump's relationship with Cohen. Trump has been slapping his name on Russian oligarch-funded projects for a long time, giving these projects a thin veneer of respectability.

So, either a shady developer says "Hey, cabbie, you'd make a great mob lawyer!" or a mobster says "Hey, driver, you'd make a great lawyer for this shifty developer I know!"?
In either case, the proper course is to take it as an insult, not a career opportunity. It's not going to end well.

And, the reason a lawyer hires lawyers? There's a saying about a man who is his own lawyer has a fool for a client. Especially when the lawyer went to a crummy school, and barely got through that.

My favourite bit of all this is the #MAGAs and bots on Twitter trying to drag it back to 'But her emails!'.

Xelebes said:

I don't think Hannity's relationship with Cohen is about covering up any extramarital affairs. Instead, I think he is the one feeding Hannity his big stories: Seth Rich, Uranium One, etc.

Click to expand...

• Two oligarchs are intercepted by the FBI.
• Broidy is named in a probe into a Ukrainian payment.
• Mueller investigates a $150K donation to the Trump Foundation by an oligarch, solicited by Cohen.
• A week later the FBI raids Cohen's offices.

This is about money. Big money. Russian money.

Cohen has more than three clients. He can easily throw two under the bus. But not the others. Not if he wants to stay alive. Which means the FBI - and Mueller by extension - has more power over Cohen than anyone can imagine.

Hannity is a side show. He probably put some money along with Trump is some shady real-estate affair and is about to get caught red-handed.

Stormy Daniels is even less of a side show. Her case will ever be pushed down the pile until the day everything else is done. By that time Cohen will have been dealt with - by the mob or the FBI. In the mean time she and her lawyer make one heck of a cheer leading team, keeping the dirt in the new cycles.

-cb

Wow, someone should write a novel... wait! They don't have to! --s6

cornflake said:

I love Hannity protesting he never paid Cohen legal fees -- ok, he maybe paid him $10!

First, who the hell pays a lawyer $10? You either pay legal fees or you don't, or, if you're fake retaining your friend to be able to claim privilege or whatever, you give them $1.

Second, Cohen says he had three whole clients, and an office in Manhattan. One of those clients is Trump, who doesn't like to pay people. That'd leave one client and Hannity, who says he paid a grand total of $10.

That doesn't seem likely!

I get they're all fucking dumbasses but the daily demonstrations of how correct Dunning and Kruger were is amazing.

Click to expand...

Well, not only does Trump not pay Cohen, but Cohen, out of the simple goodness of his heart, pays off a woman $130,000. Had to take a mortgage to get the money, he says. But never told Trump, or asked to be reimbursed. Because a lawyer with three whole clients (one who pays only $10) can afford to throw around one hundred grand like peanuts.

kikazaru said:

So does this mean that because Hannity is "involved" Fox will remove him from broadcasting any news items regarding this investigation because of a conflict of interest?

Click to expand...

They would IF Fux News was a reputable, professional practitioner of journalism that respects and abides the code of ethics the way reputable, professional practitioners of journalism do.

They are not. But even if Fux was, it would have nothing to do with Sean Hannity who is not now, nor has he even been in any way, shape or form, an actual journalist. Which is why Sean Hannity will continue to be Cohen and Trump's biggest and loudest supporter on cable news, conflict of interests be damned.

blacbird said:

1. With his records having been seized, Cohen has no reason to lie, and every reason NOT to lie.
2. If Hannity is lying, why? What exactly could he be worried about?

It also says a lot about this Administration that the President's personal attorney has to hire attorneys.

Click to expand...

That's been noticed.

“Mr. Cohen might have a legal degree, but this investigation is largely focused on his private business dealings and personal financial dealings,” assistant U.S. attorney Thomas McKay explained to Judge Kimba Wood of Federal District Court, addressing the president’s loud complaints that the raid of his lawyer’s office violated attorney-client privilege. “He has more attorneys of his own than he has clients.”

Click to expand...

As Jimmy Kimmel quipped, "That sounds normal. He has a lawyer he doesn't pay. By the way, I'm thinking of hiring Michael Cohen as my lawyer. He only has three clients and apparently he works for free. He doesn't take money from anyone."

The way Hannity tells it he wants to invoke his attorney-client privilege despite not being a client of this attorney. How does that work exactly?

nighttimer said:

The way Hannity tells it he wants to invoke his attorney-client privilege despite not being a client of this attorney. How does that work exactly?

Click to expand...

It makes sense if you think of it as him saying "I do not wish to be held accountable for my actions."

Xelebes said:

It does seem likely. Cohen is a negative-income lawyer. There is a reason he moonlighted as a taxi-driver. He went to Cooley Law School, perhaps the worst law school in the United States (and it is heading further south) so he likely graduated without getting a job and barely met the bar standard. His moon-lighting as a taxi driver got him jobs with the Russian mob and that is perhaps how he ended up being the personal attorney of Trump and still put a suit on his frame.

I don't think Hannity's relationship with Cohen is about covering up any extramarital affairs. Instead, I think he is the one feeding Hannity his big stories: Seth Rich, Uranium One, etc.

Click to expand...

He has an office in 30 Rock, was sitting in a hotel room in midtown, had a home someplace with a HELOC he was able to pull $130k off -- that's serious money. The office alone...

This feels like a tv show, not real life.

Will Collins said:

This feels like a tv show, not real life.

Click to expand...

This is hauntingly close to Trumps campaign slogan for 2020:

Keep America Reality Television

ETA

They will really try to KART off the competition (I'll see myself out for the bad pun )

Will Collins said:

This feels like a tv show, not real life.

Click to expand...

My husband and I look at each other and say the same thing almost every night.

Will Collins said:

This feels like a tv show, not real life.

Click to expand...

I don't like this channel, but my remote doesn't seem to be allowing me to click away from it. Wassup wit' dat?

It's not worth a separate thread, but the NY Times devoted its entire editorial page to warn the Republican Congressional majority how they will have to respond when Trump fires Mueller and Rosenstein and they don't pussyfoot around either as they throw back in their faces the very words Republican senators used against Bill Clinton in 1999.

"In a country based on the system of laws, which is really the great gift given to us under the terms of our Constitution, there needs to be a consistency of application. The idea that all people are equal under the law is not a relative term.” — Judd Gregg, 1999


“I have asked myself how men from an era when honor was valued above all other traits, men like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and James Madison, might have viewed a President who committed perjury and obstruction of justice for personal and political gain.” — Phil Gramm, 1999


“What standard of conduct should we insist our President live up to? ... Do not underestimate, my friends, the corrupting and cynical signal we will send if we fail to enforce the highest standards of conduct on the most powerful man in the nation.” — Pete Domenici, 1999


“Committing crimes of moral turpitude such as perjury and obstruction of justice go to the heart of qualification for public office.” — Orrin Hatch, 1999

nighttimer said:

“Committing crimes of moral turpitude such as perjury and obstruction of justice go to the heart of qualification for public office.” — Orrin Hatch, 1999

Click to expand...

Apparently the incumbent and his people read this as meaning the 'perjury and obstruction of justice' were part of the qualifications for public office. In which case they are overachievers.

frimble3 said:

Apparently the incumbent and his people read this as meaning the 'perjury and obstruction of justice' were part of the qualifications for public office. In which case they are overachievers.

Click to expand...

Hahaha you said that like he reads things.

Introversion said:

In a statement Fox News said: “While Fox News was unaware of Sean Hannity’s informal relationship with Michael Cohen and was surprised by the announcement in court yesterday, we have reviewed the matter and spoken to Sean and he continues to have our full support.”

Click to expand...

Fox's investigative journalism. Lower case (i) and (j).

-cb

nighttimer said:

I don't like this channel, but my remote doesn't seem to be allowing me to click away from it. Wassup wit' dat?

It's not worth a separate thread, but the NY Times devoted its entire editorial page to warn the Republican Congressional majority how they will have to respond when Trump fires Mueller and Rosenstein and they don't pussyfoot around either as they throw back in their faces the very words Republican senators used against Bill Clinton in 1999.

"In a country based on the system of laws, which is really the great gift given to us under the terms of our Constitution, there needs to be a consistency of application. The idea that all people are equal under the law is not a relative term.” — Judd Gregg, 1999


“I have asked myself how men from an era when honor was valued above all other traits, men like George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Adams and James Madison, might have viewed a President who committed perjury and obstruction of justice for personal and political gain.” — Phil Gramm, 1999


“What standard of conduct should we insist our President live up to? ... Do not underestimate, my friends, the corrupting and cynical signal we will send if we fail to enforce the highest standards of conduct on the most powerful man in the nation.” — Pete Domenici, 1999


“Committing crimes of moral turpitude such as perjury and obstruction of justice go to the heart of qualification for public office.” — Orrin Hatch, 1999

Click to expand...

Republicans won't even dignify that with a look. They can't. At this point, any admission that mistakes were made would likely mean the end of the Republican party, and too many of them have no skills other than being shills and living off a government salary to take that risk.

cornflake said:

He has an office in 30 Rock, was sitting in a hotel room in midtown, had a home someplace with a HELOC he was able to pull $130k off -- that's serious money. The office alone...

Click to expand...

You can be all that and still make your living with negative income. Leverage, leverage, leverage. Oh where, oh where does he find that leverage. . .

Xelebes said:

You can be all that and still make your living with negative income. Leverage, leverage, leverage. Oh where, oh where does he find that leverage. . .

Click to expand...

The office alone is likely $10k a month.

By all accounts, Hannity is struggling mightily to "explain" this mess. And, if you want to google a bit, you can come up with a brilliant portrait by Jim Carrey of Hannity as a manatee.

caw

ShaunHorton said:

Republicans won't even dignify that with a look. They can't. At this point, any admission that mistakes were made would likely mean the end of the Republican party, and too many of them have no skills other than being shills and living off a government salary to take that risk.

Click to expand...

Nobody connected to this shitshow looks good and Fux News in particular is put in an awful position. The Murdochs want to make money and brag about how powerful they are, but they also want the legitimacy that comes with being viewed as a practitioner of serious journalism.

Which they are not when their most visible star is all up the current administration's butt like a hemorrhoid. The Society of Professional Journalists Code of Ethics sheds light on how grave the Hannity dilemma is for Fux.

Act Independently
The highest and primary obligation of ethical journalism is to serve the public.

Journalists should:


– Avoid conflicts of interest, real or perceived. Disclose unavoidable conflicts.

– Refuse gifts, favors, fees, free travel and special treatment, and avoid political and other outside activities that may compromise integrity or impartiality, or may damage credibility.

– Be wary of sources offering information for favors or money; do not pay for access to news. Identify content provided by outside sources, whether paid or not.

– Deny favored treatment to advertisers, donors or any other special interests, and resist internal and external pressure to influence coverage.

– Distinguish news from advertising and shun hybrids that blur the lines between the two. Prominently label sponsored content.

Click to expand...

This is not complicated or arcane or complex. Anyone with an I.Q. higher than a potted plant should be able to grasp the concept that you cannot claim to be honest and truthful when you have a direct relationship with the individuals you are ranting and raving in defense of on your popular television program. You simply cannot do this.

An ethical journalism organization would have either suspended or fired Hannity immediately. Fortunately for him, ethics is not an principle Fux News takes seriously.

blacbird said:

By all accounts, Hannity is struggling mightily to "explain" this mess. And, if you want to google a bit, you can come up with a brilliant portrait by Jim Carrey of Hannity as a manatee.

caw

Click to expand...

Skip the Google and follow the link for Manatee Hannity.