Posted on 04/17/2018 6:33:13 AM PDT by GIdget2004
Attorney and frequent Fox News guest Alan Dershowitz criticized host Sean Hannity on Monday for not disclosing his relationship with Michael Cohen, President Trump's attorney, during his frequent discussions about Cohen in recent weeks.
Dershowitz, a defender of Trump amid his legal woes, was brought on to discuss former FBI Director James Comey’s Sunday night interview on ABC News, but first addressed the Monday revelation that Hannity is the previously unnamed client of Cohen.
“I really think you should have disclosed your relationship with Cohen,” Dershowitz said, calling it a “complicated situation.”
“It was minimal,” Hannity responded.
“I understand that, and you should’ve said that,” Dershowitz, an opinion contributor for The Hill, replied. You were in a tough position because, A, you had to talk about Cohen, and, B, you didn’t want the fact hat you had spoken with him to be revealed.”
“I have the right to privacy,” Hannity interjected. “It was such a minor relationship.”
“You should have said that,” Dershowitz said.
Hannity was revealed to be Cohen's client during a hearing Monday afternoon related to last week's FBI raids of Cohen's office and home. Cohen's attorney only shared Hannity's identity after a judge ordered him to.
Hannity is a staunch ally of Trump’s, and frequently defends the president on his Fox News show. He was fiercely critical of last week’s raids on Cohen’s office, using it as a launching point to attack special counsel Robert Mueller’s probe into Russian meddling in the 2016 election.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
That sort of "neutrality" is to be avoided. The purpose of this thread is simultaneously to defend Hannity and to defend Cohen's lawyers, all the while bashing anybody who dares criticize either the Hannity side or the Cohen side. So you might as well get over it.
(Of course, it may be rationally impossible to have a consistent and logical argument that simultaneously defends both Hannity and the Cohen team. But hey, what difference -- at this point -- does it make?)
Yeah. If it turns out that Trump and Hannity both use the same Russian barber, Trump should be impeached and Hannity should be shamed off the air.
Or something like that. :)
I know lawyers will do a consult before you retain them. I assume that consult is also privileged. So, in that sense they would be “your” lawyer.
That does seem a bit odd, no!? That must mean their is something in the paper trail before this 'court' that isn't so easily dismissed. As someone stated up thread, it's like the 'court' already knew this to be.
>> Why did Cohen’s lawyers say Sean was a client if they have no monetary relationship? <<
Why do lawyers sometimes bend the truth or even tell lies?
Beats me.
His reasoning was Hannity was discussing Cohen and Trump issue without disclosing he had some type of relationship with Cohen.
We want our journalists to be objective, even if we agree with them, right? Or if something might interfere with their objectivity, we would want to know that, right? In my world, Hannity reporting on things related to somebody with whom he has had personal dealings is called a “conflict of interest”.
Put another way... If Rachel Maddow was found to have used an attorney that is now on Mueller’s staff, and then speaks glowingly of Mueller’s team, wouldn’t you have wanted to know the existence of the business relationship in that case? I know I would; it can help me evaluate the spin I am being provided by the propagandists. It’s why somebody like Cramer is supposed to mention that he owns a stock he discusses if he owns it; to mitigate the conflict of interest.
Agreeing with Douche-awitz on this one.
“No conservative Trump supporter has the right to privacy.”
Sarcasm can be fun, maybe, but ultimately its purpose is nonexistent. Pretentiousness and dishonesty find their greatest refuge in sarcasm.
It could be that the person using sarcasm is a patriotic American who will take a strong stand. But the tactic is more flight than fight.
In the worst cases on this website, sarcasm disguises an enemy of America whose personal weakness is only exceeded by that of his true ideology, progressivism. So the only stand he can take is passive aggression.
Yup.
How about we all send e-mails or letters to the DOJ & The FBI declaring OUR connections with COHEN?
I don’t have one. Most of the whole country does NOT have one-—but perhaps being inundated with paper avalanche stating such would get their attention.
Mueller & the Deep State are willing to break ANY law to get rid of Trump. What they don’t get is that IF they get truly close to doing that, they will unleash about 66 million or more of US onto them, and they cannot control all of us. They will start CW II. I have confidence on who will survive CW II.
The 4th Amendment is just as important as #1 & #2. It means you can keep your privacy-—which is exactly what these raids on Cohen’s records destroyed. PRIVACY.
IF I go to a lawyer-—I expect to have that privacy privilege. Same for my CPA.
This raid & how it is being handled isn’t entirely about ‘getting Trump’. It is about tearing away the shield of PRIVACY from every single person in the USA. But, of course, the Dems don’t think this will apply to THEM.
>> I know lawyers will do a consult before you retain them. I assume that consult is also privileged <<
Good point. I think it’s correct, even when no money was paid.
Ergo, if something like that scenario is actually what happened, then Cohen’s lawyers may need to explain fully, truthfully and ASAP to the judge — and then just hope that a dim-brained Hannity doesn’t come out again with some public statement to contradict their explanation.
I can answer your questions. It is because the two-tiered justice system is more pronounced under Sessions than it was even under Holder and Lynch. The Left is out of control and batguano crazy drunk out of their minds on power. They know that no matter what they do, the DOJ will simply continue to hound and persecute Trump and his associates.
Sessions has completely wimped out, and the Left is running hog wild. It will continue until we get an AG that aggressively prosecutes the Deep State.
I agree.
I am a life long bookkeeper/accounting person. I am now 78.
I have had MANY people over the years ask me questions about how to do some part of another of their bookkeeping-—Payroll—& tax payments. It was CONVERSATION. I NEVER charged them a penny. Those conversations are private.
What next from the Dems? They can really rile up America if this judge isn’t reined in. She is WAAAY beyond out of line.
Save your sanctimonious screed. I wasn’t being sarcastic.
How about Trump & Hannity file to see the COMPLETE list of clients that Stormy Daniels lawyer has?
Would that fly?
Gloria Allred....Lisa Bloom.......ANY lawyer or CPA.
>> IF I go to a lawyer-—I expect to have that privacy privilege. Same for my CPA. <<
My CPA has told me directly that our conversations are not covered by something analogous to “attorney-client” privilege.
(I’d prefer for him to be wrong — but in fact, I believe him.)
I am 78 & have been doing accounting/bookkeeping since I was 17==61 years. I have been self-employed since 1980. I have 2 clients left-—one for over 48 years & one for over 44 years.
I couldn’t even BEGIN to COUNT the number of CONVERSATIONS I have had with MANY, MANY people about their books—payroll —tax payments—deadlines—ANYTHING.
Its only a “consult” but by doing so the lawyer is barred from representing anyone that may be opposing you in this matter. Even the consult is covered by A/C privilege. Even if the lawyer didnt charge you for it. Technically he is a lawyer in your pocket, because he cant knowingly work against you.
A nice tactic is to call and “consult” with every lawyer in town. That way your legal opponent will have to go further to find a lawyer that is unbiased to find representation against you. If he didnt beat you to this trick, that is.
This is so ridiculous as we all know Hannity is a conservative opinion show that is shown from a conservative viewpoint. Makes no difference yet those other networks do not disclose their Dem/liberal leftwing bias & being nothing but propaganda.
“...I think you need to divulge ALL...”
OK, your logic is too good. I’m standing corrected.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.