Cohen’s Client Revealed

PUBLISHED: 10:18 PM 17 Apr 2018

Hannity Outed In Connection To President’s Personal Lawyer

However, there are no monetary records… they just talked.

Who Sean Hannity “hires as a lawyer and why is nobody’s business.”

Robert Mueller’s team of special investigators took a break from the Russia collusion witch-hunt so that they could go on a fishing expedition. A wide net was cast around President Donald Trump’s personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, and it’s being dragged all the way across Washington.

On Monday, Sean Hannity became the latest big fish to be caught up in the net. Judge Kimba Wood threw privacy concerns right out the window (again) by ordering Cohen’s lawyers to divulge the name of Mr. Cohen’s third “mystery” client in open court, starting a liberal media feeding frenzy of outraged speculation, as soon as they smelled Hannity’s blood in the water.

“Predictably, without knowing all or frankly any of the facts, the media went completely insane,” Hannity declared. He stood by his right to privacy not to have his name revealed, especially because the relationship was so minor.

Fellow Fox host Tucker Carlson points out that the only reason liberals even care is that they are desperate “to hurt Trump and anybody close to Trump.” Who Sean Hannity “hires as a lawyer and why is nobody’s business.”

Carlson warns the public not to let this get blown out of proportion by the media. Sean Hannity isn’t a government official, just a talk show host. “He’s not under investigation by anyone for anything.”

Everything about the April 9, raid smacks of political bias and partisan motivation. More and more debate centers around the impartiality of government investigations generally.

Hannity never even formally hired Cohen, just picked his brain for some real estate advice in a casual conversation. He was never billed for the advice or otherwise paid a single cent.

This judge is making up the rules as she goes along, Carlson asserts. The Constitution provides the right to privacy. “No judge has a right to violate his privacy or anybody else’s. Those used to be the rules, but the rules have changed.”

Carlson is quick to point out that if you hate President Trump you may be smiling now, but someday the shoe will be on the other foot. This development in the saga means that the Attorney-client privilege is now meaningless.

Privacy, public reputation, and fairness are things of the past.

Documents filed ahead of Monday’s hearing state that “three people received legal help from Cohen” after Donald Trump became president. Trump was one of them.

Trump fundraiser Elliot Broidy was the second. He resigned his job with the Republican National Committee after news broke on Friday that he paid off a Playboy Playmate through Cohen, following an affair and unexpected pregnancy.

The third client, lawyers Todd Harrison and Stephen Ryan insisted, was nobody’s business and they didn’t want to name him publicly.

“It almost goes without saying, unfortunately, that none of Mr. Cohen’s clients want to be associated with the government raid on his home and law office, or want to be affiliated in any way with the proceedings here and the attendant media coverage.”

The judge had no sympathy. “I understand if he doesn’t want his name out there, but that’s not enough under the law,” Wood declared as she ordered the disclosure.

As soon as Hannity learned he had been outed, he told his radio listeners, then later, Fox News viewers, that all he had were “occasional, brief discussions” with the attorney, to get Cohen’s “input and perspective.”

Mr. Hannity had believed that “those discussions were covered by attorney-client privilege.” No other person was involved, in the matters he talked with Cohen about, and his questions “almost exclusively focused on real estate.”

The Courts have long held that an attorney-client relationship exists even for unpaid advice.

The primary purpose of Monday’s hearing was to set limits on who gets first look at the documents and other evidence seized from Cohen’s office and home on April 9.

Cohen’s lawyers argued why they should get to sift through to see what should be declared off limits before turning the rest back over to prosecutors.

The prosecutors want to use the standard “taint team” procedure. A group of prosecutors in the same office would look the records over and sort out which ones they thought, in their “allegedly” unbiased opinion, were usable.

Attorney Joanna Hendon, representing President Trump, also filed a motion requesting the Judge hold the evidence from prosecutors until he can study them.

“Fairness and justice, as well as the appearance of fairness and justice, require that, before they are turned over to the Investigative Team, the seized materials relating to the President must be reviewed by the only person who is truly motivated to ensure that the privilege is properly invoked and applied: the privilege-holder himself, the President,” Ms. Hendon argues.

Another option, Hendon suggests, allows Cohen’s lawyers to perform an “initial review,” then “identify to the president all seized materials that relate to him in any way and provide a copy of those materials to him and his counsel.”

Cohen’s team has another option which Judge Wood has agreed might be worth implementing. An independent third party official, called a “special master,” who is usually a lawyer with no connection to either side, can wade through the pile to see what is protected and what isn’t.

“I have faith in the Southern District U.S. Attorney’s Office that their integrity is unimpeachable,” Judge Wood noted, so a taint team is “a viable option.”

She also agreed that “a special master might have some role here,” to help “ensure fairness and the perception of fairness.”

Judge Wood told the courtroom she would take some time to think the matter over before issuing a ruling. Meanwhile, she ordered the prosecutors to “create a database of what was taken from Cohen and share it with his legal team.”

Seriously, that’s what she ordered. Her activism is sickening.