With most of the media in a feeding frenzy after judge Kimba Wood – the same judge who 5 years ago married the 83-year-old George Soros to 42-year-old Tamiko Bolton…
… unveiled that Michael Cohen’s “third client” is Sean Hannity, questions swirled over potential conflicts of interest, and whether Hannity had an obligation to disclose his relationship to Cohen, whom he defended on his show on more than one occasion.
As we observed earlier, Hannity justified his silence on the matter claiming Cohen never represented him “in any matter involving a third party”, had never “retained [Cohen’s] services” and had occasionally “asked Mr Cohen questions concerning the law that Mr Cohen indicated would be privileged.” This however prompted more questions, the top two being i) whether asking your lawyer “some legal questions” and saying “attorney/client privilege” makes you their client and, ii) why was Cohen’s team so reluctant to reveal Hannity’s name in the hearing, and why the secrecy?
Earlier on Monday, even attorney and frequent Fox News guest Alan Dershowitz Sean Hannity criticized host Sean Hannity for not disclosing his relationship with Cohen 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.”
Alan Dershowitz (!) says that Hannity should have disclosed that he was a client of Cohen before discussing the FBI raid last week.
Hannity responds: “I have the right to privacy.” pic.twitter.com/lheMdQWqHl
— Judd Legum (@JuddLegum) April 17, 2018
So to answer all of this, in his show on Monday night Hannity addressed the Cohen situation for the second time as follows.
“Michael Cohen never represented me in any legal manner. I never retained his services, I never received an invoice. I never paid Michael Cohen for legal fees. I did have occasional brief conversations with Michael Cohen, he’s a great attorney, about legal questions I had or I was looking for input or perspective.
“My discussions with Michael Cohen never rose to any level that I needed to tell anyone that I was asking him questions. And to be absolutely clear: they never involved any matter, any – sorry to disappoint so many – matter between me, a third party, a third group, at all. My questions focused almost exclusively on real estate. I said many times on my radio show ‘I hate the stock market, I prefer real estate.’ Michael knows real estate.
“So in response to all the wild speculation, I want to set the record straight here tonight. I never asked Michael Cohen to bring this proceeding on my behalf. I have no personal interest in this legal matter. That’s all there is, nothing more.”
To be sure, if Hannity is lying – and with both the FBI and NSA now in possession of all Cohen docs – we will know momentarily, or as soon as the leak to the NYT/WaPo hits, at which point Hannity’s future at Fox News will be no more. On the other, if indeed as Hannity claims “there is no there, there”, maybe Trump will be right, and “attorney-client” privilege is indeed dead, in which case perhaps judge Wood who officiated the wedding of the the lovely couple in the photo above, in which the bride is exactly half the age of the groom, can disclose just what the nature of their relationship is.