Michael Cohen is having a really bad day. He went into court trying to block prosecutors from reviewing his seized documents until he had a chance to review them for attorney-client privilege; judge asks for a list of his clients; he provides a list of exactly 3, but refuses to identify the third one, claiming that client has invoked attorney-client privilege and he can't reveal the name. Judge calls BS, says identifying this client doesn't violate the privilege, so tell me who this is.
It's Sean Hannity, who has been using his Fox News pulpit to defend Cohen against the DOJ without revealing the fact that Cohen is his lawyer, which breaks all sorts of journalism ethics rules.
Then Hannity says this is not true - he has never used Cohen as an attorney, and has never paid him or been invoiced by him, and did not invoke attorney-client privilege.
They can't both be telling the truth, so who do you believe?
If Hannity is being honest, Cohen and his lawyer just lied in open court, there is no privilege involved, and anything in Cohen's documents or tapes involving Hannity is available to the prosecution.
If Cohen is being honest, Hannity may have willfully hidden the relationship from his superiors at Fox News, who unknowingly allowed him to use their platform to defend his own attorney. Any reputable news organization would immediately suspend him in contemplation of dismissal, or at the very least not allow him to continue commenting on air about the matter.
I'm not sure which one I should believe. |
