Ha ha! It's HANNITY!

[Adre]

AJ to the defense! He seems upset. Are you Cohen’s fourth client, AJ?

 

[WoundedKnee]

I'm not AJ and I'm not defending anybody. All I've done is to note that this is going to blow up in Rory's face, again, as usual.

 

[ThatsTheGuy]

I can't think of anyone who has a more punchable face.

What purpose did this serve the prosecution?

What public or personal harm has it done, or might it do, to Hannity?

2 questions no one seems to be thinking about at all.

I don't really hate the man. It's just that, after the 1st minute, no matter what he's talking about, he sounds like those teachers you never see on Charlie Brown - wawawa.

 

[cowslinger64]

I'm not AJ.

Lol..

As big a doofus as Ish is, at least he's not afraid to admit who his new name is.. Unlike you and broke dick Vette.

 

[jaF0]

I'm not AJ and I'm not defending anybody. All I've done is to note that this is going to blow up in Rump's face, again, as usual.

Fixed yer post fer ya.

 

[BobaFetaCheese]

I'm not AJ and I'm not defending anybody. All I've done is to note that this is going to blow up in Rory's face, again, as usual.

Why do you think that?

 

[Pookie]

Fun tweet from the past ....

https://twitter.com/seanhannity/status/630834524243427328?s=19

 

[Hypoxia]

Might we suspect that Sean and Donnie are... closer than we thought? Not sexually, no of course not, but involved in... questionable stuff. Might we note that anyone associated with or working for Tromp gets thrown under the bus? Might Sean need help?

 

[Sean]

I'm not AJ

Oh do fuck off.

 

[Pookie]

I'm not AJ

Pookahontas says hi!

 

[RoryN]

Poor Rory... his "gootcha" threads never work out the way he so desperately wants and needs them to.

...said the little fishy who immediately took the bait.

 

[RobDownSouth]

I'm not AJ ...

Would you be willing to swear to that on your honor as a United States Marine?

....didn't think so.

Vetty wouldn't either.

Semper Flee!

 

[richard_daily]

Hannity is inconsequential. The real news is that the guy implicated in billions of dollars in money laundering through 1MDB happens to have the same lawyer as Trump.

 

[Oblimo]

Hannity is inconsequential.

While I doubt it will amount to a hill of beans in terms of any actual bad acts or even any import to ongoing Federal investigations, the optics are sooo bad it’s fucking hilarious.

 

[Adre]

I'm not AJ and I'm not defending anybody. All I've done is to note that this is going to blow up in Rory's face, again, as usual.

I wouldn’t admit to it either.

 

[HisArpy]

I don't really hate the man. It's just that, after the 1st minute, no matter what he's talking about, he sounds like those teachers you never see on Charlie Brown - wawawa.

Hannity is a big name because he pushes the right buttons for his audience. Unfortunately the buttons don't make a whole lot of sense sometimes so he goes off the rails and into the weeds. Wa wa wa indeed.

That said, THE POINT about Hannity being named as 1 of Cohen's clients was to prove that Cohen actually HAD clients, thus the evidence seized may more likely fall under privilege rather than the exception as argued by the Gov. (Namely that Cohen only had 1 client - Trump and thus they were co-conspirators and no privilege exists. That Hannity and the California guy are ALSO clients throws a monkey wrench into that entire argument.)

The judge could have ordered a review of the files in camera to determine if there were more than 1 client of Cohen's in the seized files. If so, she could have ruled on that basis without releasing the names to the general public where they are suffering humiliation at the hands of the gleeful. The judge fucked up.

 

[zipman]

Let's talk some more about MSM liberal bias.

Hannity has clear conflicts of interest but the morons who watch his show and Fox and Friends won't care because they are the biggest hypocrites on the planet.

Since it seems like all Cohen did was pay hush money to mistresses, I wonder if Hannity's wife is going to have a little chat with him tonight.

 

[zipman]

I'm not AJ and I'm not defending anybody. All I've done is to note that this is going to blow up in Rory's face, again, as usual.

Bwahahahahaha!

 

[Rotadom]

If Fox was an actual news organization, coming on night after night to argue against the unfairness of the investigation into someone with whom you have an undisclosed relationship would be a very big deal indeed.

this is really the only relevant point in this thread. well done.

 

[gotsnowgotslush]

waffle

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...michael-cohens-client/?utm_term=.53288ba7277c

 

[HisArpy]

waffle

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...michael-cohens-client/?utm_term=.53288ba7277c

It's disingenuous.

Hannity could very well have gone to Cohen for legal advice about potential issues or for clarification on terms involving his Fox contract, his radio show contract, a prenup, a will, a trust, a foundation and so on.

NONE of those things would have involved a 3rd party.

Yet you (and the author of the article) ASSUME that because he says there is no 3rd party, he must be hiding something.

 

[Wrong Element]

It's disingenuous.

Hannity could very well have gone to Cohen for legal advice about potential issues or for clarification on terms involving his Fox contract, his radio show contract, a prenup, a will, a trust, a foundation and so on.

NONE of those things would have involved a 3rd party.

Yet you (and the author of the article) ASSUME that because he says there is no 3rd party, he must be hiding something.

Sure, those are possible. But: 1) Cohen seems to specialize in clients who have problems with marital infidelity; and 2) there's the matter of Hannity's attempt to keep his name from being disclosed. Maybe he wanted it kept secret only because he knew how any sort of relationship with Cohen would look, but since it's apparent his superiors (and presumably his viewers) don't care about the ethical issues there, I think the alternative is a good bet if not quite a safe bet just yet. Why wouldn't a wealthy man like Hannity get a real lawyer for serious legal work, instead of the Saul Goodman of pussy?

(I suppose it's also possible that when Hannity says that he never paid Cohen a retainer or any fees, he might be truthful insofar as money never exchanged hands, but there's definitely an intangible value to him defending Cohen and Trump on national television five nights a week.)

 

[doowdniw]

What purpose did this serve the prosecution?

Well, it will make it a lot easier for the taint team to determine attorney/client privileged communications if they know who the clients are.

 

[BobaFetaCheese]

the Saul Goodman of pussy?

That made me LOL for real

 

[Pookie]

Sure, those are possible. But: 1) Cohen seems to specialize in clients who have problems with marital infidelity; and 2) there's the matter of Hannity's attempt to keep his name from being disclosed. Maybe he wanted it kept secret only because he knew how any sort of relationship with Cohen would look, but since it's apparent his superiors (and presumably his viewers) don't care about the ethical issues there, I think the alternative is a good bet if not quite a safe bet just yet. Why wouldn't a wealthy man like Hannity get a real lawyer for serious legal work, instead of the Saul Goodman of pussy?

(I suppose it's also possible that when Hannity says that he never paid Cohen a retainer or any fees, he might be truthful insofar as money never exchanged hands, but there's definitely an intangible value to him defending Cohen and Trump on national television five nights a week.)