Trump sued by Stormy Daniels over hush payment

[running_coach]

@Ravenman

After hearing that, I got so excited that I farted.

(No, not really, but… wow.)

Not excited or didn’t fart?

[Ravenman]

@running_coach

Not excited or didn’t fart?

One had nothing to do with the other.

[Aspenglow]

@Bayard

Per a WSJ reporter on Twitter, Michael Cohen’s mystery “third client” is Sean Hannity.

x.com

I howled. In a good way.

I think a special master will be appointed. I feel sorry for whomever it is.

[iiandyiiii]

The writers for this reality show really pulled off a good episode today. Bravo!

…Hannity…!!!

[RTFirefly]

They’ve really been keeping the plot moving this past week. Kudos!

[EddyTeddyFreddy]

What did Hannity do that needed the talents of Mr. Fixer? Tune in for our next exciting episode!

[Defensive_Indifference]

And, in the manner of a true journalist, Hannity has been covering this story for weeks without disclosing that he has a vested interest in it.

[Steve_MB]

@EddyTeddyFreddy

What did Hannity do that needed the talents of Mr. Fixer? Tune in for our next exciting episode!

@Bayard

And, in the manner of a true journalist, Hannity has been covering this story for weeks without disclosing that he has a vested interest in it.

Bad journalist! Mistress spank!!

[RTFirefly]

@Steve_MB

Bad journalist! Mistress spank!!

Who are you calling a ‘journalist’?

[Lightnin]

@EddyTeddyFreddy

What did Hannity do that needed the talents of Mr. Fixer? Tune in for our next exciting episode!

One theory I’ve heard is that this would give Trump and Hannity a third-party communication channel which would be protected by lawyer-client confidentiality. Does that sound possible to you guys?

[Ravenman]

I can’t link to the story, but an Apple News story from CNN has Hannity saying he never paid Cohen as a lawyer, and would just ask legal questions once in a while.

I continue to laugh. How does a lawyer not understand a lawyer-client relationship?

[kenobi_65]

@Ravenman

I can’t link to the story, but an Apple News story from CNN has Hannity saying he never paid Cohen as a lawyer, and would just ask legal questions once in a while.

Or, maybe he did pay him; Hannity can’t keep his own story straight. From a story in the Washington Post:

A Fox News spokeswoman did not respond to a Fix inquiry on this point. Instead, the network issued the following statement, attributed to Hannity: “Michael Cohen has never represented me in any matter. I never retained him, received an invoice, or paid legal fees. I have occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective. I assumed those conversations were confidential but, to be absolutely clear, they never involved any matter between me and a third party.”

On the radio, Hannity did not directly address his lack of disclosure but hinted at a possible defense — that he did not consider himself a formal client of Cohen’s.

That Cohen’s attorneys included Hannity’s name on a list of clients presented in court “just shows that Michael was doing his due diligence and being totally thorough about anybody that he might have had attorney-client privilege with,” Hannity told listeners.

Hannity made further comments that appear to be somewhat inconsistent with the statement he issued through Fox News. He said that he might have paid Cohen a small fee, after all, and said he did not merely assume that their conversations were privileged but rather sought assurances.

“I might have handed him 10 bucks [and said,] ‘I definitely want your attorney-client privilege on this,’ ” Hannity said on the radio. “Something like that. I requested that privilege with him when I would ask him: ‘Well, this just came up. What do you think about this? What do you think about that?’ ”

[JohnT]

I’ve heard of $10 hookers before, but never a $10 attorney.

[Sherrerd]

@Bayard

And, in the manner of a true journalist, Hannity has been covering this story for weeks without disclosing that he has a vested interest in it.

Hannity as ‘a journalist’… what a bizarre notion.

At any rate, his ratings tonight should be the highest they’ve been–maybe ever.

[JohnT]

I’m calling that he won’t have his show tonight.

(Just to make sure it happens, of course. )

[kenobi_65]

@JohnT

I’m calling that he won’t have his show tonight.

(Just to make sure it happens, of course. )

Maybe they’ll run a whole hour on sex-crazed pandas during his slot.

[Sherrerd]

@JohnT

I’m calling that he won’t have his show tonight.

(Just to make sure it happens, of course. )

He’s got enough juice at that network to just run the show without mentioning the issue (or allowing any guest to mention it).

I’m guessing he’ll dismiss it with ‘this is nothing, just Them trying to bring down Truth, Justice and the American Way’—and then ignore it for the rest of the show. But we’ll see.

[bobot]

@Bayard

And, in the manner of a true journalist, Hannity has been covering this story for weeks without disclosing that he has a vested interest in it.

Gaping Hole. GAPING HOLE!!

Analysis | The gaping hole in Sean Hannity’s story about being Michael...

Edit: So who plays Hannity next week on SNL?

[Aspenglow]

@Lightnin

One theory I’ve heard is that this would give Trump and Hannity a third-party communication channel which would be protected by lawyer-client confidentiality. Does that sound possible to you guys?

It does to me. All three droolers involved are dumb enough to think they could commit criminal acts so long as they hid behind their thin veneer of “attorney-client privilege.”

Hannity was cognizant enough to realize it would look bad for him if this information got out. Otherwise, why hide it? Seems he wasn’t very prepared for it to come out, either, based on his confused reactions to the news.

[kenobi_65]

@bobot

Gaping Hole. GAPING HOLE!!

Now I’m wondering if that was the title of one of Ms. Daniels’ videos.

ducks and runs