All of Hell’s Kitchen broke loose on Monday when Michael Cohen’s infamous “mystery client” was revealed in court to be Fox News host Sean Hannity. (Cohen’s attorneys had argued that revealing the name of the client, who the world now knows is Hannity, was “likely to be embarrassing or detrimental to the client,” but the judge in the case ruled that embarrassment did not amount to a sufficient legal defense.) This led to plenty of jokes as Hannity’s radio program went dead silent while he undoubtedly scrambled to assess the potential damage of the revelation, as well as how to respond to it. When Hannity finally emerged from his cocoon, he offered a number of contradictory explanations for his name surfacing in open court as a client of a lawyer famous for arranging secret hush-payments to mistresses. Needless to say, many are speculating about exactly what the Trump superfan is trying to hide.
In a pair of tweets, Hannity first claimed that Cohen “has never represented me in any matter.” That is to say, Hannity says he never paid a retainer or other legal fees or even saw an invoice from Cohen. He did, however, admit to asking Cohen “legal questions” for “input and perspective.” Hannity then said that he believed these discussions were “confidential,” but he insisted, “[T]o be absolutely clear they never involved any matter between me and a third-party.”
Is Hannity Truly Michael Cohen’s Client?
Yes. Not only did Cohen’s lawyers state this fact in court, but Hannity admitted as much while also (weakly) attempting to deny it. To clarify, Hannity both denied legal representation by Cohen while also admitting to asking him for legal advice and believing that — as with an attorney-client relationship — that these conversations would remain secret. So, he’s attempting to claim the benefits of attorney-client privilege while also insisting that Cohen was not his attorney. Hannity’s obviously trying to have it both ways, essentially saying, “Michael Cohen has never been my lawyer, but anything we discussed should be kept private because of attorney/client privilege.”
That said, one of the first things that law professors teach students is how to avoid this type of situation. That is, if friends or family ask for casual legal advice, lawyers are advised to not indulge them because this means that these people are then clients. That’s precisely the reason why courthouse employees (whether they are licensed attorneys or not) will not offer legal instruction (even for a simple form) and advise people to hire an attorney.
That’s not all. On his radio show, Hannity then made a Breaking Bad-esque statement whe he admitted that he “might have handed him 10 bucks [and said,] ‘I definitely want your attorney-client privilege on this’ … something like that.” In this way, Hannity is admitting that he paid Cohen (at least) a nominal amount of money, which has been ruled in loads of cases to be enough financial consideration (that is, the amount agreed upon by two parties) to create the basis of an implicit contract. So, even without an invoice and even if Hannity and Cohen only agreed verbally on $10 for his legal services, this exchange of money only further proves that Hannity was indeed Cohen’s client.
There’s also the question of why Hannity, who reportedly made $36 million in 2017, was seeking essentially pro-bono legal services from Cohen, which only adds another shady layer to this spectacle. As for Hannity’s wish to remain a secret client and his vehement protests upon revelation, well, that presents another bad look.
What Is Hannity Trying To Hide?
Hannity could be trying to conceal a number of embarrassing matters here. The first thought on many people’s minds, of course, is that Cohen — who has operated mostly as a “fixer” and dealmaker for Donald Trump — has recently grown notorious for arranging settlements for mistresses in extramarital affairs. He did so for Trump, going so far as to personally pay Stormy Daniels’settlement, and Cohen was also recently revealed to have negotiated a $1.6 million settlement with a Playboy model on behalf of for ex-GOP fundraiser Elliot Broidy. Could Cohen have negotiated such a deal for Hannity, who is due to celebrate his silver (25th) anniversary this year with wife Jill Rhodes?
Hannity tried to ward off such a suggestion with the tweet that Cohen never gave him advice “involv[ing] any matter between me and a third-party.” However, every legal dispute — even the dullest civil transaction — involves third parties. That is, unless Hannity was thinking of suing himself, but we’ll give him the benefit of the doubt that even he’s not quite silly enough to do that.
Beyond that sort of juicy speculation, Hannity said on his radio show that “Michael knows real estate,” so his questions “exclusively almost” revolved around that subject. That leaves wiggle room for Hannity to admit to other things later, of course. But for now, it’s worth noting that Cohen has represented Donald Trump not only in a number of international real estate transactions (including the abandoned proposal for a Trump Tower in Moscow), but he also engaged in several cash-only sales for high-value NYC properties that have raised flags with federal investigators as potential vehicles for money laundering. By seeking legal advice from Cohen, Hannity opened himself up to the possibility that Cohen could have engineered a sketchy deal for him. Again, this is just speculation, but Cohen’s reputation precedes him.
READ MORE: Uproxx.com
Article Courtesy of Uproxx
First Picture Courtesy of Nicholas Kamm and Getty Images
Second Picture Courtesy of Saul Loeb and Getty Images
First and Second Tweet Courtesy of Twitter and Uproxx