If Sean Hannity’s comments about Michael Cohen and the hush money paid to Stormy Daniels forces him to testify to Congress and/or federal prosecutors, as experts believe, here’s hoping investigators also find out why Cohen claimed him as a client
Hannity’s big mouth about Cohen will probably compel him to testify to federal investigators
Below is the relevant exchange between Hannity and Trump during the interview that aired last night (I confess this slipped by me as I watched it then). Note that Hannity introduced the subject of Michael Cohen, then steered it back to Cohen after Trump moved on to “witch hunt hoax” and “I’ve been the most successful president in the first two years of office…” So clearly, Hannity intended to drop this nugget:
HANNITY: You know, I was kind of dragged in a little bit into the Michael Cohen issue. I interviewed him many times on radio and TV. He was never my attorney. He did apologize to me for his attorney saying that in court and - but I can tell you, personally, he said to me, at least a dozen times, that he made the decision on the payments and he didn't tell you.
TRUMP: Yeah.
HANNITY: He told me, personally.
TRUMP: Yeah, well he did, and he made the decision.
On the radio yesterday, Hannity said he could name "five other people" Cohen said the same thing to.
Hannity may already be regretting his statements. As former prosecutor and Senior Legal Editor Ronn Blitzer wrote on Law & Crime, if Hannity hasn’t just volunteered himself as a witness, he will probably be subpoenaed:
This admission that he’s had “at least a dozen” conversations with Cohen about this subject, and that those conversations included information contrary to what Cohen told lawmakers under oath, should be of high interest to the congressional committees who questioned Cohen. Not only that, federal prosecutors with the Southern District of New York (SDNY) who brought the case against Cohen would also likely want to learn more.
Blitzer also cited several high-profile attorneys who agree, including former federal prosecutor and MSNBC legal analyst Mimi Rocah. She pointed out that not only does Hannity have no privilege to block a subpoena but also mocked the idea that Cohen was reimbursed $130,000 by Trump for a deal he had no hand in:
Right, and then Trump paid Cohen back anyway because he’s such a nice guy. SDNY should subpoena Hannity. No Attorney-client priv here & he didn’t learn this in his capacity as a “journalist.” https://t.co/F4xCkJ0qOX
— Mimi Rocah (@Mimirocah1) March 1, 2019
The notion that Trump repaid the hush money out of the goodness of his heart is further undercut in a smart analysis by Philip Bump. He explained how the evidence shows that Trump stiffed the National Enquirer when it fronted “catch and kill” money to ex-Playmate Karen McDougal to suppress her claim of an extramarital affair with Trump. That was before Team Trump knew of a Stormy Daniels problem.
It’s worth pointing out that Cohen originally said that Trump had no knowledge of the Daniels’ payout. So it’s possible Hannity told the truth during his interview with Trump. But surely Congress and federal prosecutors will want to know more.
Was Cohen trying to hide something when he claimed Hannity as a client?
Perhaps more important than what Cohen told Hannity about the hush money is the question of why Cohen claimed Hannity as a client. After the FBI seizure of material from Cohen's home and office last year, Cohen's lawyer named Hannity as one of Cohen's clients, in an effort to shield some material from prosecutors via an attorney/client privilege. Hannity did not come out then and fully deny the relationship but offered a shifty "explanation" that said Cohen had never represented him but that he had "occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective." Hannity also said he had "requested attorney-client privilege" from Cohen. Hannity further said he never paid Cohen any retainer or fees but "may have handed him $10 once."
Yesterday, on the radio, Hannity claimed, essentially, he had been flummoxed when he put out those earlier statements. Hannity now insisted he had no attorney-client relationship with Cohen, whatsoever: "I've never been his client. We've never -- he's -- we've never had that relationship, or anything that resembles, in any possible way -- he was never my lawyer."
OK, let's assume Cohen never was Hannity's lawyer in any way. What would have made Cohen's attorney say otherwise? On MSNBC, attorneys Jill Wine-Banks and Michael Avenatti agreed that there was probably something embarrassing (or worse) to Trump, involving Hannity, that Cohen wanted to keep from prosecutors - and it had nothing to do with legal advice:
AVENATTI: There is something there. Michael Cohen doesn’t just volunteer the name Sean Hannity as a client unless there is a document that they want to deep-six or keep confidential. It doesn’t happen, it just doesn’t happen.
[...]
WINE-BANKS: I’d like to add to one thing Michael said which is I agree with him that there has to be a reason he said it and that it’s because he’s trying to keep something quiet but I’ll also add that I’ll bet that it isn’t legal advice that he’s trying to keep quiet. It has something to do with having a conversation about protecting Donald Trump or having Sean Hannity say something on-air to protect him, that it has nothing to do with any legal advice that Michael Cohen gave to Sean Hannity.
Whatever Cohen's relationship with Hannity is or was, we deserve to know why Cohen's lawyer claimed Hannity as a client and what he was trying to shield from legal scrutiny.
Watch the comments that may land Hannity in front of investigators below, from the February 28, 2019 Hannity.
I’ll bet Trump shows up with a fake mustache claiming he’s John Baron.
Hannity has bumbled into admitting multiple personal, non-Fox News conversations with a known felon, specifically concerning the matters for which he was convicted and for which conflicting testimony has been offered. It’s not only appropriate for him to be subpoenaed by prosecutors and Congress, it’s actually a legal obligation that they do it.
The only way Hannity can avoid actually saying anything now is to plead the 5th, and that might actually be more interesting. It’s possible of course that Hannity could just state under oath that he has no idea what he’s talking about – perhaps try the “Alex Jones” defense of saying he’s just an entertainer playing a part on TV when he says this stuff. That might be nearly as interesting as watching him plead the 5th.
Either way, he has put himself into this position.
“A MAJOR gem will drop about Pie in front of the entire world. It will be so big The Heels will pass out in her office from a state of shock. The staff may need to get a supply of smelling salt to revive her.”
LOL! Hey Antoinette: are you SURE it won’t be a supply of ammonia capsules?
:^)
Hannie Pie is in deep dada and he knows it. We predict he will hide behind “Freedom of the Press” banner by calling himself a so-called “journalist.”
He forgets that certain people have certain information on him, and probably gave it to certain lawmakers who are interested in questioning him about his relationship with Cohen and other people.
A MAJOR gem will drop about Pie in front of the entire world. It will be so big The Heels will pass out in her office from a state of shock. The staff may need to get a supply of smelling salt to revive her.
The Stop Hannity Express presents the best of Hannie Pie and his close friend, Cohen.
Pie says to Cohen: “We’re friends but I know you….”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jnKYzoqASsw
At 2:16 Pie says: “A lot of people ask me cause we’ve been friends for a long time…”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYQ4KIVIp68
Pie claims he sought Cohen for real estate advice
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ML2fyFCPMNo
Rudy the Rat reads transcript exposing the Cohen-Trumpy deal on Pie’s show
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvS-rc4uV1I
Rudy the Rat tells Pie that Cohen was reimbursed for his $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZwDSRAK6tY
Pie and Carson talk real estate. How ironic! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcBNvTUZyIU
NOTE TO HANNITY
We are taking bets on your departure from Fox “News” Channel. We say this spring. Some people say by this summer. What do you think?