Discussion: Trump Ally Alan Dershowitz Tells Hannity He Should Have Disclosed Cohen Link

Hannity lamented the “wild speculation” from the “mainstream media”



These recordings are going to be awesome. I hope Sean didn’t know he was being taped.


there is a BIGGER story here. Hannity directely contradicted Cohen’s lawyers last night.

Hannity, last night .“I never asked Michael Cohen to bring this proceeding on my behalf”

Steve Ryan (Cohen’s lawyer) in court yesterday:
“The client was contacted over the weekend, and asked that we not disclose their name. And further, that we take an appeal if the Court was going to make that name public.”

The judge is NOT going to be happy about this…

(sources Hannity at 2:16 in video at http://video.foxnews.com/v/5771603172001/?playlist_id=930909813001#sp=show-clips

Ryan at 12:11 in Maddow A-block video at http://video.foxnews.com/v/5771603172001/?playlist_id=930909813001#sp=show-clips


BUSTED! Even by the Trumper Douche-owitz!


The reason the adage that “the coverup is worse than the crime” is a thing is because concealment is instinctively recognized as awareness of culpability. He knew if he said there was a legal relationship between him and Cohen, even as a FalseNews host it would have at least slightly undermined his credibility as a sycophantic toady. So at least that, but Cohen isn’t a guy with a real practice, nor is he a guy you go to for aboveboard legal advice, whether it’s girlfriend trouble or–gods forbid–“real estate.”


He then echoed his statement from earlier in the day, telling Fox News viewers that he had “occasional brief conversations” with Cohen about legal questions, mostly involving real estate.
Then what would be your objection fuckwad?
Certainly there wern’t any shady deals discussed and you should welcome the exoneration the seized material would provide


As a matter of fact yesterday was the first time Cohen had seen the inside of a courtroom


Yet another obituary for irony.


Has anyone ever had a brief conversation about a business decision with an attorney? The point is to get advice so that you can make an informed decision, isn’t it? I wonder what Hannity’s definition of “brief” is.


What difference does that make to the judge?


I bet whatever recordings the prosecutors have aren’t really Hannity, just like that really wasn’t Trump’s voice on the Access Hollywood recording. They can fake that stuff, you know. They use crisis actors who are in between fake crisis gigs. Alex Jones will blow the lid off this tonight.


So much we don’t know - and the conflicting stories per Cohen’s lawyers and Hannity are likely to guarantee that we will know much more about this ‘client-relationship’ … probably in pretty short order.

~pointing at Hannity~ HA HA!


This crowd may not be good at much else, but they sure as hell are good at making themselves look guilty of something.



He claims of a right to privacy. But he also has a right to lie, mislead and be morally corrupt which he embraces as a fundamental truth.


I think this is a case of Dumb and Dumber outwitting themselves. I can see it now: Cohen whines to Hannity about having to give the court a client list, and he can only come up with two names. Hannity says, “well, gosh, Michael, you and I have had off-the-cuff legal conversations – tell the court you have three clients, but don’t give them my name.” “oooh – good idea, Sean, yeah, thanks, man.”

Now the court’s making Cohen disclose the names, too – so his lawyer does. And Hannity, who just thought he was helping out his bud, is now all over the news and everyone’s wondering what Cohen “really” did for him.

So, what’s he do? Tells the media that no, Cohen didn’t represent him, they just had a coupla chats now and again about real estate.

Avenatti seems to think that, no, Hannity has something to hide, and that’s why he didn’t want his name out there. It’s not that I think Hannity doesn’t have things to hide, but honestly, the more I think about it, the more I think this is a case of no good deed (yeah, tell ‘em you have three clients) going unpunished.

When combined with a collective IQ that would make a better golf score, I think you have a recipe for the slapstick that followed yesterday’s hearing. One more player and they can reprise the Stooges.


Speculation aside, what Dershowitz told Hannity is obvious. Regardless of what Hannity may have discussed with Cohen legalwise, this relationship should have been disclosed to his viewers, especially in view of his highly vocal (need I say, fawning) defense of Cohen. Apart from any potential criminal dealings it establishes an obvious case of Hannity getting free legal advice from Cohen in exchange for favorable press coverage. It would be unethical were it not Fox News where the concept is unknown.


Wish he would exercise his right to remain silent. On his own, or as suggested to him by law enforcement as he does the perp walk.


Maybe ‘real estate’ is Hannity’s code word for Trump. So, every time Hannity spoke to Cohen about ‘real estate’…