- Joined
- Oct 26, 2010
- Messages
- 6,271
- Reaction score
- 5,783
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
There is a lot of misunderstanding about attorney-client privilege. It is not necessary to pay money or have a retainer agreement to establish attorney-client privilege. Prospective clients have attorney-client privilege. All you have to establish (loosely speaking) is that communications were exchanged for the purpose of obtaining or rendering legal advice.
It does not seem implausible to me at all that Hannity would consider his communications with Cohen privileged, even if Cohen never came to represent him in a formal capacity.
It also does not seem strange that Cohen would want to keep his client's identities secret, as client identities themselves can be privileged information (just as with doctors and patients). Nor does it seem strange that Hannity would want it protected, as the knowledge that he was connected to a professional fixer can and HAS led to rampant speculation.
But it's only speculation at this point. There is way too much confirmed shadiness going on in politics and journalism today to warrant the attention paid to this particular episode of the soap opera. IMO.
It does not seem implausible to me at all that Hannity would consider his communications with Cohen privileged, even if Cohen never came to represent him in a formal capacity.
It also does not seem strange that Cohen would want to keep his client's identities secret, as client identities themselves can be privileged information (just as with doctors and patients). Nor does it seem strange that Hannity would want it protected, as the knowledge that he was connected to a professional fixer can and HAS led to rampant speculation.
But it's only speculation at this point. There is way too much confirmed shadiness going on in politics and journalism today to warrant the attention paid to this particular episode of the soap opera. IMO.