How do you reconcile these two remarks....

[ChrisL]

This was already explained earlier in the thread. He never hired him for his services, but did get some legal advice, which is still covered under attorney/client privilege even if he never actually used his services as a lawyer.

Money doesn't have to change hands. Lawyers do pro-bono work all the time. Cohen told the judge that Hannity was his client. There was no misunderstanding his claim. Was he lying?

He said he sought out his legal opinion before but never actually hired him as a lawyer. Why does this confuse you so much?

You're the one confused.

No, you are. They would need to obtain a warrant to legally look at or use anything regarding Sean Hannity and his interactions with the lawyer that were related to professional advice/opinions.

Isn't that what happened?

They had a warrant to look at Sean Hannity's case files with this particular lawyer? Link?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

You can seek our the advice of an attorney without actually becoming a paying client. What is so difficult to understand about this? I can call an attorney right now and ask him for advice. He can give me some free advice over the phone, and that is STILL covered under attorney/client confidentiality. Getting it yet? Good grief. *rolling my eyes*

It's not covered at all. Especially since Hannity says they had no professional relationship.


When an Attorney-Client Relationship Begins
Before the privilege can be asserted, there must be an attorney-client relationship. Many assume that they are protected by the privilege when, in fact, no attorney-client relationship has actually been formed.

The confidentiality privilege can begin when the attorney and the client have agreed on the representation of the client. This privilege can also be asserted when a person has attempted to become a client of the attorney when the information was disclosed.

 

[ChrisL]

If the

You can seek our the advice of an attorney without actually becoming a paying client. What is so difficult to understand about this? I can call an attorney right now and ask him for advice. He can give me some free advice over the phone, and that is STILL covered under attorney/client confidentiality. Getting it yet? Good grief. *rolling my eyes*

It's not covered at all. Especially since Hannity says they had no professional relationship.


When an Attorney-Client Relationship Begins
Before the privilege can be asserted, there must be an attorney-client relationship. Many assume that they are protected by the privilege when, in fact, no attorney-client relationship has actually been formed.

The confidentiality privilege can begin when the attorney and the client have agreed on the representation of the client. This privilege can also be asserted when a person has attempted to become a client of the attorney when the information was disclosed.

Nope, if it was for even legal advice, it is covered under client-attorney privilege.

Attorney Client Privilege - General Counsel - Wayne State University

The attorney-client privilege is one of the oldest and most respected privileges. It prevents a lawyer from being compelled to testify against his/her client. The purpose underlying this privilege is to ensure that clients receive accurate and competent legal advice by encouraging full disclosure to their lawyer without fear that the information will be revealed to others. The privilege covers written and oral communications and protects both individual and institutional clients. The privilege extends from the attorney to include legal office staff that facilitates communications to and from the attorney.

The attorney-client privilege does not apply to every communication with an attorney. For the privilege to exist, the communication must be to, from, or with an attorney, and intended to be confidential. In addition, the communication must be for the purpose of requesting or receiving legal advice. For example, an e-mail or memorandum from one administrator to another concerning a legal matter typically is not privileged because such e-mail is not sent to or from an attorney for the purpose of obtaining legal advice.

Communications must be kept confidential for the privilege to apply. If the substance of attorney-client communications is disclosed to persons outside the University – or even to persons within the University who are not directly involved in the matter – the privilege may be extinguished.

Your communications with General Counsel or outside counsel representing WSU should never be discussed with anyone outside WSU, including family members or friends. Within the University, such communications should be discussed only with persons who have responsibility for the particular matter.

 

[ChrisL]

So if the lawyer has paperwork regarding even conversations he has had with Mr. Hannity, those would fall under confidentiality clause.

 

[ChrisL]

I hope people are not believing the leftists and what they are trying to say about attorney-client privilege. They are just blatantly wrong.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

It's called ATTORNEY/CLIENT PRIVILEGE, and it is a very IMPORTANT right that we have. Get your facts straight, libs.

There is no privilege if the alleged client denies being a client, you loon.

 

[ChrisL]

It's called ATTORNEY/CLIENT PRIVILEGE, and it is a very IMPORTANT right that we have. Get your facts straight, libs.

There is no privilege if the alleged client denies being a client, you loon.

Like I said, he obviously didn't understand his own rights, just like you! If you ask an attorney for legal advice in his realm of his job as an attorney, then he is under a legal obligation to keep that to himself. Dumb ass.

 

[ChrisL]

God damn. Look at you people, trying to trample over a person's rights because "you don't like him." Bunch of petulant retards. It's only a matter of time before this shit backfires on your dumb asses.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Was Hannity ever officially a client of this guy? Yes or no?
Seems like a pretty straightforward question.

I would guess that Cohen is the one being truthful as the the court has all of his documents.

Hard evidence held by the law does tend to inspire honesty.


.

Ok. So what then is the benefit to Cohen by asserting this in open court?

 

[ChrisL]

Protect your rights. Protect other's rights even if you don't necessarily agree with them or like them. This man is a US citizen who obviously went to get some type of legal advice from an attorney. He has rights to privacy, and just because there is a witch hunt going on to "find" something, doesn't mean his rights are null and void. Fuckers.

 

[BlackSand]

Mueller is not conducting the investigation.

In any case ... Someone is conducting the investigation.
At which point my question would still be the same.

Why is it important for us to reconcile the comments without the evidence that makes whatever we may decide irrelevant?

.​

 

[ChrisL]

If I go to a lawyer for his professional advice or opinion, it is not up to HIM or YOU whether or not that information is going to be confidential. It is up to ME. That is one of my rights as a US citizen. Just one of the things that makes our country great.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

I think this entire thread makes it quite clear just where leftists stand when it comes to United States citizens and our rights, and that's not just the 2nd amendment!

Tissue?

It is pretty sad that you people have such a poor understanding of your own rights. Sad indeed.

It is pretty sad that you people have such a poor understanding of your own rights. Sad indeed.

 

[bodecea]

I love how losers posting (who don't even have the "courage" to use their own pictures as their avis) on the net have the nerve to judge another person's "courage."

Wait....you measure courage by what may or may not be real people on avatars?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

There is a thing called attorney/client privilege. As a United States citizen who is equally protected under the laws of this nation, Mr. Hannity owes you absolutely no explanation. Deal with it.

Hannity says Cohen was never his lawyer. How can there be attorney client privalige when he was never his attorney? However, if he was his attorney

The Crime-Fraud Exception to the Attorney-Client Privilege
The Crime-Fraud Exception to the Attorney-Client Privilege
Not all attorney-client communications are privileged.
Whether the crime-fraud exception applies depends on the content and context of the communication. The exception covers communications about a variety of crimes and frauds, including (to name just a few):

• “suborning perjury” (asking an attorney to present testimony she knows is false)
• destroying or concealing evidence
• witness tampering, and
• concealing income or assets.

This was already explained earlier in the thread. He never hired him for his services, but did get some legal advice, which is still covered under attorney/client privilege even if he never actually used his services as a lawyer.

No. One is either a client or not.

Sean Hannity said that he never paid for his services or retained him as a lawyer but that he did seek legal advice from him. So what is your issue? Obviously, he (like you) made the mistake of thinking that you are not actually a "client" from a legal perspective unless you are a PAYING client, but that is not the case. So? What is your issue?

Post it up.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

If I seek the legal advice of an attorney and I don't pay for it, he or she is still under attorney/client legal binding contract. Period. End of story.

No.

 

[ChrisL]

I love how losers posting (who don't even have the "courage" to use their own pictures as their avis) on the net have the nerve to judge another person's "courage."

Wait....you measure courage by what may or may not be real people on avatars?

Well, obviously you are not ex President Obama. I can totally understand why you would be too cowardly to post using your real picture though. Totally.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Here you go, dummies.

attorney-client privilege

fourth, the communication must have occurred for the purpose of securing a legal opinion, legal services, orassistance in some legal proceeding,

Now, argue that shit.

How about 1, 2 and 3, loon?

 

[Mac1958]

Was Hannity ever officially a client of this guy? Yes or no?
Seems like a pretty straightforward question.

I would guess that Cohen is the one being truthful as the the court has all of his documents.

Hard evidence held by the law does tend to inspire honesty.


.

Ok. So what then is the benefit to Cohen by asserting this in open court?

I was agreeing with you.
.

 

[ChrisL]

If I seek the legal advice of an attorney and I don't pay for it, he or she is still under attorney/client legal binding contract. Period. End of story.

No.

Yes. An attorney cannot go blabbing about legal advice he has given, just like a doctor can't. Learn the law. Help yourself.