How do you reconcile these two remarks....

[ChrisL]

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?

What about them? None of that negates the fact that if you speak to an attorney to secure a legal opinion or assistance, that is covered under the act.

 

[ChrisL]

Do you people actually believe that you can ask a lawyer for his legal professional opinion, and he can go babbling about it to others without a legal warrant to do so? Bwa ha ha.

 

[ChrisL]

Geez, that would be even more so for any documents said lawyer kept regarding such discussions. You can't just go reading other people's legal shit, dummies.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

Leftists, always trying to violate the rights of the people.

Attorney-Client Privilege
In the law of evidence, a client's privilege to refuse to disclose, and to prevent any other person from disclosing, confidentialcommunications between the client and his or her attorney. Such privilege protects communications between attorney andclient that are made for the purpose of furnishing or obtaining professional legal advice or assistance. That privilege thatpermits an attorney to refuse to testify as to communications from the client. It belongs to the client, not the attorney, andhence only the client may waive it. In federal courts, state law is applied with respect to such privilege.

The attorney-client privilege encourages clients to disclose to their attorneys all pertinent information in legal matters byprotecting such disclosures from discovery at trial. The privileged information, held strictly between the attorney and theclient, may remain private as long as a court does not force disclosure. The privilege does not apply to communicationsbetween an attorney and a client that are made in furtherance of a Fraud or other crime. The responsibility for designatingwhich information should remain confidential rests with the client. In its most common use, however, the attorney claims theprivilege on behalf of the client in refusing to disclose to the court, or to any other party, requested information about theclient's case.

As a basic construction in the judicial system, the privilege is an ancient device. It can be found even in Roman law—forexample, Marcus Tullius Cicero, while prosecuting the governor of Sicily, could not call the governor's advocate as a witness,because if he were to have done so, the governor would have lost confidence in his own defender. Over the years, the closetie between attorney and client developed further with reforms in English Common Law.

Because the attorney-client privilege often balances competing interests, it defies a rigid definition. However, one often-cited characterization was set forth in United States v. United Shoe Machinery Corp., 89 F. Supp. 357 (D. Mass. 1950). The courtarticulated five requirements: first, the person asserting the privilege must be a client, or must have sought to become a clientat the time of disclosure; second, the person connected to the communication must be acting as a lawyer; third, thecommunication must be between the lawyer and the client exclusively—no non-clients may be included in thecommunication; fourth, the communication must have occurred for the purpose of securing a legal opinion, legal services, orassistance in some legal proceeding, and not for the purpose of committing a crime; fifth, the privilege may be claimed orwaived by the client only (usually, as stated above, through counsel).

You dont read so good.

The underlined portion says clearly that there must be an attorney- client relationship. Not advice in casual conversation.

first, the person asserting the privilege must be a client, or must have sought to become a clientat the time of disclosure; second, the person connected to the communication must be acting as a lawyer; third, thecommunication must be between the lawyer and the client exclusively—no non-clients may be included in thecommunication; fourth, the communication must have occurred for the purpose of securing a legal opinion, legal services, orassistance in some legal proceeding, and not for the purpose of committing a crime; fifth, the privilege may be claimed orwaived by the client only (usually, as stated above, through counsel).

If he asked the lawyer his opinion on a legal matter, it doesn't matter whether it was within a casual conversation or not. The same rules apply as he was asked his "professional" advice or opinion.

I just showed you you're wrong with your own link, loon.
If I'm at a cocktail party and I ask........
a lawyer a legal question,
a doctor a medical question,
a consultant a business question,
a contractor a building question,
It's casual conversation. I'm in no way a client of any of them.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

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.

You are a fool.

The privilege is the client's to assert.
In this case, Hannity denies being a client, dummy.

 

[ChrisL]

Leftists, always trying to violate the rights of the people.

Attorney-Client Privilege
In the law of evidence, a client's privilege to refuse to disclose, and to prevent any other person from disclosing, confidentialcommunications between the client and his or her attorney. Such privilege protects communications between attorney andclient that are made for the purpose of furnishing or obtaining professional legal advice or assistance. That privilege thatpermits an attorney to refuse to testify as to communications from the client. It belongs to the client, not the attorney, andhence only the client may waive it. In federal courts, state law is applied with respect to such privilege.

The attorney-client privilege encourages clients to disclose to their attorneys all pertinent information in legal matters byprotecting such disclosures from discovery at trial. The privileged information, held strictly between the attorney and theclient, may remain private as long as a court does not force disclosure. The privilege does not apply to communicationsbetween an attorney and a client that are made in furtherance of a Fraud or other crime. The responsibility for designatingwhich information should remain confidential rests with the client. In its most common use, however, the attorney claims theprivilege on behalf of the client in refusing to disclose to the court, or to any other party, requested information about theclient's case.

As a basic construction in the judicial system, the privilege is an ancient device. It can be found even in Roman law—forexample, Marcus Tullius Cicero, while prosecuting the governor of Sicily, could not call the governor's advocate as a witness,because if he were to have done so, the governor would have lost confidence in his own defender. Over the years, the closetie between attorney and client developed further with reforms in English Common Law.

Because the attorney-client privilege often balances competing interests, it defies a rigid definition. However, one often-cited characterization was set forth in United States v. United Shoe Machinery Corp., 89 F. Supp. 357 (D. Mass. 1950). The courtarticulated five requirements: first, the person asserting the privilege must be a client, or must have sought to become a clientat the time of disclosure; second, the person connected to the communication must be acting as a lawyer; third, thecommunication must be between the lawyer and the client exclusively—no non-clients may be included in thecommunication; fourth, the communication must have occurred for the purpose of securing a legal opinion, legal services, orassistance in some legal proceeding, and not for the purpose of committing a crime; fifth, the privilege may be claimed orwaived by the client only (usually, as stated above, through counsel).

You dont read so good.

The underlined portion says clearly that there must be an attorney- client relationship. Not advice in casual conversation.

first, the person asserting the privilege must be a client, or must have sought to become a clientat the time of disclosure; second, the person connected to the communication must be acting as a lawyer; third, thecommunication must be between the lawyer and the client exclusively—no non-clients may be included in thecommunication; fourth, the communication must have occurred for the purpose of securing a legal opinion, legal services, orassistance in some legal proceeding, and not for the purpose of committing a crime; fifth, the privilege may be claimed orwaived by the client only (usually, as stated above, through counsel).

If he asked the lawyer his opinion on a legal matter, it doesn't matter whether it was within a casual conversation or not. The same rules apply as he was asked his "professional" advice or opinion.

I just showed you you're wrong with your own link, loon.
If I'm at a cocktail party and I ask........
a lawyer a legal question,
a doctor a medical question,
a consultant a business question,
a contractor a building question,
It's casual conversation. I'm in no way a client of any of them.

If he has paperwork on it, then it wasn't just a casual conversation. You would need a warrant to obtain any paperwork that a lawyer kept regarding advice he gave regarding a legal issue or anything else for that matter.

Are you actually arguing that lawyers can discuss legal advice he has given and release paperwork without a warrant? is that your piss poor argument? Seriously?

 

[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.

You are a fool.

The privilege is the client's to assert.
In this case, Hannity denies being a client, dummy.

If he received legal advice and he would like to that to be kept confidential, then it is confidential, dummy.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

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?

.​

It's compelling that Hannity was revealed to be the third client but denies being a client at all.

 

[ChrisL]

An attorney, just like a doctor, cannot discuss anything that they have done in their legal realms with others without the proper consent forms signed by the citizen. They are VERY strict about these rules.

 

[ChrisL]

In the link I posted, it states that legal advice falls under the confidentiality clause, unless the client (yes, if you get legal advice, you would fall under the definition of a "client" legally), gives his consent to release the information. That is the bottom line here, so just give it up. You have no legal argument. That is the whole reason why warrants have to be obtained to get this kind of information if it is being done against the client's wishes. We have a right to privacy in this country, like it or not, liberals.

 

[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.

You are a fool.

The privilege is the client's to assert.
In this case, Hannity denies being a client, dummy.

It doesn't matter if Hannity denies being a client. That does not negate his right to privacy under the law. Duh. Ignorance of the law doesn't mean that others can violate it.

 

[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.

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

Clueless.

That only applies if the attorney is acting in an official capacity. Not over drinks in casual conversation. One must actually be or seeking to be a client to expect privilege.

 

[BlackSand]

It's compelling that Hannity was revealed to be the third client but denies being a client at all.

Why do you find it compelling (what I have been, and will continue to ask) ... And to what ends?

.​

 

[Care4all]

1. Michael Cohen's lawyers averred in court that Sean Hannity is one of Michael Cohen's clients.
2. Sean Hannity asserts that he was not at all Cohen's client.
   

   Michael Cohen has never represented me in any matter. I never retained him, received an invoice, or paid legal fees. I have occasionally had brief discussions with him about legal questions about which I wanted his input and perspective.
   -- Sean Hannity

   
   Hannity: Cohen has never represented me - CNN Video
   • No invoice. No legal fees paid. No legal advice given.

What is attorney-client privilege?

What do you plan to gain from your desire to reconcile the comments?

If in fact Sean Hannity is/was a client of Cohen ... And if in fact it has anything to do with Muller's investigation ...
Then Special Counsel Muller would have seized files regarding Sean Hannity from Cohen when his office was raided.

Special Counsel Muller will tell you what you should believe about the relationship between Hannity and Cohen if he thinks it means anything.

.​

Let me guess, you think Mueller is the Southern district of NY prosecutor and running this investigation because Hannity told you so at Trump's request, on his show?

 

[Hutch Starskey]

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.

You are a fool.

The privilege is the client's to assert.
In this case, Hannity denies being a client, dummy.

It doesn't matter if Hannity denies being a client. That does not negate his right to privacy under the law. Duh. Ignorance of the law doesn't mean that others can violate it.

It doesn't matter if Hannity denies being a client. That does not negate his right to privacy under the law. Duh. Ignorance of the law doesn't mean that others can violate it.

You are truly dopey.
He can't both deny being a client and exercise the privilege that comes with being a client.

 

[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.

Clueless.

That only applies if the attorney is acting in an official capacity. Not over drinks in casual conversation. One must actually be or seeking to be a client to expect privilege.

It includes any discussion regarding a legal matter that the client would want to be confidential. You don't get to determine whether or not the attorney-client privilege exists. It is what it is.

Here is the tweet that Hannity made regarding this matter. Note that he never says he didn't seek any type of legal advice from this attorney. He never retained his services or paid him is what he says. That in no way means he doesn't fall under the privacy act. Free legal advice counts.

Hannity took to Twitter on Monday afternoon to say Cohen “never represented me in any matter. I never retained him, received an invoice, or paid legal fees.”

 

[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.

You are a fool.

The privilege is the client's to assert.
In this case, Hannity denies being a client, dummy.

It doesn't matter if Hannity denies being a client. That does not negate his right to privacy under the law. Duh. Ignorance of the law doesn't mean that others can violate it.

It doesn't matter if Hannity denies being a client. That does not negate his right to privacy under the law. Duh. Ignorance of the law doesn't mean that others can violate it.

You are truly dopey.
He can't both deny being a client and exercise the privilege that comes with being a client.

He can deny whatever he wants to deny. If this lawyer has paperwork that has to do with a legal matter to do with this person, then he cannot just release it and talk about it. This is pretty simple to understand. Legal advice counts in the attorney-client privilege laws.

 

[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.

You are a fool.

The privilege is the client's to assert.
In this case, Hannity denies being a client, dummy.

It doesn't matter if Hannity denies being a client. That does not negate his right to privacy under the law. Duh. Ignorance of the law doesn't mean that others can violate it.

It doesn't matter if Hannity denies being a client. That does not negate his right to privacy under the law. Duh. Ignorance of the law doesn't mean that others can violate it.

You are truly dopey.
He can't both deny being a client and exercise the privilege that comes with being a client.

You are not understanding the fact that HIS denials of anything don't really matter if this lawyer has paperwork pertaining to a legal matter regarding him. His rights still apply. The state/feds still have to obtain a warrant to get this type of paperwork. That is the LAW. This is a law to protect us.

 

[ChrisL]

If the feds suspect Hannity of committing a crime, then they file a warrant with a judge to obtain paperwork that would be relevant to the charge, but there has to be a formal request for a warrant to request paperwork regarding legal issues of United States citizens, unless consent of release forms have been signed. Those are the laws, plain and simple. That is so that the government can't just invade your privacy on a HUNCH. Very sad that you can't get this simple concept. It is not surprising that so many of you have such a poor understanding of the logic and reasoning behind some of our other rights too.

 

[Hutch Starskey]

It's compelling that Hannity was revealed to be the third client but denies being a client at all.

Why do you find it compelling (what I have been, and will continue to ask) ... And to what ends?

.​

Why?

Because Cohen's specialty seems to be buying silence from women. He had three clients. We know he performed that service for two of them. It's funny that the third client is Trump's biggest ally at the state run tv and denies he hired Cohen.

Trump is taking everyone who gets close to him down.