Why was Hannity not afforded the right to privacy every American is supposed to get?

[C_Clayton_Jones]

No, government may not violate one’s privacy.

In civil law government may not compel a woman to give birth against her will, that’s a violation of the right to privacy.

In criminal law the government must have a warrant to search one’s person, house, papers, and effects; absent a warrant one’s right to privacy is violated.

But Hannity isn’t subject to a criminal investigation, nor is government seeking to interfere with personal matters concerning his private life, consequently no privacy rights are being ‘violated.’

 

[radical right]

We're done here

No you're done here. Your outrage is directed at the wrong person. Hannitys lawyer allowed the name to be disclosed, there's nothing the judge or the system could do to prevent that.

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

Where was Hannity's lawyer. He was responsible for keeping the name secret.

Oh.... That's Michael Cohen.

What a stupid ******* question.

Should the judge hold the lawyer responsible for exercising the freedom that the judge gave him to begin with....

We're done here

The judge gave the lawyer a choice, disclose it under seal, or disclose it openly. The lawyer chose to disclose Hannity's name openly.

Judge Wood gave Cohens lawyer a choice, he chose public disclosure.

Don't blame the judge, don't blame the system. Blame the lawyer.

You're too stupid to understand my point apparently. The lawyer should have never been given the option. Don't know how many times I have to explain this to you.

The judge is charged with the control of that courtroom and is supposed to ensure people conduct themselves according to the laws of our nation.

I believe the judge failed in her mission and I believe Hannity is paying that price for no reason other than political assassination via guilt by association.

 

[Witchit]

 

[Remodeling Maidiac]

We're done here

No you're done here. Your outrage is directed at the wrong person. Hannitys lawyer allowed the name to be disclosed, there's nothing the judge or the system could do to prevent that.

Off to ignore you go. I detest arguing with idiots. I spelled it out for you a half dozen times and you're so ******* dense you just can't seem to grasp it.

Goodbye

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Hannity isn't a client. If anything Cohen and his attorney threw him under the bus by naming him as one. My guess is that Cohen fluffed up his list with a big name he gave advice to sometimes, not knowing the FBI would raid his office, and the names would be presented in court.

The names should have been sequestered not publicly announced like some kind of circus act.

He wasn't "publicly humiliated". Other people's name are unwittingly dragged into investigations all the time. Except many times they aren't throwing themselves in front of a camera on a daily basis like Hannity does anyways. If he did nothing wrong it's a complete non-story.

If you've done nothing wrong....

A terrible excuse for giving up your rights.

No rights have been ‘given up’; absent some interaction with government – civil or criminal – the doctrine of rights doesn’t come into play.

 

[radical right]

Judge Wood gave Cohens lawyer a choice, he chose public disclosure.

Don't blame the judge, don't blame the system. Blame the lawyer.

You're too stupid to understand my point apparently. The lawyer should have never been given the option. Don't know how many times I have to explain this to you.

The judge is charged with the control of that courtroom and is supposed to ensure people conduct themselves according to the laws of our nation.

I believe the judge failed in her mission and I believe Hannity is paying that price for no reason other than political assassination via guilt by association.

As I said, do you want the judge to hold the lawyer in contempt? Throw him in jail for disclosing the information publicly instead of disclosing it under seal?

The lawyer made the wrong choice, should the judge sanction him for that?

 

[aaronleland]

THe judge allowed the lawyer to keep the name secret, but Cohens lawyer chose to disclose it openly.

Why blame the judge for the actions of the lawyer?

Because the judge is the man in control of that courtroom. It is HIS RESPONSIBILITY to uphold the values of our nation and protect the rights of the citizens.
He relinquished that responsibility to someone else in his courtroom.

Do you want the judge to sanctions Cohens lawyer? Hold him in contempt for publicly disclosing the name? Throw him in jail for disclosing the name?

Where was Hannity's lawyer. He was responsible for keeping the name secret.

Oh.... That's Michael Cohen.

What a stupid ******* question.

Should the judge hold the lawyer responsible for exercising the freedom that the judge gave him to begin with....

We're done here

Of course. It's done in law thousands of times a day, everyday. If a cop reads you your Miranda rights, and you choose to speak to them without a lawyer we hold you responsible for the freedom the law gave you.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Where was Hannity's lawyer. He was responsible for keeping the name secret.

Oh.... That's Michael Cohen.

What a stupid ******* question.

Should the judge hold the lawyer responsible for exercising the freedom that the judge gave him to begin with....

We're done here

The judge gave the lawyer a choice, disclose it under seal, or disclose it openly. The lawyer chose to disclose Hannity's name openly.

Judge Wood gave Cohens lawyer a choice, he chose public disclosure.

Don't blame the judge, don't blame the system. Blame the lawyer.

You're too stupid to understand my point apparently. The lawyer should have never been given the option. Don't know how many times I have to explain this to you.

The judge is charged with the control of that courtroom and is supposed to ensure people conduct themselves according to the laws of our nation.

I believe the judge failed in her mission and I believe Hannity is paying that price for no reason other than political assassination via guilt by association.

No, your ‘point’ is understood – it’s understood to be ridiculous and wrong.

 

[bripat9643]

Because he’s a public figure if his own volition . And a fraud .

Let me ask you this . Why can’t citizen Bill Clinton have a conversation with the AG?

Because the AG was investigating his wife dumbass.

Now answer the question in the op. On what grounds was Hannitys right to privacy violated?

What right to privacy ? Is there some right that says an attorneys client list is off limits to discovery ?

Yes there is, dumbass.

 

[forkup]

Because he’s a public figure if his own volition . And a fraud .

Let me ask you this . Why can’t citizen Bill Clinton have a conversation with the AG?

Because the AG was investigating his wife dumbass.

Now answer the question in the op. On what grounds was Hannitys right to privacy violated?

What right to privacy ? Is there some right that says an attorneys client list is off limits to discovery ?

The 4th amendment. Hannity is under no investigation but is being publicly slandered as if he has done something wrong simply based on association.
I hope he has a case and sues the **** out of the appropriate people.

If you consider the knowledge of being a client of a certain lawyer slander, shouldn't you question that lawyer? I've seen a lawyer I don't consider the knowledge of that in any way a blight on my honor.

 

[radical right]

No you're done here. Your outrage is directed at the wrong person. Hannitys lawyer allowed the name to be disclosed, there's nothing the judge or the system could do to prevent that.

Off to ignore you go. I detest arguing with idiots. I spelled it out for you a half dozen times and you're so ******* dense you just can't seem to grasp it.

Goodbye

A judge can't force a lawyer to protect the rights of his client. A judge can't order a lawyer to do a better job. It's an adversarial system where each side represents the interests of that side.
A judge can only sanction a lawyer for failing to represent the interests of his client..

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Why was Hannity not afforded the right to privacy every American is supposed to get?

Because, **** privacy.
—The Left

And, **** Hannity. But, he still should be afforded privacy.

This is outrageous bullshit, worthy of armed rebellion.

 

[radical right]

Why was Hannity not afforded the right to privacy every American is supposed to get?

Because, **** privacy.
—The Left

And, **** Hannity. But, he still should be afforded privacy.

This is outrageous bullshit, worthy of armed rebellion.

Hannity should have gotten a better lawyer. Cohen let Hannity's name be publicly disclosed.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

A judge can't force a lawyer to protect the rights of his client. A judge can't order a lawyer to do a better job. It's an adversarial system where each side represents the interests of that side.
A judge can only sanction a lawyer for failing to represent the interests of his client.

Except the rules of ethics in every goddamn state require lawyers and judges to protect the privacy of third parties and to return privileged documents if inadverantly produced or seized.

The entire legal system is taking it up the ass right now because, muh, Russians.

 

[Jackson]

Because he’s a public figure if his own volition . And a fraud .

Let me ask you this . Why can’t citizen Bill Clinton have a conversation with the AG?

You mean the 36 minute "How's your grandchildren and stop the Hillary investigaton chat?" on a tarmack where they just happened to be in a plane alone? C'mon, really?

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

Hannity should have gotten a better lawyer. Cohen let Hannity's name be publicly disclosed.

Except, the people seizing documents have a duty to not unnecessarily disclose confidential documents or information obtained on third parties in a search and seizure.

There should be sanctions levied all up and down this shit?

 

[radical right]

Except the rules of ethics in every goddamn state require lawyers and judges to protect the privacy of third parties and to return privileged documents if inadverantly produced or seized.

The entire legal system is taking it up the ass right now because, muh, Russians.

It's the lawyers job. It is only the judges job when those third parties do not have legal representation.

If the person has a lawyer, the judge leaves it to the lawyer. That's the point of having a lawyer.

 

[Jackson]

Because he’s a public figure if his own volition . And a fraud .

Let me ask you this . Why can’t citizen Bill Clinton have a conversation with the AG?

Because the AG was investigating his wife dumbass.

Now answer the question in the op. On what grounds was Hannitys right to privacy violated?

What right to privacy ? Is there some right that says an attorneys client list is off limits to discovery ?

What does that have to do with anything?

 

[radical right]

Except, the people seizing documents have a duty to not unnecessarily disclose confidential documents or information obtained on third parties in a search and seizure.

There should be sanctions levied all up and down this shit?

In order to protect attorney-client privilege, they have to know who the clients are.