"[Judge Kimba Wood] ordered the name be revealed. Ryan took a breath and identified the client as Hannity. The full courtroom reacted audibly and immediately." Because, well, of course they did.

It's ironic how quickly the pendulum swings when it comes to what the news of the day is. A mere two weeks ago I wrote about the problem with boycotts and mentioned the Media Matters led boycotts of Sean Hannity's advertisers, presumably to pressure Fox News into cancelling his program, for being "a Trump propaganda operation."

I also mentioned that it seems as though the boycotts that get the most media attention are those that are targeting right-wing commentators, radio hosts, public figures and organizations, and that the basis of these boycotts are founded in political divergence and their end goal is to simply silence voices that they don't agree with for, well, being voices that they don't agree with.

Imagine my surprise, then, that after the world found out that Sean Hannity is the third mystery client of Michael Cohen, President Trump's personal attorney, left-wing commentators, radio hosts, public figures and organizations began running headlines decimating Hannity's reputation and name.

To be fair, several right-wing individuals were criticizing Hannity for his involvement with Cohen, including some of his colleagues at Fox News. Not to mention that many of their critiques are fair. Howard Kurtz, one of the aforementioned Fox News colleagues, mentioned that Hannity should have been forthright with his connection to Cohen the moment the FBI raided Cohen's home and office, writing that ". . . the best course is being transparent and disclosing it."

Kurtz is absolutely correct here. Even though Hannity claims that he was never actually a client of Cohen's, and only sought him out for legal advice on real estate, the wise thing for him to have done would've been to disclose his legal relationship with Cohen once he found out potential documents tying the two of them together were seized by the FBI.

That said, let's air some things out.

First of all, between his legal team at Fox News and attorneys that he works with personally, Hannity has a working relationship with several attorneys, so why is it suddenly a big deal that one of the attorneys he has sought legal advice from is President Trump's personal attorney? Well, the last four words of that probably serve as a substantial answer.

But even that can be explained away. Hannity and President Trump have been close friends for a long time, long before the President gave any indication that he was going to campaign in 2016. In fact, an early estimate would indicate that Hannity and President Trump began their friendship around 2011. Given that Michael Cohen became President Trump's personal attorney in 2007, it's not that far of a stretch to guess that Hannity became friendly with Cohen as well.

It's also well known that Hannity owns and invests heavily in real estate properties. Seeing as Cohen was an attorney for the Trump Organization, a real estate firm, it would also make sense that Hannity would perhaps seek legal advice from the personal lawyer of one of the most successful real estate moguls in the world.

It's important to lay out the likely foundation of Hannity and Cohen's working relationship, because it seems to dispel any notion that their relationship began with some sort of nefarious intent or as a means to give President Trump an ardent supporter within the Republican camp. Especially when we see that Hannity and President Trump were friends for years before his run and that his legal relationship with Cohen, by Hannity's account, was regarding advice on real estate investments.

That brings us to the other major theory here: Hannity is a client of Cohen's due to some scandalous affair that Cohen has worked to cover-up for Hannity.

It would make sense, right? After all, Cohen paid $130,000 to a porn star that President Trump allegedly had an affair with to keep her quiet prior to the 2016 presidential election. He also helped RNC fundraiser, Elliott Broidy, pay $1.6 million to a Playboy model he had an affair with and impregnated. And those are two out of the three clients that Cohen has worked with in the last several years. Surely the revelation that Hannity is the third means that he hired Cohen for the same reason as the other two, right?

Not exactly. According to Philip Bump at the Washington Post, "Hannity’s short-term goal is to kneecap the assumption that his involvement with Cohen was, like Trump’s and Broidy’s, centered on an agreement concerning an illicit sexual relationship. There’s no evidence that this is why he worked with Cohen. But for all intents and purposes — including the purposes of the court — Hannity was indeed Cohen’s client."

To add further disillusion to that theory is the connection between Broidy and Cohen. In April of last year, the RNC announced that Cohen had been appointed as a deputy national finance chairman. Oh, by the way, guess who else was appointed as a key RNC finance executive in April of last year? One Elliott Broidy. Also as a deputy national finance chairman.

Now, to be clear, could Hannity have hired Cohen for the same reason that Broidy and President Trump did in regard to their alleged affairs? Sure. But the evidence for that just isn't there. Not yet at least. The only evidence that we have is that Hannity invests in real estate, Cohen is the personal attorney of (at the time) one of the world's leading real estate moguls, President Trump and Hannity were friends long before his presidential run, and Cohen and Broidy have worked together for the RNC since April of last year.

Based on that information, the only logical scenario that we can deduce is that Hannity began working with Cohen, after becoming friends with President Trump, on real estate ventures. Cohen's work for President Trump and Elliott Broidy regarding their alleged affairs stem from the fact that he is President Trump's personal attorney and the fact that he already had a personal relationship with Broidy prior to taking him on as a client. Both of which are completely separate from any working relationship that he had with Sean Hannity.

Again, if new evidence comes out supporting the claim that Hannity was working with Cohen to cover-up some sort of illicit sexual relationship then we'll move forward with that. But until then, it's completely irresponsible to report that as if it has any sort of bearing in reality. Especially since Cohen's legal relationship with all three individuals in question can be established for entirely different, non-overlapping reasons.