Former President Donald Trump’s “hush money” trial continues in New York on May 20.
Follow here for the live updates:
Trump Calls Judge a ‘Tyrant’
“That was incredible, I’ve never seen anything like it in my life,” President Trump said after leaving the courtroom. He spoke for longer than usually.
He criticized Justice Merchan, calling him a “tyrant.”
“Hopefully the motion to dismiss this trial will go through because this trial is a disaster for our country,” he said. “This is a witch hunt.”
He commented that even the press was “thrown out” of the courtroom earlier when the judge clashed with a witness.
“This is a show trial, there’s no actual crime or evidence,” President Trump said. He read from several articles covering the trial.
“This case should be dropped by the judge,” he said. “I think the judge, if he did that, would be—he’d gain the respect back. Either the appellate court has to step in, something has to happen.”
Judge Reserves Ruling
Mr. Blanche reiterated his points, and the judge did not issue an immediate ruling.
“I’m going to reserve a decision,” Justice Merchan said.
Prosecutors Say Trump Participation Is Enough to Prove Intent
Prosecuting attorney Matthew Colangelo said the “trial record overwhelmingly rebuts that there is no evidence of falsity.”
He pointed to records entered into evidence, tracking the wire payment Mr. Cohen made to Mr. Davidson, and testimony from Ms. Clifford acknowledging the payment.
“Mr. Blanche made a couple of arguments regarding intent to defraud,” Mr. Colangelo said. “As a matter of law, your honor, it is more than sufficient if the defendant set in motion the sequence of events that led to the false entries being made.”
“And then of course, as your honor also held, the evidence show intent to deceive government regulators,” Mr. Colangelo said. “On the last point, intent to conceal evidence of a crime, your honor there were weeks and weeks of testimony, corroborated by emails, bank records, and other documents, of a conspiracy that was entered into in a meeting in Trump Tower that was then effectuated through unlawful means.”
“To conceal investor advisory services, to conceal the intended transaction between AMI and Donald Trump, your honor there’s a lot more, but we don’t need to make a full summation to rebut the argument that Mr. Blanche has made. A dismissal is not warranted.”
Justice Merchan said, “I’ll reserve judgment.”
‘Fool 12 New Yorkers?’ Defense Ask Judge to Find Cohen Not Credible
“There is no way that the court should let this case go to the jury relying on Mr. Cohen’s testimony. Without his testimony, there is no case,” Mr. Blanche said. “He has repeatedly lied, and he lied this morning. We put on irrefutable proof, when he testified on direct about a phone call.”
“So you’re asking me to find Mr. Cohen not credible as a matter of law,” Justice Merchan said.
“Yes,” Mr. Blanche said. “It shouldn’t move the court that he continues to lie.”
“So you want me to take it out of the jury’s hands, and decide before it gets to the jury,” Justice Merchan said.
“We didn’t just catch him in a lie, he came in here with a history of lying under oath,” Mr. Blanche said.
“You think his lies are so irrefutable he’s going to fool 12 New Yorkers?” Justice Merchan asked.
The judge then heard from the prosecution.
Defense Moves to Dismiss Case
The parties conferred to discuss scheduling for the remainder of the trial. Ms. Hoffinger said she has about 30 to 45 minutes of cross-examination for Mr. Costello, which would continue tomorrow.
Mr. Blanche asked for dismissal.
“Your honor, for several reasons, we believe the court should enter for dismissal now,” Mr. Blanche said.
“First, there’s absolutely not evidence that the filings were false. The business records were not false. there is no dispute that Mr. Cohen provided legal services to President Trump in 2017. Not only did Mr. Cohen not deny that, but Ms. Tarasoff said the same thing, when she entered the invoices into the system they were entered as legal services,” he said.
“Second, there is no evidence that there is any intent to defraud by President Trump in connection with these filings,” Mr. Blanche argued. “These are records that were generated in Michael Cohen’s personal relationship … out of the personal records, the personal bank account of President Trump, where Presiednt Trump was the only person who had any signatory authority over the bank account.”
“There is no evidence that there is any intent by President Trump at that time to mislead or falsify any business records,” Mr. Blanche said. “If there was intent to defraud, there would be something there, either the invoices are entered in a different manner, there would be some evidence.”
“Third, now, the people rest today and there is no evidence, zero, that anyone was thinking about a campaign finance charge in 2016 when this payment was made to Ms. Daniels,” Mr. Blanche said. “There is no evidence that anyone was thinking about a campaign finance charge when Mr. Cohen and Mr. Weisselberg met to discuss how he would be paid.”
“And so the prosecutors have talked about some sort of conspiracy to influence the election, but as the court knows, there has to be something illegal about this effort,” Mr. Blanche said. “What the evidence shows is that they got together in 2015 to talk about positive and negative stories, and Mr. Pecker would keep an eye out about anything bad he heard about President Trump.”
“The underlying criminal intent that the People are suggesting, FICA, New York business tax fraud … as a matter of law they should not be allowed to use any of those predicates when there’s no evidene that Mr. Pecker, Dylan Howard, or any other alleged coconspirators had any kind of criminal intent,” Mr. Blanche said. “We don’t have any evidence of any kind of criminal intent when this so-called conspiracy is born or played out over the next year and a half.”
Mr. Blanche said Karen McDougal was seeking to restart her career and an agreement that would put her on the cover of magazines while Dino Sajudin was shopping around a false story.
“How on earth is keeping a false story from the voters criminal?” Mr. Blanche asked. “So it’s a false story and a decision is made to pay off the author of the false story. That’s not catch and kill, your honor, it’s certainly not criminal catch and kill.”
“There’s simply no evidence of any criminal intent in 2016, 2017, and for that reason, the court should enter a verdict in favor of the defendant,” Mr. Blanche said.
Costello: Cohen Was ‘Suicidal’ After Search
Ms. Hoffinger asked about that first meeting between Mr. Costello and Mr. Cohen, and how the raid affected Mr. Cohen.
“Mr. Cohen was visibly shaken up that day, wasn’t he?” Ms. Hoffinger asked.
“He was suicidal that day,” Mr. Costello said.
“As a criminal defense attorney for all those years, you can understand how traumatic it is for someone to go through that experience,” Ms. Hoffinger said.
“He was putting on quite a show, and he explained to us that two nights before, he was on the roof of the Regency Hotel, and he was going to jump off and kill himself, because he couldn’t handle the pressure of the ongoing criminal case he saw heading his way,” Mr. Costello said.
“Did you tell the grand jury that you thought he was acting as a drama queen?” Ms. Hoffinger said.
“No, I said I didn’t know whether he was acting like a drama queen,” Mr. Costello said. He added that he couldn’t accurately assess how serious Mr. Cohen had been but his law partner believed it.
Court adjourned.
Prosecutors Ask Costello About Giuliani, Trump Connections
Mr. Costello said his law partner Mr. Citron had known Mr. Cohen for 10 years, and Mr. Costello took the meeting because Mr. Citron had arranged it.
“Because Jeff was a real estate attorney, and this was obviously a criminal matter,” Mr. Costello said.
“And if you could land him, personal attorney to Donald Trump, as a client, this would be big news for your firm, and it would be what you call a high-profile case?” Ms. Hoffinger asked. She also asked it it would solidify connections with Rudy Giuliani.
Mr. Costello said that Mr. Giuliani was not representing President Trump at that time.
“Would it be something you would announce on your website?” Ms. Hoffinger asked.
“I don’t know what the firm would do,” Mr. Costello said.
Prosecutors showed an email Mr. Costello sent to his son.
“I will be on the team. ‘It would be an honor to have you part of my team. I will be eternally grateful for the help and guidance you have given me.’—Michael Cohen, personal attorney to President Donald J. Trump,” the email read. “This is not public yet so do not say anything to anyone about this. I do not know when we will make an announcement but I have been authorized to contact Rudy Giuliani as counsel to President Trump and tell him I will be representing Michael Cohen.”
His son wrote back: “Wow. This is big news. Congrats Dad.”
Costello Denies ‘Pressure Campaign’
“Mr. Costello, did you ever put pressure on Michael Cohen to do anything?” Mr. Bove asked.
“No,” Mr. Costello said.
“During your interactions with Michael Cohen, did you consider him to be a client?” Mr. Bove asked.
“Absolutely, I treated him that way,” Mr. Costello said.
“And whose interest did you have in mind?” Mr. Bove asked.
“Michael Cohen’s,” Mr. Costello said.
Mr. Costello said his firm did not try to collect payment from Mr. Cohen, as the “amount wasn’t enough.”
Costello Testimony Continues
Justice Merchan motioned for the jury to return to the courtroom.
Mr. Bove showed an email from Mr. Costello to Mr. Cohen on May 16, 2018.
“You wrote at the bottom of this message, ‘I will not pester you. If you want to talk, you know how to reach Jeff or myself,’” Mr. Bove said.
“Michael had been complaining about the lawyers,” Mr. Costello started, before prosecutors objected.
“Stricken. Please just answer the question,” Justice Merchan said.
Mr. Costello said Mr. Cohen called him the same day. Looking at the call records, the call was an hour and 36 minutes.
A June 7, 2018, email from Mr. Costello to Mr. Cohen said that “to prove to you that Rudy Giuliani called me and I did not call him, I photographed the pages from my iPhone.”
Call records showed that Mr. Cohen initiated a call that lasted 46 minutes.
On June 13, 2018, Mr. Costello sent an email to Mr. Cohen with a line that read, “If you want or need to communicate something, please let me know and I will see that it gets done.”
“That was in response to his complaint, and I wanted him to know, if you have a complaint, tell me and I will pass it on,” Mr. Costello said.
“And who was he complaining about?” Mr. Bove asked.
“Rudy Giuliani,” Mr. Costello said.
Judge Warns Costello, Clears Courtroom
Prosecutors continued to object, and the judge sustained the objections, before warning Mr. Costello about decorum.
“As a witness on the stand, if you don’t like my ruling, you don’t say ‘geez,’ and if a question is overruled, you don’t say ‘strike it,’ because I’m the only one who can strike an answer,” Justice Merchan said. “And if you don’t like my ruling, you don’t look at me side-eyed, and you don’t roll your eyes. Do you understand that?”
“Are you staring me down?” the judge asked.
He ordered the courtroom cleared.
Costello Testimony Conflicts With Cohen’s
Mr. Costello said Mr. Cohen had been working with a law firm in Washington. Mr. Bove asked about conversations about retention. Prosecutors objected again, prompting an exclamation from Mr. Costello.
“What had Michael Cohen said to you about how to communicate with Rudy Giuliani?” Mr. Bove asked.
“He told me he wasn’t going to announce it publicly, so although I could tell Giuliani, he wasn’t suppposed to tell anybody in the media,” Mr. Costello said. “He wanted to know how the investigation of Michael Cohen began, whether it was a referral from Washington, how did it get to the Southern District of New York, which is right down the street from here.”
“So Michael Cohen wanted to get information from Rudy Giuliani?” Mr. Bove asked.
“That’s correct,” Mr. Costello said.
Mr. Cohen had testified that it was the other way around.
Costello Says Cohen Denied Trump Knowledge of Stormy Daniels Payment
Mr. Bove asked about what was said about President Trump knowing about the Stormy Daniels deal.
“Michael Cohen said numerous times that President Trump knew nothing about payments to Stormy Daniels, and that he did this on his own,” Mr. Costello said.
Costello Takes Witness Stand
Mr. Costello said he was formerly an Assistant US Attorney in the Southern District of New York, and deputy chief of the criminal division. He met Mr. Cohen in person on April 17, 2018, at the Regency Hotel in Manhattan, accompanied by his law partner Mr. Citron, who knew Mr. Cohen.
“First, Michael Cohen explained the situation, because I had never met Cohen before so I had no idea what was going on, that his home and office had been searched with a search warrant,” Mr. Costello said.
“He as absolutely manic at that meeting. We were in a conference room on the second floor of the Regency Hotel, and he kept pacing, and he said my life is shattered, I want you to show me what my escape routes are,” Mr. Costello said.
Mr. Costello said he had then pointed out that a search warrant for a law office is harder to get, and that he believed Mr. Cohen was obviously not the target of the search warrant, both statements were objected to.
“I explained to Mr. Cohen that this entire legal situation would be resolved by the end of the week if he had truthful information about Donald Trump. He made the same statement he made 10 times that day, he said ‘I swear to God, Bob, I don’t have anything on Donald Trump,’” Mr. Costello said.
“He said, ‘I don’t understand why they’re trying to put me in jail for an … NDA,” Mr. Costello said,
Mr. Bove asked if the Trump family came up and prosecutors objected, prompting a sidebar.
Judge Allows Costello to Testify
“So Mr. Bove, you can definitely cross-examine as to two prior inconsistent statements, obviously, and I will give you some latitude to explore the pressure campaign. But I’m not going to allow this to become a trial within a trial, as to whether there was this pressure campaign to affect Mr. Cohen,” Justice Merchan said. “This is not what this trial is and I’m not going to allow it to become that.”
Defense Calls Robert Costello, Prosecutors Object
The defense next called Mr. Costello, and attorneys conferred with the judge over the admissibility of his testimony.
Defense attorney Emil Bove argued that Mr. Cohen testified that Mr. Costello was pestering him when the records reflect it being the other way around and “now we’re seeking an opportunity to respond.”
Mr. Cohen had testified he omitted things when he spoke with Mr. Costello, fearing they would go back to President Trump.
“That’s extremely probative,” Mr. Bove said, arguing for the opportunity to rebut the “pressure campaign” narrative the prosecutors presented.
“They didn’t just ask a few questions about this, they put it in exhibits,” Mr. Bove.
The judge said the exhibits were admitted for jurors to assess the credibility of Mr. Cohen. He did not see how Mr. Costello could testify about what Mr. Cohen really thought or felt.
“Part of what Mr. Costello is going to do is explain that certain things that Mr. Cohen testified about at this trial were false,” Mr. Bove said.
The judge called for a short break.
Defense Attorneys Call First Witness
The defense called as their first witness Daniel Sitko, an analyst who works in defense attorney Todd Blanche’s law firm.
Mr. Sitko had been tasked to create a summary chart of phone calls from records shared, and identified calls between Mr. Cohen’s phone number ending in 0114 and three numbers associated with Mr. Costello.
Counting unanswered calls as well, there were 75 calls total.
Cohen Says Money in 2017 Was Repayment
Mr. Cohen maintained that he believed the call he made to Mr. Schiller included a conversation with Mr. Trump about the Stormy Daniels contract.
“So your testimony is still that in the 90 seconds you were on the phone with him, you talked to him about being harassed by a 14-year-old, everything that was going on, and then you asked him to pass the phone to President Trump and you spoke to him?” Mr. Blanche asked.
“That’s correct,” Mr. Cohen said.
“When you testified that you never asked for, nor would you accept a pardon from President Trump, you’re saying that this was not a lie?” Mr. Blanche asked.
“No sir,” Mr. Cohen said.
Mr. Cohen also affirmed that the $420,000 he accepted in 2017 was not payment for legal services, but to pay back money owed.
“You worked for President Trump for, I believe you said, 11 years,” Mr. Blanche said.
“Correct,” Mr. Cohen said.
“Did he overpay things regularly?” Mr. Blanche asked.
“No sir,” Mr. Cohen said.
Mr. Blanche finished questioning Mr. Cohen and the prosecutors rested their case.
Cohen Views Trump Partly to Blame for Loss of Law License
“Now, defense counsel has asked you a lot of questions about how you’ve profited. Putting aside financial matters, how has telling the truth about Mr. Trump affected you personally?” Ms. Hoffinger asked.
“My whole life has been turned upside down. I lost my law license, my businesses,” he said.
Mr. Blanche then asked Mr. Cohen whether he was blaming President Trump.
“Mr. Cohen you were just asked a question a minute ago about your life being turned upside down because you changed your view about Mr. Trump, right? You were just asked a question about the consequences of your conduct, and you said you lost your law license, right. Is that President Trump’s fault?”
“In part,” Mr. Cohen said.
“You pleaded guilty to tax fraud and to making false statements to a bank. Does President Trump have anything to do with that?” Mr. Blanche asked.
“No,” Mr. Cohen said.
“In New York, when you plead guilty to a felony, you automatically lose your license to practice law?” Mr. Blanche asked.
“Correct,” Mr. Cohen said.
Prosecutors Play Cohen-Davidson Recording
Prosecutor played an audio recording of Mr. Cohen on a call with Keith Davidson.
“What would you do if you were me?” he asked in the recording. “I mean, would you write a book? Would you break away from the entire Trump, you know, we’ll call it doctrine? Would you go completely rogue? Would you join with Bannon? Any thoughts? It’s not just me that’s being affected. it’s my entire family. It’s, you know, and them there’s no, nobody is thinking about Michael.”
“I wasn’t going to play penny wise, pound foolish. And I’m sitting there thinking to myself, what about me? What about me? And I can’t tell you how many times he said to me, you know, ‘I hate the fact that we did it,” Mr. Cohen said in the recording.
Mr. Cohen testified he was referring to the payment he made to Mr. Davidson for the Stormy Daniels story on behalf of Mr. Trump.
Cohen Returns for Questioning by Prosecutors
Mr. Cohen returned to the witness stand and testified about the photograph showing Mr. Trump and Mr. Schiller together.
He confirmed that during this time period, he recalled having conversations with Mr. Trump about the Stormy Daniels matter, with some being in person and some by phone.
Mr. Cohen also affirmed he had reviewed materials like phone records and messages before he testified.
“Do you have any doubt that you had a conversation that you should work it out with Allen Weisselberg?” Ms. Hoffinger asked.
“No doubt,” Mr. Cohen said.
“Do you have any doubt that Mr. Trump gave you the final signoff to go to the bank and make that payment?” Ms. Hoffinger asked.
“No doubt,” he said.
Parties Come to Agreement on Trump Photograph
Mr. Steinglass said the exhibit would come in without calling a paralegal to testify, on the stipulation that the exhibit is a still photograph and they have to ask a foundational question about whether it is a fair and accurate representation. Mr. Blanche agreed.
Judge Won’t Allow C-SPAN Video Into Evidence, Prosecutors to Call Witness Back
Over the lunch break, the judge reviewed cases prosecutors cited to submit into evidence photos of President Trump together with his bodyguard Mr. Schiller, pulled from C-SPAN archives.
Justice Merchan sustained the defense’s hearsay objection and did not allow the images into evidence. He ruled that Mr. Browning, executive director of the C-SPAN, did not lay the foundation prosecutors needed to then admit these videos.
“To suggest that a paralegal or anyone else can now take the stand, and they are now qualified to testify on C-SPAN videos, would be to suggest that anybody here could now testify as a business records expert,” Justice Merchan said. “So that objection is sustained and those videos cannot come into evidence.”
Prosecutors asked to allow Mr. Browning to testify again. The defense objected to prolonging the case past the set schedule.
Justice Merchan asked prosecutors if they could have the witness present by 9:30 a.m. tomorrow, May 21.
Prosecutors are now trying to arrange travel for Mr. Browning.
After Mr. Browning’s testimony, the prosecution will rest their case and the defense will call their witnesses.
Prosecutors Seek to Admit Photo of Trump and Bodyguard Together
Prosecutors showed Mr. Cohen a photo, and he identified President Trump and bodyguard Keith Schiller.
They sought to enter the photo into evidence and defense attorneys objected.
“So you’re offering to establish date and time?” the judge asked.
“That’s right,” said prosecuting attorney Joshua Steinglass.
Mr. Blanche said they “never asked or implied that Mr. Schiller was or was not with President Trump on that day. What we argued was that the phone call was to Keith Schiller about a completely different topic than what the witness testified to on direct.”
Prosecutors Seek to Clarify Fake Cases Cohen Used to Apply for Early Release
Ms. Hoffinger also asked about the three fake cases that Mr. Cohen submitted to his attorneys to apply for early release. Mr. Cohen had testified they were AI-generated cases, and clarified after questioning from prosecutors that he had not known they were fake.
“I went over to Google Bard, which is an AI search engine, and I typed in ‘early termination of supervised release’ based on certain factors,” Mr. Cohen said. “It gave me a plethora of cases that appeared to me to be legitimate. They certainly looked legitimate, and there were facts behind it that supported what we were going to put into this motion.”
Mr. Cohen said he copy and pasted the first three to send to his lawyers.
“I was just trying to be helpful, I anticipated that they would make sure that the information was accurate and correct and would fit into the motion that was being forwarded on my behalf,” he said.
He said his lawyer Donna Perry noticed they were not legitimate.
“They were created by teh AI program, which just wants to please the user. They were hypotheticals,” he said. “And Ms. Perry informed me that they were wrong and we should inform the court. And I said absolutely, please do it. Ms. Perry even went so far as to then find three cases that were directly on point.”
Prosecutors Ask Cohen to Clarify ‘Interest’ in Case
Prosecutors then asked about the defense’s question about whether the case affected Mr. Cohen personally.
“I know it may feel like you’re on trial here after cross-examination, but are you on trial?” Ms. Hoffinger asked. “Is your liberty at stake in this case? Is your wife’s liberty at stake in this case?”
Mr. Cohen answered no to each of the questions.
Mr. Cohen affirmed he had no retainer agreement for 2017. “I never expected to get paid” for the legal work done that year, he added.
“And did the $420,000 you received have anything to do with legal services in 2017?” Ms. HOffinger asked.
“No ma’am,” he said, affirming the “retainer” he put on the invoices was a “false” statement.
Mr. Cohen also testified he signed a waiver agreement with the US Attorney Office of the Southern District of New York affirming that he never retained Mr. Costello as his attorney.
Prosecutors Ask About ‘Deceptive’ Denial Statement
Ms. Hoffinger showed the denial statement Mr. Cohen issued about the $130,000 payment he made.
“The misleading and deceptive line is, ‘Neither the Trump Organization nor the Trump campaign was a part to the transaction with Ms. Clifford, and neither the Trump Organization nor Mr. Trump directly benefitted,” Mr. Cohen said.
Ms. Hoffinger read the line, “The payment in question does not constitute a campaign contribution or expenditure” and asked Mr. Cohen if this was a truthful sentence.
The defense objected and attorneys conferred with the judge. Ms. Hoffinger then repeated the question.
“Was that a true statement?” she asked.
“No, ma’am,” Mr. Cohen said.
The judge reminded the jury that Mr. Cohen’s pleading guilty to violating campaign contributions was not evidence of the defendant’s guilty, but only context.
“Did Mr. Trump approve the substance of these false statements by you?” Ms. Hoffinger asked.
“Yes ma’am,” Mr. Cohen said.
Ms. Hoffinger then asked about the agreement he entered into with Ms. Clifford.
“Under the circumstances of this NDA with Stormy Daniels that you’ve testified to, was that perfectly legal?” she asked.
“No ma’am,” Mr. Cohen said.
Ms. Hoffinger asked about Mr. Cohen’s guilty plea, resulting in another sidebar.
Cohen Says Stealing $30,000 Felt Like ‘Self Help’
Ms. Hoffinger also asked about the $30,000 Mr. Cohen said he stole from the Trump Organization.
He said that Red Finch had been commissioned to assist in a CNBC poll on the most famous businessmen in the last century. Mr. Trump polled near the bottom at the beginning of the poll and Mr. Cohen reached out to Red Finch, who “assured me that he was able to do the acquisitions of IP addresses, to create an algorithm to ensure that Mr. Trump would rise significantly in this poll.”
Mr. Cohen said he had Mr. Trump’s permission to work with Red Finch to acquire the IP addresses, but the CNBC ended up not continuing the poll, so Mr. Trump felt he didn’t receive the benefits of Red Finch’s services and did not want to pay.
Ms. Hoffinger asked Mr. Cohen why he took the $30,000, and Mr. Cohen said he felt it was “self-help” and he was very angry at Mr. Trump.
“Well, for a long time, I had been telling him about the $50,000 so I could collect it for the president of Red Finch. I was angered about the reduction in the bonus, so I felt it was almost like self-help. I wasn’t going to let him have the benefit. I had not only protected him the best that I could, I had also laid out money to Red Finch a year and a half earlier, and again, $130,000. To have my bonus cut by two-thirds was very upsetting to say the least,” Mr. Cohen said.
Prosecutors Ask Cohen to Clarify Testimony
Ms. Hoffinger followed up with Mr. Cohen, asking him to clarify when he testified about lying to Congress.
Mr. Cohen said he testified falsely in 2017 and truthfully in 2019.
“You testified that you didn’t have a specific recollection of talk about other matters,” Ms. Hoffinger asked about Mr. Cohen’s October phone call with Mr. Trump. “But you did have a specific recollection of talking about Stormy Daniels?”
“Yes ma’am,” Mr. Cohen said.
Mr. Cohen also affirmed he never sent Mr. Weisselberg a retainer agreement.
“Because there was no retainer agreement,” Mr. Cohen asid.
“So ultimately, did Mr. Weisselberg ask you to send invoices instead?” Ms. Hoffinger asked.
“Yes,” Mr. Cohen said.
He also said he did legal work for the Trumps in 2017, but not pursuant to a retainer.
“Did you bill for that work?” Ms. Hoffinger asked.
“No ma’am,” Mr. Cohen said.
“And did the $420,000 include compensation for that work?” Ms. Hoffinger asked.
“No ma’am,” Mr. Cohen said.
Cohen Says He has Financial Interest in Trump Case, Not Conviction
Mr. Cohen confirmed he made more in 2017 working for President Trump than in previous years when he was paid $500,000 annually, because of taxes.
“Do you have a financial interest in the outcome of this case?” Mr. Blanche asked.
“Yes sir,” Mr. Cohen said. “When you said do I have a financial interest in this case, I talk about it on my podcast, I talk about it ok TikTok, and they make money. And that’s how I was viewing your question. Whether Mr. Trump is ultimately determined innocent or guilty is not going to affect whether I speak about it or not.”
“The question to you today is whether a conviction benefits you financially?” Mr. Blanche said.
“The answer is no, it’s better if he’s not for me because it gives me more to talk about in the future,” Mr. Cohen said.
Mr. Blanche asked Mr. Cohen whether he was willing to lie under oath when it affected his personal life, and was asked to rephrase the question.
“When you lied to Congress, you said you lied out of loyalty, correct?” Mr. Blanche asked. “My question to you is, it’s true that you will lie out of loyalty, correct?”
Mr. Cohen answered affirmatively.
“And your testimony remains that notwithstanding everything you’ve said over the years, you have a specific recollection of having conversations on the phone with then-candidate Donald J. Trump about the Stormy Daniels matter?” Mr. Blanche asked.
“Yes sir,” Mr. Cohen said.
“No doubt in your mind,” Mr. Blanche said.
“No,” Mr. Cohen said.
“I have no further questions,” Mr. Blanche said, concluding cross-examination. The attorneys briefly conferred with the judge.
Cohen Seeking ‘Name Recognition’
Mr. Cohen said he has been working with someone on the “Fixer” podcast for about three months and is considering writing a third book. He confirmed he has talked about considering a run for Congress.
“Your work, and what you’ve been going over the past several years going after President Trump, that’s the name recognition?” Mr. Blanche asked.
“I wouldn’t say that. The name recognition is the journey that I’ve been on,” Mr. Cohen said.
“My question is whether your journey has been daily attacks on President Trump since at least 2020?” Mr. Blanche asked.
“Yes,” Mr. Cohen said.
“You’ve said that President Trump trusted you?” Mr. Blanche asked.
“Yes sir,” Mr. Cohen said. He affirmed that President Trump trusted his counsel and that he acted as his attorney when he worked for him.
Defense Questions Cohen About Income
Mr. Cohen said from 2017 through summer of 2018 he made $4.5 million, and that between the time he pled guilty and published his book had no income, and many bills to pay.
He started his podcast fall 2020 during home confinement and published his book, and has made about $4 million, or about $1 million per year, since that.
Mr. Cohen said he also has a podcast in the works with the title “Fixer.”
The court took a break.
Cohen Testifies About Conversations With Costello
Mr. Blanche asked about 2018, when the story about Ms. Clifford’s NDA was published. Mr. Cohen said he could not recall several of the communications Mr. Blanche asked about, and confirmed he recalled recording several calls with reporters at the time.
On April 9, 2018, the FBI raided Mr. Cohen’s residence, and then he received a message from Jeffrey Citron to set up a meeting with Mr. Costello to discuss representation.
“I believe they brought some sort of retainer agreement, yes,” Mr. Cohen said.
Mr. Cohen said he had 10 or more phone conversations with Mr. Costello over the following months.
On April 23, Mr. Costello sent a message to Mr. Cohen: “Michael, I spoke with the person you asked me to, and he said he would find out exactly how the matter ended up in the SDNY.”
Mr. Cohen confirmed that person was Mr. Giuliani.
“Part of their [FBI] probably cause for the search warrant was Mr. Friedman?” Mr. Blanche asked.
“Correct,” Mr. Cohen said. “I had leased taxi medallions to him.”
More emails between Mr. Cohen and Mr. Costello were entered into evidence.
Mr. Cohen wrote, “Bob, as I have stated in the past, when the right time comes, and now is not the right time, we will advance our conversations regarding this issue. There are too many hands right now all with varying view points and ideas.”
Mr. Costello wrote on May 16, “Michael, I realize you are under a tremendous strain and every day this Avenatti guy brings you more stuff to try to paint you in a negative way, even though it has nothing to do with his alleged client Stormy Daniels. As I said before, this is psychological warfare.”
Mr. Cohen confirmed they had long calls that weekend, but not if he called or received the calls.
“How many times, if you can recall, did you meet with Mr. Costello in person?” Mr. Blanche asked.
“I believe it was once or twice,” he said.
Other emails previously shown in court were referenced again.
“You were also talking to him at that time about who was going to pay for Mr. Costello, correct?” Mr. Blanche asked. “And the reason why I ask that question, Mr. Cohen, is that it looks like in the earlier email you write to Mr. Costello, “I’m not sure what concerns you have, sir …’ in the time that you started speaking with Mr. Costello and now, there had been a change in whether the Trump Organization was paying their lawyers?”
“Correct,” Mr. Cohen said. “There was significant invoices that were being sent by McDermott Will & Emery to the Trump Organization for payment, and the payment was not being made in accordance with the invoices. I expressed to him that the nonpayment was becoming an issue, and to let Mr. Giuliani to pass that along to President Trump, that it was becoming an issue.”
Defense Asks About Cohen Legal Work in 2017
Mr. Blanche asked about the hiring of Marc Kasowitz as President Trump’s personal attorney when special counsel Robert Mueller began his investigation.
Mr. Cohen confirmed this had not changed his role or relationship with president Trump. He said the two attorneys were in touch, with Mr. Cohen actively reviewing subpoenaed documents in January and February, and that he had no part in selecting Mr. Kasowitz.
Mr. Cohen also confirmed working with First Lady Melania Trump on multiple occasions in February, March, and April 2017.
Mr. Cohen said he also had six total clients for consulting and was paid $4 million. Mr. Cohen said he did not tell President Trump about these clients himself, though President Trump later found out.
He consulted AT&T on acquiring Time Warner, and said that President Trump had actually introduced to him the CEO of AT&T.
Mr. Cohen also had as a client Columbus Novo for half a year, paying $80,000 per month. He also had as a client Novartis, which paid him $100,000 per month. He said he only had few communications with this client.
Mr. Blanche started to make the argument that a retainer agreement was not conditioned on how much work was done, and prosecutors objected.
Mr. Cohen confirmed that he also had Korea Aerospace as a client for six or seven months, and BTA bank, and an individual named Franklin Harvey whom he had met at Mar-a-Lago.
Weisselberg Told Cohen to Call $420,000 Agreement ‘Retainer’
Mr. Cohen confirmed that Mr. Weisselberg had called the $420,000 a retainer, and asked him to send in invoices, but that he was not going to have a retainer going forward.
Mr. Cohen said those were the only two conversations he had with Mr. Weisselberg about his role as Mr. Trump’s attorney.
Cohen Stole $30,000 From Trump Organization
Mr. Blanche asked Mr. Cohen about the $50,000 reimbursement for Red Finch polling, when Mr. Cohen and former Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg came to a $420,000 agreement.
Mr. Cohen confirmed he had originally paid his Red Finch connection $20,000 in cash, and he had it in a brown paper bag.
“He still wanted the $30,000, this placated him for the time being. I still needed his services. So I gave him the amount he needed for his out of pocket expenses,” Mr. Cohen said.
“So you never gave the $30,000 to the guy from Red Finch,” Mr. Blanche asked.
“No sir,” Mr. Cohen said.
“So you stole it from the Trump Organization?” Mr. Blanche asked.
“Yes sir,” Mr. Cohen said.
Mr. Cohen confirmed he told that story multiple times to the district attorney’s office, and that he has never pleaded guilty to larceny or paid that money back.
Defense Casts Doubt on Cohen Timeline Testimony
Mr. Cohen previously testified he had two phone calls with then-candidate Trump the morning of Oct. 26, 2016.
“Now you testified on direct that the reason you spoke with President Trump on that day was you needed his approval for what you were doing,” Mr. Blanche said. “You did not want Ms. Daniels to sell her story to the Daily Mail, and you wanted his approval?”
“That’s correct,” Mr. Cohen said.
Mr. Blanche asked if he recalled what President Trump was doing that day.
“He was doing rallies, basically every day,” Mr. Cohen said.
“Do you remember that morning, the morning of the 26th, that President Trump was going to sit down and do an interview with ABC News right after 9 o’clock? Does that ring a bell?” Mr. Blanche asked.
“No sir,” Mr. Cohen said.
Mr. Blanche also asked Mr. Cohen if he recalled that the 26th was the day of an opening ceremony for the Old Post Office building in Washington, D.C.
“No, sir,” Mr. Cohen said.
“But you do have a specific recollection that on those phone calls, you talked about the Stormy Daniels deal?” Mr. Blanche asked.
“Because it was important to me,” Mr. Cohen said. “It was important that I take care of it, but it was not personally important to me.”
Mr. Blanche said this was also around the time the Access Hollywood tape was released, and asked Mr. Cohen why those two calls would not have dealt with other matters.
“If there was going to be meetings that day, you don’t think you would have spoke to him about any other issues, just Stormy Daniels?” Mr. Blanche asked.
“My recollection is that we spoke about Stormy Daniels because that’s what he told me to take care of and that’s what I was working on,” Mr. Cohen said.
Defense Highlights Financial, Legal, Employment Issues Parallel to Cohen Deal
Mr. Blanche followed up with questions confirming Mr. Cohen’s earlier answers in testimony. Then he asked about Mr. Cohen’s taxi medallion business.
Mr. Cohen confirmed several messages exchanged around Oct. 13, 2016, including with his medallion agent Mr. Friedman.
“You were having issues with Mr. Friedman paying you during that time period,” Mr. Blanche asked.
“Yes sir,” Mr. Cohen said.
He confirmed checks were bouncing at the time, and Mr. Friedman was having marital problems, and Mr. Cohen helped him find an apartment.
He also confirmed he was litigating other issues at the time, and had explored getting a position at iPayments via David Pecker who had a connection.
Cohen Met With Rep. Goldman Twice
Mr. Cohen said he met with Rep. Dan Goldman twice.
Mr. Goldman, a critic of President Trump, has been commenting on the trial in the media.
Cohen Returns to Witness Stand
Mr. Cohen continued his testimony under cross-examination. He said he did not speak with reporters about the case.
Mr. Cohen said he since the beginning of the year, he has spoken to prosecutors close to 20 times. He last met with them about 10 days ago.
“When you met with the prosecutors again, they asked you questions similar to what they asked you Monday and Tuesday?” defense attorney Todd Blanche asked.
“The same topics, yes sir,” Mr. Cohen said. He confirmed he had heard before some of the questions prosecutors asked last week.
Judge Orders Parties to Write Up Definitions
Justice Merchan ordered the parties to draft definitions to give to the other side and come to an agreement.
“The simpler the better,” he said. “If the two sides can agree on the definitions of those terms, that’s all the better. You decide who wants to draft it and who wants to do a redline, and you can send it to me.”
Defense Argues Jury Needs Definition for ‘For the Purpose of Influencing an Election’
Defense attorney Emil Bove argued that testimony limited to definitions of these terms would not help the jury much.
“The tough spot that we’re in right now is that your honor has not indicated a firm intention to instruct the jury on FECA,” Mr. Bove said. “If you’re willing to give us any sense on whether you’re going to instruct the jury on these issues, we would come to the pre-charge conference … and we would resolve that at the charge conference.”
Justice Merchan said that his position was that “I often think that less is better.”
He reminded the defense that the prosecutors needed to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt, “and that reduces the burden on every word, every phrase.”
Mr. Bove argued that they are left in a “very tricky situation” because of the way the charges are structured in this case.
“This New York election law conspiracy, is only unlawful if there is an unlawful activity. Otherwise it’s just an agreement to win an election, and that’s why I think that this statute has not been applied,” Mr. Bove said.
Justice Merchan said his position has not changed from day one.
“I offered guidance and you’ve known for months that this is not new,” Justice Mechan said. “If you had concerns about these specific rulings, you could have come to me some time ago, and now you’ve waited until the people are almost done.”
“It would be inappropriate for me to tell you right now what my instruction is without hearing from both sides,” Justice Merchan said.
Mr. Bove argued that the way the prosecution structured the laws in this case was also new to them.
“Fundamentally, our concern is now it’s a phrasing issue: ‘for the purpose of influencing an election,'” Mr. Bove said.
Prosecuting attorney Matthew Colangelo pushed back, arguing that they identified these statutes months ago in filings. He argued that Mr. Smith’s testimony in these statutes would be legal interpretation, and inappropriate under rules the judge has already set.
Judge Rules on Expert Testimony
Last week, defense attorneys asked the court to allow expert testimony from Bradley Smith, a former FEC commissioner, on terms in the statutes prosecutors are using in the case.
The judge said the expert would not be allowed to offer interpretation of the law, such as what it means to violate a statute in “for the purpose of influencing the election.” Justice Merchan said if the defense were allowed to offer an interpretation of the law, he would have to allow the prosecutors to do so as well, and “this would result in a battle of experts” that would confuse rather than enlighten the jury.
“Therefore, I again invite you to submit proposed jury instructions,” he told the parties.
The judge defined what Mr. Smith would testify about.
“He can testify as to what the FEC is, its purpose, and general decisions and terms that relate directly to this case, such as contribution, expenditure, and independent expenditure,” the judge said.
‘Cat’s Out of the Bag’: Defense Addresses Costello-Cohen Communications
Defense attorney Todd Blanche sought to submit an email communication between an associate of Robert Costello’s and Michael Cohen.
“That’s direct impeachment to what Mr. Cohen testified no Tuedsay, he testified that he didn’t really feel like he clicked with Mr. Costello,” Mr. Blanche said. The associate expressed they were pleased with what was discussed with Mr. Cohen and requested a follow-up call.
Last week, prosecutors showed in court several emails between Mr. Costello and Mr. Cohen, and Mr. Cohen testified that he did not trust Mr. Costello, whom he viewed as a spy for Rudy Giuliani who would report anything Mr. Cohen said back to Mr. Costello.
At the same time, Mr. Costello had been testifying in Congress, confirming he pressed Mr. Cohen for information while testifying that Mr. Cohen repeatedly stated he had no proof of President Trump and any wrongdoing.
Mr. Cohen never retained Mr. Costello as his attorney.
Prosecuting attorney Susan Hoffinger objected on the basis of hearsay, as it “doesn’t disclose what is in Michael Cohen’s mind.” Mr. Blanche argued that was the case for several exhibits put forth by the government.
The judge said he would not allow it in, as it is an email from an associate of Mr. Costello’s and not Mr. Cohen or Mr. Costello themselves.
“I don’t see any probative value for impeachment purposes at all,” Justice Merchan said. “Nowhere in this email does it express Mr. Cohen’s state of mind. You can certainly ask him some more questions if you like, but right now it’s hearsay. I’m not going to allow it.”
Judge Schedules Summations for Next Week
Justice Merchan said that issues attorneys brought up over the weekend made it clear they weren’t ready for summations on Tuedsay.
“It looks like we’ll be finishing up evidence this week so we can have summations next week,” he said.
The parties submitted and objected to exhibits shown to the judge.
Trump Says He Missed Campaign Stop
President Trump said he had plans to make a campaign stop this morning before he was alerted that court would convene early today.
“I’m here instead of campaigning. As you know, I was supposed to be in a very different state this morning, when the judge actually decided to call it early and get it looks like we’re gonna have a very big gap between days and it’s going to be determined right now in court,” he said.
“But we’re here about an hour early today. I was supposed to be making the speech. for political purposes. I’m not allowed to have anything to do with politics because I’m sitting in a very freezing cold, dark room for the last four weeks. It’s very unfair. They have no case to have no crime.”
President Trump read from printed articles and commentary coverage of his trial, as he has done recently.
“The key element is missing,” he said, referring to a New York Post editorial on the case, “and it says what’s missing a crime there’s no crime.”
President Trump maintained he did nothing wrong, and that he properly paid a legal expense that was categorized as a legal expense, before criticizing the judge, prosecutor, and his political rival President Joe Biden, who has agreed to do two debates with President Trump.
Trump Arrives With Large Entourage
Flanking former President Donald Trump today are South Carolina Attorney General Alan Wilson, Rep. Eric Burlison, Rep. Andrew Clyde, Rep. Mary Miller, Rep. Keith Self, John Coale, Alan Dershowitz, Will Scharf, Steve Witkoff, Bernie Kerik, Kash Patel, Vernon Jones, Jerry Kassar, Chuck Zito, per the Trump campaign.
From The Epoch Times