Editor's note: Norman Eisen is a CNN legal analyst and editor of “Trying Trump: A Guide to His First Election Interference Criminal Trial.” He served as counsel to the House Judiciary Committee during the first impeachment and trial of then-President Donald Trump. The views expressed in this commentary are his own. Read more opinion pieces on CNN.
Michael Cohen, a former lawyer and fixer for former President Donald Trump, was one of the first witnesses I interviewed as part of the original Trump impeachment. That's because I was investigating the same 2016 election interference allegations that are currently at issue during the former president's hush. Financial criminal trial.
Mr. Cohen, a passionate accuser, has been at Mr. Trump's side since 2006, negotiating a $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels to benefit the Trump campaign, and in 2018 He was about to be sent to prison after pleading guilty to campaign finance violations and other crimes.
Noam Eisen – Provided by: Noam Eisen
I was expecting someone completely different from the person I met: someone who was frank, reflective, and funny, even if he was irreverent and had a hatred for Trump. Mr. Cohen has not wavered since he provided me with key details about the campaign and its cover-up, which will be central to Mr. Trump's testimony in his Manhattan criminal trial, which begins Monday. As we approach his long-awaited appearance, I think he will exceed expectations in how he presents to the jury, much like Daniels did last week.
The District Attorney's Office set it that way through efforts during the trial. They have systematically corroborated Cohen's future testimony with a series of credible witnesses and corroborating documents, gradually narrowing the scope of unconfirmed evidence that Cohen will provide.
Mr. Cohen will no doubt be the subject of vigorous cross-examination, including the many lies he now admits he told while dating Mr. Trump and his guilty plea to charges of perjury. There is a high possibility that But the prosecution's effective strategy greatly shortened the leap of faith required for the jury to believe him (as it did when I interviewed him).
Here's how prosecutors upfront supported Cohen's testimony across three major aspects of the case:
Trump's intention was to benefit his campaign
First, Cohen is expected to testify, based on his conversations with Trump, that the purpose of the payment to Daniels and subsequent alleged falsification of business records was to benefit Trump's 2016 presidential campaign. . Prosecutors have already presented extensive evidence to the jury in this regard. For example, David Pecker, former chief executive of American Media and publisher of the National Enquirer, said he met with Trump and Cohen at Trump Tower in Manhattan in 2015 for a clear purpose. He testified that he had hatched a “catch-and-kill'' conspiracy. Benefits the Trump campaign.
Pecker explained that the scheme later began paying hush money to Stormy Daniels to further benefit the Trump campaign. Therefore, Mr. Cohen's testimony that he discussed the payments with Mr. Trump and that their purpose included benefiting the campaign is a continuation of his already established intentions.
In another example, the jury also heard evidence of Trump's own statements suggesting the purpose of the scheme was to benefit his campaign. Hope Hicks, a former Trump aide, said that when the Daniels scandal broke in 2018, the former president told her that it would be better to deal with allegations of sexual contact with Daniels at that point. He testified that he told him. That story will come out before the election. ”
Mr. Hicks also testified that Mr. Trump admitted that he knew that Mr. Cohen paid Mr. Daniels. Mr. Trump insisted that Mr. Cohen paid the money himself, not at Mr. Trump's direction, but Mr. Hicks did not believe him. She explained that it is inconceivable that Mr. Cohen would have paid Mr. Daniels without President Trump's direction.
Trump Tower Conference: Making a Plan
Cohen is likely to testify about a second meeting in President Trump's office between October 10, 2016 and October 28, 2016, attended by former Trump Organization finance chief Allen Weisselberg. , where President Trump agreed to pay Daniels $130,000. Cohen said Trump told him, “It's not a lot of money, so you should just do it. So go ahead and do it.” Mr. Trump then allegedly instructed Mr. Cohen and Mr. Weisselberg to “fix everything.” The two reportedly met again at Trump Tower in early January to do so, and later confirmed it to Trump.
Keith Davidson, the former lawyer who negotiated the hush-money payment for Ms. Daniels, made it clear in his testimony that he believed Mr. Trump was responsible for final approval of the funds. He testified that Cohen needed Trump's approval to transfer the funds and that he believed Trump was the source. Mr. Davidson maintained that he never believed that Mr. Cohen was the ultimate source of the funds, asserting that the funds were expected to come from Mr. Trump or related business entities.
Deborah Tarasoff, a former Trump Organization accountant, also told the jury that Trump was directly involved in compensating Cohen. Tarasoff detailed how payments shifted from the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust to Trump personally in 2017, reflecting a deeper personal involvement. She detailed the processing of checks for Trump's signature, including a $70,000 check signed by Weisselberg and Eric Trump and a $35,000 check sent from Trump's personal account. Ta.
This evidence is critical to refuting defense claims that Trump was cut out of the deal and makes clear that Trump actively repaid Cohen, including during his time in the White House. It is shown in
White House meeting: Redemption for Mr. Cohen
Mr. Cohen is also expected to testify that he met with Mr. Trump at the White House in February 2017, where Mr. Trump again agreed to a repayment plan that Mr. Weisselberg concocted. President Trump then personally signed a check to Cohen from the Oval Office for the remainder of the year. Prosecutors have already elicited testimony supporting the meeting and redemption plan, highlighting Trump's frugality and check-signing practices.
For example, Trump Organization administrator Jeffrey McConney could testify about Weisselberg's handwritten notes — “I've seen his handwriting for 35 years,” McConney said, recognizing it. He said he had confirmed the exact repayment scheme Trump was using to repay the hush money to Cohen. This key physical evidence from Mr. McConney and Mr. Weisselberg (who may not have testified in person) independently revealed the “total” amount that Mr. Trump paid Mr. Cohen after their February 2017 meeting. It is something to prove.
Madeleine Westerhout, a former Trump aide who sat just outside the Oval Office and looked directly into Trump's desk, said she was actually present at the White House for the February redemption meeting. President Trump was able to testify both about his plans to do so and about President Trump's early business practices. his government. She detailed how President Trump remained focused on the personal and business details of the Trump Organization while in the White House.
This supports the idea that Mr. Trump would have been paying close attention to the $35,000 check he was signing to Mr. Cohen during the same period. Mr. Westerhout also read an email to Mr. Cohen confirming the February meeting at the White House.
Finally, Sally Franklin, senior vice president at book publisher Penguin Random House, quoted from Trump's own writings and in his own words about check signing and other practices that repeatedly corroborated Cohen's story. .
For example, a chapter titled “How to Pick Pennies” in “Trump: Think Like a Billionaire” states that Trump “received a check for 50 cents and we at the Trump Organization deposited it. They might say it's cheap. I looked at the bottom line and judged it… because like I said before, I know where my money is being spent. In the same spirit, I always read my bill to make sure I haven't been overcharged.”
Defense attorneys will certainly pursue Cohen over his past lies and perjury convictions while working for President Trump. But Mr. Cohen's case is so strongly supported that for the jury, Mr. Cohen's conviction does not require a leap of faith, but more like a leap of faith. Combine that with the brutally unfiltered, inner-hearted person I first met in 2019, and you might surprise us all, and of course the jury, beyond expectations. This means that you will have a witness that you will never know.
For more CNN news and newsletters, create an account at CNN.com.
