In a high-stakes hush money trial, former President Donald Trump’s former lawyer, Michael Cohen, testified that Trump was intimately involved in a scheme to suppress stories about sexual encounters that could damage his 2016 campaign. Cohen stated that everything required Trump’s approval and that Trump was updated on efforts to bury stories related to porn actor Stormy Daniels and Playboy model Karen McDougal. He also mentioned that Trump had promised to reimburse him for money he fronted for the hush money payments, although Trump has denied having sexual encounters with these women.
Cohen’s testimony, which spanned several hours, connected Trump directly to the payments and highlighted Trump’s focus on the potential impact on his campaign rather than protecting his family from salacious stories. Cohen detailed steps he took to mask the payments, including opening a bank account to pay Daniels without disclosing the actual purpose to the bank. He also described discussions with Trump and the Trump Organization’s former chief financial officer about reimbursements for the payments.
The testimony revealed Cohen’s negotiations with David Pecker, the publisher of the National Enquirer, regarding the hush money payments and efforts to suppress the stories of Trump’s alleged affairs. Cohen recalled a conversation between Trump and Pecker about the McDougal story and quoted Trump as saying he would take care of the payment. Prosecutors aimed to present Trump as a hands-on manager, with Cohen testifying that Trump would instruct him on matters and wanted to be kept informed.
Despite Cohen’s checkered past and guilty pleas related to the hush money payments and lying to Congress, prosecutors relied on his testimony and other witness accounts to establish Trump’s involvement in the scheme. The defense raised doubts about Cohen’s credibility, describing him as an “admitted liar” with a vendetta against Trump. However, prosecutors aimed to counter these attacks by acknowledging Cohen’s past crimes and presenting other witnesses to support his testimony.
The trial provided insight into the inner workings of the Trump Organization and Trump’s interactions with his associates in handling potentially damaging stories. Cohen’s testimony shed light on Trump’s preoccupation with the impact of the stories on his campaign and campaign finances. The implications of the trial could have legal consequences for Trump, depending on the jury’s assessment of Cohen’s credibility, but could also be politically advantageous for Trump as he fundraises off the legal proceedings and portrays them as part of a biased criminal justice system.
