More stories

  • in

    Donald Trump comes face to face with former fixer Michael Cohen – podcast

    This week, it was Donald Trump’s former fixer Michael Cohen’s turn to take the stand in the hush-money trial in New York. Cohen walked the jury through the steps he says he took to make any potential story that would damage Trump’s image go away, in advance of the 2016 election.
    The defence is trying to chip away at Cohen’s credibility, to sow seeds of doubt among the jury listening to his testimony. So how did he do? Jonathan Freedland asks former federal prosecutor Ankush Khardori what he makes of the prosecution’s star witness so far

    How to listen to podcasts: everything you need to know More

  • in

    Trump’s hush-money case has proven he’s a low-life. Can it prove he’s a criminal? | Margaret Sullivan

    When you set out to explore Donald Trump’s personal life and business practices, you don’t expect to meet any paragons of virtue.Sleazy media figures who buy and “kill” damaging stories? Yes. An adult film actor ready to tell all to make a buck? Certainly. A parade of spokespeople and staffers who compromised their own integrity during his presidential administration? No doubt.A conman, philanderer and grifter himself, the ex-president always has surrounded himself with dicey characters. That’s how he rolls. So it’s hardly surprising that Michael Cohen, the star prosecution witness in the so-called “hush-money” case unfolding in New York City, fits right in.The former Trump lawyer and fixer pleaded guilty in 2018 to campaign-finance violations, tax fraud and bank fraud. He pleaded guilty to lying to Congress. He went to jail. And he was disbarred.That’s why it would be funny – if it weren’t so cringe-inducing – to hear the way Cohen is being praised by some commentators in the endless talk loop of cable-news trial coverage.“Michael’s one of the good guys,” was the assessment of CNN guest-talker Anthony Scaramucci, who memorably lasted less than two weeks as Trump’s communications director and who is now vehemently opposed to Trump winning a second term.I’m all for redemption, but I wouldn’t go that far. I certainly wouldn’t hold up Michael Cohen as an example of a great American.But, against the odds, Cohen’s testimony does ring true. (Not that one can hear it directly; unfortunately, the trial is not being televised or even recorded for audio only.)His words, and the description of his demeanor from those inside the courtroom, make a kind of consistent and logical sense. What’s more, much of it has been “pre-corroborated” by testimony and evidence earlier in the trial.We’ve heard from people such as David Pecker, who ran the National Enquirer, where he caused damaging stories to be given the “catch-and-kill” treatment to help Trump gain the presidency in 2016. We’ve seen supporting text messages and emails and documents.On the stand on Monday, Cohen didn’t spare himself. He admits he lied and falsified in protecting his boss. He even admitted to secretly recording Trump during a one-on-one meeting and, because the audio has gone public, we can hear the two of them hashing out one of their seedy arrangements; respectable lawyers don’t do that to or with their clients.And he certainly didn’t spare Trump, instead portraying him as the equivalent of a mob boss, as well as someone intimately involved with every decision in keeping his tawdry relationships secret as he sought the presidency in 2016.What the New York district attorney must prove, though, is criminality, not low-life behavior.Will a jury decide that Trump’s behavior amounted to criminal election interference? That will require a lot of connecting the dots – that Stormy Daniels not only was paid off to keep quiet about the time she claims to have had sex with Trump, but that the payment was then recorded falsely in a way that violates campaign finance law.If those dots are going to be connected, it’s Cohen who must connect them.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIt’s not an airtight case. Rather, it is “the least muscular and existentially threatening of the four criminal prosecutions Trump faces”, wrote the Trump biographer Tim O’Brien this week.But it’s likely to be the only case that’s going to come to trial before the election. For those who want a shred of accountability for Trump’s endless misdeeds, this is the one they’ve got. And, given that, Cohen is essential.Can jurors find him credible, given his checkered past? Even if they do, is it possible to make the leap to criminal violations of campaign-finance law? And could every one of them then agree to convict?That’s an Everest-high mountain to climb. Trump’s lawyers are sure to bombard Cohen with his foibles during cross-examination later this week.My take is that Michael Cohen is – finally – telling the truth. He’ll hold up well under the hostile questioning. Jurors will believe him and will buy most of his story, given his consistency and the corroborating evidence and earlier testimony.Finally, Michael Cohen will come off like an honest broker.As for a jury then connecting that credibility to criminal election-law interference? And then, unanimously, deciding to convict the former president?That’s a big stretch.I can believe Michael Cohen’s testimony, but – at least right now – I can’t believe in that outcome.
    Margaret Sullivan is a Guardian US columnist More

  • in

    Trump on Trial: National Enquirer boss dishes on Trump

    You’re reading the Guardian US’s free Trump on Trial newsletter. To get the latest court developments delivered to your inbox, sign up here.On the docket: Pecker tells allDavid Pecker, the former publisher of the National Enquirer, returned to the witness stand on Tuesday as a witness for the prosecution and explained to jurors how he coordinated with Donald Trump and his team to bury scandals about the then candidate during the 2016 campaign.Pecker laid out how he’d repeatedly paid to purchase stories about Trump’s alleged marital infidelities before keeping them from reaching the light of day – a scheme known as “catch-and-kill” that prosecutors claim Trump illegally falsified business records to conceal in order to help his presidential campaign.Pecker said he had a “great relationship” with Trump that dated back to the late 1980s – then spent the next hours of testimony damning him with not-so-faint praise.Pecker described Trump as “very knowledgeable”, “very detail-oriented”, “very cautious and very frugal”, and “almost a micromanager” in his business dealings. Those complimentary descriptions hurt Trump because prosecutors need to prove that Trump had direct knowledge of the scheme to pay his attorney Michael Cohen back for his payments to adult film star Stormy Daniels by falsely labeling them as business expenses.Pecker then discussed a 2015 meeting he had at Trump Tower with Trump, Cohen and Hope Hicks, a top Trump campaign official, where they asked him what he could do “to help the campaign”.He promised to be the campaign’s “eyes and ears” to find out about “women selling stories” about Trump, and work to kill them, because Trump was “well known as the most eligible bachelor and dated the most beautiful women” (another unhelpful compliment for Trump, who had been married to his third wife, Melania, for a decade at that point). He then testified that he routinely coordinated with Cohen at Trump’s behest to run negative stories about Trump’s political foes. It’s a misdemeanor under New York law to conspire to promote the election of someone by unlawful means.Pecker then walked through two schemes to catch and kill those stories. The first was paying Trump Tower doorman Dino Sajudin $30,000 for the rights to a story about Trump fathering a child with a maid who worked in the building. When Pecker told Cohen the Enquirer would pay the fee itself (even though he didn’t plan to run the story), he said Cohen told him “the boss would be very pleased”.Pecker then testified that he bought the rights to the story of Karen McDougal, a former model who claims she had an affair with Trump.Pecker said Trump called him once about McDougal, but that most of his interactions were with Cohen.“Michael was very agitated – it looked like he was getting a lot of pressure,” Pecker said shortly before court adjourned for the day.Pecker will return to the witness stand when the trial resumes on Thursday. He’ll likely finish testifying about McDougal and move on to explain his role in connecting Trump’s team to Stormy Daniels.Judge rips Trump’s lawyer during contempt hearingView image in fullscreenOn Tuesday morning, before the trial resumed with Pecker’s testimony, Judge Juan Merchan held a hearing to determine whether he should find Trump in contempt for repeatedly violating his gag order prohibiting the former president from attacking potential witnesses and jurors.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionAs Hugo Lowell reported from the courtroom, it didn’t go well for Trump’s team.Merchan was deeply skeptical of arguments from Trump attorney Todd Blanche, expressing frustration that Blanche wasn’t answering his questions about Trump’s specific social media posts, and rebuking him for his arguments.“Mr Blanche, you’re losing all credibility, I have to tell you right now,” Merchan said at one point. “You’re losing all credibility with the court.”Prosecutors had highlighted 10 different Trump social media posts in which he’d attacked likely witnesses including Cohen and Daniels and reposted attacks on the jury itself. They also said they’d file paperwork on an 11th example: Trump left court on Monday and immediately went on camera to attack Cohen by name. They said they wouldn’t seek jail time for the violations, but asked Merchan to fine Trump the legal maximum of $1,000 for each violation.Blanche’s arguments that Trump was “allowed to respond to political attacks” and that, in some cases, he was just resharing others’ comments didn’t fly with Merchan.“Give me one. Give me one recent attack he was responding to,” Merchan said when Blanche said Trump was just responding in kind.Merchan didn’t issue a ruling on whether he’d hold Trump in contempt.But Trump was nonetheless furious. After court concluded for the day, the former president complained to reporters that the “totally unconstitutional” gag was blocking him from attacking likely witnesses.“They can say whatever they want, they can lie, but I’m not allowed to say anything. I just have to sit back and look at why a conflicted judge has ordered me to have a gag order,” he said. More

  • in

    Trump’s hush-money trial: National Enquirer publisher says he was ‘eyes and ears’ of 2016 campaign

    Donald Trump sat for the second day of witness testimony in court in Manhattan on Tuesday in his criminal trial over hush-money payments to an adult film star and an alleged fraudulent cover-up of those payments just weeks before the 2016 election.David Pecker, the ex-president’s longtime ally and former publisher of the National Enquirer – who prosecutors contend was integral in illicit, so-called catch-and-kill efforts to prevent negative stories about Trump from going public – was on the stand again as a prosecution witness after a brief appearance on Monday following opening statements.He told the court about being invited to a meeting with Trump and his then lawyer, Michael Cohen, in New York in 2015 after Trump had just declared his candidacy for president and was seeking a friendly and powerful media insider.“They asked me what can I do – and what my magazines could do – to help the [election] campaign … I said what I would do is I would run or publish positive stories about Mr Trump and I would publish negative stories about his opponents, and I said that I would also be the eyes and ears because I know that the Trump Organization had a very small staff,” he said.Earlier on Tuesday, however, Judge Juan Merchan heard arguments about a request from prosecutors to hold Trump in contempt of court. They said he repeatedly violated a gag order barring him from publicly attacking witnesses in the trial.Todd Blanche, Trump’s lawyer, argued that his client was just responding to political attacks, not flouting the judge’s order, and that seven of the instances cited were reposts of other people’s content on social media, which “we don’t believe are a violation of the gag order.”Merchan asked whether there was any case law on it. Blanche replied: “I don’t have any case laws, your honor, it’s just common sense.”As Blanche continued to repeat that claim, the judgesaid:“Mr Blanche you’re losing all credibility…with the court. Is there any other argument you want to make?”Merchan on Tuesday did not announce a decision on the contempt issue.Trump’s criminal hush-money trial: what to know
    A guide to Trump’s hush-money trial – so far
    The key arguments prosecutors will use against Trump
    How will Trump’s trial work?
    From Michael Cohen to Stormy Daniels: The key players
    Pecker first took the stand on Monday and provided brief testimony of his work as a tabloid honcho. “We used checkbook journalism and we paid for stories. I gave a number to the editors that they could not spend more than $10,000 to investigate or produce or publish a story, anything over $10,000 they would spend on a story, they would have to be vetted and brought up to me, for approval.”Pecker said he had final say over the content of the National Enquirer and other AMI publications.Prosecutors contend that Pecker was at the center of a plot to boost Trump’s chances in the 2016 election. The alleged plan with Trump and Cohen was, if Pecker caught wind of damaging information, he would apprise Trump and Cohen, so they could figure out a way to keep it quiet. That collusion came to include AMI’s $150,000 payoff to the Playboy model Karen McDougal, who claimed to have had an extramarital affair with Trump, prosecutors have said.This kind of “catch-and-kill” tactic did not happen with Trump before he ran for president, Pecker said.The alleged plot to cover up a claimed sexual encounter between Daniels and Trump is the basis of prosecutors’ case.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionIn October 2016, the Washington Post published a video featuring Trump’s hot-mic comments during an Access Hollywood taping, in which he boasted about sexually assaulting women. The comments, which Colangelo read to jurors, included “Just kiss. I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything … Grab ’em by the pussy. You can do anything.”After they surfaced, the campaign went into panic mode, Colangelo said. It worked to characterize these comments as “locker room talk”, but, when Daniels’ claim came across Trump and his allies’ radar, they feared the backlash: people would see these ill-behaved ways were not mere talk.“Another story about infidelity, with a porn star, on the heels of the Access Hollywood tape, would have been devastating to his campaign,” Colangelo said in his address to jurors. “Cohen carried out a $130,000 payoff to Daniels which Trump allegedly repaid him in checks that he listed as legal services in official company records.“Look, no politician wants bad press, but the evidence at trial will show that this wasn’t spin or communication strategy,” Colangelo continued. “This was a planned, coordinated, long-running conspiracy to influence the 2016 election, to help Donald Trump get elected through illegal expenditures – to silence people with something bad to say about his behavior.“It was election fraud, pure and simple.”Trump denies the charges. On Tuesday afternoon, Steinglass asked why Pecker said he would notify Cohen if he heard “anything about women selling stories”.Pecker said: “In a presidential campaign, I was the person that thought that there would be a lot of women that would come out to try to sell their stories because Mr Trump was well-known as the most eligible bachelor and dated the most beautiful women.”In fact, he was also accused of sexual assault and harassment by a series of women. In a civil case, Trump was found liable last year for having sexually abused the New York writer E Jean Carroll in the 1990s.Pecker said he ran negative stories about Trump rivals, including presidential opponent Hillary Clinton and GOP rivals Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio.He said he paid $30,000 to catch and kill a story from a doorman purporting that Trump had fathered an illegitimate child with a woman who cleaned his New York penthouse.The trial is due to resume on Thursday. More

  • in

    New York prosecutors request Trump gag order ahead of hush-money trial

    Manhattan prosecutors on Monday asked the judge presiding in Donald Trump’s criminal case on charges of falsifying business records to impose a gag order on the former president, seeking to bar him from attacking potential witnesses and revealing juror identities.The request, submitted by prosecutors in the office of the Manhattan district attorney Alvin Bragg, repeatedly referenced the gag order imposed in Trump’s federal criminal trial in Washington to ask for similar limitations on what he can publicly say about the case.“[The] defendant has a long history of making public and inflammatory remarks,” the 30-page filing said. “Those remarks, as well as the inevitable reactions they incite from the defendant’s followers and allies, pose a significant threat to the orderly administration of this criminal proceeding.”The proposed gag order hewed closely to the contours of the order upheld in December by the US court of appeals for the DC circuit that decided Trump’s inflammatory statements in the federal election interference case could not remain unrestricted, despite his objections.Prosecutors asked the New York judge Juan Merchan to limit Trump from assailing people in three categories: known or foreseeable witnesses concerning their trial testimony; court staff and the district attorney’s staff as well as their families; and any prospective jurors.The filing made extensive use of Trump’s posts on his Truth Social platform decrying the criminal cases in their filing, notably including a post that Trump published in March last year when he erroneously predicted he would be arrested in connection with the business records case.“THE FAR & AWAY LEADING REPUBLICAN CANDIDATE & FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATE OF AMERICA, WILL BE ARRESTED ON TUESDAY OF NEXT WEEK,” Trump had written in a post attached as an exhibit. “PROTEST, TAKE OUR NATION BACK!”The filing also drew direct lines from Trump’s inflammatory statements about the case to actions taken by his followers, arguing that immediately after that post in particular, the district attorney’s office received its first threat – even before Trump was formally charged.Trump’s lawyers are likely to oppose the gag order and could appeal it should Merchan agree with prosecutors. Still, if Merchan were to impose a gag order, he would be the latest in a string of judges in federal and state courts restricting Trump’s most acerbic remarks.The gag order request comes weeks before Trump is scheduled for trial in the Manhattan criminal case on 25 March. Last year, the district attorney’s office charged Trump with 34 counts of falsifying business records to cover up hush-money payments to the porn star Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election.Prosecutors have cast the case as an attempt by Trump to manipulate the 2016 election, arguing Trump paid $130,000 to buy Daniels’ silence about the affair because he was supposedly concerned about damaging his presidential campaign.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionThe charges hinge on how the hush money was recorded on Trump’s business records. Trump falsified the records, prosecutors allege, by recording the reimbursements to his former lawyer Michael Cohen – who made the payment to Daniels – as “legal expenses” from a “retainer agreement”.To make their case, prosecutors asked the judge in a separate filing on Monday to allow them to introduce ancillary evidence at trial related to their 2016 election interference theory, including other hush-money payments Trump made in advance of the 2016 election.They also asked the judge to allow them to use the infamous Access Hollywood tape where Trump boasted about groping women, which came shortly before Trump made the hush-money payment to Daniels.Trump’s lawyers pushed back at prosecutors in their own filing, asking the judge to exclude evidence about the 2016 election because it was irrelevant to the actual business records allegations. They also asked Cohen to be barred from testifying because he had previously made misstatements. More

  • in

    Trump fined $10,000 for violating gag order and described as ‘not credible’ on witness stand – as it happened

    Judge Arthur Engoron has fined Trump $10,000 after holding a brief hearing in which he called the ex-president to testify about his possible violation of a gag order this morning. Engoron previously ordered Trump not to make disparaging comments about his staff; in commentary this morning, Trump appeared to make one such statement about Engoron’s law clerk.Trump denied that he was speaking about Engoron’s clerk, and insisted he was speaking about Michael Cohen. Engoron disagreed.“As the trier of fact I find that the witness is not credible,” Engoron said in imposing the fine.Moments before it concluded, Cohen said: “Donald Trump spoke like a mob boss.”Cohen’s comment was in reference to prior statements about Trump’s directives which the ex-president’s defense team has described as inconsistent.Specifically, Trump’s team has honed in on Cohen’s testimony to Congress in which he appeared to say that his former boss didn’t tell him to inflate real estate valuations.Cohen was asked in February 2019: “Did Mr Trump direct you or Mr Weisselberg to inflate the numbers for his personal statement?”“Not that I recall, no,” Cohen said.On re-direct, Cohen explained: “He did not specifically state ‘Michael, go inflate the numbers.“As I’ve stated in my books and I’ve stated publicly, Donald Trump speaks like a mob boss,” Cohen said. Trump says what he wants without “specifically” saying.“We understood what he wanted, so when they asked me, ‘Did Mr Trump direct you or Mr Weisselberg to inflate numbers for his personal statement?’ and I stated, ‘No, not that I recall,’ that’s what I was referring to.”Court has wrapped for the day.There was a bit more bizarre courtroom drama just now. Trump abruptly left the courtroom after Cohen’s cross-examination wrapped.Faherty, a lawyer for the attorney general’s office, is now questioning Cohen on redirect. It’s unclear why Trump walked out of the courtroom.Cross-examination of Michael Cohen has resumed, but all eyes are still on the events that just transpired with Judge Arthur Engoron’s imposition of a $10,000 fine on Trump after apparently violating a gag order.Engoron imposed this punishment after calling Trump to the witness stand to explain to whom the ex-president was referring when he said: “This judge is a very partisan judge with a person who is very partisan sitting alongside him, perhaps even much more partisan than he is.’”Engoron asked Trump lawyer Chris Kise: “Mr Kise you, I believe, said on behalf of defendant Trump … that he was referring to Michael Cohen when he said what he said.”“Is that correct?”“Yes,” Kise said.“I’m going to hold a hearing right now about that,” Engoron said.Engoron called Trump to testify.“Mr Trump, did you say in the hallway this morning, ‘This judge is a very partisan judge with a person who is very partisan sitting alongside him, perhaps even much more partisan than he is.’”“Yes,” Trump said.“To whom were you referring when you said the person sitting alongside of me?”“You and Cohen,” Trump replied.“Are you sure that you didn’t mean the person on the other side of me – my principal law clerk?”“Yes, I’m sure.”Engoron asked whether he had previously referred to her as partisan.“I think she’s very biased against us,” Trump said.Trump also addressed his prior failure to remove past disparaging comments about the clerk in a timely way, which flouted a previous Engoron order.Trump said that his camp had put up a picture of her and removed it after Engoron took issue, but that “we have so many different sites”.“I believe that it was one of the political groups one of the Pacs that had it up or left it up,” Trump said.After Trump left the stand, Engoron said: “As the trier of fact, I find that the witness is not credible and that he had been referring to my law clerk.”Trump’s team unsuccessfully pushed back against the fine.Judge Arthur Engoron has fined Trump $10,000 after holding a brief hearing in which he called the ex-president to testify about his possible violation of a gag order this morning. Engoron previously ordered Trump not to make disparaging comments about his staff; in commentary this morning, Trump appeared to make one such statement about Engoron’s law clerk.Trump denied that he was speaking about Engoron’s clerk, and insisted he was speaking about Michael Cohen. Engoron disagreed.“As the trier of fact I find that the witness is not credible,” Engoron said in imposing the fine.Donald Trump has just sat down at the witness stand.The lunch break ended and court has resumed.Judge Engoron is now addressing Trump’s possible gag order violation.We’re still on the lunch break, but Trump has commented on the possible gag order violation that judge Engoron discussed earlier.Trump wouldn’t discuss what transpired after court broke for lunch; after media and public left the courtroom, it was sealed to reporters and observers.As shown in this video by Law 360’s Frank Runyeon, Trump denied violating the gag order.It’s possible we will know more about the potential gag order violation when court resumes after lunch.Habba just concluded her cross-examination of Cohen, leaning hard on her argument that he’s dishonest – and angry that his former confidant and boss didn’t help him.She prompted Cohen to say that he was being untruthful during prior congressional testimony in which he said “I don’t recall” when asked if Trump inflated asset valuations.“Did you ever ask President Trump to pardon you while he was in the White House?” Habba asked.“No,” Cohen said.“He didn’t pardon you, did he?”“No,” Cohen replied with force.Court proceedings are now on a break for lunch. They will resume at about 2.15pm, with additional cross-examination from another lawyer in Trump’s camp.Habba is now trying to portray Cohen as irrelevant and desperate to make money off of his ill-fated relationship with Trump. Did he make money off of his Trump tell-all? How much did he make?“And without stories or accusations about President Trump, you really don’t have anything to [sell]?” Habba asked.“I disagree,” Cohen responded.“Your primary income is speaking about Trump,” Habba pressed. “The more outrageous your stories are about president Trump, the more money you make, is that accurate, Mr Cohen?”“President Trump makes you relevant, doesn’t he?” she said later.“I think the circumstances make me relevant.” Before Cohen returned to the witness stand several minutes ago, Judge Engoron – who fined Trump $5,000 for violating a gag order that barred Trump from publicly commenting about his staff – said he was just alerted to comments that appeared to violate said order yet again.“It was just brought to my attention that the Associated Press reported…Mr Donald J Trump just stated the following to the press gaggle outside the courtroom: ‘This judge is a very partisan judge with a person who is very partisan sitting alongside him, perhaps even much more partisan than he is.’”“It’s really easy for the public or anyone to know who that person is,” Engoron said, referring to the law clerk whom Trump previously disparaged.“This recent statement – assuming the Associated Press is correct– obviously was intentional. I stated the last time that any future violations would be severely punished,” Engoron said. “Again, I should ask the question: Why should there not be severe sanctions for this blatant, dangerous disobeyl of a clear court order?”Trump lawyer Chris Kise insisted: “His whole commentary related to Mr Cohen and his credibility as a witness. We’re certainly aware of the order.”Engoron didn’t appear to buy the explanation, saying that the word “alongside” strongly suggested Trump was referring to his clerk. “I’ll take the whole matter under advisement,” Engoron said.Right before recess, Trump’s lawyer specifically pointed to Cohen’s use of the former president for personal gain and media content.Habba’s cross has also tried to paint Cohen as a spurned friend desperate to save his own skin.She asked Cohen whether he ever told Robert Costello, who was once a longterm Trump ally, “I don’t have anything on Donald Trump. I swear to god I don’t have anything on Donald Trump.“I don’t recall that.”“Do you recall that you told him that you would do – excuse my French – whatever the F it takes to avoid jail time?”“I don’t recall that, either.”Habba later intimated that Cohen was upset at Trump for not giving him a top White House position. She showed a series of spring 2017 texts between Cohen where someone listed as “Person 4” speculated about Trump’s chief-of-staff pick.“Keep guessing, dopey,” Cohen said.“Stop!!! You!” Person 4 replied, writing shortly thereafter: “OMG Please be true. Are you serious? You need to.”“He needs to ask, I would never,” Cohen responded.“You were never given a position in the White House, were you, Mr Cohen?”“I was given the position that I asked for. There’s no shame in being personal attorney to the president.”Court has now broken for the mid-morning break. Habba’s cross-examination of Cohen has spiraled from showmanship to campy theatrics as she has repeatedly nitpicked the former Trump fixer’s comments, down to his diction.During these exchanges–and squabbles with opposing counsel–Habba would raise the volume of her voice at key moments to make a point.While lawyers can be theatrical–and many of the best are–Cohen’s refusal to take guff contributed to the abject zaniness characterizing moments of this morning’s proceedings.“I’ve answered every question that you want, why are you screaming at me?” Cohen said.When Habba asked Cohen whether James initiated the investigation because of his comments on Trump, she pointed toward the state’s top prosecutor, who raised her hand from the first row of the gallery.“You’re welcome,” Cohen said to the courtroom. The courtroom erupted into laughter.“You’re welcome?” Habba said. “That’s telling.”“I was being comical,” Cohen said shortly thereafter.At another point, when Habba asked Cohen about the AG’s investigation, he said: “You can ask Ms. James.”“Objection,” James said from the gallery, prompting chuckles.Here are some of the latest images of key people returning to court for Trump’s civil fraud trial.Not surprisingly, Trump attorney Alina Habba is trying to cast Michael Cohen as a liar, as he’s the key witness in New York attorney general Letitia James’s civil fraud case against the ex-president.She’s also tried to catch Cohen in a trap admitting to perjury. (Lying under oath, which is perjury, constitutes a crime.)She specifically honed in on Cohen’s disavowal Tuesday of his guilt in several crimes he did, in fact, admit to five years ago.“There was no tax evasion. At best, it could be characterized as a tax omission. I have never in my life not paid taxes,” Cohen had insisted, noting that he’d spoken out against this charge many times. Cohen said there were crimes he did plead guilty to that he committed, but not everything.“I wanted to correct the record because when all of this started, it was overwhelming, the amount of misinformation, disinformation, mal-information about me was overwhelming and enormous,” Cohen said. He also disavowed arranging the payment to Karen McDougal, which he admitted to during his first plea proceeding.“I acknowledged my complicity in the Stormy Daniels matter, but…I never paid Karen McDougal,” Cohen said Tuesday. “I was tasked to review documents to ensure that Trump was protected.”Habba repeatedly asked Cohen whether he committed “perjury” during his guilty plea before the late Manhattan federal court judge William Pauley.After lawyers on both sides went head-to-head about whether Habba could use the word ‘“perjury,” Engoron instructed them to proceed without the term. She eventually got her point across, without the linguistic showmanship.“Yesterday was the first time you admitted, in open court, that you lied to Judge Pauley, correct?”“In open court?” Cohen said. “Yes.”Michael Cohen is back on the stand.Trump lawyer Alina Habba, after wishing him “good morning”, said she reminded Cohen that he was still under oath.“True,” Judge Arthur Engoron said plainly from the bench.She’s asking Cohen about the many felonies he pleaded guilty to in 2018.Within moments, the attorney general’s office took issue with these questions, as Habba on Tuesday repeatedly asked him about this.“We did this yesterday,” Colleen Faherty, a lawyer for the attorney general, said.Donald Trump has entered the courtroom. He looked forward as he walked and took his seat at the defense table without fanfare.Court was called to order several moments before his arrival; lawyers have been discussing housekeeping matters with the judge.Good morning from downtown Manhattan, where Michael Cohen is expected to soon return to the witness stand in Donald Trump’s New York state civil fraud trial.Cohen’s testimony at the 60 Centre Street courthouse stems from New York attorney general Letitia James’s lawsuit against the ex-president. Her civil claim maintains that Trump unlawfully inflated values of his properties on financial statements when it suited him.Cohen, the onetime Trump fixer who in 2018 pleaded guilty to a plethora of federal crimes related to his ex-boss, repeatedly implicated him in financial wrongdoing on Tuesday. When proceedings resume this morning, Trump attorney Alina Habba will continue her cross-examination.Here are the key points of Cohen’s testimony against Trump on Tuesday.Trump wanted to “reverse-engineer” his net worth.Cohen testified that Trump wanted him and Weisselberg to figure out a way for him to have the net worth he wanted. Per Cohen: “I was tasked, by Mr Trump, to increase the total assets based upon a number that he arbitrary selected, and my responsibility, along with Allen Weisselberg predominately, was to reverse-engineer the various different asset classes, increase those assets, in order to achieve the number that Mr Trump had [requested].”Cohen and Weisselberg altered financial statements “by hand” to give Trump his desired net worth.During meetings when Cohen and Weisselberg discussed Trump’s financials, he would make demands about what they should be. Trump, Cohen said, “would look at the total assets and he would say, ‘I’m actually not worth $4.5bn, I’m really worth more like six.’“He would then direct Allen and I to go back to Allen’s office and return after we achieved the desir[ed] goal.” Cohen said he and Weisselberg would go line-by-line on the financial statement and “mark it up by hand … in able to get the total asset number that Mr Trump asked us to achieve”.Trump allegedly had final control over business operationsThe New York attorney general’s office is working hard to prove that Trump and his inner circle conspired in defrauding lenders and insurers with inflated property valuations. Cohen’s testimony puts Trump at the center of making decisions that enabled this alleged wrongdoing. Trump, he said, made decisions about his desired net worth, how he’d present himself to insurers–and which of his underlings would carry out his wishes. “All the final decisions were done by Mr Trump,” Cohen said.Proceedings will kick off around 9.30am ET. We will be providing live coverage as they progress. More

  • in

    Kevin McCarthy’s historic ouster as US House speaker was a tragedy foretold

    “In the past, those who foolishly sought power by riding the back of the tiger ended up inside.” These words, delivered at the US Capitol by president John F Kennedy in his 1961 inaugural address, seemed particularly apt on Tuesday.Kevin McCarthy’s ousting as speaker of the House of Representatives was a personal tragedy foretold. The first seeds of destruction had been planted when, days after declaring Donald Trump responsible for the January 6 insurrection, McCarthy went grovelling at Trump’s Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida and made his pact with the devil.Then came last year’s midterm elections when, thanks to Trump’s assault on democracy and his rightwing supreme court’s assault on abortion rights, Republicans underperformed and squeezed out only a narrow majority, handing extremists a huge influence.The power-hungry McCarthy was elected speaker after an epic 15 rounds of voting and, minutes later, publicly paid tribute to Trump for working the phones to help him secure victory. But he had cut a deal with the far right that would come back to bite him, including rules that made it easier to challenge his leadership.McCarthy then spent nine months trying to govern an ungovernable party, described by former Barack Obama strategist David Axelrod as the “Lord of the Flies caucus”. As the Democratic minority leader Hakeem Jeffries has noted, the House Republican caucus is in a state of civil war.It is further proof that the political consultant Rick Wilson was on to something when he wrote a book titled Everything Trump Touches Dies. After sneaking a win in the electoral college in 2016 while losing the national popular vote, Trump has repeatedly been a grim reaper for his party’s fortunes in 2018, 2020 and 2022.The toadies who have shown extreme loyalty to Trump have usually regretted it. His fixer Michael Cohen went to prison. His vice-president, Mike Pence, could have been hanged on January 6 and is now condemned to the purgatory of explaining to half-empty rooms why he should be president. Rudy Giuliani, Mark Meadows and other January 6 co-conspirators face possible jail time.Now McCarthy, who purported to be restraining Trump’s worst impulses, has become the first speaker of the US House in history to be forced out of the job. Trump did nothing to spare him the humiliation. McCarthy destroyed any hope of being rescued by Democrats by announcing a baseless impeachment inquiry into Joe Biden and blaming them for trying to shut down the government.Maxwell Frost, a Democratic congressman from Florida, wrote on X, the platform formerly known as Twitter: “The Speaker did this to himself by lying to both Democrats AND Republicans. Speaker McCarthy will go down in history as the weakest Speaker in the history of our country.”No one who has been following US politics in the self-destructive, nihilistic, eat-one’s-own age of Trump will be surprised by Tuesday’s events. Words such as “historic” or “unprecedented” will have to be retired. There is no obvious heir apparent.The Lincoln Project, an anti-Trump group, summed it up: “The Republican party of Trump cannot govern at any level; The Maga parasite is eating them alive. There will be a reckoning for the GOP as the next Speaker will be even more of a Maga apologist because that’s what the party demands. No one is coming to the rescue who has the courage to tell the truth, only cowards who hide behind the chaos and pretend to look busy.”It is a recipe for more days or perhaps weeks of inertia in Congress, which instead of tackling social inequality or supporting Ukraine will be consumed with factional infighting. America’s long march of democratic decay continues. More