Michael Cohen

Subterms

    More stories

    • 100 Shares149 Views

      in US Politics

      Michael Cohen’s lawyer compares Trump to Clinton-Lewinsky case

      by

      A lawyer representing a key witness in the investigation into Donald Trump over hush money payments has drawn comparisons between the case and the sex scandal that embroiled Bill Clinton, as it became clear there would be no indictment in the Trump investigation until next week at the earliest.Lanny Davis, who represents Michael Cohen, Trump’s former fixer, hypothesized about what might have happened if Clinton had handled his affair with Monica Lewinsky differently.Clinton was impeached in his second term after lying about his relationship with Lewinsky while he was president. Davis, who served as a special adviser to Clinton, speculated about how the Democrat might have been perceived if a representative had paid money to Lewinsky.Cohen, who was Trump’s lawyer and fixer for more than a decade before he turned on his former boss, paid $130,000 to Stormy Daniels to prevent her from going public with allegations that she and Trump slept together a decade before he won the White House.“I won’t mention the name of the former president I worked for,” Davis told Politico in an interview.“But can you imagine if … he had written personal checks as part of that controversy?“Can you imagine if I had personal checks out of a checking account of a sitting president that reimburses a hush money scheme, and then I used a legal argument to say why he should get off: because New York state law doesn’t apply to federal law? Good luck!”Cohen, who was sentenced to three years in prison for ​​tax evasion and campaign-finance violations related to the Daniels payment, has been a key witness in the investigation into Trump.The now-disbarred lawyer paid Daniels through a shell company, and was then reimbursed through Trump, whose company logged the reimbursements as legal expenses. The Manhattan district attorney, Alvin Bragg, is leading the investigation into potential wrongdoing by Trump.Davis, a lawyer and longtime political operative, claimed in the Politico interview that he himself had triggered that investigation by speaking to Cyrus Vance, Bragg’s predecessor.“Cyrus Vance Sr was the secretary of state under Jimmy Carter – I’m showing my age now […] I was in my 20s when President Carter was elected,” Davis told Politico.“And I got to know Mr Vance. So his son, being the DA of [Manhattan], I called after Michael was sent to prison.”Davis said he believed “the evidence of financial fraud was on the record in the [congressional] hearings and that Vance’s office should interview Michael”.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotion“They came to Otisville [the prison where Cohen served some of his sentence] … They did manage to get a visit, and then two and then three separate visits at the beginning,” Davis said.“And that’s how it began.”Davis’s interview came as the investigation into Trump rolled on in New York. Reports had suggested Trump would be indicted this week – Trump himself claimed, wrongly, last weekend that he would be arrested on Tuesday – but the grand jury hearing the case is not due to meet again until Monday.In the meantime Trump, who is the subject of multiple other legal inquiries, warned on Friday of “potential death and destruction” should he be charged in the case.In a rambling, idiosyncratically punctuated message posted on Truth Social, a niche rightwing social media network that he owns, at 1am, Trump wrote:“What kind of person can charge another person, in this case a former President of the United States, who got more votes than any sitting President in history, and leading candidate (by far!) for the Republican Party nomination, with a Crime, when it is known by all that NO Crime has been committed, & also known that potential death & destruction in such a false charge could be catastrophic for our Country? Why & who would do such a thing? Only a degenerate psychopath that truely [sic] hates the USA!” More

    • 88 Shares189 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump hush-money grand jury proceedings abruptly postponed

      by

      The Manhattan grand jury expected to consider criminal charges against Donald Trump over his role in the payment of hush money to the adult film star Stormy Daniels will not meet on Wednesday, according to a source familiar with the matter, and is on standby about meeting on Thursday.The reason for the schedule change was not immediately clear.The grand jury, which meets in the afternoons on Mondays, Wednesdays and Thursdays, is not required to meet three times every week. It may hear from an additional witness before being asked to vote on whether to return an indictment in connection with the hush money payment, the source said.The adjournment sparked a flurry of speculation among people close to Trump, advisers asking if it signalled weaknesses in the case being prosecuted by the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin Bragg, or whether there was more damning evidence to come.A spokesperson for the district attorney’s office did not respond to a request for comment.On Monday, prosecutors allowed a Trump-aligned lawyer, Robert Costello, to testify before the grand jury. He assailed the credibility and account of the prosecution’s star witness, the former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen.The case centers on the $130,000 Trump paid Daniels through Cohen in the final days of the 2016 election. Trump reimbursed Cohen with $35,000 checks using his personal funds, which were recorded as legal expenses. In 2018, Cohen pleaded guilty to federal charges, some connected to the payments.What charges the district attorney might now seek against Trump remain unclear, though some members of his legal team believe the most likely scenario involves a base charge of falsifying business records, coupled with tax fraud, because Trump would not have paid tax on the payments.In recent days, Trump has been resigned to the fact that he will face criminal charges in the hush-money case, and has repeatedly insisted to advisers that he wants to be handcuffed when he makes an appearance in court, the Guardian previously reported.The former president has reasoned that since he would need to go to Manhattan criminal court in downtown New York and surrender to authorities for fingerprinting and a mugshot, the sources said, he might as well seek to turn it into a spectacle.Trump’s increasing insistence that he wants to be handcuffed behind his back for a perp walk appears to come from various motivations, including his desire to show defiance for what he sees as an unfair prosecution, and to have the whole affair galvanize his base for his 2024 presidential campaign.But above all, sources close to Trump said, he is deeply anxious that any special arrangements, like making his first court appearance by video link or skulking into the courthouse via an obscure entrance, would make him look weak or like a loser.Trump’s legal team has recoiled at the idea of him appearing in person, and recommended that Trump allow them to quietly turn him in next week and schedule a remote appearance, even citing guidance from his Secret Service detail about security concerns.But Trump has rejected that approach. Over the weekend, he told various allies he did not care if someone shot him, as he would become “a martyr” if so.He also said that if he was shot, he would probably win the presidency in 2024, the sources said. More

    • 125 Shares179 Views

      in US Politics

      People vs Donald Trump review: Mark Pomerantz pummels Manhattan DA

      by

      ReviewPeople vs Donald Trump review: Mark Pomerantz pummels Manhattan DAProsecutor who helped convict John Gotti thinks Alvin Bragg let Trump slip from the hook. His memoir proves controversial Mark Pomerantz is a well-credentialed former federal prosecutor. As a younger man he clerked for a supreme court justice and helped send the mob boss John Gotti to prison. He did stints in corporate law. In 2021, he left retirement to join the investigation of Donald Trump by the Manhattan district attorney. Pomerantz’s time with the DA was substantive but controversial.Trump porn star payment a ‘zombie case’ that wouldn’t die, ex-prosecutor says in bookRead moreIn summer 2021, he helped deliver an indictment for tax fraud against the Trump Organization and Alan Weisselberg, its chief financial officer. At the time, Cy Vance Jr, the son of Jimmy Carter’s secretary of state, was Manhattan DA. Pomerantz also interviewed Michael Cohen, Trump fanboy turned convicted nemesis, pored over documents and clamored for the indictment of the former president on racketeering charges.For Pomerantz, nailing Trump for his hush money payment to Stormy Daniels, the adult film star who claims an affair Trump denies, didn’t pass muster. But that avenue of prosecution was a “zombie case” that wouldn’t die. It still hasn’t: a Manhattan grand jury again hears evidence.Pomerantz saw Trump as a criminal mastermind aided by flunkies and enforcers. He believed charges ought to align with the gravity of the crimes. But as Pomerantz now repeatedly writes in his memoir, Alvin Bragg, elected district attorney in November 2021, did not want to move against Trump. In early 2022, Bragg balked. In March, Pomerantz quit – and leaked his resignation letter.“I believe that Donald Trump is guilty of numerous felony violations of the penal law,” Pomerantz fumed. “I fear that your decision means that Mr Trump will not be held fully accountable for his crimes.”Now comes the memoir, People vs Donald Trump: An Inside Account. It is a 300-page exercise in score-settling and scorn. Pomerantz loathes Trump and holds Bragg in less than high regard. He equates the former president with Gotti and all but dismisses the DA as a progressive politician, not an actual crime-fighter.In a city forever plagued by crime and political fights about it, Bragg’s time as DA has proved controversial: over guns, trespassing, turnstile jumping, marijuana and, yes, the squeegee men.Bragg is African American. This week, a group of high-ranking Black officials protested against Pomerantz’s attacks. In response, Pomerantz called Bragg “respected, courageous, ethical and thoughtful” but said: “I disagreed with him about the decision he made in the Trump case.”In his resignation letter, Pomerantz wrote: “I have worked too hard as a lawyer, and for too long, now to become a passive participant in what I believe to be a grave failure of justice.”Trump, he now writes, “seemed always to stay one step ahead of the law”. That may conjure up images of Road Runner and Wile E Coyote but Pomerantz is serious. “In my career as a lawyer, I had encountered only one other person who touched all of these bases: John Gotti, the head of the Gambino organised crime family.”The Goodfellas vibe is integral to Trumpworld. In The Devil’s Bargain, way back in 2017, Joshua Green narrated how Trump tore into Paul Manafort, his then campaign manager, shouting: “You treat me like a baby! Am I like a baby to you … Am I a fucking baby, Paul?” It was if Trump was channeling Joe Pesci.With the benefit of hindsight, Pomerantz concludes that the US justice department is better suited to handle a wholesale financial investigation of Trump than the Manhattan DA. Then again, the attorney general, Merrick Garland, has a lot on his plate. An insurrection is plenty.Pomerantz’s book has evoked strong reactions. Trump is enraged, of course. On Truth Social, he wrote: “Crooked Hillary Clinton’s lawyer [Pomerantz says he has never met her], radically deranged Mark Pomerantz, led the fake investigation into me and my business at the Manhattan DA’s Office and quit because DA Bragg, rightfully, wanted to drop the ‘weak’ and ‘fatally flawed’ case. This is disgraceful conduct by Pomerantz, especially since, as always, I’ve done nothing wrong!”Really?In December, a Manhattan jury convicted the Trump Organization on 17 counts of tax fraud and the judge imposed a $1.6m fine. Alan Weisselberg pleaded guilty and testified against his employer. Trump and three of his children – Ivanka, Don Jr and Eric – are defendants in a $250m civil lawsuit brought by Letitia James, the New York attorney general, on fraud-related charges. That case comes to trial in October 2023, months before the presidential primary. Sooner than that will be the E Jean Carroll trial, over alleged defamation and a rape claim Trump denies.Significantly, state prosecutors say Pomerantz may have crossed an ethical line.“By writing and releasing a book in the midst of an ongoing case, the author is upending the norms and ethics of prosecutorial conduct and is potentially in violation of New York criminal law,” J Anthony Jordan, president of the District Attorneys Association of the State of New York, announced.Never Give an Inch review: Mike Pompeo as ‘heat-seeking missile for Trump’s ass’Read moreBragg accused Pomerantz of violating a confidentiality agreement. Pomerantz is unbowed. “I am comfortable that this book will not prejudice any investigation or prosecution of Donald Trump,” he states on the page. No formal ethics complaint has appeared.Pomerantz also offers a window on personalities that crossed his path. Cohen receives ample attention. Pomerantz lauds Trump’s former fixer for his cooperation but reiterates that Cohen pleaded guilty to perjury.His conduct left Pomerantz shaking his head. Cohen’s liking for publicity could be unsettling. So was his Oval Office tête-a-tête with Trump over the payment to Daniels. Pomerantz was disgusted. Trump and Cohen, he writes, defiled America’s Holy of Holies, its “sanctum sanctorum”.No harm, no foul. Cohen’s lawyer, Lanny Davis, announced: “Mr Cohen will continue to cooperate with DA Bragg and his team, speaking truth to power – as he has always done.” On Wednesday, Cohen met the Manhattan DA for the 15th time. Pomerantz is gone. The show goes on.
      People vs Donald Trump: An Inside Account is published in the US by Simon & Schuster
      TopicsBooksDonald TrumpUS politicsUS taxationRepublicansPolitics booksLaw (US)reviewsReuse this content More

    • 175 Shares199 Views

      in US Politics

      Trump porn star payment a ‘zombie case’ that wouldn’t die, ex-prosecutor says in book

      by

      Trump porn star payment a ‘zombie case’ that wouldn’t die, ex-prosecutor says in bookMark Pomerantz writes of frustration of attempt to make hush money to Stormy Daniels a money-laundering case Donald Trump’s hush money payment to the adult film star Stormy Daniels is a “zombie case” that keeps coming back from the dead, a former New York prosecutor writes in a new book published as his former office once again considers filing criminal charges against the former president over the matter.Prosecutors likened Trump to mob boss and had to prove he wasn’t insane – bookRead morePeople vs Donald Trump: An Inside Account, will be published in the US on Tuesday. It has been extensively reported. The Guardian received a copy.Mark Pomerantz’s book has proved controversial, not least because it arrives as the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin Bragg, continues to investigate Trump, empaneling a grand jury hearing evidence about the Daniels payment. Bragg and Pomerantz, who fell out over the investigation of Trump, have exchanged broadsides in the media.On the page, Pomerantz lists numerous matters on which he says New York prosecutors considered charging Trump, including his tax affairs, his relationships with financial institutions including Deutsche Bank and Ladder Capital, property deals in Washington and Chicago, and leases at Trump Tower in Manhattan.But he says the Daniels payment came to seem a viable way to take Trump on.Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, claims to have had an affair with Trump in 2006. He denies it, but in 2016, as he ran for president, his then lawyer and fixer, Michael Cohen, paid Daniels $130,000 to stay quiet.News of the payment broke in early 2018, when Trump was president. Trump was revealed to have reimbursed Cohen for the payment but only Cohen paid a legal price, his breach of election finance law contributing to a three-year prison sentence. Trump has never been charged.In his book, Pomerantz writes that he came to view the payment as a potential money-laundering offence.“If Clifford had gotten money by threatening to tell the world that she had slept with Donald Trump,” he writes, “that sounded like extortion to me. And if it was extortion, then maybe the hush money she received could be regarded as criminal proceeds, so action taken to conceal Trump’s identity as the source of the money was chargeable as money laundering.”This, Pomerantz writes, was “a new idea, and I got enthusiastic about it”. He shared his ideas with other investigators, he says, and “the return to life of the hush money facts as a potential basis for prosecution sparked a nickname for this part of the investigation … the ‘zombie’ case, because it was alive, and then it was dead, and now it had sprung back to life”.Pomerantz writes that he thought the “zombie case” was “very strong”, as the basic facts were “readily provable”. He describes Cohen’s willing cooperation and evidence that Trump directed Cohen to lie about the payment in the Oval Office itself.In late February 2021, Pomerantz says, he sent a memo to the New York district attorney, then Cy Vance Jr, outlining the “zombie case” and its vital contention that the $130,000 Cohen paid Daniels was “‘dirty money’, or the proceeds of a crime”.He admits he was presenting “a somewhat awkward construct”, in part as he would have to prove Trump was a victim of blackmail.Cohen’s description of Trump’s reaction to Daniels’s claims helped. Pomerantz writes: “I asked what words did they use, and his answer was that Trump referred to it as ‘fucking blackmail’. That was more than sufficient for my purposes.”But Pomerantz says his “creative theorising smacked into [the New York district attorney’s] cautious and conservative culture”. Other investigators “balked” at his extortion theory, he writes, partially because it would be hard to prove Daniels had physically threatened Trump, as necessary under New York law.Pomerantz then focused on Daniels’s lawyer and extracting information from federal prosecutors in New York. But he said he came upon “a new legal problem” which returned the “zombie case” to its grave.Under New York law, he writes, the money Daniels received “had to qualify as ‘criminal proceeds’ when Cohen sent it; otherwise sending was not money laundering. If the money became criminal proceeds only when received, the crime of money laundering had not taken place.”And so the “zombie case” was dead again.Pomerantz describes a brief flutter back to life, when he and colleagues were “contemplating an indictment that featured false business records … which would bring the ‘zombie’ theory back from the dead once again”.But Bragg, who succeeded Vance as Manhattan district attorney, became a lightning rod for liberals when he was reported to have backed away from indicting Trump on any charge. Pomerantz resigned in February 2022, accusing Bragg of acting “contrary to the public interest”.On Sunday, discussing Trump’s tax affairs, Pomerantz told CBS: “If you take the exact same conduct, and make it not about Donald Trump and not about a former president of the United States, would the case have been indicted? It would have been indicted in a flat second.”Pomerantz also called Bragg’s decision not to indict Trump a “grave failure of justice”.Bragg told the New York Times Pomerantz “decided to quit a year ago and sign a book deal”.“I haven’t read the book and won’t comment on any ongoing investigation because of the harm it could cause to the case,” Bragg said.Bragg did secure a conviction against the chief financial officer of the Trump Organization, Allen Weisselberg, on tax charges. Not long after that, the investigation of the Daniels payment was reported to be ongoing.Trump complained about “a continuation of the Greatest Witch Hunt of all time”.But Pomerantz’s “zombie” case has bounced back from the grave once again.In his book, Pomerantz says that if the hush money case is the only one the New York DA pursues against Trump, it will be “a very peculiar and unsatisfying end to this whole saga”, given that “persistent fraud … permeated [Trump’s] financial statements”.“That case involves serious criminal misconduct, [but] it pales in comparison to the financial statement fraud.”TopicsBooksDonald TrumpPolitics booksUS politicsUS crimeMichael CohenStormy DanielsnewsReuse this content More

    • 125 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Michael Cohen: prosecutors could ‘indict Trump tomorrow’ if they wanted

      by

      Michael Cohen: prosecutors could ‘indict Trump tomorrow’ if they wantedNew York investigation of Trump Organization is one of a number of sources of legal jeopardy for the former president Prosecutors in New York could “indict Donald Trump tomorrow if they really wanted and be successful”, the ex-president’s former lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen said on Sunday, discussing investigations of Trump’s business affairs.Can the Republican party escape Trump? Politics Weekly Extra – podcastRead moreAsked if he was “confident you did help Donald Trump commit crimes”, Cohen told NBC’s Meet the Press: “I can assure you that Donald Trump is guilty of his own crimes. Was I involved in much of the inflation and deflation of his assets? The answer to that is yes.”Cohen also repeated his contention that Trump will not run for the White House in 2024, because his huge fundraising success while hinting at such a run is too profitable a “grift” to give up.The Manhattan investigation of the Trump Organization, including whether Trump cheated on property valuations for tax purposes, is one of a number of sources of legal jeopardy for the former president.Trump denies all wrongdoing. Because the Manhattan district attorney, Cyrus Vance Jr, leaves office at the end of the year, some think indictments may be imminent. Cohen, who has cooperated, said: “I really try not to talk about it because it’s their investigation, nor do I want to tip off Trump or the Trump Organization’s people about what is actually happening.“So I would rather just not answer that specific question, other than to say that you can bet your bottom dollar that Allen Weisselberg is not … the key to this. They are going after Donald. They’re going after Don Jr, Eric, Ivanka, a whole slew of individuals, family as well.”Cohen also said he was “not their only witness, and most importantly, what I gave to them are thousands and thousands of documents”.“I’m not asking anybody to believe me,” he said. “No different than when I testified before the House oversight committee. Every statement that I make, I’ve backed up with documentary evidence. I truly believe that they can indict Donald Trump tomorrow if they really wanted, and be successful.”Weisselberg, chief financial officer of the Trump Organization, was indicted on tax charges, a move most thought meant to induce him to turn on Trump. Cohen did so, after being convicted on charges including lying to Congress and facilitating a pay-off to the porn star Stormy Daniels. He recently completed a three-year sentence, much of it served at home thanks to Covid.“They didn’t really do to Allen Weisselberg what they did to me,” Cohen said. “The threat against me was that they were going to file an 85-page indictment that was going to include my wife. They were going to say she was a co-conspirator to the hush money payment, which is absolutely nonsensical.“And, look, I’m married now 27 years. I’m with the same woman for 29 years. There was no chance in the world that I was going to put her at risk with these animals. The way they came down on me is nothing like what they’re doing to Weisselberg.“They should be squeezing right now [Allen’s son] Barry Weisselberg, who works for the Trump Organization, and they should be squeezing [another son] Jack Weisselberg, who is [with] one of only two organizations that made loans to the Trump Organization that we still know.Stormy Daniels to Michael Cohen: Fox News movie brought back memory of sex with TrumpRead more“You know, when you talked about whether or not Donald Trump inflated or deflated his assets, every single word that I had said about that is 100% accurate.”Cohen suffered a setback earlier this month, when a judge in New York ruled the Trump Organization was not liable for legal fees he said it owed. He told NBC he wanted to ensure that others “become responsible for their dirty deeds. I should not be responsible for Donald Trump’s dirty deeds.“Donald Trump is the one who was involved with the campaign finance violation [the payment to Daniels], as was Allen Weisselberg, as was Don Trump Jr, Ivanka, Eric, you know, and several other individuals. They need to be held accountable.“And I, like everybody else, am waiting for both Cyrus Vance Jr’s district attorney case [and New York attorney general] Tish James’s civil case, to move forward, and start moving forward a little quicker.”Cohen was asked if he believed the Trump Organization was “a criminal enterprise”.“Let’s just say that they committed crimes,” he said.TopicsMichael CohenDonald TrumpUS politicsRepublicansUS crimeUS taxationNew YorknewsReuse this content More

    • 163 Shares129 Views

      in US Politics

      Boost for Trump as Cohen loses fees case and Zervos drops defamation suit

      by

      Boost for Trump as Cohen loses fees case and Zervos drops defamation suitJudge rules against ex-president’s former fixer while Apprentice contestant ‘stands by allegations’

      Christie: Trump knows better on election or is just ‘plain nuts’
      Donald Trump saw his former campaign chair and White House strategist Steve Bannon indicted on Friday, for contempt of Congress over the Capitol attack. But the former president also received two slices of good news from courts in New York.Betrayal review: Trump’s final days and a threat not yet extinguishedRead moreIn one development, Summer Zervos, a former contestant on Trump’s TV reality show who accused him of sexual assault, dropped her defamation lawsuit against him.In another, a judge said the Trump Organization did not need to pay millions in legal bills to Trump’s former fixer and attorney, Michael Cohen.Cohen sued the Trump Organization for failing to make good on a promise to pay legal costs resulting from his work. But on Friday a judge said Cohen had failed to prove the bills he incurred amid a criminal investigation and other lawsuits were related to conduct as an employee of the Trump Organization.The alleged missed reimbursements included $1.9m for legal fees and costs, plus another $1.9m related to Cohen’s criminal case, according to Cohen’s 2019 complaint.“In a nutshell, Mr Cohen’s legal fees arise out of his (sometimes unlawful) service to Mr Trump personally, to Mr Trump’s campaign, and to the Trump Foundation, but not out of his service to the business of the Trump Organization,” the judge said.Cohen’s attorney, Lanny Davis, said the decision was “unfair”. He also linked to a crowdfunding account in support of Cohen.A longtime employee, Cohen became a critic of Trump while he was president, testifying that Trump directed him to break the law. In 2018, Cohen pleaded guilty and was sentenced to prison for his role in illegal hush-money payments to women to help Trump’s 2016 campaign and lying to Congress about a project in Russia.Cohen has written a memoir and hosts a politics podcast and is close to completing his sentence under home confinement.On Friday he tweeted: “Despite over 300 hours of cooperation and ‘CONTINUING’”, New York prosecutors, the Federal Bureau of Prisons and the US justice department were ⁩“riding me ‘door to door’ on a matter they refused to bring against [Trump]. Another ‘9’ more days and done!”’It felt like tentacles’: the women who accuse Trump of sexual misconductRead moreZervos is a former contestant on The Apprentice, the show Trump fronted for NBC before entering politics. She sued in New York state court in 2017, saying the then president had damaged her reputation when he said she and other women alleging sexual assault and harassment were making things up.Friday’s filing said the case was dismissed and discontinued with prejudice, meaning Zervos cannot file the same claim in state court in the future. The filing also said each party was responsible for its own costs.Zervos accused Trump of kissing and groping her against her will in 2007, an allegation she detailed during the 2016 election. He denied it.On Friday, the attorneys Beth Wilkinson and Moira Penza said: “After five years, Ms Zervos no longer wishes to litigate against the defendant and has secured the right to speak freely about her experience.“Zervos stands by the allegations in her complaint and has accepted no compensation,” they said.Trump’s lawyer, Alina Habba, called the decision to drop the case “prudent”.“She had no choice but to do so as the facts unearthed in this matter made it abundantly clear that our client did nothing wrong,” Habba said.Trump said: “It is so sad when things like this can happen, but so incredibly important to fight for the truth and justice. Only victory can restore one’s reputation!”At least 26 women have accused Trump of sexual misconduct, harassment or assault, allegations he denies.The writer E Jean Carroll has accused Trump of raping her in a department store dressing room in the 1990s. She sued for defamation after Trump claimed she had lied about the incident to sell a book and said she was “not my type”.Speaking to the Guardian in 2019, Carroll said she had “a crystal clear memory of most of [the alleged attack]. A lot of it is etched into my brain”.‘I accused Donald Trump of sexual assault. Now I sleep with a loaded gun’Read moreShe also described feeling Trump’s “shoulder against me. That was the weight I felt. He was big, and he had one of his topcoats on, so he had that against me, too. I remember the feeling of being pressed by his shoulder, my head bouncing against the wall. That is clear. It was so surprising.”Carroll also showed the Guardian a loaded gun which, wary of threats, she kept on the bedside table.On Friday, responding to news of Zervos’ decision to drop her suit, Carroll wrote: “Friends, I feel MORE determined to fight and win my defamation suit against Trump. In fact, as soon as the Adult Survivors Bill passes in New York, I will sue Trump for rape. My spirits are high! My attorneys are warriors!”The Adult Survivors Act is a state measure that would grant sexual assault survivors the chance to sue after the statute of limitations has expired. It is modeled on legislation that allows people who were victims of abuse as children to sue without time constraints. The measure has not passed the state assembly.TopicsMichael CohenDonald TrumpNew YorkUS politicsnewsReuse this content More

    • 138 Shares169 Views

      in US Politics

      Sounds about right: why podcasting works for Pence, Bannon and Giuliani

      by

      What do Steve Bannon, Rudy Giuliani, Michael Cohen, Mike Pence and Anthony Scaramucci all have in common?
      They worked for Donald Trump, obviously, and several have been implicated in alleged crimes connected to the former president, but as of this month, each of these one-time high-profile Trump acolytes also has his own podcast.
      Pence became the most recent to announce his own show this week, with the announcement that the oft-derided former vice-president will launch a podcast to “continue to attract new hearts and minds to the conservative cause”.
      Like his one-time associates, Pence will enjoy the benefits of a regulation-free platform to share his thoughts on any topic of his choosing, and similarly to Bannon et al, Pence will also be able to keep himself in the public sphere – although the dry, mild-mannered Pence is likely to differ in tone from the Bannons and Giulianis of the podcast world.
      On his War Room podcast, Bannon has called for the beheading of Anthony Fauci – something Pence is unlikely to do – while Giuliani’s Common Sense podcast has been used to further often unhinged claims of political fraud, which Pence might leave alone.
      Cohen and Scaramucci’s podcasts, which are critical of Trump, may not fit in with the Trump worshippers’ efforts, but the fact that five of Trump’s most prominent acolytes chose this format for propagating their views – over television, radio or the written word – is pretty remarkable.
      So, why podcasts? One major factor is one of the oldest in politics: money.
      “I think in part it’s because it’s an easier medium to get into than something like radio or television. The overhead costs are much much lower. If you have an avid base, and the Trump base tends to be an avid base, you can make a ton of money doing this,” Nicole Hemmer, author of Messengers of the Right: Conservative Media and the Transformation of American Politics, said.
      “So there’s a real revenue opportunity for them.”
      Bannon et al will get paid through advertising, the amount varying depending on how many downloads they get.
      “If you have audience of just 35,000 people, you can make a profitable podcast,” Hemmer said. “If you have an audience of 100,000 people, now you’re starting to talk real money, and if you’re getting millions of downloads, you can build kind of an empire.”
      Everyone likes money, but Bannon, Giuliani and Pence will also be pushing their version of conservative politics.
      Meanwhile, the very title of Cohen’s podcast, Mea Culpa, sets out his own, different goal – specifically, an earnest attempt to re-enter polite society. The aims of the notoriously self-promoting Scaramucci – his podcast is co-hosted with his wife and is called Scaramucci and the Mrs – probably include keeping himself famous.
      Podcasts give their hosts the freedom to push all those agendas to a potentially huge audience.
      Bannon, who was pardoned by Donald Trump on the former president’s last day in office, recently claimed that his podcast, Bannon’s War Room, had been streamed 29m times. Bannon is known to lie, but the architect of Trump’s “America first” policies has undoubtedly found an audience, including among those who ransacked the US Capitol on 6 January.
      “It’s all converging, and now we’re on the point of attack tomorrow. It’s going to kick off, it’s going to be very dramatic,” Bannon told his listeners on 5 January. “It’s going to be quite extraordinarily different. And all I can say is strap in. You have made this happen and tomorrow it’s game day.”
      Bannon’s podcast was banned from YouTube after the insurrection, while Giuliani has also had episodes removed, but the power of podcasting is that there is always somewhere for the series to run – both shows are still available on Apple Podcasts, on Bannon’s and Giuliani’s websites, and elsewhere.
      “You have an independence and a freedom if you have a podcast – you’re not going to get de-platformed by social media, you’re not going to get kicked off of Fox News, you’re not going to get kicked off of radio stations,” Hemmer said.
      “You have control and independence, which is a big selling point right now on the right.” More