Advertisement

Cohen May Have Blown Alvin Bragg’s Case Against Trump: Analysis

Advertisement

OPINION: This article may contain commentary which reflects the author's opinion.


Michael Cohen, a convicted serial liar and Donald Trump’s former personal lawyer, may have just blown District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s entire case against the 45th president, according to an analysis posted on the X platform following Cohen’s testimony in the ‘hush money’ case on Monday.

On Monday, Cohen stated in his testimony that he had covertly recorded the president discussing a payment to former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker before the 2016 election. He testified that Pecker had given $150,000 to former Playboy model Karen McDougal to buy her story of an alleged affair with Trump and to keep her allegations silent before the election.

Cohen has also played a key role in the ongoing legal case surrounding alleged hush money payments intended to silence Stormy Daniels, the adult film actress who claimed to have had a sexual encounter with Trump in 2006 at a celebrity golf event. The prosecution has depicted these payments as Trump’s efforts to block harmful information from jeopardizing his 2016 presidential bid. Yet, Cohen’s latest testimony offers a contrasting view, suggesting that Trump considered the allegations not at all important to the success of his campaign.

Cohen indicated that Trump was unconcerned about the potentially embarrassing nature of the story, implying that Trump believed the story would not matter if he were to win the election. This perspective could significantly affect the prosecution’s case, which relies on proving that Trump was actively involved in a cover-up to sway the election outcome.

According to Cohen, the former president’s main concern was not the exposure of the affair itself but rather the potential campaign repercussions. He testified that Trump said, “If I win, it won’t have any relevance. If I lose, I don’t really care,” according to NBC News.

Advertisement

One X user caught what appears to be a key contradiction.

“JUST IN: Michael Cohen just blew the entire case apart as he spent the later part of the morning talking about Trump’s knowledge of the Stormy Daniels situation. According to him, Trump didn’t care about the story being embarrassing because he only cared about the campaign. This testimony contradicts the entire indictment, because the prosecution says Trump wanted to hide the story for campaign gains, but the checks to Cohen came after he was elected. He claims Trump said that if he wins, the story will no longer matter, but also claims Trump paid him as ‘legal fees’ to hide the affair in 2017. Which is it Michael?” the post said.

In 2016, Daniels asserted that she and Trump had an affair in 2006. She further claimed that Trump’s former lawyer paid her $130,000 in hush money shortly before the 2016 election to prevent the story from surfacing. This narrative of Trump’s purported concerns regarding the potential consequences of the Daniels revelation has been central to discussions concerning the hush money transaction.

Advertisement

There was a widespread belief that Trump aimed to sidestep any scandal that could harm his presidential bid, which led to the alleged arrangement with Cohen.

Yet, Cohen’s assertion that Trump remained unfazed casts doubt on the justification that the payment was motivated by apprehension over potential political fallout in the 2016 election.

If Trump genuinely showed no concern about the story, it raises doubts about the motives behind the payments and challenges the prosecution’s narrative that it was a last-ditch effort to safeguard his candidacy.

Fox News legal analyst Gregg Jarrett also poked holes in Cohen’s testimony in a column published Monday following the fixer-lawyer’s testimony.

“Cohen readily confessed that he often lied and bullied people. He also deceived his own client, Trump, by secretly recording him shortly before the 2016 election,” he wrote.

“Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg knows that he is teetering dangerously close to suborning perjury. But he is wholly committed to convicting Donald Trump for crimes not committed or fully revealed,” Jarrett added.

Test your skills with this Quiz!