Michael D. Cohen, an important witness within the Manhattan district lawyer’s prison investigation into Donald J. Trump, testified in entrance of a grand jury on Monday, as prosecutors close to a probable indictment of the previous president.
Mr. Cohen, Mr. Trump’s former fixer, testified for a lot of the afternoon and was anticipated to return on Wednesday to proceed his testimony.
When he walked into the constructing the place the grand jury meets, Mr. Cohen remarked to reporters that he felt “positive” however “a little bit twisted, to be sincere, inside” and that his objective was “to inform the reality.” On his manner out, Mr. Cohen’s lawyer, Lanny J. Davis, referred to as it a “lengthy and productive afternoon” and mentioned that Mr. Cohen “answered all questions.”
His look is considered one of a number of current alerts that the district lawyer, Alvin L. Bragg, is poised to hunt an indictment of the previous president for his position in paying hush cash to a porn star within the days earlier than the 2016 presidential election.
Mr. Bragg’s prosecutors have already questioned not less than seven different folks earlier than the grand jury this yr, and Mr. Cohen is probably going one of many closing witnesses, in line with folks with data of the matter. It could be uncommon for a prosecutor in a high-profile white-collar case to query practically each related witness with out intending to hunt an indictment.
One other sign that an indictment is probably going got here when Mr. Bragg’s workplace knowledgeable Mr. Trump’s attorneys that the previous president might seem earlier than the grand jury this week ought to he need to achieve this. Such affords nearly at all times point out an indictment is shut, as a result of in New York, potential defendants have the correct to reply questions within the grand jury shortly earlier than they’re indicted.
Mr. Trump declined the provide, folks with data of his determination mentioned. And members of his authorized workforce just lately met privately with prosecutors to make their case in opposition to an indictment, considered one of his attorneys, Joseph Tacopina, mentioned on “Good Morning America” on Monday. One of many attorneys on the assembly was Susan R. Necheles, who Mr. Tacopina mentioned was “main the cost” for Mr. Trump.
The previous president has blasted Mr. Bragg’s investigation, saying that the Democratic district lawyer is conducting a politically motivated “witch hunt.” Final week, Mr. Trump issued an announcement wherein he denied having an affair with the porn star, Stormy Daniels, and mentioned Mr. Bragg’s inquiry was an effort to “take down” the main Republican candidate within the 2024 presidential election.
If Mr. Bragg in the end decides to ask the grand jurors to vote to indict Mr. Trump, the case might hinge on Mr. Cohen’s testimony.
It was Mr. Cohen who made the $130,000 hush cash fee to Ms. Daniels in late October 2016, stifling her story of an affair with Mr. Trump. Mr. Trump later reimbursed him, signing month-to-month checks whereas he was president, and Mr. Cohen pleaded responsible in 2018 to federal fees involving the hush cash.
Mr. Bragg’s case would doubtless heart on how Mr. Trump and his household enterprise, the Trump Group, dealt with the reimbursement funds to Mr. Cohen.
The corporate falsely recorded the funds in inner data as authorized bills, in line with courtroom papers in Mr. Cohen’s federal case. The Trump Group’s data additionally cited a phony retainer settlement with Mr. Cohen, who was a lawyer however had no such settlement with the Trumps.
In New York, it may be a criminal offense to falsify enterprise data, however to make it a felony, prosecutors would wish present that Mr. Trump’s “intent to defraud” included an effort to commit or conceal a second crime.
Whereas it’s unclear what that second crime could be on this case, it’s doable that Mr. Bragg will cite a violation of state election regulation. Just like the federal prosecutors who charged Mr. Cohen, Mr. Bragg’s prosecutors might argue that the fee to Ms. Daniels was a bootleg contribution to Mr. Trump’s marketing campaign, provided that the cash silenced Ms. Daniels, which helped his candidacy.
A conviction is just not a certain factor. An try to mix the false data cost with the election violation can be primarily based on a authorized principle that has not been evaluated by judges, elevating the likelihood {that a} courtroom might throw out or restrict the fees. But when a case does go to trial, the circumstances of the hush cash fee — a president basically paying off a porn star — might enchantment to a jury.
At trial, Mr. Trump’s attorneys are more likely to assault Mr. Cohen’s credibility, noting that he pleaded responsible not solely to the hush cash but additionally to accusations that he lied to Congress a few potential Trump lodge deal in Moscow.
Prosecutors might reply that Mr. Cohen was mendacity for Mr. Trump, and that lately his story in regards to the hush cash has been constant. Mr. Cohen, for instance, has lengthy mentioned that Mr. Trump directed him to pay Ms. Daniels, an accusation that was supported by federal prosecutors within the case in opposition to Mr. Cohen.
And when Mr. Cohen was requested throughout congressional testimony why Mr. Trump’s firm unfold out the reimbursements over many months, he defined, “That was to be able to conceal what the fee was,” including that it was completed “in order that it might appear like a retainer.”
Requested whether or not Mr. Trump knew, Mr. Cohen replied, “Oh, he knew about every thing, sure.” On Monday, Mr. Cohen mentioned he was not testifying to precise “revenge” on Mr. Trump.
“That is all about accountability,” he mentioned. “He must be held accountable for his soiled deeds.”
Sean Piccoli contributed reporting.
