In a stunning revelation, Michael Cohen testified he secretly recorded Donald Trump discussing a payment to suppress claims of an affair ahead of the 2016 election.
On April 23, 2024, New York witnessed a significant development in the criminal trial of former President Donald Trump. Fox News reported that Cohen, Trump’s ex-attorney, testified that he covertly recorded a conversation with Trump concerning a hush-money payment.
This testimony marked a critical point in the ongoing legal proceedings against Trump, who has denied all allegations of wrongdoing and pleaded not guilty.
Michael Cohen’s Covert Recording Reveals Critical Details
The secret recording transpired on September 6, 2016. It entailed a discussion with Trump about arranging a payment to David Pecker, the then-publisher of the National Enquirer, to silence Karen McDougal.
McDougal, an ex-Playboy model, allegedly had an affair with Trump—an assertion Trump denies. This undisclosed payment discussion led to the establishment of an entity tasked with transferring $150,000 to Pecker.
Pecker later testified during the trial, explaining the payment rationale and affirming that the money was to preemptively quash McDougal’s allegations from surfacing before the presidential election. This clarification aligned with the intent discussed in the Cohen-Trump recording, where Cohen is heard asking, “So what do we get to pay for this? One-fifty?” elucidating their previous knowledge of the amount needed to silence McDougal.
Cohen performed the secretive recording using his iPhone, cleverly kept running during their encounter across Trump’s desk. His testimony elaborated that Trump was oblivious to the recording process.
This action, although controversial, was testified by Cohen to have been taken to document transactions he deemed significant.
The legitimacy of the recording was challenged, sparking intense debates in the courtroom. Cohen, in his testimony, stressed, “He already knew based upon a conversation with David, which is why he mentioned the number 150,” trying to solidify the argument that Trump was aware of the financial figures involved.
Convolution in Court Over Cohen’s Conduct and Labeling of Expenses
The trial’s core issue revolves around the falsified business records, predominantly centering on not merely the Pecker payment but also a $130,000 payment made to Stormy Daniels, another woman alleging an affair with Trump.
The Trump Organization supposedly reimbursed Cohen for the Daniels payment and erroneously recorded it as a legal expense.
This alleged misrecord has brought additional scrutiny to the trial. Legal experts, in sessions separate from the trial, voiced skepticism over Daniels’ testimony’s relevance towards the case focusing on falsified records, although her sharing of the supposed 2006 encounter with Trump was significant public interest.
The court firmly denied a motion for a mistrial proposed by Trump’s legal team. This assertion was emblematic of the trial’s heated nature, as the courtroom witnessed not only legal confrontations but also public and media reactions.
Republican Senator JD Vance notably criticized Cohen’s method, sharing via social media, “Michael Cohen admitting he secretly recorded his employer. Just normal conduct, right?”
These criticisms highlight a broader political narrative around the trial, with figures like Vance commenting, “Does any reasonable, sensible person believe anything that Michael Cohen says? I don’t think that they should.” Meanwhile, Cohen humorously remarked in a TikTok video, “Trump 2024? More like Trump 20-24 years,” indicating his posture toward the seriousness of the accusations and the trial.
Judge Orders Michael Cohen’s Silence Ahead of Testimony
Before testifying, Judge Merchan instructed the prosecution to ensure Cohen did not make public comments about the case. This order aimed to preserve the trial’s integrity, reflecting the sensitive nature of the proceedings where public statements might skew public perception and influence judicial fairness.
As the trial unfolds, the revelations from Cohen’s recording and successive testimonies have stirred significant media and public discourse surrounding the credibility, political careers, and legal repercussions for those involved. The legal process continues to unravel these complex layers, drawing keen interest on a national and international scale.
Click this link for the original source of this article.
Author: Staff Writers
This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, https://patriotmomdigest.com and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.