NNew York prosecutors trying to convict Donald Trump of falsifying business records face a formidable challenge: They must convince a jury to trust the word of a convicted perjurer.
The credibility of Michal Cohen, Trump’s former lawyer and mediator, dominated the fifth week of the former president’s trial. Cohen’s testimony is at the heart of allegations that Trump allegedly ran a scheme to hide secret payments to porn star Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election and lied on business forms to hide campaign finance violations.
“He is really the only person in the prosecution who can connect these dots and bring all the evidence together,” says Renato Mariotti, a former federal prosecutor.
But Cohen isn’t exactly the ideal witness. In 2018, Cohen pleaded guilty to eight felonies involving the hush money scheme, including lying to Congress and federal investigators. He spent more than a year in prison before serving the remainder of his three-year sentence in home confinement. “It goes without saying that he has some credibility problems,” says Anna Cominsky, a professor at New York Law School.
Trump’s defense lawyers spent much of the week working to discredit Cohen. In his cross-examination, attorney Todd Blanche described Cohen as untrustworthy and revenge-driven, highlighting his history of lying and his frequent anti-Trump tirades on social media. He reminded Cohen that he recently called Trump an “idiot dictator” who belongs in a cage. “Sounds like something I would say,” Cohen responded. Blanche also suggested that Cohen had a financial interest in Trump’s death, pointing to T-shirts and coffee mugs he sold that said, “Send Trump to the Big House, not the White House.”
It’s the central strategy of Trump’s defense: portray Cohen as a disgruntled former employee whose word cannot be trusted. “It’s important to make it clear that this guy is not a trustworthy person,” says a source close to Trump. “He lies about everything. He didn’t just lie once in his life. He didn’t just lie to Congress once. He lied in court, he lied to investigators, he lied to his wife.”
See more information: Trump and Cohen share a tortured history
Trump’s lawyers addressed a secret recording Cohen made of Trump shortly before the 2016 election, which he later leaked to the National Inquirer. “He secretly recorded Donald Trump on a phone call as blackmail,” the source said. “That’s his client at the time. Completely unethical.”
Prosecutors’ burden is to prove beyond a doubt that Trump ordered Cohen to pay Daniels $130,000 to prevent her from going public with a sexual encounter she allegedly had with Trump in 2006. (Trump denies the affair.) According to Cohen, Trump agreed. to reimburse him a total of $420,000 in monthly installments of $35,000 and record the payments as legal fees. Invoices and checks show that Trump paid Cohen that amount in January and February 2017, each labeled as legal fees. But only Cohen can explain the reason for these payments.
In court, Cohen recalled discussions with Trump about ensuring Daniels’ silence after the infamous Access Hollywood A tape has surfaced of Trump bragging about grabbing women by their genitals. “Just do it,” Cohen says Trump told him. He also claimed that Trump was more concerned about his electoral prospects than his home life. In Cohen’s testimony, Trump said: “Women are going to hate me. The guys might think it’s cool, but it will be a disaster for the campaign.”
For some former prosecutors, Cohen’s testimony provided the elements needed to convict Trump, who faces 34 criminal charges. “He provided the testimony the prosecution needed on direct examination,” says Barbara McQuade, a former U.S. attorney. Mariotti agrees: “These conversations are critical to establishing vital parts of the prosecution’s case.”
Ultimately, however, a 12-member jury will determine Trump’s fate. If just one of them concludes that the prosecution has failed to prove its case, Trump could step aside.
Blanche’s cross-examination of Cohen is expected to resume on Monday, and it remains unclear whether Trump will testify in his own defense. A source familiar with the matter said a decision has not yet been made.
The case will depend on whether jurors believe Cohen despite his unsavory past. This is not a new complication; prosecutors are often forced to rely on witnesses with credibility issues, Cominsky says. But it is a much more serious challenge in the first criminal trial against a former and potentially future President. Says Cominsky: “We never know what a jury will do”
This story originally appeared on Time.com read the full story
