NEW YORK — Prosecutors worked to restore Michael Cohen’s credibility Monday after lawyers for ex-President Donald Trump raised doubts about critical phone calls he had with Mr. Trump near the 2016 election and got the so-called fixer to admit he pilfered $30,000 from the Trump Organization.
The defense rained blows on Mr. Cohen during a marathon cross-examination, casting him as someone who profits off the former president’s legal misery, lied freely and was busy with other matters at the time he claimed to be coordinating a payoff with Mr. Trump to porn star Stormy Daniels.
Prosecutors, hoping to patch things up with the jury, focused on the most critical part of Mr. Cohen’s allegations.
“Were you too busy to get approval [from Mr. Trump] to finalize that payoff?” prosecutor Susan Hoffinger said on re-direct.
“No, ma’am,” Mr. Cohen said.
The prosecution’s case hinges on whether Mr. Trump was actively involved in the Daniels payment to avoid bad press near the 2016 election, and if he took part in an alleged scheme to conceal the money through reimbursements to Mr. Cohen.
SEE ALSO: Michael Cohen admits stealing $30K from Trump Organization
Mr. Cohen says Mr. Trump was an active participant. Whether the jury believes Mr. Cohen could determine whether Mr. Trump, the presumptive GOP nominee for president, is convicted on 34 counts of falsifying business records. A conviction could affect his campaign against President Biden.
Trump lawyer Todd Blanche on Monday said Mr. Cohen was helping Mr. Trump’s daughter Tiffany avoid a blackmail threat in October 2016. The fixer was also trying to shore up endorsements for Mr. Trump and focused on personal business deals tied to property and taxi medallion interests.
Pressed on why Mr. Cohen would have remembered phone calls about Ms. Daniels on those busy days, Mr. Cohen said: “Because they were important to me.”
Last week, Mr. Blanche called into question whether a key phone call between Mr. Trump and Mr. Cohen focused on Ms. Daniels, as the star witness claimed, or centered on a complaint Mr. Cohen had about a young prank caller.
It was a pivotal moment in the cross-examination, as the defense suggests Mr. Cohen fabricated details about the preelection period to try and convict Mr. Trump.
The defense says Mr. Cohen paid Ms. Daniels on his own and said as much to people during the Trump presidency, though Mr. Cohen now says he was protecting Mr. Trump at the time.
Mr. Trump’s lawyers also insist Mr. Trump thought he was paying legal expenses to Mr. Cohen in 2017, not conducting a cover-up.
Mr. Cohen, during questioning from prosecutors, insisted Mr. Trump was involved in the payment scheme.
He also said the series of reimbursement checks he received in 2017 were for Ms. Daniels, his bonus and tech company expenses — not for legal work unrelated to Ms. Daniels, as the defense suggested by raising Tiffany Trump and other tasks.
In a notable moment Monday, Mr. Cohen acknowledged pocketing $30,000 of the $50,000 earmarked for Red Finch, a tech company that did work for Mr. Trump and his company.
Mr. Cohen said he handed over only $20,000 in cash.
“So you stole from the Trump Organization?” Mr. Blanche asked.
“Yes, sir,” Mr. Cohen said.
Mr. Blanche also questioned whether Mr. Cohen continued to seek publicity from serving as Mr. Trump’s chief antagonist, pointing to his moneymaking books, podcast and a possible TV show called “The Fixer.”
Mr. Cohen said the show started filming but hasn’t been picked up.
The prosecution tried to put the focus back on the defendant — Mr. Trump — and noted that Mr. Cohen is a witness brought to court under a subpoena.
“Are you charged with any crimes in this case?” Ms. Hoffinger asked.
“No, ma’am,” Mr. Cohen said.
Mr. Trump looked straight ahead and crossed his arms at times during Mr. Cohen’s testimony. The witness spoke calmly and tended to ponder things before answering Mr. Blanche’s rapid-fire questions.
Mr. Cohen is expected to be the state’s second-to-last witness. Once the prosecution rests, the defense can decide whether it calls witnesses.
State Supreme Court Judge Juan Merchan said he planned to limit what Bradley A. Smith, a former Republican Federal Elections Commission member appointed by President Bill Clinton, could say if the defense calls him as an expert witness on election laws.
The judge said he didn’t want to spur a war of election experts.
Hoping to set guardrails around expert testimony, Judge Merchan asked both sides to agree on common definitions of key terms related to federal election law.
Judge Merchan also said that closing arguments will be held on the Tuesday after Memorial Day, given the extent of remaining business and the holiday weekend.
• Tom Howell Jr. can be reached at thowell@washingtontimes.com.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.