Politics
Column: Michael Cohen started testifying against Trump. Here's what prosecutors need from him
Michael Cohen, perhaps the most anticipated trial witness in modern memory, took the stand Monday morning in the Manhattan district attorney’s hush money prosecution of Donald Trump. Even before his testimony began, Cohen was the most visible character in the trial save Trump himself.
In the early hours of his testimony, the former Trump attorney covered the National Enquirer’s alleged agreement to “catch and kill” stories that might damage the then-candidate, which like much of Cohen’s expected testimony had been detailed by other witnesses. He then discussed the revelation of the “Access Hollywood” recording that threw the campaign into a tailspin, including Trump’s instructions to spin his comments about sexually assaulting women as mere “locker room talk.”
Cohen testified that it was during the feverish efforts to manage that crisis that he learned that the adult-film actor Stormy Daniels was shopping her story of a liaison with Trump, something that he said would have been “catastrophic” for the campaign. He said Trump ordered him to do what he had to do to keep the story from coming out before the election.
Cohen came across on the stand as responsive, matter-of-fact and unguarded in response to Assistant Dist. Atty. Susan Hoffinger’s low-key questioning.
From the opening arguments, both sides have acknowledged Cohen’s central role in the charges against his former boss, for whom he was an uber-loyal fixer and attack dog. And both sides have taken pains to stress Cohen’s credibility problems to the jury.
The defense in fact has put nearly all its chips on the chances that the jury will reject Cohen’s story, making his coming cross-examination the dramatic centerpiece of the trial. More surprisingly, the prosecution has also peppered its presentation with disparagement of Cohen, whom several witnesses portrayed as a self-interested blowhard.
The most significant instance came during the testimony of Hope Hicks, who related that Trump had told her that Cohen paid off Daniels “out of the goodness of his heart” rather than any direction from him. The prosecution then asked a devastating follow-up: Did that seem in keeping with Cohen’s character? No, Hicks responded, she “didn’t know Michael to be an especially charitable person or selfless person.”
Translation: Trump had reimbursed Cohen and lied to Hicks about it. It may have been this honest and damaging assessment that caused Hicks to break into tears.
The prosecution’s participation in pummeling Cohen was good strategy. It likely lowered the jury’s expectations, decreasing the enormous weight on the shoulders of the government’s star witness.
The jury had to be prepared for a witness whose record comprises multiple criminal convictions, such as the illegal payments at issue in this very trial. The prosecution is betting that having already absorbed the bad news, the jurors can listen to Cohen with relatively open minds.
And here’s the thing about Cohen, in my subjective opinion: It comes through that he is telling the truth.
Yes, he is a strong personality — a native New Yorker through and through — and, yes, he has an enormous ax to grind with Trump, who has remained free (so far) while Cohen went to jail for him. But there’s a difference between a witness with credibility problems, however great, and one who is lying, and divining that distinction is what the jury system is for.
We’ve seen that already in this trial with the testimony of Daniels and David Pecker, the louche tabloid muckraker who described the “catch and kill” scheme. Both gave the defense plenty of ammunition for cross-examination, but both came across essentially as telling the truth.
Cohen has been consistent in his story since he turned traitor on Trump, and his earlier lies are easy to understand in the context of his former sycophancy.
Most important, if the cornerstone of the defense is what will no doubt be a savage cross-examination of Cohen, the foundation of the government’s case is its corroboration of his testimony. Starting with the prosecutors’ smart decision to lead with Pecker, their presentation has been designed to prospectively corroborate Cohen. The jurors will be able to recognize nearly every detail from having heard it before.
Cohen will have to carry a few key details alone, however, the most important of which concern two meetings. One was a January 2017 meeting among Trump, Cohen and Allen Weisselberg, the Trump Organization’s longtime chief financial officer and ultimate loyal fall guy, in which Trump allegedly told the two men to work out a plan to reimburse Cohen. The other is a February 2017 meeting between Cohen and Trump in which the then-president allegedly signed off on reimbursing his fixer with monthly payments camouflaged as a legal retainer.
Strong corroborating evidence of the arrangement can be found in what is probably the most important document in the case: an invoice with Weisselberg’s handwritten annotations explaining how Cohen’s $130,000 payment became $420,000 in reimbursements, including taxes and other considerations.
But as far as the jury is concerned, Weisselberg, who could confirm the arrangement and Trump’s role in it, is nowhere to be seen. That’s because he’s at Rikers Island serving a perjury sentence for lying to protect Trump. In fact, it emerged last week that the district attorney’s office hadn’t even tried to reach the former executive, presumably assuming he would continue to do whatever he could to help Trump.
Weisselberg’s absence is a reminder that prosecutors have to play with the cards they’re dealt. Trump continues to exercise a powerful influence over those in his orbit, and Weisselberg is just one example of a witness the district attorney can’t rely on for that reason.
All of which only heightens Cohen’s importance for the prosecution. This week’s testimony will determine whether his word is strong enough to support a measure of accountability for his former boss.
Harry Litman is the host of the “Talking Feds” podcast and the Talking San Diego speaker series. @harrylitman
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt explained why President Donald Trump does not consider Iran’s seizure of two ships in the Strait of Hormuz a violation of the ceasefire agreement.
Leavitt made the statement during an interview with Fox News’ Martha McCallum on Wednesday just hours after Iran captured the Greek and Mediterranean-flagged vessels.
“Does the seizure of two ships — as we said, they were Greek and Mediterranean-owned ships with cargo on them, and the reports are that Iran basically seized them and then moved them into Iranian waters. We don’t know what’s going to happen to these crews. We’re not sure where all of this is going. Does the president view that as a violation of the ceasefire?” McCallum asked.
“No, because these were not U.S. ships. These were not Israeli ships. These were two international vessels,” Leavitt responded.
US FORCES ATTEMPTING TO BOARD SANCTIONED RUSSIAN-FLAGGED OIL TANKER IN NORTH ATLANTIC, SOURCES SAY
Karoline Leavitt, White House press secretary, conducts a press briefing. (Tom Williams/CQ-Roll Call, Inc via Getty Images)
“And for the American media, who are sort of blowing this out of proportion to discredit the president’s facts that he has completely obliterated Iran’s conventional Navy, these two ships were taken by speedy gunboats. Iran has gone from having the most lethal Navy in the Middle East to now acting like a bunch of pirates. They don’t have control over the strait,” she continued.
“This is piracy that we are seeing on display. And the naval blockade that the United States has imposed continues to be incredibly effective. And, to be clear, the blockade is on ships going to and from Iranian ports. And the point of this is the economic leverage that we maintain over Iran now. While there’s a ceasefire with respect to the military and kinetic strikes, Operation Economic Fury continues, and the crux of that is this naval blockade,” she added.
The Iranian made ‘Seraj’ a high-speed missile-launching assault boat on display in Tehran on August 23, 2010, as Iran kicked off mass production of two high-speed missile-launching assault boats the ‘Seraj’ (Lamp) and ‘Zolfaqar’ (named after Shiite Imam Ali’s sword) speedboats which will be manufactured at the marine industries complex of the ministry of defense. (YALDA MOAIERY/AFP via Getty Images)
Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps said the vessels, identified as the MSC Francesca and the Epaminondas, were operating without proper authorization and had tampered with navigation systems, accusations that could not be independently verified. The ships had earlier reported coming under fire near the strait, underscoring the increasingly volatile conditions in one of the world’s most critical shipping lanes.
US ‘LOCKED AND LOADED’ TO DESTROY IRAN’S ‘CROWN JEWEL’ ‘IF WE WANT,’ TRUMP WARNS
The Guard attacked a third ship, identified as the Euphoria, which had become “stranded” on the Iranian coast, Iranian media reported. It did not seize that vessel.
Ships and tankers in the Strait of Hormuz off the coast of Musandam, Oman, April 18, 2026. (Reuters)
Both the U.S. and Iranian sides have targeted commercial and cargo vessels as part of a broader pressure campaign tied to stalled negotiations. U.S. forces have also moved to seize at least one Iranian-linked vessel in the region, with each side accusing the other of violating the terms of a fragile ceasefire.
CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP
The Strait of Hormuz is a vital artery for global oil shipments, with roughly 20% of the world’s supply passing through it. Traffic has slowed dramatically as ships reroute or avoid the area amid gunfire, seizures and conflicting directives from both militaries.
Fox News’ Morgan Phillips contributed to this report.
WASHINGTON — Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass and L.A. County Supervisor Kathryn Barger met privately with President Trump and administration officials Wednesday to press for federal support and yet-unpaid wildfire recovery funding as the region continues to rebuild from the 2025 fires.
“This afternoon we met with President Trump and Administration officials to advocate for families who lost everything,” Bass and Barger said in a statement. “We had a very positive discussion about FEMA and other rebuilding funds as well as the support of the President to continue joining us in pressuring the insurance companies to pay what they owe — and for the big banks to step up to ease the financial pressure on L.A. families.”
Barger said the two leaders had a “high-level discussion” with the president in the Oval Office, sharing stories about what fire survivors are experiencing day to day. She added that “we left details behind with the President,” but did not specify whether Trump made any funding or policy promises during the meeting.
“First and foremost, today’s meeting was to thank the President for his initial support of infusing federal resources to expedite debris removal, as well as his recent tweet about insurance companies, which have already proven fruitful,” she said in a statement provided to The Times.
Bass was similarly reserved about the discussions, telling reporters that “we will follow up with the details,” but signaled progress is being made on federal support.
“I think what’s important is that we certainly got the president’s support in terms of, you know, what is needed, and then the appropriate people were in the room for us to follow up. And that was Russ Vought, who is the head of the Office of Management and budget,” Bass told KNX on Wednesday.
The meeting comes on the heels of a yearlong standoff between California leaders and the Trump administration over wildfire recovery funding, disaster response and whether the federal government should have a say in local rebuilding permitting.
California leaders, led by Gov. Gavin Newsom, have accused the Trump administration of withholding billions in critical wildfire aid, prompting a lawsuit over stalled recovery funds. Officials allege political bias in the delay of billions of dollars from the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
Newsom visited Washington in December. When he made his rounds on Capitol Hill, he met with five lawmakers, including three who serve on the Senate and House appropriations committees, to renew calls for $33.9 billion in federal aid for Los Angeles County fire recovery.
But the governor said he was denied a meeting with FEMA and would not say whether he had attempted to meet with Trump to discuss the issue.
Bass, meanwhile, appears to have found a path to the president on a subject that has been paramount for her community.
The fruitful meeting comes after Trump lobbed insults at the mayor at a news conference earlier this year, where he called her “incompetent” for how she handled last year’s wildfire recovery efforts. He alleged that under Bass’ leadership, the city’s delay in issuing local building permits will take years when it should have taken “two or three days.”
California officials, including Newsom, have urged the Trump administration to send Congress a formal request for the $33.9 billion in recovery aid needed to rebuild homes, schools, utilities and other critical infrastructure destroyed or damaged when the fires tore through neighborhoods more than 15 months ago.
What Bass and Barger’s meeting with the president ultimately produces remains to be seen.
The billions in recovery aid have not yet materialized, but the meeting could potentially give those discussions new momentum.
The White House did not immediately respond to a request seeking comment about the meeting.
Earlier this month, Trump criticized insurance provider State Farm on Truth Social for its handling of the devastating Los Angeles County wildfires. He accused the insurance giant of abandoning its policyholders when tragedy struck.
“It was brought to my attention that the Insurance Companies, in particular, State Farm, have been absolutely horrible to people that have been paying them large Premiums for years, only to find that when tragedy struck, these horrendous Companies were not there to help!” Trump wrote.
But the rebuke didn’t come out of the blue. It stemmed from a controversial February visit to Los Angeles by Trump administration officials.
Trump tapped Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin in an effort to strip California state and local governments of their authority to permit the rebuilding of homes destroyed in the Eaton and Palisades fires.
Within the week, Zeldin was in Los Angeles, bashing Newsom and Los Angeles officials at a roundtable with fire victims and reporters, saying that residents were suffering from “bureaucratic, red tape delays and incompetency” and that leadership was “denying them … the ability to rebuild their lives”.
During the trip, officials heard direct complaints from local leaders and fire victims about insurers being slow, restrictive and insufficient with their claim payouts.
After these meetings, Trump directed Zeldin to investigate the insurers’ responses. State Farm, facing roughly $7 billion in fire-related claims, is also under formal investigation by California’s insurance commissioner over its handling of the crisis.
Despite tensions with the administration, Bass and Barger appeared confident that progress was being made on the insurance and funding issues.
“Our job is to fight for our communities,” their joint statement concluded. “When it comes to this recovery, our federal partners are essential, and we are grateful for the support of the President.”
Navy Secretary John Phelan was fired on Wednesday after months of infighting with senior Pentagon leaders and disagreements over how to revive the Navy’s struggling shipbuilding program.
Mr. Phelan is leaving the Pentagon and the Trump administration effective immediately, wrote Sean Parnell, the Pentagon’s chief spokesman, in a terse statement.
In his role leading the Navy, Mr. Phelan had championed the “Golden Fleet,” a major investment in new ships including a “Trump-class” battleship. But Mr. Phelan’s leadership was marred by feuds with senior leaders in the Pentagon, including Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Deputy Defense Secretary Stephen Feinberg, Pentagon and congressional officials said.
Mr. Phelan is the first service secretary to leave the administration, though he is the second one to clash with the defense secretary. Mr. Hegseth also has butted heads with Army Secretary Daniel P. Driscoll over promotions and a host of other issues. Mr. Hegseth fired the Army’s chief of staff, Gen. Randy George, earlier this month.
The Navy secretary has no role overseeing deployed forces, and Mr. Phelan’s firing is not likely to have significant implications for the conduct of the Iran war or U.S. Navy operations to blockade Iranian ports or open the Strait of Hormuz. As the Navy’s top civilian leader, his main responsibility is to oversee the building of the future naval and Marine Corps force.
But the tumult could make it harder for the Navy to replenish its stock of Tomahawk missiles and high-end air defense systems, which have been in heavy use in Iran.
Tensions had been simmering for months between Mr. Phelan and his two bosses — Mr. Hegseth and Mr. Feinberg — over management style, personnel issues and other matters.
Mr. Feinberg, in particular, had grown increasingly dissatisfied with Mr. Phelan’s handling of the Navy’s major new shipbuilding initiative, and had been siphoning off responsibility for the project from him, said the congressional official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss personnel matters.
Mr. Phelan, a White House appointee, also had a contentious relationship with his deputy, Under Secretary Hung Cao, who is more aligned with Mr. Hegseth, especially on some of the social and cultural battles that have defined the defense secretary’s tenure, the officials said.
A senior administration official said that Mr. Hegseth informed Mr. Phelan before the Pentagon’s official announcement that he and President Trump had decided that the Navy needed new leadership.
A spokeswoman for Mr. Phelan referred all questions on Wednesday evening to the Defense Department.
Last fall, Mr. Hegseth fired Mr. Phelan’s chief of staff, Jon Harrison, who had clashed with senior officials throughout the Pentagon. The unusual move highlighted the broader tensions between Mr. Hegseth and Mr. Phelan.
Still, the timing of Mr. Phelan’s firing caught some Pentagon and congressional officials off guard. On Wednesday, Mr. Phelan was making the rounds on Capitol Hill, talking to senators about his upcoming annual hearing with lawmakers to discuss the Navy’s budget request and other priorities.
“Secretary Phelan’s abrupt dismissal is troubling,” Senator Jack Reed of Rhode Island, the top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, said in a statement Wednesday night. “In the midst of President Trump’s war of choice in Iran, at a moment when our naval forces are stretched thin across multiple theaters, this kind of disruption at the top sends the wrong signal to our sailors and Marines, to our allies, and to our adversaries.”
Mr. Phelan also had a close relationship with Mr. Trump. In December, Mr. Phelan appeared alongside Mr. Trump at his Mar-a-Lago resort to announce the “Golden Fleet” and the new class of battleships bearing Mr. Trump’s name.
“John Phelan is one of the most successful businessmen in the country — in our country,” Mr. Trump said. “He’s been a tremendous success.”
Before joining the Trump administration, Mr. Phelan ran a private investment fund based in Florida.
“He’s taken probably the largest salary cut in history, but he wanted to do it,” Mr. Trump said at the December press conference. “He wants to rebuild our Navy. And you needed that kind of a brain to do it properly.”
But Mr. Trump’s effusive praise masked deeper tensions with Mr. Phelan’s Pentagon bosses.
Bryan Clark, a naval analyst at the Hudson Institute, said that Mr. Phelan was “driving the Navy in a different direction” than what Mr. Hegseth and Mr. Feinberg wanted.
“He was championing initiatives like the battleship and frigate that don’t align with where the D.O.W. leadership is taking the military, which is toward submarines, stealth aircraft, unmanned systems and software-driven capabilities like electronic warfare and cyber,” Mr. Clark said in an email, using the abbreviation for Department of War, as the administration calls the Defense Department.
Mr. Phelan also clashed with Mr. Hegseth over personnel issues in the Navy and Marine Corps, a former senior military official said. Mr. Hegseth has directed service secretaries to scrub the social media accounts of general- and admiral-level promotion candidates to ensure they are not deemed too “woke” by Mr. Hegseth’s standards, the official said.
Maggie Haberman and Eric Schmitt contributed reporting.
-
Lifestyle17 minutes agoYou’re Invited! (No, You’re Not.) It’s the Latest Phishing Scam.
-
Education23 minutes agoOhio State Details Relationship that Led to Former President Walter Carter Jr.’s Resignation
-
Technology29 minutes agoBEWARE SOFTWARE BRAIN
-
World35 minutes agoLandlords allegedly posting ‘Muslim-only’ apartment ads in violation of country’s equality act: report
-
Politics41 minutes agoLeavitt explains why Iran’s seizure of two ships doesn’t violate Trump’s ceasefire
-
Health47 minutes agoHighly contagious stomach bug spreads fast, hitting certain patients hardest
-
Sports53 minutes agoWWE to hold premium live event in Saudi Arabia amid Iran ceasefire
-
Technology59 minutes agoToyota’s CUE7 robot shoots hoops using AI