Cohen's Letter to the FEC is NOT Exculpatory Evidence: Here's why
On Wednesday, former President Donald Trump and several Republicans, including Sean Hannity and Marjorie Taylor Greene, disclosed a letter that they claim exonerates Trump in the Stormy Daniels hush money case. The letter, which Trump revealed in a post on his social media platform Truth Social, was sent by Michael Cohen's lawyer, Stephen Ryan, to the Federal Election Commission in February 2018, in response to a complaint filed by government watchdog Common Cause.
According to the letter, "Neither the Trump Organization nor the Trump campaign was a party to the transaction with Ms. Clifford, and neither reimbursed Mr. Cohen for the payment directly or indirectly." However, this argument has been widely discredited, as both Trump and his personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani, admitted that Trump did in fact reimburse Cohen for the payment to Daniels, and Cohen has provided documentary evidence, in the form of multiple Trump-signed checks, to corroborate this claim.
As part of the investigation, a Manhattan grand jury has heard testimony from former Trump associates, including Cohen, who pleaded guilty to violating federal campaign finance laws in August 2018 for arranging the payment to Daniels and another woman who claimed to have had an affair with Trump. Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg has been criticized by Republicans for not presenting the 2018 letter to the grand jury. However, legal experts have pointed out that the letter's contents are irrelevant, given Trump and Giuliani's own admissions.
In May of 2018, just three months after Michael Cohen's lawyer sent the letter to the Federal Election Commission, Rudy Giuliani made a surprising admission during an appearance on Fox News with Sean Hannity. Giuliani stated that Trump had indeed reimbursed Cohen for the payment.
The next day, President Trump himself posted the same admission on Twitter, claiming that Cohen was paid through reimbursement. Trump also insisted that the payment was not made by his campaign, although legal experts have pointed out that this argument is irrelevant, as the payment would still have benefitted his campaign regardless of who made it. Additionally Cohen has already been convicted in federal court of making this very payment as exactly that; a “campaign contribution.”
While Cohen's letter may have initially cast doubt on Trump's involvement in the payment, Giuliani and Trump's subsequent admissions have made it clear that Trump played a direct role in reimbursing Cohen. This admission has likely been a key piece of evidence in the ongoing investigation into the hush money payment, and has raised serious questions about the legality of the payment and Trump's involvement in it.
These admissions have also discredited the letter that Cohen sent to the Federal Election Commission while still working as President Trump's "fixer." At the time of the letter, both Trump and Cohen were aware of the possibility of an investigation into the payments made to Stormy Daniels, and the President was seeking to distance himself from the allegations as much as possible.
Two months after Cohen's letter was sent, his home and office were raided by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York. Trump's legal team was then forced to adjust their defense, shifting from a claim that Trump had not reimbursed the payment to arguing that he had reimbursed it personally, rather than through his campaign.
If the previous revelations are not enough to discredit the February 2018 letter that Republicans are touting as "exculpatory evidence," then proof of payments certainly will. Cohen has provided investigators with documentary evidence of reimbursement checks that were personally issued by Trump to him. There were 11 checks in total, each for $35,000.
While it is Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg's responsibility to present credible exculpatory evidence to the Grand Jury, Cohen's February 2018 letter is far from "credible." In fact, it has already been completely debunked.
Krassenstein’s Democratic Informer is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber.