Type to search

Why Republican Barbs Bounced Off Michael Cohen

Congress Editor's Blog Featured Post Scandals White House

Why Republican Barbs Bounced Off Michael Cohen

Share
cohen

Watching the Republicans strenuously berate Michael Cohen as he appeared before the House Oversight Committee, it was clear that they had no idea who this New York character is or what his testimony means. They couldn’t grasp that further diminishing the already disgraced attorney could not separate him from the man he had represented for 10 years, and that denouncing him as a lying felon cannot rehabilitate the president — because the detestable Cohen so perfectly embodies the sordid world of Donald Trump.

The Cohen moment on Capitol Hill inspired an almost eerie sense of deja vu in anyone who has ever watched a mob chieftain’s trial or a congressional hearing on organized crime. With their exaggerated indignation and their recitations of witness lies and sins, the Republicans on the House panel sounded just like Mafia defense lawyers impugning a rat witness. And in their morality play, Cohen fit the role of a Mafia capo who has turned on his old boss.

The timeworn strategy of discrediting an associate to exonerate the accused is rarely effective, however, for a very simple reason routinely explained by federal prosecutors: Convicting a bad guy almost always requires the testimony of another bad guy, because nobody else has firsthand knowledge of the crimes in question. Just look up the trial of the late John Gotti, or the Senate hearings on organized-crime influence on labor unions — where the key witnesses had perpetrated crimes far worse than tax evasion or bank fraud.

So the more that the Republicans emphasized the dishonesty and criminality of Cohen, the more they impeached the character of his former client.

But there was a deeper problem in the Republican strategy, which relied heavily on the unflattering descriptions of Cohen in a sentencing memorandum filed by the U.S. Attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York. Over and over again, a GOP committee member would cite the Southern District prosecutors to underline Cohen’s offenses and condemn his character — a gambit that the witness hardly disputed.

If the Republicans say we must attend to what the Southern District filing said about Cohen, how about its description of “Individual 1,” identified beyond doubt in Wednesday’s testimony as Donald J. Trump. Recounting the scheme to hush up Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal with payoffs via the National Enquirer, that harsh sentencing memo explains clearly:

With respect to both payments, Cohen acted with the intent to influence the 2016 presidential election. Cohen coordinated his actions with one or more members of the campaign, including through meetings and phone calls, about the fact, nature, and timing of the payments. In particular, and as Cohen himself has now admitted, with respect to both payments, he acted in coordination with and at the direction of Individual-1.

At the hearing, Cohen also produced two checks, each for $35,000 — one bearing the distinctive signature of Donald J. Trump, and another signed by Donald J. Trump Jr. and the COO of the Trump Organization — that proved he was telling the truth about the reimbursement scheme.

Somehow, none of the Republican committee members mentioned that damning paragraph; in fact, none of them mentioned “Individual-1” at all. Nevertheless, Individual-1 made big news at the hearing, even though he was dining in Vietnam with his buddy Kim Jong Un.

The moment came when Rep. Raja Krishnamoorthi, D-Ill., asked specifically about Cohen’s most recent conversation with the president. His answer must have sent a chill clear across the Pacific: “Unfortunately, this topic is actually something that’s being investigated right now by the Southern District of New York, and I’ve been asked by them not to discuss.” Krishnamoorthi pressed him, asking whether Cohen knows of “any other wrongdoing or illegal act” by the president.” The president’s former lawyer replied, “Yes, and again, those are part of the investigation that’s currently being looked at by the Southern District of New York.”

Whatever report may arrive from the Office of Special Counsel in coming days, Trump’s troubles are far from over.

 

Tags:
Joe Conason

A highly experienced journalist, author and editor, Joe Conason is the editor-in-chief of The National Memo, founded in July 2011. He was formerly the executive editor of the New York Observer, where he wrote a popular political column for many years. His columns are distributed by Creators Syndicate and his reporting and writing have appeared in many publications around the world, including the New York Times, the Washington Post, The New Yorker, The New Republic, The Nation, and Harpers.

Since November 2006, he has served as editor of The Investigative Fund, a nonprofit journalism center, where he has assigned and edited dozens of award-winning articles and broadcasts. He is also the author of two New York Times bestselling books, The Hunting of the President (St. Martins Press, 2000) and Big Lies: The Right-Wing Propaganda Machine and How It Distorts the Truth (St. Martins Press, 2003).

Currently he is working on a new book about former President Bill Clinton's life and work since leaving the White House in 2001. He is a frequent guest on radio and television, including MSNBC's Morning Joe, and lives in New York City with his wife and two children.

  • 1

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.