The Make-or-Break Testimony of Michael Cohen
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 май 2024
- This episode contains explicit language.
Michael Cohen, Donald J. Trump’s former lawyer and fixer, took the stand in the former president’s hush-money trial.
Jonah E. Bromwich, a criminal justice reporter, discusses how Mr. Cohen could cause problems for Mr. Trump himself.
Guest: Jonah E. Bromwich, one of the lead reporters covering the Manhattan criminal trial of Donald J. Trump for The New York Times.
Background reading:
• Michael Cohen is the central witness (www.nytimes.com/2024/05/14/ny...) in the first criminal trial of an American president.
• Mr. Cohen’s account of an arrangement struck in the White House (www.nytimes.com/2024/05/14/ny...) was the only personal testimony tying Donald J. Trump to falsified documents.
For more information on today’s episode, visit nytimes.com/thedaily (nytimes.com/thedaily?smid=pc-t...) . Transcripts of each episode will be made available by the next workday.
There are inaccuracies here. First, Cohen is not Trump's right hand man. That's actually Wisselberg who is the CFO. Cohen has to go to Wisselberg to get reimbursed. Cohen, therefore isn't the only person that can link Trump to the "criminal disguise of those records..." That other person is Wisselberg. Therefore, the criminality is not entirely captured by Cohen's role in it. That is untrue. Wisselberg is a signatory on many of the checks, not Trump. Cohen does not report solely to Trump. He also has to report to Wisselberg. So that statement is untrue. Come on, Times. Do better. This is deceiving. Cohen never has one boss in the whole world. The other boss is Wisselberg.
lol, the criminality?
@@dimitrioskantakouzinos8590 IMO the prosecution has proven its case. But the defense gets it's turn and I'm not on the jury. But the reporting in this is sloppy and deceiving. I understand they want a clear story the listener can follow, but you can't present this like Wisselberg isn't standing right there when this is happening.
@@needmorecowbell6895 You say you think the prosecution proved its case. I assume that before this political prosecution, you were completely neutral when it came to Trump? Or did Alvin Bragg persuade a die-hard Trump-hater that Trump was guilty of shooting his dog?
@@dimitrioskantakouzinos8590 No one is completely neutral, not even the jury. But most of us are all capable of considering what's been presented to us and reaching conclusions. My conclusion may not be the same as yours and that's okay. Nobody ever won an election 150 million to zero.
@@dimitrioskantakouzinos8590 I don't think the jury's first ballot is going to be unanimous and they are right there listening to everything. But they're going to think about it a while and listen to what the other jurors have to say and somewhere down the line they'll reach a consensus...unless they don't.
They was flirting In the beginning
Thank you, Jonah! Waking up early for *this nonsense* so we don't have to. 😂
Stay strong though the ✨️conviction!✨️
That was a lame introduction. I don't need Press to tell me what day it is. Get to the trial and tell us what cameras aren't allowed to show us. Nobody, I'm sure, believes that MC didn't enjoy being a bully so, if the case rests on his honesty, then 45 is likely found not guilty. I like listening to MC because I like hearing 45 get poked in the eyes (if I can't see him get poked) but I don't think Mike is an honorable guy.
The guy is lying, but not a biggie because I don't like the guy he's lying about.
The person under scrutiny is Trump not Cohen. Did the alleged crime happen or not? If Cohen's intent is to put Trump away, so what? Why does that matter? remember Ms Hicks testimony, Trump admitted to her, yeah "Cohen did it out of the goodness of his heart". It did happen, and Trump was in on it. They cooked the books. There's nothing contradicting the corroborating evidence
Ask Alan D what he thinks about this phone kangaroo court
Its broke they can even specify what crime was committed because there wasnt a crime.
This might make sense if not for the indictment, trial, and evidence. 😂
Falsifying business records. 34 counts, pretty specific stuff if you read the indictment.
Why did Cohen serve jail time? Sheesh
NO! You are being intentionally and willfully ignorant. The charges are the crimes in question. Paying hush money to keep information from public that would affect an election then falsifying business records to cover it up, very simple. Like I said you understand this but you fain ignorance so you can pretend it's all just made up. ..... 91 charges across 3 states and the federal government just made up from thin air.... not to mention some of the crimes we have video tapes and phone calls of, which have been seen and heard by the public.... if Biden could make all that happen you best not cross Biden and pray the supreme court doesn't get presidential immunity
@@dinklessprinkles4641 Basically a non-crime, being accused of defrauding himself (note that the Hillary campaign had the same thing and they got a fine), on which the statute of limitations have run out but for the insane upgrading to a felony based on a *state* determination that federal campaign finance laws had been violated (which Biden's crooked DOJ didn't even prosecute).
But you guys just believe what you want to believe. THIRTY FOUR COUNTS!
Here's to hoping the jury doesn't allow any of Trumps intimidation tactics delay justice.
Cohen did an amazing job from what I've been hearing from multiple sources.
What crime? Specify the crime?
It happened 10 years ago. Give me one crime?
@ajlacostewm falsification of business records. The prosecution is literally specifying the crimes which is why there is a trial and jurors to evaluate their evidence. That's what criminal court is.
@ajlacostewm - Why did Cohen serve jail time? You think Trump wasn't in on it?
@@ajlacostewm Read the indictment.
@@emberrayne8987 that's a crime that's punishable by a fine not jail time, so what's the crime he did that constitutes jail time?
How is it a federal crime that they say it is?