Listen to the article
Michael Cohen Alleges Prosecution Pressure in Trump New York Cases
Michael Cohen, former personal attorney to Donald Trump, has accused New York prosecutors of pressuring him to provide testimony specifically designed to secure convictions against the former president. In a Substack post published Friday, Cohen claimed both the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office and New York Attorney General’s Office coerced him into delivering evidence that fit their predetermined narrative.
“I felt pressured and coerced to only provide information and testimony that would satisfy the government’s desire to build the cases against and secure a judgment and convictions against President Trump,” Cohen wrote.
Cohen served as a key prosecution witness in two high-profile New York cases against Trump. In 2023, he testified in a civil case brought by New York Attorney General Letitia James, which resulted in Trump being found liable for fraudulently inflating his assets to obtain favorable loan terms. In 2024, Cohen also appeared as a witness in Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s criminal case, where Trump was ultimately convicted on 34 counts of falsifying business records.
The timing of Cohen’s statement coincides with a federal appeals court’s consideration of Trump’s request to move his hush money case to federal court for further review. Last month, the appeals court handed Trump a legal victory by ordering a review of the case regarding presidential immunity claims.
In his detailed accusations, Cohen alleged that prosecutors were uninterested in testimony that did not support their goal of convicting Trump. “When my testimony was insufficient for a point the prosecution sought to make, prosecutors frequently asked inappropriate leading questions to elicit answers that supported their narrative,” he stated.
Cohen further claimed that both James and Bragg used their high-profile cases against Trump to advance their careers, suggesting they were motivated by a desire to be known as officials who “took down Trump.” He wrote, “They blurred the line between justice and politics; and in that blur, the credibility of both suffered.”
The former lawyer’s allegations raise questions about prosecutorial conduct in politically sensitive cases. Cohen himself has a complicated legal history, having pleaded guilty in 2018 to several crimes including tax evasion, campaign finance violations, and lying to Congress. He served time in federal prison and was later released to home confinement during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Cohen explained that his cooperation with authorities came while he was incarcerated, suggesting he felt compelled to provide testimony fitting prosecutors’ narratives in hopes of receiving sentence reduction. This context adds a layer of complexity to his current allegations about prosecutorial pressure.
“You may reasonably ask why I am speaking out now. The answer is simple. I have witnessed firsthand the damage done when prosecutors pick their target first and then seek evidence to fit a predetermined narrative,” Cohen stated, while emphasizing he was not writing in defense of Trump.
The accusations come at a critical moment in Trump’s ongoing legal battles. The former president’s legal team has filed what they described as a “powerhouse” appeal in the Manhattan case. Legal experts note that Cohen’s credibility as a witness was already scrutinized during the trials due to his criminal history and past association with Trump.
Neither the Office of the New York State Attorney General nor the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office has publicly responded to Cohen’s allegations. Their reactions will be closely watched as these claims could potentially impact the ongoing appeals process in Trump’s New York cases.
The situation highlights the complex intersection of law, politics, and personal relationships that has characterized many of the legal proceedings surrounding the former president. As Trump continues to challenge his New York convictions, Cohen’s latest statements may add new dimensions to an already contentious legal landscape.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
13 Comments
This is a sensitive and politically charged issue, so it’s important to approach it with nuance and objectivity. While I’m no fan of Trump, I believe in the rule of law and due process. If Cohen’s allegations are substantiated, it could raise serious concerns about the integrity of the legal process.
I agree, a measured and impartial assessment is crucial here. The public deserves to know the truth, whatever it may be. Maintaining the credibility of our justice system should be the top priority, regardless of one’s political affiliations.
This is a concerning allegation from Michael Cohen. If true, it raises serious questions about the integrity of the legal process and the potential for political interference. I hope the relevant authorities thoroughly investigate these claims to ensure justice is served fairly and impartially.
I agree, the accusations of coercion are troubling. Prosecutors have a responsibility to uphold the rule of law, not bend it to a predetermined outcome. Transparency and independence in these high-profile cases is crucial for public trust.
Regardless of one’s political leanings, the integrity of the legal system should be paramount. If Cohen’s claims have merit, it’s a concerning development that warrants a thorough, impartial investigation. Transparency and accountability must be upheld.
As a general principle, I’m deeply concerned by any allegations of prosecutorial misconduct or abuse of power. If Cohen’s claims have merit, it could call into question the validity of the cases against Trump. However, more evidence is needed to assess the situation objectively.
I’m curious to learn more about the specific details of Cohen’s claims. Were there any concrete examples of pressure or coercion, or is this more of a general allegation? Without more substantiation, it’s difficult to assess the validity of his statements.
That’s a good point. More specifics would be helpful in evaluating the credibility of Cohen’s claims. Anecdotal allegations can be difficult to verify, so I agree that a more detailed accounting of the alleged misconduct would be important.
While I’m no fan of Trump, I do believe in due process and the presumption of innocence. If Cohen’s claims have merit, it could undermine the credibility of the cases against the former president. However, I’d want to see more evidence before drawing firm conclusions.
That’s a fair perspective. These are complex legal and political matters, and knee-jerk reactions aren’t helpful. Careful, impartial scrutiny of the facts is needed to ensure the integrity of the justice system, regardless of one’s views on Trump.
This is a complex and contentious issue, with valid concerns on both sides. While I’m no fan of Trump, I believe in the rule of law and due process. If Cohen’s allegations are true, it could undermine public trust in the justice system. A full, impartial inquiry is needed.
Well said. Maintaining the credibility of our legal institutions is crucial, regardless of the individuals involved. A thorough, unbiased investigation is the best way to determine the facts and address any potential misconduct.
This is a concerning development. Prosecutors wielding undue influence to shape testimony is a serious breach of ethics. I hope these allegations are thoroughly investigated to determine if any improper conduct occurred. The public deserves to know the truth, whatever it may be.