At one point yesterday it was revealed that Michael Cohen had, in effect, stolen money from Trump’s company. Aaron Blake at WaPo explains,
To recap: Cohen testified that he paid a technical services company named Red Finch about $20,000 to rig online polls in Trump’s favor, after initially agreeing to pay it $50,000. (The poll-rigging arrangement was first reported by the Wall Street Journal in 2019.)
But Cohen testified that he sought to be and was reimbursed for the full $50,000 from the Trump Organization. He said he was ultimately paid $100,000 because of the practice of “grossing up” — reimbursing double the amount because the money is taxable income.
“You stole from the Trump Organization?” Trump attorney Todd Blanche asked.
“Yes,” Cohen said.
This morning I noticed that rightie sites were pratically giddy with glee at this admission. Alvin Bragg’s Case in Shambles said one headline at RedState. The Fox News headline proclaimed Cohen’s bombshell admission could lead to hung jury, if not acquittal: expert.
Really? Maybe not. As Aaron Blake explains, “While Monday’s testimony might have dinged Cohen’s already tenuous credibility, it could also have cast a spotlight on a major hole in the defense’s case.”
That $100,000 reimbursement for the Red Finch payment was actually part of the $420,000 Cohen was paid over 12 months ($35,000 per month) starting in early 2017. These are the very same payments that prosecutors say Trump illegally falsified as being legal expenses, even as they really included reimbursement for the $130,000 hush money payment to adult-film actress Stormy Daniels. The charge is that Trump falsified the expenses to cover up the decade-old tryst Daniels alleged late in the 2016 campaign.
(Cohen described the $420,000 as being $130,000 for the Daniels payment plus $50,000 for Red Finch — both “grossed up” by doubling them — plus $60,000 to account for what Cohen viewed as an insufficient annual bonus.)
But despite drawing attention to this allegedly criminal reimbursement scheme, Trump’s lawyers have also argued that the payments to Cohen weren’t actually reimbursement at all. This despite Trump’s having seemingly indicated as much both publicly in 2018 and in anothercourt case.
As I understand it, the big bad crime here is that Trump falsified financial records to conceal another crime, which involved a conspiracy with the National Enquirer to keep the Stormy Daniels episode out of the news until after the election. The records he falsified were reimbursements to Michael Cohen for his out-of-pocket expenses. Trump tried to cover up these expenses by labeling the money to Cohen as a retainer for legal services. That’s the crime. And whether Cohen managed to squeeze some extra money out of Trump by concealing what he had really paid out doesn’t make any of that go away. If anything, the Red Finch story digs the hole Trump is in a little deeper, seems to me.
Aaron Blake:
That $100,000 reimbursement for the Red Finch payment was actually part of the $420,000 Cohen was paid over 12 months ($35,000 per month) starting in early 2017. These are the very same payments that prosecutors say Trump illegally falsified as being legal expenses, even as they really included reimbursement for the $130,000 hush money payment to adult-film actress Stormy Daniels. The charge is that Trump falsified the expenses to cover up the decade-old tryst Daniels alleged late in the 2016 campaign.
(Cohen described the $420,000 as being $130,000 for the Daniels payment plus $50,000 for Red Finch — both “grossed up” by doubling them — plus $60,000 to account for what Cohen viewed as an insufficient annual bonus.)
Blake also points out that the information about Michael Cohen helping himself to some extra Red Finch money had come out in the prosecution’s questioning of Cohen last week, or whenever it was. They just didn’t use the word “steal.”
Trump’s lawyers have been saying that the reimbursements weren’t really reimbursements, but it’s not clear to me what their arguments are for that claim. They still look like reimbursements to me.
So testimony is finished, and I’m reading that the jury won’t be back until next Tuesday. Then they will hear closing arguments and begin deliberations. After the jury left the lawyers and the judge had a big debates over jury instructions. For example, from the New York Times:
For more details of the issues discussed, see Josh Kovinsky at TPM, DA’s Office And Trump Team Hash Out How Jury Will Evaluate Case.
The judge says he will have final jury instructions by the end of the day Thursday. The Times also reported this:
Texas’s lieutenant governor was among those who praised Trump outside the courthouse on Tuesday, but there was also an opposing voice from the Lone Star State. Cecy Vazquez Dreher stood in Collect Pond Park across the street with a handwritten sign noting that “Loser Trump” still owed her hometown, El Paso, more than a half million dollars for a 2019 rally.
“The El Paso taxpayers are still waiting for his bill to be paid,” said Vazquez Dreher, 57, a real estate agent. She was in town to see friends she made when she attended the Wharton School of Business, which Trump attended as well. When asked if that is where he learned not to pay bills, Vazquez Dreher said: “I don’t think it was part of the curriculum.”
As I think I may have already said, one of the subthemes of the trial has been what a deadbeat Trump is. Which we knew already.