Anti-Trump Resistance Hero Michael Cohen Now Says He ‘Felt Coerced’ To Give Damning Testimony By Trump Prosecutors

Screenshots

Michael Cohen claimed in a new Substack article that the decision to prosecute Donald Trump in two New York cases was purely political, and that prosecutors “pressured” Cohen to mold his testimony to fit their particular narratives.

Cohen, who was Trump’s former personal attorney and “fixer,” served as “key witness” against his former boss in two trials: The first was a civil action brought by the New York Attorney General Letitia James in 2023 on charges that Trump fraudulently inflated his business assets. The second was a criminal action that became known as the “Stormy Daniels hush money” case that was brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg.

Trump lost in both cases; the first judgment that imposed a staggering $454 million penalty was overturned on appeal, and the hush money conviction is now being reconsidered by a lower court.

Cohen wrote:

From the time I first began meeting with lawyers from the Manhattan DA’s Office and the New York Attorney General’s Office in connection with their investigations of President Trump, and through the trials themselves, 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.

…

During my time with prosecutors, both in preparation for and during the trials, it was clear they were interested only in testimony from me that would enable them to convict President 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.

Cohen clarified that the purpose of his article was not “to defend Donald Trump, nor to relitigate his conduct.”

“You may reasonably ask why I am speaking out now. The answer is simple,” Cohen wrote. “I have witnessed firsthand the damage done when prosecutors pick their target first and then seek evidence to fit a predetermined narrative.”

He added, “When politics and prosecution become indistinguishable, public trust erodes; not just in individual cases, like mine and Trump’s, but in the system itself. That erosion serves no one, regardless of party, personality, or power.”