“Fixer” Michael Cohen EXONERATES Trump in Unearthed Letter

Cohen’s story has changed so many times he has trouble keeping track of the truth, but a 2018 letter from Michael’s lawyer to the FEC explains how Trump had nothing to do with the Stormy payments.

In this report:

Michael Cohen, the self-proclaimed “fixer” for Donald Trump, is back in the spotlight with his latest media venture—a documentary or perhaps a comedy special. This new teaser trailer features Cohen strutting around, declaring his past role as Trump’s fixer, and now claiming to “fix” things for everyday people. This narrative might be compelling, but it’s overshadowed by a significant piece of history: a letter from Cohen, dated February 8, 2018, that seemingly exonerates Trump from any wrongdoing related to the Stormy Daniels payment.

Cohen’s Past and His Documentary Teaser

Michael Cohen’s new documentary teaser presents him as a reformed individual who has embarked on a journey of redemption. In it, he speaks about his past work for Trump, fixing both professional and personal problems for the former president. He admits to gaining power, wealth, and notoriety during his tenure and paying the price for it, including a 36-month prison sentence.

Cohen now claims to use his skills to help “the little guy” who normally wouldn’t have access to his expertise. However, this portrayal of Cohen as a heroic figure is at odds with his historical record and recent behavior. His credibility remains highly questionable, given his track record as a convicted felon and admitted liar.

The 2018 Letter: A Key Piece of Evidence

The letter from February 8, 2018, written by Cohen’s lawyer Stephen M. Ryan, addressed to the Federal Election Commission (FEC), is a critical document in understanding Cohen’s role and Trump’s involvement. This letter states that Cohen used his own personal funds to facilitate a payment of $130,000 to Stormy Daniels in a private transaction before the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Importantly, it clarifies that neither the Trump Organization nor the Trump campaign was a party to the transaction and that neither reimbursed Cohen for the payment.

This statement, coming from Cohen’s legal representative, asserts that the payment did not constitute a campaign contribution or expenditure, thus falling outside the FEC’s jurisdiction. The letter emphatically calls for the dismissal of any complaints, stating there is no evidence to the contrary.

The Transformation and Credibility Issues

Despite this clear declaration, Cohen’s story changed dramatically once he came under legal pressure. Initially, Cohen claimed he acted independently, without Trump’s involvement. However, as investigations progressed, Cohen found himself in a precarious position. The government executed search warrants on his properties, seizing various documents and electronic devices. Facing significant legal threats, Cohen’s narrative shifted.

Cohen eventually pled guilty to multiple charges, including making false statements to Congress. In court, he admitted that the payments to Stormy Daniels were made for the principal purpose of influencing the election. This plea was part of a deal with prosecutors, who often leverage plea bargains to secure cooperation from defendants.

Michael Cohen’s Flip: Legal and Moral Implications

Cohen’s flip and his subsequent testimony raise serious questions about his reliability. His initial letter to the FEC stands in stark contrast to his later courtroom admissions, highlighting a flip seemingly motivated by a need to mitigate his own legal consequences. The contrast between his statements further diminishes his credibility as a witness.

Moreover, Cohen’s legal troubles didn’t end with his guilty plea. He was again accused of lying during the trial overseen by Judge Engoron. A federal judge noted that Cohen’s inconsistent statements either indicated he lied during his guilty plea or committed perjury again later. This observation underscores Cohen’s ongoing struggle with truthfulness.

JD Vance’s Critique and Political Ramifications

The political context surrounding Cohen’s testimony cannot be ignored. JD Vance, a prominent political figure and supporter of Trump, attended the trial to express his concerns. Vance criticized the prosecution’s reliance on Cohen, pointing out his status as a convicted felon and habitual liar. He also highlighted what he perceives as partisan motives behind the legal actions against Trump, suggesting that this trial is more about political retribution than justice.

Vance’s remarks resonate with a broader narrative pushed by Trump’s supporters—that the legal system is being weaponized against political opponents. This perspective fuels the ongoing debate about the integrity of the judicial process and its susceptibility to political influence.

Conclusion

Michael Cohen’s new documentary might attempt to paint him as a figure of redemption, but his past actions and shifting narratives tell a different story. The 2018 letter from Cohen’s lawyer remains a pivotal document, asserting Trump’s non-involvement in the Stormy Daniels payment. Cohen’s subsequent flip and the legal consequences he faced only add layers of complexity to his character and credibility.

As the trial continues, the contrast between Cohen’s initial claims and later admissions will undoubtedly play a crucial role. The political undertones of this case further complicate the public’s perception of justice and fairness. Ultimately, Cohen’s journey from Trump’s fixer to a contentious witness exemplifies the turbulent intersection of law, politics, and personal ambition.

Cohen Letter Re Handling Transaction on His Own Without the Candidate by Robert Gouveia on Scribd