Talk About Tennis 2.0

Adam Klasfeld
@KlasfeldReports
Trump's lead attorney Todd Blanche tries, and so far, fails, to persuade the judge to impeach Michael Cohen's testimony through emails objected to by prosecutors as hearsay.

Merchan: "I don't see any probative value here for impeachment purposes, at all."

It's also "double-hearsay," the judge says.

Justice Merchan turns his attention to the defense's expert witness Brad Smith.

The judge previously allowed Smith to offer limited testimony about campaign finance law, before the defense challenged the scope of the ruling.

Background https://justsecurity.org/wp-content/upl ... 8-2024.pdf


Merchan previously barred Smith from offering legal opinions, beyond explaining the basics about how the FEC operates.

But the judge seems skeptical that Smith will be able to confine himself to the boundaries of that ruling.

Merchan notes that Smith was also barred from similar testimony during the trial of disgraced crypto billionaire Sam Bankman-Fried.

Prosecutors and defense attorneys can offer arguments about the campaign finance definitions at issue during the charge conference where they're hashing out jury instructions.

Trump's attorney Emil Bove expresses disappointment about the ruling:

"We're restricted in what Mr. Smith can say, and frankly, Mr. Smith reading the statutory definitions is not going to help the jury."

Justice Merchan tells Bove that he cannot see how Smith can opine on these issues without interpreting the law.

Bove says he has no plan to lead Smith through precedent: "He's a former commissioner of the FEC. So he has an authoritative view of what these things mean."

Merchan to Team Trump:

"You're asking me for further guidance, but that's exactly why we have the pre-charge conference" before summations — so that the attorneys know what law they are arguing to the jury.

Adam Klasfeld
@KlasfeldReports
·
6h
"Witness entering."

Judge: "Good morning, Mr. Cohen. Welcome back."

The judge reminds Cohen that he's still under oath.

"All rise."

The jurors make their usual B-line to the jury box — again mostly without making eye contact with the defendant.

As Trump's attorney Todd Blanche resumes his cross, he asks Michael Cohen how many reporters he's spoken to over the weekend.

Cohen says he's spoken to reporters — but not about the case.

Blanche asks a series of questions about his preparations for the case by prosecutors.

Blanche asks about Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.), who was previously one of Trump's impeachment prosecutors

Cohen concedes that he lied during the congressional testimony for which Goldman prepped him.

Blanche questions Cohen about text messages related to his taxi medallion business, which have not been entered into evidence — and therefore, aren't shown to the jury.

Explainer:

The defense has latitude to show the witness information to refresh his memory, even if it hasn't been formally entered into evidence.

Blanche's line of questioning explores Cohen's history in the taxi medallion business, which ultimately led to some of his criminal charges.

Cohen tried to help with the marital problems of a business associate, a topic Blanche tried to explore before the prosecution objects.

That business associate, John Lydon, was a mortgage broker with a company called Resolution Consultants.

That's the same name as the entity Cohen used for the hush money payments to Karen McDougal.

Blanche explores what else Michael Cohen was up to on the week of Oct. 26, 2016, the day that he executed the payoff to Stormy Daniels through his shell company.

Blanche takes on Cohen's two phone calls with Trump on that day, before he opened the account at First Republic Bank.

Cohen said that he spoke to Trump those times about the payoff, and Blanche asks whether that's still his testimony.

It is, Cohen says.

Blanche asks whether it "rings a bell" that Trump was going to sit down for an ABC interview with George Stephanopoulos.

Cohen says it doesn't, and Blanche presses him repeatedly on that answer, drawing multiple objections.

All sustained.

The last sustained objection, by Justice Merchan, was more emphatic if a little annoyed that his prior rulings apparently had been ignored.

Blanche's questioning turns to the RedFinch expense, and Cohen describes paying his contact there $20,000 in a "small paper bag."

Cohen says that didn't resolve the matter because the full expense was $50,000.

Blanche notes that Cohen billed the Trump Organization for the full RedFinch expense — and was reimbursed for it — even though he never fully paid it.

Q: So you stole from the Trump Organization, right?
A: Yes, sir.

Cohen acknowledges that he was never prosecuted for larceny or paid back the Trump Organization.

He also acknowledges he was paid back the "grossed up" version, and so he was reimbursed more than the expense he never paid.

Todd Blanche needles Cohen on that point.

Q: To this day, you've never fixed that?
A: No, sir.

Asked again about whether he stole from the Trump Organization, Cohen reiterates: Yes.

Blanche asks Cohen a series of questions about the $35,000 monthly payments, with sign-offs from Eric Trump and Don Jr. in the first months.

Adam Klasfeld
@KlasfeldReports
·
6h
Analysis:

Blanche told jurors as the trial began that these monthly payments were legal payments, not reimbursements. This questioning hints at that argument, without making much headway.

Two of Trump's sworn statements call them reimbursements. The jury heard about both.

Adam Klasfeld
@KlasfeldReports
·
6h
ICYMI, this morning, via the hallway press pool.

"[Trump] did not respond to shouted questions:

Mr. Trump, will you testify?
Have your lawyers advised you not to testify?
Mr. Trump, do you want to testify?
Are you afraid to testify?"

Blanche asks Cohen about his professional relationship with Marc Kasowitz, who was Trump's attorney during the Mueller investigation.

Blanche tries to slip in twice into a question that Cohen was paid $35,000 pursuant a "retainer agreement." Prosecutors object both times.

Sustained both times.

Cohen's actual testimony, asked and answered repeatedly, is that these were reimbursements.

Adam Klasfeld
@KlasfeldReports
·
6h
Blanche's line of questioning explores Cohen raking in money from consultancy agreements with companies like Novartis ($1.2 million), AT&T ($200,000), and Columbus Nova ($80,000/month).

Through these and other clients, Cohen made $4 million, according to his testimony.

Q: President Trump was paying you $35,000 a month, correct?
A: Correct.

Blanche finally asks the question in a way that avoids an objection, by not characterizing the payment in any manner.

After the FBI's search, Michael Cohen agrees, he told people that Trump knew nothing about the payment.

That was before Cohen pleaded guilty and acknowledged making payments at Trump's "direction" and for his benefit.

Asked whether it would surprised Cohen to learn that he and Costello communicated over the phone 75 times, Cohen responds: "It seems excessive but possible."

Reminder:

During direct, Michael Cohen reviewed a series of emails about attorney Robert Costello opening up a "back channel" to speak to Trump through Rudy Giuliani. Costello hoped to keep Cohen from cooperating with Mueller's investigation, emails suggested.

Multiple jurors rub their eyes. Others have been resting their heads on their hands, using their fists or fingers as platforms.

They still appear to be paying attention to the evidence, however, even as the questioning starts to drag.

When Blanche flashes the emails between Cohen and Costello on their monitors, the jurors appear to get more alert.

Asked how much made on consultancy agreements, Cohen reiterates it amounted to about $4 million.

Blanche adds that he made $35,000 a month adding up to $420,000 from the Trump Organization.

Cohen responds that those were "reimbursements."

Blanche pivots to Cohen's change in financial fortune between his guilty plea and sentencing.

Cohen acknowledges: "I paid the deficiency of the taxes before sentencing."

Since the fall of 2020, Cohen has made $4.3 million on books and pods, roughly $1 million a year, he says.

Blanche: "So, you're also, am I correct, pitching a TV show based upon your life?"

Cohen says he's not pitching it, but his producer Phil Alberstat is. The proposed title is "Fixer," he acknowledges.

Morning recess.

Adam Klasfeld
@KlasfeldReports
·
5h
Trump and his entourage are back, including Alan Dershowitz.

Some of the GOP officials haven't returned, yet.

"All rise."

The jury is entering.

Blanche resumes his cross.

Q: How long have you been working with the gentleman you described to pitch this show?
A: Approximately three months.

Cohen says the pitches happened after it was shot seven to eight months ago.

Cohen confirms that he's considering running for Congress, agreeing it's partly because of his name recognition.

"My name recognition is because of the journey I've been on. Is it affiliated with Mr. Trump? Yes." But it's not because of Mr. Trump, he insists.

Blanche notes that his journey has included near-daily attacks on Trump.

Cohen acknowledges that he's also considering a third book.

Asked if he has a financial interest in the outcome of this case, Cohen calmly replies: "Yes, sir."

"I talk about it on my podcast. I talk about it on TikTok, and they make money."

But Cohen eventually backpedals a bit, saying the outcome doesn't affect whether he speaks.

Cohen then turns the question about the financial interest in Trump's conviction on its head:

"It's better if he's not [convicted], for me, because it gives me more to talk about in the future."

Q: This trial affects your personal life, doesn't it?
A: Yes, sir.

Citing Cohen's testimony that he lied for Trump out of loyalty, Blanche asks:

Q: It's true that you will lie out of loyalty, correct?
A: Yes, sir.

Blanche then turns that proposition into a question of whether Cohen would lie out of loyalty to prosecutors.

He ends cross by asking if there's "no doubt in your mind" he talked to Trump about the Daniels payoff.

"No doubt," Cohen replies.

Blanche: "No further questions."

Adam Klasfeld
@KlasfeldReports
·
4h
Prosecutor Susan Hoffinger begins redirect, by having Cohen clean up his answer about whether he testified falsely in Congress in 2019.

During cross, Cohen said he did, but the year he lied to Congress was 2017, he says now.

Q: Did you ever send Mr. Weisselberg a retainer agreement?
A: No, ma'am.

Asked why not, Cohen responds that there was no legal work he was being compensated for at the time.

Reviewing Cohen's work for Trump and his family over 2017 and 2018, the prosecutor asks him whether he ever billed for that. Cohen says no.

Q: Did you ever get paid a dime for the work in 2018?
A: No, ma'am.

Prosecutor Hoffinger asks Cohen what the RedFinch expense was for, and Cohen talks about the poll-rigging.

Cohen says Trump's performance in a CNBC poll about top business leaders disappointed him, and he wanted to "create an algorithm" to ensure that Trump's numbers would "rise and rise."

Now that redirect has begun, Cohen continues his pattern of delivering his answers straight to the jury.

The prosecutor asks Cohen about stealing the difference on the RedFinch expense in his Trump Org reimbursement.

"Why did you take that extra $30[,000]?" Hoffinger asks.

Cohen says he was angry about his bonus being cut and it was "almost like self-help."

Asked whether he acknowledges now that it was wrong to do that, Cohen agrees that it was.

Cohen agreed during cross that NDAs are perfectly legal.

On redirect, the prosecutor asks whether "the circumstance surrounding this NDA" were "perfectly legal."

After an objection is sustained as to leading, she tried again — successfully. Cohen answers that this one wasn't.

Prosecutor Hoffinger notes that Cohen may feel like he's on trial here.

Q: But are you actually on trial here?
A: No, ma'am.

Prosecutor Hoffinger turns to the most damaging part of Blanche's cross: Michael Cohen's conversation with Keith Schiller.

But before Hoffinger can get to this, lunch break.

That's because prosecutors want to show Cohen photographs of Trump and Schiller together on that day, and the defense is opposing it.

The prosecution says it proves that Trump and Schiller were together from the time of that call.

Blanche:

"We never asked or implied that Mr. Schiller was not with Mr. Trump on that day."

He says the implication was Cohen and Schiller talked about a different topic, i.e. the 14-year-old prankster.

Blanche argues the date and time of the C-Span archives showing Schiller and Trump together amounts to "inadmissible hearsay."

"The rules of evidence still have to apply."

Blanche, on the date and time of the image:

"It's an out-of-court statement being offered for the truth of the matter asserted."

Assistant DA Josh Steinglass points to the C-Span testimony about how times are verified before posting.

"We're entitled to be able to establish [...] that the defendant and Mr. Schiller were together at the time of this phone call."

Adam Klasfeld
@KlasfeldReports
·
2h
Back from lunch break.

Justice Merchan reviews the testimony of C-Span's custodian of records and recites relevant portions from this evidentiary dispute into the record.

News

Justice Merchan does NOT allow prosecutors to bring in the C-Span images in as-offered during Michael Cohen's redirect.

They wanted the images to confirm Trump and Schiller were together when Cohen called on Oct. 24, 2016.

Prosecutors want to call Robert Browning back to testify in order to get the C-Span images introduced into evidence.

News

The defense will likely rest today, Trump's lawyer Todd Blanche says.

Why this topic came up:

After losing their battle to admit the C-Span evidence into the record, prosecutors sought to recall the custodian of records.

The defense opposed because, among other reasons, there's a "likelihood" they may rest today.

Justice Merchan signaled an openness to breaking after Cohen's testimony today—and letting that prosecutors recall that witness, Robert Browning, first thing tomorrow morning.

The prosecution will see if that would be possible.

C-Span is booking travel right now for the witness, prosecutors say.

Trump's attorney Todd Blanche has a standing objection, saying that the defense has witnesses ready to go.

(Note: They must be short witnesses on such a timetable.)

Justice Merchan doesn't appear to be swayed about breaking to make way for prosecutors to recall the C-Span witness:

"There's no prejudice to anyone that I can see."

The judge also gives Trump's team the option to call the defense witnesses out of order today, and have prosecutors call Browning tomorrow, if the defense prefers.

The C-Span exhibit WILL come in after all, after prosecutors and defense attorneys agree to a stipulation that will avoid the issues of recalling the other witness.

Adam Klasfeld
@KlasfeldReports
·
2h
Cohen's testimony resumes.

Prosecutor Hoffinger shows him a photograph of Trump and Keith Schiller.

Hoffinger reads a stipulation showing that the image is a still frame of a video at the date and time stated.

Asked whether he had a number of conversations with Trump about resolving the Stormy Daniels matter, Cohen says: "Yes, ma'am."

Q: Do you recall the general substance of the conversations with Mr. Trump?
A: Yes.

Cohen says he doesn't have any doubt about his conversations with Trump about resolving the Stormy Daniels matter.

"No doubt," he says.





Asked whether Trump had anything to do with the tax crimes and bank fraud charges, Cohen answers no.

Q: Is one of the reasons you lost your license to practice law because of those tax crimes and making false statements to a bank?

Objection, asked and answered.
Sustained.

Cohen acknowledges that he signed a waiver to speak about his conversations with Robert Costello.

"Although I do not believe that any of my communications with Costello or other lawyers at DHC are subject to attorney-client privilege, I hereby waive" any privilege, it read.

Blanche tries to suggest that Cohen previously thought the communications were privileged before signing that waiver, but Cohen pushes back:

"I accepted that [Costello] wanted them to be attorney-client privileged."



Adam Klasfeld
@KlasfeldReports
·
2h
Prosecutors: The People rest.

Adam Klasfeld
@KlasfeldReports
·
2h
The defense calls: Daniel Sitko, who is Blanche's paralegal.

The jury is shown call logs of Michael Cohen's phone calls to Robert Costello's office at Davidoff Hutcher & Cintron.

On cross, the witness concedes that the calls specifically to or from the firm would not be traceable to a specific person, like Costello.

Some of the calls involving the firm were forwarded to a number ending in "3595," which the witness says indicates they were forwarded to voicemail.

These were double-counted in the records, Sitko agrees.

"The defense calls Robert Costello."—

Prosecutor Susan Hoffinger: "Your honor, we need to approach."

(Sidebar)

The sidebar extends so long that the judge must excuse the jury for arguments.

When they leave, Justice Merchan asks prosecutor Susan Hoffinger to lodge her objections. She wants Costello's testimony to be excluded.

If Costello's testimony is admitted, Hoffinger says, his testimony must be strictly limited:

"They're not entitled to elicit from Mr. Costello their opinions on Mr. Cohen's credibility."

Trump lawyer Emil Bove says he's being offered to rebut the alleged "pressure campaign."

Bove says it's the prosecution's doing that Costello has been featured in the case:

"They brought it up."

Hoffinger says they did not put Costello on their witness list.

Justice Merchan says he's going to pause for five minutes, telling the lawyers not to leave the courtroom.

Justice Merchan rules that Robert Costello can be called to scrutinize Cohen's two allegedly inconsistent statements, and he'll have "some latitude" to testify on the alleged pressure campaign.

But the judge says he won't allow a "trial within a trial" beyond that.

Bove: "The defense calls Robert Costello."

Costello takes the witness stand and takes the oath.

Adam Klasfeld
@KlasfeldReports
·
1h
Bove's questioning begins with biographical details of Costello's life.

Costello was previously a federal prosecutor in Manhattan, before his work at his current law firm.

Bove asks Costello about his meeting at the Regency Hotel.

Cohen was "absolutely manic" for the first two hours of that meeting, saying: "My life is shattered. My family's life was shattered."

Cohen asked for an "escape route," Costello said.

Bove asks a series of questions interrupted by a series of sustained objections by prosecutors.

Costello quotes Cohen as saying:

"I swear to God, Bob. I don't have anything on Donald Trump."

Costello also quotes Cohen saying:

"I don't understand why they're trying to put me in jail for some f-ing NDAs."

As Costello continues his answer, prosecutor Hoffinger objects again. Sustained again.

After another sustained objection, Merchan says: "Please approach," with a hint of give-'em-an-inch exasperation in his voice at the scope of the questioning.

Bove gets a pinpointed question about Trump's knowledge over the plate, and Costello replies:

"Michael Cohen said numerous times that President Trump knew nothing about these payments."

Costello repeats that Cohen said this "numerous" times.

Prosecutor: Objection.
Judge: Sustained.

Costello: "Geez!"

Merchan to Costello, with annoyance: "I'm sorry?"

Merchan excuses the jury to castigate Robert Costello.

"I want to discuss proper decorum in my courtroom. [...]

"If you don't like my ruling, you don't say 'Geez!'"

He also may not give him "side eye."

Merchan orders the courtroom cleared.

Trump’s entourage in the first couple of rows appears to be allowed to stay.

The press is in the hallway.

We're back, and so is the jury.

What happened after the courtroom was cleared? I'll be eager to see tonight's transcript.

Adam Klasfeld
@KlasfeldReports
·
1h
Bove asks Costello about another email.

Bove's questioning refers to a series of messages between Costello and Cohen, set against phone logs of their calls.

Costello:

"Mr. Cohen was making constant complaints about Rudy Giuliani" and his comments to the press.

The witness continues his answer until the prosecutor objects.

Judge: Sustained.

Costello continues.

Judge: Sustained, followed by an instruction to Costello.

Q: Mr. Costello, did you ever put any pressure on Michael Cohen to do anything?
A: No.

Q: Did you ever instruct him to interact with Rudy Giuliani on anything?
A: Not at all.

Costello said he had "exclusively" Michael Cohen's interests in mind during his time speaking with him.

Costello concedes he's spoken "frequently" in media and before the House Judiciary Committee last Wednesday.

Bove: "Nothing further, your honor."

Prosecutor Susan Hoffinger: "Good afternoon, Mr. Costello."

Costello: "Hi."

Hoffinger shows Costello an email from his partner, Jeff Citron, extolling his experience to Cohen.

Q: You and your partner thought this would be a good opportunity to get Michael Cohen as your client?

Costello pushes back, saying this was his partner's doing.

Costello acknowledges Cohen's case would have been high-profile and generated publicity.

Asked whether retaining Cohen would have been a big win for his law firm, Costello replies: "I would say no. I didn't want to have him as a client for the firm."

Costello's son responded to the news this way on April 20, 2018:

"Wow. That's big news. Congrats Dad. I hope this leads to a lot of good things coming your way."

Full tennis-match eyes from the jurors as the prosecutor volleys questions and answers with the witness.

Q: You know what a search warrant is, do you not?
A: Of course I do!

Asked whether it's also "pretty serious" for the FBI to search a lawyer's office, Costello says it's "very serious."

Costello says of Cohen: "He was suicidal that day, and acting very manic."

Q: "You thought he was being a drama queen, didn't you?"

At first, Costello answers no, but he says that Cohen said he was "on the roof of the Regency Hotel and he was going to jump off."

Judge: "Counsel, please approach."

It's past the usual 4:30 p.m. ET stop time, and once sidebar ends, trial closes for the day.

Day Two of Costello's cross coming up tomorrow.

Adam Klasfeld
@KlasfeldReports
·
1h
During the post-trial session, Trump's lead attorney Todd Blanche moves for an order of dismissal.

This is routine after the prosecution completes its case.

Blanche:

"There is no evidence that there's any intent to defraud by President Trump."

Blanche:

"These are records on his personal— his personal records at the Trump Organization."

Blanche says there was "zero" evidence that anyone was thinking of a campaign finance charge when Stormy Daniels was paid, or when the meeting with Weisselberg happened.

Blanche says there's "absolutely no evidence" that Cohen, David Pecker, Dylan Howard or anyone else had criminal intent during the conduct at issue in the case.

(Note: Pecker testified AMI entered the non-prosecution agreement because he thought they admitted to a campaign violation.)

A text message also showed Dylan Howard darkly musing that Trump may give him a pardon for "electoral fraud."

(But the text couldn't come in because neither Howard nor the recipient testified.)

As it became clear Trump would win, then-Enquirer editor in chief Dylan Howard sent a close relative a message saying the soon-to-be POTUS-elect may pardon him for "electoral fraud."

(Since Howard wasn't in court, the jury couldn't see the message.)

Blanche also asks for a directed verdict because Michael Cohen's testimony isn't credible.

Justice Merchan skeptically repeats that Blanche wants him to find Cohen's testimony not credible "as a matter of law."

Justice Merchan pointedly asks whether his position is that Cohen's testimony was an "irrefutable lie" that can nevertheless fool "12 New Yorkers."

Then, he hears from the prosecution.

ADA Matthew Colangelo is up

Colangelo notes that the falsifying business records statute punishes anyone "causing" the falsified records:

"As a matter of law, it is sufficient, more than sufficient, that the defendant set in motion the sequence of events" leading to the falsification of records.

Adding it isn't necessary to deliver full summations on the dismissal bid, Colangelo says the trial record "overwhelmingly supports" each offense.

Justice Merchan says he'll reserve decision.

Then, Todd Blanche wants another word in. The judge allows it.

Now, trial is actually adjourned until Costello's cross continues on Tuesday morning.

I'll cover it live from the courtroom then, as I have and will ever day...

Anna Bower
@AnnaBower
·
2h
The defense calls its first witness: Daniel Sitko, a legal analyst at Blanche Law.

Sitko is a young guy who looks to be in his twenties. He's wearing glasses.

Sitko says that as a part of his work, he was asked to make a call summary chart showing calls between Cohen and Robert Costello.

Six calls were longer than half an hour, Sitko says.

One of the calls, from Memorial Day weekend of 2018, shows a 96 minute phone call between Costello and Cohen.

Now Mangold is up for the prosecution for cross examination.

There are a number of durations in the chart in which the duration is 0:00? Yes. That's when the call was not answered? Yes.

Bove asks about Cohen's response, in which Cohen said it was great news for Rudy and that he owes Costello a call.

The prosecution launches a series of objections to several questions about this email, which are sustained.

"Geez," Costello exclaims.

What did Cohen tell you about communications with Giualini?

He said that I could tell Giuliani that my firm was on his team, but that he wasn't going to announce it to the press. That's why he used the term "backchannel."

Costello says that Cohen wanted him to find out how the SDNY investigation began.

BOVE: So Cohen was trying to get information *from* Giuliani?

COSTELLO: Yes

More objections, more sustained.

Costello lets out an audible sigh.

Justice Merchan is frustrated. He asks the jury to step out.

JUSTICE MERCHAN addresses COSTELLO: I want to talk about proper decorum in my courtroom.

He reprimands Costello, telling him not to say "geez" or make other responses when he doesn't like a ruling from the court.

Do you understand? Costello says he does.

We're back in action now.

Costello appears on the screen, his expression looking a bit like a a schoolboy who has just been reprimanded.

Bove resumes his cross examination.

Bove displays a series of calls between Cohen and Costello in June of 2018.

Bove displays an email between the two around that time, in which Costello says "please remember if you want to communicate something, please let me know and I will see that it gets done..."

Bove asks what he meant by that, but as Costello launches into a monologue about Cohen's complaints about another law firm, Justice Merchan sustains objections. Please just answer the question asked, Merchan says.

BOVE: Mr. Costello, did you ever put any pressure on Michael Cohen about anything?

COSTELLO: No

BOVE: Did Mr. Cohen ever put a pressure on you? Objection, sustained.

In dealing with Cohen, who did you owe an obligation to? Michael Cohen. Costello insists that his professional duty as a lawyer was to Cohen alone, not Trump.

You've testified in Congress about this case? I did, the House Judiciary Committee last Wednesday.

Costello also says he's done media appearances about the case.

No further questions from the defense.

Anna Bower
@AnnaBower
·
1h
Hoffinger up for cross examination.

Your law partner, Jeff Citron, emailed Michael Cohen about you representing him? The email speaks for itself, Costello says.

Hoffinger pulls up the email. It's confusing to me, Costello says. It looks like it's from Cohen to Citron, but "I guess it's in a string."

The email chain is admitted into evidence.

At the time, you had heard about the Michael Cohen investigation in the news? Yes

And you were interested in having him as a client? No, I went along to the meeting with Jeff Citron. Citron knew Michael Cohen for about 10 years.

But you knew from the news that Cohen was Trump's personal attorney? Yes
And so that would be a big win for you and your firm? I would say no, I didn't want him as a client with the firm.

Would you announce him as a client on your firm website? I don't know what the firm would do.

Hoffinger displays an email dated April 20, 2018 from Costello to his son. "I will be on the team," Costello wrote, telling his son that he didn't know when it would be announced but that he has been authorized to tell Giuliani that he would be representing Michael Cohen.

Based on news with the search warrants, you knew Cohen had been through a traumatic event? You knew of the FBI raid of his residence?

"I wouldn't use the term raid, they executed a search warrant."

Laughs from the overflow at the irony of this statement. IYKYK.

COSTELLO: Cohen told us that two nights before, he was on the roof of the Regency Hotel and that he was going to jump off because he couldn't handle the ongoing investigation.

HOFFINGER: You told the grand jury that you thought Cohen was acting like a drama queen?

Costello tries to respond with a monologue. Merchan instructs him to answer "yes" or "no" to the question if he can.

I said I didn't know whether he was just being a drama queen.

Merchan asks counsel to approach the bench. Another sidebar.

Jurors, we're going to stop at this time, Justice Merchan says when everyone returns to their seats.

Once the jurors are gone, Merchan asks how much Hoffinger has left on cross examination.

About half an hour, 45 minutes, she says.

And at this point, the defense says it does not plan to call any other witnesses.

Blanche pops up: Your honor, we have a motion for an order of dismissal.

He launches into argument:

First, there's no evidence that the records were false. There's no dispute that Cohen provided legal services to Trump in 2017.

Second, there's no evidence of intent to defraud in connection with these filings. These were records generated in connection to Cohen's personal relationship w/ Trump in 2017. He was paid first by a Trust, and then from the personal bank account over which Trump had sole authority. The checks were then sent for him to sign *in the White House.* If there was intent to defraud, then the records would have been entered in a different manner, for services that weren't actually rendered, or with a little bit of evidence of intent to defraud, of which there is none.

There's also no evidence that anyone was thinking about a campaign finance charge when Cohen and Weisselberg met in 2017. So there's no evidence of an effort to conceal anything by Trump or anyone involved.

There's talk of this being used to cover up a conspiracy to influence the election. But there has to be something unlawful about that effort to influence...there's no evidence of any criminal intent behind the plan to publish positive stories about Trump and negative stories about his opponent. No evidence that Pecker, Trump, Howard, or anyone else had any criminal intent at the time they engaged in this conduct. There was no discussion at the 2015 meeting about "catch and kill." So we don't have evidence of any criminal conduct at this first meeting where the conspiracy was allegedly born.

Look to Karen Mcdougal, Blanche continues. She didn't even want her story out.

With Sajudin, that was a "demonstratively false" story...so if there was a conspiracy to influence the election, how is keeping a false story from the voters criminal?

That's not a catch and kill, and it's certainly not a criminal catch and kill.

When it comes to Daniels, AMI wanted nothing to do with that. If it was really a conspiracy, AMI jumped out of that conspiracy. Mr. Pecker insisted that he wanted nothing to do with it.

So the three separate incidents that supposedly had conspiratorial criminal intent had none of it. And so the court should enter a dismissal before verdict.

Blanche continues: A key part of the story is that on Oct. 24, Cohen spoke to Keith Schiller who handed the phone to Trump.

Merchan: So you're asking me to find the call not credible as a matter of law?

Yes, Blanche says.

Merchan: So you want me to take it out of the jury's hands... that this person is so not credible that his testimony can't be considered?

Blanche: Yes, he testified and he lied under oath in this courtroom.

Merchan: You said his lies are irrefutable? So you think he'll fool 12 New Yorkers to believe in this lie?

Merchan says he'll hear from the People now.

Colangelo is up to respond. The trial record rebuts the record that there is no falsity, he says. He points to testimony of Cohen, McConney, Trump's office of government ethics form in which he disclosed reimbursing Cohen, public statements from Trump saying he reimbursed Cohen....

Regarding intent to defraud: One point raised by Blanche actually goes to the causation element, Colangelo says. It's more than sufficient as a matter of law if the defendant "set in motion" the events that led to the false entries knowing that that was reasonable foreseeable consequence of his actions.

What's more, Colangelo says, the evidence shows intent to defraud and intent to deceive government regulators.

As to the "step up" crime intent, the "unlawful means" of the election conspiracy included campaign finance violations, other false document entries, etc.

JUSTICE MERCHAN: Thank you, I'll reserve a decision.

But Blanche wants a last word: A conspiracy doesn't happen just because three people get together and talk.

You have no evidence of catch and kill at the 2015 Trump Tower meeting. You have a legal expense that's recorded, and there's a lawyer who performed legal services. How else is Ms. Tarasoff in accounts payable supposed to record that?

JUSTICE MERCHAN: As I said, I'm going to reserve decision. I'll see you both at 9:30 am tomorrow.

Roger Parloff
@rparloff
My understanding is that after Justice Merchan cleared the courtroom today, he put defense witness Robert Costello on notice that his conduct was contemptuous & if he did it again (stared Merchan down) Merchan would remove him from the stand & strike his testimony.

Photo: Screen capture
Robert Costello
https://www.rawstory.com/trump-robert-c ... 668325109/