tied to the trump organization. she was the lead attorney on the trump university fraud suit, which was settled. they didn t admit anything. this is somebody who has been closely tied to the trump organization. her connection to the trump organization appears to be relatively clear. what is more important, at least to daniels case, is whether or not there is a nexus between that attorney, the trump organization and ec consultants and michael cohen, who are the parties to the contract, who actually signed the contract. remember, trump, david denison, did not sign the contract. thank you, danny. we appreciate you all sticking around this hour. we ll be right back with today s big picture. ities. at ameriprise financial, we can t predict what tomorrow will bring. but our comprehensive approach to financial planning can help make sure you re prepared for what s expected and even what s not. and that kind of financial confidence
story to millions of people watching on 60 minutes. as we all know, michael cohen s job in all of this is to keep her quiet, defend the president of the united states, and continue the story, such as it is, which is that he s saying, you know, that they re denying this ever occurred. these reports out there that the michael cohen team and his lawyer are seeking an injunction to prevent 60 minutes from airing, the interview, is that going to fly? that s talking about a term prior restraint. who was the party to this contract? david denison, which we know works for donald trump and sarah huckabee sanders, stormy daniels and michael cohen. who is not there? 60 minutes.
giving back the money is part of sort of taking back control of her own narrative, whatever it is. i don t know her, but i think telling hr her story and telling the truth about this person who became president, their encounter the way she described it in in touch magazine, it was not unpleasant, it didn t go sideways. ten years after the encounter she was offered $130,000 for silence, an agreement that was never signed by whoever she entered into it with, her lawyer says the president under a fake name, i think david denison. but the telling her story seems to me to be more than about profiting. i m surprised to hear you say that. i don t know if we would give her a gold membership to the me too movement. to your point i m not saying she s a victim. i m saying we don t think we should put this all on money. i think there are things that the president did that now that he s a leader of the froo he world, whether could he be blackmailed by the russians. i wish i agree with you
is able to tell her story the american people will learn how that amount was arrived at among the parties. but this isn t about her having buyer s remorse. it really isn t. final question. i m intrigued. peggy peterson, how do you come up with peggy peterson, how do you come up with david denison? well, you ll have to ask mr. cohen because he is the one that came up with these aliases. we have no idea. all right. i hope you get the chance. thank you. appreciate you being here. so do i. i hope yyou get that chance today. he can call me right now. i d love to hear exactly what his reaction might be. i d love to hear it as well. thanks for having me. michael cohen, pick up the phone sgloom phone. up ahead, the surprise announcement of tariffs caused panic. why are they worried? and i have a prop here for you for this segment. do you know what that is?
llc, and/or davidson, denison, rather, david denison, the president. the pseudonyms. and/or. he does not have to sign the agreement for it to be effective. however, what i find to be interesting is that when you get into the clauses that deal with what happens at the arbitration, they only refer to d.d. having the right to specify what law will apply, d.d. specifying where the arbitration will take place. and d.d. is not a party to it. so i think it s sloppy drafting here. and as a result of that, there s a valid contract, but the clause is the most important clauses may not apply. there s really two separate legal arguments taking place. one having to do with the future of the nondisclosure agreement, but also the potential federal elections violation that could blow back on the president, but the first person who has to deal with that is michael cohen. can he make a legal argument that he took on this