cohen $130,000, he had to true up the amount so that michael cohen would actually get the full $130,000. you wouldn t need to do that if these were actually legal fees. this is not how this would work. so, and as you pointed out, there are a lot of prior inconsistent statements and you ll hear from the prosecution about, look, if this was an innocent scheme, why is his story changing so much over time. yeah. so i think those are all of the kinds of things you ll hear to undermine an exalted ceo, i didn t know what david pecker and michael cohen were doing at the ground level. what about this defense that the d.a. s office is stretching a misdemeanor and they haven t even picked one aggravating crime. i think tim is right. they re going to focus on the
kellyanne conway, but they ll only focus on the evidence admitted into trial. so they re going to hear things from cohen that might echo what we ve learned in public but it has to be done under oath. but of course, cohen has been under oath before. he testified under oath to congress about all of this. what i did each and every time is go straight into mr. trump s office and discuss the issue with him. he acknowledged to allen that he was going to pay the $130,000 and that allen and i should go back to his office and figure out how to do it. you could expect consistent testimony to that end from cohen before these jurors. the legal problems, of course, are adding up and that is where this man who has chosen to run for president again, many people in this situation wouldn t even do that, is going to have to face some level of public
briefly recently defendant trump making that point. take a look. i was paying a lawyer. and it was a legal expense, an accountant, i didn t know, mark it down as a legal expense. that is exactly what it was. and you get indicted over that. so to finish this point, in your experience, working for him as a client, does he get that kind of argument from the lawyers and his understanding that this is going to be useful in the case, or is he pushing that argument on the lawyers? well i think it is consistent with what the evidence here is. because they have an invoice from michael cohen asking to be paid that. so, when you have michael cohen giving an invoice saying it is for legal fees, it is then paid as legal fees and it is annotated as legal fees, it would make sense that is exactly what he s going to claim. so how do you deal with on this topic, the tape?
which tape? there is the cohen tape where he said, hey, we re going to pay it off? michael cohen, you know, he has given so many different stories on this. when he was initially raided by the feds, he went and told his lawyer that this was something that he did without donald trump s knowledge whatsoever. and said that he did it that way because he wanted to hide it so that melania wouldn t find out about it. so, it is one of those things where you have to go with how many different stories does michael cohen say and how much could you really believe him. yeah, we have something on that for your explanation. because i m curious how i think they re going to use that as trial. but while many people politically in america, thought, wow, this guy michael cohen has turned it around and become such an informed and strong critic of donald trump, as you know, tim,
looking for information. and they believed that i had a value. and that the value was the insight that i was capable of offering them and they were willing to pay. how many times did you meet with them? for $1.2 million how many times did you meet with them? i provided them with in-person and telephone access whenever they needed it. how many times? six times. six times. wow. $200,000 a call. sir, i also would like to this is my five minutes, mr. cohen. not yours. did you get money from the back of kazakhstan? it s not a bank of kazakhstan. it s called bta. kazakhstan bta bank did you get money from them? i did. for what purpose. the former ceo of that bank