tv MSNBC Live With Katy Tur MSNBC February 27, 2019 11:00am-12:00pm PST
>> yes, it is made part of the exhibit. >> you will provide it to the committee? >> yes, ma'am. >> is executives at the company then and i quote "agreed to reimburse cohen by adding $130,000 and 50,000 grossing of that amount to 360,000 for tax purposes and adding $60,000 bonus such that cohen would be paid $420,000 in total." executives of the company decided to pay $420,000 of monthly installments over the course of the year of $35,000, is that accurate? >> yes, that's accurate. >> because if you pay $130,000 and you live in new york, we have a 50% tax bracket, in order to get you 130 back, you have to have 260. if he gave me back 130, i would be out 65,000. >> what was the purpose of
spreading the reimbursements to you over the installments? >> i wanted the money in one shot or preferred it that way. in order to be able to put it onto the books, allan weisselberg made the decision that should be paid over the 12 months so that it would look like a retainer. >> did mr. trump know about this reimbursement method? >> oh, he knew about everything, yes. >> thank you mr. cohen. the president not only knew about the payment, he knew how to hide the payment and reimbursement to you. >> we discussed it. everything had to go through mr. trump and approved by mr. trump. >> now you are going to prison. >> yes, i am going to prison. >> i yield back. >> thank you mr. chairman. >> yes, i yield my time. >> earlier you said, i am assuming new york is a one party
consent. you are also a member of the new york bar? >> correct. >> how do you rate the ethical realm of being a lawyer? >> it is not an illegal thing. >> i am not asking if it is illegal. >> i think every other lawyer in here knows where it is on the ethical standard. when you said you had 100 tapes, were any of those tapes are other clients? >> yes. >> i think this is pretty amazing. i really do, did any of them waived privilege? >> nope. >> five minutes ago, in the middle of our hearing on oversight, you immediately responded that you would hand over tapes to this committee without any of your previous clients waiving privilege. >> i am not the only one in possession of those documents. >> whoever else that's in charge
of those documents are not my concern. my concern is i know lawyers that would go to jail before they violate attorney/client privilege. in a matter of seconds, you said you would turn it over. >> just trying to cooperate. >> they're already in the hands of all of the agencies. >> what law enforcement determines to do something and why you determine to do something, client privilege and attorney's trust account are the two sacred thing that you can do as your entire career as a lawyer. >> rudy giuliani waived it. >> i am not talking about rudy giuliani, i am talking about you. >> i don't know who's on those tapes. only you know. there is a hundred of them. >> the other ones are subject to ongoing. >> in a matter of one second, you took no absolute
calculatiocalculation of your role as your counselor, when you passed the bar and signed on the bar and a member of the bar, you immediately said if it helps me out, in the two day in front of tv, yes. absolutely, mr. chairman, you can have it. >> that goes into what we are going to talk about next briefly. we talked about these tax indictments on tax fraud and bank fraud as they are isolated incidents but they are not isolated incidents. these were intricate and elaborate lies that needed to be held with constant, just constant deception of banks and businesses and associates and accountants and potentially your family. received over $2.4 million in personal loans from taxi medallion company one.
those were loan payments, correct? >> no, sir. >> those were payments that were made by the management company that was operating the medallions. >> to you? >> to me. >> those were deposited into your personal account or in some instances your wife's account. >> it was deposited into the joint checking account of my wife and i that's located at the base of the building that we resided. >> were those disclosed on your tax returns? >> they are not. they were not disclosed on my tax returns. >> your accountant talked to you about those deposits, you told them you would not pay for a memo that you did not ask to be done? >> that's inaccurate. >> the sentencing court of new york has it wrong? >> i don't know. i don't know what mr. getzo wrote. there are a series of issues
regarding his memo. putting all that aside with jeff getzo, the incident to that is i pled guilty. i made my mistakes. i am not so sure why this singular attack on my tax. if you want to look at them, i am happy to show you. >> if the chairman gives me 20 minutes, i have plenty of questions. >> i am done. >> that's exactly when it comes to the credibility why i asked, please let's figure out -- >> these are not isolated incidents of attacks. these were constant deception whether it is rolling over a $20 million line of credit to a $14 million credit. you went to great lents gths concealing that at one bank and you are reducing your net income to a bank.
these are things that's happening january of 2018 and january of 2015. these were things constantly involved -- my question was it exhausting keeping track of all the lies you are telling all these people. >> the gentleman's time is expired. >> i don't have an answer for it. >> thank you, mr. chairman. mr. cohen, good luck on your road to reredemption. >> thank you, it is going to be a long way. >> that's particularly hard for your children so i wish you well and your family well. >> as you describe your road to here, mr. cooper asked you when the moment was when you decided you need to change. it strikes me there is a transition you illuminated here. your period of time for ten years working as somebody as a developer who you admired and when the special counsel called you in was a key part of it or
you would not be here. the in between part that i find really interesting and troubling at least in terms of appearances and confidence of the american people would have in this institution and democracy quite frankly. during that period of time, i want to ask you about two specifics if we have enough time. first, the trump tower, you were negotiating for this as you said to be the tallest building in europe. in your guilty plea with the special counsel, you quote, "cohen as individual one, of the possibility of president trump traveling to russia and asked a senior campaign official about potential business travel to russ russia." when did this conversation happen, do you recall? >> early on in the campaign. >> who was the official?
>> corey lewandowskilewandowski. >> what did you discuss in the meeting? >> which date mr. trump would have availability as we are going to russia to take a look at the project. >> go ahead. >> unfortunately, it never came to -- until such time there was no reason to come up with a date but when i first received the information request to go to russia, what i decided to do was spoke to mr. trump about it. he told me to speak to corey to see what dates may be available if i got the information i needed. >> so it is not because of appearances or did it stop because the party decided not to pursue it. >> i am sorry -- i didn't hear
your question. >> he pursued it because he thought you may be going back to developmental business. why did the deal stop? >> because he won the presidency. >> in that interim period of time, he must admit it looks troubling. certainly there is trouble that mr. trump was part of this negotiation and at the same time what we know perhaps separately that the russians are engaged in our election? >> well, i don't know about them being engaged in the election, i can only talk for myself. here i would say to mr. trump in response to his questions of what's going on in russia and still waiting for documents and that night in a rally he would turn around and do his battle cry of no russia and no collusion and no involvement, witch hunt. >> on january 2017 this year, you hired john gager, to rigged
online polls for donald trump. did you hire him? >> yes, those were back 2015? . >> 2014. >> you did hire him? >> yes, i did speak to him about manipulating these online polls. >> did he use bots to manipulate the polls? >> he used algorithm. if that's bots, then the answer is yes. >> did the president have any involvement in directing you to do this? >> what were the results to the polls? >> exactly where we wanted him to be. cnbc poll, we came in at number nine and he was at the top of the poll as well. the cnbc was contenders and top
250 people that they named and it was supposed to be the top ten most influential people. >> earlier today, you directed a comment to my colleagues and i am quoting so, correct me if i got this wrong. "the more people who follow mr. trump, the more people will be where i am," is this kwoyour expectation that people in the administration will end up where you are? >> yes, sadly if are they follow blindly as i have, the answer is yes. >> when i ran for congress, i talked about how washington was broken. i did not expect the level of partnership and stagnation of policies that would improve the lives of americans that i am witnessing today. it is disappointing to me that this committee and chairman chose to spend our time questioning an individual that has zero credibility and instead of spending our time improving the lives of americans or
creating jobs. here we are taking testimonies from a convicted liar and not one who had just lied to his comments or family or friends but testimony from an individual who lie to this body, he lied to congress through false statements and written statements. he lied through congress and amplified his false statements by repeating his lies and including other potential witnesses. now we on this committee and the american people are expected to believe mr. cohen's testimony. i don't know a juror in america would believe anything mr. cohen says given his actions. you stood before multiple congression today and raise your hands to swear to be honest. is that correct? >> yes, that's correct. >> you lied to congress on your
own accord and admitted to lying to congress, correct? >> i have already stated my peace on that. i knew what he wanted many e e . i was staying on party line. >> he never directed you to lie to congress? >> he did not use those words, no. >> were payments made to you by mr. trump, correct? >> yes, among other things, yes. >> other than your testimony here today, there is absolutely no proof that those specific payments were for those specific purposes, was that correct? >> it is my testimony that the check that i produce d as part f this testimony, the $35,000 and the second check that's signed by don jr. and weisselberg were two checks out of the 11th that were meant for the reimbursements of the hush money payment to stormy daniels. >> so in your testimony on page 13, you claimed and i quote,
"mr. trump directed me using my own funds from a home equity line of credit to avoid any money tracking back to him that could impact his campaign," do you have any proof of this direction? >> just the payments, sir. >> no e-mail. >> mr. trump does not have e-mail. >> no recording. >> i do not have recordings. >> text message? >> mr. trump does not text message. >> no directions other than your testimony today? >> the fact that i paid on his behalf at his direction the money to keith davidson's account. you are right, there is no other documentation na i hav i haveta. . >> i don't know how to answer that, sir. >> well, it is simple. there is nothing in the evidence that shows the exhibit you
provided today that shows that trump directed you to make those payments? >> other than the non-disclosure agreement that has been seized by government authorities? i don't believe there is anybody out there that believes that i just decided to pay $130,000 on his behalf. >> you were his attorney for over ten years? >> that does not mean i pay $130,000. >> he was not paying you for representation of counsel. >> how did president trump knew that you had a he lock. >> because we discussed it. >> did you tell cuomo that you
had no access to trump on october of 2016. >> your interview with chris cuomo. >> i would need to see the documents. >> did you tellii was protectin. >> you told him that you made these payments without telling him. >> thatif that's what i said to chris cuomo, yes. >> if this is true, the department of justice would not let you discuss it during your testimony here today, is that correct? >> i don't know. >> gentleman's time is expired. >> i did want to say one last thing. not only did i lie to the american people, i lied to the first lady when the president called me, i was sitting in a car with a friend of mine and he had me speak to her and explain to the first lady. the answer is -- you are not
accurate and i don't feel good about any of this. this was not my intention. >> mr. lawrence. >> sorry. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i want to put on the record, being a black american and having endured the public comments of racism from the sitting president as being a black person, i can imagine what's being said in private and into prop of one member of our entire race of black people. and say that nullifies that and totally insulting and in this environment of expecting a president to be inclusive, and to look at his administration speaks volume. i have some questions. i want to talk to you about this intimidation of witness. mr. cohen, you were initially scheduled to the before the house oversight committee on
february the 7th, but your legal team delayed your testimony quoting "ongoing threats against your family from the president and attorney rudy giuliani," is that correct? >> yes, ma'am. >> after you admitted the president's negotiations over real estate project and russia continues well through the summer before the 2016 elections, president trump called you "a weak person" and accused you of lying. on december 16th, after 2018, after you disclosed it was the president who directed you to arrange hush money payments to stormy daniels and karen mcdougal to conceal his extramarital affairs, he called you a rat. mr. cohen, why do you feel or believe that the president is repeatedly attacking you? you are stating that you feel
intimidated asking us to protect you, following your cooperation with law enforcement. >> when you have access to 60 plus million people that follow you on social media, you have the ability within which spark some action by individuals that followed him. from his own words that he can walk down in fifth avenue and shoots someone and gets away with it. it is never comfortable when the president of the united states -- >> what do you think he can do to you? >> a lot. it is not just him, it is those people that followed him in his rhetoric. >> what is a lot? >> i don't know, i don't walk with my wife if we go to the restaurant or go some where. i don't walk with my children. i make them go before me. i had fear. it is the same fear that i had before when he initially decided to drop that tweet in my cell
phone. i received some and i am sure you will understand i received some threats and facebook messengers and all sorts of social media. attacks upon me whether to private direct message that i had to turnover to secret service because they are the most viral and disgusting statement that is anyone could ever receive and when it starts to affect your children, that's when it really affects you. >> on january 2019, mr. rudy giuliani called your father-in-law a criminal and said that he may have ties to organized crime. do you believe that the president's lawyer publicly target your father-in-law as an effort to intimidate you. why is your father-in-law being pulled into this? >> i don't know the answer to
this. my father-in-law is in the clothing business came into this country from the expulsion of jews from the ukraine, he came to this country and worked hard and he's now enjoying his retirement. i never in my life would think that mr. trump would do something so disgraceful. he's attacking him because he knows that i care about my family and to hurt me, he's trying to hurt me. my father-in-law was the biggest investment happens to be in the trump's property. it does not make any sense to me. i want to be real clear about that. as the chairman has said retaliating witnesses and threatening families and members is a mob tactic that does not benefit the president of the united states. i want to be on the record this
hearing is not about discrediting the president, it is about the oval office that we take as members of congress to have checks and balances and meet the laws and the policies of this country to serve. thank you, i yield back. >> floyd. >> mr. cohen, i would to offer my heartfelt thoughts to your family of what they are going through. i know it is tough for you to stand here in front of the committee. the chairman suggests that you volunteer to come here, you testified that you are asked to come here, is it correct that you are asked to come here, yes or no? >> yes. >>. >> the combined prisoning sentence would bring it to seven years. you are going to three years, yes or no? >> yes. >> you told my colleague here
today that you did not commit bank fraud, trying to understand can be for clarity, are you or not guilty of making false statements to a financial institution, yes or no? >> yes, i pled guilty. >> you said clearly what lawyers are being untruth full and characterizing your desire to work in the administration, do you say again being untruth full in making that characterization, yes or no? >> i am saying it is not accurate. >> i am not using the word u untruthful. >> i do not want the role or the title in the administration. >> you testify today that you have never been to prague and never been to the czech republic, do you stand booiehin that statement? >> yes, i dough. >> conservative news magazine by david corn which he resooeceive his -- question, you as my
friend mr. armstrong rightly inquired, offered the committee of taped information with a bat of an eye, do you stand behind that? >> i am sorry, you said it so fast. >> you asked my friend mr. armstrong taped information of your clients with a bat of an eye, do you stand behind that offer? >> if the chairman asks me and i will take it under advisement and not a problem. yes, i will turn it over. >> you suggested that you are going to review it in our next break to correct the record, yes or no? >> yes. >> you helped out the president's campaign or involved in the campaign as a representative spokesperson and everyone in yo even of your words and dating back to 2011, is that accurate, yes or no? >> yes. >> 2011 is the year that sticks to my head, it was the year that i was diagnosed with cancer, i
was not pushing for donald trump to be president. i was fighting cancer. even in 2016, i was publicly backing a certain republican from texas. you were all in. you either wanted donald trump to be your president because it would be good for the country or you did it for your own advantage. >> rather they are sick and tired of this hole. they supported the president because they are sick and tired of the games we are seeing here today. they are sick and tired of politicians refuse to secure the border. we blown through 300 or $450 million during this cherade.
just yesterday a border patrol arrested an ms-13 member in mcallen texas for his alleged rules and kidnapping in texas. this is this week. this is what we are ignoring. this is not what we are doing for the american people while we engage in this. this is not what the american people send us here to do. this is an embarrassment for our country. i talk to my beautiful wife back in texas just before the hearing, i said don't bother watching. s she says, don't worry, i won't. i have more important thing to do. she has hell a lot of important
things to do than to watch this. i said amen, darling, i can't help but to think that's what the majority people thinking while watching this unbelievable service. circus. i yield back. >> thank you, mr. chairman. i got houses and schools to help rebuilding the virgin islands and expansion of voting rights and education opportunities and criminal justice reform, thank you the democratic majority can walk and chew gum at the same time. we are here with you right now. you earned well in the ten years that you worked with donald trump. what was your position of the gop up to eight months ago? >> i was vice chair of the finance committee. >> you were vice chair of the finance of the republican
national committee, right? >> correct. >> i do want to say i was a democrat until steve wynn found out that i was and made me switch party. >> on behalf of the many members here who have expressed to your family and apologies to your family. i want to apologize for the inappropriate comments and tweets that have been made by other members of this body and as a former prosecutor and counsel on house et i cahics. i think it should be referred to the committee of witnessing tampering under my colleague matt gaetz and maybe possibly him being referred to a criminal prosecuti prosecution, i want to put that on the record. on may 2nd, 2018, rudy giuliani, appeared on fox news and referred to the president's
reimbursement to you of payments for stormy daniels as retainer. the president tweeted and i quote. "mr. cohen, an attorney received a monthly retainer and not from the campaign and having nothing to do with the campaign from which she entered into reimbursement and a private contract between two parties known as a non-disclosure disagreement." the office of government ethics which is the agency with the speedometer responsibility of what the president needs to report ethically. they were skeptical that a retainer were actually in place and asked to see the agreement on call on may 8th. the president's personal council, dylan, replied that she would. mr. dylan would not let oge staffs come to her office to
review the retainer agreement. >> prosecutors stated that truth and fact, there is no such retainer agreement. mr. cohen, did you ever have a retainer agreement in place for the president for miss clifford? >> no. >> was rudy giuliani's statement inaccurate? >> yes. >> was the statement about the retainer agreement inaccurate? >> is it inaccurate? >> and her statement is what? >> her statement to them was quote not to permit to read the agreement because it was privileged. >> there was no greagreement. >> and his statement was mr. cohen and attorney received a monthly retainer not from the campaign and having nothing to do with the campaign for which she entered into the reimbursement. >> that's not accurate. >> you mentioned to my colleague from new york and also in your testimony about mr. weisselberg
and other individuals miss rona. who are those individuals? are they with the trump administration? >> yes. they are. >> are there other people that we should be meeting with? >> allan weisselberg is the chief finance officer. >> you got to give us quickly names as you can. >> and miss rona. >> her office is directly next to his. she's voinvolved a lot that wen on. >> when the president's lawyers were having the discussions with the office of ethics 2018, did they reach out to talk to you about these payments? >> no, ma'am. >> did you share anything with them otherwise or any other considerati conversations? >> the committee obtain more information about these facts by obtaining documents from the white house and the president's
attorneys? >> i believe so. >> mr. chair, i think those are the individuals that we should be speaking with. and i yield back at this time. >> the meeting will now stand in recess again. we'll come back, listen up, 35 minutes, 35 minutes after the last vote begins. for mr. cohen, we are talking about probably an hour or so. >> thank you so much. >> so we have an hour. michael cohen is now on recess for this testimony. they're breaking in order to go to vote. i believe it is a vote on gun control. the first big vote on gun control that congress has had in years. they'll be back in one hour. today while under oath before the house oversight committee, michael cohen spoke about his decade of working for donald
trump and finances. his recollection for the trump's campaign presidency including what he knew about the wikileaks disclosure and when and how donald trump was involved in the negotiations for the trump tower in moscow. >> mr. trump is a conman. he asked me to pay off an adjustment film star with whom he had an affair and to lie about it to his wife. which i did. >> the president claimed s he k nothing about these payments. his ethics filing said that he owed nothing to you. based on your conversation with him, is there any doubt in your mind that president trump knew exactly what he was paying for? >> there is no doubt in my mind and i truly believe there is no doubt in the minds of the people of the united states of america. >> here is what i see. i see a guy working for ten years and trashing for a guy
who's working ten years, didn't get a job for the white house and now you are behaving just like everyone else who got fired or didn't get the job like andy mccabe and james comey and same kind of selfish motivation after you don't get the things you want. >> mr. jordan, all i wanted was what i got. >> was ivanka, jared or don jr. still involve inside the russian tower deal at that time? >> company was vofrinvolved in deal meant that the family are involved in the deal. >> is it possible the whole family is conflicted or compromised with foreign adversary in the months before the election. >> yes. >> the democrats witness to testify before congress today is none other than a scorned man
who's going to prison for lying to congress. let that sink in and he's the star witness to congress. >> when you called donald trump a cheat in your open testimony, what would you call yourself? >> a fool. >> you are a disgraced lawyer. >> you are a poathological liar. >> you don't know truth from falsehood. >> are you referring to me or the president? >> i did the same thing that you are doing now for ten years. i can only warn people, the more people that follow mr. trump as i did blindly are going to suffer the same consequences that i am suffering. >> let's go right back to capitol hill, garret haake is there. what do you have? >> reporter: we have been watching lawmakers going out to vote here. the general sense among democrats is they heard a lot of what they wanted to hear from
cohen. you are up next, i guess let me start there congressman rakhan. what questions do you want to s ask? >> the checks that he offered and i am going to question him on that. that's direct evidence that the president directed illegal scheme that's part of the criminal investigation in the southern district of new york. i am going to ask him to expand on what he knows about that and what he knows about executive one and executive two. >> reporter: the republican in this committee paints him as an unreliable figure and he may get a book deal once he's out of prison? do you find him credible? >> i do, what the american people will see and republicans screaming at him and being angry and michael cohen is choking up when he thinks of what his kids is going to think about him.
he's coming off as human and remorseful and he had nothing to lose and he's coming clean. every time the republicans attacked him as someone who lied about the moscow project, they should remember that trump had said the exact same thing. i am glad that republicans are finally acknowledged that the president is lying. >> are there other threads from this hearing and former trump executives in a lot of this meeting, what would you like to see this committee focus on based on what you heard? >> financial crimes are the most serious. allan weisselberg and donald trump jr. directed cooking the books and paying him in a way that was financial fraud. it is being investigated by the southern district of new york, the president is implicated, i want to hear who else in the trump's family is part of that investigation. >> i think one of the push backs that we'll hear from republicans when it is said and done, he came out and said he had no direct evidence of collusion. this was a guy side by side with
donald trump for ten years, he did not see any direct evidence of collusion with the russians. what do you make of that part? >> the russia investigation will be apart of adam schiff's investigation. they're two different things. mueller is looking into of the russia investigation. the southern district of new york is looking into financial crimes that the president and his son and weisselberg may have been involved in and they were involved in it after the president took office. i mean the idea that the president was directing illegal payment schemes from the oval office, you could not write it in the movie script. that's the movie script that republicans should have talked about. >> you talked about the checks and the receipts if you will, is this something where you want to see michael cohen producing more of these ingredients. how important of the physical documents that he's able to establish his credibility? >> that's the smoky gun. the check with donald trump
jr.'s signature and weisselberg's signature. let's just be clear of what they have done. they cooked the trump's books in covering up for post-gameayment. it is a crime that anyone would commit and basically we have the goods now. collins is giving the american public the exhibits. he's saying here are their checks with the signatures. >> congressman, i will let you go vote. thank you very much for your time. i appreciate it. >> katy, bring the receipts and the paper work here telling the story and michael cohen's credit ability. >> when they resume after this votes here, you will see suddenly a different tone and a more of a build-up potentially because you won't have the back and forth that we gotten used to over the last few hours. in this first round, only democrats to go.
>> i want to focus on that evidence. in order to do that, let's bring in nbc news intelligence, ken dilanian and our chief legal kr correspondent, ari melber and also the author of "making of donald trump" and our glenn cushner and our msnbc analyst, jeremy bash and our prosecutor, carrie lam. the checks are the evidence that they need. are the checks the smoking gun? do they prove donald trump knew he was paying michael cohen back for a hush money payment to a woman covering up the affair in order to affect the outcome of the election? >> yeah. i think that's clear. that's a problem for the people involved. it is probably not what the congress is traditionally
considers on a quote on quote high crime but it goes to why it is not enough to attack michael cohen. this is all about materials that other people are involved in with evidence. >> so it is an election's crime but it is not a necessarily high crime and misdemeanor, not the bar for impeachment. >> i agree with ari, here what most problematic to the president with respect to the hush money payments. we know the crime of trying to suppress this kind of evidence to hide it from the american people during the election continued. so he successfully tamper it down and it continued through the inaugural period and after he took office and now we have michael cohen saying that conspiracy which was an ongoing offense, it is not like a robbery or assault where it is one and done. we now have a conspiracy of ongoing crime that moves right into the white house when the president is saying as he's you
know showing off the paintings in the oval office to michael cohen. don't worry, the reimbursements for your hush money payments is coming. now, we have crime right in the white house. >> carrie, how significance is that? there is a doj in the memo that says you can't indict the president. how significant is it for a man committing a finance crime while he was in the oval office. >> it is certainly something that's very unusual, right? i don't know if that has ever happened before. on the other ham, the contours of high crimes and misdemeanors in the impeachment context is very uncertain. the doj memo to date has held. bob mueller has sent signals that he intends to respect that. it may be up to congress at the end of the day to decide whether they think this falls within the
impeachment realm or the southern district of new york is going to put together enough of a case that they think they need to go back to the justice department. >> jerry, how do you think cohen is doing? >> he's coming off credible and remorseful and shaken boosbi by turn of events. the guy who's the elbow of the head of the trump's organization and here he is turning on his former boss and saying not only did he engaged in financial crimes but he had a heads up on the wikileaks e-mail dump and he suggests that donald trump jr. info informed his father and there are litany of other allegations. i think of course the republicans are trying to rough him up but at the end of the
day, the documents and the credibility of the witness and the facts will be what drives how the democrats want to take the investigation from here. >> it comes down to credibility. we have been having questions about credibility all morning. he came with documentations and the things he does not have documentation for, i.e., was the russia collusion. i don't have evidence of collusion between the trump campaign. i have my suspicion as and let tell you what those are. he admits he does not have it. >> he's one of the only people in america right now who's about to go to prison in part for lying to congress. he knows better than any one alive why you should not lie today which goes to the structure of his credibility. if i can make a broader point here on your show as i have been back on air all day, take a step back, we just saw something
totally extraordinary. in this investigation of that's been going on in washington from mueller and new york sdny, none of them have spoken under oath? public, not paul manafort and rick gates or michael flynn or not the other side character, george papadopoulos had been out and about but not under oath. this is the first time we heard a mueller witness under oath speak for extended periods of time and addressed by members of both parties. what he lays out is ad damming series of allegations against the president. >> is this for his benefit? he's already pleaded guilty to lying to congress. if he lies to congress again, i imagine that would get him into a lot more hot water. >> i often quote, rappers from brooklyn, i will quote the wisdom of the italians, queen
b bono, who benefits. he may later get rewards from other prosecutors. everything about today's testimony requires his truths at great personal risk. the partisanship, we saw in the committee that was evident. on both sides who are looking for things. to take a step back, this is a mueller witness who mueller says in court they found credible on the tee points he testified to. speaking in public and describing a president who ran on a landmark ark and used his to deal with dirty deeds and struck unwholly alliances to inquire other companies and lied to the public and alleged lies to his family. if what if happens in the middle of the bush's administration or obama's? america would have a full melt
down. it is remarkable to have it laid out. >> you can't make that comparison given where we are today. that is governed how we operate the past 100 or 200 years. what michael cohen said which was interesting, the republicans didn't bring up donald trump at all. they did not want to get into what he was alleging to donald trump. it was all about cohen and what the sdny prosecuted him. >> all republicans wanted to do is impeach and dirty up michael cohen who dirtying up himself just fine. >> i will fault democrats who have not taken the thread for us and connected them. they did not follow up the sale of the mansion in florida, they did not connect to the checks and payments very well to the non disclosure agreement.
>> they barely asked about obstruction in new york or elsewhere. >> let's bring in emily, you were sitting with michael cohen's family today. can you tell us what you learned and how michael cohen is feeling right now? >> reporter: his family is not here today. he didn't bring his family because he was worried about their safety. i think this was something that cohen was clearly prepared for. what we saw was a witness who did his homework. he came with documents that he spent last week coming through. he did that with an expressed purpose. this is a line that resonated with me the most is that, you can say whatever you will about my credibility and you are right to say after you will but that's
why i brought these documents. it is not about my words. at that moment when he says that and explains the causes behind that, it seems to strike a cord in the room. >> we still got he still has questions. >> i have not spoken with him that after was a 9.5 hour day, so i imagine he has more prep work to do. i'm just sitting in the rule and it is a goodtivity. so today is in public and after of the committee is up there and the other have is asking stan
questions. >> so we learned a few things. has michael cohen ever been to prague. he denied it repeatedly. he says he did not meet with any russians when he went on that trip to europe. ken, those were two big stories when they came out at the time. now he is saying that is not true and he is saying so in congress under the threat of being caught lying. >> there is reporting that he was once in prague, but i think we have to give great weight to his p.m., this is a key part of
that dossier. that is part of the collusion narrative that fell down today. who would be aware at the same time the southern district celebration is alive and more of a threat. and let's not frequent that cohen was asked if he was aware of other crimes, but he said he could not talk about it he said it could amount to bank fraud and tampering fraud. let's play that statement, that
could be potentially explosive. this is michael cohen talking about a meeting he had in the oval office with lawyer jay secculo. this is the moment where he is accused of and plead guilt to lying to congress about the trump tower moscow deal and how long they were in discussion about it. he made it clear to you he wanted you to lie. one of the reasons is mr. trump's lawyers reviewed and edited -- and i just want to get to the facts here. which lawyers reviewed and edited your statement to
congress. >> there was additional changes. >> was there changing about the timing. >> there was several changes made including how we were going to handle that message. the message of course being the length of time the moscow trump tower promise stayed alive. >> so he is not saying that donald trump directed him to lie in front of congress he did say that donald trump spoke a kind of code and we understood that code. and he took that to mean i should lie to congress. >> that is right.
i reached out to abbie lowell, and look, you're absolutely right in your assessment. i would add that when you look at the plea documents and the southern district prosecutor, they don't quite describe this episode in the same way. there is no mention of the means to donald trump, so he went further today in a damming way and raising questions about whether or not there was perform or witness tampering. i think there is more based on what he said than didn't said. there was no collusion that i'm aware of. if he was lying, wouldn't that
have been the easiest and most daming lie to make up? we we look to see that a cop ra -- coop ray tor is says things, and he didn't say go in and lie to congress, donald trump would reinforce over and over again we're not doing any business in russia. >> u why would these details not have shown up in any charging or filing that we have seen so far. >> the only people that can answer that is mueller's team. we know there is ongoing investigations. they are drafted ff tactical
reasons. >> i want to get to one other big moment. this is when michael cohen was talking about russia. initially it fsz not supposed to be on the table today and he made an allegation about roger stone and donald trump that roger stone called up donald trump and says he heard it on speaker phone. there will be a dump of wikileaks coming soon. a few days later donald trump asked russia if you're listening, to find hillary clinton's e-mails, we know that moment raised a ton of red flags. hearing this from michael cohen
what does that tell you? he offered to corroborating efrz for this he did say that the assistant to donald trump was on line one. he heard on speaker phone roger stone saying i spoke to wikileaks and they're going to dump the e-mails. this is after that had a meeting to talk about how to interfere, the sanctions relief, and several weeks lat either the president made that statement from the podium if you're listening, so i think when you put all of it together, it it
was well known that the meeting at trump tower, michael cohen claims there was no collusion, but was there communication? was there information shared? were there discussions? meetings about this quid pro quo? you bet there was. >> legts look at the moment he was asked this by congressman well muc welch. >> trump appealed to russia to find hillary's e-mails. he said if you're listening i hope you can find the 30,000 e-mails missing. do you recall if mr. donald trump had knowledge of the wikileaks dump at the time of
his direct appeal to russia? >> i am not b with but the call with mr. stone you believe is before -- >> yes, i'm sorry, i thought you were talking about a different set of documents that got dumped. i was in mr. trump's office july 18th or 19th and yes he went ahead, i don't know if the 35,000 or 30,000 e-mail social security what he is referring to but he certainly had knowledge. >> it is now 3:00, michael cohen has been sitting for hours of congressional testimony. we are on a break right now. they're breaking for votes, the first big gun vote in congress. she