Michael Cohen's Claim 'Is Not Worth Anything Unless It Can be Corroborated'
His assertion that President Trump knew in advance about his campaign’s June 2016 meeting in Trump Tower won’t, on its own, stand up in court.
by Adam Serwer
Jul 27, 2018
4 minutes
If substantiated, Michael Cohen’s new assertion—that Donald Trump knew in advance about a 2016 meeting at Trump Tower with Kremlin-connected individuals—would prove that the Trump campaign sought to aid a Russian-influence operation aimed at putting Trump in office.
But Cohen’s word on its own is not enough to prove anything.
“A Cohen assertion by itself is not hefty evidence. If he made a note of it, if there’s a tape, if there’s a second, third, or fourth person who can corroborate, then it starts to look like evidence,” said John Barrett, a law professor at St. John’s University and a former associate counsel in the Iran-Contra affair. “I can’t
You’re reading a preview, subscribe to read more.
Start your free 30 days