Connect with us

Hi, what are you looking for?

Latest News

House GOP goes after ‘convicted liar’ Michael Cohen, urges Justice Department to investigate recent lies

Two Republican congressional committee chairmen are again referring ex-Trump attorney Michael Cohen to the Justice Department for lying to Congress, Fox News Digital has learned.

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and House Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., had previously referred Cohen to the Justice Department after Cohen allegedly lied to Congress in a February 2019 hearing.

Cohen pleaded guilty in 2018 to campaign finance violations, making false statements to Congress and tax evasion. He was sentenced to three years in prison.

In a letter sent to Attorney General Merrick Garland on Wednesday, obtained by Fox News, Comer and Jordan wrote that much of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s ongoing case against former President Donald Trump is based on testimony from Cohen, whom they called a ‘repeated liar.’

In the letter Wednesday, Jordan and Comer remind Garland that Republicans, in February 2019, referred Cohen to the Justice Department ‘for perjury and knowingly making false statements during his testimony’ before the House Oversight Committee on Feb. 27, 2019.

Jordan and Comer said, at the time, members cited ‘six specific lies told by Cohen and urged the Justice Department to take appropriate action.’

‘Last year, we learned that Cohen separately lied again before the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence in a 2019 deposition,’ they wrote. Cohen appeared to admit to being dishonest in Trump’s non-jury civil trial stemming from New York Attorney General Letitia James’ lawsuit.

‘Cohen’s testimony is now the basis for a politically motivated prosecution of a former president and current declared candidate for that office,’ Jordan and Comer wrote. ‘In light of the reliance on the testimony from this repeated liar, we reiterate our concerns and ask what the Justice Department has done to hold Cohen accountable for his false statements to Congress.’

Cohen, during his February 2019 testimony, ‘made willfully and intentionally false statements of material fact that were contradicted by the record established by the Justice Department in United States v. Cohen,’ they wrote. Jordan and Comer also said Cohen made statements that were contradicted by witnesses with firsthand knowledge of the subject.

Those lies, according to Jordan and Comer, included Cohen denying committing various fraudulent acts, to which he had pleaded guilty in federal court.

Cohen also repeatedly testified that he did not seek employment in then-President Trump’s White House, ‘despite evidence from the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York demonstrating that ‘Cohen privately told friends…that he expected to be given a prominent role and title in the new administration.’’

Jordan and Comer also said Cohen stated that he ‘did not direct the creation of a Twitter account known as @WomenForCohen, which is contradicted by statements from the owner of the IT firm that created the account for Cohen.’

They also said Cohen lied when he said he did not have any reportable foreign government contracts, despite entering into two contracts in 2017 with entities owned in part by foreign governments.

Jordan and Comer said Cohen’s testimony also contradicted various aspects of his written statement, which he submitted in advance of the hearing. Cohen asserted that he committed crimes out of ‘blind loyalty’ to Trump, but Jordan and Comer said that was contradicted by federal prosecutors in federal court.

Most recently, Jordan and Comer said, was in October 2023, when Cohen ‘admitted to lying to Congress’ during his testimony in the Letitia James case against Trump.

When asked if he was being ‘honest’ in front of the House Intelligence Committee in February 2019, Cohen testified: ‘No.’

‘So you lied under oath in February of 2019? Is that your testimony?’ Trump attorney Alina Habba asked him.

‘Yes,’ Cohen replied.

The revelation prompted current House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Turner, R-Ohio, and committee member, House Republican Conference Chair Elise Stefanik, R-N.Y., in October to refer Cohen again to the DOJ for perjury and knowingly making false statements to Congress.

Just last week, Turner and Stefanik doubled down on their calls for another DOJ investigation into Bragg’s ‘star witness.’

‘Currently, Manhattan’s popularly elected District Attorney, Alvin Bragg, is using Cohen as his star witness in an ongoing criminal prosecution of President Donald Trump,’ Jordan and Comer wrote, noting that Bragg’s case ‘relies heavily on Cohen’s testimony and credibility.’

But the lawmakers said, in short, ‘to prosecute President Trump, Bragg has revived this ‘zombie’ case relying on a known — and convicted — liar and his testimony at a congressional hearing in which he lied at least six times.’

Jordan and Comer stressed that Bragg, ‘a popularly elected, partisan prosecutor, is using this convicted liar to carry out his politically motivated prosecution of a former president.’

‘Therefore, we again request that the Justice Department investigate whether any of Mr. Cohen’s testimony warrants another charge’ for violating the law, they wrote.

‘Congress cannot perform its oversight function if witnesses who appear before its committees do not provide truthful testimony,’ Jordan and Comer wrote.

The unprecedented criminal trial for Trump is ongoing. Cohen is expected to be called to testify.

Cohen arranged the $130,000 hush money payment to adult film actress Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election.

Trump, later, made several payments of $35,000 to Cohen, who was his personal attorney at the time. Bragg is trying to prove those payments, which totaled $420,000, were a reimbursement for the hush money payment.

But Trump defense attorneys say that the $35,000 payments were ‘not a payback,’ but instead, legal payments.

In an exclusive interview with Fox News Digital, Trump said it was not falsifying a record for a bookkeeper to note a payment as ‘legal expense’ while paying a legal fee.

‘They call it a legal expense — and that’s what it was. It was a legal expense,’ Trump told Fox News Digital. ‘It was legal fees paid to a lawyer — that’s called a legal expense.’

Trump has pleaded not guilty to 34 counts of falsifying business records in the first degree.

The charges are related to alleged payments made ahead of the 2016 presidential election to silence Daniels about an alleged 2006 extramarital affair with Trump.

Bragg must convince the jury that not only did Trump falsify the business records related to alleged hush money payments, but that he did so in furtherance of another crime: conspiracy to promote or prevent election, which is a felony.

On their own, falsifying business records and conspiracy to promote or prevent election are misdemeanor charges.

This post appeared first on FOX NEWS

You May Also Like

Latest News

Independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. has revealed what he says is his path to the White House as he faces increased pressure...


In this edition of StockCharts TV‘s The Final Bar, Dave uncovers strength in SQSP using the Stochastics Oscillator and the StochRSI indicator. He shares...


Over the past trading week, it was expected that while technical pullbacks in the markets may get extended, NIFTY may still continue to remain...


We’ve been covering the signs of weakness for stocks, from the bearish divergences in March, to the mega-cap growth stocks breaking through their 50-day...

Disclaimer:, its managers, its employees, and assigns (collectively “The Company”) do not make any guarantee or warranty about what is advertised above. Information provided by this website is for research purposes only and should not be considered as personalized financial advice. The Company is not affiliated with, nor does it receive compensation from, any specific security. The Company is not registered or licensed by any governing body in any jurisdiction to give investing advice or provide investment recommendation. Any investments recommended here should be taken into consideration only after consulting with your investment advisor and after reviewing the prospectus or financial statements of the company.

Copyright © 2023