A new public exchange between President Donald Trump and his former lawyer Michael Cohen has revived scrutiny of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg’s hush-money case, with CNN senior legal analyst Elie Honig arguing that Cohen’s latest comments could weaken the factual foundation of the prosecution.
Cohen, who was a central witness in the Manhattan trial, spoke with Trump on Cohen’s WABC radio program, according to the source material. During the segment, Cohen asked Trump to revisit the 2016 campaign and referenced a past CNN appearance in which he defended Trump against unfavorable polling.
At the end of the exchange, Trump told Cohen, “I respect the fact that you recanted everything you said.” Cohen responded, “Yeah,” according to the quoted transcript provided in the source.
Honig Flags a New Problem for Prosecutors
On CNN, Honig told Jake Tapper that people who supported the hush-money prosecution now face a difficult question about Cohen’s credibility.
Honig said prosecutors who previously reviewed the matter, including the Biden Justice Department and an earlier Manhattan district attorney, declined to bring the same case because of concerns about relying on Cohen “beyond a reasonable doubt.”
According to the source, Honig said Cohen has now publicly claimed he “felt pressured and coerced by prosecutors.” Honig framed the issue this way: if Cohen is believed, then his claim about pressure raises concerns; if he is not believed, then the case relied on a witness whose credibility is in doubt.
Honig also said he believes the case has “major legal infirmities” and that the “factual predicate has collapsed,” according to the source material.
Trump Amplifies the Clip
Trump shared the CNN segment on Truth Social, according to the source. He also reportedly shared a screenshot of Washington Examiner chief political correspondent Byron York’s post summarizing Honig’s view that Cohen’s latest statements “demolish the factual basis” of the prosecution and conviction.
The Manhattan case resulted in 34 felony counts related to falsifying business records. The source notes that the charges were elevated from misdemeanor-level allegations through prosecutors’ theory that the records were falsified with the intent to commit or conceal another crime.
The source also says the underlying additional crime was not charged as a separate count and that jurors were instructed they did not need to agree on the same underlying crime, only that an unlawful objective existed.
Appeal Still Pending
Trump’s conviction is currently on appeal in New York’s Appellate Division, First Department, according to the source material. The outcome of that appeal will determine whether Honig’s criticism becomes a legal turning point or remains part of the broader political and media fight over the prosecution.
