Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg is waking up to a nightmare unfolding this morning. His “Got Trump” convictions are hanging on by an even thinner thread than he ever imagined after a crushing interview between President Trump and an unsuspecting character yesterday.
That unsuspecting character was Trump’s former lawyer, Michael Cohen, and Bragg’s star witness.
The case rested on whether or not the jury would believe Cohen, who had previously been convicted of perjury for lying to Congress. Cohen also had open hostility toward Trump and a history of lying to business associates and the public.
President Trump has apparently decided to let bygones be bygones and joined Cohen on Cohen’s WABC radio show yesterday.
In the segment below, Cohen asks the President to go “back to 2016.”
“You and I have traveled a pretty rocky road together. Do you remember, sir, when I went on CNN with Brianna Keilar, and she told me that you’re underwater in the polls? And I responded with those famous two words, ‘Says who?’ which became a worldwide meme,” Cohen asked.
After reminiscing on the weaponization both men had endured during the President’s first term, Trump ends the segment with, “I respect the fact that you recanted everything you said.”
“Yeah,” Cohen responds.
LIVE NOW: Michael and President Trump discuss 2016.
Listen Now: https://t.co/JYtLGcmjeq pic.twitter.com/sXCbatGRfH
— TalkRadio 77 WABC (@77WABCradio) August 20, 2026
CNN’s senior legal analyst Elie Honig joined Jake Tapper to vindicate President Trump against much of the criticism he had faced publicly over the weaponized Manhattan felony charges.
“Anyone who cheered that hush money prosecution of Donald Trump two years ago has nothing left to stand on,” Honig stated.
He continued:
“The guy (Cohen) who was the reason every prosecutor who looked at this case, including the Biden DOJ and the prior liberal Democratic DA, passed on charging this case, was because they didn’t trust Michael Cohen beyond a reasonable doubt. Alvin Bragg rolled that dice and now Michael Cohen has said publicly that he ‘felt pressured and coerced by prosecutors.’
So where do you stand on Michael Cohen now? If you believe he’s a truth-teller, then he felt pressured and coerced by prosecutors. That’s not acceptable.
If you believe he’s a liar, then your case is built on a liar.
That case is going through its appeal process incredibly slowly. I think there are major legal infirmities with it. But now the factual predicate has collapsed as well.
President Trump Truth’d this clip last night.
Very, very interesting.
All of those “CONVICTED FELON!” folks are about to lose their talking point. pic.twitter.com/8TtOoPR1pj
— CannCon (@canncon) August 21, 2026
President Trump Truth’d the segment, as well as a screenshot of Washington Examiner chief political correspondent Byron York’s X post saying, “CNN legal analyst Elie Honig: Michael Cohen’s latest statements demolish the factual basis of the hush money prosecution and conviction of President Trump.”
The 34 felony charges brought in Manhattan were all for “falsifying business records,” a misdemeanor with a two-year statute of limitations, which had long passed by the time the indictment was issued in 2023.
So, Alvin Bragg used a “novel legal theory” to finally be the one who “got Trump.” Bragg would upgrade those charges to felonies by alleging that the 45th and 47th President had the “intent to commit or conceal another crime.” That crime was a state election law that had already been investigated by the federal government for a reciprocal crime, with no charges filed.
Judge Juan Merchan, whose daughter ran a fundraising organization that explicitly raised money for Democrat candidates off the prosecution of President Trump, limited the scope of testimony by former FEC Chairman and Ohio State University law professor Bradley Smith from offering opinions on whether Trump’s specific actions violated federal election law or that the conduct was legal.
In order to make Bragg’s “novel legal theory” hold, the jury was instructed that they simply needed to agree that another crime was committed. The crime was not charged. The crime was not litigated or defended by Trump’s legal team, and they didn’t need to agree that the same crime had been committed, but just that a crime had been committed.
The case is currently on appeal in both the New York Appellate Division, First Department.
Ad block users: Some site features may not work correctly while an ad blocker is enabled, because they break scripts and content this website depends on. If you can’t see comments below, for example, please disable your ad blocker.
Read the full article here