we have more coverage coming up. today at five... the explosive testimony of president trump's former lawyer to a congressional committee in washington. michael cohen, who's going to jail for tax evasion and fraud, said he wanted to apologise for helping mr trump before laying in to the president's character. i am ashamed because i know what mr trump is. he is a racist, he is a conman and he is a cheat. and i'm live on capitol hill, where we'll be bringing you the latest developments from that hearing. we'll have all the details in the next hour, as the hearing continues, and it risks overshadowing the president's summit meeting in vietnam. president trump holds talks with the north korean leader,

kimjong—un, in hanoi — their second face—to—face meeting. the bbc and itv announce plans for a newjoint streaming service — britbox — to rival netflix and amazon. firefighters remain in west yorkshire to make sure a large moorland fire reignite. —— will not reignite. it's 5 o'clock. our main story is the explosive testimony given by president trump's former lawyer, michael cohen, to a congressional committee in washington. mr cohen, who's going to prison for various offences including lying to congress in the past, told the committee the president was a racist, a cheat and a conman.

mr cohen gave a detailed statement about his professional relationship with mr trump and made a range of serious allegations about the president's conduct and values. he also asserted that mr trump knew beforehand about a leak of hacked democratic e—mails aimed at damaging the presidential campaign of hillary clinton. the president is currently attending a summit in vietnam. we'll have more on that later but first let's hear some of mr cohen's testimony so far, and i should warn you, it contains some strong language. iam i am ashamed that i chose to take pa rt i am ashamed that i chose to take part in concealing mr trump's illicit acts rather than listening to my own conscience. i am ashamed because i know what mr trump is. he isa because i know what mr trump is. he is a racist, he is a conman, and he is a racist, he is a conman, and he isa is a racist, he is a conman, and he is a cheat. he was a presidential

candidate who knew that rogerstone was talking withjulian sanders about a wikilea ks was talking withjulian sanders about a wikileaks drop on democratic committee e—mails. i lied to congress when mr trump stopped negotiating the moscow tower project in russia. i stated that we stopped negotiating in january in russia. i stated that we stopped negotiating injanuary of in russia. i stated that we stopped negotiating in january of 2016. in russia. i stated that we stopped negotiating injanuary of 2016. that was false. 0ur negotiations continued for months later during the campaign. mrtrump continued for months later during the campaign. mr trump did not directly tell me to lied to congress, that is not how he operates. to be clear, mr trump knew of and directed that trump moscow negotiations throughout the campaign and lied about it. he lied about it because he never expected to win. he also lied about it because he stood

to make hundreds of millions of dollars on the moscow real estate project. mr trump is an enigma here is complicated, as am i. he is both goodin is complicated, as am i. he is both good in bed, as do we all. but the bad far outweighs the good. —— bad. he is capable of behaving kindly but he is not kind. he is capable of committing acts of generosity that he is not generous. he is capable of being loyal but he is fundamentally disloyal. a lot of people have asked me about whether mr trump knew about the release of the hacked documents, democratic national committee e—mail ahead of time and the answer is yes. asi ahead of time and the answer is yes. as i earlier stated, mr trump knew

from roger stone about the wikileaks drop of e—mails. injuly 2016, days before the democrat convention, i was in the office of mr trump went roger stone was on the phone. he went on speakerphone and he told mr trump he had just got off the phone with julian assange trump he had just got off the phone withjulian assange and he told mr stone that within a couple of days there would be a massive dump of e—mails that would damage the campaign of hillary clinton. mr trump responded by stating to the effect, wouldn't that be great?! mr trump is racist. the country has seen mrtrump trump is racist. the country has seen mr trump caught white supremacists and bigots. you have heard him call poor countries sheet

holes. in private he is even worse. we are once driving through a struggling neighbourhood in chicago. he commented that only black people could live that way. and he told me that black people would never vote him because they were too stupid and yet i continue to work for him. just a section of the explosive testimony of michael cohen. 0ur correspondent laura trevelyan is on capitol hill for us. we had expected a very strong statement to michael cohen. did he go beyond that question has something, to the test in your actors caught us by surprise in any way? here is the thing. on capitol hill, the talk of potential impeachment is in the air from democrats because they are saying if what mr cohen is saying is correct it rises to high levels of crimes by

mr president. he said he is no long his six and he accused the president of the united states of committing a federal election crime while in office by writing a series of checks to him we investing him for the hush money payments to stormy daniels. the second is that we are hearing, as you just played in that clip, there is mr cohen saying he knew in advance that wikilea ks there is mr cohen saying he knew in advance that wikileaks would have the dump stolen democratic e—mails. intelligence has said the e—mails we re intelligence has said the e—mails were stolen by the russians and given to wikileaks. mr cohen said mr trump knew and directed negotiations to build a trump tower in moscow throughout the election campaign and lied to the american people about it. very serious but republicans are painting mr cohen as a convicted liar who has lied to congress and is

going to jailfor that. liar who has lied to congress and is going to jail for that. it was interesting, as you say, to pick up on your last point, concerted effort by some members of the committee who are saying, if it was so bad, why didn't you get out sooner than the ten yea rs didn't you get out sooner than the ten years he served? what were the a nswers ? ten years he served? what were the answers? mr cohen said he has seen the light. he was intoxicated working for mr trump and now he realises the error of his ways. republicans are saying that he wants to reduce the amount of time he will do injail. in may he is meant to go to jail for three do injail. in may he is meant to go to jailfor three years do injail. in may he is meant to go to jail for three years from multiple is that of crime, lying to congress being one of them. he is not the greatest witness in the world but he is saying he wants to tell the truth to the american

people but the presidential supporters will see him as a liar and democrats will see him as someone and democrats will see him as someone who is ripping the plaster off the trump presidency and exposing it for what it is. while the president is in office it is alleged he committed a federal election crime. the cheque was signed by the president in august of 2017, reimbursing mr cohen for the hush money payment to stormy daniels. the president is not in the country, he is in vietnam. can we expect mr trump in his usual way to respond on social media or do you think there will be a bit of a re—group inc after these allegations? you know mr trump. he believes in fighting back. he already got his retaliation in first to eating before the testimony of michael cohen that he is a liar

and he is lying to reduce his time in jail. and he is lying to reduce his time injail. top allies on and he is lying to reduce his time in jail. top allies on capitol hill are saying that cohen is a liar and why would we believe anything he says? it is political theatre and will not mean anything to the american people. is this a tipping point for democrats? do they think this is now rising to the level of something impeachable? we have had one leading person on the committee who has said this rises to the level ofa high who has said this rises to the level of a high crime and misdemeanour. it feels like a pivotal moment here on capitol hilljoined feels like a pivotal moment here on capitol hill joined the feels like a pivotal moment here on capitol hilljoined the trump presidency when the president is thousands of miles away, which must be driving him mad. some breaking news from westminster. the prominent tree —— prominent

parliamentary ally ofjeremy corbyn has been suspended. it was alleged he had been given too much drowned in regards to the anti—semitism row. what can you tell us? chris williamson was recorded at a meeting of the labour group momentum and he said he felt the labour party had apologised too much for what he said we re apologised too much for what he said were a few cases of anti—semitism. this caused uproar within the party and also the people at been piling in saying he must be suspended. ed miliband said it is a test for the leadership to pre—tax serious they we re leadership to pre—tax serious they were in dealing with anti—semitism in the party. initially he was told he would be investigated back in the last few minutes he has been suspended from the party which means he has been suspended from the

parliamentary group in the house of commons. a spokesman has basically said although a notice of investigation was given earlier, once the pattern of behaviour was looked at by staff, they realised he had to be suspended. the problem for jeremy corbyn as this has only happened after a lot of pressure was put on him. many would like to have seen put on him. many would like to have seen him act immediately and suspend mr williamson but it has taken a whole day people taking to twitter saying more had to be done before they acted. people will still be asking the question mr corbyn is he serious about dealing with this? the background was last week several members of the labour party, mps, decided to leave to join the independent group and some of them cited anti—semitism in the party as pa rt cited anti—semitism in the party as part of the reason. there were labour mps part of the reason. there were labourmpsi part of the reason. there were labour mps i spoke to who were concerned that if mr corbyn did not act more robust leader more would follow and depart from the party. he

has now acted but others will say he was too slow to do so when he was simply helping a friend. just one more, if i may. it is to do with the pressure today. there was pressure before today for the leadership to ta ke before today for the leadership to take action. when they say they have looked at the sequence of the events and patterns of behaviour, did they only realise that today? what is the timing of the inquiry? that question must be answered. all sorts of questions are being put to a labour party spokesman at lunchtime today. they were talking about a pattern of behaviour. this is not a one—off event that there were other things, including yesterday it transpired he had booked a room in the house of commons to show a film made by somebody who was themselves under investigation for allegations of anti—semitism. the pattern of behaviour and the question should be, he should have acted sooner. it

was only because many people decided to pile in and more needed to be done it looked like he acted. if they're done it looked like he acted. if they‘ re eventually many done it looked like he acted. if they're eventually many labour mps will thinkjeremy corbyn the leadership have done the right thing but they will feel he had to be dragged kicking and screaming to do so. dragged kicking and screaming to do so. let's take a quick look back on capitol hill where michael cohen has been giving evidence to the congressional committee. it is still going on but they have just taken a break. you'll not be a very long. the chairman is still in place. mr cohen and members of the committee who are there to question mr cohen, many of them by the way, they will be back in session before long we will be back to get the latest questioning and the latest evidence as it happens. you can imagine there bea as it happens. you can imagine there be a lot of interest in what is

going on in vietnam. president trump is in vietnam meeting the north korean leader kim jong—un for their second face to face meeting. critics claim there's been little progress towards denuclearisation since their last meeting in singapore. mr trump says, if north korea does give up its nuclear weapons, its future would be "awesome." 0ur correspondent, barbara plett usher, is travelling with the president and sent this report from hanoi. the handshake was not quite as historic this time but a significant moment nonetheless. president trump is counting on his personal relationship with the north korean leader to get action on denuclearisation — something he failed to achieve at their first summit last year. thank you all very much. thank you. he's also been emphasising the economic incentive for pyongyang to give up its nuclear weapons. i think that your country has tremendous economic potential — unbelievable, unlimited. mr trump pressed the steam earlier during a courtesy call with his vietnamese hosts. this communist country can be

a model, he said, it is thriving, and so on could north korea. —— so could. in pyongyang, the meeting was also building expectations for the second summit, another step towards easing the isolation of the pariah state. kim jong un was captured on film easing the strain of the long train journey to hanoi. his sister and close confidante by his side, this time with an ashtray. the north korean leader was greeted with pomp and ceremony but he's under pressure to move beyond the fanfare. he has offered to shut down north korea's main nuclear facility but only if he gets us concessions, such as relief from punishing sanctions. anticipation for the summit is running in hanoi, as vietnam makes most of its rendezvous with history. president trump will also be making the most of this. any success here can help offset the political turmoil he faces at home he will have to get commitments on denuclearisation to convince the sceptics he is not being taken

for a ride by north korea. there is speculation the two leaders may announce several measures to improve relations between their countries but a detailed road map towards denuclearisation will be much more of a challenge, especially as us officials have admitted they don't agree on what it actually means. the headlines on bbc news... president trump's former lawyer testifies in front of a congressional committee in washington and brands mr trump "a racist, a conman and a cheat." president trump holds talks with the north korean leader, kimjong—un, in hanoi — their second face—to—face meeting. pakistan's prime minister, imran khan, calls for talks with india after fighterjets have clashed in kashmir in a major escalation of the conflict.

in the sport, with the series level at 1-1 in the sport, with the series level at 1—1 england are on course to post at 1—1 england are on course to post a big score in the panel to my one—day international against west indies. the short time ago england we re indies. the short time ago england were 388—4. it is a big night in the premier league title race as liverpool look to hold onto their lead at the top against watford. fifa is investigating the transfer payment by cardiff to nantes for emiliano salam. pakistan is claiming to have shot down two indian fighterjets in a

major escalation of tensions between the nuclear powers. the conflict centres on the disputed region of kashmir, which both countries claim as their own. pakistan says it shot the planes down in retaliation for india's attack on a suspected militant training camp at balakot, in the pakistan—controlled part of kashmir. india and pakistan have fought three wars since gaining independence in 19117. 0ur diplomatic correspondent james robbins reports. pakistan says this photo shows its soldiers beside the wreckage of an indian warplane — one of two pakistan says it has shot down. india acknowledges losing one mig21 fighter and the pilot missing in action. pakistan says this is a captured indian pilot. my service number is 27981. the man identifies himself and asserts his right to say no more. that's all i'm supposed to tell you. india and pakistan have been exchanging fire along their contested border in kashmir, the line of control. it's part of rapidly—rising tensions since a massive suicide car bombing by pakistan—based militants two weeks ago.

it killed a0 indian security forces in kashmir. now both sides have been using their war planes, making this one of the most dangerous periods since the 1970s. the pakistan air force was detected and the indian air force responded instantly. in that aerial engagement, one pakistan air force fighter aircraft was shot down by a mig21 bison of the indian air force. the pakistani aircraft was seen by ground forces falling from the sky on the pakistan side. it's impossible to check the figures of knocked—out tanks... history risks repeating itself. ever since the 1960s, accounts from either side have been strongly disputed by the other. but now, what is not in doubt is that both india and pakistan have substantial arsenals of nuclear weapons. it has introduced a level

of risk which alarms the entire outside world. pakistan's prime minister imran khan says neither he nor india's prime minister can afford any escalation given the weapons they have. "if we let that happen," imran khan says, "events will remain neither in my nor modi's control. we must sit down and talk." but for now, there is no sign of tempers subsiding, with demonstrators in both countries promising revenge. no wonder the united states, china and other major powers are urging restraint and dialogue. james robbins, bbc news. 0ur correspondent rajini vaidyanathan is in delhi for us. what is your sense of the kind of level of tension now? is it intensifying do you detect there is an attempt to try and bring some kind of diplomatic initiative here?

there is no doubt about it. the pressure between these two nations is definitely intensifying. we have not heard from the indian prime minister in response to the events today but we did get a statement from the indian foreign ministry, the ministry of external affairs this evening and they have not minced no words on what they are saying that they started their statement by saying they had summoned pakistan's act in high commissioner to the ministry of external affairs where they say they lodged a strong protest at what they call the unprovoked action of aggression by pakistan against india. they demanded the immediate release of the pilot we saw in james's port, the wing commander. they want him to be returned safely. —— report. they say india reserves the right to take firm and precise

action against its sovereignty. they wonder what action will be taken. theresa may says the uk remains "firmly on course" to leave the european union with a deal if mps hold their nerve. she made the comments in a newspaper article, ahead of votes in the commons this evening on the government's brexit strategy. 0ur political correspondent, alex forsyth, reports. despite the signs, spring isn't in everyone's step in westminster. parliament's working out the implications of the prime minister's latest plan, the possibility brexit could be delayed if there is no deal in place by the end of next month. some had been pushing for that. are you part of a plot to stop brexit? no, i'm part ofa plot to back the prime minister and make sure we get a good brexit deal through the parliament

as soon as possible. thank you. 0thers clear our departure shouldn't be held up. we are not talking about delaying brexit, the prime minister is completely clear, she does not want to delay brexit and nor do i. the prime minister has said by the 12th of march parliament will get to vote again on her brexit deal once she has renegotiated parts with the eu. if that is rejected on march 13 mps will get to vote on whether we should leave without a deal, and if that doesn't get support, on the 14th of march they will get to vote on delaying brexit. past the date of march the 29th when the uk is currently due to leave the eu. speaker: order. questions to the prime minister. today theresa may insisted a deal was still within her grasp if mps get behind it, saying she doesn't want the process delayed. can i be very clear again? the government doesn't want to extend article 50, the government's policy is to get

the legally—binding changes so a deal can be brought back to this house and this house can support the deal and we can leave on the 29th of march with a deal. some tory brexiteers who want changes to the plan to avoid a hard irish border signalled they might back a deal if that backstop had a time limit. if you had a further appendix that said this will not go beyond a particular date, and a short date, not a long date, then that would remove the backstop in the lifetime of parliament. and that would have a reasonable effect from my point of view. but any budding consensus is still some way off. this afternoon, another chance for mps to have their say on the process, and it still could still get fractious. alex forsyth, bbc news, westminster. let's rejoin the events on capitol hill where we have a republican congresswoman starting the questioning for michael cohen, the former lawyer to donald trump, who is giving evidence to the

congressional committee. he is already facing a jail sentence for dishonesty and fraud and taxation that he is under pressure to explain his thinking on the president himself. can you commit under oath that you have not and will not pursue a book or movie deal based on your experiences working for the president? no. you cannot commit to making money off the book or movie deal based on your work? no. there are deal based on your work? no. there a re two deal based on your work? no. there are two parts to your question. the first part you asked me whether or not i have spoken to people regarding a possible book deal and i have. i have spoken to people who have. i have spoken to people who have sought me out regarding a movie deal. i said, can you commit under oath that you will not be that you

have not and will not pursue a book deal? i will not do that, no. have not and will not pursue a book deal? iwill not do that, no. ok have not and will not pursue a book deal? i will not do that, no. ok can you commit under oath that you will not pursue opportunities to provide commentary for a major news networks based on your experiences working for the president? no. based on your experiences working forthe president? no. can based on your experiences working for the president? no. can you commit under oath that you will not pursue political office in the state of new york? no. so, you do not commit to changing your way is basically because you want to continue to use your background as a liar, a cheater, a convicted liar, to make money, that is what you want to make money, that is what you want to do. and that is going to get me a book deal and a movie deal and a spot—on television? book deal and a movie deal and a spot-on television? i don't think so. spot-on television? i don't think so. well, it appears that it well. i yield the remainder of my time, mr chairman. in your sentencing statement to the court in december

of la st statement to the court in december of last year you said i want to apologise to the people of the united states who deserve to know the truth. both feed news ran a story that was the story in the country for a couple of days for the hit man january the 17th 2019. on january the 18th york council would neither confirm nor do neither story. —— for a couple of days. documents regarding the congressional testimony of mr cohen are not accurate. why did he not deny that story? i did not think it was his responsibility to do that. we are not the fact chequers for buzzfeed. you had a golden

opportunity to give people the truth on this story and your lawyer did not say anything. he said i cannot confirm and i cannot deny for that you had a golden opportunity and you did not do that. why not? it was not our responsibility to be the fact checkerfor our responsibility to be the fact checker for the news agencies. please, let me finish. the president says so far... i have eight seconds. may i please finish? special counsel said something they have never done and that is to say that story was false. the president has told something over 9000 lives to date. doi something over 9000 lives to date. do i asked mr davies and mr monaco, doigo do i asked mr davies and mr monaco, do i go on television in order to correct his mistakes? the answer is no. the time of the gentleman has

expired. finish the question and then we will go to mr conway. i'd find it interesting that between yourself and your colleagues that not one question so far since i am here has been asked about president trump. that is why i thought i was coming today, not to confess the m ista kes coming today, not to confess the mistakes i have made. i have already done that i will do it again every time you ask me about taxes or mistakes. yes, i made my mistakes. i will say it now again. i will pay the ultimate price. i am not here today and the american people do not ca re today and the american people do not care about my taxes, they want to know what i know about mr trump and not one question has been asked about that. thank you, mr chairman. well, mr cohen, based on your testimony and

experience, i think you can recognise the behaviour you are being subjected to on the other side of the aisle. discredit, slander... use any trick in the book to prevent your testimony from sticking. the idea a witness would come to us who is flawed, and you certainly are flawed, means they can never tell the truth, and there is no validity whatsoever to a single word they say would discredit every single criminal trial of organised crime in the history of the united states because all of them depend on someone because all of them depend on someone who has turned. it would make rico null and void, we couldn't use it any more. this congress historically has relied on all kinds of shady figures who turned. 0ne historically has relied on all kinds of shady figures who turned. one of the most famous who led to the decapitation of organised crime families in america, he was a

witness and he committed a lot worse crimes than your convicted of, mr cohen. so, don't be fooled by what my friends on the other side of the aisle are trying to do today. it is to do everything but focus on the principle, known as individual numberone in the principle, known as individual number one in the southern district of new york, as i recall. is that correct, mr cohen? that is correct. i want to ask you something that has not been asked of you so far. in our committee staff search of documents provided by the white house that we re provided by the white house that were otherwise redacted or already in the public, and i guess the white house thought that was funny, they made one mistake. there was an e—mail from made one mistake. there was an e—mailfrom a made one mistake. there was an e—mail from a special assistant to the president to a deputy white house counsel and the e—mail is dated may 16, 2017 and it says,"

potus requested a meeting on thursday with michael cohen and j potus requested a meeting on thursday with michael cohen and] is secular, any idea what this might be about? end quote mike do you recall being asked to come to the white house around that time? may 2017? off the top of my head, sir, i don't. i recall being in the white house with jay sekalo in regard to the document production as well as my appearance before the house select intel, but i'm not sure if that specifically... i will check all my records and i'm more than happy to provide you with any documentation or a response to this question. you sort of touched on presumably the purpose of the discussion, among others. this

meeting occurred just before your testimony before the select committee and intelligence here in the house, is that correct?|j believe the house, is that correct?” believe so, yes. was that a topic of the conversation with the president? if that was the particular incident with jay sekalo, yes. so you had a conversation with the president of the united states about your impending testimony before the house committee, is that correct? that is correct, yes. what was the nature of the conversation? you wanted me to cooperate and he wanted us to ensure iam making cooperate and he wanted us to ensure i am making the statement, and i said it in my testimony, there is no rush, there is no collusion, —— there is no rush hour, there is no collusion, it is all a witch hunt. this stuff has to end. did you take those comments to be suggestive of what might flavour your testimony?

so, he's been saying that to me for many, so, he's been saying that to me for any so, he's been saying that to me for many, many months. and, at the end of the day, i knew exactly what he wa nted of the day, i knew exactly what he wanted me to say. and why was jay sekalo in the meeting? because he was going to be representing mr trump, going forward, as one of his personal attorneys in this matter. so it was a handoff meeting? correct. final question did the president in any way coach you in terms of how to respond to questions or the content of your testimony before the house committee? or the content of your testimony before the house committee7m or the content of your testimony before the house committee? it is difficult to answer because he doesn't tell you what he wants. what he does is, again, michael, there is no russia, no collusion, no interference. i know what he means because i've been around him for so long. so if you're asking me whether or not that is the message, that is

the party line, the message staying on point, that he created, that so many others now telling, yes, that is the message that he wanted to reinforce. time. mr cohen, can you clarify, did you say you would do what you thought mr trump wanted you to do? at times, yes. so, you went on your intuition? i don't know if i'd call it intuition as much as i would say my knowledge of what he wa nted would say my knowledge of what he wanted because it happened before. and i knew what he had wanted. does alloy have a duty to provide his client with good legal advice? yes. we re client with good legal advice? yes. were you a good lawyer to mr trump? i believe so. when you arranged a payment to ms clifford, you're your testimony," without bothering to

consider whether that was improper, much less whether it was the right thing to do." that is your testimony today. you said you didn't even consider whether it was legal. how could you give your client to legal advice when you're not even considering whether it is legal?” did what i knew mr trump wanted. this conversation with mr trump started... i didn't ask if you are a good fixer, i asked if you are a good fixer, i asked if you are a good lawyer. sometimes you have to meld both together and i needed to at that time ensure and protect mr trump, and if i put... which i am clearly suffering the penalty of, i clearly suffering the penalty of, i clearly erred on the side of wrong. so, you feel like without bothering to consider whether it was proper, much less whether it was the right thing to do, by ignoring any conscience, if you have one, that

you are protecting mr trump? i'm sorry, sir, i don't understand. as his lawyer, you feel that you did a good job? you said you're a good lawyer, wright? that's right. is that being a good lawyer, to not consider whether or not it is legal? ididn't consider whether or not it is legal? i didn't work for the campaign, i was working and i was trying to protect mr trump. i sat with mr trump, and this goes back to 2011, this isn't the first scenario with miss daniels. my point is... this was an ongoing situation. it didn't just start. you have to let me finish. it started... it didn't stop in october but many years earlier. when were you disbarred? yesterday from what i read in the paper. when should you have been disbarred based on the legal counsel you are giving your client? i don't have a answer

for your question. how long will you cancel for mr trump? since 2007. when was the first time you gave him bad legal advice or failed to inform him of his legal obligations as you testified today that you did in the case of the payment to ms clifford? when was the first time you did that, would that qualify for disbarment? i don't know, i am not the bar association. i think you should consult with them occasionally on some of these things. what is the point, i've lost my licence! has anybody else promised to pay mr davies for representing you? no. are you offering? question, quickly. this is in your testimony, the days before the democratic convention you became privy to a conversation that some of hillary clinton's e—mails would be

leaked, is that correct? correct. was that in late july? do you know the exact date ? was that in late july? do you know the exact date? i believe it was either the 18th or 19th, but i think it was on the 19th. definitelyjuly. do you know that was public knowledge in june? this do you know that was public knowledge injune? this was mr assange... i'd like to submit this for the record. mr assange assange... i'd like to submit this forthe record. mrassange recorded to the media those e—mails would be licked onjune to the media those e—mails would be licked on june 12. to the media those e—mails would be licked onjune12. i'm not saying you have fake news but you have old news and there is not much to that. i'd like to yield the remainder of my time to mr higgins. thank you, sir. mrcohen, you my time to mr higgins. thank you, sir. mr cohen, you said i spent last week looking through boxes to find documents that would support your accusations. where are those boxes? in your garage or

accusations. where are those boxes? in yourgarage or in accusations. where are those boxes? in your garage or in storage? in storage. should these have been turned over to the authorities you've been subject to? these were the boxes returned to me. do they contain data pertinent to the investigation? did the authorities know of these boxes? you may answer the question. i don't understand his question, sir. mr cohen. good morning, thank you, chairman cummings for convening this hearing and thank you mr cohen for voluntarily testifying this morning. mrcohen, you are voluntarily testifying this morning. mr cohen, you are the executive vice president special counsel for the trump administration, correct? yes to donaldj trump administration, correct? yes to donald j trump. trump administration, correct? yes to donald] trump. and special council meeting is you are the attorney for him? itjust means i was there to hint at matters he felt we re was there to hint at matters he felt were significant and important to

him individually. and those included legal matters? yes, sir. is a former attorney, you're familiar with legal documents known as nondisclosure agreements? yes. i'm sure you know ndas can be reasonable in certain business contacts but they can also be abused to create a chilling effect to silence people as we've seen effect to silence people as we've seenin effect to silence people as we've seen in the me to movement and other places, isn't that right? yes. and the trump organisation used ndas extensively, isn't that right? that's correct. i'm reading from a re ce nt that's correct. i'm reading from a recent washington post article regarding the language in one of these types of ndas where the terns we re these types of ndas where the terns were described as very broad. for instance, the terms confidential information was defined to be anything that "mr trump risen that it may consist remain private and confidential including but not limited to any information with

respect to the personal life, political affairs and all business affairs of mrtrump political affairs and all business affairs of mr trump or any family member." do affairs of mr trump or any family member. " do those affairs of mr trump or any family member." do those term sound familiar to you? i've seen that document. in fact there is a class action lawsuit filed this month by former trump action lawsuit filed this month by formertrump campaign action lawsuit filed this month by former trump campaign worker jessica denson that this nda language is illegal because it is too broad, too vague, and would be used to retaliate against employees who complained of illegality or wrongdoing. would you agree that in the use of the ndas with this type of language and, later, when donald trump sought to enforce them, that he intended to prevent people from coming forward with claims of wrongdoing? yes. would you agree the effect of the use of these ndas and their enforcement was to have a chilling effect on people or silence them from coming forward?

chilling effect on people or silence them from coming forward7m chilling effect on people or silence them from coming forward? if you wa nt to them from coming forward? if you want to define chilling, i'm not sure... in using these ndas or trying to enforce them, he'd basically try to keep people silent. that was the goal. nothing at the trump organization was ever done unless it was run through president donald trump? that's100% certain. donald trump? that's 10096 certain. 0k, mr donald trump? that's10096 certain. ok, mrcohen, do donald trump? that's10096 certain. ok, mr cohen, do you believe there are people out there today, either from the president's business or personal life, who are not coming forward to tell their stories of wrongdoing because of the president's use of ndas against them? i'm sorry, president's use of ndas against them? i'm sorry, sir, i don't know them? i'm sorry, sir, i don't know the answer to that question. ok. sir, i have a couple of other questions for you. when was the last communication with the prison trump or someone communication with the prison trump or someone acting on his behalf?” don't have the specific date but it was a while ago. ok, do you have a

general timeframe? i would suspect it was... within two months post the raid of my home. ok, so early fall la st raid of my home. ok, so early fall last year, generally? generally. what did he or his agent communicate to you? unfortunately, this topic is actually something that is being investigated right now by the southern district of new york. and i've been asked by them not to discuss and to talk about these issues. fair enough. is there any other wrongdoing or illegal act that you are aware of regarding donald trump that we haven't yet discussed ata? trump that we haven't yet discussed at a? yes, and, again, those are pa rt at a? yes, and, again, those are part of the investigation that is currently being looked at by the southern district of new york. sir, congressman cooper asked you about whether you are aware of any

physical violence committed by president trump. i have a couple of quick questions. do you have any knowledge of president trump abusing any controlled substances? i'm not aware of that, no. do have any knowledge of president from being delinquent on any alimony or child ca re delinquent on any alimony or child care payments? i'm not aware of any of them. do you have any knowledge of them. do you have any knowledge of president from arranging health ca re of president from arranging health care procedures for any women not in his family? i'm not aware of that, no. thank you, i yield back. thank you, chairman. mr cohen can you tell me the significance of may six? in terms of, sir? a couple of months from now was yellow that is the day i need to surrender to federal prison. for the record can you state what you have been convicted of? i've been convicted on five counts of tax evasion. there is

one count of misrepresentation of documents to a bank. there is to make counts, one dealing with campaignfinance make counts, one dealing with campaign finance for karen mcdougall. one count of campaign finance violation for stormy daniels, as well as lying to congress. thank you. can you state what your official title with a campaign was? i didn't have one. and your position in the trump administration? i didn't have one. intraday's testimony you said you weren't looking intraday's testimony you said you we ren't looking to intraday's testimony you said you weren't looking to work in the white house. the southern district of new york, in their statement, their sentencing, says this" mr cohen violations was stirred by his own ambition and greed. he privately told friends, colleagues, including seized text messages, he expected to be givena seized text messages, he expected to be given a prominent role in the new

administration. when that didn't materialise he found a way to monetise his relationship and access with the president. " were they lying? i'm not saying it is a lie, it is not accurate. i didn't want to go to the white house. i brought an attorney in and i sat with mr trump, with him, for well over an hour, explaining the importance of having a personal attorney, and every president has had one, in order to handle matters, like the matters i was dealing with, which included dealings with stormy daniels, and other personal matters. excuse me, this is my time. i would like to submit this memo from the southern district of new york for the record. i'll give it to you for a —— make district of new york for the record. i'll give it to you fora —— make in a second. this memo stays you

committed four distinct federal crimes over a period of several years, you're motivated to do so by personal greed and repeatedly use your power to influence for deceptive ends. it goes on to say that you were dot to make the each involved, they were distinct in their harms, common set of characteristics with deception and motivated by personal greed and ambition. there is a lot we don't know in regards to this investigation but here's what we do know. you're expecting a job at the white house and didn't get it. you made millions lying about your close access to the president, you have a history of lying for personal gain, about your accountant to your family, the american people, to congress. the southern district of new york, you said you did all those out of blind loyalty to mr trump but your sentencing memo states this. "this was not an act out of blind loyalty as mr cohen suggests. he was driven by a desire to further ingratiate himself with potential

future president for him political success: claimed successful." we are ina success: claimed successful." we are in a search for truth and i don't know how we are supposed to ascertain truth in this quagmire of ascertain truth in this quagmire of a hearing on the best witness we can bring before this has already been convicted of lying before us. what is sad is the american people have seen is sad is the american people have seen this play out before. we have people in prominent positions fail and thena people in prominent positions fail and then a couple of years later they get a book deal. you're set to go to jail for a couple of years. come out with a multi—million dollar book deal, that isn't a bad living. my question is will you today... with you today commit to donate any further proceeds, to book deals, film, to charity? no. will the job to the yield? may i finish? will the gentleman yield? can i finish my

answer? mr cumming, hughes yielded me. i haven't finished. mr chairman, may i finish my response, please? answer his question, please. mr cohen, everything has been made of your lies in the past but i'm concerned about your lies today. and you testimony a few minutes ago, to me, you indicated you had contracts with foreign entities. and coming out, we have a truth and testimony disclosure which requires you to list those foreign contracts for the la st two list those foreign contracts for the last two years, and you put na on it! and it is a criminal offence do not have that accurately! so, when we re not have that accurately! so, when were you not have that accurately! so, when were you relying? earlier today or when you filled out the form? the gentleman's time has expired. mr cohen you may answer his question and whatever you wanted to say. his

question, i don't have an answer for his question. mr chairman! the gentleman is out of order. he said he does not have an answer. mr chairman, when we were in the majority, with all due respect, mr chairman dot to make the gentleman says he doesn't have an answer. and you've gone over your time. he is under oath to tell the truth! one of them isn't accurate! you'll have time to answer the question. mr raskin. thank you for your composure today. our colleagues are not upset because you lied to congress for the president. they are upset because you've stopped lying to congress for the president. you've described the trump campaign is a once—in—a—lifetime moneymaking opportunity, the greatest infomercial of all time, opportunity, the greatest infomercial of alltime, i opportunity, the greatest infomercial of all time, i think you said, and this may be one of the

most trencha nt observation said, and this may be one of the most trenchant observation of your testimony. do you think the trump campaign or presidency ever stopped being about making money for the president and his family and organisation? yes. when did it stop being that? when he won the election. what did it become about at that point? than it had to be about figuring out what to do in washington. can you carefully explain to america how the hush money payments to stormy daniels and others worked? can you explain what catch and kill is? sure. i received a phone call regarding both karen mcdougall as well as stormy daniels, at different times. stating that there were issues that were going to be damaging to mr trump. with the stormy daniels, it started with 2011 when she wanted to have something removed from a website, and it was the first time i spoke with keith

davidson, her then acting attorney, and we were successful in having it taken down from the website. years later, around the time of the campaign, they came back and they asked... what are you going to do now, because she is back on the trail trying to sell the story, at which point in time, david packer reached out to her and her attorney in order to go take a look at the lie detector tests that would prove that she was telling the truth. they contacted me and told me she was telling the truth, at which point to make took a lie detector test? allegedly and was seen by an employee of the national enquirer. at which point in time, i went straight into mrtrump at which point in time, i went straight into mr trump is my office and explained why it was different than the other time. were the other

women paid by donald trump? was this a standard operating practice? no. so you're not aware of any other cases? are not aware when mr trump paid, such as karen mcdougall. he was supposed to pay. he was supposed to pay $125,000 for the life story of karen mcdougall, for whatever reason he elected not to pay it. david packer was very angry because there was other monies that david had expended on his behalf. u nfortu nately, had expended on his behalf. unfortunately, david never got paid back for that, either. so, he'd done this in other cases for other mistresses or women? other circumstances, yes. not all of them had to do with women. are you aware of anything the president has done at home or abroad that may have subjected him or may subject him to extortion and blackmail?” subjected him or may subject him to extortion and blackmail? i am not, no. are you aware of any video tapes

that may be the subject of extortion or blackmail? i've heard about these tapes for a long time, had many people contact me over the years, i have no reason to believe that tape exists. in december 2015 donald trump was asked about his relationship with a real estate developer. i'm not that familiar with him, he said. why did trump endeavour to hide his relationship with felix? he had a relationship. felix was a partner in a company that was involved in the deal of a trump soho hotel, as well as, i believe, the trump lauderdale project. why did he want to distance himself? that is what mr trump does, he distances himself when things go bad for someone. at that point in time, it was going bad for felix.

you said you lied to congress about trump is make negotiations to build his moscow tower because he made it clear to you he wanted you to live. one of the reasons you knew this is because mr trump is make personal lawyers reviewed and edited my statement to congress about the timing of the moscow tower negotiations before i gave it,", so this is a breathtaking claim and i wa nt this is a breathtaking claim and i want to get to the facts here. which specific lawyers edited your statement to congress on the moscow tire negotiations and did they make any changes to your statement? there we re any changes to your statement? there were changes made, additions. jay sekalo, for one. were there changes about the timing? there were several changes that were made, including how we were going to handle that message. were you finished? the message. were you finished? the message of course being the length

of time that the trump tower moscow project remained alive. that was one of the changes? yes. first of all, i'd like to clear up something. something that bothers me. you started off your testimony, you said in response to some question that president trump never expected to win. iwant president trump never expected to win. i want to clarify that i am getting this, i dealt with him, he was always confident, he was working very ha rd was always confident, he was working very hard and this idea that somehow he wasjust very hard and this idea that somehow he was just running very hard and this idea that somehow he wasjust running to raise his profile for some future adventure, at least in my experience, is preposterous. i find at least in my experience, is preposterous. ifind it at least in my experience, is preposterous. i find it offensive when anti—trump people imply he did this on a lark and didn't expect to win. be it as it may, my first question concerns your relationship with the court. do you expect... right now i think you are sentenced to three years, correct? correct. do

you expect any time using this testimony and other testimony after you get done doing whatever you're going to do, do you expect to go back and ask for any sort of reduction in sentence? yes, there are ongoing... you're watching bbc news on our coverage continues from washington, dc where president trump is make former lawyer michael cohen is make former lawyer michael cohen is still giving evidence to this congressional committee on capitol hill. some pretty explosive testimony so far. the questioning continuing now from the membership of this big committee, so stay with us, and the evidence continues. do you expect to go back and ask for a further reduction? based off my appearance today? based upon whatever you do between now and your request... the rule 35 motion is in the complete hands of the southern district of new york, the way it works is what you're supposed to do is provide them with information

that leads to ongoing investigations. i'm currently working with them right now on several other issues of investigation that concerns them, that they are looking at. if those investigations become fruitful, then there is a possibility for a rule 35 motion. i don't know what the benefit in terms of time would be but this congressional hearing today is not going to be the basis of a rule 35 motion. i wish it was but it's not. mr cohen, mrcohen, i'm mr cohen, i'm going to come back to the question i asked before with regards to your false statement you submitted to congress. on hearing was very clear that it asked for contracts with foreign entities over the last two years. have you had any contracts with foreign entities

whether a