last week searching boxes in order to find the information that i did. so that you don't have to take my word for it. i don't want you to. i want you to look at the documents and make your own decision. >> i need my last time. >> mr. cohen: i'm sorry, sir. >> that's okay. let me just say, i don't think my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are afraid that you're going to lie. i think they are free they are going to tell the truth. >> mr. cohen: thank you, sir. >> i yield back the bells of my time. >> the gentleman from ohio is recognized. >> i appreciate the gentleman for yielding. i wanted to respond to mr. lynch. think about this -- when have you seen a federal agency where this saban customer james comey, fired. deputy director, fired. and he became. like three times under oath under investigation. right as we speak, jim baker, fbi council, demoted and left currently under investigation by the u.s. attorney's office in connecticut. lisa page demoted then left. peter strzok, to be head of intelligence, demoted and then fired. that's what happened.

that's what we are concerned about. steve actually asked for rod rosenstein -- oh, by the way, we now know that three people have told us that rod rosenstein actually was contemplating using the 25th a minute to remove the guy from presidency who the american people put there. and we asked for him to be witnessed today and the chairman said no. instead we've gotten 30 minutes from a guy who's going to prison, into months, for lying to congress. mr. cohen, i've got two quick questions before i yield back to my colleague. mr. hice asked to talk to come he said mr. schiff. obviously, mr. cummings. he took on the front of both committees. you're going to be in front of mr. schiff's committee tomorrow. have you spoken to chairman nadler or anyone on his staff, or have any of your attorney spoke determinedly? >> mr. cohen: i don't know about my attorneys, i have not spoken to him. i have not spoken to congressman nadler. and i'm not aware if my attorneys -- i can ask them. >> you can turn around and ask them.

>> mr. cohen: the answer, sir, is no. >> and he said at this present time mr. davis is not getting paid. are you anticipating and receiving some kind of compensation in the future? >> mr. cohen: when i start to earn a living -- >> are you going to wait three years? wow. >> mr. cohen: the answer is yes. >> that's a first. i've never known a lawyer to wait three years to get paid. >> mr. cohen: i guess he thinks it's important. >> i yield to the gentleman from arizona. >> well, thank you. mr. cohen, you are a disgraced lawyer. you have been disbarred. i am sure you remember -- well, maybe you don't remember -- duty of loyalty. duty of confidentiality. attorney-client privilege. i think the gentleman over your right side actually understands that very, very well and wouldn't do what you are doing here today. so let's go back and this credibility. you want us to make sure we think of you as a real philanthropic icon, that you are about justice. that you are the person that somebody would call at 3:00 in the morning. no, they wouldn't. not at all.

we saw them dissect you. right in front of this committe committee, you conflicted your testimony, sir. you are a pathological liar. you don't know truth from falsehood. >> mr. cohen: sir, i'm sorry, i referring to me or the president? >> hey, this is my time. when i ask your question, i will ask for an answer. >> mr. cohen: sure. >> are you familiar with rule 35 of the federal rules and criminal procedures? >> mr. cohen: i am now. >> oh! so, we understand you've been in contact with the southern district of new york. is that true? >> mr. cohen: i am in constant contact with the southern district of new york regarding ongoing investigations. >> and part of that application is to reduce sentencing time, is it not? >> mr. cohen: yes, there is a possibility. >> the answer is yes. >> mr. cohen: no, it's not, sir. >> it is. >> mr. cohen: it's not. >> so testimony here could help you get your sentence lesson.

isn't that true? >> mr. cohen: i'm not sure how my parents here today is providing substantial information that the southern district can use for the creation of a case. if there is something that this group can do for me, i would gladly welcome it. >> well, i've got to tell you, america is watching you. i've been getting texts right and left saying, "how can anybody listen to this pathological person? he's got a problem. he doesn't know fact from fiction." and that's what is said here. that you didn't do this for donald trump, to protect donald trump. you do that for you. nope, this is all about you. this is all about this twitter feed. let me read one of those. another one. "women who love and support michael cohen. strong, pitbull, sex symbol. no nonsense. "that's pretty sad. over and over again, we wanted

to have trust. it's built on the premise that we are truthful, that we come forward. but there is no truth with you whatsoever. that's why it's important to you. to look up here and look at the old adage that our moms taught us. "liar, liar, pants on fire." no one should ever listen to you and give you credibility. it's sad. it is sad that we have come -- in fact, i want to quote the chairman's very words. hold on -- speak of the gentleman's time has expired. >> mr. cohen, several times in your testimony you stated the bad things that you did for mr. trump. at some point, you apparently changed your course of action. there is a recurring refrain in your testimony that says, "and yet, i continued to work for

him." but at some point you changed. what was the breaking point at which you decided to start telling the truth? >> mr. cohen: there are several factors. helsinki, charlottesville, watching the daily destruction of our civility to one another, putting up silly things like this, really unbecoming of congress. it is that sort of behavior that i am responsible for. i am responsible for your silliness, because i did the same thing that you are doing now for ten years. i protected mr. trump for ten years. the fact that you pull up a news article that has no value to it, and you want to use that as the premise for discrediting me -- that are not the person that people called at 3:00 in the

morning would make you inaccurate. in actuality, it would make you a liar. which puts you into the same position that i am in. and i can only warn people, the more people that follow mr. mr. trump as i did blindly, they are going to suffer the same consequences that i am sufferin suffering. >> what warning would you give young people who are tempted, as you were? would you encourage them not to wait ten years to see the light? what advice would you give young people -- in particular, young lawyers? so that they do not abuse their bar license as you did? >> mr. cohen: look at what's happened to me. i had a wonderful life. i have a beautiful wife, two amazing children. i achieved financial success by the age of 39. i didn't go to work for mr. trump because i had to. i went to work for him because i wanted to. and i have lost it all. so if i'm not a

picture-perfect -- that's the picture that should be up there. if i'm not a picture-perfect example of to do, that is the example that i am trying set for my children. you make mistakes in life, and i have owned them and taken responsibility for them. i am paying a huge price, as is my family. so if that in and of itself isn't enough to dissuade somebody from acting in the callous manner that i did, i'm not sure that that person has any chance. very much like i'm in right now. >> a recurring theme in your testimony is concerned for your family's safety. what specifically are you most concerned about? >> mr. cohen: well, the president -- unlike my followers -- he has over 60 million people. when he turned around early in the campaign and said, "i can shoot somebody on fifth avenue and get away with it," i want to be very clear that he's not

joking. he is telling you the truth. you don't know him -- i do. i have sat next to this man for ten years, and i watched his back. i'm the one who started the campaign. and i am the one who continued in 2015 to promote him. so many things i thought he could do that are just great, and he can and he is doing things that are great. but this destruction of our civility to one another is just -- it's out of control. when he goes on twitter and he starts bringing in my in-laws, my parents, my wife, what does he think is going to happen? he is causing -- he is sending out the same message, that he can do whatever he wants. this is his country. he's becoming an autocrat. hopefully something bad will happen to me or my children or my wife so that i will not be here and testify. that's what his hope was, to intimidate me. again, i think everybody who joined and said that this is just not right.

>> have you ever seen mr. trump personally threaten people with physical harm? >> mr. cohen: no. he would use others. >> he would hire other people to do that? >> mr. cohen: i'm not sure he had to hire them, they were already working there. everybody's job at the trump organization is to protect mr. trump. every day, most of us knew we were coming in and we were going to lie to him life ran on something. that became the norm and that's what's happening in this country. it's exactly what happening government, sir. >> think i'm mr. chairman. my time has expired. >> mr. armstrong? >> thank you. >> mr. cohen: mr. chairman, can we take a break? >> not right now. >> all right.

>> mr. cohen: i did, sir. [laughter] [devil] that's okay. thank you, sir. thank you. >> mr. cohen: cummings might be able to see something that we could hear in this hearing with michael cohen, but we couldn't. his microphone is a partly not on but we do know that the former president's personal attorney has asked for a short break. as that happens, we remind you that we don't mind you're watching it my best sparks fly on capitol hill as michael cohen since before the house oversight committee. he is making explosive allegations against the president, and facing strong pushback from republicans over his credibility after being convicted of lying to congress among other things. michael cohen's testimony is expected to resume as soon as they come back in the room. first, here are some of the dramatic moments already today

from the hearing. >> i am ashamed, because i know what mr. trump is. he is a racist, he is a con man, and he is a cheat. >> how on earth is this witness credible? with all the lies and deception, the self-serving fraud, it begs the question -- what is the majority party doing here? >> we we will not tolerate lyio this congress. by anybody. we are in search of the truth. do you understand that? >> i do. >> mr. cohen, you called donald trump a cheat in your opening testimony. what would you call yourself? >> a fool. >> harris: the law sees him as a criminal lawyer. i want to bring an anchor of fox news sunday, chris wallace. chris, watching this today, what is the greatest headline that you see so far? >> chris: well, this is a man

who was inside the trump organization and obviously is, as we have said, , and is open exhibit he called him a racist, a con man, and a cheat. he has some specific evidence. he talks about him discussing hush money payments in the oval office as president. he has a copy of a check that the trump organization has indicated was supposed to be part of a retainer. cohen says there was no retainer and this was reimbursing him for the hush money payments to stormy daniels. obviously, there, the republicans on their side have roughed him up and there's a lot to rough him up about. he is a convicted liar and a convicted felon who lied to banks, lied to federal authorities, lied to congress. i actually think some of the most powerful parts of his testimony today -- and i'm not sure how many minds it's going to change, obviously if you like

donald trump you are horrified that he is even speaking. particularly as the president is in vietnam dealing with north korea. if you don't like donald trump, i suppose this is catnip. i thought some of the most powerful moments were actually not about facts, they were basically statements. uncorroborated, but statements. debbie wasserman schultz asked him whether he thought he was capable of colluding with the russians. he says he has no hard evidence of that. he does have some circumstantial evidence that the president knew about the trump tower meeting in 2016. and, rather, michael cohen said he is capable of doing anything and working with anyone to win. i also thought it was pretty powerful at the very end there when he was talking with one of the democratic congressman and basically said to the g.o.p. members cutting him off, "you are doing today exactly what i did for ten years, which is protecting donald trump without

any regard for the truth." again, if you like donald trump, i think you're going to be horrified that congress has called him as a witness, especially when the president is in vietnam meeting with kim jong un. if you don't like donald trump, you're going to think, "finally, we are hearing some of the truth." >> melissa: chris, this is melissa francis. quick question. he brought some evidence with him, although he has been convicted of forging documents. but he brought with him the bank checks but he was given some copies of, financial statements, copies of threatening letters that he himself wrote on president trump's behalf. what did we learn today so far that is new? that we had not seen before or known about before? >> chris: well, i'm trying to think. we didn't know before -- again, this is uncorroborated, but he said he was in the office with donald trump, private citizen candidate, and 2016 when

roger stone called. and it was on a speakerphone, and roger stone said, "before the wikileaks dump of the emails, we know these emails are going to come out." and donald trump said that that was great. again, it's his word, and roger stone has come out with a statement -- also some but accused of lying -- denying it. i'm not sure we knew before today about this check that was written during the time that president trump was president to michael cohen for $35,000. which he says is for reimbursement for the hush money payment to stormy daniels. we also have, again, his word, but his statement that in june of 2016 he was in the room -- in trump's office at the trump tower -- when donald jr. came and whispered something about the meeting being set up. and the president said, "good, let me know what happens."

he surmises, he doesn't say he knew for sure, but he surmises that it was the trump tower meeting between don jr. and some of their top people in the trump campaign. and that russian lawyer who had close ties with the kremlin. >> harris: chris, you talk about the suspicions, the surmising by michael cohen. how does it us any closer to the truth? you saw a ranking member jim jordan go after the fact that there was bank fraud and so much in his background that happened before he was working for donald trump. and had nothing to do with donald trump. and how much of a history of lying and crimes that there where. does any of that discredit a man who doesn't have proof of russia collusion? who doesn't have proof of the tower meeting, but has suspicions are strong feelings? >> chris: sure. obviously has a record is terrible. i mean, he is a convicted liar. and he is going to prison and a couple of months for that. obviously you expected and the republicans were well within

their rights to bring all of that up. it obviously goes to the credibility of this person. he was asked about that several times. sp1 yes. >> chris: he said, interestingly enough, "the special counsel may know about that." i will say this, that there are other people who he talks about. for instance, when he talks about the hush money payment, and he's in that meeting, he says that he was there with the chief financial officer of the trump organization. allen weisselberg, who we know has also testified before the special counsel. if allen weisselberg since there and says, "yes, president trump president trump," okayed the hush money payment which would be a campaign finance violation, we don't know. that's a big "if." if he backs up what cohen says, it has added credibility. >> marie: chris, marie harf here. i wonder if we might see

testimony from other people michael cohen has been referring to today. i will put a democrat asked him if they were of the people we should call before this committee and to give a whole list of people including david packer from ami, allen weisselberg, and others. do you think that would be one of the consequences of this hearing today? >> chris: it'll be interesting to see. those oversight committee has specifically said they aren't getting into it -- although they touched on it a bit today, into the russia investigation. that is under the purview and jurisdiction of the house intelligence committee. but i agree with you. i thought it was very interesting on one of those democratic members talked about, "who else would you suggest we talk to?" and he mentioned a lawyer for the trump organization. allen weisselberg, who was the chief financial officer. and also members of the family. it will be interesting to see, because this is the area, this is the lane, that elijah cummings, chairman of house oversight, has talked about that he is going to own. he's going to occupy here.

this is the first testimony on this whole question of what president trump did in his business dealings, things like campaign finance violations. but it may not be the last hearing. >> harris: chris wallace, please stand by. we are in a break right now with the hearing of michael cohen, the president's former attorney, testifying today. bret baier is alongside, as well. fox news chief political anchor and anchor a special report. he joins me now live from vietnam were president trump is holding his second summit with north korean dictator kim jong un. on any of a given day, this would be soaking up the screen. it has to be odd to have the president so far away as this is playing out. >> bret: the juxtaposition, harris, is premium. in no way, i was away from a public meeting on the geopolitical front which deals with the legalization of the

korean peninsula possibly. all eyes transfixed on capitol hill, including ice here in hanoi. watching the president's former attorney with all that he's testified to. i agree with what chris has said about some of the key moments. i do believe that there were a couple of other interesting points. one that michael cohen basically blasted that buzzfeed story, saying that donald trump told him explicitly to lie about the trump tower and moscow building to congress. he said, "no, that's not how we operated. that's not what happen." we get at least what cohen says under oath now about that story that was floating around for a long time. you also hear from his original opening statement, harris, that in cohen's mind, mr. trump -- now president trump -- never expected to win the presidency. he didn't want to win the presidency, it was all about marketing his brand.

and he didn't think he had a chance. in the primary or the general election. an interesting juxtaposition, now that the allegation is that the campaign worked feverishly with russia to try and get across the finish line. there were some contradictions throughout the testimony, but overall i think you saw both sides laying markers, saying the sky can't be trusted, he has no credibility, and the other side saying, "we need to hear from all people that you all didn't let us hear from." >> what you think the political invocations are going to be? michael cohen says he's testifying because he wants the american people to hear from him about what the truth is and they will decide what they think it is. clearly, this is the last thing the president wants while he is in vietnam where you are. what do you think the response is going to be politically, on capitol hill, and also with voters?

three >> bret: for small, i think there will be response foe present. he is treated before about michael cohen being a liar. and i expect you'll probably see some more of that. as far as the political implications, i think it really is the democrats who will take any bones that come out of this testimony and run with them for their investigations. >> harris: hey, would you let me to dip in for a second customer we are seeing michael cohen walked back into hearing now. we saw jim jordan seated. we saw chairman elijah cummings seen del my cv. we might be seconds away from this resuming for this was post be a short break requested by michael cohen. there was a microphone not on, so he couldn't hear cummings' exact response that. he said we would take a break. there you see michael cohen taking his seat. bret baier, i know you are a world away, and we will bring you back in if the suddenly starts. the microphones are up now but they have not begun, so i want to give you an opportunity to finish your thought. >> bret: sure.

i was going to say, the big enchilada is the mueller report. which we are waiting on and we don't know when it's going to come out. we are told probably next week. but we've been told that before. so i think people are waiting to see what is in that. these of their investigations will continue and go on. michael cohen will probably be tapped for some of these other testimonies. we know we give closed-door testimony to the senate intelligence committee yesterda yesterday. in his testimony he said that he talked to adam schiff, as well. >> harris: bret baier, thank you so much. we have been gaveled back in. let's watch. >> think you, mr. chairman. mr. cohen, you have admitted to lying on your taxes. according to federal prosecutors in the southern district of new york, you also lied to banks to get loans. "to secure loans, cohen falsely understated the amount of debt he was carrying and omitted information from his personal financial statements to induce a

bank to lend based on incomplete information." is that correct? >> harris: that is correct. >> you light on financial documents? so you lied to financial institutions in order to secure loans, so we've established that you lie on your taxes, you lied to banks, and you have been convicted of lying to congress. it seems to me that there is not much that you won't lie about when you stand to gain from it. in fact, the prosecutors for the southern district of new york noted that each of your crimes "bear common characteristics, with each involving deception and being motivated by your personal greed and ambition." as your appearance here today motivated by your desire to remain in the spotlight for your personal benefit? >> harris: no, ma'am. >> you have sought out ways to debilitate your image from tax aviator, bank swim there, all-around liar to an honorable truthful man by appearing before cable news. i am concerned you could be using your story and this

congressional platform for your personal benefit, such as a desire to make money from book deals. so, 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? >> mr. cohen: no. >> you cannot commit to making money off of a book or movie deal based on your work? >> mr. cohen: no. there are two parts to your question. the first part of your question, you asked me whether or not i had spoken to people regarding a possible book deal. and i have. and i have spoken to people who have sought me out regarding a movie deal. >> i didn't ask you if you spoken to anybody. i said, can you commit under oath that you will not, that you have not come and will not pursue a book deal?

>> mr. cohen: and i would not do that, no. >> i can you commit under oath he not pursue upward opportunio provide commentary for a major network with your experiences working for the president? >> mr. cohen: no. >> can you commit under oath he will not pursue political office in the state of new york? >> mr. cohen: no. >> so you don't commit to changing your ways, basically? because you want to continue to use your background as a liar, a cheater, a convicted liar, to make money? that's we want to do? >> mr. cohen: and that's going to give me a book deal in the movie deal and television and a spot on television? i don't think so. >> well, it appears that it will. i yield my -- the remainder of my time, mr. chairman. >> i think the gentle lady for yielding fruit in your sentencing statement to the court in december of last year, you said, "i want to apologize

to the people of united states. you deserve to know the truth." approximately a month later, busby news ran a story that was the story in the country for a couple days. their story ran january 17th 2019. on january 18th, your counsel went on tv and wouldn't confirm or deny the story. they do something that never happened. they said, the description of specific statements of the special counsel's office and the characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office regarding michael cohen's congressional testimony are not accurate. why didn't your lawyer, the day that he's on tv, when the story is the biggest thing on news and country, why did he denied the bus feed story? >> mr. cohen: because i didn't think it was his responsibility to do that. we are not the fact-checkers for buzzfeed. >> he's on tv to dock with the very story you committed to the courts. we are trying to get sentence reduced, that the mega people deserve to know the truth. you had the golden opportunity to give them the truth on a

false story. the bus feed story. underlay didn't see anything. he actually said this. "i can't confirm, i can't deny." you an opportunity does that tell mike tell the judge what you said you were going to do come one month after he said it, didn't do it. why not? >> mr. cohen: again, it wasn't our responsibility to be the fact-checker for the news agency. >> it was the biggest story in the country! >> mr. cohen: the president says so far, approximately 9,000 -- >> i've got eight seconds but i will let you finish. >> mr. cohen: chairman, can i please finish? speak of of the grave never done. they said the story was false. now you can respond. >> mr. cohen: my response -- the president has told something over 9,000 lies to date. to asked mr. davis or mr. michael monaco or do i go on television in order to correct his mistakes? the answer is no. i would -- >> the gentleman 'time has

expired. you may finish answering the question and then we're going to go to mr. connelly. this piece of only wanted to say is i find it interesting, sir, the between yourself and your colleagues, that not one question so far since i'm here has been asked about president trump. that's actually why i thought i was coming today. not to confess the mistakes that i've made. i've already done that. and i will do it again every time you ask me about taxes. mistakes. yes, i made mistakes. i will say it now and again paid i will pay the ultimate price, but i'm not here today. the america people don't care about my taxes. they want to know what it is that i know about mr. trump. and not one question so far has been asked about mr. trump. >> mr. connelly? >> thank you, mr. chairman. well, mr. cohen, based on your testimony and your 10-year experience, i think you can

recognize the behavior 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 that a witness would come to us who who is flawed -d you certainly are flawed -- means they can never tell the truth and there is no validity whatsoever to a single word they say. that would discredit every single criminal trial of organized crime in the history of united states. because all of them depend on someone who has turned. it would make rico no and void. we couldn't use it anymore. this congress has historically relied on all kinds of shady figures who turn. one of the most famous who led to the decapitation of the organized crime families in

america, congressional hearing, he was a witness. any committed a lot worse crimes than you are 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 principal. known as "individual number one" in the southern district of new york, as i recall. is that correct, mr. cohen? >> mr. cohen: that is correct. >> mr. cohen, i want to ask you something that's not in your testimony that has so far not been made public. in our committee staff search of documents 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, the white house. there was an email from a special assistant to the president to a deputy white house counsel and the email is dated may 16th, 2017. it says, and i quote, "potus," meaning the president, "requested a meeting on thursday

with michael cohen and jay scheck alone." any idea what this may be about?" do you recall being asked to go to the white house on or around that time? may 2017. >> mr. cohen: off the top of my head, i don't. i recall being in the white house with jay sekulow, and it was in regard to the documents, the document production, as well as my appearance before the house select intel. but i'm not sure if that specifically -- but what i will do is i will check all my records and i am more than happy to provide you with any documentation or response to this question. >> you sort of touched on, presumably, the purpose of the discussion. at least among others.

this occurred just before your testimony before the select committee on intelligence here in the house. is that correct? >> mr. cohen: i believe so, yes. >> was that a topic of conversation with the president himself? >> mr. cohen: if this is the specific instance that i was there with jay sekulow, yes. >> so you had a conversation with the with the president of the united states about your impending testimony before the house intelligence committee custom records that correct? >> mr. cohen: that is correct. >> what is the nature of the conversation? >> mr. cohen: he wanted me to cooperate. he also wanted to ensure by making the statement -- and i said in my testimony -- that there is no russia, no collusio collusion, there is no deal. he goes, "it's all a witch hunt." he goes, "this stuff has to end." >> did you take those comments to be suggestive of what might flavor your testimony?

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

staying on point, that's the party line that he created that so many others are now touting? yes, that is the message that he wanted to reinforce. >> of the gentlemen's time has expired. mr. massey? >> mr. cohen, can you clarify? you said at times you did what you thought mr. trump wanted you to do, not specifically what he told you to do. speaks of it at times, yes. >> so you just went on your intuition? >> mr. cohen: i don't know if i would call it intuition as much as i would just say my knowledge of what he wanted. because it happened before. and i knew what he had wanted. >> does a lawyer have a duty to provide his client with good legal advice? >> mr. cohen: yes. >> were you a good lawyer to mr. trump? >> mr. cohen: i believe so. >> when you arranged a payment to miss clifford, you state your testimony -- i will quote from your testimony -- that you did so, "without bothering to consider whether that was

improper, much less whether it was the right thing to do." you said that. that is your testimony today. you said you didn't even consider whether it was legal. how could you give your client legal advice when you are not even considering whether it's legal? >> mr. cohen: i did what i knew mr. trump wanted. this conversation with mr. trump started -- >> i didn't ask whether you were a good fixer. i asked whether you are a good lawyer. >> mr. cohen: sometimes you have to melt both together. i needed to come at that time, ensure and protect mr. trump. i'm clearly suffering the penalty of -- i clearly aired on the side of wrong. >> 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 were

protecting mr. trump? >> mr. cohen: i'm sorry, sir, i don't understand. >> you felt that was how to protect -- as his lawyer, you feel that you did a good job. you said you were a good lawyer. right? is that being a good lawyer? do not even consider whether it's legal or not? >> mr. cohen: i didn't work for the campaign. i was working at i was trying to protect mr. trump. i sat with mr. trump -- and this goes back all the way to 2011. this wasn't the first scenario with miss daniels. my point is, this was an ongoing situation. it didn't just start. let me finish. it didn't start in october it started it many years early. >> mr. cohen: >> when were you disbarred? >> mr. cohen: yesterday, based on what is on the paper. >> when should you have been

disbarred? >> mr. cohen: i don't have an answer for your question. >> how long we question for mr. trump? >> mr. cohen: since 2007. >> what was the first time you failed to inform him of his legal obligations, as you testified today that you did in the case of the payment to miss clifford? when was the first time you do that? would that qualify for disbarment? >> mr. cohen: i don't know, sir. i'm not the bar association. >> i think you should consult with them may be occasionally on some of these things. >> mr. cohen: there is no point now, i lost my license. >> has anybody else promise to pay mr. davis for representing you? >> mr. cohen: no. >> nobody has? >> mr. cohen: no. are you offered? >> [laughs] a question, quickly. you said -- and this is also in your testimony -- before the democratic convention, he became privy to a conversation that some of hillary clinton's emails were being leaked.

is that correct? >> mr. cohen: correct. >> okay. you said that's late july? do you know the exact day? >> mr. cohen: i believe it was either the 18 through the 19th, and i would ask that it be on the 19th. >> but it was definitely july? >> mr. cohen: i believe so, yes. >> did you know that was public knowledge in june? i would like to submit this for the record. >> without objection. mr. assange reported the meeting on june 12 of those would be leaked. i'm not saying you had fake news, i'm saying you had old news. there's really not much to that. i would like to yield the remainder of my time to mr. higgins. >> thank you, sir. mr. cohen, earlier you said, "i spent last week looking through boxes to find documents that would support the accusations. close to where those boxes, good sir? are they in your garage? >> mr. cohen: they are in storage. >> are these not boxes that

should have been turned over to investigative authorities during the many criminal investigations he been subject to? >> mr. cohen: sir, these are the boxes that were returned to me. >> did they contain data pertinent to currency been committed, should they not have been turned over to invest give authority customer active mr. lanny davis know these boxes? >> you may answer the question. >> mr. cohen: i don't understand this question, sir. >> very well. >> mr. cohen -- good morning, thank you, chairman cummings for this meeting. thank you, mr. cohen, for voluntarily testifying this morning. mr. cohen, you were the executive vice president and special counsel for the trump organization. correct? >> mr. cohen: i was the executive vice president special counsel to donald j. trump. >> special counsel means you were the attorney for him. is that right? >> mr. cohen: it just means i was there to handle matters that he felt were significant and important to him individually. >> and those include legal

matters? >> mr. cohen: yes, sir. >> is a former attorney you are familiar with legal documents known as ndas. nondisclosure agreements. is there? >> mr. cohen: yes. >> i'm sure you know they can be reasonable and certain business contacts. but they can also be abused to create a chilling effect to silence people, as we've seen in the #metoo movement and other places. isn't that right? >> mr. cohen: yes. >> and the trump organization used ndas extensively. isn't that right? >> mr. cohen: that is correct. >> mr. cohen, i'm reading for me recent "washington post" article regarding the linkage of one of these types of ndas when the terms were described as very broad. for instance, the term " "confidential information" was found to be anything that "mr. trump insist remain private or confidential, including but not limited to any information

with respect to the personal life, political affairs, and/or business business affairs of mr. trump or any family member." do those terms that sound familiar to you? >> mr. cohen: i have seen that document. >> in fact, there is a class 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 complain of illegality or wrongdoing. would you agree that in the use of these types of 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? >> mr. cohen: yes. >> would you agree that the effect of the use of these ndas and their enforcement was to have a chilling effect on people to silence them from coming forward?

>> mr. cohen: if you wanted to define "chilling," i'm not sure. >> that he would come in using these ndas are trying to enforce them would basically try and keep people silent. >> mr. cohen: that was the goal. >> and nothing of the trump organization was ever done unless it was run through president donald trump, correct? >> mr. cohen: that is 100% certain. >> okay. mr. cohen, do you believe that there are people out there today, ira from the president of my presidents business or personal life, who are not coming forward to tell their stories of wrongdoing bece president's use of ndas against them? >> mr. cohen: i'm sorry, sir. i'd know the answer the question. >> okay. sir, i have a couple of questions for you. warmest flask munication with president trump or someone acting on his behalf? >> mr. cohen: i don't have the specific dates, but it was a while ago >> do have a general time frame?

>> mr. cohen: i would suspect it was within two months post the raid of my home. >> so early fall of last year, generally? >> mr. cohen: generally. >> what did he or his agent communicate to? >> mr. cohen: unfortunately, this topic is actually something that is being investigated right now by the southern district of new york. i have been asked by them not to discuss or talk about these issues. >> fair enough. is there any other wrongdoing or illegal act that you are aware of regarding donald trump that we have not yet discussed today? >> mr. cohen: yes, and again, those are part of the investigation currently being looked at by the southern district of new york. >> sir, congressman cooper ask you about whether you were aware of any physical violence

committed by president trump. i just have a couple quick questions. do you have any knowledge of president trump abusing any controlled substances? >> mr. cohen: i'm not aware of that, no. >> do you have any knowledge of president trump being delinquent on any alimony or child care payments? >> mr. cohen: i'm not aware of any of it. >> do you have any knowledge of president trump ranging in health care procedures for any women not in his family? >> mr. cohen: i'm not aware of that, no. >> thank you. i yield back. >> mr. cloud? >> thank you, chairman. mr. cohen, can you tell me the significance of may 6th? >> mr. cohen: in terms of, sir? >> a couple months from now. >> mr. cohen: that's the date that i need to surrender to federal prison. >> for the record, could you state what you have been convicted of? >> mr. cohen: i've been convicted on five counts of tax

evasion. there is one count of misrepresentation of documents to a bank, there are two 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 sit with your official title with the campaign was? >> mr. cohen: i do not have a campaign to handle. >> and your position and the trip in administration? >> i do not have one. >> you said you were not looking to work in the white house. the southern district of new york, in their statement, their sentence the memo says this. "cohen's criminal violation and the federal election laws were also stirred, like others, crimes by his own ambition and greed. cohen privately told friends, colleagues, including seized text messages, that he expected to be given a prominent role in the new in administration. when that did not materialize,

cohen found a way to monetize his relationship and access with the president." where they lying, or were you lying today? >> mr. cohen: i'm not saying it's a lie, i'm just saying it's not accurate. i did not want to go to the white house. i retained -- i brought in an attorney and i sat with mr. trump with him for well over an hour explaining the importance of having a personal attorney, that every president has had one in order to handle matters like the matters i was dealing with. which included stormy daniels, and other personal matters that -- >> excuse me, this is my time. thank you. i ask unanimous consent to submit this memo from the southern district of new york for the record. >> without objection to order. >> i will give you that and a second. okay, this memo states that you committed four distinct federal

crimes over a period of several years. you are motivated to do so by personal greed and repeatedly use your power to influence for deceptive ends. it goes on to say that they each involved, they were distinct in their arms, but they had a common set of characteristics involving deception and reach 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. we know that you were expecting a drop at the white house and didn't get it. he made millions lying about your close access to the president. you have a history of lying for personal gain, including to banks about your account and pay law enforcement, your family, congress, the american people. the southern district of new york. they you said you did this to ad loyalty to mr. trump, but your memo states this. "this was not an act out of blind loyalty come as cohen suggests. he was driven by a desire to further ingratiate himself with potential future president for

whom his political sets, cohen himself claimed credit for." we are in a search for truth and i don't know how, chairman, we are supposed to ascertain truth in this quagmire of the hearing when the best witness we can bring the forces always tell mike already been convicted of lying before us. what's sad is the american be blessing this played out before. we people in prominent positions fail, and then a couple years later to get a book deal. you are set to go to jail for a couple of years. come out with a multimillion dollar book deal. that's not bad living. my question is, will you today commit to donate any further proceeds to book deals, film reviews, to charity? >> mr. cohen: no. >> will the gentleman yield? >> mr. cohen: may i finish? >> i yield to mr. meadows. >> mr. cohen: mr. chairman,

may i finish? >> mr. cohen, he has yielded me. >> mr. cohen: i didn't finish my response. i'm asking the chairman trade mr. chairman, may i finish my response was to mexico i will let you respond. answer his question please >> everything has been made of your lies in the past. i'm concerned about your lies today. under testimony just a few minutes ago to me you indicated that you had contracts with foreign entities. and yet, we have a truth and testimony disclosure form which requires you to list those foreign contracts for the last two years, and you put "n/a" on there. and it is a criminal offense to not have that accurately. so when were you lying? either in the testimony to me earlier today or when you fill out the form? >> the gentleman's time has expired. mr. cohen, you may answer his question and then whatever you wanted to say on that other one.

>> mr. cohen: his question is unfortunately -- i don't have an answer for his question. >> no, no, no. 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 -- hold on -- >> point of order. the gentleman said he does not have an answer. you have gone over your time. >> he's under oath. >> he's under oath to tell the truth! one of them is not accurate, mr. chairman. >> mr. chairman, just a questio question. >> mr. raskin? >> mr. cohen, thank you for your composure today. our colleagues are not upset because you lied to congress for the president. they are upset because you stop lying to congress for the president. you have described the trump campaign as a once a once-in-a-lifetime moneymaking opportunity. the greatest infomercial of all time, i think he said. and this may be the most transient observation of your

whole testimony. do you think the term campaign or presidency ever stopped being about making money for the president, his family, and his organization? >> mr. cohen: yes. >> when did it stop being back? >> mr. cohen: when he won the election. >> what did it become about at that point? >> mr. cohen: that had to be about figuring out what to do here in washington. >> can you carefully explained to america how the hush money payments to karen mcdougall and stormy daniels work to? can you carefully explain what "catch and kill" is? >> mr. cohen: sure. i received a phone call regarding both karen mcdougal as well as stormy daniels. obviously, at different times. stating that they were issues that were going to be damaging to mr. trump. with the stormy daniels, it started in 2011 when she wanted to have something removed from a website. that was the first time i met

keith davidson, her then-acting attorney. we were successful in having it taken down from the website. it wasn't until years later, around the time of the campaign, that they come back and ask, "what are you going to do now? because she is back on the trail trying to sell the story." at which point, david parker, on behalf of the "national enquirer," reached out to her and her attorney in order to go take a look at lie detector tests. that would prove that she was telling the truth. they contacted me and told me that she was telling the truth. at which point -- >> she took a lie detector test. >> she literally took a lie detector test and was seen by an employee of the "national enquirer." at which point in time i went straight to mr. trump's office and explained by this time it's different than another time. >> when you say different than another time, whether of the

women paid hush money by donald trump or his organization? was as a standard operating practice question work >> mr. cohen: no. >> are not aware of any other case? >> mr. cohen: i'm not aware of any of a case that mr. trump paid. which brings us to karen mcdougal. he was supposed to pay. he was supposed to pay $125,000 for the life story of karen mcdougal. for whatever the reason may be, he elected not to pay it. david was very angry because there were also other monies that david had expended on his behalf. unfortunately, never got paid back for that either. >> so david parker done this with every women? >> mr. cohen: other circumstances, yes but 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 subjection to extortion or blackmail? >> mr. cohen: i am not, no. >> are you aware of any

videotapes that may be subject of extortion or blackmail? >> mr. cohen: i've heard about these tapes for a long time. i've had many people contact me over the years. i have no reason to believe that tape exists. >> end of summer 2015, donald trump was asked about hazards dumb i really do but. "i have to think about it, i'm not that with him." why did he endeavor to hide his relationship with felix later in what was his relationship? >> mr. cohen: he was certainly in relationship. he was involved in the company that has to do with the tromso hotel. as well as the trump fort lauderdale project. why did he want to distance himself? that's what mr. trump does. he distances himself when things go bad for someone. at that point in time, it was going bad for mr. sater.

>> you said you lied about the negotiations to bring don michaels has moscow tower because he made it clear to you that he wanted you to live. one of the reasons you knew this is because, "mr. trump's personal layers stomach lawyers edited my statement to collis about the timing of the negotiations before i give it." this is a pretty breathtaking claim and i want to get to the facts come here. which specific lawyers reviewed and edited your statement to congress on the moscow tower negotiations, and did they make any changes?" >> mr. cohen: there were changes made it. jay sekulow, for one -- >> was there to do by the time a customer next week of the gentleman's time has expired. you may answer that question. >> mr. cohen: there are several changes made including how we are going to handle that message. >> will you finish? >> mr. cohen: the message of course being the length of time that the trump tower moscow

project stayed and remained alive. >> that was one of the changes? >> first of all, i would like to clear up something prejust a little something that bothers me. you started out your testimony in response to some question that president trump never expected to win. i just want to clarify that i dealt with president trump several times as he was trying to get wisconsin. he was always confidence, he was working very hard, and this idea that somehow he was running to raise his profile for some future venture, at least in my expense, is preposterous. i find it offensive when anti-trump people say that he did on the luck he didn't expect to win. be that as it may, my question concert the relationship the court. do you expect -- right now you are sentenced to three years, correct question rick >> mr. cohen: that is correct. >> do expect any time using this

testimony or other testimonies after you get done doing whatever you're going to do thio go back and ask for any sort of reduction in sentence? >> yes, there are ongoing investigations currently being conducted that have nothing to do with this committee or congress. i am assisting in. and it is for the benefit of the rule 35 motion. yes. >> see expect and perhaps we testify here today will affect going back and reducing this -- what we think is a relatively late three year sentence?" you expect to go back and ask for for the reduction? >> mr. cohen: based off of my parents are today? >> based upon whatever you do between now and your request for -- >> mr. cohen: through 55 motion is in the complete hands of the southern district of new york. the way the rule 35 motion works is what you are supposed to

provide them with information that leads to ongoing investigations. i am 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 rule 35 motion. i don't know what the benefit in terms of met don my time would be. this congressional hearing today is not going to be the basis of a rule 35 motion. i wish it was. but it's not. >> i would like to yield some time to congressman jordan. >> i yield to the gentleman from recoleta. >> mr. cohen come i will come back to the question i asked before with regard to your false statement. they submitted to congress. on here, it was very clear that it asked for contracts with foreign entities over the last two years. have you had any foreign contract with foreign entities whether it's the