Stay up to date with notifications from The Independent

Notifications can be managed in browser preferences.

Resurfaced video shows Giuliani blowing apart Trump’s new ‘evidence’ in Stormy Daniels case

‘They funnelled it through a law firm, then the president repaid it,’ Giuliani said in 2018

Gustaf Kilander
Washington, DC
Thursday 23 March 2023 17:54 GMT
Comments
Giuliani shatters Donald Trump’s new ‘evidence’ in Stormy Daniels case in resurfaced video

Your support helps us to tell the story

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.

At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.

The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.

Your support makes all the difference.

A resurfaced Fox News clip shows former New York City Mayor and Trump personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani blowing apart the former president’s supposed new evidence in the Stormy Daniels hush money case.

Mr Giuliani complicated Donald Trump’s defence in May 2018 when he appeared on Fox News admitting that Mr Trump was aware of the payments to women who claimed that they had had affairs with him.

He said at the time that Mr Trump “did know the general arrangement” and that his attorney and fixer Michael Cohen was reimbursed for paying off Stormy Daniels with funds being “funnelled” through a law firm.

Mr Cohen is now one of his former boss’s staunchest critics.

Mr Trump rejected this notion at the time, saying that Mr Giuliani “started yesterday. He’ll get his facts straight”.

Lawyer Ron Filipkowski shared the clip of Mr Giuliani from 2018 on Thursday.

“I’d like to call, as a surprise witness for the prosecution, 2018 Rudy Giuliani, who BURIES Trump’s defense,” Mr Filipkowski tweeted.

“They funnelled it through a law firm, then the president repaid it,” Mr Giuliani said at the time. “When I heard Cohen’s retainer while he was doing no work, I said, ‘that’s how (Trump’s) repaying it.’”

Mr Trump is now arguing that a 2018 letter from Mr Cohen’s lawyer, which didn’t stop Cohen from being charged for making illegal campaign contributions to the 2016 Trump campaign, shows that he’s not guilty in connection to the Manhattan DA’s investigation into those same payments.

Mr Trump took to Truth Social to share the letter from February 2018, which Mr Cohen’s lawyer at the time sent to the Federal Election Commission, saying that Mr Cohen using a $130,000 Home Equity Line of Credit to pay Ms Daniels, a porn actor, to remain silent regarding a 2006 affair she claims to have had with Mr Trump was a “private transaction” using Mr Cohen’s “own money”.

Ms Daniels’s real name is Stephanie Clifford.

“Neither the Trump Organization nor the Trump campaign was a party to the transaction with Ms. Clifford, and neither reimbursed Mr Cohen for the payment directly or indirectly,” lawyer Stephen Ryan wrote at the time.

Mr Trump said the letter was “totally exculpatory” and that the DA probe “must end”. Mr Trump may have falsified business records when he reportedly reimbursed Mr Cohen and logged the expense as a legal fee.

But the Department of Justice did indict Mr Cohen, meaning the letter wasn’t “exculpatory” in the end, as Mr Trump claims.

Mr Cohen was indicted for making an illegal campaign contribution and conspiring to violate campaign finance laws. He said in court that he made the payment on Mr Trump’s behalf and on his instruction.

The former fixer has shared evidence showing that Mr Trump and his firm paid him back, meaning that it wasn’t a “private transaction”.

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in