Frequent Donald Trump defender Alan Dershowitz downplayed Michael Cohen’s plea agreement with federal prosecutors Thursday. Cohen revealed that the president’s efforts to score a “Trump Tower Moscow” continued well into 2016.
“His credibility as a witness diminishes,” Dershowitz said of Cohen. “The question is whether he will say what others have said about buildings in Moscow or whether or not that constitutes any kind of criminal activity. I find it very hard to define.”
He went on to say that special counsel Robert Mueller is making his decisions off of false information and the president is the only one telling the truth.
“You know, it is interesting. In other parts of the world, you can’t even prosecute people for that,” Dershowitz continued.
It isn’t just Cohen’s statements, however. Cohen submitted documents proving the negotiations continued. He had emails and records of conversations that verify his statements.
At the point that Cohen gave this information, the president already submitted his written answers to Mueller and it’s possible he perjured himself already given the documents Cohen turned over.
“Before the president gave those answers, they are going to comb through every one of his answers and see if they can come up with anybody who can contradict anything the president said,” Dershowitz said. “And that is why it is called a perjury trap. Because even if the president believes what he said was true, if somebody will contradict it, then the president can be charged with lying to government officials, which is the equivalent of perjury. So, that’s why it is so dangerous for anybody who is the subject of an investigation to answer questions by the prosecution, because the prosecution then comes through evidence, tries to get evidence that they can then use to show contradictions.”
In the judicial system, however, a lie isn’t based on “belief” it’s based on facts in evidence.
Still, the attorney called it a “weakness of Mueller’s findings” because he relied on so-called “false statements.”
“And the very fact that he is conducting an investigation has created these crimes,” he continued. “These are not crimes that have been committed prior to his appointment. They are crimes that were committed as a result of his appointment. And that raises some questions about the role of special prosecutors in creating crimes. Creating opportunities for crimes to be committed. In the end, I don’t think the other is going to come up with very much in terms of criminal conduct. This was before he was appointed. That is quite shocking.”
Watch the full interview below: