Giuliani Pivots to Call Hush Money Unrelated to Trump's Campaign
(Bloomberg) -- President Donald Trump's lawyer Rudy Giuliani said hush money paid to a porn actress during the 2016 election didn't violate campaign finance laws, seeking to clarify comments he made earlier in the week.
“There is no campaign violation,” Giuliani said in a statement on Friday. “The payment was made to resolve a personal and false allegation in order to protect the President's family. It would have been done in any event, whether he was a candidate or not.”
Giuliani issued the statement a day after indicating on Fox News's “Fox and Friends” that Trump's personal attorney, Michael Cohen, paid $130,000 to porn star Stormy Daniels in 2016 to ensure that their alleged affair more than a decade ago didn't become public during the election.
“Imagine if that came out on October 15, 2016 in the middle of the, you know, last debate with Hillary Clinton,” Giuliani, a former New York mayor, said on the show. “Cohen didn't even ask. Cohen made it go away. He did his job.”
Giuliani also said that comments he made about “timing” were based on his own understanding of events rather than the president's knowledge.
Giuliani told the Washington Post on Wednesday that Trump was paying Cohen a retainer of $35,000 per month even though Cohen was doing no legal work. The total, about $460,000, was used to reimburse the Daniels payment and cover other things, he said.
Such an arrangement would appear to be a liability that would normally be reported on a federal financial disclosure report by a new president. Trump didn't disclose Cohen's payment on his behalf.
Trump confirmed in a series of tweets Thursday that he had reimbursed his attorney for the payment to Daniels via a “retainer” to stop “false and extortionist accusations” of an affair. The arrangement is “very common among celebrities and people of wealth,” he said in a subsequent message.
Representative Elijah Cummings, the top Democrat on the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee, wants Congress to investigate whether Trump violated federal ethics laws with the payment. Federal officials, Cummings said in a letter to the panel chairman Friday, must disclose any liability over $10,000 “owed to any creditor at any time during the reporting period,” as well as the “name of the creditors to whom such liabilities are owed.”
Trump didn't disclose any liabilities to Cohen incurred in 2016 in his financial disclosure form, Cummings said.
Asked last month whether he knew about the payment to Daniels, Trump said “No.'' Cohen has also said Trump didn't know about the payment.
Asked if he knew where Cohen got the money for the payment, the president said he didn't.
“No, I don't know,'' Trump told reporters.
In an interview Friday, Giuliani said that Trump didn't know about the payment at the time it was made.
Cohen's attorney David Schwartz has repeatedly said that Cohen didn't receive reimbursement from Trump. He said he was “100 percent” certain that Trump didn't repay Cohen, and said on NBC last month that Cohen made the payment out of his “love” and “loyalty” to Trump.
Trump told reporters Friday as he boarded Air Force One that he hadn't altered his account of the payment.
“We're not changing any story,” Trump said.
To contact the reporter on this story: Shannon Pettypiece in Washington at spettypiece@bloomberg.net.
To contact the editors responsible for this story: Alex Wayne at awayne3@bloomberg.net, Joshua Gallu
©2018 Bloomberg L.P.
-
'Never Seen This Level Of Negativity': Sandeep Tandon Says The Next Rally May Be Closer Than You Think
Veteran investor Sandeep Tandon says foreign selling is easing, large-caps are due a comeback and mid-caps are crowded, while he turns positive on gold, power and pharma this Diwali.
-
Indians Stay With Family, Not In Hotels | The Reason Why
India still lacks enough clean, reliable and affordable hotels for budget-conscious travellers.
-
The Economic Imperative: Analysing The Material Driving Force Behind India-Canada Strategic Reset
This economic complementarity is further reinforced by deep institutional investment ties and talent mobility, which form the bedrock of the bilateral framework.
-
Medicine Pricing: Where Must Profit Stop?
India must confront excessive margins, hidden incentives and regulatory gaps that threaten the integrity of medicine.
-
Why Amazon And Flipkart Are Struggling To Beat Meesho In India's Smaller Cities
With 274 million users and lowest-cost logistics, Meesho is defending its value commerce crown against giants like Amazon and Flipkart.
-
High US Salaries, No Green Card Certainty: The Financial Calculation Facing Indian H-1B Families
The suspension of PERM processing at eight technology employers does not cancel existing H-1B visas. What it does is force a question many Indian families have been avoiding: is the US salary worth tying your career and family plans to one employer?
-
Swiggy vs Eternal: Food Delivery's Two Rivals Are No Longer In The Same Race
Eternal is building a private AI assistant, dark.ai. Swiggy is still working out how to make Instamart pay, with an operating loss of Rs 895 crore in the July-September quarter while Blinkit stayed profitable.
-
Where You Live Shapes How You Get To Work | The Reason Why
Two-wheelers are the most popular way to get to work in India, accounting for nearly 43% of workplace commutes.
-
Unhedged Position: Can India See An Indonesia-Style Time Correction?
The Nifty is trading below levels it first clocked in 2024. Is there, then, as I have suggested in the headline, potential that the current time correction drags on painfully for the next three-five, even ten years?
-
Navigating Friction And Energy Realities: An Analysis Of Marco Rubio's October Visit To India
Occurring at a critical juncture marked by stalled trade negotiations and escalating geopolitical pressures over global energy supplies, the visit offers a profound window into modern US-India relations.