Liam Conner
A lawyer who represented two women seeking payments in 2016 for their silence about alleged sexual encounters with Donald Trump continued his testimony on former president’s criminal trial on Thursday, detailing the consequences of paying the “hush money” at the center of the case.
Keith Davidson, a Los Angeles-based attorney, told jurors how he represented Stormy Daniels in negotiations with Michael Cohen, then Trump’s lawyer, at the end of the 2016 presidential campaign. Daniels ultimately agreed to keep her story secret in exchange for $ 130 thousand, paid by Cohen.
Earlier this week, Davidson testified about his work for another client, model Karen McDougal, who also said she had sex with Trump and sought a settlement for the rights to her story. McDougal received $150,000 from the parent company of the National Enquirer tabloid on her behalf, as part of what prosecutors say was a scheme to bolster Trump’s campaign. The tabloid never published her statements.
Cohen is expected to be called later in the trial as a key witness against Trump, who has pleaded not guilty to 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. Trump denies committing the crimes and says he did not have sex with Daniels or McDougal.
In court Thursday, Davidson said Cohen was “depressed and discouraged” in the weeks after the election when Trump refused to bring him to Washington to serve in his new administration. He also told jurors what happened behind the scenes when Daniels’ payment came to light in 2018, when he received angry phone calls from Cohen threatening legal action.
Before Davidson took the stand, judge Juan Merchan held a hearing about whether Trump should be held in contempt of court and fined for four more alleged violations of a gag order imposed by Merchan before the trial. The order limits what Trump can say about those involved in the case, including likely witnesses and jurors. Prosecutors urged the judge to reimpose $1,000 fines per violation, but said they did not want prison time. Merchan did not immediately issue a ruling.
Keith Davidson’s testimony
Jane Rosenberg
Questioned by prosecutor Joshua Steinglass, Davidson detailed the agreement between Daniels and Trump that Davidson finally reached to Cohen days before the 2016 election. He said the agreement included a $1 million fine for any violation, a provision he said was “inequatable”. Trump never signed the paperwork, which used pseudonyms for himself and Daniels.
Davidson recalled the hours and days after Election Day, Nov. 8, 2016, when Trump won the presidency. Steinglass displayed a text message exchange between Davidson and Dylan Howard, editor of the National Enquirer, in the early morning hours of November 9. Davidson said, “What have we done?” Howard responded, “Oh my God.”
“This was a kind of dark humor,” Davidson said on the stand, later explaining: “There was an understanding…that our activities in some way may have helped Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.”
He said Cohen would call him “quite frequently” in the weeks after the election. He recalled a conversation that took place one Saturday morning in mid-December.
“It was a long call, and he told me that he was depressed and discouraged and he said that I — and he used very colorful language about that stage of his life,” Davidson said.
Steinglass said Davidson could cite the “colorful language” Cohen used.
“He said something like, ‘Jesus Christ, can you believe I’m not going to Washington after everything I did for that damn guy?’” Davidson recalled. “‘I can’t believe I’m not going to Washington. I’ve saved that guy’s ass so many times you don’t even know.'”
He said Cohen told him he “was never paid” and that Trump “wouldn’t even pay me the $130,000 back.”
The Stormy Daniels deal emerges
SHOVEL
Fast forward to 2018, Davidson recounted how Daniels’ payment first came to light. He said a Wall Street Journal reporter emailed him on Jan. 10, 2018, requesting comment for an article about Daniels and Trump.
Davidson said he denied the allegation of a sexual encounter between Trump and Daniels and forwarded the email to Cohen. “I think I had a contractual duty to inform them that something was about to be published,” he told the court. Cohen told him to write a “strong” response denying “everything.”
That same day, Davidson prepared a statement on Daniels’ behalf, which she would later renounce. The statement said allegations of “a sexual and/or romantic affair with Donald Trump many, many, many years ago” were “absolutely false.”
On January 12, the Wall Street Journal published a story revealing the “hush money” deal for the first time, under the headline: “Trump Lawyer Gets $130,000 Payment for Adult Film Star’s Silence.” The story included Daniels’ alleged denial, which Cohen also released to other media outlets.
In the statement, Davidson said that an “extremely strict reading of this denial would be technically true.”
“I don’t think anyone has ever claimed that any interaction between [her] and Trump was ‘romantic,'” he explained. Daniels would later allege that Cohen used “intimidation and coercive tactics” to get her to sign the statement.
A week later, on January 17, Davidson said Cohen told him he had arranged for Daniels to appear on Sean Hannity’s Fox News show. Cohen later reconsidered, telling Davidson in a text that “all the wise people think the story is dying and don’t think it’s smart for her to do interviews.” Davidson responded: “100%.”
“That was kind of in one of the [Cohen’s] stages with his pants on fire, and he was running around planning things and then when he got up on the pole and consulted with someone or some group, whoever the ‘wise men’ were, they really didn’t think it was a good idea for her to appear on ‘Hannity,'” Davidson testified. Daniels never appeared on the show.
Following Trump’s State of the Union address on January 30, Daniels appeared on “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” but refused to confirm or deny that he had sex with Trump. Earlier that day, Davidson prepared a second statement on Daniels’ behalf, denying the encounter. In her interview with Kimmel, Daniels implied that the signature on the statement was not hers, a claim that Davidson disputed in the deposition.
“Impossible,” Davidson texted Cohen, saying she signed in front of him.
At that point, Davidson said he was “trying to thread the needle” and avoid accusations that Daniels had violated his contract with Trump. “We’re trying to calm him down and at the same time trying to accommodate Stormy’s wishes,” he testified.
Davidson said Cohen threatened to sue Daniels “many times.”
“He can be a very aggressive guy. Aggressive in his pursuits to protect his client, and he often made legal threats, said he was going to bankrupt her and rain legal hell on her, and, ‘Don’t fuck with us, you doesn’t know who he’s having sex with,” he said. “He wanted to deny her story to protect his client.”
Davidson under interrogation
Emil Bove, Trump’s lawyer, began questioning Davidson after Steinglass concluded his questions. He suggested that Davidson “can also be aggressive,” just like Cohen.
Bove asked a series of questions about other clients the Hollywood lawyer has represented, including women who made allegations against Charlie Sheen and people who allegedly purchased sex tapes of Hulk Hogan and Tila Tequila.
Bove asked Davidson whether these agreements and others required Davidson to understand “getting to the point without committing extortion.”
Davidson said repeatedly that he didn’t quite understand what Bove meant.
Davidson declined to discuss the details of the deals, ultimately citing attorney-client privilege when Bove asked if he had “extracted” money from Sheen. During a tense conversation, Bove said, “Look, we’re both lawyers, I’m not going to play lawyer with you,” adding that he just wanted truthful answers.
“You’re getting real answers, sir,” Davidson said. “I will not discuss confidential matters.”
Davidson then added, “If you’re not here to play cool games, don’t say ‘extract.’”
Bove showed Davidson a Tampa Police Department report on an investigation into the Hogan case. Davidson was not charged, but acknowledged that the investigation looked into whether extortion took place.
