President Trump ’s former longtime personal lawyer Michael Cohen reportedly dismissed as „innuendo“ sources saying that he is questioning Trump’s ability to serve as president, but declined to deny the…
President Trump ’s former longtime personal lawyer Michael Cohen reportedly dismissed as „innuendo“ sources saying that he is questioning Trump’s ability to serve as president, but declined to deny the report.
Axios reported Saturday that sources told the outlet Cohen has been openly questioning Trump’s fitness as president since Trump’s widely-criticized press conference earlier this week with Russian President Vladimir Putin.
„It’s one thing for him [Cohen] to be concerned about his suitability to be president,“ one source told the news site. „It’s quite another thing to be concerned about his [Trump’s] loyalty to his country.“
When contacted by Axios, Cohen replied in a text that he „cannot comment about someone’s innuendo.“
The reporter, Jonathan Swan, wrote that he told Cohen “the sourcing was solid” and gave the lawyer the chance to dispute the characterization, but that Cohen “would not do so.”
Cohen tweeted on Monday that he backs the U. S. intelligence community’s findings that Russia interfered in the election, after Trump appeared to side with Putin’s denials of election interference during a press conference with the leader.
Cohen has moved to distance himself from Trump over the past few weeks, fueling speculation that the president’s former fixer may flip on Trump. Cohen is under criminal investigation for alleged financial crimes.
The relationship between the two suffered another blow on Friday when The New York Times reported that Cohen secretly recorded a conversation with Trump shortly before the 2016 election about making a payment to a former Playboy model alleging an affair with Trump.
The recording was seized when federal agents raided Cohen’s offices earlier this year.
Trump knocked Cohen in a tweet Saturday, suggesting that Cohen recording their conversation was „perhaps illegal.“
New York, where the discussion reportedly took place, has a one-party consent law, meaning only one person present has to give consent for a conversation to be recorded.
