Skip to main content

Michael Cohen’s Lawyer Gets into It With Lis Wiehl As He Tries to Explain Stormy Daniels Contract (WATCH)


The attorney for Michael Cohen appeared on the Law&Crime Network to discuss some of his client’s recent legal battles. Cohen, of course, is a personal attorney for Donald Trump, and was famously instrumental in the non-disclosure agreement meant to silence porn star Stormy Daniels. Attorney David Schwartz defended Cohen’s agreement, which is now the subject of a lawsuit, and things got very heated, very quickly. Catch the fireworks in the player above.

The main issue in Daniels’ lawsuit, which Schwartz called “frivolous,” is whether the agreement is a valid contract because Trump didn’t sign it, even though he’s listed as a party. Right off the bat, Schwartz told host Lis Wiehl that not only is the non-disclosure agreement valid, it’s “one of the best non-disclosure agreements I’ve ever read.”

Schwartz insisted that Trump’s signature wasn’t necessary, because the agreement was really between Daniels and EC LLC, the company set up by Cohen. Trump, he claimed, was merely a third-party beneficiary, and there is no controversy here.

Wiehl wasn’t having it.

“Who else does the LLC benefit other than Donald Trump?!” Wiehl asked. She pressed Schwartz on the issue that the only parties that benefited from the agreement were Daniels, who got paid, and Trump, who got Daniels’ silence.

“Can you name anybody else that it benefits?” she asked again.

Schwartz didn’t have an answer for that, and admitted that “the whole point was to protect him,” referring to Trump, but maintained that because Trump was a third-party beneficiary, Cohen did not have to consult with him prior to making the deal. This is another key issue related to the hush money paid to Daniels because if Trump knew about the payment at the time, he could be on the hook for accepting and not reporting an illegal campaign contribution.

After a lengthy debate, neither side moved an inch, but Schwartz insisted that Daniels’ lawsuit is going nowhere, and that the judge “will throw it out in five seconds.”

[Image via Law&Crime Network screengrab]

Have a tip we should know? [email protected]

Filed Under:

Follow Law&Crime: