UNCLASSIEIED EXECUTIVE SESSION PERMANENT SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, WASHINGTON, D.C. PART 2, DEPOSITION OF: MICHAEL COHEN Wednesday, March 6, 2019 Washington, D.C. The deposition in the above matter was held in Room HVC-304, Capitol Visitor Center, commencing at 9:37 a.m. Present: Representatives Schiff, Himes, Sewell, Carson, Speier, Quigley, Swalwell, Castro, Heck, Welch, Maloney, Demings, Krishnamoorthi, Nunes, UNCLASSIFIED 1 UNCLASSIF]ED Conaway, Turner, Wenstrup, Stewart, Crawford, Stefanik, Hurd, and Ratcliffe. UNCLASSI FIED 2 UNCLASSIEIED Appearances: For the PERMANENT SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE: UNCLAS S I FIED 3 UNCLASS I FI ED UNCLASS I F] ED For MICHAEL COHEN: MICHAEL D. MONICO CARLY CHOCRON MONICO & SPEVACK 20 South Clark Street, Suite 700 Chicago, lL 60603 LANNY DAVIS DAVIS GOLDBERG & GALBER 4 UNCLASS 5 I E]ED MR. GOLDMAN: Good morning. This is the continuation of an unclassified transcribed interview of Michael Cohen, which commenced on February 281h,2019. Mr. Cohen, thank you very much for coming to meet with us and testify again today. MR. COHEN: You're welcome. MR. GOLDMAN: My name is Daniel Goldman. I am the senior advisor and director of investigations for the majority staff, and with me is as Nicholas Mitchell, investigative counsel for the majority staff. This interview will be conducted at the unclassified level and taken in executive session. Before we begin, I just want to state a few things for the record. Mr. Cohen, as with your testimony last week, questioning today will be conducted by members and staff during their allotted time period. The process for the interview as is follows. The majority will given to ask questions, then the minority will be given t t hour hour to ask questions as well. Thereafter, the majority will be given 45 minutes to ask questions, and then the minority will be given 45 minutes to ask questions. After that second round, the majority and the minority will alternate in 3O-minute rounds until questioning is complete. There is a court reporter making a record of these proceedings, so we can easily consult a written compilation of your answers, which you will also have access to, Mr. Cohen. But because the reporter cannot record gestures, we ask that you answer all questions verbally. UNCLASS I FI ED UNCLASSIE]ED 6 As you know, you are entitled to have counsel present for you during this interview, and I see that you have brought the same counsel from last time. At this time could the counsel please make your appearances? MR. DAVIS: Lanny Davis. MR. MONICO: Michaet Monico, Monico & Spevack. MS. CHOCRON: Carly Chocron, of [\Ionico & Spevack. MR. GOLDMAN: Thank you. Now, consistent with the committee's rules and procedures, as I said, you will be able to inspect the transcript, but the transcript will remain within the custody of the committee. Finally, you are reminded that it is unlawfulto deliberately provide false information to Members of Congress or staff. And as this interview is under oath, Mr. Cohen, would you please stand and raise your right hand to be sworn in? Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give is the whole truth and nothing but the truth? MR. COHEN: I do. MR. GOLDMAN: Thank you. The record will reflect that the witness has been duly sworn. Mr. Chairman. THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Mr. Cohen, the committee would like to thank you again for volunteering to appear before us again today. We understand your time with them is precious. We also understand that you're in some discomfort after your shoulder surgery. have a separated shoulder and two rotator cuff problems, and I may have to go UNCLASS]FIED I UNCLASSIEIED 7 under the knife, so I can more than relate. We will endeavor to work as expeditiously as possible. As with last week, the scope of the interview is to address matters of interest in the investigation the committee announced on February 6th, 2019, and to allow you to correct your previous testimony before this committee, and to expand upon your testimony last week. We expect all members of the committee will be respectful and anticipate that we will not retread over matters about which you fully testified last week. While we recognize you are here voluntarily, we will expect that you'll answer our questions to the best of your recollection, fully, truthfully and completely. Before we begin, do you have any questions for us. MR. COHEN: No, sir. THE CHAIRMAN: Hearing none, I will invite Mr. Conaway to make any remarks if you would like. MR. CONAWAY: The only remark I have is as far as to the oath that you gave him last week, you left off [inaudible]. THE CHAIRMAN: I don't have the written oath in front of me, but MR. CONAWAY: Typically, it finishes off with, "So help me God," some phrase like that. MR. COHEN: I'll do it again. MR. CONAWAY: Say again? MR COHEN: I'll do it again. MR. CONAWAY: No, no, it's not your problem. MR. GOLDMAN: We understand it's the same oath that was used last UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS 8 I FIED Congress. MR. CONAWAY: Right, I understand. I should have asked you last week as well, but I didn't, and I failed, and I'm guilty of that. But l'm asking this week, does it comport with the committee rules on the oath? THE CHAIRMAN: We will check. I don't know that the committee rules prescribe a certain formula. MR. CONAWAY: Okay. THE CHAIRMAN: Our understanding was this was the same oath used MR. CONAWAY: lt was the same - oath. And as I mentioned, I should have said something last week and failed. THE CHAIRMAN: No, Mr. Conaway, I'm saying my understanding was it was the same oath that we used last session, not last week. But we will check. MR. CONAWAY: Okay. THE CHAIRMAN: As a legal matter, he's obligated to tell the truth, and that's what's most critical here. MR. CONAWAY: So with that, Mr. Chairman, no comments. Thank you. THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, Mr. Goldman. BY MR. GOLDMAN: O Good morning, Mr. Cohen. Now, at the end of your testimony last week you were asked to do several things between then and your testimony today in connection with the written statement that you submitted to this committee on August 28,2017. The committee asked you to review your materials and emails and to provide any copies of those documents related to the written statement that you UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS 9 I F]ED submitted. The committee asked for you to submit a copy of the joint defense agreement, to provide any communications that you had with Jay Sekulow, and then to try to refresh your recollection as to dates and particular details of conversations with Mr. Sekulow in particular. Were you able to do allthat between then and today? A O A Not all of it, no. Okay. So what were you able to provide to the committee? I provided a series of documents to my counsel, who I suspect provided it to your committee. O A And what were those documents, broadly speaking? They dealt with the statement with drafts, as well as additional copies of checks, and some other miscellaneous emails that were responsive to your question. O A O A Okay. Or to your request. And what were you not able to either identify or provide? The exact number of communications with Mr. Sekulow by phone, I don't have those records. I mean, it was a pretty expansive request that you had in a short period of time. MR. GOLDMAN: I would note for the record that the majority staff received these documents 2 days ago, on Monday, March 4th, while the committee and staff were at an offsite. lmmediately upon returning to the Capitol yesterday, the majority provided access to all these documents to the minority that we received. BY MR. GOLDMAN: UNCLASSIFIED 10 UNCLASSIFIED O Mr. Cohen, one thing that we did not receive from you were any written communications between you and Jay Sekulow. Were you able to find any? A O I have not been able to locate, as of yet, and the search is continuing. Okay. One thing that you did provide us and that we are going to go through now are drafts of the written statement that you provided to this committee on August 28th,2017. Now, I believe it was your testimony last week that that draft written statement was circulated among the lawyers involved in the joint defense agreement. ls that right? A That's correct. I also spent a tremendous amount of time looking for a copy of the joint defense agreement, and the harder I looked the less I was able to locate anything showing that that document was actually written. Then I learned that it was not written, it was a verbaljoint defense agreement. O A And how did you learn that? Mr. Davis contacted Mr. Ryan and made the request to find the answer to that. O Did you learn anything more about the nature and extent of this verbal joint defense agreement? A Everyone was going to work together for the common purpose of staying on message. O Was there an agreement as to who would pay for legal bills in connection with that joint defense agreement? A O Yes. Who was to pay for those legal bills? UNCLASS I FIED 11 UNCLASSIFIED A O The Trump Organization or Mr. Trump. And we'll get into some of this later. But to your knowledge, have all the legal bills that your attorney accrued during the pendency of the joint defense agreement been paid by the The Trump Organization? A O A O No. ls there money remaining to be owed to your prior counsel? Yes. Now, just remind us who again were the members of that joint defense agreement? A Steve Ryan, representing myself. You had Jay Sekulow, representing the President. You had Abbe Lowell, representing Jared and lvanka. You had Alan Garten, who was representing The Trump Organization, as well as Alan Futerfas. There might be others, but that's the ones that I recall. O Okay. I would like to turn now to majority exhibit 59, which I'm handing to the witness now. [Majority Exhibit No. 59 was marked for identification.l BY MR. GOLDMAN: O A [Vlr. Cohen, what is this document? lt appears to be an email from Steve Ryan dated August 16th of 2017, time-stamped at 12.48 p.m. Joint defense privilege and work product. l'm also included on this, along with James Commons, who is also over at McDermott, Will & Emory. O And this is one of the documents that you provided to the committee UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS I t2 FIED 2 days ago? A O Yes, sir. Now, in the text of the email from Mr. Ryan to you, he says at the top: "Abbe asks us to affirmatively address in our statement on the 25th, colon." Who is the Abbe that he refers to here? A O A That's Abbe Lowell, representing, again, Jared and lvanka. Okay. And could you read the four things that are listed under there? The first bullet point: "She was not involved in the backs and forths with FS and MC." O A O A O A All right. We'll go one by one. Who is FS? Felix Sater. ls that true? No. Why is that not true? Because she knew about the back and forth, not on all of the back and forth, but on some of it. O A O Perhaps that goes more to bullet point number two? Could you - By the way, I am the MC in the same line. Thank you for clarifying that. Can you read bullet point number two? A Yes. "She did not know FS was involved in the possible project in that country." O A O ls that true? That is not true. So it's your testimony that she was aware that Felix Sater was UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASSIFIED involved in this A O deal? ls that right? That is correct. Did she have any communications, to your knowledge, with Felix Sater about this deal? A O A No, not that I'm aware of. What is bullet point number three? "She was not in any meetings or calls with people putting it together (especially from that country)." O A O A ls that true? No. What is false about it? She engaged in a conversation with the wife of Mr. Klokov, which, while it didn't have to do specifically with Felix Sater, it still had to do with the Trump Tower Moscow project. O A Bullet point number four? "And maybe that, by the, MC knew she was at the least skeptical about him." O A O A O Again, MC is you? Yes, sir. ls that an accurate statement? I don't know the answer to that. lt goes to her thoughts' Had she every stated to you previously that she had any issues or concerns about Felix Sater? A O 13 Yes. What did she say? UNCLASS I FI ED UNCLASS A She didn't particularly care for t4 I F]ED him. And she was one of those who were responsible for Felix being asked to leave the office. O as Okay. Now, below that Mr. Ryan writes: "My response to him was follows: 'Yes, am developing that writing and shared it this a.m. with MC to see if I have it right. MC willwant me to do anything your client asks that is accurate, which is not really an issue - but it may be perceived as awkward to go as specific as your requests. That said, lwill do everything you ask and in the end make sure you really want it. I am hoping to share a version only with you this week before you are swallowed up..."' Do you know what .. oh, and then, sorry, withdrawn. Later, at the bottom it says: "MC can you and you I talk about this later today after you redline our draft to you James sent this a.m." Mr. Cohen, do you remember having a conversation with Steve Ryan as referenced here in this email? A O ldo. And what do you remember discussing with him in that conversation? MR. DAVIS: At the moment we're going to reserve the right to declare an attorney-client privilege conversation that is outside of the joint defense agreement. This would still be within the joint defense agreement, so you can answer that. It's considered by you to be part of the joint defense agreement discussion concerning an email that was within the joint defense agreement, but as to specific advice from your counsel we will at least reserve -MR. COHEN: Got it. We'll reserve the right on that. Okay. MR. DAVIS: lf it comes up in the future. UNCLASS I EI ED UNCLASS 15 I FIED MR. COHEN: The conversation that I had with Mr. Ryan was exactly about this email, which was: This is what Abbe would like us to include. Do you have any objections to any of the bullet points that are enumerated? And my response to him was: Yes, on some of them, and let's take a look at the redline that I'll get later, and then -- it's a work in progress. BY MR. GOLDMAN: O Did you explain to him which of the bullet points you had objections to including? A O We had conversations about everything, yes. ln that conversation, do you recall referencing any of these bullet points? A O I don't recallthat sPecific. Did you - do you understand what he meant by, "it may be perceived as awkward to go as specific as your requests"? A O No, sir. Now, one last question on this document. lt references at the bottom in Mr. Ryan's statement to you that, "after you redline our draft"? Does that refresh your recollection at all as to who drafted -- who initially drafted this statement? A That takes into consideration that this was the very first go-around. There were several, I believe, before this email in terms of the original draft. I believe I drafted the first one, then it was forwarded to Steve and to James Commons. They made some corrections, passed it around to the joint defense agreement, and then the document just morphed. O But this does specifically reference you doing a redline of the draft, UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS 16 I FIED correct? A O A Yes, but that could be a redline of a red-lined draft. Okay. I don't want you to think for a second that this was the very first draft. That's the point I'm trying to make. O Understood. Let's go to majority exhibit 58. [Majority Exhibit No. 58 was marked for identification.l BY MR. GOLDMAN: O A Now, what is this document, Mr. Cohen? So this is a document, an email from Stephen Ryan to me, and again cc'd to James Commons of the same office, dated August 21st of 2017, time-stamped at 2:02 p.m. And this was the current version of the Trump Tower Moscow statement. O A O This is 5 days after the previous exhibit we saw. ls that right? That's correct. And in the text of it, it says that the current version is attached. Then Mr. Ryan writes to you, and I'lljust read it for the record: 'We sort of accepted the changes from Alan and Abbe, with the exception of the specific reference to lvanka, parentheses, quote, 'Similarly, I did not discuss Mr. Sater's recommendations, requests, ideas, or even his involvement in any aspect of this potential project with lvanka Trump, who was then Executive Vice President of Development & Acquisitions at the Organization,' period, end quote, end parentheses. The lvanka sentence was awkward, so we tried to keep the ideas UNCLASSI FIED UNCLASS t7 I FIED but added two safer sentences to address the point." Then Mr. Ryan says, "But is this accurate?" to you? This references Aian and Abbe. Who is Alan? A O A O I believe it's either Alan Futerfas or Alan Garten. And Abbe is once again Abbe Lowell? Yes, sir. Let's turn the page to page 3 of this document, and you see some .. two sentences that are highlighted in yellow. Were those highlights in the original draft that was attached to this email, as far as you know? A Are you talking about the lines, Similarly The Trump Organization had O Yes, the yellow highlighting is what I'm focusing foreign on. That was in the original attachment that you received to this email, correct? A O I don't recall. Okay. Did you add these yellow highlights before providing it to this committee? A O ldid not. So this document is, to your knowledge, that is in front of us now, is the same document with the same highlights that you received as an attachment to this email of August 21st? A O A O A To the best of my knowledge, Yes. And do you know what the highlighted text represents? Yes. What is it? The point of putting this in was to show that, yes, while it might be UNCLASS I F] ED in UNCLASS 18 I FIED Moscow, The Trump Organization also has foreign hotels and golf as well as land projects in the following countries of Canada, lndia, lndonesia, lreland, Panama, Philippines, Scotland, South Korea, Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, and Uruguay. So it was basically to show that Moscow was just another -- or I should say Russia was just another country that The Trump Organization was looking to do a project in. It also - the line preceding it - this is something I do recall having conversation about, that there are quite a few other U.S. companies that have hotels in the Soviet - in Russia, specifically Moscow, the Hyatt, Marriott, the Ritz Carlton Hotel Company. O A O And that original sentence was added after you drafted it? Yes. ls it accurate that The Trump Organization had foreign hotels in all of those countries? A O A O A O A O A O A lt's either hotels or land projects. Okay. What is the definition of land projects? What they're referring to was probably golf courses. So for - Are there golf courses in lndia? No, lndia was going to be a real estate project. And was there a building that had been constructed in lndia yet? Not that l'm aware of. Was there a letter of intent? Yes, I believe that there was a project. And in Canada was there a Trump Organization hotel? Yes, in Toronto. UNCLASS I FIED 19 UNCLASSIFIED O A O A O A O A O A O ln lreland was there a Trump golf course? Yes. ln Panama was there a TrumP Hotel? Yes. ln Scotland were there Trump golf courses? Yes. ln lndonesia, what was there? I'm unaware. That's not a project l'm familiar with. What about the PhiliPPines? l'm unaware of that one as well. I didn't work on that. Okay. And the remaining of these countries - did you know whether this was an accurate statement or not? A O lt was taken off of the website. And these sentences in yellow were added into the written statement. ls that right? A O Yes, that's correct. Let's go to the next page. And there are two additional sentences in yellow. One reads: "l handled all communications with Mr. Sater regarding the potential project and other members of the The Trump Organization were not involved in those discussions." MR. CONAWAY: Excuse me, which page? MR. GOLDMAN: lt's the next page. There are no page numbers. MR. CONAWAY: The next page starts with recollection. MR. GOLDMAN: There must be the page before that. MR. CONAWAY: Yeah, it starts with August2017. UNCLASS I FIED Do you have -- UNCLASS 20 I FIED MR. GOLDMAN: ls it double-sided? Oh, then it's double-sided, sir. lt may be double-sided on yours. MR. CONAWAY: That page says August 17th. MR. COHEN: lthink he's missing a page. He is missing a page. There should be three pages in total. MR. GOLDMAN: ls that true for all of yours? MR. CONAWAY: lbelieve so. MR. GOLDMAN: Okay. We apologize. THE CHAIRMAN: lt should be two full pages and then you're missing a page. MR. GOLDMAN: Our apologies for that. MR. CONAWAY: This was highlighted yellow. This one you gave us originally was not. MR. GOLDMAN: No, our apologies for that. So does everybody see this first highlighted sentence beginning with, "l handled all communications"? BY MR. GOLDMAN: O A O A Was that an accurate statement, Mr. Cohen? No, it's not. What is not accurate about that? Other members of The Trump Organization were not involved in those discussions. O What other members of The Trump Organization had communications or conversations with Felix Sater? A Well, no, no, the sentence reads, "l handled all communications with UNCLASSIFIED 2T UNCLASSI FIED Mr. Sater regarding the potential project and other members of The Trump Organization were not involved in those discussions." lt's not accurate because I furthered the discussions after speaking with Mr. Sater, to Mr. Trump, to Don Trump, Jr., and to lvanka, as well as other members of The Trump Organization. O So is it fair to say that you define the word "discussions" as being broader than the communications directly with Mr. Sater? A O Yes. And you relayed the substance of those communications to members of The Trump Organization. ls that your testimony? A O Yes. And then the next sentence says, that's in yellow, says: "As a result, did not feel that it was necessary to apprise others within The Trump Organization of Mr. Sater's claims." I believe it's on the same topic. ls that an accurate statement? A O No, for the same reason. Did you specifically inform lvanka Trump about the conversations with Mr. Sater and the progress on the project? A I did, not to the extent that I spoke with Mr. Trump, but yes, she had knowledge. O Was it your understanding that these sentences were added to assuage Abbe Lowell's concerns about the language regarding lvanka Trump? A Yes, to the best of my recollection these were requests by Abbe Lowell. O Do you know why Abbe Lowell wanted to insert this, the information about lvanka Trump? UNCLASS I FIED I UNCLASS A O I 22 ] FIED do not know what he was thinking, no. But what he wrote in that sentence, in the email on the first page, the quote that Stephen Ryan has there, that "l did not discuss," meaning, "1," being Michael Cohen, "did not discuss Mr. Sater's recommendations, requests, ideas, or even his involvement in any aspect of this potential project with lvanka Trump." ls that an accurate statement? A O No. All right. Let's move on to exhibit 50. [Majority Exhibit No. 50 was marked for identification.l BY MR. GOLDMAN: O And if you could just take a look that document, Mr. Cohen. What is this document, sir? A This is an emailfrom Steve Ryan, dated August 22nd, time-stamped at 4:06 p.m., to me. O A O A And is this another document that you provided to the committee? Yes, sir. Could you please read the text of the document - of the email, rather? "Felix would like," in quotes, "'salesmanship' instead of," again in quotes, "'puffing.' He confirmed factual" -- "factually" -- "accuracy of doc." The next line, secular -- O Let's stop there. Let's go one by one. Who is Felix referenced in this email? A O Felix Sater. And this is an email from your attorney to you about this written UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASS I FIED 23 statement to the House lntelligence Committee. ls that correct? A O That's correct. Were you aware at the time that Felix Sater was going to receive a copy of a draft written statement and comment on it? A I'm not certain if it was Felix who received it or when he refers to Felix he's referring to Robert Wolff, who was Felix Sater's attorney. O Was it your understanding that Felix Sater was included in the joint defense agreement? A O A O Felix Sater was not included in the joint defense agreement. Okay. To the best of my knowledge. But here we have Felix Sater, either through himself or his attorney, weighing in on the written statement that you are submitting to the committee about the Trump Tower Moscow. ls that right? A O A That's correct. Let's move on then to the next sentence. "Sekulow liked doc. Suggested we change all," and in quotes, "'project' references to," and again in quotes, "'proposal.' I think that is okay." O Now, prior to August 22nd,2017 , had you had a number of conversations with Jay Sekulow about this written statement? A O A O Yes. And describe the nature and the substance of those conversations? Just about language that was going to be used in the statement. And I believe you testified last Thursday, February 28th, that you had specifically discussed the date that the Trump Tower Moscow project ended to be UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS I FIED 24 January 2016 with Jay Sekulow. ls that correct? A O A O Amongst other things, yes. And that was not accurate. ls that right? That's correct. Did you also discuss how many conversations you should represent that you had with the President about Trump Tower Moscow with Jay Sekulow? A I don't recall if we discussed the exact number, but the purpose was to limit the number so that, again, it diminished any relationship that Mr. Trump has or had with Russia. O So this was -- in this August 22nd email, this was not the first time that Jay Sekulow had -- was made aware of the substance of the written statement. ls that right? A O A O A O A That's correct. And then could you read the next sentence, please. Alan G. asked for a Word version, implying he had edits. And remind us who Alan G. is again. Alan G. is Alan Garten, G-a-rt-e-n. And the last sentence, please. No word from Abbe, in brackets, picking a jury for Menendez today, and Alan F. O A O A O And Abbe is Abbe Lowell? That's correct. Who's Alan F? Alan Futerfas. l'd like to show you now exhibit 62. UNCLASS I FI ED UNCLASSIFIED 25 Do you need a break? A Yes, just 2 seconds. I'll be right back. IRecess.] MR. GOLDMAN: Turning your attention to exhibit 62. [Majority Exhibit No. 62 was marked for identification.l BY MR. GOLDMAN: O A What is this document, Mr. Cohen? Again, this is an emailfrom Steve Ryan to me, cc'd to James Commons, dated Wednesday, August 23rd of 2017, time-stamped at 11:57 a.m. O A What is the subject of the email? "Subject: Per joint interest privilege version.3 redline and clean copies attached." O So I'll read the substance of it quickly. "Going thru the death of a thousand cuts with other lawyers. Here is latest. Only one not addressed as yet is Lowell." At the end he says: "That said this is pretty rock solid now for having everyone's thoughts." lf you could turn the page, Mr. Cohen -- well, sorry, before we get there. The statement, only one not addressed as yet is Lowell, what did you understand that to mean? A That the issue relating to lvanka's knowledge of the project had still not been fully addressed. O But when he says, "Only one not addressed as yet is Lowell," is that an indication that the other members of the joint defense agreement have UNCLASSI FIED UNCLASS 25 I FIED addressed this statement? A O A O lt appears so, yes. And did they approve of this statement? lt appears so. Now, just turning to the document that's attached, there are a number of edits in a redline on the two pages. I just want to be sure, you guys have both pages of the statement at this time. Okay. I want to focus mostly on the text that's crossed out at the top of the first page. There's a sentence there that references the fact that the proposal had nothing to do with any alleged, quote, "collusion," unquote, with Russia regarding the U.S. Presidentialelection. Do you recall any conversation -- A O A O Can you draw my attention to where you're referring? Sorry, that's the - The top? Yeah, the top. And it appears to be moved to the very end of the document on the next page. Do you recall any conversations about including any references to collusion or alleged collusion with Russia during the Presidential election in this statement either with your lawyer A O - Actually, I don't understand your question. I'm just focusing your attention on the sentence that references alleged collusion during the campaign. A O Yes. My question is, do you recall any conversations that you had with your UNCLASS I FI ED UNCLASS I FIED 27 attorney about other members of the joint defense agreement opining on whether to include such a sentence? A O A O A O A Yes. And what do you recall? That this language was requested to be inserted into the document. Why? They just felt it would make the statement rock solid. What do you mean by rock solid? As it states in the email, that this would be a good statement and one that everybody thought would do the trick, which was to stay on message and to resolve the .- or hopefully resolve the issue of what this committee was looking to obtain back during the first hearing. O So is it fair to say that one of the purposes of this letter was to distance Trump Tower Moscow from any allegations of collusion with Russia during the campaign? A As well as to distance Mr. Trump from any relationships, any contacts, anything to do with Russia. O A O So it's both aspects of that? Yes. That's my understanding. And is that your understanding from conversations that were relayed to you by members of the joint defense agreement? A O A Were relayed to me by my counsel -Right. -- who engaged in the conversations with members of the joint defense agreement. UNCLASS I F]ED UNCLASSIF]ED O got to ljust want to understand who that message was coming from once it you. Was it your attorney himself or was it the members of the joint defense agreement? A O A O A O A O lt came from my attorneys as well as additional individual. An additional individual? From the joint defense. Who was that individual? That would have been Jay Sekulow. You had specific conversations with Jay Sekulow to that effect? Yes. All right. Let's now go to exhibit 61. UNCLASSIFIED 28 UNCLASS I FI 29 ED [Majority Exhibit No. 61 was marked for identification.l BY MR. GOLDMAN: O A What is this document, sir? This is an emailfrom Stephen Ryan to me on my birthday, August 25th of 2017, time-stamped at 11:50 a.m., and it is cc'd to Jay Sekulow and James Commons, with the subject headline of: "Per joint defense and work product." O Was Jay Sekulow cc'd on any of the other emails that we had seen today? A O Not that l'm aware of. And then the text of the email says: "Per our discussion this a.m. Let me know if I missed anything or my adds are not okay." Do you recall having a discussion with Steve Ryan on your birthday in2017 about this document? A O I don't recall a specific conversation, no. Do you recall having a conversation with Jay Sekulow around that time? A O I don't recall. Let's move now to what is actually page 4 of this document, which is the redline version. And in the upper right-hand corner it says draft v.2, crossed out, and then there's a A O 4. So this is version 4. !s that right? That's what the document states, yes. The bottom of the third paragraph there is a sentence that reads: UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS I FIED 30 "The decision to pursue the proposal initially, and later to abandon it, was unrelated to the Donald J. Trump for President Campaign." And it does not appear -- oh, yes, that was then added again near the end of the document after the prior sentence that we discussed about alleged collusion was removed. Mr. Cohen, do you recall any conversations about this particular change, and in particular, changing the language related to collusion, removing that word from the document? A O I don't recallthe specific conversation, no. But it is accurate that the word "collusion" was removed from the document -- A Yes. O - in this finalversion? A Yes. But I do recall that it was moved to the end of the statement for effect purposes. O A O What effect was it intended to have by moving it to the end? Put it at the end. lt's the last thing the people look at or hear. Now, let's look again at exhibit 44, which is the final statement that was introduced last time. Now, do you recall that this is the statement that you ultimately submitted to the committee? A O I believe so, yes. And if we go to the last paragraph, we see there that sentence that was inserted in the most recent draft: "The decision to pursue the proposal initially, and later to abandon it, was unrelated to the Donald J. Trump for President Campaign." Do you see that? UNCLASS I FIED 31 UNCLASSI F]ED A O A O ldo, So that was ultimately included in the final draft. ls that right? Yes. Do you recallwhether there was anything different from the August 25th redline draft we just looked at and this final draft of August 28th? A O I would need a redline version. Now, last time, last week when you testified, we went through some of the false statements that were included in this document, including the end date of January 2016. A O Do you recall that? ldo. Now, having had some time to think about the statement a little bit more and the conversations surrounding the statement, I want to ask you again, who suggested Janua ry 2016 as the date for you to include as the end of the Trump Tower Moscow project? A O A O A O To the best of my recollection it was Jay Sekulow' Did you discuss that date with anyone else? My counsel. Anyone other than Your counsel? Not that I recall. And ultimately -- ultimately is it your understanding that all of the lawyers in the JDA signed off on this statement? A O To the best of my knowledge, Yes. And it is your understanding that all of them knew that there were materially false statements, including in this statement? A Yes. UNCLASSIF]ED UNCLASS MR. DAVIS: Could 32 I FIED l: [Discussion off the record.] MR. COHEN: Oh, I apologize. The answer is no. I don't know that they all knew, ljust knew that some knew. BY MR. GOLDMAN: O A Who do you know that knew? Abbe Lowell, Jay Sekulow, and I'm unsure as to whether or not Alan Garten or Alan Futerfas knew any of the specifics. I'm just not sure. They might have, but I'm not sure. O But Alan Garten and Alan Futerfas were the lawyers for The Trump Organization. ls that correct? A I believe so, yes. O SoA I don't know if Alan Garten was representing Don Trump, Jr. at the time and Alan Futerfas was representing The Trump Organization or backwards, ! never figured that out. O Okay. Well, Donald Trump, Jr. worked at The Trump Organization, right? A O Correct. And they would obviously have access to emails of The Trump Organization, correct? A O Yes. And there were emails -- on your Trump Organization email, related to the Trump Tower Moscow project, that were post-dated January 2016, right? A Correct. UNCLASSIFIED 33 UNCLASSI FIED O And so as assuming they are competent lawyers, they would have known that the date of January 2016 was not actually the date that the Trump Tower Moscow project ended? ls that right? A O Correct. You referenced last time that Felix Sater - that you had text messages with Felix Sater in January of 2016, including one where you said that you're finished with A O this. ls that right? That's correct. Who else, other than you and potentially Felix Sater, might have been in possession of those text messages? A O A O A Only government authorities. Did you send those around as part of the joint defense agreement? I don't recall. I don't recall. Okay. ln your testimony last week you also mentioned -I'm sorry. They would have had it based upon the seizure of my phones during the raid. And so, yes, it was definitely made part of the joint defense agreement, during the document production. O A O A O A O So let's get our dates straight, the raid was April gth, 2018? Very good. Yes. No, 17. The raid was April 9th -Oh, yes, I'm sorry. 2018, yes. The statement here is August 28th,2017? Correct. So whatever they may have seen based on the raid was well after both your written statement and your testimony to this committee? UNCLASS TFIED 34 UNCLASSIF]ED A O That's correct. Last week you testified that you may have spoken to Hope Hicks about this statement. Do you have any further recollection about whether you did or not? A O I don't. I'm still looking for emails. And last week you also confirmed in your testimony that Jay Sekulow told you that Donald Trump had seen the statement before it was issued and that Sekulow told you that, quote, "the client likes it, and that it's good." Do you recall that? A I don't know if I used the world seen as much as he was advised of the statement. O And why do you draw that distinction between seen the statement and advised about the statement? A I'm not sure whether or not he actually read it or he was just advised of the content. O Did Jay Sekulow ever relay to you any thoughts or messages that Donald Trump conveyed about the false statements included in this written statement? A O Not that I recall. All right. MR. GOLDMAN: Now, before I move on to some additional questions on the derivation of the statement, Mr. Chairman, I'd like to ask if you or any of the other members have any additional questions. THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Mr. Cohen, one of the first documents that Mr. Goldman showed you was UNCLAS S I F]ED UNCLASS I FIED 35 an emailfrom Abbe Lowell suggesting certain statements be included in your written testimony about lvanka Trump's non-involvement in the Trump Tower deal Do you recall that document? MR. COHEN: Yes. THE CHAIRMAN: You testified that a number of those statements were false. ls that correct? MR. COHEN: Three of the four. THE CHAIRMAN: Now, Abbe Lowellwas representing lvanka at the time, correct? MR. COHEN: Yes. And Jared. THE CHAIRMAN: And Jared. Abbe Lowellwould have discussed these matters presumably with his clients? MR. COHEN: Absolutely. I believe so. THE CHAIRMAN: Would he have independent knowledge, apart from discussing with them, whether lvanka was involved in any discussions of the Trump Tower Moscow deal? MR. COHEN: Not that I'm aware of. THE CHAIRMAN: So you would not have had discussions with Abbe Lowell about lvanka's involvement apart from these written communications? MR. COHEN: No. THE CHAIRMAN: So these false statement that he was proposing to you, if they came from anywhere, would have had to have come from lvanka? MR. COHEN: lt's plausible, yes. THE CHAIRMAN: And you've testified that lvanka was knowing that Felix Sater was involved in trying to make this deal happen, correct? UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS 36 ] EIED MR. COHEN: That's correct. THE CHAIRMAN: And how would she have been knowing of Felix Sater's involvement? Would you have briefed her periodically on the progress of the deal, which would involve what you were learning from Felix Sater? MR. COHEN: She was briefed on a handful of occasions. Again, not nearly to the extent that I discussed it with her father. But the project was put into a spreadsheet of active potential projects. So, yes, she knew about it. Yes, we spoke about it. On top of that, she was also going to be included in the project because the spa was going to be named the lvanka Spa, and she was interested also in ensuring that the property would be architecturally designed by, as I told you, someone like Zaha Hadid, a starchitect, as well as wanting to be involved in the interior design and decoration of the property. THE CHAIRMAN: Was that her role in other projects as well, to be involved with the spa? MR. COHEN: Yes. THE CHAIRMAN: And did you have discussions with her about the spa in this Moscow Trump Tower? MR. COHEN: Not to my recollection because that's not something I would get involved with, spa design. THE CHAIRMAN: But she was aware that the project contemplated a spa? MR. COHEN: Yes. THE CHAIRMAN: Now, she would have also been aware that that the - well, let me ask you this. Was she also aware UNCLASS]FIED that the discussions over the UNCLASS I FIE 37 D project continued after January? MR. COHEN: Yes. THE CHAIRMAN: So you kept her apprised periodically after January of what was happening with the deal? MR. COHEN: Yes. THE CHAIRMAN: And was this true of Jared as well? MR. COHEN: Not with Jared, no, not that I recall. THE CHAIRMAN: Now, I think you said that both Lowell and Sekulow would have been aware that the end date that was being put fonruard, the false end day of January, before the lowa caucus, that both Sekulow and Lowellwould have been aware that that was false. How would they have been aware of that? MR. COHEN: Well, they are familiar with the date of the lowa caucus, and communications with their clients far exceeded that specific date. THE CHAIRMAN: Thank You. Other members? Ms. Speier. MS. SPEIER: How many conversations -MR. COHEN: Can ljust add one additional thing? THE CHAIRMAN: Yes, MR. COHEN: I don't know whether or not it's been turned over to you, but I learned of an email that exists as well, and it's dated August 23rd of 2017, and it's an email between Abbe Lowell as well as Steve Ryan. And the sum and substance of the email is Abbe Lowell then trying to have inserted into the statement the words, "nor any of his family," being that we had removed that statement that you have seen in one of the other drafts. UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASS 38 I FIED One hour later, Steve Ryan replies back to him, no, and we're not going to include that statement. l'm sorry, he didn't say no, he just deleted it. THE CHAIRMAN: And, Mr. Cohen, how are you aware of this email? MR. COHEN: Mr. Ryan stated that to Mr. Davis and saw the document. THE CHAIRMAN: But you don't have the document to produce today? MR. COHEN: I don't have possession of that document. I can get it. l'll ask. THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you, we'd would appreciate that. Ms. Speier. MS. SPEIER: Thank you. MR. COHEN: I'm sorry. MS. SPEIER: So both Jay Sekulow and Abbe Lowell knew that the discussions about Trump Tower Moscow went on past January 2016? MR. COHEN: I believe so, yes. MS. SPEIER: Before drafting your statement, how many conversations did you have with Jay Sekulow? MR. COHEN: Many conversations. MS. SPEIER: Here we go again. Was it five? MR. COHEN: No, more. MS. SPEIER: Ten? Fifteen? MR. COHEN: Somewhere in that area, yes, ma'am. MS. SPEIER: Fifteen conversations. And he did counselyou on the kinds of things you should put in your statement? MR. COHEN: We spoke about the things that should go in the statement, UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS 39 I F]ED yes. MS. SPEIER: Do you recall what some of those requests were of Mr. Sekulow? MR. COHEN: We spoke about the entire statement. MS. SPEIER: So clearly the date? MR. COHEN: Yes, ma'am. MS. SPEIER: Anything specific that you can recal! that he wanted in the statement? MR. COHEN: Stay on message. Minimum contact. No Russia. No collusion. Nothinghere. MS. SPEIER: Why did you write the email to Felix Sater in January saying you were finished? MR. COHEN: Was that in January or in December of 2015? MS. SPEIER: Whenever you wrote that email, I don't have it in front of me right now. MR. COHEN: I was waiting for the information on the piece of property, which he had assured me that I was going to be receiving. I was on vacation with my family and he continuously contacted me. Again, each time that I was waiting for that specific piece of property location that they either owned or controlled, it never came, and at one point I just sort of had enough and I said to him, I have to put a stop, you know, to these phone calls. MS. SPEIER: How often did you brief Donald Trump, project after January of 2016? MR. COHEN: More than a handful of times. UNCLASS I FIED Sr. about the UNCLASS 40 I FIED MS. SPEIER: So at least six times? MR. COHEN: Sure. MS. SPEIER: Okay. MR. COHEN: Approximately. MS. SPEIER: lyield back. MR. COHEN: lf I can just also modify one thing. When you asked me the question about the lawyers who knew, and I said all, and then I modified it to say that Jay Sekulow and Alan Garten, ! want to exclude in that as well Steve Ryan from -[Discussion off the record.] MR. COHEN: I meant to exclude Steve Ryan from that? MR. GOLDMAN: Exclude him from what? MR. COHEN: That he did not know it was false. Your question was just overly broad and I answered it even broader. So he wanted to -MR. GOLDMAN: Steve Ryan did not know that it was a false statement? MR. COHEN: Correct. I did not tell him. THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Cohen, ljust want to clarify, for the record, I think that you earlier testified that those you were confident knew that the date was false were Abbe Lowell and Jay Sekulow, but I think you just said Alan Garten. Were those the two attorneys you meant to identify? MR. COHEN: Yes. THE CHAIRMAN: And of the other attorneys in the joint defense agreement -MR. COHEN: As lsaid, I'm unsure. UNCLASS I FIED 47 UNCLASSIFIED [10:37 a.m.] MR. SWALWELL: Mr. Cohen, during the period of this joint defense agreement, in addition to these emails, did you have any conversations with lawyers or anyone in the Trump family that were not by email but, perhaps, secure communications? MR. COHEN: Not that I am aware of, no. MR. SWALWELL: And have you deleted anything since the beginning of the Mueller investigation through when the raid happened, whether intentionally or unintentionally, relating to this agreement or discussion about your statement? MR. COHEN: Not that I'm aware of, no. MR. SWALWELL: Yield back. THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Carson. MR. CARSON: Mr. Cohen, how frequently did you communicate with General Smykoff (ph)? MR. COHEN: With who? MR. CARSON: Am I saying his name correctly, General Smykoff? MR. COHEN: I don't know who Mr. Smykoff is. MR. CARSON: Mr. Smykoff was a contact of Mr. Sater. You spoke to him a few times over the phone. MR. COHEN: Mr. Smykoff? MR. CARSON: Former general, former military officer. MR. COHEN: I'm not aware I ever spoke to Mr. Smykoff. MR. CARSON: Okay. According to a New York Times article, Mr. Sater set up a phone call between you, himself, and if I'm saying his name correctly, Mr. Smykoff, in which he needed passport information from you. UNCLASSI FIED 42 UNCLASSIFIED THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Carson, if I could just suggest, we only have a few minute remaining in the round. We will be going through all those documents on the Trump Tower deal. Can we defer that question until then? MR. CARSON: Certainly. THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Mr. Welch. MR. WELCH: Just to follow up a little bit on the January/June, what you said is your lawyer, Mr. Ryan, did not know that January was false? MR. COHEN: That's correct. I never told Mr. Ryan that. MR. WELCH: And you said Sekulow did know it was false, and that Lowell knew it was false. ls that correct? MR. COHEN: That is correct. MR. WELCH: All right. what's the basis upon which you say sekulow knew it was false? MR. COHEN: Well, two reasons: One, they had all of the emails and all of the communications. All of my documents were in the custody and control of the Trump Organization. The only documents that we got were the ones that were turned over to the joint defense agree - to the joint defense group. And that's what we worked off of. MR. WELCH: So Mr. Lowell and Mr. Sekulow both had documents showing ongoing communications after June -- or after January? MR. COHEN: That, as well as Mr. Lowell had spoken with his client, which is where the four bullet points, three of which I identified are false. MR. WELCH: And then finally, what was the process that you went through to go to January as opposed to June? UNCLASS I FIED 43 UNCLASSIFIED MR. COHEN: I'm sorry, sir, I don't understand what you're -MR. WELCH: Well, there had to be some discussion. You knew it was June. You put down January. And you had to go through, with or without others, a process to decide to put down January as opposed to June. MR. COHEN: Sir, there were two reasons why: lt comported with the text messages that the counsel member was just referring to where I had stated to Mr. Sater that we're done. We were able to use that as a benchmark. But the second reason was, as Mr. Sekulow had explained, just let's keep it to that date, which is prior to the lowa caucus. MR. WELCH: All right. So basically, you had a piece of documentary evidence, the text, that appeared to give a definitive end, when, in fact, you had other documents that showed it was continuing. So you backed into the - you backed into the text message of January in order to have a justification for it? MR. COHEN: Correct. MR, WELCH: Thank you. THE CHAIRMAN: We are almost out of time. One last question that will get into a little further Mr. Welch's point. You've identified emails that postdate the January stop point of your testimony, correct? MR. COHEN: Correct. THE CHAIRMAN: A number of those emails were never turned over to our committee in the document production. Do you know who was responsible for the document production and who would have withheld those documents from this committee? MR. COHEN: Alan Futerfas and Alan Garten. UNCLASS I F]ED UNCLASS I FIE THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. 44 D that concludes our time, and I'll turn I think it over to the minority. MR. NUNES: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. lwill yield to Ms. Stefanik. MS. STEFANIK: Thank you, Ranking Member Nunes. Thank you, Mr. Cohen, for your patience today. Shifting gears a bit here, I wanted to follow up on your testimony last week regarding the 12 hours' worth of in-person meetings with the Democratic staff of this committee. Do you recallthat you testified within the last 2 months you met on four separate occasions? MR. COHEN: Approximately four, yes. MS. STEFANIK: Approximately four. And do you recall, you also testified that there was approximately 4 or 5 hours of active conversation in total? MR. COHEN: Yes, ma'am. MS. STEFANIK: And at least one of those four meetings was approximately an hour? MR. COHEN: Yes. That was the day that I had - I was sick. MS. STEFANIK: Do you also recallthat you then corrected the record and expanded about how many hours, in total, 12 hours of in-person meetings? MR. COHEN: Yes, because the other approximate 7 hours was reviewing the transcript, which the committee was kind enough to bring to me, because I couldn't come to D.C. MS. STEFANIK: Thank you for that. I want to drill down on the specifics, to the best of your recollection, of each of these four meetings, to ensure that -MR. COHEN: However, I don't recommend reviewing documents on UNCLASS I FIED 45 UNCLASSIFIED Percocet. MS. STEFANIK: I appreciate that recommendation. So I want to drill down on the specifics, to the best of your recollection, of each of these four meetings, to ensure that we have all the details right and that you're able to answer to the best of your ability. So do you recall you testified that these four meetings happened within the last two months? MR. COHEN: Yes. But as I said, it was either four or five. MS. STEFANIK: Four or five. When was the first meeting, approximately? ln January? ln February? MR. COHEN: I believe it was January. MS. STEFANIK: ln January. And where - do you recallyou testified that meeting was in New York in person? MR. COHEN: Yes. MS. STEFANIK: And where specifically was that in New York? MR. COHEN: At the Lowe's Regency Hotel, in the conference room. MS. STEFANIK: And who attended specifically? MR. COHEN: At the time, Mr. Goldman. l'm sure he can answer. I don't know off the top of my head the other - my attorney was there, ltlike Monico and Carly. [Witness confers with counsel.] MR. COHEN: I was there as well. MS. STEFANIK: Did the HPSCI Democratic staff members communicate that they were representing this committee and Chairman Schiff? MR. COHEN: I don't know that that ever came up in terms of a topic. UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS I F]ED 46 MS. STEFANIK: Well, let me ask you about how did this meeting come about? Was this meeting at your request, or was it at the request of the committee staff? MR. COHEN: I believe it's at the committee's. I prefer not to be here. MS. STEFANIK: Drilling down on the specifics of the request, was that via email to your attorneys? How did that come about? MR. COHEN: Mr. Davis was contacted by staff. MS. STEFANIK: Mr. Davis was contacted by staff? MR. COHEN: Yes, and it was then relayed to me. MS. STEFANIK: And the initial contact, what was the purpose of the meeting that was communicated to Mr. Davis? MR. COHEN: ln order to get my testimony. And it made sense to voluntarily come in, because the chairman preferred not to subpoena me. MR. MONICO: By get testimony, you mean the transcript? MR. COHEN: The transcript. MS. STEFANIK: To have an opportunity for you to review the transcript? MR. COHEN: Correct. MS. STEFANIK: So as you went into this first meeting that was in approximately January of this year, describe the nature of the meetinE. When the meeting took place, did it begin with you reviewing your testimony? Was there any discussion prior to you reviewing your testimony? MR. COHEN: Can you break that question down, because -MS. STEFANIK: Sure. So, to the best of your knowledge, describe the nature of the meeting. When the meeting took place, did it simply begin with you reviewing your testimony? UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS I FI 47 ED MR. COHEN: To the best of my knowledge, I believe so. MS. STEFANIK: At any point was there any discussion regarding the types of questions that would be asked of you? MR. COHEN: Not specific questions. More the topics that they were going to - they were curious about the Trump Tower Moscow project. Everything that we're kind of going through here is topics that we were curious what we were going to be - what I was going to be questioned on. MS. STEFANIK: And that is consistent with your testimony last do want to drill down on those topics a bit more week. I today. So you talked about how it was communicated the topics that would be covered, Do you recall any specific topics in detail? MR. COHEN: The joint defense agreement. MS. STEFANIK: And what specifically was discussed? MR. COHEN: Whether or not it was written, or if it was verbal. I didn't know an answer. MS. STEFANIK: Very similar to the line of questions that they asked today? MR. COHEN: Yes. They asked whether or not -- because they wanted me to produce that document to the committee. MS. STEFANIK: So they counseled you on the types of questions they would be asking today? MR. COHEN: No. No, ma'am. That's a topic. MS. STEFANIK: But they did discuss with you the content or the topics and the themes of the lines of questions in order to ensure that you were prepared? UNCLASSI FIED UNCLASS I FI 48 ED MR. COHEN: No. MS. STEFANIK: So what did they discuss regard - MR. COHEN: Again, topics, because what they wanted was to see whether or not there was a written joint defense agreement. We - I didn't have it. So these are things that were brought to my attention by this committee in order to produce additional documents that I may be in possession of. MS. STEFANIK: So at no -- is it your testimony today that at no point they discussed the topics of potential questions they would be asking? MR, COHEN: No, they did discuss topics of potential questions, which is -- there's only five, six specific topics plus - MS. STEFANIK: So what are those five, six specific topics? The first was the joint defense agreement you just referenced. MR. COHEN: Trump Tower Moscow. MS. STEFANIK: Trump Tower Moscow. That's two. MR. COHEN: What else? We spoke about - what else? Do you have the other notes? [Witness confers with counsel.] MR. COHEN: I'm sorry, I don't remember specifically, but I remember it was more than just two or three. lt was, like, a handful of topics. MS. STEFANIK: You don't recal! any of the - if there were five topics, you only recalltwo? MR. COHEN: Off the top right now, yes. I believe the first meeting was reviewing the transcript. I spent about 6, 7 hours reviewing. I think it's like 330-some odd pages. And as lwas reading through, lwas making notes. And then at the end, we engaged in a conversation about additional documents that UNCLASS I FIED I 49 UNCLASSIFIED may or may not be able to provide. MS. STEFANIK: As you were reviewing the documents, did you ask questions of the Democratic House -MR. COHEN: I apologize. lt was 180 or 200 pages. 300 was the Senate. MS. STEFANIK: Thanks for the clarification. As you were reviewing your testimony, the 180 pages, at any point, did you ask specific questions of not your counsel, but the Democratic committee counsel? MR. COHEN: I know we spoke. Specifically - MS. STEFANIK: And what was the nature of that conversation? MR. COHEN: I don't recallthe specific conversations, but, yeah, we're all sitting in a room. lt's 7-plus hours. Yes, I engaged in a conversation as well. MS. STEFANIK: Okay. So this first meeting was 7-plus hours? MR. COHEN: Yes, approximatelY. MS. STEFANIK: And approximately how much of the 7 hours was reviewing the testimony, if you were to break it down from the MR. COHEN: No, the 7 hours was the review of. - And then there was additional time that we spent together. MS. STEFANIK: Okay. Let's transition to the second meeting. So that was the first meeting. How was it determined that a second meeting was necessary? MR. COHEN: That was communicated between the committee and my counsel. MS. STEFANIK: And the second meeting took place approximately how long after the first meeting? UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS 50 I F]ED MR. COHEN: The next day. MS. STEFANIK: Next day. And how long did the second meeting last? MR. COHEN: A long time. MS. STEFANIK: Approximately how many hours? [Witness confers with counsel.J MR. COHEN: Approximately 6 hours. MS. STEFANIK: And similar to the first meeting, was the majority of that meeting reading your testimony? MR. COHEN: Some of it. MS. STEFANIK: And then what was the rest of the meeting? MR. COHEN: Discussing the topics in the testimony. MS. STEFANIK: Do you recall, again, going back to the topics questions, how many hours were spent discussing the topics? MR. COHEN: The balance. MS. STEFANIK: And the balance would be approximately how many hours? [Witness conferred with counsel.] MR. COHEN: About 2, 3 hours. MS. STEFANIK: Two, 3 hours. Can you describe the nature of that 2-, 3-hour long conversation? MR. COHEN: Friendly, cordial. MS. STEFANIK: And the subject matters? That's a lot of time. That's why I'm asking. ln addition to the broad two subjects of the five that you've recalled, can you provide details, to the best of your knowledge, about the substance of that conversation? UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS I FI 51 ED MR. COHEN: They asked me some, you know, questions in terms of documents that I may have, additional documents, took notes to see whether or not I had those - you know, those documents. That's about the best of my recollection on that. MS. STEFANIK: At any point, was there any discussion of your - of their questions that they planned to ask when you appeared before the committee? MR. COHEN: I'm sorry? MS. STEFANIK: At any point in this 2- to 3-hour long discussion, was there any reference to potential questions that you would be asked at this testimony? MR. COHEN: Felix Yes. And, again, it goes back to topics. We talked about Sater. We talked about, you know, he asked me how -- you know, how did you know him? MS. STEFANIK: What did you talk about regarding Felix Sater? MR. COHEN: How do you know him? How did he know Mr. you have any additional documents that you could provide to us? Trump? Do Exactly some of the topics that we're talking about today. MS. STEFANIK: Exactly. So very similar to the topics that we are discussing today and the lines of questioning today. MR. COHEN: By the way, it was actually one of the topics of conversation that got me to look into the box, which is where I found those personalfinancial statements that you see on television. MS. STEFANIK: Thank you for that. That's the second meeting. Moving on to the third meeting, approximately when was the third meeting, and why was there a follow-up for the third meeting? Was it similar to going from UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASS 52 I FIED the first to the second? MR. COHEN: That's the one where I was sick with the flu, yes. MS. STEFANIK: And for reference, you did testify last week that this meeting was directly after your surgery. Do you recall that testimony? MR. COHEN: Yes. MS. STEFANIK: Okay. And do you recall that in your testimony, this was the meeting that you said was approximately 12 hours? MR. COHEN: No. MS. STEFANIK: No? MR. COHEN: No. The one where I reviewed the transcript was .. and the next day. MS. STEFANIK: Okay. So I do want to give you an opportunity to clarify for the record, because you testified : should I introduce this as an exhibit? So I want to introduce this as minority exhibit No. 3, I believe it would would just be the transcript page 49 of your testimony last week. be. lt I'll wait until you are able to see a copy of it. [Minority Exhibit No. 3 was marked for identification.l MS. STEFANIK: Yes, this particular excerpt is from 59. MR. BITAR: To clarify for the record, the minority is introducing an excerpt of last week's interview. The witness has not had a chance to review his transcript after his interview. So to confirm, Mr. Cohen, this will be the first time that you review your own testimony from last week. ls that correct? MR. COHEN: Correct. UNCLAS S I E]ED 53 UNCLASSIFIED MR. BITAR: Okay, thank you. MR. COHEN: I don't have a page 59. MR. MONICO: Fifty-nine is the last page of this document? MS. STEFANIK: I betieve so. I'll give you a moment to read that, Mr. Cohen. MR. COHEN: Page 59? MS. STEFANIK: Yes, your quote at the bottom starting with: "l had met with staff on the Democratic side." [Witness reviewed the document.] MS. STEFANIK: Are you all set? MR. COHEN: Yes. MS. STEFANIK: The reason I'm asking this is ljust want to give you the opportunity to address this, because the testimony last week, as you've just read, says that the 12-hour meeting was the one after your surgery, but in your testimony today, you're saying that the 12-hour meeting, just to clarify, was that first document review time period? MR. COHEN: lt was 2 days, and it was directly after my surgery, yes. MS. STEFANIK: Okay. So - MR. COHEN: And the one where ljust said to you that I was sick was when I had the flu. MS. STEFANIK: I'm sorry. That is my misunderstanding. MR. COHEN: lt seems to be a bad month. I/S. STEFANIK: Some health issues. Okay. So this was the first two meetings when you talked about this? MR. COHEN: Yes, ma'am. And I stand by my statement in the UNCLASS I FI ED UNCLASS I FIED document. MS. STEFANIK: Absolutely. Thank you for that clarification. So moving back to the third meeting, the day you were sick, approximately how long was that meeting? MR. COHEN: Short. I really wasn't feeling well. MS. STEFANIK: And the purpose of that meeting was to review your testimony or what was the purpose? MR. COHEN: No. That was to provide to Mr. Goldman, on behalf of the committee, the personal financial statement that I had come across as a direct result of reviewing or looking for documents. MS. STEFANIK: And who else attended that meeting in addition to Mr. Goldman? MR. COHEN: I don't -MR. BITAR: We are not in a position to identify staff here. MS. STEFANIK: The witness identified Mr. Goldman. MR. BITAR: And the witness can identify others if he'd like. MS. STEFANIK: Thank you. MR. COHEN: ldon't recall. MS. STEFANIK: Okay. Thank you, Mr. Cohen. So you said that was a short meeting. Approximately how long did that take place? MR. COHEN: An hour or so. MS. STEFANIK: And was there any discussion in that meeting? MR. COHEN: Yes. MS. STEFANIK: What specifically? What was the nature of the UNCLASS I FIED 54 UNCLASS 55 I FIED discussion? MR. COHEN: The document, what it was used for. MS. STEFANIK: Was it you discussing with Mr. Goldman - MR. COHEN: Me discussing with Mr. Goldman, as well as them reviewing the document. There wasn't a lot of conversation. The document speaks for itself. MS. STEFANIK: At any point was there discussion from Mr. Goldman regarding how this document would be used in this -- in your testimony in front of the committee? MR. COHEN: No, not that I recall. MS. STEFANIK: So that was the third meeting. Can we now shift to the fourth meeting? lt sounds like that was short, as you testified. What was the impetus for the fourth meeting? MR. COHEN: That was in D.C. MS. STEFANIK: Thatwas in D.C.? MR. COHEN: Yes. MS. STEFANIK: And when was that, approximately? MR. COHEN: lt was approximately a week before the testimony. MS. STEFANIK: And who attended that meeting? [Witness conferred with counsel.] MR. COHEN: I'm approximately the - I think sorry. lt was at Mr. Davis' - approximately office, and it was a week before my testimony and it was after the Senate, spent time at the Senate reviewing that transcript. Then when we finished, we went back to Mr. Davis'office, and that's where we had the meeting. And it was approximately also an hour, because then ! was UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS driving back to New York. 55 I FIED I had to get on the road. MS. STEFANIK: And in that hour, can you describe, to the best of your recollection, the discussion in that hour? MR. COHEN: That was about the 2012 personalfinancial statement that I came across as well, and some additional documents that I suspect I'll be questioned about today. MS. STEFANIK: At any time in any of those four meetings, was there any discussion or reference as to what to expect, regarding either the substance, topics of questions that were going to be asked of you when you appeared before the committee? MR. COHEN: So, ma'am, obviously, I know what the topics through are. I went - MS. STEFANIK: That's not answering my question. I know you know what the topics are, Mr. Cohen. MR. COHEN: That's what we talked about, and I answered the question. MS. STEFANIK: At any point, was there any discussion at all or reference to the types of answers that you intended to give to the committee? MR. COHEN: No, ma'am. l'm here just to give you my answers, truthful answers. MS. STEFANIK: Thank you. At any point in any of the four meetings, was there any discussion or reference to media coverage regarding your testimony? MR. COHEN: Media coverage, meaning what, ma'am? MS. STEFANIK: Media coverage meaning this is covered extensively by the media, this is what we anticipate the media coverage will be. UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS 57 I FIED MR. COHEN: Well, I knew that this was going to become a circus. One of the things that was brought to my attention was we prefer you not to speak to the media. And a lot of the conversation also had to do with getting in and out of the building as opposed to .. I wanted to walk right through the front doors, and they were against it. MS. STEFANIK: I want to go back to the second meeting where you referenced one of the topics was regarding Felix Sater that was identified as a topic of discussion. Can you explain more specifics about what you discussed regarding Mr. Sater? MR. COHEN: No. MS. STEFANIK: You have no recollection - MR. COHEN: The text messages that I had, how long that they had gone on for, the project. I don't have specific recollection -MS. STEFANIK: Those are fairly specific, though. I appreciate you answering in detail. Regarding the text messages, what specifically about the text messages? MR. COHEN: How many text messages I think there them all? How can we get were. Do we have them? I told them to cal! the Southern District of New York, they still have my phones. Things like - things like that. MS. STEFANIK: What other things like that? MR. COHEN: Things like that. MS. STEFANIK: Do you have any recollection of any more specifics in addition to text messages that fall under the topic of Felix Sater? MR. COHEN: Emails that we may have, whether or not we have all the emails. Any - is there a possibility that other emails may UNCLASS I FIED exist? lt's really about UNCLASSIFIED 58 document production that we spent most of the time talking about. MS. STEFANIK: Okay. I know other members have follow-up on this line of questioning. I yield to Mr. Conaway. MR. CONAWAY: Thank you. You mentioned financial statements. Are these the same ones that you gave to the O&GR Committee? MR. COHEN: Yes, sir. MR. CONAWAY: Are they the same ones you gave to the majority staff? MR. COHEN: Correct. MR. CONAWAY: Whose financial statements were those? MR. COHEN: Those were the personalfinancial statements of Mr. Trump, MR. CONAWAY: How is it that you were in possession of those? MR. COHEN: Because I was given them, in order to work with both Forbes Magazine as well as insurance company. MR. CONAWAY: At what point in time were you given those? MR. COHEN: 2011, 2012, 2013. MR. CONAWAY: Fair to say you were an employee of the company at that point in time? MR. COHEN: lwas an employee, yes. MR. CONAWAY: When you were in possession of them as you gave -- when you gave them to the majority counsel on O&GR, were you an employee of the company at that time? MR. COHEN: l'm sorry? MR. CONAWAY: Were you an employee of them when you gave them to the O&GR Committee and when you gave them to the majority staff? UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASS 59 I FIED MR. COHEN: No. MR. CONAWAY: So how is it you took company property away from the company into your own possession? How did that happen? MR. COHEN: They were in files, and .. MR. CONAWAY: Were they company Cohen, I don't think they were yours to give of a better phrase, did you steal those files? The point I'm getting to, Mr. out. Were they? So you - MR. COHEN: They gave them the documents were given - for lack - MR. CONAWAY: Did you stealthem? MR. CONAWAY: No, I did not stealthem, MR. MONICO: Let him finish. sir. I actually - Finish the question. MR. CONAWAY: Did you stealthe financial statements from the company, inadvertently? MR. COHEN: No. MR. CONAWAY: So how is it you took them in your personal possession if they were company property? MR. COHEN: They were given to me, other sir. They were also given to MR. CONAWAY: They were given to you in your role as an employee. MR. DAVIS: Excuse me, sir. He's just in the middle of an answer, and if you allow him to answer, he'll not interrupt you. MR. COHEN: Okay, go ahead. MR. CONAWAY: They were given to you as an employee, correct? MR. COHEN: They were given to me as an employee, yes. MR. CONAWAY: To be used as an employee? UNCLASS I FIED 60 UNCLASSI FIED MR. COHEN: I used it as an employee. MR. CONAWAY: So how is it you took them into your personal possession? MR. COHEN: As I stated before, they were in a file. And when I left the Trump Organization and my office was boxed, they were in the box. MR. CONAWAY: But they weren't yours to take, were they? MR. COHEN: They were given to - you asked me that question already twice, sir. MR. CONAWAY: Did you have permission to share those financialMR. DAVIS: Excuse me, sir, with respect. MR. CONAWAY: I can't hear you. I still can't hear you. I'm sorry, I can't hear you. THE CHAIRMAN: Could you use the microphone, Mr. Davis. MR. DAVIS: Excuse me. With respect, sir, he wanted to explain believe, inadvertently, you interrupted - and - that these files were given to him. And I'm asking the witness to continue the explanation to your question, if you would allow him, please. MR. COHEN: I'm okay. Go ahead, please. MR. CONAWAY: See, I thought he was through. MR. COHEN: I'm done. MR. CONAWAY: Did you have Mr. Trump's permission to share those financial statements with O&GR? MR. COHEN: With who? MR. CONAWAY: With the Committee on Government and Oversight? MR. COHEN: I did not have Mr. Trump's express permission, no. UNCLASSIEIED I 61 UNCLASSIF]ED MR. CONWAY: Did you have permission to give them to the majority staff of this committee? MR. COHEN: No. MR. CONAWAY: Thank you. MR. STEWART: Mr. Cohen, lappreciate -[Witness conferred with counsel.] MR. COHEN: So just to finish the answers for the record, I was given the documents by the Trump Organization in order to work on issues that dealt with Forbes Magazine as well as with the - to give to the insurance companies as we were working on insurance-related issues. And those documents were shown to them and given to them as well, as well as Deutsche Bank. MR. STEWART: Mr. Cohen, I appreciate you being here. I know it's been a long couple of days. I want to come back to these meetings -- MR. COHEN: To say the least. MR. STEWART: Yeah, I imagine. I want to come back to these meetings in New York, if I could. I don't understand who was in attendance at these meetings. Can you describe that, please? MR. COHEN: So I had my counsel, okay, Mr. Monico, and I also had Carly. [Witness conferred with counsel.] MR. COHEN: The -- to the best of my recollection, the first meeting was witnf ano MR. GOLDMAN: So the record is clear, lthink he's referencing UNCLASS I FIED 62 UNCLASSI FIED MR. COHEN: Oh, I'm sorry, I apologize MR. STEWART: I want to know specifically who from this committee, either members or staff or representatives, were in attendance at those meetings? MR. COHEN: At the various different meetings? MR. STEWART: Yes. MR. COHEN: Mr. Goldman. MR. STEWART: Mr. Goldman. MR. COHEN: The second meeting *rtI .. MR. STEWART: Only Mr. Goldman at the first meeting? MR. COHEN: No. I apologize. I don't -- I don't know who was at which meetings. I'm pretty sure that they can answer that question better. The gentleman that was - MR. STEWART: Are some of them in the room here? MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. STEWART: Can you just point to them? MR. COHEN: Yes. The gentleman sitting next to Mr. Goldman. MR. STEWART: Okay. MR. COHEN: And the young lady -MR. STEWART: Mr. Mitchell? MR. COHEN: Mr. Mitchell. The young lady sitting behind Mr. Mitchell. MR. STEWART: Okay, who is? MR. COHEN: MR. STEWART: Okay. MR. COHEN: And I believe -- yes, UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS MR. STEWART: Okay. Any other 63 I FIED - MR. COHEN: And the young lady that's sitting next to I MR. STEWART: Any congressional members at any of these meetings? MR. COHEN: No. No, sir. MR. STEWART: Have you had any conversations with any Members of Congress from this committee regarding these meetings? MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. STEWART: Can you identify those? MR. COHEN: The chairman. MR. STEWART: Okay. Can you tell us about that conversation? MR. COHEN: lt was a telephone conversation, and the purpose was to ask me to do this voluntarily as opposed to being subpoenaed, because he would prefer it that way. MR. STEWART: And when did that meeting - or that conversation take place? MR. COHEN: I don't recall. MR. STEWART: Was it before these meetings in New York? [Witness conferred with counsel.] MR. COHEN: I'm sorry, I don't recall. MR. STEWART: Did you discuss anything other than your voluntary appearance before the committee? MR. COHEN: No. MR. STEWART: Were you aware that these individuals that you were meeting with only represented one party of this committee? MR. COHEN: Well, he identified himself as the chairman of the committee UNCLASS I FIED 64 UNCLASSIEIED MR. STEWART: Not, not with Mr. Schiff. With the other attorneys. Were you aware that they only represented one party within this committee? MR. COHEN: I'm aware of that, yes. MR. STEWART: Were you aware at the time? MR. COHEN: At the time? Yes. MR. STEWART: Did they make you aware of that? MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. STEWART: So they said, we represent the majority on this committee, and there are no members of the minority or representatives from the minority here with us? MR. COHEN: Yes, sir. They're the ones that reached out to me. Had the minority reached out to me, I would have met with them as well. MR. STEWART: So it's important to note that this isn't a judicial process. We don't have prosecutors. We don't have defense attorneys. This is supposed to be an unbiased, fact-finding undertaking. Did it appear unusual to you that you would only be meeting with representatives from one member -- or from one party within this committee? MR. COHEN: No, sir, because, again, they're the ones that reached out to me. Had the minority reached out, I would have met with you as well. My sole purpose was to be able to find what documents that they were interested in obtaining from me to see if I had them. And I gave them, and I suspect that you probably have seen them as well. MR. STEWART: That might have been your sole purpose in this meeting, but much more than that - MR. COHEN: That as well as to clear the record. UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS 65 I FIED MR. STEWART: Much more than that took place, though, as we've already discussed. You had hours-long conversations regarding your testimony, reviewing questions that you might be asked, reviewing potential answers. Much more than that took place. MR. DAVIS: Excuse me. [Witness conferred with counsel.] MR. COHEN: I'm sorry, sir, you stated that lwas reviewing answers. lt wasn't. lt was about topics. And actually, I also believed that it was on behalf of the committee, because I suspect that the committee as a whole wants to get down to the truth. So whether I give it to you or I give it to them, I suspect that you share things. MR. STEWART: Well, that would hopefully be the case that happened here. case. That wasn't the None of this was shared with us, which is one of our objections to this, including the fact that these meetings took place at all was not shared with us, and hasn't been in any meaningfulway since then. Have you had any other communications with attorneys, staff members, or members of these committees after these initial long meetings that took place? MR. COHEN: And the one here in D.C., no, sir. MR. STEWART: I don't know who Mr. Sater is. I don't know why he's important. There seems to be a lot of questions regarding that. Help me understand. Who is Mr. Sater? How does he fit into this whole thing? MR. COHEN: Felix Sater is a gentleman who was a partner in a company called Bayrock. And Bayrock was responsible for the Trump Tower Soho Hotel as well as a Trump Tower/Fort Lauderdale project. Mr. Sater brought a project to my attention, which was the Trump Tower Moscow proposal. UNCLASS I EIED UNCLASS 66 I FIED MR. STEWART: At what time, approximately? MR. COHEN: That was around September-October of 2015. MR. STEWART: And is he a U.S. citizen? MR. COHEN: He is a U.S. citizen, yes. MR. STEWART: What is his association with Moscow? How does he have relationships where he can bring you a business opportunity in Moscow? MR. COHEN: He claimed that he had a relationship with a -- he was acting as the licensee's representative. And the name of that company was called l.C. Expert, lnc. I actually googled it and it is a legitimate company. They're a mid{ier realestate development company that was seeking to do a much larger project, and would be interested in licensing the Trump brand. MR. STEWART: They were a U.S. company? MR. COHEN: They are not. MR. STEWART: Where are they located? MR. COHEN: Moscow. MR. STEWART: Okay. With Moscow principals or Russian principals, as far as you know? MR. COHEN: Yes. The principal is a gentleman by the name of Sergey lvanov. MR. STEWART: But, again, Mr. Sater was a U.S. citizen, but he had a business relationship with these individuals who - MR. COHEN: He's of Russian descent, and he's done business in Moscow, in Kazakhstan, you know, other places around the world. MR. STEWART: Okay. And was this unusualto you? I mean, there had been discussions regarding potential properties in Russia for, as ! understand, UNCLASS I EI ED 67 UNCLASSIFIED quite a long time, years, on and off again with The Trump Organization. ls that true? MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. STEWART: I mean, as I recall some press reports maybe going back to the 1980s that they had considered building Trump properties in Moscow. MR. COHEN: I've heard that too. Yes. MR. STEWART: Do you think -- any reason to believe that's not true? MR. COHEN: I have no reason to believe it's not true. MR. STEWART: So what was different about this? I mean, these are conversations that had been going on for 25 years, on and off again, various levels of interest or, you know, potential success. What was different about this that you wanted to pursue this one? MR. COHEN: There was nothing different. MR. STEWART: So you pursued this with the same -. or the organization pursued this with the same level of interest that they had many other potential deals in l\Ioscow, is that true, over the years? MR. COHEN: Not just Moscow, anywhere. MR. STEWART: Okay. Can you describe those initial conversations with Mr. Sater then? MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. STEWART: Would you please? MR. COHEN: Sure. He contacted me to say that he was the rep for lC Expert, lnc., and that they were interested in licensing the Trump mark for what would be the tallest property in all of Europe. We were looking at approximately 120 stories, and it would have three dimensions to UNCLASS I FIED it. The top would be 68 UNCLASSI FIED residential; the center of the building would be hotel; and the base would be commercial. MR. STEWART: And was this idea, or this proposal, any different, other than perhaps the height of the building, any different or anything meaningfully different from any other proposal that had been discussed in Moscow or Russia or anywhere else in the world? MR. COHEN: Or anywhere. MR. STEWART: So this was very common? MR. COHEN: Yes. To receive proposals like this? Yes. MR. STEWART: And why would that come through you rather than through the counsel for the organization, who generally dealt in real estate? MR. COHEN: Because that's not accurate. MR. STEWART: Which part? MR. COHEN: Proposals didn't come to general counsel. MR. STEWART: Okay. MR. COHEN: Proposals came to various different individuals. Blind proposals would then get distributed to Don, lvanka, or Eric. They were in charge of development. This one came to me because I happened to know Felix Sater. And the kids weren't too happy with him, because of an issue that arose that ended up having them decide that he needs to leave the 26th floor, to leave the building altogether. MR. STEWART: "He" being Mr. Sater? MR. COHEN: Mr. Sater, yes. MR. STEWART: And UNCLASSIFIED 69 UNCLASSI FIED MR. COHEN: So as an example -- you asked with regard to general counsel. General counselwould technically never see this, and I'll give you an example. lt's how I ended up doing the Trump Tower Batumi project. Somebody that we've talked about that's in the book, Giorgi. Rtskhiladze, is a friend of mine and he had this opportunity with a company there and he brought it to me. Very much the same as the Doral (ph). That came to me through a friend of mine who's a bankruptcy lawyer in Florida. lvanka ended up taking it over, but that project came to me. So -- everybody's job who's an executive was to try to enhance The Trump Organization's holdings. MR. STEWART: Okay. MR. COHEN: And if you had relationships, you used them. MR. STEWART: I understand. You and Mr. Sater had worked together for some time? MR. COHEN: We knew each other. I never actually really worked with him. MR. STEWART: How long had you known him? MR. COHEN: So I knew Mr. Sater, as I said, last time when I was here, I believe. I met Felix for the first time when I was in high school, when we'd come to the city with friends, and it turns out friends of mine knew hirn. And then after that year or so of seeing him at clubs here in the city, I hadn't seen him for 25 years, until I saw him at The Trump Organization when he was doing the, again, Trump Tower Soho project with floor. - as a partner at a company, MR. STEWART: Okay. You mentioned Can you describe that? Why? at Bayrock. he was asked to leave the 26th MR. COHEN: There was some disagreements between Felix and The UNCLASS I FI ED Trump Org, and it had to do with his past. ABC that held him out in a pretty negative 70 ] FIED UNCLASS There was a story that was done on light. And Alan Garten went on in order to defend The Trump Organization, the fact that Mr. Trump didn't really know him. So he was insulted by that. lt's all sort of personal stuff. lt wasn't business-related. MR. STEWART: ls it fair to say that they had lost trust with Mr. Sater? MR. COHEN: That the family lost trust in him? I don't know. You'd have to ask them that question. MR. STEWART: Well, I'm trying to understand why they asked him to leave, and you said there was some media - MR. COHEN: Because there was a lot of negative press that was swirling around Felix regarding his history, his past. MR. STEWART: So because there was negative information regarding his history, they asked him to leave the 26th floor or this executive location? MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. STEWART: I'm just trying to draw the conclusion, it's because they lost trust in him. They didn't feel he was an individual who represented the organization well. MR. COHEN: That would be your impression. That doesn't mean that they wouldn't take an opportunity if he brought it and it was economically as sound as this one could have been. MR. STEWART: Once again, I'm just trying to understand. There was negative information regarding him. They asked him to leave. What other possible explanation would there be for that, other than they lost trust in him? MR. COHEN: I don't know. You would have to ask them that question. UNCLASSIFIED I UNCLASS mean, they certainly 7L I FIED didn't. I mean, I spoke with Mr. Trump about it on about 10 occasions. I've spoken to Don Jr. about it. lvanka was going to have the spa in it. So, again, that's your assertion that they lost trust. Yeah, maybe they didn't want to see him there, but that doesn't mean they wouldn't have taken a proposal. IMR. STEWART: Can you describe any other reason why they would have asked him to leave after this negative information came out? MR. COHEN: He wasn't paying rent for the room. He wasn't an employee of The Trump Organization. MR. STEWART: Do you know any of those to be true? MR. COHEN: Well, he was not paying rent, and he was in the office that eventually took. He also had one of his employees, his own personal employees in the bullpen outside of the resulted from the negative MR. STEWART: office. There was some bad blood, again, that press. So there are many reasons. Okay. meaningful, but it's curious to pay rent. Was l'm just me. curious. I don't think it's really What -- he wasn't an employee. He had to he in arrears for a long period of time, do you know? MR. COHEN: I'm sorry? MR. STEWART: Was he in arrears on his rent for a long period of time? MR. COHEN: I'm not aware that there was ever any rent. MR. STEWART: Maybe I misunderstood the answer to your question. thought you said that he had not paid MR. COHEN: There was no was to source I - rent. So he was there rent-free. His job deals. That's why Mr. Trump allowed him to stay in that office. UNCLASS I FIED I 72 UNCLASSIFIED MR. STEWART: Can you describe the negative information that was revealed about him? MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. STEWART: Would you? MR. COHEN: That he had stabbed someone in the face with a champagne glass many years ago. That he was involved in a pump and dump. He had changed his name from two Ts to one T. MR. STEWART: Were you aware of any of these accusations or claims about him? MR. COHEN: At what point in time, sir? MR. STEWART: Previous to these media revelations. MR. COHEN: Previous? Around that time, yes, I became made aware of that. His attorney, Robert Wolff, sent like a four- or five-page statement about Felix. MR. STEWART: Okay. About the same time previous to the media revelations, do you think? MR. COHEN: The ABC one that l'm referring around that time, yes. MR. STEWART: Ms. Stefanik. MS. STEFANIK: Thank you. UNCLASSIFIED to? Yes, somewhere UNCLASS 73 I EIED Mr. Cohen, shifting back to my lines of questions, and I appreciate you going into detail on your testimony. And you've talked about today how the four meetings, the purpose was to review your testimony that you had given prior to the committee, to read the transcript, to request documents from the HPSCI Democratic majority staff, and then discussion of broad topics. On the document request piece, you talked about their questions, "their" meaning the Democratic staffs questions regarding texts with Felix Sater. ls that correct? MR. COHEN: Yeah. I believe they asked if I had them. MS. STEFANIK: As well as financial statements. ls that correct? MR. COHEN: No. I advised Mr. Davis, who then advised the committee that I had located this set of documents. MS. STEFANIK: And the Democratic committee staff requested those documents? MR. COHEN: Yes. MS. STEFANIK: What other documents were requested of you in those four meetings? MR. COHEN: I don't have specific - MS. STEFANIK: Do you have a broad memory of that, of the types of documents? MR. COHEN: ln whatever -- on the topics, whatever additional documents that you can find that you think would be helpful to the committee in getting to the bottom of this, to getting to the truth. MS. STEFANIK: Okay. On the topics piece, you said you think there were about five topics that were discussed. And the two that you've identified UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASS 74 I FIED were Felix Sater questions as well as the potentialTrump Tower ft/oscow project. You have no recollection of the other three topics? MR. COHEN: When we're going through the book, I'm sure I'll chime in and I'll say, this is one of the topics that we talked about. MS. STEFANIK: understanding that Right. But each of those topics, it was your - MR. COHEN: Well, the third one was the personalfinancial statements, asked if I had found them. Yes. MS. STEFANIK: The personalfinancial statements, okay. It is your understanding, though, that those topics that were discussed by Mr. Goldman and other members of the Democratic majority staff, that those topics would be raised in questions when you testified in front of the committee? MR. COHEN: I didn't need Mr. Goldman to tell me that, but yes, we did discuss it. We also spent a lot of time talking about how crazy he is to leave his gig at MSNBC to come here. MS. STEFANIK: Well, tell me a little bit about that conversation. MR. COHEN: I was jealous. I mean, he had a great gig. MS. STEFANIK: I am interested to hear about the conversation regarding his appearances on MSNBC, so I'd love to hear about the details. MR. COHEN: I was joking with him when I said recognize clown at you. He goes, I recognize you too. that. I said, Oh, I'm sure I lt's just cordialities. I'm actually a heart. I enjoy humor. MS. STEFANIK: This was a very friendly meeting, was your testimony? MR. COHEN: I wanted it to be that way, yeah. to anybody. UNCLASS I FIED I didn't want to be adverse UNCLASS 75 I FIED MS. STEFANIK: Was one of the topics that was discussed other Trump family members? MR. COHEN: We talked about the family members. MS. STEFANIK: And what did you talk about with the family members? MR. COHEN: ln regard to the Trump Tower Moscow deal. MS. STEFANIK: So very similar to the questions today? MR. COHEN: Well, not to the questions. ln terms of topics. MS. STEFANIK: But very similar to the topics today? MR. COHEN: lt wasn't a deposition, you know, of me. Right. We talked about topics, just having .. the same way you and I are having a conversation at the moment. lt was the same thing. You know, was any documents that you may have that pertain to lvanka? ls there any documents you could provide this committee that pertain to Don Jr.? What about to Eric? Anything to Mr. Trump? No, Mr. Trump doesn't have email. Who else might have They weren't questions directed at me. it? Things like that. They were more towards me. MS. STEFANIK: ln addition to the document request piece that you've talked about, was there a broader conversation not pertaining to documents regarding Trump family members'potential involvement in the Trump Moscow project? MR. COHEN: I'm so sorry. I missed the question. MS. STEFANIK: So you just testified that a lot of it had to do with document requests. My question is to you, was there a broader discussion about -- or questions about Trump's family members' involvement in the Trump Tower Moscow project? MR. COHEN: There might have been. I don't recall. UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS MS. STEFANIK: You don't 76 I FIED recall. Okay. You also .. do you recallthat you also testified that in addition to the staff of this committee, the Democratic majority staff, you also did communicate with Democratic staff for the House Oversight Committee? MR. COHEN: That is correct. MS. STEFANIK: And do you recall you testified that was by phone? MR. COHEN: That was by phone, yes. MS. STEFANIK: Okay. [Witness conferred with counsel.] MR. COHEN: And I don't recall if I ever met them in person. MS. STEFANIK: Okay. Your recollection is those were by phone. You also testified that you approximated it was a couple of hours. MR. COHEN: Correct. MS. STEFANIK: Can you talk about where that request to have those conversations came from? Was that your attorneys reaching out, or was it the House Oversight staff reaching out to you? MR. COHEN: So House Oversight fonruarded to Mr. Davis a letter requesting my appearance before their committee, and he contacted me. said, sure, I would speak to them. They, too, did not want to subpoena And me. I And that's how it all started. MS. STEFANIK: And then your first conversation, approximately when, to the best of your recollection, was that? MR. COHEN: I don't -- I don't recall. MS. STEFANIK: Was it a month before your testimony .MR. COHEN: lf you leave the dates blank, we could check on our UNCLASSIFIED 77 UNCLASSI FIED calendars and come back to you and fill it in. MS. STEFANIK: Okay, that would be great. What was the nature of the conversation when you got on the phone call? So we've talked about the initial request by the House Oversight staff. Can you talk about the nature of the conversation? MR. COHEN: I assume my conversations with them are not really relevant to this committee. I'm happy to talk about things that I discussed -MS. STEFANIK: lt is relevant to this committee. You can answer the question. MR. COHEN: lt's the same exact thing. They were talking about topics that they're interested in discussing. And a good part of it was about having - whether it would be an open or a closed hearing. The standard conversation. MS. STEFANIK: What topics did they discuss that they were planning on raising in their committee hearing? MR. COHEN: Topics that were brought up at the Oversight. MS. STEFANIK: Topics such as? MR. COHEN: Well, obviously, I knew that every Republican was going to attack me on credibility, so I sort of put that to the side. And we discussed that kind of at length also, that it was going to be a massive assault against your character. I said, it wouldn't be the first time. So we moved on to what the Democrats would probably be looking to ask. And it was all about Trump Organization, Mr. Trump, your relationship to him, your characterizations, things like that. MS. STEFANIK: I want to ask a little bit about the credibility accusation. UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS I FIED 78 So did you raise the concern of the credibility accusation, or did the House Oversight staff bring up that topic? MR. COHEN: I think it was probably me. MS. STEFANIK: Okay. And what was -- what specifically did they talk about regarding the credibility piece that you just referenced? MR. COHEN: I'm not even sure there's a question there. MS. STEFANIK: What specifically did they discuss regarding the credibility issue that you just mentioned? MR. COHEN: Whether or not I was going to be credible or not. MS. STEFANIK: Did they talk about their belief that Republicans would attack you on credibility? MR. COHEN: Actually, yes. MS. STEFANIK: And what specifically did they say? MR. COHEN: The Republicans are going to attack you on your credibility. MS. STEFANIK: Did any staff members from this committee discuss that topic with you at any point? MR. COHEN: No, not that I recall. MS. STEFANIK: Okay. You talked about the credibility. What other topics did the House Oversight staff discuss with you? MR. COHEN: That's the best of my recollection. MR. RATCLIFFE: Mr. Cohen, John Ratcliffe. Good to see you again. MR. COHEN: How are you, sir? MR. RATCLIFFE: I want to follow up on my colleague, Ms. Stefanik's questions, regarding the meeting with the staffs of both committees, on this committee as well as the Oversight Committee. And I apologize, I wasn't in here. UNCLASS]EIED UNCLASS 79 ] EIED How long did you say you spoke on the phone with the House Oversight Democratic staff? MR. COHEN: Approximately an hour. MR. RATCLIFFE: . Was it one conversation or multiple conversations? MR. COHEN: I believe it was one. lt could have been two, with the second one being short. [Witness conferred with counsel.] MR. COHEN: I don't recall. lt was either one or two. MR. RATCLIFFE: Mr. Cohen, I want to ask you about some information that I have and try and determine its accuracy. Did you discuss with a member of either of the staffs from either of the committees AMl, the parent company of the National Enquirer? MR. COHEN: I don't recall. MR. RATCLIFFE: Did you discuss what has been described as a catch and kill operation against people who were making allegations against Mr. Trump? MR. COHEN: lt's possible. I believe so. ldon't recall, but I believe so. MR. RATCLIFFE: Well, let me see if I can refresh your recollection. Did you discuss David Pecker as a person with knowledge of relevant facts about documents that would support that program? [Witness conferred with counsel.] MR. COHEN: I believe we spoke about that topic, yes. MR. RATCLIFFE: And did you discuss Mr. Trump's concern about the whereabouts of documents relating to that catch and kill and who possessed them? MR. COHEN: lt's possible, yes. UNCLASS I FIED UNCLAS S 80 I FIED MR. RATCLIFFE: And is it possible that you discussed David Pecker? ls it possible you discussed Barry Levine? MR. COHEN: lt's possible. MR. RATCLIFFE: Did you discuss Barry Levine? MR. COHEN: Not that I recall, but it's possible. MR. RATCLIFFE: Dylan Howard? MR. COHEN: lt's also possible. MR. RATCLIFFE: Did you discuss your knowledge of those individuals having not just knowledge of relevant facts, but access to a treasure trove of documents relating to that? MR. COHEN: lt's also possible. I have made that statement before, yes. MR. RATCLIFFE: Well, I want to know if you made it to the - MR. COHEN: I don't recall. MR. RATCLIFFE: - to the staff members? MR. COHEN: I don't recall. MR. RATCLIFFE: Did you discuss with members of the Democratic staff the issue of asset inflation? MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. RATCLIFFE: And did you discuss specifically whether or not Mr. Trump or The Trump Organization had inflated the value of assets to an insurance company? ItIR. COHEN: Yes, I believe so. MR. RATCLIFFE: And did you discuss, Mr. Alan Weisselberg in connection with that? MR. COHEN: ldon't recall. UNCLASS ] F]ED UNCLASS I FIED 81 MR. RATCLIFFE: Did you discuss Ron Lieberman in connection with that? MR. COHEN: I also don't recall. MR. RATCLIFFE: Did you discuss Matthew Calamari as having knowledge of that? MR. COHEN: I also don't recall. MR. RATCLIFFE: ls it possible that you discussed Mr. Weiselberg, Mr. Lieberman, and Mr. Calamariwith the Democratic staff? MR. COHEN: lt's possible. ldon't recall doing so. MR. RATCLIFFE: But you did recall discussing the inflated value of assets to an insurance company? MR. COHEN: Yes, ! believe that topic came up. MR. RATCLIFFE: Did you discuss where documents and information in support of submitting inflated - MR. COHEN: I'm sorry, can you give me just one second, please? MR. RATCLIFFE: Yes, sir. [Witness conferred with counsel.] MR. COHEN: I'm sorry, your question was did I answer questions? MR. RATCLIFFE: No. My question is, did you discuss with the Democratic staff of either committee in advance of any testimony that you gave whether or not Mr. Trump and The Trump Organization inflated assets -MR. COHEN: Okay. Then I stand by my previous statement. MR. RATCLIFFE: And that previous statement was that you did? MR. COHEN: Yes, I believe so. MR. RATCLIFFE: And in that same connection discussing with the Democratic staff, let me just, so the record is clear, did you discuss with them Alan UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS 82 I FIED Weiselberg as having -- as a person having knowledge of relevant facts of submitting inflated - MR. COHEN: And then I stated ldon't recall, but it's possible. MR. RATCLIFFE: Okay. MR. COHEN: And the same for Mr. Lieberman and Mr. Calamari. MR. RATCLIFFE: And did you discuss where documents and information in support of that might be found within The Trump Organization? MR. COHEN: I don't recall, but if the question was asked, it would be with them at AMl, at their office. I never had those documents. MR. RATCLIFFE: I understand, but l'm asking what members of the Democratic staff asked you. MR. COHEN: I don't recallthat specific - I apologize. I don't recall that specific question being asked. MR. RATCLIFFE: Do you recall discussing reviewing Mr. Trump's financial statements and comparing those to tax returns? MR. COHEN: Not that I recall. I've never seen Mr. Trump's tax returns. MR. RATCLIFFE: Was the testimony that you gave under oath to members of the Democratic - Members of Congress before the Oversight Comm ittee truthfu I testimony? MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. RATCLIFFE: Did it differ, in substance or in content, from the information that you shared with the Democratic staff in meetings and conversations that you had on the phone and in person? MR. COHEN: I can't really answer that question, because if one question that was asked by the Oversight staff mirrors an answer that I gave, then the UNCLASS I FIED 83 UNCLASSIF]ED answer would be yes. But I was there tor 7-112 hours. So the answer is no, I did not have a diary of questions that were going to be asked of me across the board, but topics and issues and one or more of the questions that were asked did fall in line with some of the Democratic Congress. MR. RATCLIFFE: So the answer is yes? MR. COHEN: The answer is as ljust stated. MR. RATCLIFFE: Okay. Well, l'm trying to be - it's not a trick question. I'm trying to find out -- MR. COHEN: lt's so broad. lt's so broad that I can't answer it that way. MR. RATCLIFFE: So I guess let me try and simplify it. Were the answers you gave under oath to Members of Congress consistent with the answers that you gave to members of the Democratic staff? MR. COHEN: To the extent that the question related back to a conversation that I had had with a Democratic staff or member, yes. UNCLASSIFIED 84 UNCLASSIFIED [11:37 a.m.] MR. RATCLIFFE: I think what's, Mr. Cohen - the questions that I just related to you, I asked you in the same order and sequence and content to which certain members of the Democratic Party asked you questions under oath last week. And in response to many of these, you've related that you had previously given information to the Democratic staff to those exact same issues with regard to content and information. MR. DAVIS: Excuse me, Congressman. Would it be possible for the witness to see what you're reading so he can see what he said in the transcript of his hearing and compare it to what you're asking? MR. RATCLIFFE: Well, he won't be able to read my notes. MR. DAVIS: lt's based on your notes, not the transcript? MR. RATCLIFFE: Well, when this transcript is released, the questions that I asked can be compared to the questions that were asked by Democratic Members of Congress. MR. DAVIS: Thank you. MR. RATCLIFFE: And the answers that you gave, Mr. Cohen, indicate that some of that information was known to members of the Democratic -- to Democratic Members of Congress before they asked those questions. MR. DAVIS: Excuse me, sir. MR. COHEN: Sir, I spoke with, as I had said before -- well, Democratic staff for the majority, other than speaking with, again, the chairman, who were hoping that I would come here voluntarily as opposed to pursuant to subpoena. MR. RATCLIFFE: I understand all that. I'm just trying to make clear so that the record is real clear with respect to the fact that you shared knowledge and UNCLASSI FIED 85 UNCLASSI FIED information on a number of issues with Democratic staff members that were subsequently directly asked and answered the same way by Democratic Members of Congress. THE CHAIRMAN: I don't necessary know that that follows from the testimony. MR. RATCLIFFE: Well, when the transcript gets released it'll prove whether it was or not. THE CHAIRMAN: Unless you have a transcript of his interview with the staff, I don't think it's possible, but is there a question for the witness? MR. RATCLIFFE: Yeah, there is a question. Mr. Cohen, NBC and Wall Street Journal and other news outlets are reporting that your prior counsel, Stephen Ryan, raised the possibility of a pardon on your behalf with members of President Trump's legal team. lt was reported that that discussion occurred by your lawyer, Mr. Ryan, in the weeks after the raid on your office by the FBl, your home and office, in April of 2018. Did the White House -- anyone at the White House ever offer a pardon to you, to your knowledge? MR. COHEN: Directly? MR. RATCLIFFE: Yes. MR. COHEN: Not that I recall. MR. RATCLIFFE: Did President Trump ever discuss with you the possibility of a pardon? MR. COHEN: No, not that I recall. MR. RATCLIFFE: Did any member of President Trump's legal team ever - did a member of President Trump's legal team ever offer or discuss UNCLASS I FIED 86 UNCLASSI FIED with you the possibility of a pardon? MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. RATCLIFFE: Who was that? MR. COHEN: Jay Sekulow. THE CHAIRMAN: And why don't we take a S-minute restroom break MR. COHEN: Thank you. IRecess.] THE CHAIRMAN: All right. You're okay to begin? Yes. MR. COHEN: I lost all my Republican friends. THE CHAIRMAN: The minority counsel has authorized us to begin in the absence of the Republican members. Mr. Cohen, ljust want to make clear, as we did at our last session, it's perfectly appropriate for you to meet with the minority staff. lt's also appropriate for the members of the -- l'm sorry, to meet with majority perfect for minority staff to ask you about that. staff. lt's perfectly But I appreciate your cooperation with the committee and hope that cooperation will continue. We may very well follow up with additionalquestions after today's session. MR. COHEN: Sir, if I can just reiterate. Had the minority reached out and asked to meet with me, I would have met with them as well. And I will continue to provide you with any information that I obtain or that I come across that would further advance your investigation. THE CHAIRMAN: Okay. MR. SWALWELL: And, Mr. Chairman, maybe the witness can say that again when the minority is present, noting that they are not present here. UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS I FIED 87 THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Cohen, I take it during the many weeks prior to your testimony being noticed, the minority never bothered to reach out to you to see if you would be willing to meet with them? MR. COHEN: That's correct. THE CHAIRMAN: lnstead, were many members of the minority, in fact, attacking you publicly? MR. COHEN: Every day, all day. THE CHAIRMAN: You know, by comparison, Mr. Cohen, how many sessions have you had with the staff of the Office of the Special Counsel? MR. COHEN: Seven. THE CHAIRMAN: And approximately how long did each of those seven sessions go? MR. COHEN: Approximately 10 hours each session. THE CHAIRMAN: And were those sessions designed to determine what you knew about many of the same issues we've discussed today? MR. COHEN: Many of the same issues, yes. THE CHAIRMAN: As well as in preparation for any testimony you might give to either a grand jury or in a criminal prosecution? MR. COHEN: Yes, sir. THE CHAIRMAN: So those sessions were far more lengthy than any sessions that you had with the majority staff of our committee? MR. COHEN: Yes. THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Goldman. MR. GOLDMAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. BY MR. GOLDMAN: UNCLASS I FIED 88 UNCLASS]FIED O Mr. Cohen, while we're on the topic of the special counsel's office, in the special counsel's sentencing letter in your case they identified four areas that you provided assistance to them about. Do you recall that? A O lf you have the document it would be better. One of the areas that they identified was something that they said was that you were truthful and you provided information that was core to their investigation. Do you recall that? A O I recall that. What -- now that there are no limitations by the special counsel on your testimony, can you tell us what they were referring to about items or matters that were core to their investigation that you provided truthful information about? A So I can, off the top of my head, just talk about potentially two' One, of course, is the Trump Tower Moscow project which they were interested in. And the second one was regarding the concept of pardons. O Was there anything else that we have not touched upon in this committee either last Thursday or today thus far? A O A O Not that I'm aware of. I want to pick up - I believe yours is more expansive in terms of scope. l'd like to pick up on the written statement that you submitted August 28tn,2017. Do you recall that that was approximately 2 months before you testified before either the House lntelligence or Senate lntelligence Committees? A O Yes, I believe so. And on February 28th you also testified about an interaction that you UNCLASS I FI ED UNCLASS had with Alan Garten at Patton Boggs I FIED 89 - or Squire Patton, I don't know what you call it now -- where he brought over to you your contacts and asked you to identify which ones were business, which ones were personal, et cetera. Do you recall that conversation? A I do, and I belive that's one of the documents that I located and I think we had fonrvarded to your committee. Didn't we find that document, the one with all of my contacts? The email addresses. I'm O A O sorry. Go ahead. We'lltouch upon that in a minute. Sure. And that was -- I believe that was also when you testified that Alan Garten relayed to you the back and forth that he had with people on Air Force One about drafting a statement for Don Jr., a false statement, about the purpose of the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting. ls that right? A O A O I believe that was the meeting, yes. And do you recall approximately when that was? I can get you that date. Well, let me ask it a different way. What was the purpose of him showing you your contacts and other documents? A The Trump Organization received a subpoena in order to turn over documents, and since I had no documents, everything being in their custody and control, they wanted the contacts to be limited to, I suspect, non-business-related, you know, removal, family removal emails that are not pertaining to the investigation. UNCLASSIFIED 90 UNCLASSIFIED O So the purpose of the meeting was to discuss a document production that The Trump Organization needed to provide? A O A O Correct. And was it to provide to this committee? I don't know which committee, but I suspect it was all the committees. All right. And do you recall that the false statement that Don Jr. issued about the Trump Tower meeting that was discussed on Air Force One, do you recall that happened in approximately June of 2017? A O I believe so. Was the conversation that you had with Alan Garten close in time to that statement being issued in June of 2017? A I believe so, but I can get you the exact date. lf we leave it in the transcript open, l'll get that for you. O And we just went through the iterations of the drafts of the written statements that started with an email, at least in our possession, of August 16th, 2017? A O Correct. So was this conversation with Alan Garten about The Trump Organization document production also close in time to the written statement? A O Again, I believe so. And I believe you testified last time as well that you had a number of conversations, many conversations, I believe you said, with Jay Sekulow close in time to the submission of this written statement. ls that right? A O That's correct. And it was those conversations, I believe you testified, where you've UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS 91 I FIED discussed the false nature of the written statement with Jay Sekulow? A O A O A O About this statement, not in its totality, but about parts, yes. But aspects of it that were false? Yes. lncluding the end date of January 2016? Yes. And including reducing the number of communications that you had with Donald Trump? A O Correct. And I believe you said both today and last time that in those conversations with Jay Sekulow he repeatedly told you to stay on message? A O A Yes. ls that right? And then followed up that the client is really proud of you, that, you know, he's with you, he loves you, and everything is going to be fine. O Now, last week, before your testimony in front of the Oversight Committee, you submitted a written statement to A O them. ls that right? That's correct. And when relative to your testimony did you submit that written statement? A O A O A Hours before. I mean, like under 24 hours. Had you been working on that written statement for a while? Yes. But you just submitted it the night before your testimony? Correct. UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS I FIE O 92 D Mr. Cohen, why did you submit the August 28th, 2017, written statement to this committee 2 months before your testimony before this committee? A O A O I don't recall the exact -- I don't recall the exact reason. Do you recall that you also made it public? Yes. And do you recallthat the testimony before this committee and the Senate lntelligence Committee were both going to be closed testimony? A O Yes. Do you recall having any conversations with anyone about why you might want to issue a public written statement at the end of August of 2017? A lf I'm not mistaken, and I could be, but I believe that lwas supposed to appear before your committee and then it got canceled because the statement was released, unless I'm referring to the Senate, I don't recall, and then the statement got released and it got canceled. O A O Okay. MR. BITAR: lt's Maher Bitar, genera! counsel. For the record, the Do you recall whether that was for the House or for the Senate? I don't recall, I apologize. cancelation came from the Senate. MR. COHEN: From the Senate. I apologize then. You all look alike. BY MR. GOLDMAN: O Did you think at the time that by releasing the statement publicly that it was a way for you to publicly stay on message? A Yes, as well as to get the narrative, the narrative that I was trying to UNCLAS S I EIED 93 UNCLASSI FIED put out there in advance. I do recall that Jared Kushner had done the same thing, and it was met with tremendous success, and so I was copying his game plan. O A What do you mean it was met with tremendous success? He put out a statement prior to his appearance, and it was well-received by media and by a lot of the commentators on television. O A O A O A Was it is well-received by the President and his circle? Yes, very much so. And was that important to you? Very much so. Why was that important to you at the time? Because I was loyal to Mr. Trump, loyal to the President, and I was going to stay on message, which is what I was expected to do. O Did you have any discussions with anyone other than your own lawyer about this strategy of getting the narrative out publicly? A O A Yes. Who did you speak to about that? Definitely Jay Sekulow, and I don't recall if it was any others, other than my own attorney. O At any point in those conversations did Jay Sekulow relay to you that the President approved of getting this message out publicly? A O A .. I know that the President was aware of the statement and approved O What aspects of it do you know that he approved? I don't know if he used those exact words, but, yes, I know that - ln sum and substance. it. UNCLASS I FIED 94 UNCLASSIFIED A Well, when I would speak to Mr. Sekulow, he would say, you know, the client is happy with the way the statement goes. And then he even reached out to me after the hearings to say that the President heard you did great and loves you and everything is going to be good, everything will be fine. O A O You testified that the hearing was closed, right? Correct. So how did -- how do you understand the President knew how you did during the hearings? A I guess for the same reason that after our last appearance here, before I hit the front steps of the Capitol, everybody in the media knew exactly what went on in this room anyway. So I guess somebody leaked or somebody spoke, I have no idea. But he knew about it, and I spoke to Jay Sekulow about it, and he told me what he told me, that the client was extremely happy. O Okay. Do you recall discussing this stay on message strategy in connection to this written statement with anyone other than Jay Sekulow? A O Not that I recall, other than my attorney. Last week, after your Oversight testimony, Jay Sekulow released a statement which said, in part: Today's testimony by Michael Cohen that attorneys for the President edited or changed his statement to Congress to alter the duration of the Trump Tower Moscow negotiations is completely false. ls that an accurate statement? A No, to the same extent that the documents that you've already questioned me on show that they changed many aspects to my statement. [Discussion off the record.] MR. COHEN: Let me change that. UNCLASS Can you repeat the question? I FIED UNCLASSIFIED 95 BY MR. GOLDMAN: O Sure. ljust: I read that statement that Jay Sekulow gave where he focused very specifically on the duration of the Trump Tower Moscow negotiation, and he said that any testimony you made that the President or attorneys for -- sorry. That the attorneys for the President edited or changed that aspect of the statement was completely false. A O A And so the question was -ls that an accurate statement? I can't give you an answer. I don't know. What I would say is that the joint defense agreement provided the attorney group with copies of the statement, and it was changed and edited by all, and ultimately the information that was in that statement was acknowledged by everyone. O And when you first drafted the statement, or at least of the drafts that we've seen, is it accurate that January 2016 was always the end date for the Trump Tower Moscow project? A Yeah, I wrote the initial draft of the statement, and I put in the January O And did you discuss with Jay Sekulow prior to putting in that January date. date that you were going to put in the January date? A I don't recall specifically that conversation, but he read it and we had discussed it. O You testified earlier that Jay Sekulow and you discussed ending the purported date A - ln January. UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASS I FIED 96 O - in January. A That's correct. O So it was already baked into the statement when you drafted it? A That's correct. O Were there other aspects of the statement that Jay Sekulow edited? A Yes, there were. You'll find them in the revisions. MR. GOLDMAN: Mr. Chairman, do you or any of the members have any questions on this? THE CHAIRMAN: Just a couple. Mr. Sekulow's statement of last week only denies that the edits or changes to the statement were designed to alter the duration of the Moscow Trump Tower negotiations. He says nothing about whether he was aware that it was false to begin with. Was that correct? MR. COHEN: That's correct. THE CHAIRMAN: ln your view, was this an effort to make a non-denial denial? MR. COHEN: That's one way to put it. The purpose, Chairman, was again to minimize the duration, to minimize the contact. lt was just to stay on message. And as I testified before, which comports with what ljust said to Mr. Goldman's question a moment ago, the goalwas to keep it to a minimum. And when I had previously discussed with Mr. Sekulow the fact that this text existed between Felix, myself for the January, that's where that date ended up being inserted into the original draft. THE CHAIRMAN: And just to be perfectly clear about this, the statement UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASS I FIED 97 about the Trump Tower negotiations ending in January that was part of your original draft was false, and Mr. Sekulow knew that it was false? MR. COHEN: Yes, sir. THE CHAIRMAN: Was part of the intention in releasing this statement publicly when your testimony would be private and doing so well in advance of your testimony, to telegraph to others what the party line should be in particular about the duration of the Trump Tower Moscow negotiations? MR. COHEN: I wouldn't say that it was to telegraph the message. Everybody knew the message. lt was just reinforcement of the message. THE CHAIRMAN: Okay. MR. COHEN: And when I was referring to everybody, I was talking about everybody in the circle, not everybody in the world. THE CHAIRMAN: Okay. MR. KRISHNAMOORTHI: Mr. Cohen, was there any discussion about why it was -- the message was decided to go out that the Trump Tower negotiations would conclude in January 2016? MR. COHEN: Because it was prior to the lowa caucus, which many people believe is the beginning, the kick-off to the campaign. MR. KRISHNAMOORTHI: And who communicated that message to you? MR. COHEN: That would have been Jay Sekulow. MR. KRISHNAMOORTHI: And was there any other reason for why that January 2016 timeframe would be the end date? MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. KRISHNAMOORTHI: Can you please elaborate? MR. COHEN: Because there was a text message, again, between myself UNCLASS I E]ED UNCLASS I F]ED 98 and Mr. Sater, that corroborated that date and gave it credibility. MR. KRISHNAMOORTHI: Okay. Thank you. THE CHAIRMAN: Okay. Mr. Goldman. BY MR. GOLDMAN: O Could ljust follow up with Mr. Sater for 1 minute. ls it your understanding that Mr. Sater knew that the dates in the written statement were false? A Yes, he was a participant in all of the communications up and through June of that year. O Did you have any conversations with Mr. Sater directly prior to submitting this written statement about the substance of the statement? A O I did not. I don't recall having any. But in that email that we saw where he said everything was essentially accurate -- A O That's an emailfrom Steve Ryan. I understand. So that was the sum total of your understanding as to Sater's involvement in the drafting of this statement? A O Yes. I'm going to move on now to -- MR. SWALWELL: ljust have one question. MR. GOLDMAN: Go ahead. MR. SWALWELL: Mr. Cohen, during this period of time you mentioned that there possibly was a leak after your testimony, but you did receive an attaboy. Were you familiar during this period of time as to whether President Trump had UNCLASS I FIED 99 UNCLASSIFIED any relationship with the chairman of the committee at the time, Mr. Nunes? MR. COHEN: [Nonverbal response.] MR. SWALWELL: Did you know of a relationship between the two? MR. COHEN: Only what I would read in the newspaper. MR. SWALWELL: lyield back. Thanks. BY MR. GOLDMAN: O I'm going to move on now to continue the pardon conversation that we had last year -- last time you testified, on February 28th. I'm not going to rehash all of your testimony. A O Thank you. But if I could summarize what I believe you testified to last time and just have you explain whether this is accurate. You testified last time that you met in the Oval Office with Donald Trump and Jay Sekulow in or about May of 2017? A O Correct. During which conversation you discussed the possibility of a pardon. ls that accurate? A Correct. To the best of my recollection, yes. O At that time was Jay Sekulow the President's lawyer? A During the first meeting he was not, he actually was my attorney. O He was your attorney at that time? A Yes. I brought him into the White House, and it was ultimately decided that he would represent the President and then provided me with the name of - and I think I testified to this last time -- and provided of a couple of different attorneys that I should reach out to. UNCLASS I FIED me with the names UNCLASS I FI ED 100 The first one I reached out to they had a conflict, the second one didn't want to do it because of previous payment issues, and the third one ended up being Steve Ryan. O Did you have an attorney prior to receiving the letter from this committee requesting your voluntary cooperation? A O No, sir. Do you recall then subsequently receiving a subpoena from this committee when you refused to cooperate? A O Yes. Was this meeting at the White House before or after you received the subpoena? A O I don't recall. I would : if I had to guess -- Well, don't guess about. Let me help you refresh your recollection. Because I think last time you stated that one of the topics of conversation is that Trump A O A Actually it was - -- was upset that you were not cooperating. Yes, but I don't know if I had received your subpoena at that time. There was an article that I had refused to come, and I don't know if it was because of the subpoena or because of the article that said I refused. So I'm just still not sure O You also testified last time that after this meeting in the Oval Office, which you described in some detail last time, that you had a number of phone calls with Jay Sekulow relating to the A case. ls that right? That's correct. UNCLASS]FIED 101 UNCLASSIE]ED O Now, having had the opportunity to think about this for almost a week, do you have any better recollection as to the nature and substance of any conversations you had with Jay Sekulow about pardons? A O Nothing greater than what I had already stated to the committee. Okay. You testified last time about the notion of a pre-pardon, and that you had a conversation with him about that? A O Correct. And that that might relate - that might be conferred upon individuals other than you as well? A Yes. And that pre-pardon wouldn't work, again, because then you waive your Fifth Amendment rights since you now have immunity, so the concept disappeared rather quickly. O Can you state again what Sekulow said about the reason why at least he was considering giving pardons to you and perhaps others? A O lt was to shut down the inquiries and to shut the investigation down. And do you know whether - did he relay to you any conversations he had had with the President, who he referred to as the client, in that: on that topic? A Virtually all my conversations were -- referred back to the client. Jay wasn't going to speak on behalf of the President, he was relaying messages back and forth, and as well giving me legal advice in certain respects. O So is it your testimony that whatever discussions that Jay Sekulow had regarding pardons was done with the knowledge and authority of the President? A O I believe so. You testified last time about a number of conversations that you had UNCLASSI FIED L02 I FIED UNCLASS both leading up to the written statement at the end of August and your testimony at the end of October with Jay Sekulow. Do you remember that? A O Yes. And you were asked after the - after your testimony last week to try to think about whether or not you had additional conversations with Jay Sekulow related to pardons after you testified before the House and Senate lntelligence Committees. Do you remember whether you had any conversations with him after that testimony and before the raid -- or don't call it a raid - before the searches in April 9th, 2018? A I don't recall. MR. GOLDMAN: Mr. Chairman, before I move on to the summer of 2018 pardon discussion, do you or the members have any other questions on the Sekulow pardon discussions? THE CHAIRMAN: Just one question. There was a public report in the time since you last testified last week on the subject of pardons. lt was a narrative that was different than your testimony before the committee, so I presume it had nothing to do with your testimony. But it posited that you approached the White House seeking a pardon. How did the topic of pardons come up initially? Was it something that you sought from the White House or they raised with you? MR. COHEN: Okay. So they raised the topic, and what they were doing, including publicly, they were dangling the concept of pardons, and the purpose of course was to keep everybody part in the joint defense team. And my conversations with exactly on that - starting with, you know, Jay Sekulow, were point. Okay. Well, what about me? Right? I have to go for this UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS 103 I FIED hearing and then another hearing and then there was a third committee that wanted, you know, what about me? At which point the President -- I'm sorry, Mr. Sekulow - stated that the President loves you, don't worry, everything is going to be fine, nothing is going to happen. THE CHAIRMAN: And at this point when you had this - when you had the first conversation with Mr. Sekulow about pardons, was he representing you at that point or was his client Mr. Trump? MR. COHEN: His client at that time was Mr. Trump - President Trump. THE CHAIRMAN: And did Mr. Sekulow bring up the topic of pardons with you initially, and then you inquired about whether you were among the category they were considering, or how did that conversation -MR. COHEN: Yes, they were dangling, you know, pardons, both by communications as well as by media. And I asked about it as well. I mean, I was part of the joint defense team, I was part of the gang, and I wanted to know what about - what about me? THE CHAIRMAN: And so the first conversation you would have had with Mr. Sekulow on the subject of pardons took place after there was already a public dangling of pardons? MR. COHEN: I don't recall the exact time, but there was a conversation even before it became public between myself and Mr. Sekulow. THE CHAIRMAN: And was that conversation not only confined to you but others who were part of the joint defense agreement? MR. COHEN: I don't know about that, ljust know what my conversations with Mr. Sekulow were about. UNCLASS I FI ED UNCLASS 1.04 I FIED THE CHAIRMAN: Okay. Mr. Quigley. MR. QUIGLEY: Thank you, again, Mr. Cohen, for being here. You talked about the multiple conversations with Mr. Sekulow. ln this initial round when you were saying, "What about me?" what was his first reaction to, "What about me?" MR. COHEN: The President loves you and you're going to be just fine. This isn't going anywhere. MR. QUIGLEY: But you're a thorough person, an attorney, your reaction would have been, does that mean you're going to consider pardoning me, something like that? MR. COHEN: Something like that, yes. lwanted to be included in the group of people that he was considering. That when I say he, ! meant Mr. Trump, the President. MR. QUIGLEY: ln your mind, and understanding Mr. Sekulow and the President, what was the strongest indication that Mr. Sekulow gave you that they would consider pardoning you? What were his words, in your mind, that were the strongest, best indication that would have given the best hope that it was possible? MR. COHEN: Only that the matter was going to be over in like 6 weeks or 8 weeks, and then that 8-week would come about and it was still ongoing and more things I had to do. So I went ahead and I'd say, I mean, is this still on the table? And they were like, yeah. You know, it's another couple of weeks and everything is going to be fine, and, you know, the client loves you, and just don't worry, nothing is going to happen. MR. QUIGLEY: They could take that to mean that you're not going to need UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIFIED 105 a pardon because this whole thing is going to fade away or that they were going to take care of you in a pardon in some other matter? MR. COHEN: That's possible as well. MR. QUIGLEY: Thank you. BY MR. GOLDMAN: O All right. Mr. Cohen, let's move ahead now to conversations related to pardons that occurred after the search warrants were executed on April 9th, 2018, with individuals other than Jay Sekulow. Before I do that, though, you're pretty -- we have your phone records here, and we're not going to show them to you right now, but we have gone through them and there are a number of conversations with Jay Sekulow? A O I'm aware of that. You were -- were these all business conversations or were they personal in nature? A O The only business that I had was regarding this investigation. But were they about your families or were they about, you know, business, so to speak? About legal issues? A O A O Government -- Sorry, not business. Legal issues? Yes. And you had any number of conversations with him in 2017 and 2018, right? A O A That's correct. You could not count them right now? Correct. UNCLASSI FIED 105 UNCLASSIFIED O A O We're talking well over 100? Sounds correct. After the FBI searched your homes and office in April 2018, did you have any more conversations directly with Jay Sekulow about the possibility of a pardon? A O I don't recallthe specific dates. You might have been discussing with him at that point the materials and the documents that the Southern District of New York seized from you, right? A O Yes. And so in the context of a new potential case against you, does that refresh your recollection as to whether you may have had discussions about pardons at that point with Jay Sekulow? A Again, I can't give you exact whether it was one conversation after the raid or five conversations, but the topic of pardons continued. O The topic of pardons continued with whom? A With Mr. Sekulow. O Throughout the course of the investigation until you broke from A - the joint defense O - the President? A That's correct. O Which was? A Around July. O So is it your testimony that you continued to have conversations with Jay Sekulow about the possibility of a pardon all the way up until July of 2018? A Yes, I wanted the matter to go away for UNCLASS I FIED me. Yes. LO7 UNCLASSIFIED O Near the end of that period, do you recall what he said? Was it in any way different than what he would have said to you a year prior to that? A I don't recall, you know, specifically. I can only tell you at some points he had said, you know, it's very difficult right now for political reasons, but, you know, he's not going to let anything happen to stay you. The client loves you and just strong. He's really sorry this is happening to you. O A O So the message was to sort of hold tight and you'll be taken care of? That's correct. Now, after the searches, did you have any discussions of a possible pardon with anyone other than Jay Sekulow? A O A O A O Yes. With whom? His name is Robert Costello. And who is whose Robert Costello? He's an attorney. Describe broadly for us the nature and substance of the conversations that you had with Robert Costello about pardons? A Sure. So I received from Jeffrey Citron from Citron - an email, and then followed up by a phone call, I think Citron, Davidoff & Hutcher, is the firm's name, who I happen to know from sitting on a board with a bank. And he said that he has a gentleman in his firm who has a longstanding relationship with Mr. Giuliani, and that he's a criminal defense attorney, and we'd like to come meet with you in order to discuss your current situation. O Just so the record is clear, by Mr. Giuliani, do you mean Rudy Giuliani? UNCLASS ] FIED 108 UNCLASS]F]ED A O A O A O Same gentleman, yes. What happened after that initial conversation? We met. Who is we? Myself, Jeff Citron, and Robert Costello. And did you learn what Robert Costello's relationship with Rudy Giuliani was? A According to Mr. Costello he knows Rudy for over 30 years, that they're extremely close. And continuously through all my communications with him, he touted that relationship, that it's gxtremely important to have him on board as a back channel in order to get messages and get what you need from the President and the White House staff. O A O And what did you understand that to mean? Pardon. We're going to go through some of the documents in a minute, but just to set the scene. Did Mr. Costello ever relay to you that Rudy Giulianiwas, on behalf of the President, offering you a pardon if you did not cooperate? A O A I don't think that those are the terms or the way that he expressed it. So how did he express it? That he's extremely close to Rudy. That it's extremely important that he remain on board. That all the things that you would want, you know, we can work on, we can make happen for you. But you need us to be part of your team, because the connection, again, is that backdoor channe! to Rudy Giuliani, hence the President. O Did you have any discussions directly with Rudy Giuliani about a UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASS I FIED 109 pardon? A O No. l'd like to have you take a look at the majority exhibit 54. [ttlajority Exhibit No. 54 was marked for identification.l BY MR. GOLDMAN: O A O A Do you recognize this exhibit? Yes. What is it? lt's an email from Robert Costello to me dated Saturday, April 21st, of 2018, time-stamped at 12:02a.m. O A O A your And is this a document that you recently provided to the committee? Yes. All right. Could you read the email, please? Sure. "Michael, ljust team. spoke to Rudy Giuliani and told him I was on Rudy was thrilled and said this could not be a better situation for the President or you. He asked me if it was okay to call the President and Jay Sekulow and I said fine. We discussed the facts, Jay Goldberg's stupid remarks, et cetera. He said I can't tell you how pleased I am that I can work with someone I know and trust. He asked me to tell you that he knows how tough this is on you and your family, and he will make sure to tell the President" -- sure is spelled wrong, it says make sue to tell -- "make sure to tell the President. He said thank you for opening this back channel of communication and asked me to keep in touch. I told him I would after speaking O to you further. Bob." Okay. lf we could go to the next page, please. And what is on the UNCLASS]FIED UNCLASS I FI 110 ED next page? A lt's an additionalemail, again, from Robert Costello to me, this one dated April 21st of 2018, and time-stamped at 8:57 p.m. O Now, in it he - Mr. Costello says that he, quote, "l spoke with Rudy. Very, very positive. You are," quote, "'loved,"' unquote. He then knew that. said: "l told him everything you asked me to and he said they There was never a doubt and they are in our corner. Rudy said this communication channel must be maintained. He called it crucial and noted how reassured they were that they had someone like me whom Rudy has known for so many years in this role." And then it's signed below: "Bob." A lt also states: "Sleep well tonight, you have friends in high places." He must be referring to the Lord. O A O Who do you think he is referring to actually? He is referring to the President. And then you referenced earlier the back channel of communication, which is referenced in the first email. What did you understand that to mean? A O A O Also to the President. And why was that relevant or important? All for the topic of the pardon. Did you have any follow-on conversations with Mr. Costello about these emails? A O A Yes, there are more emails that followed, as well as -Sorry, did you have any conversations that are not in the emails? Not that I'm aware of. I could, again, continue to check. UNCLASS I FIED 1L7 UNCLASSIFIED O A Okay. And anything that I find I'll have counsel immediately forward to this committee. O No, sorry, my question is whether you had any phone conversations or in-person meetings in the aftermath of this email to discuss this further. A O Yes. There were phone conversations, to the best of my recollection. Do you remember if you had a phone conversation that discussed these April 21st emails when he says: "lf you want to call me I will give you the details." Did you ever get more details? A O A Yes. And what were those details? Same as what the email says. You're loved. That don't worry. The President is not going to leave you out there hanging. You need me. I'm the back channel to Rudy, and Rudy is speaking on a regular basis with the President about this. Everybody's concerned. They don't like what's going on. And you need me as that link. O Okay. I'd like now, if we have a minute, to turn to majority exhibit 55. [Majority Exhibit No. 55 was marked for identification.l BY MR. GOLDMAN: O A What is this document, Mr. Cohen? This is an email, again, from Robert Costello to me, and it's cc'd to Jeff Citron, dated Tuesday, May 15th of 2018, and time-stamped at 1 :05 p.m. O I'm going to read a sentence in the middle. lt says: "l have UNCLASSIEIED UNCLASS I F]ED 11.2 continued to be in touch with my friend, who indicates that he and Jay Sekulow will be meeting with Steve Ryan Wednesday or Thursday in Washington, D.C., to discuss mutually beneficial actions. My friend suggested that we have a talk with you as there is significant information that we need to communicate." Who is he referring when he says "my friend"? A O Rudy. And did you ever come to understand what he meant by "mutually beneficial actions"? A O A O That this would come to an end for me. How would it come to an end for you? A pardon. Did you ever learn what the significant information that Mr. Giuliani needed to communicate to you was? A I did not. Not to best of my knowledge. MR. GOLDMAN: I believe our time is up, Mr. Chairman. I yield. THE CHAIRMAN: Back to the minority. MR. RATCLIFFE: Mr. Cohen, I want to follow up on where I left off with you at the end of your last session. I was asking you about the issue of pardons and related to you the NBC and Wall Street Journal reporting about your prior counsel, Stephen Ryan, and I asked you three questions. The first one was whether anyone at the White House had ever discussed with you the possibility of a pardon. I understood your answer to be no. I asked you about whether or not President Trump had ever -- MR. COHEN: Sir, I'm sorry, I don't recall saying no on that. MR. RATCLIFFE: Well, l'll give you a summary of what I heard and then UNCLASS I FIED 113 UNCLASSIFIED you can correct it. MR. COHEN: Sure. MR. RATCLIFFE: The second question was whether or not President Trump ever discussed with you the possibility of a pardon, and I thought I heard you say no. And then my third question was, was a member of the President's legal team ever discussed with you the possibility of a pardon, and I heard you say yes, and I asked you who it was, and you said Jay Sekulow. So let me let you correct what I just - MR. COHEN: Then it's correct. MR. RATCLIFFE: Okay. I've accurately summarized? MR. COHEN: Yes, sir, yes, you have. MR. RATCLIFFE: Okay. And I apologize, I wasn't here when the majority was asking questions about the pardon, So I'm not .- l'm just trying to understand the details of that. The discussion that you had with Jay Sekulow about the possibility of a pardon, tell me about that, when that took place, to the best of your knowledge. MR. COHEN: When I received the subpoena to -- whether it was this committee or the Senate Select Committee -- that's when it, to the best of my recollection, it started. MR. RATCLIFFE: Did he approach Okay. To the best of your recollection, how did it start? you? And how did that happen, to the best of your knowledge? MR. COHEN: We were involved in a conversation, and yes, he raised it. MR. RATCLIFFE: Tell me how he raised it, to the best of your recollection? UNCLASSI FIED UNCLASSIFIED Lt4 MR. COHEN: As we were engaged in the conversation, he brought it up as this is one way to stop the investigation, that the President could pardon -- or pre-pardon everyone, and that way you can then finish with the investigations and you don't -- you don't have to -- there's no more cooperation, there's no more -- no more case against you. MR. RATCLIFFE: Okay. Do you remember anything else about that? MR. COHEN: Like I said, it's But - to specific sum and substance, I don't' MR. RATCLIFFE: Do you -- I'm sorry. MR. COHEN: Sorry. The topic of pardon. MR. RATCLIFFE: Do you recallwhere that conversation took place? MR. COHEN: By phone. MR. RATCLIFFE: Was it one conversation, to the best of your knowledge? MR. COHEN: No, there were multiple conversations about pardons. MR. RATCLIFFE: With Jay Sekulow? MR. COHEN: Yes, sir. MR. RATCLIFFE: Were they all in the same general timeframe that you talked about, the issuance of a subpoena by either the Senate Select Committee on lntelligence or this committee? MR. COHEN: No, sir. lt continued on because, as the case continued to develop, I was then again assured that this matter was going to come to an end. And he would say, it's going to come to an end in 6 weeks. Mueller is going to -- you know, it's going to get shut down, or Mueller is going to put out a report. Then 6 weeks came, and then it was like, well, there's so much more, they just requested more people to come in, so probably give it another 2 months, and UNCLASS I FIED 115 UNCLASSIFIED it was by the end of the summer, and it just kept going on and on. MR. RATCLIFFE: So the fact that you had multiple conversations about it, was that because you were receptive to the idea of a pardon? MR. COHEN: Yes, sir. MR. RATCLIFFE: Okay. And when I asked you last week about evidence that you had a potential obstruction of justice, I asked you to state on the record for me any evidence that you had that might be obstruction of justice. The offer of a pardon as some sort of a quid pro quo for some other benefit might be evidence of obstruction of justice. So my question to you is, why didn't you mention this last week when I asked you about it? MR. COHEN: I didn't relate the two. I wasn't being - THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Ratcliffe, we did have extensive testimony about this last week, but you had already left the committee. MR. RATCLIFFE: I appreciate the clarification. I think my question was, why, in response to the question that I asked about obstruction of justice and evidence that would support it, Mr. Cohen didn't bring it up. But I'll let the record speak for itself. So the reporting that I started to ask you about, the NBC and Wall Street Journal reporting, that it was your prior counsel Stephen Ryan who raised the possibility of a pardon on your behalf with members of Trump legal team, is that accurate or not? MR. COHEN: That's not -- that's not accurate. MR. RATCLIFFE: Okay. MR. COHEN: I asked Mr. Ryan to meet with Rudy Giuliani, and I don't UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS 116 I FIED recall if Jay was a party to that, but it was to explore the possibility of a pardon, because that possibility was constantly being dangled in my 100 percent open to accepting MR. RATCLIFFE: it. face. And, yes, I was Anything to end this. Okay. Did you ever make public statements that you would never accept a pardon from President Trump? MR. COHEN: I did. Yes, I made that statement. MR. RATCLIFFE: How do you reconcile that statement with the one you just made? MR. COHEN: Because I was talking about in the present tense, I wasn't talking about in the past tense when I was writing my statement. MR. DAVIS: Excuse me 1 minute. [Discussion off the record.] UNCLASSI FIED UNCLASSIFIED 1L7 [12:48 p.m.] MR. COHEN: And it was in July. Around July 2nd is when I had decided I was not going to be affiliated with the team any longer on that joint defense agreement, and I authorized Mr. Davis to make that statement. MR. RATCLIFFE: All right. And you're referring to your current attorney, Lanny Davis, making public statements to the effect that you would never accept -MR. COHEN: I was talking about in the present tense, yes, sir. MR. RATCLIFFE: Yeah. ljust want the record to be clear that Mr. Davis made public statements on your behalf with your consent and knowledge that you would never accept a pardon from Mr. Trump? MR. GOLDMAN: Mr. Ratcliffe, can we just put a time to these statements? MR. RATCLIFFE: Well, it was actually a public statement by Mr. Davis. MR. GOLDMAN: ljust want to put a time to it. MR. COHEN: July 2nd would be the date. MR. RATCLIFFE: Okay. To the best of your knowledge, that's when it is, July of 2018? MR. COHEN: Yes, July 2018. MR. RATCLIFFE: Fair enough. What was it about July of 2018 that changed your mind about - before that date, as I understand it, you were interested in a pardon, and after that date, you would never accept one from President Trump? MR. COHEN: Because lhad had enough of the lies, and lhad enough of the fake dangling of, you know, pardons by the various different individuals. And I realized that I'm on my own in this fight. MR. RATCLIFFE: So when you say the fake lies and the dangling, none of UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASSIFIED 118 the conversations to your earlier testimony were directly with President Trump? You're not accusing him of fake lies or dangling a pardon, are you? MR. COHEN: Well, Jay Sekulow doesn't speak on behalf of Jay Sekulow. He was speaking on behalf of the President. And Robert Costello certainly wasn't speaking on behalf of Robert Costello. He was speaking as an intermediary for Rudy Giuliani, who speaks on behalf of the President. MR. RATCLIFFE: But, again, just so the record is clear, with respect to all those individuals you just named, you don't have direct knowledge that they had conversations with the President about MR. COHEN: ldo it? You were -- not. MR. RATCLIFFE: You're assuming they were acting with his knowledge and authority? MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. RATCLIFFE: Okay. MR. DAVIS: Excuse me, Congressman, for a minute. MR. RATCLIFFE: Yes. [Witness conferred with counsel.] MR. DAVIS: Thank you. MR. RATCLIFFE: Anything we need to clarify for the record? MR. DAVIS: No. MR. COHEN: He just wanted to whisper in my ear. MR. RATCLIFFE: So before I yield to my colleague who has some follow-up questions, I also went through a litany of issues that you had discussed with the Democratic staff. One of the things I asked you about was whether you discussed with them UNCLASS I FIED 119 UNCLASS]FIED the catch and kill operations against people who were making allegations against Mr. Trump. And can I accurately reflect that you said yes, you had discussed that with members of the Democratic staff prior to your public testimony? MR. GOLDMAN: Just for clarification, could you just identify which committee when you're talking about Democratic staff? MR. RATCLIFFE: Well, I can have the witness do that, if he's able to. I wasn't privy to the conversations that Democratic staff for the lntelligence Committee had versus conversations that Mr. Cohen had with members of the Oversight staff. Obviously, the record is clear that he had hours of testimony and conversations with them, both staff. So he would have to be the one to clarify. MR. GOLDMAN: There was no testimony with any staff, and -MR. RATCLIFFE: No, his testimony about conversations with the staff. THE CHAIRMAN: lf we could just go back, I'm sorry, to your question. And, Mr. Cohen, if you .MR. RATCLIFFE: So my question was, we talked about earlier I said, did you discuss with members of the Democratic staff of either committee the catch and kill operations against people who were making allegations against Mr. Trump? I heard you to say yes. ls that MR. COHEN: That is right? correct. I also stated I wasn't sure which, you know, committee I had spoken to. MR. RATCLIFFE: That's fine. But my question is -- so my question is, last week when Ms. Ocasio-Cortez asked you a question in a public hearing about the catch and kill program and the people who were making allegations against Mr. Trump, you had previously had a conversation with Democratic staff about that same issue? UNCLASSI FIED UNCLASSIFIED 120 MR. COHEN: I can't tellyou that that's a question Ms. Ocasio-Cortez stated. MR. RATCLIFFE: That's my question. ljust want to make sure that the record is clear. When she asked you that question on that subject, that you had previously discussed the same issue with Democratic staff members? MR. COHEN: lf she asked me that question? MR. RATCLIFFE: lf she asked you that question. MR. COHEN: Then the answer would be yes. MR. RATCLIFFE: And if she asked you about persons with knowledge of relevant facts and David Pecker as one of those people, I heard you earlier today say that you had a discussion with Democratic staff members about David Pecker being one of those people, correct? MR. COHEN: That would be correct. MR. RATCLIFFE: And if Ms. Ocasio-Cortez asked you about the issue of asset inflation, and specifically, whether or not Mr. Trump or The Trump Organization had inflated the value of assets to an insurance company, again, so the record is clear, you and I discussed earlier today, and you admitted that you had had that conversation with Democratic staff before Ms. Ocasio-Cortez asked you about it? MR. COHEN: Yes. However, Rachel Maddow also did a program on it for about 30 minutes. So it wasn't -- once the document was posted, it became open season on the document, but that's, I guess, irrelevant. MR. RATCLIFFE: I'm just trying to make sure the record is clear about what Ms. Ocasio-Cortez and other members of the Democratic staffs of jurisdiction may have been aware of, based on conversations that you had with the staff of UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASS 121. I FIED those committees. MR. COHEN: I still also say if in the future you want to reach out to me for any questions and clarification, I'm available. MR. RATCLIFFE: I'll do that. I'm going to yield to my colleague from Utah. MR. STEWART: All right. Thank you. And just to follow up on a couple things you said earlier if you could, sir, regarding your conversations with Mr. Sekulow, you were asked a few moments ago whether discussions regarding pardons was done with the knowledge of the President, and you answered, I believe so. Did Mr. Sekulow ever tell you he had discussed this with the President? MR. COHEN: He would say that I just got off the phone or I just left the office of the client. Yes. MR. STEWART: Okay. So - but he could have got off the phone or left the office of the client and discussed a lot of things. Did he directly tell you I have discussed the possibility of a pardon with the President? MR. COHEN: No, sir. MR. STEWART: Okay. That's an important distinction. MR. COHEN: The answer would still be no. MR. STEWART: Okay. Did Mr. Costello ever tell you that he had discussed the possibility of a pardon with the President? MR. COHEN: No, sir. MR. STEWART: Okay. So is it possible, maybe even likely, that they were discussing a range of possibilities, a range of ideas, without the President's knowledge? UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASS t22 I FIED MR. COHEN: lt's possible. MR. STEWART: So on what basis do you answer this question when you said I believe so, when asked if this was done with the President's knowledge? MR. COHEN: Because I believe so. MR. STEWART: Based on? MR. COHEN: My belief. MR. STEWART: Based on? MR. COHEN: The communications that I had with the various different individuals. lt's my belief. I am entitled to -- the belief is that it started at a specific time, and I had conversations with individuals. And it was -MR. STEWART: I understand, but .. MR. COHEN: You know, Jay Sekulow being his attorney, and then following it up with the communications with Robert Costello, this was my belief. MR. STEWART: But at no time did either of them tell you they had discussed this with the President? MR. COHEN: At no time did either of them say that they spoke to the President about it. MR. STEWART: ln the many discussions you had with Mr. Sekulow or others about the possibility of a Presidential pardon, did you ever try to avoid that conversation? MR. COHEN: No. MR. STEWART: Did you ever indicate you weren't interested in a pardon? MR. COHEN: At any point did I what? MR. STEWART: lndicate that you were not interested in a pardon. MR. COHEN: lf you would timeframe it. UNCLASS I FIED t23 UNCLASS]EIED MR. STEWART: At any time. MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. STEWART: Previous to, say, JulY. MR. COHEN: Previous, I was open to the possibility of being considered, yes, along with everybody else. MR. DAVIS: July 2018? MR. STEWART: Yes, sir. Previous to July 2018, did you ever tell any of these individuals that you would not accept a pardon? MR. COHEN: Not that I recall. MR. STEWART: So during none of these conversations did you -- you never asked for a pardon? MR. COHEN: I never asked them .. first of all, please understand that my relationship with the President at that time was still very solid. I didn't need to call them or to ask them to speak to the President. I could have called him myself. I could have made an appointment to go to the White House to see him and to ask for it. They were dangling the pardon in order to keep the joint defense team together, to stay on message. MR. STEWART: And I'm just trying to reconcile .. MR. COHEN: And that -- again, sir, I apologize. That's my belief. MR. STEWART: Okay, I understand and I appreciate that. I'm just trying to reconcile in my own mind some previous statements. For example, reading from your statement last week to the Committee on Oversight and Reform, you said: I have never asked for. And you didn't avoid these conversations. You didn't say, I'm not interested in a pardon. You didn't tell him you wouldn't accept a UNCLASSIFIED UNCLAS S I FIED 724 pardon. And yet, you're saying you never asked for a pardon. MR. COHEN: I never asked. MR. STEWART: So would it have been implied that you were obviously interested in a pardon from these conversations? MR. COHEN: Before the July? MR. STEWART: Yes, before July. MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. STEWART: All right. I want to follow one other thing very quickly if I could, and this won't take long, Mr. Cohen. I want to understand the relationship with Mr. Sater and his relationship with the Trump campaign or with The Trump Organization. You had known him for several years, I believe, you told us previous. MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. STEWART: And you considered him a friend, apparently? MR. COHEN: I considered him a colleague. But yes, I would consider him a friend at the time. MR. STEWART: You had a friendly relationship. lt wasn't adversarial? MR. COHEN: Not adversarial at all. MR. STEWART: Again, I think you answered this, but I want to just for clarity and to understand, he had worked for the Trump campaign or Organization for about how long? MR. COHEN: So Mr. Sater never worked with the campaign. MR. STEWART: But he had an office in the organization? MR. COHEN: On the 26th floor, yes. MR. STEWART: And I'm sorry, I maybe confused you, because I did say UNCLASS]FIED UNCLASSI FIED campaign. But for The Trump Organization 725 is what my questions are. MR. COHEN: He never worked for The Trump Organization. MR. STEWART: Can you explain that, how he has an office there but he doesn't work for the organization? MR. COHEN: Mr. Trump allowed him to occupy an office on his floor, the 26th floor, as well as a space in the bullpen outside his office for an assistant, because the goalwas Felix was sourcing deals, licensing deals, and Mr. Trump believed that Felix could do it, since he had proven himself on one or more occasion, and was interested in having these licensing deals. MR. STEWART: So he was essentially as kind of a commissioned salesman. ls that a fair description? MR. COHEN: I don't know how to describe it other than he was there and he was trying to source deals on behalf of - MR. STEWART: Trying to sell deals on behalf of the organization? MR. COHEN: To bring deals to the organization, yes. MR. STEWART: And then .- and he was involved with other deals than the Trump Tower Moscow deal, I'm assuming? MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. STEWART: Could you describe some of those other deals that he was involved with? MR. COHEN: Trump Soho. Trump Soho was a licensed dealthat existed between his company. They put the deal together. lt waq called Bayrock. And they put the deal together between SAR Realty, which is a large real estate development company, using the Trump brand for the development of a condo hotel. UNCLASS I FI ED t26 UNCLASSIFIED MR. STEWART: And were there others other than Trump Soho that he was involved with? MR. COHEN: I believe he was also involved in the Trump Fort Lauderdale, which is a residential project that took place in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. I don't know whatever happened to it. MR. STEWART: Any others that you're aware of? MR. COHEN: Not that I'm aware of, no. MR. STEWART: The Trump Tower Moscow deal, which there was a lot of interest in, it didn't go fonnrard, obviously. MR. COHEN: lt did not go forward. MR. STEWART: Mr. Sater always supported it, so far as you know? MR. COHEN: I'm sorry? MR. STEWART: Mr. Sater was always supportive of this, so far as you know? MR. COHEN: Oh, yes. I believe so. MR. STEWART: And can you describe, other than for obvious reasons, if there's more, will you describe why it didn't go forward? MR. COHEN: Yes. Because at no point in time were they ever able to produce for me documentation that demonstrated they either owned or controlled a piece of property to which we could design and build a Trump Tower Moscow. MR. STEWART: Hard to build a tower if you don't own a piece of property in Moscow. MR. COHEN: You don't know what size it could be. You don't know anything about it. MR. STEWART: At what point did it become obvious that they didn't own a UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS I FIED L27 piece of property there, didn't have access to property? MR. COHEN: I don't know the exact time period. MR. STEWART: Can you give about? Was it in January? MR. COHEN: Well, January I certainly had stil! not received information, so I couldn't start to work on definitive documents. Started getting frustrated with him. And then, as stated in my text, I called the deal over, at which point a couple weeks later, maybe 2 weeks or so, he contacted me again that he had a piece of property, and that I should be receiving it. And there's knowledge in the Kremlin about this project and they want this project to go fonruard. MR. STEWART: Did you believe him? MR. COHEN: Yes and no. MR. STEWART: Based on his nonperformance in the past? MR. COHEN: The answer is, based on his performance would be no. However, I would believe him when I received proof of the ownership of or control of a piece of property. MR. STEWART: But it's fair to say, based on what you just said, by January or thereabouts, you considered the deal dead, and you had lost trust that he was going to be able to secure a property, which was essential for this deal to go fonuard? MR. COHEN: I lost confidence that he was going to produce a piece of property. MR. STEWART: And you probably, I'm guessing, shared that conclusion with other members of the organization? MR. COHEN: I told Mr. Trump in one of our conversations that I still have not received any information regarding a piece of property. UNCLASS I FIED 128 UNCLASSIF]ED MR. STEWART: And one other thing, if I could, and it's just he has such an interesting background. We discussed briefly earlier in the morning some of the media reports regarding his background. You seemed to be surprised by that, some of those media stories. MR. COHEN: I've known Felix a long lVlR. time. I didn't know. STEWART: Had no idea? MR. COHEN: Some of that, no. MR. STEWART: Sometimes people do surprise us. leave kind of the executive floor at that point because of that. UNCLASS I FIED And he was asked to UNCLAS S t29 I FIED MR. STEWART: When he was asked to leave the 26th floor, where did he go? MR. COHEN: You know, I don't know the answer to that. MR. STEWART: Did you see him at that point? Was he still in the Organization? MR. COHEN: He was not in the Organization, no. He was never in the Organization. MR. STEWART: Well, I know, but understand, but in the organization building and association. But so far as that, did that sever the relationship between The Trump Organization and Mr. Sater then? MR. COHEN: lt severed his location in The Trump Organization, but it didn't sever the opportunities that he would have brought in. UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS 130 I F]ED MR. STEWART: Did you ever see him in the building after that? MR. COHEN: He did. He came to see me once. He was in the area, wanted to come up. MR. STEWART: But he didn't have an office in the building any longer? MR. COHEN: No, sir. MR. STEWART: But it's your understanding that he continued a relationship? MR. COHEN: Well, I continued to speak with him, yes. MR. STEWART: No, I mean a professional business formal relationship between the organization and Mr. Sater. Was that severed at that point? MR. COHEN: There was never a formal agreement or relationship that existed. MR. STEWART: Well, they must have had some relationship. He was providing them with leads and helping to sell, right? MR. COHEN: True. MR. STEWART: Did that continue after he was asked to remove himself from the: MR. COHEN: Only on the Trump Tower Moscow project. MR. STEWART: Only on that, so far as you know? MR. COHEN: So far as I know. MR. STEWART: that they're interested in Okay. Let me just, with the help of some colleagues, - Can you review for me the date of these media reports that ended up with him severing his occupancy on the executive floor there? MR. COHEN: I don't specifically know the date, but it was an ABC report, UNCLASS I FIED 131 UNCLASSI FIED and I believe it was done by Matt Mosk. MR. STEWART: Can you help me generally? Was it summer, winter? About what year? MR. COHEN: I apologize. l-- MR. STEWART: Would it have been previous to July of last year? MR. COHEN: Sir, I apologize. I don't know the exact date and I don't want to guess. MR. STEWART: All right. I want to bore down on this just a little bit. Within the last 10 years? Within the last 5 years? Help me get to some kind of timeframe of when this happened. So when - MR. COHEN: We're referring to what now? MR. STEWART: When these media reports came out. l'm sorry. Help me understand. I'm just trying to get a general timeframe of when these media reports came out and Mr. Sater ended up leaving the 26th can't remember. I get that. I can't remember floor. You say you anything. I miss my wife's birthday allthe time. MR. COHEN: I understand. MR. STEWART: But generally, was it - I mean, let's start with a place that's a well-defined event in your mind, July of last year, when this whole thing blew up, was it previous to that? MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. STEWART: A year previous? MR. COHEN: I would .. I would say it had to be in the range of 2015, the year of 2015. MR. STEWART: Sometime in the year of 2015? UNCLASS I FIED UNCLAS S L32 I FIED MR. COHEN: Yes, sir MR. STEWART: Thank you. Ranking member? I believe we yield our time. MR. NUNES: We yield back this time. MR. STEWART: We will give you 8 minutes of your life back. MR. COHEN: With that 8 minutes, I'll have a cookie. THE CHAIRMAN: Just a couple of follow-up questions before I give it back to Mr. Goldman. When you had the conversations with Mr. Sekulow about pardons, he represented the President, correct? MR. COHEN: That is correct. THE CHATRMAN: And when he would talk with you about the client being pleased with what you were doing and towing the party line, the client was the President, correct? MR. COHEN: Yes, that is correct. THE CHAIRMAN: And from the gist of those conversations, he was indicating to you that he was discussing your situation with the President, was he not? MR. COHEN: Yes. And I can tell you that the President was not happy with what occurred, in terms of whether it was the raid or even the fact that The Trump Organization was being required to turn over a series of documents under these document production. lt didn't please him, as I'm sure you can imagine. THE CHAIRMAN: But in particular, when you were having discussions with him about pardons and he would refer to his client -MR. COHEN: The client is the President. UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS L33 I FIED THE CHAIRMAN: The client is the President. And he was communicating to you that he was in discussicin with the President about making sure that you were protected? MR. COHEN: Yes. THE CHAIRMAN: And the whole purpose of him engaging with Mr. Costello was for the purpose of pursuing a potential pardon, was it not? MR. COHEN: Well, Mr. Costello reached out to me, offering his services as a criminal defense attorney post seeing what occurred, whether it was on television or in the press, and was very persistent in talking about his relationship to Rudy Giuliani, then one of the personal attorneys to the President. THE CHAIRMAN: He was essentially offering his service as a back channel to Giuliani and the President on the subject of pardons? MR. COHEN: Yes. Pardons was one of the services that he was offering. THE CHAIRMAN: And when it came to the issue of pardons, he communicated to you on April 21st in an email that my colleague went through with you: He, referring to Giuliani, asked me to tell you that he knows how tough this is on you and your family and he will make sure -- misspelled sue -- make sure to tell the President. So it was certainly the implication of your communications with Mr. Costello that the back channel with Mr. Giulianiwas for the purpose of reaching the President on the subject of pardons? MR. COHEN: And that he had reached - the answer is yes. And that he had, in fact, reached the President, according to his communication with Rudy. THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Goldman. MR. SWALWELL: Mr. Chairman, can I just follow up on your question? UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASSIFIED 734 THE CHAIRMAN: Yes. MR. SWALWELL: Mr. Cohen, you said that you were told by Mr. Sekulow that the President was going to, quote/unquote, "take care of you and not let anything happen to you." Other than a pardon as it related to your criminal liability, was there any other thing that the President could do to, quote/unquote, "take care of you"? MR. COHEN: He could have paid the bills. MR. SWALWELL: But did you understand that to mean pay the bills? MR. COHEN: lt was - it was whatever they as a group could do to put an end to the investigation. MR. SWALWELL: And did you understand that, as far as mechanically, what he could do to, as I said, take care of you and not let anything happen to you, functionally there was nothing other than a pardon? MR. COHEN: Not that I can think of. you. MR. SWALWELL: Thank I yield back. THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Goldman. EXAMINATION BY MR. GOLDMAN: O A O A O A O Just to follow up briefly, who has the power to issue pardons? That would be the President. And who was the President's lawyer? Jay Sekulow. Jay Sekulow had conversations with you about pardons. ls that right? That is correct. You were, until last week, a lawyer, correct? UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS A O 13s I F]ED That's also correct. And are you aware that under the ethics rules of lawyers, they cannot make representations on behalf of their client without their client's authorization? A those. Yes. Though as a disbarred lawyer, I no longer I've wiped them from my O brain. remember any of I'm sorry. We're going to just try to finish up this topic. I'd like to show you majority exhibit 60. [Majority Exhibit No. 60 was marked for identification.l BY MR. GOLDMAN: O A What is this document, Mr. Cohen? So there came a point in time where I questioned '- I'm sorry. Let me answer your question. Sorry. THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Cohen, just so you know, we have votes, I think, scheduled around 1:30, and that would be a good time for you to take a lunch break. MR. COHEN: Okay. Thank you. This is an email from Robert Costello to me, dated Thursday, June 7th of 2018, and it's timestamped at 3:16 p.m. BY MR. GOLDMAN: O A And you were about to describe what this email is about? So in the conversation that I had had with Mr. Costello, I must have intimated to him that I didn't believe that the conversations that were taking place between Rudy Giuliani and the President, or, I should say, Robert Costello and to Rudy were actually occurring, at which point in time he forwarded to me this communication. This says: [/ichael, to prove to you that Rudy Giuliani called UNCLASS I F] ED UNCLASS I FIED 136 me, and I did not call him, I photographed the pages from my iPhone, which I am attaching. They show - O Let me stop you from reading right here. Let's go to the attachment 'A Yes. O - which is page 4. And describe what this attachment is. A lt's a screenshot that O Sorry, go ahead. A * that states Rudy Giuliani's name, and it shows today that at both 1:15 and at 1:08, that he had incoming calls, one lasting 5 minutes and the second 6 minutes. We should probably redact that so that Rudy's home number is not -- or his cell number is not put out there. O As you know, this is closed session. So none of these documents will be released without redaction. And what's on the second page? A lt shows, again, al2:55, that he had received a callfrom Rudy. Then there's two that are to me, and then again one underneath after, I guess that must be his wife, two to Rudy, and then again two to me, with the times of 1:15 and then 1 1:30, and then finally, at the bottom, me again at 11:11 a.m. O And the idea of this screenshot was just to demonstrate to you that he is having phone conversations with Rudy Giuliani? A O That is correct. And that he, Giulianiwas calling him, that Costello was not calling Giuliani? A O That is correct. Well, both, incoming and outgoing. Okay. I'd like to show exhibit 56. UNCLASSI FIED UNCLASS I EIED t37 [Majority Exhibit No. 56 was marked for identification.l BY MR. GOLDMAN: O A What is this document, Mr. Cohen? This is an email, again, from Robert Costello to me dated Wednesday, June 13,2018, timestamped at 3:21 p.m. O The first paragraph reads: "Since you jumped off the phone rather abruptly, I did not get a chance to tell you that my friend has communicated to me that he is meeting with his client this evening." And he added that "if there is anything you wanted to convey, you should tell me and my friend will bring it up for discussion this evening." Who is Robert Costello referring to as his friend? A O A O His friend is Rudy Giuliani. And who is referred to here as his client? The President. And what did you understand him to mean when he asked you whether there was anything you wanted to convey? A O A O The issue of a pardon. And do you recall responding to this? ldo not. Was it typical for you to convey a message about a pardon through Costello to Giuliani? A O A No. What was more typical? He brought it up that - he'd already communicated the whole issue of UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS the pardon. I didn't really fully understand. I was going on that day. L38 I EIED tired. I had a lot of things He wanted to engage me in conversation. I didn't feel like being involved in conversation and so, again, ljumped off the phone, as hewrote, rather abruptly. O A O And you remember that conversation? Yes. Do you remember speaking about anything substantive with him on the call? A I don't, other than he kept pushing for him to represent me with a formal retainer agreement so that he could advance the conversations and advance what we were talking about, again, which is the pardons. O And then the last sentence of the second paragraph reads: "What you do next is for you to decide, but if that choice requires any discussion with my friend's client, you have the opportunity to convey that this evening, but only if you so decide." ls that, once again, a reference to Giuliani as the friend and his client as the President? A O Yes. And it talks about an opportunity to convey a choice. What is that choice? A O The choice would be for a pardon. Finally, l'd like to go to exhibit 57. [Majority Exhibit No. 57 was marked for identification.l BY MR. GOLDMAN: UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS O 139 I FIED And while everybody else gets it, can you just explain, Mr. Cohen, what's on exhibit 57? A Yes. This is an email, again, from Robert Costello to me dated June 28th of 2019 and timestamped at 3:20 p.m. O One second. Mr. Cohen, l'm question on that. sorry. I think you gave us back exhibit 57. Sorry, exhibit 56. On the last paragraph I had one that we went over, about it's up to your decision, he was saying, and let him know what you decide. Do you see where it says that? A O A Yes. Did you ever let him know what you decided on this topic? I don't recall getting into additional - obviously, he already knew what I was looking for, because we had talked about it on several occasions. Again, they had been dangling this concept, and it was now Robert Costello who dangled it to me, and then now using Rudy as a back channel to the President. O So is that an accurate reflection of how the dynamic existed, in terms of whether it was your decision to relay information to Mr. Giuliani or vice versa? A O I don't understand your question. So that indicates that it's up to you to decide whether you want to relay information. Was that your understanding of how this process worked? A No. When he's saying that is we had just come off of a rather tough conversation, and what he's saying in the email is that only I decide, you know, where we go from here. retained. He wanted to be part of if not He wanted to be the team representing me, so that he could O - So the decision was in connection with retaining his services and UNCLASS I FI ED UNCLASS 140 I FIED going forward. ls that what you're saying? A O Correct. All right. Let's quickly go to exhibit 57, which is, I believe, stated as another emailfrom Mr. Costello to you on June 28. And it reads: "Michael, I've met with my friend and I have one answer of you and have conveyed all of your expressed concerns to him for transmission to his client. My friend is traveling to Europe at 5 p.m. tonight, so I cannot tell you exactty when your concerns will be relayed. lf you want, you can give me a call. Signed Bob." Again, my friend is who? A O A O A Rudy Giuliani. His client is who? The President. Do you know what he's referring to in the first sentence there? Again, it's the same conversation. lt was the same conversation over and over again, which is, stay part of the joint defense agreement, stay on message, the President loves you, he'S going to make sure that you're okay, they're dangling the pardon, but you need me, because I am the link. I am that connection to the White House if, in fact, that you're going to be able to be a recipient of a pardon. O Do you recall ever getting information back from Mr. Giuliani via Robert Costello after this email on June 28th? A O I don't recall. Mr. Cohen, you said on July 2nd, which would have been I guess 4 days after this email, that the JDA ended, in your mind. What is it about that date that ended the JDA in your mind? UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS A 141 I FIED There were so many things that were going on. I was going through a whole series of issues as a result of The Trump Organization's failure to make payments to McDermott, Will and Emery. We had gone through a tremendous amount of document review, the raid. I mean, there was so much that was going on, that I had just decided it was time to stop with the lying, stop protecting the President, because ljust seemed to be finding myself in worse and worse situations, because here I am lying on his behalf, and trying to protect him to my own detriment. And I said, I had enough. I just had enough. O A Did you formally end your involvement in the joint defense agreement? The joint defense agreement came to an end on its own, because that was, most specifically, for determining document privilege and production for -- O Did you relay the fact that you were going in a different direction from the President to anyone else who was in the joint defense agreement? A O No, not that I recall. You just simply did not reengage with the joint defense agreement once you got new counsel. ls that accurate or -- A That would be accurate. And - [Witness conferred with counsel.] MR. COHEN: And, I mean, I also went public on Stephanopoulos on ABC, which made it clear. And then somewhere down the line, Robert Costello as well reached out when I had retained the services of Guy Petrillo, and he was rather livid at my choice. BY MR. GOLDMAN: O So were there any direct conversations you had that broke from the UNCLASSI FIED UNCLASS 142 I F]ED prior arrangement you were involved in with the President, his lawyers Giuliani and Sekulow, and others in the joint defense agreement? A Not that I can recall. MR. GOLDMAN: Mr. Chairman, do you or the members have any follow-up questions on this topic? THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Swalwell. MR. SWALWELL: Mr. Cohen, ljust want to make it clear, when you broke out of the joint defense agreement, the dangling of the pardon was still out there. ls that right? lt wasn't like they told you there's no more pardon for you and then you left. MR. COHEN: That is correct. lwould say, yes. I believe - MR. SWALWELL: Had anything changed? Again, you told us last week that you started to figure out that this was a ruse to keep everyone in the joint defense agreement. But as far as what they had projected to you, Mr. Sekulow and others, had the status of, you know, a potential pardon changed, as far as it was communicated to you? MR. COHEN: As far as l'm aware, not that I believe' MR. SWALWELL: Thank you. That's all. THE CHAIRMAN: Ms. Speier. MS. SPEIER: Thank you, Mr. Cohen. ljust have a couple of quick questions. Did you ever talk to the President of the United States after you were raided? MR. COHEN: I don't recall, but I believe I might have on one occasion. MS. SPEIER: Did you call him or did he callyou? UNCLASS]FIED UNCLASS I F]ED L43 MR. COHEN: He called me. MS. SPEIER: And what did he say to you? MR. COHEN: To the best of my recollection, it was -- it's -- I mean, it's just - it's terrible. Honestly, I don't recall the sum and substance of the conversation. MS. SPEIER: Did you talk to the President again before you broke with the joint defense agreement? MR. COHEN: lwould need a timeframe. I apologize. MS. SPEIER: I guess the joint defense agreement, you were raided in April, and the joint defense agreement, you severed your relationship in July. MR. COHEN: ln July. I don't recall if I did or I didn't. I would need just to see phone records. I don't recall. MS. SPEIER: Did you -- you have said a number of times that Mr. Sekulow had said stay on message; and very recently, you indicated that, whether it was to Mr. Sekulow or one of the other attorneys, Stay on message, stay in the JDA. Did you ever indicate to Mr. Costello that you were considering breaking from the JDA, or did you - maybe I should just leave it there. MR. COHEN: So Mr. Costello was never part of the JDA, nor was he ever my attorney. This was a gentleman that wanted to get involved. And, as you can see from the email chain, he's rather persistent in terms of ensuring that he becomes part of the team. So I did not express to him that I was exiting from the joint defense agreement. Rather, upon my decision to go with Petrillo, he responds to me that's a stupid move, that obviously your choice has been made. Are you aware UNCLASS I FIED 144 UNCLASSIFIED that Petrillo had worked with Comey and Preet Bharara, and that this is not being looked upon favorably. lt was something to that extent. MS. SPEIER: Conveying - MR. COHEN: Conveying to me that - MS. SPEIER: Mr. Giulianiwill find that - MR. COHEN: That they're not happy with what my: with my decision, and basically, to identify that by doing so, that any possibility is certainly not something that's even going to be discussed. And when I say possibility, I'm referring to a pardon or payment to McDermott. [Majority Exhibit No. 51 was marked for identification.l MS. SPEIER: Let me ask you to look at exhibit 51, which is the accounting of all of the fees that were being generated by a firm that you had not hired, correct? MR. COHEN: That is correct. MS. SPEIER: And there is one reference here on page 4 where it says, review Avenatti-Giuliani fight. Do you know whether or not Mr. Costelto was representing Mr. Giuliani? MR. COHEN: That's a great question, Congresswoman. I don't know the answer. MS. SPEIER: So, conceivably, his conversations with Rudy Giulianithat he referenced to you could have been about a separate -MR. COHEN: Yes. I'm also not sure why I'd be paying for that, but - MS. SPEIER: Well, I guess the only point I'm trying to make is that he may have had a second client and the client being Rudy Giuliani, and his conversations UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASS I FIED 145 with Rudy were not about you, but about Rudy? MR. COHEN: That's very possible. MS. SPEIER: All right. lyield back. THE CHAIRMAN: Any other questions? Why don't we break here for votes. And we have I guess about 6 more minutes on the clock when we resume before we turn it back over to the minority. So how many votes do we have? MR. CONAWAY: Rule votes. Probably a couple, at least. THE CHAIRMAN: So why don't we shoot for being back at 2 p.m., assuming all votes are over. Thank you. IRecess.] UNCLASS]FIED UNCLASS t45 I FIED [2:32 p.m.] MR. MONICO: Chairman, my client would like to say something. MR. COHEN: I'm really in discomfort with my shoulder and my battery is just like draining. So if we can wrap this up, if at all possible. THE CHAIRMAN: I think that things will go quicker from this point we're going to move as expeditiously as we can. We lost, on. So unfortunately, half an hour with an unexpected floor ceremony. So we're going to move as quickly as we can. But I understand you're in discomfort physically from your shoulder and we'll try to move things along. MR. COHEN: Any idea when we can put a time limit on this? THE CHAIRMAN: You know, I really don't. But why don't we start and cover as much ground as we possibly can. MR. DAVIS: Thank you. BY MR. MITCHELL: O Good afternoon, sir. When you testified before the committee last week, you stated that there were multiple lines of effort with regard to Trump Tower Moscow. Specifically, you mentioned Felix Sater and you also mentioned Giorgi Rtskhiladze. A O A Rtskhiladze. Correct? ls that right, sir? Yes. [Majority Exhibit No. 3 was marked for identification.l BY MR. MITCHELL: O Sir, I'm handing you what's been marked as majority exhibit No. 3. UNCLASS I FIED 1.47 UNCLASSIF]ED And this is an email dated September 25th,2015. lt's from you to Felix. Do you have the document in front of you? A O A O A O A Yes. And there's also an attachment. Do you see that, sir? Yes. And it appears to be a design study. Yes. Where did you get this design study? From John Fotiadis. From John Fotiadis Architecture. I mean, I've gone through this 1,000 feeling well. times. lt's a design from John Fotiadis. I'm really not l'm in pain. And to talk about an architectural design, the document speaks for itself. I would -- I mean, I really need to move this along, because I got to get back to New York. I have injections tomorrow of cortisone in my shoulder, in my left shoulder. I'm really uncomfortable. And, I mean, this is never going to move, you know, quick enough. O A Sir, we will do our absolute best to move quickly. John Fotiadis Architecture. And this design study was not made specifically for Trump Tower Moscow, was it? A No, it was not. [Majority Exhibit No. 5 was marked for identification.l BY MR. MITCHELL: O Showing you majority exhibit No. 5. UNCLASSIFIED This is an email dated UNCLASS 148 I FIED September 29th of 2015 from Dmitry Kiselyov to you. Do you have that in front of you, sir? A O Yes. And it's also got an attachment, which is a letter as well as what appears titled presentation of the company. Do you have that in front of you? A O A O A the - Yes. Who is Dmitry Kiselyov? He works for Andrei Rozov over at lC Expert, !nc. And who is Mr. Rozov? He's the principalof lC Expert, lnc., which was the licensee of what would have been Trump Tower Moscow project. O And this morning, you were asked about lC Expert by the minority, and you said that Sergey lvanov was the principal of lC Expert. ls that accurate, sir? A O A You did. O Thank you, No, that would not be correct. Did I say Sergey lvanov? I'm sorry. I confused the Russian name then. lt was Andrei Rozov. Sorry. sir. And at the time that you received this email back in September of 2015, had you already heard of lC Expert? A O A O Yes. And was that from Felix Sater or from someone else? From Felix Sater. And there were some questions this morning by the minority about Felix Sater's role within The Trump Organization. And you previously testified about Felix Sater's relationship with lC Expert. Can you just clarify, in the context UNCLASS I FIED t49 UNCLASSIFIED of the Trump Tower Moscow deal, whether Felix Sater was acting as an agent of The Trump Organization or was he acting as an agent of lC Expert? A O On behalf of lC Expert, as the licensee's representative. And at the time that these discussions were occurring in September of 2015 and beyond, Mr. Sater was no longer occupying any office space within Trump Tower. ls that correct? A I am not aware. I don't recall what day that Felix had left his office at the Trump Tower. O Drawing your attention to the second page of majority exhibit No. 5, which is the letter. lt's got a Bates number ending in 602 at the bottom. On the very first line, it says: lt was a pleasure speaking with you on Friday. Do you recall having a conversation with Mr. Rozov? A O A Yes, I had one conversation with Mr. Rozov. And can you describe what was discussed during that conversation? They were excited to be a part and to do the Trump Tower Moscow project. Again, I had testified previously the last time I was here that I don't even know if it was Andrei Rozov that I was speaking to. lt could have been somebody else as Felix was translating. O And that was the call that was mentioned in this letter. ls that correct? A O Yes. And attached to this letter is a multipage slide deck again entitled "Presentation of the Company." Did you review the slide deck? A O Yes. And did you share it with Mr. Trump at the time? UNCLASS ] FIED 150 UNCLASSIFIED A O A O I don't believe that I shared with him this specific slide deck. Did you share the slide deck with anyone at The Trump Organization? Not that I recall. What about the letter from Mr. Rozov, did you share that letter with Mr. Trump? A O A O I don't recall. And anyone from The Trump Organization? I don't recall. Last week, you testified about a letter of intent that Mr. Trump signed, and I think your testimony was on or about October 28th of 2015. Do you recall that testimony? A O Yes. And were you involved in drafting or revising that letter of intent before Mr. Trump signed it? A O Yes. Who else, other than you from The Trump Organization, was involved in revising or drafting that letter of intent? A O I drafted the letter of intent. Was anyone else from The Trump Organization involved in that process? A lt may have been looked at by Jason Greenblatt, but I'm not sure. Or it may also have been looked at by Alan Garten, but I don't believe so. O And do you recall what, if anything, either Mr. Garten or Mr. Greenblatt said about the letter of intent before it was signed by Mr. Trump? A No, I don't recall. UNCLASS I EI ED 151 UNCLASSIFIED O A O On the other side of those negotiations, was that Mr. Sater? Yes. Was there anyone else on the other side of the negotiations of the letter of intent? A Not that I'm aware of. [Majority Exhibit No.6 was marked for identification.l BY MR. MITCHELL O Showing you majority exhibit No. 6, this is an email from Felix Sater to you dated October 9th of 2015. Do you have that in front of you, sir? A O Yes. There's a mention, both in the subject line and in the body, of Andrei Molchinov. Do you see that? A O A ldo. And do you know who that person is? I don't. What I - Felix had sent me a hyperlink to a Forbes article that shows he's a very substantial individual and a billionaire. O But other than this hyperlink, you have no other personal knowledge of this gentleman? A O No, sir. ln the body of the email, Mr. Sater says: Meeting with Andrei Molchinov on Wednesday to do Trump Moscow on his whether that meeting took place? A O I am unaware. Do you know what Molchinov's site was? UNCLASS I FI ED site. Do you know 1.52 UNCLASSIF]ED A O ldon't. The email also mentions that his stepfather was gov of St. Petersburg and Putin worked for him. Do you have any understanding of what the relevance of that statement would be with regard to Trump Tower Moscow? A Just to bolster the importance of Andrei Molchinov. [Majority Exhibit No. 7 was marked for identification.l BY MR. MITCHELL: O Showing you majority exhibit No. 7. This is an emailfrom Felix Sater to you dated October 12,2015. Do you have that document in front of you? A O Yes. And the subject line is Andrey L. Kostin, CEO of WB Bank. Were you familiar with Mr. Kostin before receiving this email? A O No. Do you know anything about Mr. Kostin's relationship with WB Bank other than what's described in the contents of this letter? A O A O No, ldon't. Do you know of any of Mr. Sater's connections with VTB Bank, if any? ldo not. ln the same email, Mr. Sater wrote: Now all we need is Putin on board and we are golden. Meeting with Putin and top deputy is tentatively set for the 14th. Do you see that? A O A I see that. Do you know if that meeting ever occurred? I'm unaware. UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS 1s3 I FIED [Majority Exhibit No. 8 was marked for identification.l BY MR. MITCHELL: O Showing you majority exhibit No. 8. This is an emailfrom Giorgi to you dated October 1Oth of 2015 re: the residential Moscow. Do you see that, sir? A O A O ldo. And just to be clear, this was a separate effort from the Sater No, sir. - Giorgi Rtskhiladze has no affiliation to Felix Sater at all. And attached to this email is, again, what appears to be a slide deck titled "Platforma lnvestment Management." A O Yes. Have you ever heard of Platforma lnvestment Management before receiving this email? A O No, sir. Do you know whether you or The Trump Organization did any business with that entity? A I've never done any, and I'm unaware if The Trump Organization has ever done any business with them. O A Did you personally do any due diligence on this company? No. THE CHAIRMAN: That's the end of our time. We yield back to the minority. BY O All right. Thank you for being here, Mr. Cohen. Real quick, I just want run through kind of a timeline with your UNCLASS I F]ED 754 UNCLASSI FIED discussions and your personal relationship with Mr. Sater. So I'll try to keep it quick. You previously testified before the committee that you knew Mr. Sater when you were teenagers. ls that correct? A O Yes. Okay. And that you had several decades where you were not in contact and recontacted sometime in the 2000s. ls that correct? A O Correct. And then around what time was that and the circumstances of which you reconnected? A When I saw him at The Trump Organization regarding the Trump Soho project. O A Okay. And do you remember about what time that was? O Got it, okay. And then ljust want to actually lt was prior to my working at The Trump Org. So I figure around 2006. - minority exhibit 1, which was your transcript from back in 2017, page 30, it mentions that you met him at a mutual friend's party A - I saw him one time, yes. Yes, I thought you were referring to when we reconnected. O A Got it. A backyard party is not to me reconnecting. But yes, I saw him at a mutual friend's backyard barbecue party. O Okay. And then so in 2006, what were your conversations with him regarding Trump Soho? UNCLASS I F]ED UNCLASS A O A I E]ED 155 That he was involved in it. Okay. That he was involved in the putting together of the deal between Czar Realty and The Trump Organization and it's going to be a beautiful building. UNCLASS I EIED UNCLASS]FIED 156 12:44 p.m.l BY O A O A O And this was before you started working for The Trump Organization? Correct. And you started working with The Trump Organization in 2017. Correct. And then when you started with The Trump Organization, at that point in time was Mr. Sater located on the 26th floor? A O A O A o A O No. So when did he actually move to the 26th floor? lt was after the construction of the Trump Soho project. Around what time was that, do you remember? ldon't. 2000 -- Sir, I really - I really don't know. Okay. All right. ln terms of contact with Mr. Sater after you reconnected, so in 2006 timeframe, how often did you contact him and communicate with him? A O A O A O A lnfrequently. lnfrequently? Would there ever be gaps in talking to him? I suspect. Okay. And then when was the last time you talked to Mr. Sater? lt was a while ago. A while ago? Yeah. UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS O A O t57 I FTED Months? No, years. Years, okay. And then describe the Trump Soho deal generally speaking? A I have no knowledge about it other than I've been the building. Again, when I got to The Trump Organization, the building was already constructed. I had no involvement in the relationship other than the fact that I know all the parties. O Okay. And do you know, before Mr. Sater moved to the 26th floor, where was he located prior to A well. I I think O that? Do you know? think, if l'm not mistaken, Bayrock may have been in the building as they had an office on the Got - in the commercial side as well. it. And so he moved up to the 26th floor at some point in time after 2006? A Correct. Okay. All right. That's all I have MS. STEFANIK: ljust had - thank you, again, Mr. Cohen, for your patience with these questions. I I just had one more which references back to my initial line of questioning. asked about the meetings that occurred prior to your testimony last week. This question is, did you have any meetings or communications between that testimony last week and the testimony today with any of the House lntelligence Committee staff? MR. COHEN: Did I have any -MS. STEFANIK: Any communications or any meetings, any UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS I FI 1s8 ED conversations? MR. COHEN: Just regarding scheduling, yes. MS. STEFANIK: So just regarding scheduling? MR. COHEN: Yes, ma'am. MS. STEFANIK: So that would be different than the previous four meetings where you did talk about topics - MR. COHEN: Correct. MS. STEFANIK: I Okay. That's it. actually have one more clarifying question. I think earlier you talked a little bit about when Felix Sater left the 26th floor, the circumstances were because of a business dispute. Do you remember around what time that was? MR. COHEN: I don't, but I don't recall saying it was r:egarding a business dispute. Oh, my apologies. What were the circumstances as to why he left? MR. COHEN: That was where there was some pretty negative press that had come out regarding Felix Sater. That's right. I apologize. You're right. And timeframe, 2015,2016? MR. COHEN: Again, you could look it up on Google. That's the one where ABC's Matt Mosk (ph). I don't remember -- So around the time of the ABC article was when he actually: MR. COHEN: Correct UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS I EIED 159 -- was bumped out All right. Thank you, sir. MR. COHEN: Thank you. That's allwe have THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Mitchell. MR. MITCHELL: Sir, who is Jeffrey Davis? MR. COHEN: I'm unaware. MR. MITCHELL: I'm handing you majority exhibit No. 9. [Majority Exhibit No. 9 was marked for identification.l MR. COHEN: He might be related to Lanny Davis. BY MR. MITCHELL: O This is an email from Felix Sater to you, cc'ing Jeffrey M. Davis. Does that help refresh your recollection as to the identity of Mr. Davis? A O A O A O A O A O Jeffrey Davis, I believe, is an attorney over at Moses & Singer. Was Moses & Singer involved in the Trump Tower Moscow deal? I know that Moses & Singer represents Felix Sater. Personally? I believe so. I believe that's where Wolff is an attorney at. And attached to this email is a letter of intent. ls that correct? This is the letter of intent, yes. And not the final version, though, correct? No, sir. Now, I want to show you majority exhibit No. 10. [Majority Exhibit No. 10 UNCLASS I EIED 150 UNCLASSIEIED was marked for identification.l BY MR. MITCHELL: O This is an emai! dated November 2nd,2015, from you to a variety of individuals. Do you have that document in front of you, sir? A Yes. Unfortunately, it's so small I can't read it. O Well, in the middle, the subject says, "executed LOl." Does that look about right? A Again, I can't see. lt's too small for me. But if you say it, I'll take your word for it. O And then below that, it says: "Gentlemen, it is extremely important that the nature and content of the attached LOI not be disclosed until such time as the parties have either concluded the definitive agreement documents or have agreed to a" -- and then the text cuts off. And underneath that it says: "We are truly looking fonruard to this wonderful opportunity and project." A O A O Okay. This is an emailthat you wrote, correct? That's correct. And why did you say that it was extremely important that the nature and content of the LOI not be disclosed at that time? A Because there wasn't a deal, and also I didn't want the topic of Russia coming up. O Did you have conversations with Mr. Trump about the topic of Russia in the context of the signing of this LOI at the end of October of 2015? A I don't recall the exact conversation. Felix wanted to do a press release also on behalf of LC. Expert, and I did not want that to occur. UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS O I F]ED 151 Did you have a conversation with Mr. Trump about this proposed press release? A O I don't recall. Do you recall having any conversations with anyone from The Trump Organization about that press release? A O I don't recall. Attached to this email, same question but with regard to the campaign Did you have any conversation with anybody in the campaign about this press release? A O Not that I recall. Attached to this email is a letter of intent. On the very first page there it's -- at the top, it says October A O I Do you see that, sir? do. And this is the executed LOl, correct? And if we jump to the page ending in 00069, you'll see a signature there under Trump Acquisition, A O A O A O A 28th,2015. LLC. Do you see that? ldo. And whose signature appears there? That's Mr. Trump's signature. So is this the executed LOI? Yes, it is. What is Trump Acquisition, LLC? lt was an LLC that was formed for the sole purpose of the Trump Tower Moscow project. O A Were you involved in creating that entity? Yes. UNCLASS I FI ED 762 UNCLASSIFIED O A O A O A Was this standard operating procedure for The Trump Organization? lt was. And why is that? Because each project would have its own corporate standing. Why is that? Because it's a separate deal, and each building or each project would just fall under its own corporate status. O Did you ever have any discussions with Mr. Trump as to that arrangement? A O A O I don't understand your question. What arrangement? About having a separate corporate entity like - That's standard operating procedure at The Trump Organization. And did you ever have any conversations about that standard operating procedure? A O A O Not that I recall. Did you present this LOI to Mr. Trump? tdid. And was it around the time that this document was signed by Mr. Trump? A O A O A Yes. ls it fair to say sometime end of October of 2015? Yes, sir. What did you discuss with Mr. Trump at that meeting? That the economics that we negotiated are extremely favorable to The Trump Organization. That it was going to be a three-part property, again, UNCLASS I EIED UNCLASS I E]ED 163 residential, hotel, and then commercial. That, obviously, I would be doing on top of that the commercial agreement as well as the hotel management agreement. And then the residential portion, again, had incredibly good economics to it as well. That it was going to be the tallest building in all of Europe. And it was worth hundreds of millions of dollars in the end. O And how did you know that it was going to be worth hundreds of millions of dollars? A Well, based upon the size and the fact that the hotelwould be a new hotel in Moscow, and bringing a Western company would be very favorable in terms of what's called a rack (ph) rate. And then, as far as the commercial property, he would get an interest in that, which would carry on in perpetuity. O So is it fair to say that the terms of this particular deal were more favorable than terms of other licensing agreements that you have been involved in? A O A Yes. And do you know why? Because of the size of the project, the scope, and I just negotiated harder for a higher percentage on this than I did on the, say, Trump Tower Batumi project. O Do you know how much financing would have been needed for this project? A O ldo not. Did you ever have any discussions with Mr. Sater about how much financing would be required? A Mr. Sater spoke about financing for this property quite a bit, but as the UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS I L64 FIED licensor it was not Mr. Trump's responsibility to be involved in the financing of the project or any completion guarantees. O So you never had any conversations with Mr. Trump about how much financing would be required for this project? A I would No, only that once we started getting into the definitive documents that want to see that there was a bank that was attached to the project to ensure that if it got started that it would be completed. O And to your knowledge, would this have been the most lucrative licensing deal for The Trump Organization? A O I would say yes. Now, I asked you earlier about who was involved in negotiating the LOI prior to its final execution at the end of October of 2015. Who else within The Trump Organization or the Trump family, other than Mr. Trump, was aware of the existence of this LOI after it had been executed? A O A Don Jr., lvanka, and Eric. And how do you know that? Because it goes into a system where it tracks the projects that are currently being looked at. And I explained that to you the last time, that prior to leaving that there was a form circulated to many members of The Trump Organization as to projects that they were working on, and that was so that they could clean up all of these open opportunities prior to Mr. Trump - the inauguration of Mr. Trump. O Just so we're on the same page, the form that you're testifying about now, that was a form that was circulated at the time of Mr. Trump's election in November, correct? UNCLASSI FIED UNCLASS A O A O 1,65 I FIED Yes, correct. You said - lt was on an Excel spreadsheet. Now, you said there's a system that tracks projects. ls that the Excel spreadsheet that you're talking about or is that a different thing? A I'm not aware if it's different. By the way, I also talked to Don and lvanka about this project, more specifically, with Don. But I spoke to Don and lvanka as well -- I'm sorry,y€S, Don Jr. O After this LOI was signed, you still needed land financing and approval from the Kremlin, correct? A O A Correct. And you also needed definitive agreement? Three definitive agreements. Actually, it would have been even more because of lvanka's O spa. She would have had her own. ls it common for The Trump Organization to conduct any sort of due diligence after an LOI is executed? A O Yes, it would have been part of the definitive documents. And you previously testified that other than doing some Google searches for l.C. Expert, you personally never conducted any due diligence on that entity. ls that correct? A O That's correct. l'm going to hand you majority exhibit No. 11. [Majority Exhibit No. 11 was marked for identification.l BY MR. MITCHELL: UNCLASS I FIED 156 UNCLASSIEIED O This is a November 3rd, 2015, email from Felix to you. Do you have that document in front of you, sir? A O A O A O ldo. And the first line mentions Andrey. ls that Andrey Rozov? Rozov, I believe so, yes. And that's the gentleman from l.C. Expert? Correct. And the next line it mentions a Trump press conference, and it talks about a press A O A - a clip. Do you see that? ldo. Did you ever send a clip of that press conference? I don't recall. I might have. But according to the way that it reads, just watched the Trump press conference, so I suspect that he saw when Mr. Trump was praising Vladimir Putin? O And then Mr. Sater goes on to say: I need that part of the press conference cut into a short clip to be played for Mr. Putin. Please get it done. Do you recall ever getting it done and sending a clip? A O I don't recall if I did. And do you recall that that press conference was related to Mr. Trump's campaign? A O I believe so, yes. What did you think, if anything, about the fact that Mr. Sater was asking for a copy of this particular clip in connection with the Trump Tower Moscow deal? A I'll be honest, I have no idea what Felix wanted it for and what he UNCLASS I FIED I UNCLASS L67 IFIED intended to do with it. O Later on in this email Mr. Sater writes: By the way, a very close person and partner to Putin's closest friend, a partner and advisor who has been with Putin since teenage years, et cetera, et cetera, is flying to a private island in the Bahamas. Do you see that? A O A O ldo. Do you know who this close person was? ldo not. Do you know whether Mr. Sater ever met with that close person in the Bahamas? A O I do not know. Later on in that same email Mr. Sater says: become President of the USA and we can engineer it. I Buddy, our boy can will get all of Putin's team to buy in on this. What, if any, understanding did you have on what Mr. Sater meant by engineer it? A I have no idea. Felix writes the way Felix writes, and you'd have to ask him that question. O He also wrote: Michael, Putin gets on stage with Donald for a ribbon cutting for Trump Moscow and Donald owns the Republican nomination. Did you think that Trump Tower Moscow could help Mr. Trump's chances in the campaign? A I didn't even think about it when he first sent me the email because I'm not so sure that a ribbon cutting is going to get you the Presidency of the United States. UNCLASSIE]ED UNCLASS 1.68 I FIED So Felix is very colorful in his language, and he's always touting sort of very lofty concepts. And I'm not so sure that just because we're building a property in Moscow and Putin is there at a ribbon cutting means that you own the Presidency, because if that's the case anybody that's going to be running in 2020 should go build a building. O I'm going to ask you the inverse question. Did you think that running for President could help Mr. Trump build a tower in Moscow? A O A I would say yes. I would say it would certainly be a benefit. When you say a benefit, you mean it would - Enhance the prospect. THE CHAIRMAN: Just a couple quick follow-up questions. The October date in which Mr. Trump signed the letter of intent also coincided, I believe, with the date of one of the Republican Presidential debates. Do you recall any discussion of that when he was signing the documents or the documents were provided to him? MR. COHEN: Not that I recall, no. THE CHAIRMAN: Shortly thereafter, in November, was the email in which my colleague just referenced that you emphasized how important it was that it not be made public, the letter of intent. Was it a concern that if it became public it could be a campaign issue and that might scotch the deal? MR. COHEN: Actually, I don't recall the reason why I had said I didn't want him putting it out there. There were no definitive documents. And Felix wanted to hold a big press conference on the signing of an LOl. I don't recall if it had to do with Mr. Trump. lt could have. ljust don't recall. THE CHAIRMAN: At some point the President made clear to you in his UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS I FIED 169 public denials that he did not want his negotiations over the tower to be made public? MR. COHEN: Yes, that's correct. THE CHAIRMAN: When Mr. Mitchell asked you about the video clip of Trump praising Putin and Felix Sater's interest in getting a hold of that, would the dissemination of that clip in Moscow potentially help get Kremlin approval of the project? MR. COHEN: lt's possible. THE CHAIRMAN: Back to you. MR. MITCHELL: Sir, you testified last week that you and Mr. Sater discussed an idea of offering a penthouse. THE CHAIRMAN: I'm sorry, Ms. Speier. MS. SPEIER: Thank you. During the Oversight and Government Reform hearing, I asked you whether or not there was an expiration date in the letter of intent, and I believe you said, no, there was not. MR. COHEN: I don't recall if there was an expiration. I don't believe that there was. MS. SPEIER: And yet you also said that it was terminated. Was there a letter sent to anyone terminating the letter of intent? MR. COHEN: Yes. MS. SPEIER: Do you have a copy of that? MR. COHEN: I don't. lt's in the possession of The Trump Organization. They sent it. And that was when Mr. Trump had already become President-elect? MS. SPEIER: So the letter of intent termination did not occur until after UNCLASS I FIED 170 UNCLASS] F]ED Donald Trump had been elected President? MR. COHEN: The formal termination letter went out, I believe, when they were doing cleanup, which was when he became President-elect. MS. SPEIER: Did anyone else on the campaign know about the letter of intent? Did Paul Manafort know about it? MR. COHEN: I'm not aware. MS. SPEIER: Michael Flynn? Jeff Sessions? MR. COHEN: I'm not aware. MS. SPEIER: All right. Thank you. I yield back. THE CHAIRMAN: Yeah, Mr. Maloney. MR. MALONEY: Mr. Cohen, you said that the project would be possibly the most profitable in the history of The Trump Organization. ls that right? MR. COHEN: That's correct. MR. MALONEY: And can you explain to me how much more profitable? And can you do that in an apples-to-apples way? So I understand that this is a tall building and there are some economics involved with just the size of the project, but on a per floor basis, how do you view that? Can you just put some context on that for us? MR. COHEN: So this project was a combination of many different projects that exist individually. So we'll use Trump Soho, which is a residential it's a hotel condo. This would have, say, approximately 40 floors of - l'm sorry, hotel. So there was never a decision at this point as to whether it was going to be a hotel condo, meaning that you sell them and you just put them into a pool under a hotel management agreement. The residential portion was worth a lot of money, you know, based upon the UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASSIFIED 171. price per square foot and the fact that it was 40 floors overlooking, but it was supposed to be the best piece of property in Moscow. And then you have the commercial, which would be approximately 40 floors. MR. MALONEY: But, Mr. Cohen, I'm just trying to get at with respect to the other projects that the organization did that were comparable, the terms on each of those individual component parts were also more favorable on this project? ln other words, taking each, the residential part, the commercial part, the hotel part, would it have been more profitable than the other projects in each of those component parts? MR. COHEN: Well, the profitability would be predicated upon the economy in Russia, but specifically in Moscow. And I believe that the hotel would be a tremendous success. The commercial space would also be because it's a new building, and again, it's a Western developer. And then the residentialwould be based on the price per square foot. MR. MALONEY: But I thought you said you also negotiated more favorable terms? MR. COHEN: That's also correct. So it was 5 percent of the first $100 million, then it's 4 percent up to $250 million, and so on, down to 1 percent. MR. MALONEY: And that was better than the other deals you had negotiated in the past? MR. COHEN: Yes, by about a percentage point. MR. MALONEY: And did it occur to you at the time that you were getting a better deal from this project than you had on the other projects? MR. COHEN: I thought my negotiation skills had gotten better. MR. MALONEY: Could there be another explanation for that? UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS I FIED t72 MR. COHEN: Yes, that they wanted the project as well, and I saw that they wanted it, so I took advantage of it. MR. MALONEY: And final question. MR. COHEN: Not to mention that there was also, I believe, a $4 million upfront license fee. MR. MALONEY: When you say they wanted the project, I asked you this question in your first appearance, but at any point in this did any of your Russia counterparties, Felix Sater, any of the people you were dealing with, communicate to you a concern that Mr. Trump's political ambitions might complicate this transaction or make it less likely to close? MR. COHEN: No. MR. MALONEY: They didn't see that as a risk? MR. COHEN: No. Actually it was seen as a benefit. MR. MALONEY: Thank you. THE CHAIRMAN: Okay. BY MR. MITCHELL: O Mr. Cohen, you testified last week that you and Mr. Sater discussed an idea of offering the penthouse apartment to Putin? A No, what I said last week was that Mr. Sater came up with the marketing stunt of offering to President Putin the penthouse. And the purpose of that was to drive up the value of the price per square foot for the residential components, very much as I said last time, that no different in condominiums where celebrities live, that's the first thing that the real estate brokers will tout. O A Did you ever talk to Mr. Trump about that idea? Yes. UNCLASS I EIED UNCLASSIFIED O A O A O A 173 And what was his reaction? He said he thought it was funny. So he did not take it seriously? I don't know how he took it. He just thought it was clever, funny. Did he approve of the proposal? Well, there was no specific proposal. lt was Felix relaying a concept to me, and me also thinking it was clever, so I relayed it to Mr. Trump. O A O A O Would you say that Mr. Trump was open to the idea? Sure. Well, he didn't dismiss it? He did not dismiss it. He also didn't bless it, but he didn't dismiss it. I believe you also testified last week about an individual name Dmitry Klokov? A O Yes. And were his efforts the same or different from Felix Sater's efforts with regard to Trump Tower Moscow? A I don't even think that they're comparable. Felix Sater was the licensee's representative. Klokov was a stranger to the project whose wife contacted lvanka wanting to be involved in the project, and he had no relationship to the project other than, again, the wife sending an email to lvanka. O A And do you know how Mr. Klokov's wife learned of the project? I do not. I also don't know the relationship that exists between Klokov's wife and lvanka. O A What was Mr. Klokov seeking in the Trump Tower Moscow deal? Placing the two, as he would call it, persons of interest together for a UNCLASS I FIED 174 UNCLASSI FIED meeting in Moscow. O I'm showing you the majority exhibit No. 13. [Majority Exhibit No. 13 was marked for identification.l BY MR. MITCHELL: O the - And these are emails dated November 181h,2015. You're one of you're a recipient and then also a sender. Do you have that document in front of you, sir? A O Yes. And there is a mention in the email at the bottom that says: "l will introduce you to the close person." ls that the person of interest that you were just referring to a moment ago? A I'm sorry, please direct me to where you .. O Sure. ln the email at the bottom, third line down. A "l will introduce you to the close person." O Yes. Do you know who that close person is? A I do not. Because it further then states, "who has spoken to our person of interest," who I believe that they're referring to is Putin. O A O A O What makes you say that? Just the way I was reading it, unless I have it backwards. And if you had it backwards, what would be the interpretation be? That the close person is Vladimir Putin. And then in the email above your response in the middle there, it says "l would gladly meet with you and your contact while in Moscow to discuss setting up the meeting between our two individuals." Who did you mean by "our two UNCLASSIF]ED UNCLASS I FIED L75 individuals" in that email? A O Mr. Trump and President Putin. Did you ever have any communications with Mr. Klokov, regardless of the form, in which you discussed who these two individuals were, namely, Mr. Trump and Mr. Putin? A O Say that again. Sure. Did you have any communications with lVr. Klokov in which you were more explicit about the identity of these two individuals, whether it would be over the telephone or email or some other method of communication? A Well, I did speak to Mr. Klokov by telephone. I would also just like to say that the next line, "however, it would have to be in conjunction with the development and an official visit." O Did you ever speak with Mr. Trump about this communication with Mr. Klokov? A O A O A I don't recall. What about lvanka? Yes. What was the nature of that discussion? When she had forwarded to me the initial contact email, she had asked me to keep her informed. O A O A O Okay. As to how the communication goes. And did you do that? tdid. Was that in person or over the phone or in writing? UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASSIFIED A O A To the best of my recollection it was over the phone. What did you tell her? That I had spoken to Mr. Klokov, and I continuously talked to him about the project. He was insistent upon keeping the conversation about President Putin and Mr. Trump, and trying to entice me to bring Mr. Trump to Moscow for a meeting with President Putin. O A O And what would Mr. Klokov get out of this deal? I don't know the answer to that. Thank you. You testified earlier that lvanka Trump's interest in the Trump Tower Moscow had related to a spa. ls that correct? A Amongst other things. As a child of Mr. Trump, it would just be another acquisition in the Trump estate. O So what was her role in these communications that you had with Mr Klokov? A O A Again, I relayed the top - the conversation to her and how it went. Did she play any other role in Trump Tower Moscow? Yes. MR. MITCHELL: Okay. I think we're out of time. THE CHAIRMAN: Back to the minority. MR. COHEN: Can we -- THE CHAIRMAN: Sure. Do you need a break? MR. COHEN: Yeah, I do. I would like to terminate it at this time if at all possible, THE CHAIRMAN: lf you'd like to take a break, we can take a break. MR. COHEN: Okay. UNCLASS I FIED L76 177 UNCLASSI FIED IRecess.] THE CHAIRMAN: All right. : All right, Mr. Sater MR. COHEN: No, Mr. Cohen I'm sorry, Mr. Cohen. You're not Mr. been a long day. Sater. I'm sorry, it's lt was a test. BY O So back in 2017, you testified to us that the start of the Trump Tower Moscow project when Felix Sater reached out to you, that was in September o12015, correct? A On or about, yes. O Okay. So do you still stand by that testimony? A Yes. O Perfect. Were you ever invited to St. Petersburg A I'm sorry, September of 2017? O September 2015? A '15. Yes. O Were you ever invited to the St. Petersburg Economic Conference? A lwas. O Did you attend? A No, sir. O Why not? A Well, first of all, the way Felix described it to me that we were supposed to receive an invite from somebody of very significant importance. I ended up getting a hyperlink to the economic forum's website to go on and to put UNCLASS I FIED L78 UNCLASS I EIED in all my information, my credit card, and so on. I had no interest in that. Not to mention, by the time he finally got it to me, it was like 3 days before, and you couldn't even get a visa fast enough. O A Got it. Why did he invite you? His allegations were that there were very significant, both business people, government people, banks, and that we can do a tremendous amount of business throughout the entire region, branding, whether it's Trump properties or just on personal business opportunities. O A O ls it fair to say it was a networking opportunity? Yes. Okay. Thank you. And then we talked a little bit about Mr. Sater's background earlier. Were you aware of allegations that he was involved with organized crime? A No. I knew that he was involved in a pump-and-dump brokerage, I but was unaware that it was related to organized crime. O Okay. Were you aware how Bayrock Group gets its funding? Do you know anything about that? A ldon't. Okay. All right. We're good for our side. THE CHAIRMAN: Okay. ljust have a couple questions before I give it back to Mr. Mitchell. Did you brief or discuss periodically the Moscow Trump Tower dealwith Don Jr. MR. COHEN: Yes. THE CHAIRMAN: So he had more than a passing familiarity that you were UNCLASS I FIE D UNCLASS I L79 FIED working on the project? MR. COHEN: Yes, because we talked about if the project got going it would be a fun place for us to go to. THE CHAIRMAN: lf Mr. Trump, Jr. said that he only had a vague familiarity with the project, would that be accurate or inaccurate? MR. COHEN: lwould say it's inaccurate. THE CHAIRMAN: !f he said that he wasn't very involved at all, would that be inaccurate? MR. COHEN: I would say that that's not exactly accurate. There really wasn't a lot of information at the time. lt was -- we were waiting still again for a piece of property, and that way we can actually design the size and the scope of the project. All the information that -- almost all the information that I had he aware of as well. And then, again, going to lvanka, who was adamant that John Fotiadis, though he's a great guy and a great architect, you're not going to get the highest price per square foot off of an architect who is not internationally well-regarded. THE CHAIRMAN: But you kept not only Donald Trump but his son, and Don Jr., as well as lvanka apprised of the status of your work on the Moscow Trump Tower project? MR. COHEN: Yes, but not with the same regular:ity that I did with Mr. Trump. THE CHAIRMAN: And - MR. COHEN: And that, sir, is because he would ask: What's happening with Russia. THE CHAIRMAN: Was Don Jr. aware that you were discussing the project UNCLASS I EI ED UNCLASS I FIED 180 with his father? MR. COHEN: Yes, because -- I'm sorry, Chairman. The way that it would work is once the project would come to fruition, one of the three children would become assigned to the project, and I had the best working relationship with Don Jr. so he was the one that would become the family project manager on it. THE CHAIRMAN: So if Mr. Trump, Jr. was asked, "Did Michael Cohen ever tell you whether he was in contact with your father about a Trump Tower in MosCOw in 2015?" and he anSwered, "He may have, nOt that I recall," wOuld that be false or misleading? MR. COHEN: He may have, but not as I not misleading. lt's not accurate, but it's recall. ls it misleading? No, it's - he certainly covered himself well. THE CHAIRMAN: So you're saying it's not misleading, it's just downright false? MR. COHEN: Okay. I'll saY that. Yes. THE CHAIRMAN: Well, I'm asking You. MR. COHEN: Yes, it's false. THE CHAIRMAN: lf he was - He knew. if Don Jr. was asked, "Were you aware that in 2016 Mr. Sater and Mr. Cohen were in negotiations or communications about visas for Mr. Cohen and your father to travel to Moscow for the Trump Tower deal?" and answered, "Not that I recall, no," Would that be accurate or inaccurate? MR. COHEN: I believe that would be accurate. I don't know if he knew. Rhona Graff knew because I went to her and asked her whether she had Mr. Trump's passport in the event he okayed it. THE CHAIRMAN: Was Don Jr. aware of the termination of the deal that UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS I FIED 181 Ms. Speier asked you about? MR. COHEN: Yes. THE CHAIRMAN: So he would have known that the deal did not - the letter of intent was not formally revoked until Mr. Trump was already President? MR. COHEN: Yes. THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Mr. Mitchell. MR. MITCHELL: Sir, I'm handing you majority exhibit No. 16. [Majority Exhibit No. 16 was marked for identification.l BY MR. MITCHELL: O Subject lt is an email dated November 19,2015 from Felix Sater to you. line: A O "Please call me." Do you have that document in front of you? Yes. And the first line says: call me, I have Evgeney on the other A O A O A O A O A I believe he works -- "Please" line." this is from Felix Sater -- "Please Do you know who Evgeney is? for LC. Expert. Do you Evgeney's last name? Not - I do not. Could it be Evgeney Smikov (ph)? Could be, yes. Could it be Evgeney Dvoskin (ph)? I don't recognize that name. Okay. Do you recognize Evgeney Smikov (ph)? Yes. UNCLASS]FIED UNCLASS O A O 782 I F]ED How do you recognize that name? You provided me an email prior that had his name attached to it. Okay. Other than that email, do you have any recollection of that particular name? A O No. Now, you indicated moments ago that you spoke with Rhona Graff about getting a copy of Mr. Trump's passport? A O A O That's correct. Did you ever get a copy of his passport? ldid not. Did you ever talk to Mr. Trump about personally traveling - him traveling to Russia to pursue this deal? A O A O A O A Yes. And when was that? Around this same time, December 2015. And what did he say? I'm sorry? What did he say? To go speak to Corey Lewandowski to see what available times might be open, and that's, of course, subject to getting more of the information that I needed to make it, obviously, worthwhile. We weren't just going for the sake of going to Russia. O A O Did you speak with Corey Lewandowski? tdid. When was that? UNCLASS I F]ED 183 UNCLASSI FIED A O A Around the same time. And can you describe the nature of that conversation? office. I told him that ljust Went downstairs to his spoke to Mr. Trump, and there's this opportunity that we're looking at, and ljust need to know what dates are open in terms of a block so that I can just keep those dates in mind, and express back to Felix that if you get the information that I need by so and so date that these are dates that we might be able to head overseas. O A Okay. And did you get, in fact, get dates from Mr. Lewandowski? There were a couple of blocks that were still open, because obviously he was going on the speaking tour. O A O A O A O Did you send those blocks to Mr. Sater? No. And why not? Because I never received the information that I needed. From Mr. Sater? That's correct. I'm handing you majority exhibit No. 46. [Majority Exhibit No. 46 was marked for identification.l BY MR. MITCHELL: O This is a copy of your criminal information in the Southern District of New York in Case 18 CRIM A O 850. Do you generally recognize this document? ldo. And you pleaded guilty to the facts contained in this criminal information, correct? UNCLASS I F]ED UNCLASS]F]ED A O paragraphs A O 1.84 Correct. I'm going to draw your attention just to a couple of specific I think the Republicans talked about this quite a bit. I'm going to draw your attention to just a couple of paragraphs. Page 7, paragraph at the bottom, Romanette (ph) i? A O Yes. lt states that: "On or about January 141h,2016, Cohen emailed Russian Official 1's office asking for assistance in connection with the Moscow Project." Do you see that? A O A O A ldo. Who is Russian Official 1? Peskov. How did you decide to contact Mr. Peskov? I was told by Felix in a text message that if you don't believe me, you can reach out to Vladimir Peskov and he'll confirm that the government knows about the project and that they're interested in doing the project. I don't know the exact words, but it's in a text message. O A O lt's in a text messages? Yes. Did Mr. Sater explain to you why you should contact Mr. Peskov in particular? A O No, he was just a point of contact. And how did you find the email address to Mr. Peskov's office? UNCLASSIFIED 185 UNCLASSIFIED A not. I I didn't. I had asked Felix whether he had his contact info. He did asked actually a gentleman, John Santucci (ph) from ABC, if he said he did not. had. He And lwent online and I googled the Kremlin and I was able to find a general mailbox address. O Was that general mailbox address specifically associated with Mr. Peskov or was it just generic? A O Generic as to the Kremlin. Did you use your Trump Organization emait address to send this email? A O A O A ldid. Did you have a copy of this January 14th, 2016 email? ldo not. When was the last time you saw a copy of this email? At one of the -- at one of the testimonies that I gave. I believe it was to the special counsel's office. O Do you know whether special counsel's office received a copy of this email? A O I don't know. All I know is they had it. Did the special counsel's office ask you any questions about this January 1 4th, 2016, email? A O A O They did. Do you recallwhat those questions were? Same as what you're asking. ln that same paragraph it says: "On or about January 16, 2016, Cohen emailed Russian Official 1's office again, said he was trying to reach UNCLASS I EIED UNCLASS I FlED 186 out" -- excuse me -- "trying to reach another high-level Russian official, and asked for someone who spoke English to contact him." Did I read that correctly? A O A O A O Yes, you read it correctly. Why did you send a second email? I don't recall. Did you receive a response to your January 14th,2016, email? Possible. Yes, I believe so. I'm showing you majority exhibit No. 47. [Majority Exhibit No. 47 was marked for identification.l BY MR. MITCHELL: O This is an email dated January 16th of 2016 from you to PR_peskova@prpress.gov.ru. Do you see that, sir? A O ldo. Now, you testified moments ago that the email address that you used for the January 14lh,2016, email was not specific to Mr. Peskov. !s that correct? A O Correct. Now, this email here, majority exhibit No. 47, has an email address of PR_peskova. Do you see that? A O ldo. So is this email address that you used for January 16th, 2016, different than the one you used for January 14th? A O Same email address. Oh, it's the same email address? UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSIF]ED L87 A Yes. tvly email address? O No. MR. DAVIS: No, the one you're sending it to. BY MR. MITCHELL: O No, the one you're sending it to. A No. No. A different email address. O Thank you. A I believe the one I sent on the 14th was to lnfo@Kremlin.ru, it was to a general mailbox. lt's amazing what you can find on Google these days. O ln the body of the email of majority exhibit 47 it says, "l'm trying to reach Mr. Sergei lvanov." Do you see that, sir? A O ldo. ls he the high-level Russian officialthat is mentioned in the criminal information? A O A A A O I believe it is, yes. Who is Sergei lvanov? I think he's press secretary to President Putin. How did you find his name? I don't recall. So you testified that Mr. Sater provided you Mr. Peskov's name specifically? A O A O Correct. Do you recallwhether Mr. Sater mentioned Mr. lvanov specifically? I don't -- I don't recall. Have you ever spoken to Mr. lvanov? UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASS A O A I FIE D 188 No. Do you have any recollection as to why you reached out to him? To see whether or not that what Felix had told me about the project was actually true. O But Mr. Sater didn't mentioned Mr. lvanov, so how did you pick him in particular to reach out to? A O I don't recall. This document, majority exhibit No. 47, is this one of the documents that you recently produced to this committee? A O A I believe so, yes. And where did you get this document? While I was searching through old emails this happened to be one of, like, four or five emails that were sent to me to review, and so I forwarded it to my counsel. O A O Sent to you by whom? Steve Ryan, by my attorney. And there's a Bates number on the bottom right-hand corner, do you see that, COHEN_MICHAEL? A O A O A ldo. ls that a Bates number that you placed on this document? I didn't place on it. I believe it was part of the document production. Whose document production? Well, it would have been under McDermott, Will & Emory on behalf of the joint defense agreement or the joint defense team. O So on behalf of The Trump Organization? UNCLASS]FIED 189 UNCLASSIEIED A On behalf of everybody. They did all of the accumulation and Bates stamp for the joint defense team. O paragraph Taking you back to majority exhibit No. 46, going to page says: L The top On or about January 20,2016, Cohen received an email from the personal assistant to Russian Official 1." And that's Mr. Peskov, is that right, Russian Official 1? A O Yes. "stating that she had be trying to reach Cohen and requesting that he call her using a Moscow-based phone number she provided." Who was Assistant 1? A O A O A O A I believe it's Ms. Peskova. ls it Ms. Peskova or could it be Elena Poliyakova (ph)? I'm sorry, I believe it's Elena Poliyakova (ph). Who is Elena Poliyakova (ph)? She's assistant to Mr. Peskov. What, if anything, did this email say? I don't recall specifically. Here is the phone number, please call me when you have an opportunity. O A O A O Do you know if anyone was copied on this email? I'm unaware. Did you speak to anyone at The Trump Organization about this email? Not at that time, no. At what time did you speak to anyone at The Trump Organization about this email? A About this specific email? I did not. UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS I EIED 190 O Never? A No. Well, actually, I apologize, that's not true, I spoke to Mr. Trump about it. O A O A O A O A O When was that? That was after I had spoken to Ms. Poliyakova (ph). Okay. We'llget there. Yes. Did you forward this emailto anyone? Not that I recall. Did you reply to the email? No, not that I recall. Do you have a copy of this January 20th, 2016, emailfrom Elena Poliyakova (ph)? A O A O A O A O A O I do not. When was the last time you saw a copy of this email? Again, at one of the hearings that I attended. With the special counsel's office? I believe so, yes. And did they ask you questions about it? Yes. Do you recallwhat questions they asked you? The same that you're asking. Now, in your February 28th interview before this committee you mentioned that Alan Futerfas and Alan Garten, the two lawyers who were tied to The Trump Organization, were responsible for the document production that you UNCLASS]FIED UNCLASS 191 I FIED produced to the committee in response to this committee's [/lay of 2017 subpoena. ls that accurate? A O That's accurate. Who else would have, at The Trump Organization, would have known about the document production to this committee, other than those two other - two individuals? A O I guess Jae Cho, who heads the lT. That's J-a-e and then C-h-o. And what was his responsibility with regard to these document productions? A They would have given him the search terms and he would have ran them for Mr. Garten and Mr. Futerfas. O A O A O A O A O A O A O Would Mr. Trump have been aware of the production? I don't know the answer to that. Any of his family members? I also don't know the answer to that. What about members of The Trump Organization? Yes. Who? Alan Garten. Other than Mr. Garten? I'm -- And Mr. Cho. I don't have the answer. Would the decision about what documents to produce have been made by lawyers without any input from any of the executives at the company? UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASS A O 192 I FIED I don't know how they ran that process. And did anyone - it sounds like somebody from The Trump Organization or representatives of The Trump Organization communicated with you and your counsels about the document production. ls that right? A O That's correct. Are you aware of any communications that involved you or your counsels about what documents to produce or withhold from the committee? A O ldo not. Do you have any information about why The Trump Organization would have withheld from this committee production of the January 141h,2016, email from you to Peskov's office? A O ldo not. Same question as to the January 161h,2016, emailfrom you to Peskov's office regarding Sergei lvanov? A O I also do not. Same question with regards to the January 20th,2016, email from Elena Poliyakova (ph)? ' A ldo not. THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Cohen, what Mr. Mitchell is asking about is you've testified that the members of the joint defense agreement were aware that the written testimony that you were going to give to this committee was false. Documents that would have contradicted that timeline, namely, the three that Mr. Mitchelljust referenced, were not produced to this committee. ls there any insight you can shed as to who might have been involved in withholding documentary evidence that would have contradicted your written false UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS I FI ED 193 testimony? MR. COHEN: Again, it would be other members of the joint defense team, but specifically at The Trump Organization level. THE CHAIRMAN: And did I hear you to say that you spoke to Mr. Trump about your conversation with Mr. Peskov's office? MR. COHEN: Yes, with Ms. Poliyakova (ph). THE CHAIRMAN: And was the conversation you had with Mr. Trump about that conversation with Ms. Poliyakova (ph) in person or by phone? MR. COHEN: lt was in person. THE CHAIRMAN: And how soon after your conversation with her on the phone did that take place? MR. COHEN: Right aftenruards. THE CHAIRMAN: Can you tell us about the conversation you had with Ms Poliyakova (ph)? MR. COHEN: ljust found that she was very professional and her questions regarding the project were insightful. As an assistant, I was impressed, and I just made mention to him that I had spoken to an assistant for Peskov, and I was, again, incredibly impressed with her line of questioning regarding the project. And I made mention how nice it would be to have an assistant who asked such pertinent questions. UNCLASS I F]ED UNCLASS 794 I FIED [3:47 p.m.] THE CHAIRMAN: So Ms. Policowvow was quite aware of the nature of the proposed Trump Tower Moscow deal? MR. COHEN: Yes. THE CHAIRMAN: So when Mr. Sater said he had reached out to the Kremlin, or people around the Kremlin for help, it was clear that he was not exaggerating? MR. COHEN: I can't say that. I don't know. lt seems correct, but I don't know how they knew of the project, but they certainly knew about it. THE CHAIRMAN: And by the detailed nature of her questions, you could tell that they knew a great deal about the project? ttIR. COHEN: Yes. THE CHAIRMAN: And what kind of questions did she have for you about the project? MR. COHEN: The areas that obviously we would want to be building in. don't want to try to recollect the specific questions, but there were just very profess -- they were very professional, talking about like the size of the project, the scope, length of time, where the construction crews were going to come from. I mean, it was a pretty insightful conversation. THE CHAIRMAN: And how long a conversation did you have? MR. COHEN: lt was close to 20 minutes. THE CHAIRMAN: Did you have an ask for her at the end of the conversation or during the conversation? MR. COHEN: Yes. THE CHAIRMAN: And what was your ask? UNCLASSI FIED I UNCLASSI FIED 195 MR. COHEN: lf, in fact, that there was interest that somebody should get back to me. THE CHAIRMAN: And what was her response to that? MR. COHEN: Okay, I'll pass it along with my notes and if someone is interested, they'll get back to you. THE CHAIRMAN: And did she reference any conversations that she had had with Mr. Peskov or others about the deal? MR. COHEN: Not that I recall. THE CHAIRMAN: And when you informed Mr. Trump of your conversation with Ms. Policowvow, what was his reaction? MR. COHEN: Okay, good, keeP me Posted. THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Mitchell. BY MR. MITCHELL: O Did you speak with anyone else within The Trump Organization other than Mr. Trump about this conversation that you had with Ms. Policowvow? A O Not that I recall. Did you speak with Mr. Sater about the fact that you had had this call with Ms. Policowvow? A I don't recall. Just to expand, it wasn't about just the phone call. That gave me some sense of reassurance that I would take Felix's additional calls. But what I really needed was some proof of ownership or control over a piece of property so we can get the party started. [Majority Exhibit No. 22 was marked for identification.l BY MR. MITCHELL: UNCLASSI FIED UNCLASS O I EI Showing you majority exhibit No. between you and Mr. Sater. The first page 195 ED 22. These are text messages is dated January 21st,2016. Do you see that? MR. little HECK: Excuse me. Mr. Welch asked you if you could pull the mic a closer. Thank you. BY MR. MITCHELL: O A O A O Do you recognize these text messages? ldo. And are they, in fact, between you and Mr. Sater? Yes, they are. On the first page, the middle, it says: Call me when you can. lt's about Putin. They called today. Do you see that? A O A O A O ldo. And those are from Mr. Sater? That is correct. Do you know who "they" called today is referring to? ldo not. Well, in subsequent text messages in this same exhibit, it appears that you are arranging a phone callwith Mr. Sater. Did you speak to Mr. Sater? A O I spoke to Mr. Sater allthe time. Did you speak to Mr. Sater about the fact that it was about Putin they called today? A O That's his text message to me. And did you speak to Mr. Sater about that? UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS A O A 1,97 I F]ED Yes, ldid. What did Mr. Sater say? They're working on trying to find a piece of property within which to build the Trump Tower Moscow project upon. O But Mr. Sater said it's about Putin they called today. Did Mr. Sater explain to you who "they" were? A Not that I recall. BY MR. GOLDMAN: O lf I could just jump in. Mr. Cohen, this text is the day after your conversation with Elaina Policowvow. Did you remark to yourself or others about the fact that Putin, or someone from Putin's office called Sater the day after your conversation with Elaina Policowvow? A O A O A Yes. What did you think about that? Obviously, they know about the project. And just to be clear I - apologize. My head is really like throbbing. lt's hard -- l'm just saying it's hard for me to sort of stay focused. So I apologize. And I really want to be able to answer, you know, your questions. So the answer is yes, I do remember that he remarked that I told you and that they know of the project. O We're almost done, Mr. Cohen. We're going to power through here, so just bear with us. And that was -- as you had explained earlier, that was one of the three things that you still needed in order to complete the deal was approval from the UNCLASS I F]ED UNCLASS 198 I FIED Kremlin? A No. What I needed, the first thing was that documentation demonstrating that they owned or controlled a piece of property that we can build a building on. After that, it would be that they had enough relationship with the government in order to obtain permits that would be necessary to build what would be the tallest building in all of Europe. O A And the third thing was financing, right? Was about that they had secured financing to ensure that once the project got started that it wouldn't fall to its wayside because of lack of funding. BY MR. MITCHELL: O Sir, from the end of January 2016 until early May of 2016, what was going on with the Moscow Trump Tower project generally? A I was waiting for Mr. Sater to get me the information that I needed. A lot of conversation back and forth by Felix to me in regard to keeping the project alive. O And during the time period February to May of 2016, did you have conversations with Mr. Trump about the project? A O ldid. And do you have -- can you estimate how many conversations you had with him? A O I think, in total, approximately 10. And were any of those conversations about the Trump Tower Moscow jump out in your mind as being particularly noteworthy? A No. They were quick conversations that I'd be, whether in his office or walking with him to the elevator or down to a vehicle, because he was leaving UNCLASSIF]ED UNCLASS 199 I F]ED for a rally. He would ask me, So what's happening with Russia? And then I would tell him, I'm stillwaiting for the documentation. What would be - what would stick out in my head and be noteworthy is right after I told him that where I'm still waiting for information regarding the property, he would be out in front of the rally talking about witch hunt and that there's no Russia, there's no collusion, there's nothing here, it's just not real, there's no business. THE CHAIRMAN: I yield back to the minority. We yield our 30 minutes to you, Mr. Chairman BY MR. MITCHELL: O From January, the same time period, January of 2016 through May of 2016, did you speak with anyone on the campaign about the Trump Tower Moscow project other than Mr. Trump? A Not that I recall. [Majority Exhibit No. 27 was marked for identification.l BY MR. MITCHELL: O Handing you majority exhibit No. 27. Once again, this is a series of text messages between you and Mr. Sater. The first date on the first page is May 3rd of 2016, and the last date on the last page is May 6th of 2016. Do you have that in front of you, sir? A O ldo. On the third page and Bates number ending in 143, there's a mention at the bottom that says: Peskov would like to invite you as his guest to the St. Petersburg Forum, which is Russia's Davos, June 16th to UNCLASSIFIED 19th. Do you see that? UNCLASS I A O FIED 200 ldo. And you mentioned the St. Petersburg Forum a little earlier today, correct? A O A O A Correct. And did you ever travel to the Forum? I've never been to Russia or St. Petersburg. At this point, did you intend to go to the Forum? lf there was something that was legitimate that I could justify traveling across the globe, sure, I would have gone. O And Mr. Sater says: Possibly introduce you to either Putin or Medyevev. Do you see that? A O Yes. The only person he didn't say is God. And was it your understanding that he was trying to get you to go, to travel to Russia? A O A O Ya think? Did you speak to Mr. Trump about this invitation? I don't recall at that time. Did you speak with anyone within The Trump Organization about this invitation? A O A O I don't recall. What about the Trump family? I don't recall. Was this invitation to attend the St. Petersburg Forum, these conversations with Mr. Sater, were these related to the Trump Tower Moscow deal? UNCLASS I F] ED 20t UNCLASSIFIED A lt was related to the Trump Tower Moscow deal as well as new opportunities. O Now, on May 26, 2016, Mr. Trump secured the needed number of delegates for the Republican nomination for President. Did Mr. Trump at that time tell you to stop pursuing the Trump Tower Moscow deal? A O A O A O No, sir. ln fact, he actually asked me, what's going on with Russia? When was that? Around that same given time. And that was referring to the Trump Tower deal? Correct. Going back to the criminal information, it states that from on or about June 9th to June 14th -- A O I'm sorry, sir, what page are you on? Page 7. That's majority exhibit No. 46. lt says: From on or about June 9th to June 14th,2016, individual 2 sent numerous messages to Cohen about the travel, including forms for Cohen to complete. ls individual 2 here, Mr. Sater? A Yes, sir. [Majority Exhibit No. 28 was marked for identification.l BY MR. O MITCHELL: , And I'm showing you majority exhibit No. 28. And are these the text messages that are referred to in the criminal information from June 9th to June 14th of 2016? A Yes. UNCLASS I FI ED UNCLASS I O A O 202 FIED These are the ones that mention the meeting at the Atrium Snack Bar? This is regarding the St. Petersburg Economic Forum. And the criminal information says: On June 14,2016, Cohen met individual 2, which is Mr. Sater, in the lobby of the company's headquarters to inform individual 2 he would not be traveling at that time. A O A O That is correct. And is that that meeting at the Atrium Snack Bar? Yes. On June 14th,2016, The Washington Post broke the story about the DNC having been hacked by Russian actors. Did your cancellation of the trip to the St. Petersburg Forum have anything to do with the DNC having been hacked? A O A O No. And why did you cancelthat triP? lt was never scheduled. Why did you decide not -- why did you tell Mr. Sater on June 14th that you were not going to be traveling at that time? A Because, again, it's 3 days before the beginning. And even if you wanted to get a BC, you couldn't get it quick enough. Not to mention all the statements that he'd previously made about the invites and who was going to be sponsoring us going there turned out to be inaccurate. O A And did you tell Mr. Trump that you would not be traveling? I did not. I don't recall bringing it up with him. MR. MITCHELL: Mr. Chairman. THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Cohen, that concludes the Trump Tower Moscow questions. We're going to now enter a lightning round and ask you about UNCLASS I FIED a UNCLASS 203 I F]ED number of things, some of which you may know nothing about, so it could go very quickly. MR. COHEN: Can I say right now that I don't know anything about anything? THE CHAIRMAN: But we're very mindful of your time and your pain, so we will make this as painless as possible. MR. MONICO: We would agree to do it by written form, if you like' THE CHAIRMAN: Let's try to get through quickly now. it. We're going to move it very Mr. Goldman. BY MR. GOLDMAN: O We do need you to try to answer these questions to the best of your recollection, Mr. Cohen. We understand your discomfort, but -So, Mr. Cohen, were you involved in any way with the Presidential transition? A O No. Who were the individuals who were primarily in charge of the transition? A There were quite a few people. Jared was involved in the transition. There were many people involved in the transition team. O I think let's just focus for a second on some of the reporting and Special Counsel's Office pleadings about meetings with foreigners during the transition period. And I'm going to focus on your firsthand knowledge, not on anything that you read after the fact, okay? Place yourself in the time of the transition. Were you aware of any meetings that anyone on the transition team had with anyone from the country of UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS I FI ED 204 Qatar? A O A Yes. Tell us what you recall. I recall that Jared had a meeting. And I don't know who else off the top of my head was part of that, but I was contacted by Emad Zuberi (ph), who told me that Jared was meeting with the Qatari delegation at the Tower. O A O A Did he tetl you what it was in relation to, what the meeting was about? ldon't recall. What else do you remember about who the meeting was with? There were a couple of gentlemen that were from the country of Qatar, and they came to see Jared. O A O A O Just Jared? And others. ljust don't -You just don't know who? No, ldon't. Do you know if they were discussing personal business or government business? A O Or both. I don't know. Are you familiar with any meetings from anyone on the Presidential transition with anyone from SaudiArabia? A I believe that the same, that Jared and the same group had also met with the delegation from SaudiArabia. O A O And who from SaudiArabia, do you recall? ldon't. And how did you learn about this? UNCLASSI FIED 205 UNCLASS]F]ED A O A O I believe the same way. lt was from either Emad or somebody else. So Emad Zuberi from Qatar would know about the Saudi connection? I was told. I don't recall how I was advised. And at the time, were you aware of whether Mr. Trump or anyone on the Presidential transition team had any meetings or communications with anyone from Russia? A O No, l'm not aware. Are you aware of whether Jared Kushner met with Sergei Gorkov, who's the chairman of the VEB bank? A O I'm unaware. Are you aware of whether anyone - that there was a meeting with members or individuals from the UAE in Trump Tower in December 2016? A O A O A O I'm unaware. Do you know Mohamed bin Ziedeomnion (ph), MBZ? Not MBS, MBZ. No. Do you know someone named George Nader? ldo not. Are you aware of any meetings that Michael Flynn had with anyone from Russia? A O A O lam not. Were you aware of a meeting ldo - do you know Erik Prince? not. You mentioned last time the Agalarovs. Do you know any of the Agalarovs? A I've met both the -- well, I've met what I think is the entire UNCLASSIEIED family. l've 206 UNCLASSI FIED met Aras Agalarov, who's the dad. l've met the wife. I've met Emin, and I've met the daughter. O A O A O A O A O And where did you meet them? ln Las Vegas. ln what context did you meet them? The Miss USA Pageant. Did they ultimately host the 2013 Miss Universe Pageant in Russia? Yes. You did not go to that, right? I could not go. After that pageant, were you aware of any business deals that The Trump Organization was pursuing with the Agalarovs or the Crocus Group, their business? A O A Yes. What were you aware of? That Don Jr. and Emin were contemplating a development by the Crocus Center. O A O A O What kind of a development? Real estate development. Were you involved in that deal? Not at all. Who else was involved from The Trump Organization in that potential deal? A O Unaware. But you know Don Jr. and Emin were putting it together? UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASS A O A O A O A O A 207 I FIED Correct. Do you know - it ultimately never happened, right? Correct. Do you know when it ended? ldo not. Did you ever have any conversations with Don Jr. about it? Yes. Describe those conversations. lt was around the time that we were doing the LOI with Mr. Sater, because he wanted to make sure that I knew that there was still the possibility that he was going to be doing something with the Agalarovs. O So it was in October of 2015, there was still the possibility of that deal coming through? A O A Possibility. What did he say? Just that we're working and dealing with Agalarovs, you know, in Moscow, to just make sure that if we have to terminate the LOl, that we can do that without any significant fighting. O I want to briefly just go back. Bear with us here. That conversation you had with Alan Garten about the statement from Air Force One issued by Don Jr. Who did Alan Garten tell you was on Air Force One? A Obviously, the President, and Hope. But we - he did not identify each and every member that was sitting with the President during the back-and-forth exchange of the document when the President wrote the draft. O And where was Don Jr. at the time? Was he on Air Force One? UNCLASSIEIED UNCLASS A O I FIED 208 I believe he was with Alan Garten. And so that's why Garten was there going back and forth with Air Force One? A O Correct. And you had mentioned Hope Hicks was involved on Air Force One. Who else was involved? A O A O Again, I don't know specifics. Who did Alan Garten tellyou was involved? I What did he tell you about the back-and-forth from Air Force One to Don Jr. and A don't recall him saying specifically who was -- who was there. back? What was the discussion? That it took a long time getting the document finally drafted, because there were so many back-and-forth edits. And they drafted. They sent it to Don Jr., and then he looked at it and then they drafted. Then they changed it, and back and O forth. And finally, that this was the statement that came out. And were you familiar -- you testified last time that you subsequently recalled that Don Jr. whispered something to Donald Trump behind his desk, that you connected the dots and thought that that related to that meeting that was the subject of that statement. Do you recall that? A Yes. But now we're in a whole other time zone. O Yes. But that statement related to that meeting, right? A I believed that it did. I was suspicious. When I ultimately learned that there was a Trump Tower meeting that involved that whole group, just for some reason, it clicked to me. O And was it during that conversation? UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS 209 I FIED MR. MONICO: With Alan Garten? MR. GOLDMAN: Yes. MR. COHEN: No. BY MR. GOLDMAN: O A O lt clicked with you another time? Yes. So by the time Alan Garten was relaying to you about the Air Force One conversation, had you already -- A I had asked Alan O - had that suspicion? A Again, I would have to just go back and see what date it was that Alan was at my office. But when it came to the Trump statement from Air Force One, it's really kind of unrelated to my suspicion about the meeting. O That's what I'm asking. I'm asking if that was the connection. A No. I had asked Alan, what's the story with this statement? Why are you talking about adoption? I mean, it just didn't make any sense to that's where we got to having a conversation me. about: it went back and forth And and back and forth, and finally this is how they ended up drafting the statement for release. O A O Did Alan Garten indicate to you that he knew the statement was false? He did not say those words, no. Well, without saying those specific words, did you understand that he knew that the statement was not accurate? A I don't know what he knew. I knew from reports that it had nothing to do with adoption. UNCLASS I F]ED UNCLASS O A I FIED 210 How did you know that? Because I saw the reports talking about the headlines that said to obtain dirt on Hillary Clinton, the emails. O Separate from the media, did you have any conversations with Alan Garten about the fact that they were going back and forth and back and forth about the statement in order to come up with a story? A O A O A O That's - that was the impression, yes. Did he indicate to you that Don Jr. knew that it was a false story? Well, obviously, Don Jr. knew it was a false story. Did Alan Garten indicate to you that Don Jr. knew -Not that I recall. I know you had role you had - we discussed your role in the campaign, the limited - A I didn't have a role. O - other than the minority outreach. A But that had nothing to do with the campaign per se. That was my decision to create the National Diversity Coalition. O A O A O A O A Do you know someone named JoelZamel (ph)? No, sir. From the Saye (ph) Group in lsrael? No. Did you go to the Republican National Convention? I believe so, yes. Your wife is a Ukrainian native, right? Correct. UNCLASSIFIED 271 UNCLASSIFIED O Were you aware of any discussions about the party platform being changed at the convention? A O No. Let's talk briefly for a second about what's - an individual named Andrey Artemenko. Do you know Andrey Artemenko? A O A O A O A O A O A O A O A O A O A O I know who he is. Have you ever met Andrey Artemenko? Yes. How many times? One time. Where was that? That was at the Lowe's Regency Hotel. When? lt was after January of 2017. And who else did you meet him with? Felix Sater. And what was the context of your meeting? Felix asked me to join him in a meeting with Artemenko. And what was that meeting about? When Felix first asked me to join him in the meeting, he didn't say When did you learn what that meeting was about? When I got to the meeting. Who told you what the meeting was about? Artemenko, Felix. Which one? UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS A O A O A I FIED 2t2 Both. What did he say to you? So he introduced himself. Sorry. What did Artemenko saY? So Artemenko introduced himself, told me that he was a member of Parliament in the Ukraine, okay. And then he turned around and told me he was going to be running for the presidency of the Ukraine, that he's the Donald Trump of the Ukraine. Okay, that's great. Then he proceeded to tell me that he was aware that there were significant, significant dollars being stolen from USAID that was being sent to the Ukraine, and he had all the proof, and that was some of the things he was going to campaign on, the corruption that's taking place in the Ukrainian Parliament by its leadership. O A And what was that plan, did he tell you? That they were stealing money from USAID. And I said, I'm pretty sure Mr. Trump wouldn't be happy about that. You should certainly notify the White House. O A What else did you discuss at that meeting? Then he asked me -- then he - then Felix turned around and said that he also thought - and then Artemenko then took over and he said, ! also think that in order to stop all the killing that's going on in Crimea, that the way to do it would be for the Ukraine to lease to Russia for'100 years, Crimea. lt would stop over 10,000 deaths. O A O And what did you say in resPonse? That's great. Nobody wants to see 10,000 people die' What did he saY next? UNCLASS I F]ED UNCLASS A 273 I FIED Then I sort of thanked him for his time. I finished my coffee and chocolate chip cookie. And I realized I was swimming in a lane that I had no business in, and I picked myself up. I thanked him. And they then asked me if I would take a document. And I said, for what reason? They said, well, who can to? we send this I said, you should send it to the White House and send it attention: President Trump, 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. They said they don't need a ZIP code, they know where the Capitol is. They said, well, who else can we send it too? So I said Michael Flynn. So he said, well, why Michael Flynn? Well, he's the only guy who has actually a post position as of right now, and that's who you probably should send it to. He said, okay, would you take a insult him. copy? so I said, sure. I didn't want He was a member of Parliament. So I took it. to lt's a one-pager, two-page. And it really wasn't about Crimea. lt was Felix had typed out the notes for what he wanted to discuss since Andrey Artemenko doesn't write in English. So I said, Sure. I took a copy. And as I was walking home, I threw it in the garbage can. O You never delivered it to Michael Flynn? A No. I didn't think it would be nice to throw it away in front of his face. O Did you ever receive a letter from Felix Sater in connection to this Ukraine peace plan? A O A O A lt's a bullet point. lt said, lease Crimea to Russia 100 years' However you would describe it, did you ever -I wouldn't call it a peace plan. l'd call it a bullet point. Okay. Did you ever receive a letter in connection to this discussion? No, sir. UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASSI FIED O 2L4 Let me turn briefly to the inauguration. What was your involvement in the inaugural planning committee? A O A Other than raising money, nothing. How much money did you raise? For the whole campaign and the inauguration, I don't know specifically, but it was like over $15 million. O Do you recall who you specifically raised money from for the inauguration? A O A A whole slew of folks. I don't have the exact list, but -- Can you remember one name? Sure. lke Perlmutter. I got it from Andy lntrater. I got it from Howard Lutnick. I got it from -- oh, boy. MR. MONICO: We can give you a list. MR. COHEN: Emad (ph) took it. I Zuberi. No, I don't know if I got Emad or Elliot Broidy don't know. Everybody was fighting for who gets credit for what. BY MR. GOLDMAN: O A O A O Did Elliott Broidy have a relationship with Emad Zuberi? That's where I met Emad through. And what do you know about that relationship? I don't. They're both from California. Do you ever -- did there come a time when you had a conversation with someone named Stephanie Wilcoff? A O A Yes. About the inaugural committee? Yes. UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS] FIED O A O A 215 Who was Stephanie Wilcoff? She's a friend of mine. And what was her role in the inaugural committee? She planned two of the functions. She was supposed to be involved in all of them, but she ended up only being involved in two. O And did she raise any suspicions that she had about the inaugural committee to you? A O A She did. What did she say to you? lt didn't make any sense, the amount of money that was spent on the inauguration. O And who was ultimately responsible for the purse strings on the inaugural committee? A O A Three people. Who? That would be Tom Barack, it would be Rick Gates, and Jared Kushner. O They were the three who had authorization over the money that was donated to the committee? A O A O A O Correct. You mentioned that you raised money from Andy lntrater. Who is he? Andy lntrater is a private fund in New York called Columbus Nova. He runs it? lt's his - yes. He's the principal. How much money did he donate to the inauguration? UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS A O A O A O A O A I FIED 2L6 A quarter of a million dollars, I believe. And are you aware of his relationship with Victor Vekselberg? lam. What is that relationship? I believe they're like fourth cousins. And do they have a business relationship, to your knowledge? They did years ago, yes. And what was that relationship? The largest investor in Columbus Nova was Victor's company called Ruse Nova. O And was Victor Vekselberg still an investor in Columbus Nova as of January 2017? A O A O A O A O lf he was, it was minimal. How do you know Andy lntrater? I met Andy through a mutual friend also from California. Around the time of the inauguration? Prior. How long prior? I would say around the time that Mr. Trump became President-Elect. And how did you come to think that he would donate $250,000 to the inaugural committee? A ldidn't. lasked. O Why did you ask him A Because I also got him to donate money to the campaign. O And did he ever -UNCLASS I FIED 277 UNCLASS]FIED A I apologize. So I need to restate my - it was prior to Mr. Trump becoming President-Elect that I had met him. O And did he ask for anything special in return for his $250,000 donation to the inaugural committee? A No. Just two tickets. O Did he say who the tickets were for? A Yes. He told me he was going to bring his cousin Victor. O Victor. And did he say anything about why Victor wanted to come? A No. He just wanted to come to the inauguration. O Do you know who Victor Vekselberg is? A ldo. O Who is he? A He's an oligarch who's also close with Putin. He's got business all over the world. O A O A O A O Did you see Victor Vekselberg at the inauguration? I saw Victor, yes. Did you speak with him? I said hello, yeah. Describe the conversation that you had. How's everything? What's going on? Standard type of pleasantries. Did Andy lntrater or Victor Vekselberg try to get any access to the President or administration officials? A O Not that I'm aware of. This Columbus Nova, did you ultimately enter into a consulting agreement with them? UNCLASS I FI ED 2L8 UNCLASSIEIED A O A tdid. For what? The purpose was to develop an infrastructure fund. One of the things that the President talked a lot about was raising funds that would go to rebuilding our roads and highways and bridges and so on. He then went to Riyadh, and he went to the Arab Emirates and Japan and China. I just raised $250 billion, 250. One of the things that Andy and I were going to do is put together an infrastructure fund, but specifically we were looking to build a rebar manufacturing facility. O A O A Well, you entered into a consulting agreement with him, right? Yes. And what was the purpose of that consulting agreement? ln order to go raise funds from overseas investors or U.S. investors for the infrastructure fund. O A O Had you ever had a business relationship with him before? No. Were you ever asked to use your connections to the administration in furtherance of this consulting agreement? A O Not that I recall. Did you ever speak to anyone in the administration on behalf of Columbus Nova? A I spoke to David whatchamacallit. lt's a friend of mine. MR. MONICO: We'llget the name. MR. COHEN: Head of the VA. David Shulkin. He's a friend of mine for 20 years, I should have remembered. So I spoke to David Shulkin about Andy UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASS I EI 219 ED lntrater is an investor, or Columbus Nova is an investor in Not Jewel - Enjoy, which is one of the e-cigarettes. And one of the things he wanted to do is to get a name so that they could send a proposal to stop veterans from smoking tobacco, but rather to use Enjoy as opposed to cigarettes. O A And was that a part of your consulting agreement that you did that? I was just available to him if he questions. He also had, years ago, applied for OPEC funds. And he has a company which is overseas that manufactures with American that. parts. I think it's lighting, light bulbs and things like So he had asked me who they could reapply for an OPEC loan for that company. I gave him the name, but he never ended up sending the proposal, because they never ended up putting one together. O And just to be clear, before the election, you had never had a business relationship with Andy lntrater, right? A O Correct. I had just met him and we became friendly. And are you aware of how large Columbus Nova is, in terms of its assets under management? A O A O A O A O A Columbus Nova or Ruse Nova? Columbus Nova. No, I'm not. Okay. lt's a multibillion dollar fund. Columbus Nova? I believe. I don't belleve you're right. I don't believe you're right, no, sir. Ruse Nova is? Ruse Nova is. That's Victor Vekselberg. Columbus Nova is not a UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASSI FI ED 220 billion dollar fund. O A And how much was your consulting agreement? lt was $1 million for 1 year. I didn't take the full, because after things started getting hectic, I couldn't continue to look at different opportunities. I mean, I brought this one great opportunity to him as well that we were going to do, which is taking ice pops that are infused with less than 5 percent alcohol, so you can -- instead of getting -- remember when you were kids, you used to have those big ice pops? Now, it tastes like a Moscow mule or a Pina Colada, things like that. And because of my relationship to Steve Wynn, we were going to bring them to the Wynn as a test where instead of taking 100 people in order to sel! a thousand drinks, here you have ice pops, which are more refreshing that taste exactly like it. And unfortunately, my kids sucked them up even though they're underage, but don't tell anybody, and they thought that they tasted exactly like a regular drink. And that would have been a great opportunity and it was a buddy of mine from college who built the machine. lt's a fabulous opportunity. Unfortunately, al! this nonsense put a damper on that. So a lot of the stuff that I was doing with Andy was also create business. MR. GOLDMAN: One minute, please. Mr. Chairman. THE CHAIRMAN: So I'll allow the members to go around the table with their remaining questions, and Dan may have some final ones and then we'll see if - okay. So let me just motor through these very quickly. The Ukraine peace deal or talking points that you discussed with UNCLASSI FIED UNCLASS 221. I FIED Mr. Artemenko and Felix Sater, did the Russian desire to have relief from sanctions as a part of that deal, was that part of the discussion? MR. COHEN: No, sir. THE CHAIRMAN: Do you know whether that was one of the talking points in the so-called peace plan? MR. COHEN: ! didn't even read the document. He put it into an envelope and then they sealed it. And, like I said, it went into a garbage pail. THE CHAIRMAN: I think you testified earlier you don't know who Konstantin Kilimnik is. MR. COHEN: ls that right? ldo not. THE CHAIRMAN: And did you become aware, apart from the public press reports, at any point, that the campaign had shared polling data with Mr. Kilimnik, for some reason? MR. COHEN: No, sir. THE CHAIRMAN: Was Don Jr. aware of Mr. Sater's role in the Trump Tower Moscow deal, his efforts to try to put it together? MR. COHEN: Yes. THE CHAIRMAN: lf Don Jr. testified, I don't remember him having - him per se having a role, would that be false? MR. COHEN: That would be false. THE CHAIRMAN: Did he understand that Mr. Sater was on the other side of the transaction with lC, trying to put the deal together? MR. COHEN: Yes. That he was the licensee's rep. THE CHAIRMAN: So if he represented that he would only speculate that Mr. Sater played a role as a broker, that would not be accurate testimony? UNCLASSIE]ED UNCLASS 222 I F]ED MR. COHEN: No, it would not be. THE CHAIRMAN: Are you aware of any foreign contributions to the inaugural committee? MR. COHEN: lam not, no. THE CHAIRMAN: ln your written testimony before the Oversight Committee, you testified that in July 2016, days before the Democratic Convention, you were in Mr. Trump's office when his secretary announced that Roger Stone was on the phone. Was that Rhona who made that announcement? MR. COHEN: I believe so. THE CHAIRMAN: And Mr. Trump put Mr. Stone on the speaker phone? MR. COHEN: Yes, sir. THE CHAIRMAN: When Mr. Stone told Mr. Trump that he'd just gotten off the phone with Julian Assange, and that Mr. Assange had told Mr. Stone that within a couple days there would be a massive dump of emails, did Mr. Trump seem surprised by that information? MR. COHEN: Yes. THE CHAIRMAN: And he responded with something along the lines of That would be great? MR. COHEN: Well, yes, after Roger finished. And then he asked me, he goes, do you think Roger is telling the truth, which is why I know that this was the first time that the Assange scenario came up, because if .. it was the question to me, do you think that Roger is telling the truth? Do you believe don't know. You know, Roger is Roger. You never - Roger? I said, I you never know. THE CHAIRMAN: And when Roger was on the phone, did Mr. Stone indicate whether he would follow up in any way with Mr. Trump and inform him of UNCLASSI FIED UNCLASS I FI ED 223 anything else he learned from Mr. Assange? MR. COHEN: Yes. He turned around and when Mr. Trump said to him, Okay, good, let me know. THE CHAIRMAN: And what did Mr. Stone respond to that? MR. COHEN: Okay. And Roger Stone called many times to the office. THE CHAIRMAN: And are you aware whether he made calls to the office after that conversation you overheard on the speaker phone? MR. COHEN: Roger called quite often. THE CHAIRMAN: And that continued through and past that date of the conversation you overheard? MR. COHEN: Yes, I believe so. THE CHAIRMAN: So there would have been future opportunities for Mr. Stone to share information, if any, that he gleaned from Mr. Assange? MR. COHEN: lf any, yes. THE CHAIRMAN: Ms. Speier. We'lljust go down the line. MS. SPEIER: Thank you. Mr. Cohen, you've been quite willing to answer all our questions and we really appreciate it. MR. COHEN: lt's only 24 hours. MS. SPEIER: Do you have any recognition about the sale of the Trump mansion in Florida to Mr. Rybolovlev? MR. COHEN: Rybolovlev MS. SPEIER: Say it again. MR. COHEN: Rybolovlev. MS. SPEIER: You do, huh? UNCLASS I FIED 224 UNCLASSIFIED MR. COHEN: I do. MS. SPEIER: What can you tell us about that sale? MR. COHEN: So Mr. Trump had purchased that property in Palm Beach for a little over $40 million. We didn't really do much with the property. I know he slapped a couple of coats of paint onto it. Wanted to sell it. I believe it was sold to Sotheby's Brokerage. Dmitry Rybolovlev works with the real estate broker that was down there in Florida. And I know he was asking like $125 million forthe property, and they ultimately settled on a price of $95 million. MS. SPEIER: And that was in 2008, at the beginning of the recession, correct? MR. COHEN: Right before. He literally timed it - I mean, the sale could not have been timed better for Mr. Trump. MS. SPEIER: Mr. Rybolovlev, or however you pronounce his name, never saw the property, correct? MR. COHEN: I'm unaware. I've never met Mr. Rybolovlev. MS. SPEIER: And he's Russian, correct? MR. COHEN: He's Ukrainian, I believe. MS. SPEIER: He's Ukrainian, but has ties to Vladimir Putin? MR. COHEN: I don't know the answer to that. MS. SPEIER: Okay. Do you know anything about the Alfa Group? MR. COHEN: Alfa Group? MS. SPEIER: Or Alfa Bank, I should say. MR. COHEN: The only thing I know about Alfa Bank is there was, I think, some issue with an offsite server. But no, I don't know anything about Alfa Bank. UNCLASS I FI ED UNCLASS ] FIED 225 [Majority Exhibit No. 38 was marked for identification.l MS. SPEIER: So could you look at exhibit 38, please. MR. COHEN: Yes, ma'am. MS. SPEIER: So I'm going to pronounce his first name Giorgi. MR. COHEN: Giorgi. MS. SPEIER: Giorgi, okay. And he's a personalfriend of yours? MR. COHEN: Yes, ma'am. MS. SPEIER: And what does he do? MR. COHEN: Giorgi is an investor in various businesses. He has a company called the Toroil Group, T-o-r-o-i-1. MS. SPEIER: And is he a U.S. citizen? MR. COHEN: I believe he has U.S. citizenship, yes. MS. SPEIER: ls he also a Russian citizen? MR. COHEN: No. He's Georgian. MS. SPEIER: He's Georgian, okay. MR. COHEN: He's the gentleman that I did the Trump Tower Batumi deal with. MS. SPEIER: So he sent you a text that says: "Stop flow of some tapes from Russia, but not sure if there's anything else, just so you know." How did you respond to that? MR. COHEN: Tapes of what? MS. SPEIER: You wrote: Tapes of what. And he responded in return? MR. COHEN: Not sure of the content, but person in Moscow was bragging had tapes from Russia trip. UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS 226 I FIED MS. SPEIER: So this was a text that you received on October 30th, 2016, correct? MR. COHEN: Correct. MS. SPEIER: So it's days before the election? MR. COHEN: Yes, ma'am. MS. SPEIER: And then subsequently, he says: "Willtry to dial you tomorrow, but wanted to be aware." So he's trying to alert you to something, is he not? MR. COHEN: Yes, ma'am. MS. SPEIER: Do you believe it has something to do with Donald Trump? MR. COHEN: Yes, I know it does. MS. SPEIER: And tell me why you know it does. MR. COHEN: Because he told me. MS. SPEIER: He told you in a text, or on -MR. COHEN: No, ma'am, on the phone. MS. SPEIER: So the following -- you had not had a conversation on the phone on the 30th. ls that correct? MR. COHEN: That - I believe you are right, yes. MS. SPEIER: And then he says, I'm not sure -- "l'm sure it's not a big deal, but there are lots of stupid people." And you indicate, you have no idea. MR. COHEN: When I said that you have no idea how many stupid people that there are. MS. SPEIER: I do not trust me. What does he mean? What is he suggesting there? MR. COHEN: I do, trust me. UNCLASS I FIED 227 UNCLASSIFIED MS. SPEIER: Oh, I do trust me. MR. COHEN: I don't know. MS. SPEIER: All right. So you -- and then he says to you - MR. COHEN: Oh, I'm sorry, I do. Meaning he knows how many stupid people that there are, trust me. MS. SPEIER: Oh, okay. I do, comma, trust me. MR. COHEN: He needed a comma or a period. MS. SPEIER: Then he says to you, he needs to make it to the White House, Mike. This is all on the 30th. So you have a conversation with him when? MR. COHEN: Probably the following day. MS. SPEIER: So probably on Halloween, December - October 31st, you talk to him on the phone, and what does he say to you? It/R. COHEN: That this is regarding the infamous pee tape when Mr. Trump was in Moscow for the - MS. SPEIER: lt wasn't infamous then, was it? MR. COHEN: Yes, yes. That the tape - the conversation about the tape has gone back almost a couple months past when they were there for the Miss Universe Pageant that that tape existed. MS. SPEIER: So you're suggesting you've known about the rumors about this tape for many years -MR. COHEN: Yes, ma'am. MS. SPEIER: - before October 30th? MR. COHEN: Oh, yes. MS. SPEIER: And did you ever try to follow UNCLASS I FIED up? Did you ever talk to Mr. UNCLASS 228 I FIED Trump about this potential rumor? MR. COHEN: Yes. MS. SPEIER: And what did Mr. Trump say to you? MR. COHEN: lt's not true. MS. SPEIER: But it persisted, evidently? MR. COHEN: Yes. MS. SPEIER: As some things do. And did he ask you to follow up and determine where that was coming from? MR. COHEN: He asked me to find out where it was coming from, yes. MS. SPEIER: And what did you find out? MR. COHEN: lt didn't exist. MS. SPEIER: Who did you talk to to determine that - MR. COHEN: Many people. Over the course of the years, I must have had half a dozen people reach out. One gentleman reached out to me -- I don't know who he was -- claiming that he had the tape. I said, okay, send me 4 seconds of it and name your price. So he turned around and he said to me, I'm not sending it to to have to trust you. me. So how do I know you have I said, Well, how much do you it? He said, Well, you're going want? He said, $20 million. I said, sure, why don't you tell me what bank account you want me to wire it to and under whose tape. name. So he said to me, he goes, I'm being serious, I'll release the I said, well, send me 4 seconds, not even any of the salacious stuff. Just send me something so I know it's real, I can walk into Mr. Trump's office, and l'll figure out how to get you -- you know, how to get you your money. He hung up on me, never heard from him again. MS. SPEIER: So .. but it persists, and then you're hearing it again on UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS October 30th. I FIE 229 D lt does not become public knowledge until January of 2017, when BuzzFeed releases the Steele dossier. MR. COHEN: That's not really before of that. true. There were conversations way TMZ, Harvey Levin called me, said he had heard about the existence it. You know, other people had heard of the existence of that tape. MS. SPEIER: Okay. MR. COHEN: And that conversation has been going on, very much like me being in Prague. lt's just something that just .. MS. SPEIER: Has a life of its own. MR. COHEN: Correct. You know, just to kind of be comical for a half a second. MS. SPEIER: Do it. MR. COHEN: When lwas speaking with Mr. Trump about it, you know, said to him, I'm a little disappointed. He's like, what do you mean? said, Well, I woutd have liked to have been invited to the was wild. I Why? And party. lt sounds like it So he goes, Michael, it never happened. And I said, All right, you know, if you say so, it never happened. And he said, no, I'm serious, it never happened. This whole thing is just pure nonsense. And I believe it simply because, as everybody said to me, the event was over kind of late. And then I spoke with Keith Schiller about it, who told me that he had brought Mr. Trump up to his room and then stayed there about a half hour to ensure that he was okay, then went to his own room. And I said, well, if these women were brought in and then they urinated on the bed, where did Mr. Trump sleep? He said, well, you're right about that. So I'm sure he That's how we kind of deduced it didn't happen. UNCLASS I FIED it didn't happen. I UNCLASS 230 I FIED MS. SPEIER: Did anyone offer you, any foreign national offer you money during the campaign as a campaign contribution? MR. COHEN: No, ma'am. MS. SPEIER: ls it safe to say to say that Donald Trump was shocked when he had won the election on election night? MR. COHEN: I'm going to go back to my New York thing. Ya think? MS. SPEIER: What did he say to you? MR. COHEN: He didn't. When he won, ! was already at the hotel. I was there with my daughter. He was not there, and neither were most of the members of his family. Only until the time that they started saying that it looks like Donald Trump may have won the election. Did he ultimately show up? And he was fortunate that it didn't get called until about 3:30 in the morning, because he didn't have a speech prepared either, either way, concession or victory. And came there and the following day, when I saw him in the office, he goes, Man, you believe Wow. it? And I was like, no. And he said to me, he goes, He goes, this is going to be something. I was like, yes, it's going to be something. MS. SPEIER: Something. MR. COHEN: Something. MS. SPEIER: What about that infomercial you referred to? MR. COHEN: Well, that's how the campaign started, that this was supposed to be the greatest infomercial in the history of U.S. politics. That was when he was sitting at about 2 or 3 percent at the very beginning. lt's funny, because he would turn around and say to me, you know, so what chance do you think I have of winning? And I would say, well, you know, 10 percent. He goes, UNCLASS I FIED 237 UNCLASS I EIED no, no, 3 percent. Okay, you're right, 3 percent. I'm not a pollster, prognosticator. He says 3 percent, 3 percent. MR. MONICO: We got to keep moving. We got to keep moving. I have a plane to catch. MS. SPEIER: He was having fun there. MR. MONICO: I have a plane to catch, though. MS. SPEIER: All right. Okay. I think I'll yield back at this point. THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Quigley. MR. QUIGLEY: Thank you. You mentioned and it sort of trailed off why you ended the relationship, the contractual relationship or stopped doing work for Columbus Nova. Could you spell it out just a little bit more? MR. COHEN: Sure. What ended up happening it sort of preoccupied all of my time and I couldn't follow is they had the raid, and through. One of the things Andy and I were going to do is to travel overseas where I have a lot of contacts and relationships. And we were going to go raise a lot of money for Columbus Nova fund for infrastructure. MR. QUIGLEY: I think you mentioned that you understood that Victor had invested in Columbus? MR. COHEN: Correct. MR. QUIGLEY: Do you know how much, and how did you know that? MR. COHEN: Andy told me that he was initially the largest investor in Columbus Nova. And then Andy did very, very well for himself, and he actually wanted to break away and not be under, you know, Victor's Ruse Nova and do his own thing. And Andy is an American citizen MR. QUIGLEY: But you mentioned that he was still invested, but if it was, UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASS I FIE a minimum amount. How much and MR. COHEN: I don't 232 D - know. I don't know any -- MR. QUIGLEY: He still could have been invested at the same level, for all you know? MR. COHEN: No, no. I remember Andy had told me that he had reduced the level of his participation in projects significantly. And that was -- I believe that was at Andy's interest. He wanted to really be his own guy. But he made a lot of money over the years. MR. QUIGLEY: You could imagine why people would ask you these questions, because there's Victor, who's not American, and it is money flowing through Columbus Nova, which is doing business with you. So it obviously could be suspect as money flowing through a legitimate source to help the Trump inauguration, the Trump campaign, or yourself, who was seen as someone very close to the President-to-be, correct? MR. COHEN: Yes, I could see that. But at the same time, if I - with that relationship, if I wanted to reach out to Putin in order to build the Trump Tower Moscow project, I certainly didn't need to go through anybody. Then I could have just gone straight to Victor Vekselberg, or through Andy. MR. QUIGLEY: And this is $1 million contract, correct? MR. COHEN: Correct, over the course of a year. MR. QUIGLEY: And how much do you think you actually received? MR. COHEN: About half of it. MR. QUIGLEY: About half? And you stopped getting any when it was terminated? MR. COHEN: I told Andy that ! didn't feel comfortable. Andy actually UNCLASS I F]ED UNCLASS became a friend, more of a friend than a I FIED 233 client. And we used to go for lunches and dinners and with his wife and my wife and so on. MR. QUIGLEY: So he never mentioned anything about Victor asking him to do certain things, help certain -- anybody in particular? Andy never said anything asking you to help anybody, asking Andy to help anybody, or help the Russians or anybody in that vein at all? UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASS 234 I FIED 14:47 p.m.l MR. COHEN: Not that I recall, no. MR. QUIGLEY: Okay. MR. COHEN: Nothing to do with Russia. MR. QUIGLEY: Okay. Thank you. MR. SWALWELL: Mr. Cohen, just closing the loop on the Rybolovlev sale. Did Mr. Trump know that he was Russian as it was being negotiated. MR. COHEN: Yes. Well, he's not Russian, he's Ukrainian. MR. SWALWELL: Did he know that he was Ukrainian as it was being negotiated? MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. SWALWELL: Did he tellyou that? MR. COHEN: I think I may have told him that he was Ukrainian because I think he's the principal of a company called Ukafertile (ph). MR. SWALWELL: Fertilizer? MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. SWALWELL: And that was before the sale closed? MR. COHEN: Yes. Well, somebody is coming up with $95 million and they are going to be wiring it, I found out who it is and I googled it. MR. SWALWELL: Were you aware of any efforts by anyone in the Trump family or organization or campaign once the Mueller investigation began to destroy evidence or to get rid of any evidence that could be incriminating? MR. COHEN: Unfortunately, I wasn't at The Trump Organization there so wouldn't know. MR. SWALWELL: But, I mean, just through conversations you had, were UNCLASS I FIED I 23s UNCLASS]FIED you aware of any efforts to kind of reduce liability or exposure by getting rid of evidence? MR. COHEN: I'm not aware of any. MR. SWALWELL: Were you familiar with any communication device -- or were you familiar with any communication platforms that were used to evade maybe a wiretap or detection, like Signal or Confide or some types of messenger apps like that? MR. COHEN: I'm aware of those, yes. MR. SWALWELL: Are you aware of people in the Trump family or the organization or the campaign using those once the Mueller investigation began? MR. COHEN: I'm not aware. MR. SWALWELL: So you never heard anyone say, "Hey, let's just talk about this on Signal or keep this on Confide"? MR. COHEN: That not that I'm aware of, l'm sorry. MR. SWALWELL: With respect to the tape that was being discussed, were any of the offerings or suggestions that were made to you that a tape may be out there, was any of this outreach submitted to you via email? Like do you have any Trump Org emails where an offering like this was made? MR. COHEN: I don't recall how the -- I don't believe it was by email, I believe it was phone call. MR. SWALWELL: And were any of the phone calls made by people who you believed to be Russian or Ukrainian? Like was it a rumor that it was domestic or were there, you know, Russian Americans or Russians who were also perpetuating -MR. COHEN: The only one that I can obviously recallwould be now, this UNCLASS I E] ED UNCLASS 236 ] FIED one, Yergei (ph), said to me that somebody in Moscow told him that they have this tape, but the rest were domestic. MR. SWALWELL: ls Rhona Graff the type of person who, just like you, would also lie to protect President Trump, based on your -MR. COHEN: I can't answer that question. She's very loyal to Mr, Trump as well. MR. SWALWELL: How about Mr. Schiller, have you ever seen him lie before for Mr. Trump. MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. SWALWELL: Have you seen him tell a significant lie for Mr. Trump. MR. COHEN: I don't know what you deem to be significant. MR. SWALWELL: Well, what did you see? MR. COHEN: Keith is the ultimate protector, and he was his bodyguard, his attache for many, many years. And he was the keeper of Mr. Trump's secrets, So, for example, if he was going to text a female, he would have Keith do it on his phone. MR. SWALWELL: What are some of the lies that you saw Mr. Schiller tell to protect Mr. Trump? MR. COHEN: I don't know. I can think about them. MR. SWALWELL: With respect to that Moscow trip, the Miss Universe trip, who was on the flight with Mr. Trump and Mr. Schiller over to Russia? MR. COHEN: I believe Don Jr. was there as well. I truly don't recall. I didn't go, so -MR. SWALWELL: Do you know why they used Mr. Ruffin's plane rather than Mr. Trump's plane? UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASS 237 I FIED MR. COHEN: I believe his plane was down. MR. SWALWELL: Do you think Mr. Schiller is someone who has a good memory? MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. SWALWELL: Why do you say that? MR. COHEN: Well, he was a detective in the New York City Police Department, and I think he was with the drug task force. First I think he was with the Department of Corrections in terms of MR. SWALWELL: I guess just your observation, was he someone who had a good memory? MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. SWALWELL: How about Ms. Graff? MR. COHEN: Not as good as Keith's. MR. SWALWELL: Going back to -- well, just - you said to us and to the House Oversight Committee that you have suspicions of collusion. And if you were in our position as investigators, who would you talk to to corroborate those suspicions? What other witnesses would you go to to kind of fill in that color on your suspicions? MR. COHEN: Can I think about that, get back to you with a list? MR. SWALWELL: Yes, please. Finally, with the phone call that you said Mr. Trump made to you after the raid of your house, I want you to just take a moment, because you have a very good memory and you've been able to recall a number of conversations throughout the years, but this seems like a significant phone call. lt's the President of the United States calling after a pretty traumatic moment in your life. UNCLASS I EI ED UNCLASS 238 I FTED What did he say to you on that phone call? MR. COHEN: Very much that this is, you know, this is getting out of control. This is a - this witch hunt. You know, it's just -- it's terrible, you know, for you and your family. And it was really more just .. it was just more like a human-type of a conversation. MR. SWALWELL: Did he ever say that you're going to be okay? I'll make sure you're okay? MR. COHEN: He said that many times, including the same line was repeated to me by Jay Sekulow. Same thing, don't worry, everything is going to be okay. MR. SWALWELL: This was the call after the raid? MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. SWALWELL: Did he ever tell you to stay strong also? MR. COHEN: Always. MR. SWALWELL: And that includes the call after the raid? MR. COHEN: Yes. THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Heck. MR. HECK: Mr. Cohen, I just want to thank you very much for your presence here today and last week and for your fofthcoming testimony. And because I believe the staff and my colleagues have been incredibly thorough, and because l, too, have had major shoulder surgery and I have more than a good idea of what you're going through right now, I'm going to go ahead and defer and pass to Congressman Maloney. MR. COHEN: Thank you. Thank you. THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Maloney. UNCLASS I F]ED UNCLASS I FI ED 239 MR. MALONEY: Can I ask you just one thing, and I apologize if you've covered it before because I had to step out for another hearing. But the conversations with Mr. Costello, did he initiate those conversations or did you initiate those conversations? MR. COHEN: No, he did. Actually, the conversation was initiated by Jeff Citron, who was the senior partner in that firm. MR. MALONEY: Did you know Mr. Costello before the communications we've been discussing today? MR. COHEN: No, sir, but I did know Jeff Citron. MR. MALONEY: And it was Mr. Citron who reached out to you? MR. COHEN: That's correct, yes. MR. MALONEY: You did not initiate those conversations? MR. COHEN: No, sir. MR. MALONEY: So if Mr. Costello suggests othennrise, that's not accurate? MR. COHEN: That would be an absolute lie. MR. MALONEY: Thank you. THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Krishnamoorthi. MR. KRISHNAMOORTHI: Thank you, again, Mr. Cohen. A couple of -MR. MONICO: Sorry, we have to go. MR. COHEN: He's going, not me. MR. DAVIS: I'll cover you. MR. COHEN: Thank you. MR. KRISHNAMOORTHI: Yeah, you better stop the billing right there. MR. COHEN: No, the billing continues to run until he gets home. UNCLASS]EIED UNCLASS 240 I FIED MR. DAVIS: You all know I'm here pro bono. MR. COHEN: lt's amazing, he even charges me when he eats. Can I tell you one last funny story, by the it. Did you see "Saturday Night Live"? way? I think you'll all appreciate Did you notice when they kept saying, "Mr. Cohen, over here, over here," something interesting that's funny. What they don't know is I'm deaf in my left ear, and that's why I couldn't hear anything on the left side. And the way that the sound rips around the room, sometimes it's very difficult. I'm not fully deaf, l'm like 90 percent deaf in the left ear, and I just couldn't hear where it's coming from. And with the cameras, right, a hundred of them inside your face, I couldn't figure out who was talking to where. But Ben Stiller did a great job. He's very funny. THE CHAIRMAN: I'd say, it's not bad to have Ben Stiller play you on TV' MR. COHEN: Wait until I see him. See if it's funny then. MR. KRISHNAMOORTHI: Mr. Cohen, you know, going back to the instruction to say that the conclusion of the negotiations of Trump Tower Moscow was January 2016, did anybody explain to you why it was important to have the conclusion be before the lowa caucuses? MR. COHEN: Well, the lowa caucus was obviously a date, seeing that it's the kickoff to the campaign. MR. KRISHNAMOORTHI: Sure. Did they say something to the effect of, well, if it got out that we were continuing to negotiate after the start of the lowa caucus, that would be a bad thing for the campaign or a bad thing for the MR. COHEN: lt wasn't specifically laid cut-off date to use. And the important out. - lt was just this is a good thing was also, stay on message, right? UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS 241. I FIED Again, I say it a hundred times, no Russia, no collusion, no business, no deals, minimize the Trump-Russia connection, because that was a topic that was obviously prevalent in the papers. MR. KRISHNAMOORTHI: Got it. ln August 2013, it was reported that - maybe you talked about this earlier, I'm sorry, I was shuttling between committee hearings -- in August 2013, it was reported that Eric Trump said, quote, unquote: "Well, we don't rely on American banks," and then, "for financing. We have all the funding we need out of Russia." Do you have any idea what he's talking about in that quotation? MR. COHEN: I have no idea, but actually somebody who you would want to speak to about that would be Jason Greenblatt, who worked on all of the deals. He was general counsel at the time. And, of course, Alan Weisselberg. They would be the two people that I would go to first in order to find out what Eric was talking about. MR. KRISHNAMOORTHI: Okay. And was it your observation that in the purchase of properties, whether it was golf courses or homes, that they were primarily done with cash in the later timeframe before you left the organization? MR. COHEN: I've never seen that happen where it was with cash. I think you're referring to like a satchel fullwith cash? MR. KRISHNAMOORTHI: No, no, no, no. I mean with, like, wire transfer of money as opposed to debt. MR. COHEN: The only one that I'm aware of is the one with Dmitry Rybolovlev where it was a wire that came from his bank, because I was tracking that with Alan Weisselberg just to make sure that the money hit. MR. KRISHNAMOORTHI: Okay. UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS 242 I EIED MR. COHEN: Because I reviewed the sale contract that was done by Sotheby's. MR. KRISHNAMOORTHI: Okay. Last question. The term "witch hunt," did he ever use that term in running The Trump Organization? MR. COHEN: ln running The Trump Organization? MR. KRISHNAMOORTHI: Yeah, did he ever. MR. COHEN: No. MR. KRISHNAMOORTHI: -- use that term before becoming President? MR. COHEN: No. MR. KRISHNAMOORTHI: Okay. All right. Thank you. MR. COHEN: Thank you. THE CHAIRMAN: Just to follow up realquickly. You mentioned Mr' Greenblatt and Mr. Weisselberg as two people who know, who would be knowledgeable on whether Russia money was being used to finance some of the Trump properties or you're probably aware we're looking into the allegations that the Russians may have laundered money through The Trump Organization. ln addition to those two individuals, are there other people you would recommend that we talk to on the issue of alleged money laundering or Russian financing of Trump properties? MR. COHEN: Other than the children, Don Jr., lvanka, Eric, no, no. You know, there's a misconception about The Trump Organization that it's this big, massive company with 10,000 employees. lt's was really run by 12 of us. not. I mean, the entire company Well, overlapped. Like I would do a lot with Alan Garten and George Soreal (ph), with Larry Glick and Ron Lieberman and Alan and Jason Greenblatt. UNCLASS I F]ED UNCLASS 243 I FIED lf you take a look at just the executives that are there, you can pretty much just figure out exactly who you would want to speak to for every single .. like Larry Glick ran golf courses and Ron Lieberman helped in order to do budgets. So if you were looking at anything with golf courses, then those are the two people that you would want to speak to. Now, I don't think you're going to find Russian money in order to do these golf courses because he didn't pay a lot for the properties. And then what he does is he creates the golf course and then sells memberships. And a membership, say, $50,000, but he'll sell 500 of them, and that more than pays for the entire golf course, plus what he spent in terms of building the clubhouse. And then basically, you know, they foot the bill by the monthly chit that they're required to pay, whether it's with food or with their membership. So it's not as if you need Russian money in order to pull something like that. THE CHAIRMAN: But the two individuals you mentioned would be the two that would be knowledgeable about, in the case of the golf courses, where the money came from to buy those courses? MR. COHEN: Yes. ln order to build the golf courses, too. But it's not nearly as expensive as you may think. THE CHAIRMAN: There have been public reports that The Trump Organization invested upwards of a couple hundred million in cash in these properties. To your knowledge, would that be an amount The Trump Organization would have liquid on its own? MR. COHEN: So the answer is yes. I was sitting in Mr. Trump's office one time and a gentleman came, knocked on the door, and handed him a check. It was actually from Steve Roth (ph) of Vornato UNCLASS (ph). They had just done I FIED a 244 UNCLASSIF]ED refinance, this was a couple years back, maybe 5, 6 years back, where they had refinanced I think it's 1320 Avenue of the Americas in Manhattan, as well as the Bank of America Building in San Francisco, and Mr. Trump has a 30 percent interest in those two buildings. The check was like slightly over $100 million. So, yeah, he would have had that cash sitting around. THE CHAIRMAN: And Mr. Krishnamoorthi mentioned a comment, I think, from Eric Trump. There was another comment from one of the sons : MR. COHEN: I believe Don Jr. made a similar comment, too, about Russians are our best clients, our best customers. THE CHAIRMAN: Or a disproportionate share of income was coming from Russia? MR. COF{EN: Right. THE CHAIRMAN: Do you know the basis of those comments? MR. COHEN: No. THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Swalwell asked you about encrypted apps. Are you aware of people using encrypted apps, either during the campaign or during the investigation that followed? MR. COHEN: Yes. THE CHAIRMAN: Who is that and what apps were they using? MR. COHEN: I don't recall the Signal or one of those app. lt could be : whether it was Dust or apps. And as I had said I think last time, I don't have access to those phones, which are still in the possession of the SDNY, but I would be able to give you a list once I see the phones in terms of who I communicated with that had that specific app. THE CHAIRMAN: So you had those apps on your phone? UNCLASS ] EIED UNCLASS 245 I FIED MR. COHEN: I do. THE CHAIRMAN: And there were people that expressed to you a desire to communicate with you over those platforms? MR. COHEN: Yes, ljust don't recall how those conversations, you know, took place. Hey, we should just communicate through Signal or through Dust or what have you. THE CHAIRMAN: But you may still have some of those conversations on your phone? MR. COHEN: Yes. Well, not Dust, because it automatically wipes itself out. THE CHAIRMAN: lf you could check those encrypted conversations that you still have and determine if any are relevant to the questions we've asked you today. MR. COHEN: Sure. And as I said, I pledge to you, on both sides of the aisle, any questions that you have or any additional things that you want me to look for, information to provide, just reach out and I'm happy to comply. THE CHAIRMAN: Thank you. Mr. Goldman, you can finish up. MR. GOLDMAN: Real quick. BY MR. GOLDMAN: O Do you recall any conversations on encrypted apps that were not -- were designed to avoid potential detection? A O A I believe they all are. But was there : I mean, that's the purpose. UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASS O 246 IFIED Right. Was there a particular reason why you were communicating with people on the campaign or The Trump Organization? A lt wasn't with The Trump Org or the campaign, I think it was post, which is a couple of people. O A O A Who? I don't -- You don't remember anyone? I don't, I really don't. MR. DAVIS: We'll look. BY MR. GOLDMAN: O A O Have you ever been to Augsburg, Germany? I've never been to Germany. Let me just ask you a couple questions about I know this not your A O - - Why does she get to leave. We're almost there. I know this is not your area, of the financing and banks. But do you know which banks The Trump Organization either had loans from, bank accounts with, or any other business with? A Well, they have bank accounts local in the States. I believe that they have with Signature Bank. I mean, just, you know, local banks. At one point they asked lvanka to join the board, so we moved a bunch of accounts over there as sort of a way of welcoming her to their board. But they - most of their financing deals, I believe, went through Deutsche Bank. And as far as other moneys that existed, t believe that they were done through funds, like Steve Mnuchin's fund, which I think is Colony Capital. They UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS were a lender on the Trump Chicago project. So I don't even know whether O A O A 247 I FIED - So it wasn't a commercial bank, it was more of a private lending? Correct. Them and others. I mean, they parceled it out. Do you know which others? I don't, but I do -- again, I can tell you Jason Greenblatt was heavily involved in that. O Was Trump Chicago the last actual real estate development that The Trump Organization did that was not a licensing agreement? A Ground up? O Yeah. A I think so, yes. O And when was that? A That would be the first season of "The Apprentice." O Okay. Not the Matthew Calamari season? A No. Actually that may have been the finale, the famous "whoa." That was when what's his name won. O Right. And who was the contact at Deutsche Bank for The Trump Organization? A O A Rosemary Varblik, I think is her last name, V-a-r-b-l-i-k. Do you know where Alan Weisselberg's son works? Which son? He has two. One works for The Trump Organization, and the other works for a fund that I believe it was also a lender to The Trump Organization, I think it starts with an F, I don't recall. O A Does Ladder Cap (ph), does that ring a bell? Ladder Cap (ph). lt doesn't start with an F, it starts with an L. I was UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS 248 ] FIED close, both letters in the alphabet. O The checks that you received for your reimbursement for the Stormy Daniels payment, I believe came from Capital One? A O A That's correct. So were there accounts at Capital One as well? Yes, because Capital One is a bank that's actually located in the property that he owns, which happens to be the building that I live in. O Real quick. Well, do you know if there are any foreign investors in The Trump Organization or any of the deals as far as you know -- A O I don't believe so. The Trump Foundation, do you know if there were any donations ever from any foreign individuals or entities? A I'm not aware of any. O Did you have anything really to do with the Trump Foundation? A Yes. Oh, I apologize, let me rephrase that. Can you ask that question again about foreign O A O A - Foreign donors or foreign individuals or entities? The answer is, yes, I do. Sorry. Who is that? That was the one where I had negotiated with Viktor Pinchuk (ph) from the Ukrainian American chamber. lt was the Ukrainian American Economic Forum is exactly wtrat it was called. And I negotiated a scenario where they wanted Mr. Trump to come to the Ukraine to become a part of it, and he obviously couldn't go because of timing. And I negotiated instead that they would do it about by Skype. UNCLASS]FIED 249 UNCLASSIF]ED And it was a 1S-minute Skype scenario where they put a big television screen on in the room and they had a translator who would ask questions of people in the audience, and then he would respond and back and forth. It was 15 minutes for $150,000. He had me direct them to use the foundation to make the payment. O A Why? Well, probably not to pay taxes on it or to hide the fact that it was a foreign entity that was paying. O A O Did he say this to you or are you speculating? No, I'm speculating. Did he ever indicate to you that that's why he funneled money through the foundation for other purposes? A O A O A Would be probably not paying tax on it. But did he ever tell you that Not word for word. that: Not word for word. ln code? I knew what -- the reason why he was putting it there. He considered the foundation to be his checkbook, it's his money, that's how he would refer to it. That's exactly what he did. He had me do a contract that had the funds wired to the foundation, and, you know, he would direct me to speak to Alan Weisselberg in order to get all the wiring instructions and to establish it with Alan so that the payment would be made. O A O When was this Skype conversation? During the campaign? Yes. Just, I mean, you didn't put any time on it, you said he obviously UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS I FIED 2s0 couldn't go, but -- A O A O A Yes, it was during the beginning of the campaign, I believe. Okay. Last topic. The BTA Bank. Yes. What is - what was your personal relationship with them? I met the gentleman who was CEO of the collection part of the bank. It was like four, some say six, some say eight billion dollars that was stolen by a gentleman named Oblyasov (ph), something like that, who is Kazakh. He's living now in France. And he stole between $4 billion to $8 billion from the bank, and they wanted to find that money, both overseas, but also in New York there were a couple of real estate projects that were funded in part with that money. So they wanted myself and Mark Kassewitz (ph) to go and try to reclaim the stolen funds. O Was any of the money invested in The Trump Organization or any Trump Organization deals? A O No, not that I'm aware. Completely separate. Completely separate. Okay. One minute. Just one last thing. Are you aware of any other banks other than Deutsche Bank where The Trump Organization received financing from? A Banks? O Yeah. A No. But, again, a lot of it was done with these private capital groups like -- even the one with Mnuchin, which I think was either Doon Capital and also Colony Capital. O I'll get you names and I will send to you as I go through. That would be great. Who dealt with apartment sales, even in the UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS licensing agreements, 251 I EIED right? The Trump Organization helps to try to sell condos. ls that right? A O Correct. And who from The Trump Organization was responsible for that aspect of the business? A There's been a few people that have come and gone, so I don't know who the person that is currently running Trump Realty. But that's what they do, they put in-house brokers. And, again, I don't know who the individual is today, but I can find out. O A Who was it while you were there? There were several different people. There was a guy named Bob Cunningham. There was a young lady - I forget, l'm blanking on her name. But there were quite a few people over the course of the years that ran Trump Realty. O Okay. Mr. Cohen, we may have some follow-up questions, particularly about the structure of The Trump Organization and who focused in what areas and during what time periods. Would you be willing to answer follow-up written questions on that? A O Yes. And we may have some additional requests, including the spreadsheet of potential projects that you referenced as being passed around after the election? A I'll look for it, if I have O Okay. it. lf not, The Trump Organization should have it. MR. DAVIS: Active deals. UNCLASS I EIED UNCLASS 252 I F]ED THE CHAIRMAN: Ms. Speier had one last question. MR. COHEN: You're excellent on TV, by the way. MS. SPEIER: Thank you. MR. COHEN: Especially when you're nice to me. MS. SPEIER: Mr. Cohen, you just said that it was - at least I got to impression that Donald Trump would have money put into the foundation to avoid paying taxes, and this one payment was done for that purpose. Were there other deals that actually funneled the money into the foundation to avoid taxes? MR. COHEN: I don't know so much about deals as much as opportunities. So, for example, when he did the "Battle of the Billionaires" with Vince McMahon, that was I believe either $4 million or $5 million for his appearance. That money ended up in the foundation as opposed to him individually. MS. SPEIER: So the - MR. COHEN: Even as an example, during the campaign, when he elected not to do the second debate, instead to raise money for veterans, we directed people to send the money to the foundation as opposed to the organization itself or some other entity. MS. SPEIER: So the painting that he had purchased through a straw person was not the only incident where he used the foundation as his wallet? MR. COHEN: No, it was not. MS. SPEIER: Can you give us any other examples? MR. COHEN: I did. Between the \AME, and also the - I had asked an individual to make a donation for the veterans, and he gave me a million dollars. He did a half million and his wife did a half million, and that money was put into the foundation. UNCLASS I FIED 253 UNCLASSIEIED On top of that, we also used the foundation for at one point when I was negotiating a settlement on a case that dealt with Alonzo Mourning, the million dollar Zo challenge. The guy is a nephrologist, hits the ball and puts it in. Could you imagine? And there was no insurance onto it. And there was a big fight as to who was responsible for the million dollars because they hadn't taken out the hole-in-one golf insurance. And they claim that a guy -- I mean, you can't make this stuff up. lan Galuly (ph) put out emails that said, don't worry, I'll make sure that the distance is accurate. But the distance wasn't accurate. So even if there was insurance, what is going to happen? And then Alonzo was holding Trump Briarcliffe Manor, that's the one in West Chester, responsible. And what I ultimately did was I created a concept of you become a member at every single Trump golf .. I called it the Trump Centurion package, where you're a member of every, right, you became a member of every single golf course, though you chose one, you didn't have to put up a bond. But the only thing that you ended up paying is the monthly charge onto it, and you become a member for life, and you could play at any golf course that you want. And you're technically a member of all. And we sold three of them using Charity Buzz, and one went through the foundation. lt was another way of just paying an obligation that didn't belong. You can't use the foundation to pay obligations, So -MS. SPEIER: Was there ever a sexual harassment case that was filed or at least a request made of Donald Trump in an elevator sexually harassing someone? MR. COHEN: No. I think what you're referring to is there is an allegation UNCLASSI FIED 254 UNCLASSIFIED of a tape that involves .. I talked about this at the House Oversight - with Mr. Trump and the First Lady, and just like the P-Tape. I don't believe it exists and I don't believe that he would ever strike her. MS. SPEIER: Okay. All right. lyield back. MR. COHEN: You're really putting me through agony. I thought you liked me THE CHAIRMAN: The contributions you mentioned that went into the Trump Foundation, the $4 million or $5 million in fees that he got for being on the show, the -MR. COHEN: The "Battle of the Billionaires." THE CHAIRMAN: "Battle of the Billionaires." He would put that into his foundation so it would not be considered income to his person? MR. COHEN: lt would not be if it's sitting in a foundation. THE CHAIRMAN: And then he would draw, he would write checks on it as if it was his personal bank account? MR. COHEN: I don't know what he used the moneys for, only Alan Weisselberg would know. MR. DAVIS: Well, we know the portrait. MR. COHEN: Yes, he did that with the portrait. THE CHAIRMAN: Any questions on your side? No Thank you so much for spending so much time of your time with us. THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Bitar has a final statement to enter into the record MR. BITAR: Thank you, Mr. Cohen. My name is Maher Bitar, I'm the general counsel for the committee. As Mr. Goldman mentioned, we will likely UNCLASSIFIED UNCLASS I FIED 255 have follow-up questions. That will be conveyed through a formal communication to your counsels, and we will communicate in that respect. MR. COHEN: And you,can call me at Otisville (ph) State Penitentiary Camp. Thank you guys so much. MR. BITAR: Thank you very much, Mr. Cohen. [Whereupon, at 5:22 p.m., the deposition was concluded.] UNCLASS I FIED Majority Exhibit 50 - Michael Cohen (Feb.28, 2019) HPSCI Fwd Cohen; From: Sent: Draft S tatementattor Michael wonk product-attorney Cohen cllenr comrnunlLdLr.un Monday, March 4, 2@19 LLz To: Lanny J. Davis; Carly A. Chocnon Fwd: Cohen; Draft Statement/attorney work product-attorney Subject: communication $ B o You ns , U..L noks ./,*/r4r"r-l "* /0 O1a-rr, bu : # E fi Michael D. Cohen, Esq. (Ce11ular ) Forward Fnom: Ryan, Stephen Date: Tue, Aug 22, Subject: RE: Cohen; communication To: Michael fur,r*( Er/dL*r,- Draft Statement/attorney work product-attorney client Cohen Felix would like 'salesmanship' instead of 'puffing'. accunacy of doc. Sekulow liked doc. that is ok. think client Suggested we change He confinmed factually all'project'refenences to'proposal'-I Alan 6 asked fon a word vension implying he had edits. No word fnom Abbe (picking a jury fon Menendez today) and Alan F. Steve Stephen M. Ryan Pantner McDenmott t^Ji1l & Emeny N. td. Biognaphy tdebs LLP I fne DC 2000L Washin ite vCand Fnom: Ryan, Stephen ust 22 Sent: Tuesday, To: Michael Co hen Subject: FtrJ: C ohe n; na McDenmott Email Building I I Twitten I t-inkedtn SOO North Capitol Street, Blog 777 14 AM eme rney work pnoduct-attorney client Page 1 Fwd Cohen; communication Draft Statementattonney wonk pnoduct-attorney client communication Stephen M. Ryan Pantnen McDermott hlill & Emeny LLP I fne McDermott DC 20007 N. W. llas From: Ryan, Stephen Sent: Tuesday, Aug ust To: Michael Cohen Cc: Commons, James Subject: Cohen; Dr PLease see 22 500 North Capitol Street, 2077 ) nney work pnoduct-attonney the attached updated version for Stephen M. Ryan Pa ntnen McDermott Will & Emery Building LLP I fne client communication review/comments. McDenmott Building 500 Nonth Capitol Stneet, tten Biognap *******rl.'t********+t*1.+*****+****:**,F,1.*t*:1.,1.,1.*****r(i(rl.:{.*************,t*****,lc*,l.rl.********,i* ** *,* ** * ** * ** ** ** *,t,1.***********tf This message is a PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL communlcation. This message and all attachments are a private communication sent by a 1aw firm and may be confidential on pnotected by privilege. If you are not the intended r ecipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosune, copying, distnibution or use of the information contained in on attached to this message is strictly prohibited. PIease notlfy the sender of the deliveny ernor by replying to this message, and then delete it from your system. Thank you. ****************{.{.{.,1.i.*+*'1.*************,t*****{.x********,F****+**,t********************* ** *** f ** * * ***** ** *** **{. *,1,1.{.*tl.** Please visit http: /lwww.mwe.com/ fon more infonmation about bur Firm. Page 2 Majority Exhibit HPSCI - 62 Michael Cohen MichaelCohen Monday, March 4, 2019 1 1:19 AM From: Sent: Lanny J. Davis; Carly A. Chocron Fwd: Per joint interest privilege v.3 redline and clean copies attached To: - Subiect: Clean - Statement on Trump Tower Moscow.DOCX; Redline of Statement on Trump Attachments: Tower Moscow.PDF flerlc I Yours, g e I H u 7€rg M@ no/es ' lc'oEM q.ru/l.e EXHtBIT be;;a .ftodn44.- Fonrrarded message From: Ryan, Date:Wed, Aug 23, 20L7 al ll:57 AM St.ptt"nII Subject: Perjoint attached To: MichaelCohen Cc: Commons, Ja Going thru the death of a thousand cuts with other lawyers. Here is latest. Only one not addressed as yet is Lowell. I am starting to lose patience with 'happy to glad' revisions by other lawyers who believe their mellifluous prose is better than anyone else. That said this is pretty rock solid now for having everyone's' thoughts. Steve Stephen M. Ryan Partner McDermottWill & Em LLP The McDermott 500 North Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001 EioEraohv I webtite I vCard I Email I Twitter I tinkedh I Blog This message is a PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL communication. This message and allattiachments are a private communication sent by a law firm and may be confidential or protected by privilege. lf you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the information contained in or attached to this message is strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender of the delivery error by replying to this message, and then delete it from your system. Thank you. 1 1? Egg, Sm: *2 32m 383630: mcoS or: DRAFT V.2 Attorney Work Product Privileged & Confide ntial On Augusr 17,2017, my legat counsel, McDermott Will & Emery LLP, produced documents to the House Perrnanent Select Committee on Intelligence (the "Committee") on my behalf. Certain documents in the production reference a proposal for "Trump Tower Moscow," which contemplatedapu+e{1privaterealestatedevelopmentinRussia.@ te* provide the Committee with additional information regarding the proposal. iftg writing to am As background, other U.S. hotel chains and brands had already opened in Moscow, including; @HyattHoteIsCorporation,MarriottInternational,fnc.,andtheRitz- Carlton Hotel Company. Similarly, the Trump Organization had foreign hotels. as u'ell as.golf and land projects, in Canada, India, lndonesia, Ireland, Panama, Philippines, Scotland, South Korea, Turkey, the UAE and Uruguay. During my ten years with the Trump Organization, the company received countless proposals for licensing deals and real estate ventures in locations across the globe. I ln or around Septembe r 2015,I received a proposal for the construction of a luxury hotel, office, and residential condominium building in Moscow, Russia, I performed some initial due diligence to assess whether the "Trump Tower Moscow" proposal aligned with the Trump Organization's strategic business interests. Based on my preliminary assessment of the proposal, the licensee would be required to find and present an appropriate parcel of land that could be obtained and developed with all necessary government permits and permissions. In addition, the licensee would be responsible for all development costs and financing of the land and building. The Trump Organization would license the "Trump" brand name to a qualified Moscow-based real estate development company for the purpose of identifying, promoting, and marketing the building. The proposal was under consideration at the Trump Organization from September 2015 until the end of January 2016. By the end of January 2016,ldetermined that the proposal ** not feasible for a serie+vaglgq1of business reasons and should not be pursued further. Based on my business determinations, the Trump Organization abandoned the proposal. The decision to pursue the proposal initially, and later to abandon it, was unrelated to the Donald J. Trump for President Campaign. I worked on the proposal within my capacity as Executive Vice President and Special Counsel to the Trump Organization. I performed a dual role in evaluating the proposal and provided both legal and business advice. I primarily communicated with the Moscow-based development company, LC. Expert lnvestment Company ("Expert Investment"), through a U.S. citizen thirdparty intermediary, Mr. Felix Sater. Mr. Sater was formerly an executive at a company called Bayrock Group and was involved in the deal for the Trump SoHo New York Hotel. which broke ground in 2007. Mr. Sater claimed to have appropriate eefire€+ilons-relationships within the business community in Russia in order to obtain the real estate. hnancing. government permits. and other items necessarl' tor.such a development. The Trump Organization did not employ Mr. Sater in connection with the Trump Tower Moscow proposal, nor did the Trump Organization compensate Mr. Sater for his DRAFT V.2 Attorney Work Product Privil e g ed & C onfidential involvement in the proposal. Mr. Sater acted as a deal broker and would have been compensated by the licensee if thl pefee+pfgposa!-had been successful. I have known Mr. Sater for several dlcades and I routinely handled communications with him regarding the po{en'+ld about aspects of the prqieetproposal, as Efqie€tpfoposal. Mr. Satet, on occasion, made claims ieit as'tris aUility to bring the fj€€Fppposgl-to fruition. Over the course of my business dealings with Mr. Sater, he has sometimes used colorful language and is *as$ee*prone to salesnianshippuff,q. 4sra'+esaltrl did not feel that it was necessary to routinely apprise others that Mr' Sater sent *ithi" thdmp Organization of only to me. Mr. Satei constantly asked me to travel to Moscow as pafi of his efforts to push forward the discussion of the Er€ie€+proposal. I ultimately determined that the proposal was not feasible and never agreed to make a trip to Russia, Consequently, I did not tral'el.ne+e++rar'e{ed toRussiaforthisEfqFproposal'@nerhar.e{+r.ertraveledtoRussia. Despite ouertures by-Mr. Sater, I never considered asking Mr. Trump to travel to Russia in connection with thii proposal. I told Mr. Sater that Mr. Trump would not travel to Russia unless there was a definitivc agieement in place. To the best of my knowledge, Mr' Trump was never in contact with anyon. uboot this prgre€+BlgBosalother than me on two occasions, including signing a non-binding letter of intent in 2015' On or around October ZB,ZOl5,Trump Acquisition, LLC executed a non-binding letter of intent (.,LOf) with Expert Investment, memorializing the parties' "intention to negotiate for and .tt.rnpt to enter into a mutually acceptable agreement covering all aspects of the transaction." The parties expressly agreed that, "unless and until a License Agreement betwe_en the Parties has been executed and dtlivered, . . . no party shall be under any legal obligation of any kind whatsoever to consurnmate a transaction hereby by virtue of this LOL" Following execution of the non-binding LOI, we began more detailed work and analysis regarding various aspects of the For example, we solicited building designs from different architects I e"rc.++-ltf.l*rproposal. the prqieetproposal' In iretiminary discussions regarding-potentia-1. financing for ' mid-Jaiuly "na "ng"frdin ZOi6,Mr. Saier suggested that I send an email to Mr. Dmitry Peskov, the Press the gurBi*S€reieetproposal would require approval5 I Secretary for the President of Ruisia,hadsince nor been issued. I decided to abandon the proposal less I I' within rhe Russian govemment that rhan two weeks latei and do not recall any response to my email, nor any other contacts by me with Mr. peskov or other Russian government officials about the p+qleetproposal. The prq1€€+ pfoposat never advanced beyond the non-binding LOI. I did not ask or brief Mr. Trump, or any 6fl]t f.rnily working at rhe company, before I made the decision to terminate further work on the prqjeetproposal. presidential The Trump Tower Moscow proposal was not related in any way to Mr. Trump's "alleged" collusion $'ith Rlrssia campaign. Moreor,er. rhe proposal had nothing ro do u'ith an]' ,.g*dii-e the U*S. pr*tidentiol el.ction. dwBothIandtheTrumporganizationwereevaluatingthispnqeet proporol *a m*y others from solely a business standpoint, and rejected going forward on that basis, Majority Exhibit 6t HPSCI - Michael Cohen Michael From: Sent: To: Subject: Monday, M 4, Lanny J. Davis; Carly A. Chocron Fwd: Per joint defense and work product PDF CLEAN - Near FinalStatement'1055 AM Friday August 25.pdf; CLEAN - Near Final Statement 1055 AM Friday August 25.DOCX; REDLINE - Overnight Changes to Statement Friday August 25.pdf Attachments: #,oM ,. BfiIBII Yours, CrcrL noks- @duc-.p€ /o"/4aon M-^.-p b W-rrar^* MichaelD. Cohen, Esq. Cellular) Foruvarded messa From: Ryan, Stephen Date: Fri, Aug 25, 20t7 at 11:50 AM Subject: Per joint To: Michael Cohen Cc: Jay Seku Commons, James Per our discussion this am. Let me know if I missed anything or my adds are not ok. Stephen M. Ryan Partner Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001 Eiosrephv I website I vcard I Email I Twitter I Linkedh I Elor This message is a PRIVILEGED AND CONFIDENTIAL communication. This message and all attachments are a private communication sent by a law firm and may be confidential or protected by privilege. lf you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or use of the information contained in or attached to this message is strictly prohibited. Please notify the sender of the delivery error by replying to this message, and then delete it from your system. Thank you. Please visit htto://www.mwe.com/ for more information about our Firm 4l$dt#r{fi!* DRAFT V,4 Attorney l;f/ork Product Privileged & Confidential STATEMENT OF MICHAEL D. COHEN, Esq. Today, August 28,2017, my legal counsel, Stephen M. Ryan of McDermott Will & Emery LLP, produced documents to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (the "Committee") on my behalf. Certain documents in the production reference a proposal for "Trump Tower Moscow," which contemplated a private real estate development in Russia. The proposal was similar to other ideas for real estate projects contemplated years before any campaign. I am writing to provide the Committee with additional information regarding the proposal. As background, other U.S. hotel chains and brands had already opened in Moscow, including Hyatt Hotels Corporation, Marriott Intemational, Inc., and the Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company. Similarly, the Trump Organization had foreign hotels, as well as golf and land projects, in Canada, India, lndonesia, Ireland, Panama, Philippines, Scotland, South Korea, Turkey, the UAE and Uruguay. During my ten years with the Trump Organization, the company received countless proposals for licensing deals and real estate ventures in locations across the globe. In or around September 2015,1received a proposal for the construction of a luxury hotel, office, and residential condominium building in Moscow, Russia. I performed some initial due diligence to assess whether the "Trump Tower Moscow" proposal aligned with the Trump Organization's strategic business interests. Based on my preliminary assessment of the proposal, the licensee would be required to find and present an appropriate parcel of land that could be obtained and developed with all necessary govemment permits and permissions. In addition, the licensee would be responsible for all development costs and financing of the land and building. The Trump Organization would license the "Trump" brand name to a qualified Moscow-based real estate development company for the purpose of identiffing, promoting, and marketing the building. The proposal was under consideration at the Trump Organization from September 2015 until the end of January 2016. By the end of January 2016,1determined that the proposal was not feasible for a variety of business reasons and should not be pursued further. Based on my business determinations, the Trump Organization abandoned the proposal. I worked on the proposal within my capacity as Executive Vice President and Special Counsel to the Trump Organization. I performed a dual role in evaluating the proposal and provided both legal and business advice. I primarily communicated with the Moscow-based development company, I.C. Expert Investment Company ("Expert Investment"), through a U.S. citizen thirdparty intermediary, Mr. Felix Sater. Mr. Sater was formerly an executive at a company called Bayrock Group and was involved in the deal for the Trump SoHo New York Hotel, which broke ground in 2007. Mr. Sater claimed to have appropriate relationships within the business community in Russia in order to obtain the real estate, financing, govenrment permits, and other items necessary for such a development. The Trump Organization did not employ Mr. Sater in connection with the Trump Tower Moscow proposal, nor did the Trump Organization compensate Mr. Sater for his involvement in the proposal. Mr. Sater acted as a deal broker and would have been compensated by the licensee DRAFT V.4 Attorney lYork Product Privileged & ConJidential the proposal had been successful. I have known Mr. Sater for several decades and I routinely handled communications with him regarding the proposal. Mr. Sater, on occasion, made claims about aspects of the proposal, as well as his ability to bring the proposal to fruition. Over the course of my business dealings with Mr. Sater, he has sometimes used colorful language and has been prone to "salesmanship." As a result, I did not feel that it was necessary to routinely apprise others within the Trump Organization of communications that Mr. Sater sent only to me. Mr. Sater constantly asked me to travel to Moscow as part of his efforts to push forward the discussion of the proposal. I ultimately determined that the proposal was not feasible and never agreed to make a trip to Russia. Consequently, I did not travel to Russia for this proposal (nor did any other representative of the Trump Organization to the best of my knowledge) and I have never traveled to Russia. Despite overtures by Mr. Sater, I never considered asking Mr. Trump to havel to Russia in connection with this proposal. I told Mr. Sater that Mr. Trump would not travel to Russia unless there was a definitive agreement in place. To the best of my knowledge, Mr. Trump was never in contact with anyone about this proposal other than me on two occasions, including signing a non-binding letter of intent in 2015. if On or around October 28, 2015 , Trump Acquisition , LLC executed a non-binding letter of intent ("LOI") with Expert Investment, memorializing the parties' "intention to negotiate for and attempt to enter into a mutually acceptable agreement covering all aspects of the transaction." The parties expressly agreed that, "unless and until a License Agreement between the Parties has been executed and delivered, . . . no party shall be under any legal obligation ofany kind whatsoever to consummate a transaction hereby by virtue of this LOL" Following execution of the non-binding LOI, we began more detailed work and analysis regarding various aspects of the proposal. For example, we solicited building designs from different architects and engaged in preliminary discussions regarding potential financing for the proposal. In mid-January 2016,Mr Sater suggested that I send an email to Mr. Dmitry Peskov, the Press Secretary for the President of Russia, since the proposal would require approvals within the Russian govemment that had not been issued. Those permissions were never provided. I decided to abandon the proposal less than two weeks later for business reasons and do not recall any response to my email, nor any other contacts by me with Mr. Peskov or other Russian govemment officials about the proposal. The proposal never advanced beyond the non-binding LOI. I did not ask or brief Mr. Trump, or any of his family, before I made the decision to terminate further work on the proposal. The Trump Tower Moscow proposal was not related in any way to Mr. Trump's presidential campaign. The decision to pursue the proposal initially, and later to abandon it, was unrelated to the Donald J. Trump for President Campaign. Both I and the Trump Organization were evaluating this proposal and many others from solely a business standpoint, and rejected going forward on that basis, DRAFT V.2! Attorney Work Product P rivileg e d & C onJid e n tio I (}n SI-ATLME\T OF MICHAEI- D. COHEN. Esq l1 () Will & Emery oilar. August ll=lu. 2017, my legal counsel, Stc hc'n LLP, produced documents to the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (the "Committee") on my behalf. Certain documents in the production reference a proposal for "Trump Tower Moscow," which contemplated a private real estate development in Russia. The proposal was similar to other ideas for real estate projects contemplated years before any campaign. I am writing to provide the Committee with additional information regarding the I proposal. As background, other U.S. hotel chains and brands had already opened in Moscow, including Hyatt Hotels Corporation, Marriott International, Inc., and the Ritz-Carlton Hotel Company. Similarly, the Trump Organization had foreign hotels, as well as golf and land projects, in Canada, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Panama, Philippines, Scotland, South Korea, Turkey, the UAE and Uruguay. During my ten years with the Trump Organization, the company received countless proposals for licensing deals and real estate ventures in locations across the globe. In or around September 2015,I received a proposal for the construction of a luxury hotel, office, and residential condominium building in Moscow, Russia. I performed some initial due diligence to assess whether the "Trump Tower Moscow" proposal aligned with the Trump Organization's strategic business interests. Based on my preliminary assessment of the proposal, the licensee would be required to find and present an appropriate parcel of land that could be obtained and developed with all necessary govemment permits and permissions. In addition, the licensee would be responsible for all development costs and financing of the land and building. The Trump Organization would license the "Trump" brand name to a qualified Moscow-based real estate development company for the purpose of identiffing, promoting, and marketing the building. The proposal was under consideration at the Trump Organization from September 2015 until the end of January 20l6.By the end of January 2016,I determined that the proposal was not feasible for a variety of business reasons and should not be pursued further. Based on my business determinations, the Trump Organization abandoned the proposalJhe-Ceeisiepte ilter t() ahanddn it; \\a" HnhJ+ate+tt>tffikl*J+'++mp{or P+cside+{h+npargn. I worked on the proposal within my capacity Executive Vice President and Special Counsel to the Trump Organization. I performed a dual role in evaluating the proposal and provided both legal and business advice. I primarily communicated with the Moscow-based development company,I.C. Expert lnvestment Company ("Expert Investment"), through a U.S. citizen thirdparly intermediary, Mr. Felix Sater. as Mr. Sater was formerly an executive at a company called Bayrock Group and was involved in the deal for the Trump SoHo New York Hotel, which broke ground in2007. Mr. Sater claimed to have appropriate relationships within the business community in Russia in order to obtain the real estate, financing, govenunent permits, and other items necessary for such a development. The Trump Organization did not employ Mr. Sater in connection with the Trump Tower DRAFT V.2! Attorney lYork Product Pr ivileg ed & C o nJid entia I Moscow proposal, nor did the Trump Organization compensate Mr. Sater for his involvement in the proposal. Mr. Sater acted as a deal broker and would have been compensated by the licensee if the proposal had been successfut. I have known Mr. Sater for several decades and I routinely handled communications with him regarding the proposal. Mr. Sater, on occasion, made claims about aspects of the proposal, as well as his ability to bring the proposal to fruition. Over the course of my business dealings with Mr. Sater, he has sometimes used colorful language and has been prone to "salesmanship." As a result, I did not feel that it was necessary to routinely apprise others within the Trump Organization of communications that Mr. Sater sent only to me. Mr. Sater constantly asked me to travel to Moscow as part of his efforts to push forward the discussion of the proposal. I ultimately determined that the proposal was not feasible and never agreed to make a trip to Russia. Consequently, I did not travel to Russia for this proposal (nor did any other representative of the Trump Organization to the best of my knowledge) and I have never traveled to Russia. Despite overtures by Mr. Sater, I never considered asking Mr. Trump to travel to Russia in connection with this proposal. I told Mr. Sater that Mr. Trump would not travel to Russia unless there was a definitive agreement in place. To the best of my knowledge, Mr. Trump was never in contact with anyone about this proposal other than me on two occasions, including signing a non-binding letter of intent in 2015. On or around October 28,2015, Trump Acquisition,LLC executed a non-binding letter of intent ("LOI") with Expert Investment, memorializing the parties' "intention to negotiate for and attempt to enter into a mutually acceptable agreement covering all aspects of the transaction." The parties expressly agreed that, "unless and until a License Agreement between the Parties has been executed and delivered, . . . no party shall be under any legal obligation of any kind whatsoever to consummate a transaction hereby by virtue of this LOI." Following execution of the non-binding LOI, we began more detailed work and analysis regarding various aspects of the proposal. For example, we solicited building designs from different architects and engaged in preliminary discussions regarding potential financing for the proposal. [n mid-January 2016, Mr Sater suggested that I send an email to Mr. Dmitry Peskov, the Press Secretary for the President of Russia, since the proposal would require approvals within the Russian govemment that had 'lhose pcnlissions uere nclcr pruvidcd. I decided to abandon the proposal less not been issued. than two weeks later for business reasons and do not recall any response to my email, nor any other contacts by me with Mr. Peskov or other Russian govemment officials about the proposal. The proposal never advanced beyond the non-binding LOI. I did not ask or brief IvIr. Trump, or anyofhisfamily@,beforeImadethedecisiontoterminatefurtherwork on the proposal. The Trump Tower Moscow proposal was not related in any way to Mr. Trump's presidential campaign. ia proDosal initiall}. and later rrigardrr+3l'+he-{-S-prcside*tial-el+e+ion-'fhe' decision to pursr.re tltc' to abandon it. uas runrclated to the Donrrlcl .l Trurnn lirr [)residc-nl L'anrDriun. Both I and the Trump Organization were evaluating this proposal and many others from solely a business standpoint, and rejected going forward on that basis. 1 UNCLASSIFIED EXECUTIVE SESSION PERMANENT SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLIGENCE, U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, WASHINGTON, D.C. T a E 2 c, z R *Jt# EXHBTT c.lL,rvDEPOSITION OF: MICHAEL COHEN f1ot€.S *4tor{**rP @ lD-b3a'm vt Thursday, February 28, 2019 Washington, D.C. The deposition in the above matter was held in Room HVC-304, Capitol Visitor Center, commencing at 9:35 a.m. Present: Representatives Schiff, Himes, Sewell, Carson, Speier, Quigley, Swalwell, Castro, Heck, Welch, Maloney, Demings, Krishnamoorthi, Nunes, UNCLASS I FIED . 51 UNCLASSI FIED MR. RATCLIFFE: Did he ask you about your prior testimony before this committee? MR. COHEN: Not that I recall. MR. RATCLIFFE: You mentioned earlier that you had four conversations with members of this committee staff, correct? MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. RATCLIFFE: Were all of those conversations with members of the majority staff? MR. COHEN: TheY were with - t\/R. RATCLIFFE: The Democratic staff? MR. COHEN: I believe so, Yes. MR. RATCLIFFE: All right. Give me as much information as you can about when those four conversations took place. MR. COHEN: I don't have the specific dates, sir. walking calendar. I apologize. I don't. Within the last I mean, I'm not a - within the last 2 months. MR. RATCLIFFE: Four separate occasions? MR. COHEN: On four separate occasions. I believe it was four. MR. RATCLIFFE: To the best of your recollection, how long did any of those four occasions, conversations last? MR. COHEN: Two hours. lvlR. RATCLIFFE: A total of 2 hours? MR. COHEN: One was t hour. No, no. l'm not sUre exactly in total. MR. RATCLIFFE: I'm asking to the best of your recollection. So the best of your recollection, in Summary, you're saying you had 2 hours of conversation? UNCLASS I FI ED UNCLASS 52 I FIED MR. COHEN: All four? You want all four or you want individual? MR. RATCLIFFE: Allfour. MR. COHEN: Four or 5 hours in total, or something like that. MR. RATCLIFFE: ln - 4 or 5 hours of preparation for the testimony that you were providing today, correct? MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. RATCLIFFE: All right. ln those 4 to 5 hours, to the best of your recollection, what did you discuss with the Democratic staff of this committee? MR. COHEN: Do you have a specific question? What did I discuss? We discussed the topics that were being looked at, that this committee has interest in, and information that I may have to be able to provide some clarity. MR. RATCLIFFE: And in 4 to 5 hours, did you discuss so far some of the same topics that we've covered in the first hour of your testimony? MR. COHEN: We really haven't covered Trump Tower Moscow thing for a long time. much. I've been covering We talked about this that. We also talked about financial records that came into my possession. MR. RATCLIFFE: And so did that - in those 4 or 5 hours, did that include members of the Democratic staff asking you questions about your knowledge about these transactions like the Trump Tower Moscow project? MR. COHEN: There was back-and-forth conversation, yes. MR. RATCLIFFE: So you did give an advance summary of what your testimony was going to be today? MR. COHEN: I don't know if I would call it an advance summary, had conversation. MR. RATCLIFFE: You gave 4 to 5 hours of detail regarding your UNCLASS IEIED sir. We 53 UNCLASSIFIED knowledge in back-and-forth conversations with members of the Democratic staff of the House -MR. COHEN: Again, sir, we had conversation. I don't know if I would say it was detailed. We also went over the transcript, which was quite long. MR. RATCLIFFE: So, now, a little bit more about the specifics of how those 4 to 5 -- four meetings over 4 to 5 hours took place. Did any of them take place in person? MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. RATCLIFFE: How many? MR. COHEN: All of them took place in person. MR. RATCLIFFE: Where did they take place? MR. COHEN: ln New York. MR. RATCLIFFE: Members of the Democratic staff traveled to New York to meet with you to discuss your testimony before this committee today for 4 to 5 hours? ls that your testimony under oath? MR. COHEN: I'm sorry? MR. RATCLIFFE: Members of the Democratic staff traveled to New York and met with you for 4 to 5 hours to discuss your testimony prior to today? Is that your testimony under oath? MR. COHEN: What I said was I met with them in New where they traveled from. York. I don't know I met with them in New York. MR. RATCLIFFE: I believe they've called votes. Can you mark the time so I can resume immediately after votes? Before we adjourn, Mr. Stewart has one question' THE CHAIRMAN: We're not adjourning. We can continue untilwe get a UNCLASS I FI ED UNCLASS little 54 I FIED closer. We have a long day ahead of us, so we should make use of as much time as we can. MR. RATCLIFFE: Mr. Stewart, you have one question? MR. STEWART: One question to follow up on this, Mr. Cohen. ln regards to this before we break, in these 4 to 5 hours of conversations in person with members of Democratic staff or, in some cases, the chairman, would you say you were better prepared for this testimony than you were before you had those conversations? MR. COHEN: I was in preparation for three hearings. I had one Tuesday, one yesterday, and one today, and you're all covering the exact same topic. MR. STEWART: I understand. I'm just asking -MR. COHEN: I also just would like to make clear that I asked them to come to New York because I had just come out of surgery -MR. DAVIS: I don't think the witness finished. MR. COHEN: I had just come out of surgery, and I had asked them to come to me because I could not travel. MR. STEWART: And it's of little interest to me, I think, whether you met here or in New York. The fact that you met is the most important thing to me and I think to members. Would you say that you are better prepared for your testimony having met with these individuals than you would have been otherwise? MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. STEWART: ls it fair to say that they helped you prepare your testimony? MR. COHEN: UNCLASS I FIED No. I read through the transcript, so I'm better prepared. 55 UNCLASSI EIED MR. STEWART: But those meetings helped prepare you for these hearings? MR. COHEN: Sir, I had the transcript. I was preparing myself. I'm not adopting their answers; I have my own. MR. STEWART: You did say yes, so I'll leave it at that. MR. DAVIS: He just modified -- you have to stop interrupting and give the witness courtesy. Finish your answer. MR. COHEN: Okay. I was using my prior testimony in order - THE CHAIRMAN: Members, please, let's allow the witness to finish his answer. MR. COHEN: I was using the prior testimOny in order to prepare myself, along with the information that I had for the other two hearings in preparation for this. MR. RATCLIFFE: Mr. Cohen, did the meetings that you had that you've represented, were those meetings with Democratic staff members of this committee? tt/R. COHEN: Yes. MR. RATCLIFFE: Did it include members of the staff or members of other con g ressional committees? MR. COHEN: My belief, it was the staff. MR. RATCLIFFE: Of committees besides the lntelligence Committee? tr/R. COHEN: Of this committee. MR. RATCLIFFE: Only of this committee? MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. RATCLIFFE: l'm going to UNCLASSI FIED - 55 UNCLASSIEIED MR. COHEN: Did you ask me if I had also spoken with other House committee members or staff? The answer is yes, l've spoken with other committees as well. MR. RATCLIFFE: All right. Tell me about those meetings. MR. COHEN: I spoke with staff for the House Oversight as well. MR. RATCLIFFE: The Democratic staff? MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. RATCLIFFE: How about for the Senate Select Committee on lntelligence? MR. COHEN: I don't believe so. MR. RATCLIFFE: The conversations you had with the House Oversight majority staff, how many meetings did you have with you can them? lf you don't know, - MR. COHEN: I apologize. I don't know. I don't recall. MR. RATCLIFFE: Were those meetings separate and apart from the four meetings that you've identified today that took place with the majority staff of the House Select Committee on lntelligence? MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. RATCLIFFE: How long, in aggregate, did the meetings with the House Oversight staff committee last? MR. COHEN: I don't recall. A couple of hours. MR. RATCLIFFE: And did those meetings, to the best of your recollection, take place in person? MR. COHEN: I believe that they were by phone. MR. RATCLIFFE: Do you recallwhat -- l'm sorry? UNCLASS I FIED UNCLASS 57 IFIED Mr. Cohen, in your plea agreementwith the specialcounsel regarding lying to Congress, you admitted that you lied to three areas, in regards to three areas before this committee and the Senate Select Committee on lntelligence. Those three areas are the time of your discussions surrounding the Trump Tower Moscow project, when they ended; your agreement or willingness to travel to Russia in furtherance of that deal; and the fact that you received a response to an inquiry that you made to a Kremlin spokesperson. ls that an accurate summary? - MR. COHEN: lf that's what it states in the document. I don't have it to MR. RATCLIFFE: Would you like to review it? MR. COHEN: lwould. MR. RATCLIFFE: Have your criminal information? MR. COHEN: Sure. So I don't have to read the whole thing, can you identify? MR. GOLDMAN: Mr. Ratcliffe, would you mind introducing it into the record? lf it's okay with the minority - MR. RATCLIFFE: I'm happy to offer it. I offered it because the witness asked to use it to refresh his recollection, which is why I'm providing it to him. But if you're asking me to introduce it as an exhibit, l'm also happy to do that. MR. GOLDMAN: That's up to you. We'll talk at the break' MR. RATCLIFFE: I don't need to introduce it as an exhibit, but l'm happy to let the witness use it for his recollection. MR. GOLDMAN: Okay. MR. RATCLIFFE: Mr. Cohen, you've had a chance to review the document. Did I provide an accurate summary of the plea agreement that you made with the special counsel regarding areas in which you were charged and UNCLASS I FIED 58 UNCLASSIFIED admitted lying to Congress? MR. COHEN: Yes. MR. RATCLIFFE: ls there anything else the Special Counsel's Office claimed that you lied about for which you have not been charged? MR. COHEN: Not that I'm aware of. THE CHAIRMAN: Mr. Ratcliffe, there are 5 minutes remaining on the vote I don't know if there's an appropriate breaking point for you, but - MR. RATCLIFFE: This is fine for members. I'm happy to recess. THE CHAIRMAN: Okay. Why don't we recess here? We'll come back immediately followin g votes. IRecess.] UNCLASS IFIED 59 UNCLASSIFIED [12:15 p.m.] THE CHAIRMAN: Okay, we're going to go back on the record. A couple things before we do. As you might expect after 2 days of full testimony, Mr. Cohen is pretty exhausted. We are going to go until 5 o'clock today. Mr. Cohen has agreed to come back on March 6th, because we don't think we'll get through our questions by 5:00. So we'll make sure that we divvy up the time equally between now and then. And I want to remind my colleagues also, it's perfectly appropriate for staff to meet and have proffer sessions with witnesses. And l'm sure those of you that were former prosecutors did the same with witnesses to prepare for their testimony. And, with that, Mr. Ratcliffe or - MR. COHEN: I'm sorry, Mr. Chairman, can I the record or at least expand upon it. - I would like just to correct When I was asked how many hours -- THE CHAIRMAN: Yes. MR. COHEN: - I had met with staff from the Democratic side, I interpreted that question to mean approximately how many hours did you speak with them. I want to just be clear that directly after my surgery, my shoulder surgery, I was unable to come to D.C., and I asked for the courtesy, because I wanted to read my prior testimony. So they brought the testimony to me. And we probably were in the same room together for about 12 hours, but only speaking for 5 or 6 hours, but we were in the same room. So I wanted just to be accurate for the record. THE CHAIRMAN: Thank You, Mr. Cohen. Mr. Ratcliffe. UNCLASS IEIED Gnrail - Giuliani 9/ t'l/?018 M Gmail MlchaelCohen Giuliani 1 message Sat, Apr 21,2018 at'12:02 AM Costello, Robert J To: MichaelCohen Privileged And Confidential Michael, I just spoke to Rudy Giuliani and told him I was on your team. Rudy was thrilled and said this could not be a better situation for the President or you. He asked me if it was ok to call the President and Jay Sekelow and I said fine. We discussed the facts , Jay Goldberg 's stupid remarks etc. he said I can't tell you how pleased I am that I can work wilh someone I know and trust. He asked me to tell you that he knows how tough this is on you and your family and he will rnake sue to tell the Presldent. He said thank you for opening this back channel of communication and asked me to keep in touch. I told him I would after speaking to you further. .P:UI sent trom my rPnone STATEMENT OF CON FIDENTIAL]TY The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain confidential or privileged information. lf you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately by email reply to sender or by telephone to Davidoff Hutcher & Citron LLP at (800) 793-2843, ext. 3284, and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments. IRS DISCLOSURE NOTICE ln accordance with lnternal Revenue Service Circular 230, we inform you that any discussion of a federal tax issue contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used, by any recipient for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on the recipient under United States federal tax laws, or (ii) promoting, marketing or recomrnending lo another party any tax-related matters addressed herein. latttlaltltlaia*tatlra #% DEP0Sm0il EXHIB]T a!*,1- ndtt -l"rlSoducal E sy'p-,, e b+ ru,i,,1 Qollbt,*n Majority Exhibir 54 HPSCI - Michael Cohen (Feb.28, 2019) Gmail - Ciuliani e/li/20 r 8 fY Gmail Mlchael Cohen Giuliani 'l message Sat. Apr 21, 2018 at 8:57 PM Costello, Robert J To: MichaelCohen Attorney Client Communication Privileged I spoke with Rudy . Very Very Positive.You are "loved". lf you want to call me I will give you the details. I told him everything you asked me to and he said they knew that. There was never a doubt and they are in our corner. Rudy said this communication channel must be maintained. He called it crucial and noted how reassured they were that they had someone like me whom Rudy has known for so many years in this role Sleep well tonight , you have friends in high places. Bob P.S. Some very positive comments about you from the White House. Rudy noted how that followed my chat with him last night. Sent from my iPad STATEMENT OF CONFIDENTIALITY The information contained in this electronic message and any altachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain confidential or privileged information. lf you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately by email reply to sender or by telephone to Davidoff Hutcher & Citron LLP at (800) 793-2843, ext. 3284, and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments. IRS DISCLOSURE NOTICE ln accordance with lnternal Revenue Service Circular 230, we inform you that any discussion of a federal tax issue contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used, by any recipient for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on the recipient under United States federal tax laws, or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein. tr rri t tr ftat ltt *r ttt rtti ta 0nrnil 9/ r /20tt) - Contrnunicntion fvl Gmail Michael Cohen Communication 3 messages Tue, May 15, 2018 at '1:05 PM Costello, Robert To: Michael Cohen Cc: ''Citron, Michael, I am sitting here with Jeff Citron drafting this email. We need you to set a time up tomorrow when we can talk, Notwithstanding the fact that you have failed to communicate with me despite several text messages and emails, pursuant to youi instructions, I have continued to be in touch with my friend who indicates that he and Jay Sekulow will be meeting with Steve Ryan Wednesday or Thursday in Washington D.C to discuss mutually beneficial actions. My friend suggested that we have a talk with you as there is significant information which we need to communicate. We strongly sense that we are being "slow-played" and that policy ls emanating from McDermott Wll & Emery, However, you have previously assured us that is not the case and we are on the team. Therefore we have continued our dialogue and need to bring you up to date concerning serious concerns on the part of our friends ' a g Jeff & Bob EXHBTT fr Robert f. Costello, Esq, Davidoff Hutcher & Cihon LLP 605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158 Firm:flDircctJ Enrail Fax:J Wcbsite Cl2-p/k nafu -{"7+rh)&-ttca/ @ /z . S? p*-, 4b"LLr' v Qotdna-rt Itttatttttttattitlllattlalttatttttttlllrtlta STATEMENT OF CONFIDENTIALITY The information contained in this electronic message and any atlachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain confidential or privileged information. ll you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately by email reply to sender or by telePhone to Davidoff Hutcher & Citron LLP at (800) 793-2843, ext. 3284, and destroy all copies ofthis message and any attachmenls. IRS DISCLOSURE NOTICE ln accordance with lnternal Revenue Service Circular 230, we inform Majority Exhibit 55 HPSCI - Michael Cohen (Feb. 28, 2019) ln 9/l InOl& . Gnrail ' Corrlnruilicalior you that any discussion of a federal tax issue contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and it cannot be used, by any recipient for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on the recipient under United States federal tax laws, or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein. Tue, May 15, 2018 at 1 :42 PM Michael Cohen To; ''Cost,ello Cc:"Citron, Jeffrey" Bob, As I have stated in the past, when the right time comes, and now is not the right time, we lvill advance our conversations regarding this issue. Here are too many hands right now all with varying view points and ideas. I asked you to reach out to Stephen Ryan if there was something lo communicate as I can only listen to one person at a time. You can always reach out to me directly but under no circumstances do I want anyone communicaling on my behalf with anyone else. lQuoted text hiddenl Yours, Michael D. Cohen, Esq. Personal Attorney to President Donald J, Trump 30 Rockefeller Plaza 23rd floor New York, New York 1 011 2 (NYC Office) DC Office) Costello, Robert J. To: Michael Cohe Wed, May 16,2018 at 12:'16 PM Michael, realize you are under a tremendous strain and every day this Avenatti guy brings up more stuff to try to paint you it has nothing to do with his alleged client Stormy Daniels. As I have said before, this is psychologicalwarfare and Avenatti is acting for undisclosed others who are well funded and not afraid to break the law to obtain any evidence they can to try to tarnish you. As we have discussed, you are doing the "rope-a dope" just standing there taking body shots after body shots. No one on your side has been punching back and exposing Avenatti for the political operative he is. I in a negative way, even though lsayall thatbecause,Jeffandlsimplyrequestedatimetotalktoyou,andyourespondedwithaharshemail. You ever asked me to "reach out to Stephen Ryan". You continue to say I can contact you directly but when I did several times last week you did not respond. Do not let the stress of the situation get to you- that is their entire game plan. We are trying to help you but it does require some communication and a telephone call is much better than an email. I will not pester you. lf you want to talk, you know how to reach Jeff or myself. Best regards and good luck, Bob Gnrail - FW: CopitrakScan 9/l f/20rE M Gmail Michael Cohen FW: CopitrakScan 1 message Thu, Jun 7,2018 at 3:16 PM Costello, Robert J To: MichaelCohen ATTORNEY CTIENT PRIVILEGED COM MU NICATION Michael, that Rudy Giuliani called me and I did not call him, I photographed the pages from my iPhone which I am attaching. They show that you called me at 11;30am today on my cell and that the next call I had was two incoming calls from Rudy Giuliani at 1:08 PM and then at 1:15 PM because the first cell call transmission was lost (calling from lsrael) and Giuliani called me back at 1:15To prove to you After you called me back at 2:43 pm and we spoke, I called and left a message for Rudy at 2:55 pm (New York time). lwill let you know when I hear back from him' Bob $ E e EXH!BIT E E (loo*- /ntradttet I'/A Robert !. Costello, Esq. Davidoff Hutcher & Citron LLP 505 Thircl Avenue, New York, NY no&a @ 10158 Firm:JDirect:I Ema Fax:f \{ebsite From: COSTELLO, ROBERT J. Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2018 PM To: Costello, Robert J. SubJect: CopitrakScan t )o 1t it r u I< li t :tt n lV tttiJ' i c ttt Majority Exhibit 60 - Michael Cohen (Feb.28,2019) HPSCI itt tt r/3 Grnail - FW: CopitrakScan 9/l !i2018 copitrak l'lti< Arry a ]jtril rttcssotlt' i: pii'ttlt'qtr!, cottiitit:rttitrl ortr.l srtllatl ttrttutllroritrtl ttst: or dist lttsrrrt is tct tt'tpyrirlitt l.troltiititt'ti *t*ititttti*t*t*titittllatttttlt*lll STATEMENT OF CONFIDENTIALITY The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain confidentialor privileged information lf you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately bf email reply to sender or by telephone to Davidoff Hutcher & Citron LLp at (800) 793-2843, ext. 3284, and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments. IRS DISCLOSURE NOTICE ln accordance with lnternal Revenue Service Circular 230, we inform you that any discussion of a federal tax issue contained in this tommunication (including any attachments) is not intended or writen to be used, and it cannotbe used, by any recipient for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on the recipient under United States federal tax laws, or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein f] GopitrakScan-99999.001.PDF 2t7 9/11'12018 Gmail FW: CopitrakScan 226K 3/3 Rudy Giuliani Greenhers Traurig message $ ca ll pay FaceTime Today 1:15 PM lncorning Call 5 minutes 1:08 PMlncoming Call 6 minutes home FaceTime ET L rftf;Efrls Rudy Giuliani ',''rr ,..ir." ilr*$"ril# . },,.. ,_. ,i.;.., d'? ii " ,1.';r .,+ p ;!"," i irl{ Michael Cohen (21 _I:.a.,r;:rpr,c il'i'-t r, l*ilet $:jr.t,.": i*T'i *"q'] ff tr/ i t-:i fr {-} Rudy Giuliani (21 'g : ;lt'* 'J ;"'l .tl *3 $lrt t I a I a I , fut I Michael Goh.,. (21 ,I "uT:;:&u'i,r.,L*d I $:) l"t q:l l'","? {:l} i'r iti i:* il*,; Michael Cohen rr:i t ,rl ., rr;,1 i'ii f:. *, jI {j ii t=5'';', i i.g'i .i a I gilU20tE Gnrail - FlV: tlpdatc DRAIT M Gmail MichaelCohen FW: Update DRAFT 1 message Costello, Robert $ a g e o 2 Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 3:21 PM H To: Michael Cohen ilLttL *;,/-r/r)u4 @ i ruV"' ryear"*l Qolaav-' nefieo ' Michael, Since you jumped off the phone rather abruptly, I did not get a chance to tell you that my friend has communicated to you me that nL is meeting with his client lhis evening and he added that if there was anything you wanted to convey should tell me and my friend will bring it up for discussion this evening. would suggest that you give this invitation some real thought. Today's newspaper stories should not rattle you. The event annouriced today you ihought would be announced Friday or Monday so it is merely a difference of timing. MW& E were brought in to do a discreet tisk and they have performed those services in an exemplary fashion. This is not a positive and not change in-plan rather it is exacily what was planned. Your message or the message of M!v.&E should be n.gaive in any way. W1rat you io next is for you to decide, but if that choice requires any discussion with my friends client, you have the opportunity to convey that this evening, but only if you so decide. I you quite frankly that I am not used to listening to abuse like today's conversation. You have called me numerous times over the lasi month to discuss issues and I have always tried to be as helpful as I could You told me back in April that I was part of the team and I have acted accordingly on your behalf. When I suggested that we meel and "That's not going to happen" discuss a strategy following this news you suddenly took a new approach and stated: Stunned by thislemark, I was asking you for a clariflcation of our legal relationship. You indicated that you would be talking to someone in a boutique nrm tnat was not ready to get involved and when I noted that you were willing to sit down with t[em but not sit down with us, you had an unfortunate oulburst. I relayed this situation to Jeff Citron who suggested you that you probably were lust having i bad moment but that it was necessary to seek a clarification of our position with I must tell in light of your remarks. please remember if you want or need to communicate something, please let me know and I will see that it gets done, hope I am wrong but it ieems to both Jeff and I that perhaps we have been played here. Let me know what you want to I do. Bob Robert J. Costello, Esq' Davidoff Hutcher & Citron LLP 605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158 Firnr,l ,o*,I Direct:I MajoritY Exhibit 56 HPSCI - Michael Cohen (Feb. 28,2019) linrail: v2 9/l t/20t8 f4 Cnnil - Ansrvers I Grnail * tS€fi E EXHEIT a E a Answers Michael Cohen H 3 messages &l L n'rfu 'n -\ g J-ntrocla&r* -i Costello, Robert rhu, Jun 28,2018ar 3:20 PM -t n7) %d*/ $ot/r'o-' To: Michael Cohen Michael, l've met with my friend and I have one answer of you and have conveyed all of your expressed concerns to him for transmission to his client. My friend is travelling to Europe at 5pm tonight so I cannot tell you exactly when your concerns will be relayed. lf you want you can give me a call, 8ob Robert f. Costello, Esq. Davidoff I-Iutcher & Citron LLP 605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10'158 rirnrlJDirectf FaxJ Enrail: Website ilffi il#ffi ;;;,;il*ilt' trtttti'ttt't*rttt*tt**t The information contained in this electronic message and any attachments to this message are intended for the exclusive use of the addressee(s) and may contain confidential or privileged informalion. lf you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately by email reply to sender or by telephone to Davidoff Hutcher & Citron LLP at (800) 793-2843, ext. 3284, and destroy all copies of this message and any attachments. IRS DISCLOSURE NOTICE ln accordance with lnternal Revenue Service Circular 230, we inform you that any discussion of a federal tax issue contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or writlen to be used, and it cannot be used, by any recipient for the purpose of (i) avoiding penalties that may be imposed on the recipient under Majority Exhibit 57 HPSCI - Michael Cohen (Feb. 28, 2019) 9/ll/2018 Gnrail - Ansrven 't United States federal tax laws, or (ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any tax-related matters addressed herein. taaitaatttla)tattaaa tttltirltltttltltl trlta tltttlltlllttltttt llttttttft Thu, Jun 28,2018 at 4:01 PM Mlchael Cohen To: "Costello, Robert J." Nol sure what concerns other than non-payment I expressed to you. But I thank you either way for your assistance in speaking to your friend. [Ouoled text hidden] Yours, Michael D. Cohen, Esq. Thu, Jun 28,2018 at 4:45 PM Costello, Robert To: MichaelCohen The answer about why they haven't brought an action challenging Mueller, His investigation and the Michael Cohen referral and investigation based upon the findings of the lG (Horowitz) report. ljust saw your Tweet and then the outrageous response from Tom Arnold. You should bury that guy's credibility with his own text messages. How dare he say "YOU broke the law. YOU ruined your future & your family's financial security. The Cab Medallion Clownshow? Shut Up & Dance." Robert J. Costello, Esq. Davidoff Hutcher & Citron LL,P 605 Third Avenue, New York, NY 10158 Firmlrtr*r,E Fax:J Email: Wc'bsite From: Michael Cohen Sent: Thursday, June To: Costello, Robert J. Subject: Re: Answers lOuoted lexl hiddenl [Ouoted lext hidden] a E g Majority Exhibit 5l DEPOSmOil EXHIB]T DAVIDOFF HUTCHER & CITRON e E . A.b-r-Ut_ naCa_s HPSCI - Michael Cohen LLP (Feb. 28, 2019) 605 THIRD AVENUE NEW YORK, N.Y. 10158 : utfroclr.c{& @ t eq?,,. % Qep Spz^"r FAX FEDERALI.D. NO. 13 3138680 Page: Michaef Cohen., Es File Statement INVESTIGATION/SEARCH WARRANT BY OFEICE 04/20/2018 Jrc RJC U.S. 04/2U2018 RJC Telephone caIL R. eiuliani; telephone call M. Cohen,' telephone call R. Giul i ani 04/2212018 RJC Telephone calL M. Cohen,' telephone call telephone caff M. Cohen R 04/23/2078 RJC Reviewing background documentsi filings in SDNY; telephone call Rudy Giuliani; Email- Mike Cohen JIC Calfs with Bob re: issues 04/2412018 RJC 04/25/2018 JrC RJC 04/26/2018 MRY 14057-001M 283958 ATTORNEY'S Calls, conference with Bob, conference with Keith, follow up. Telephone calf J. Citron,' telephone call Mike Cohen; telephone cal-l Ci-tron,' telephone call Michael Cohen "on the Train",' telephone call E. Hatzimemos re: RWG: Legal research on search warrant and attorney client privi lege Giuliani; No No 1 0'1/11/2078 Telephone call J. Citron (5x); Email M. Cohen re: Sessions not recused; SDNY documents; telephone calf A. Hazlitt re: taxi medall-ion industry Conference with Bob; update with Sid. Retainer Agreement; Te.l-ephone calls J. Citron (4x); Judge Wood sets hearing New Case Memo; Conference with R. Costeffo re: client appearance, issues, case status and strategy, attended SDNY appearance before Judge K. Wood, conference with R. Costello Hours 2 .00 0.00 4.75 3,087.50 1.50 975.00 1.00 650.00 1.75 0.50 1,137.50 0.00 .50 1,625.00 0.75 0.00 2 2.50 1,625.00 Page: Michaef Cohen, Esq. Fil-e INVESTIGATION/SEARCH WARRANT BY OEEICE JIC RJC 04/21l2018 MRY JIC RJC 04/30/2018 Jrc RJC U.S. Statement ATTORNEY'S re: same, searched PACER for case filings, saved same to system, emails with R. CosteIlo re: same Catls with Bob re: hearing. Telephone call J. Citron,' Telephone calI M Yogg to cover Court conference in SDNY; Telephone caIl J. Citron (3x) re: Special Master; Email Mike Cohen re: Barbara Jones Conference with R. Costel-Lo re: search warrant, search application, and counsef, drafted memo re: 4-26-2018 hearing and provided same to R. Costel"lo for review Updates. Reviewing alL documents filed in SDNY,' Lega1 law offices warrants and research on search and Special Masters Update with Bob. Reviewing alI all documents filed Telephone call M. Cohen in 05/01/2018 RJC Telephone call M. Cohen,'Telephone Giul-iani; Telephone call M. Cohen SDNY; R RJC Update. Discussion with Bob; review of article. Telephone call J. Citron,' Telepone caLl- R. Giuliani,' Review M. Yogg memo re: special master hearing call Jeff Citron (7x); GiuLiani; confirms repayment 05/03/2018 RJC Telephone 05/0412018 RJC Email M. Cohen; Email J Coheni Telephone cal-I J 05 / 0't / 2078 JTC RJC Update with Bob. R Citron,' Email Citron (3x) 3.75 0.25 1,181.25 0.00 2.25 7 1.00 0.50 t 462.50 475 00 0 00 4.50 2,925.00 0.25 0.00 r.75 1, 137.50 50 0.25 0.25 1.00 975.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.50 975.00 2.75 1,787.50 2 00 1, 300.00 0 z5 1 50 M. research; Telephone call J' Citron,' EmaiI J. Citron News 14057-001M 283958 Hours 1. 05/02/2078 JrC update with Bob. JIC JIC No. No. 2 01/r'1 /2078 0.00 975.00 r Michael Page: Cohen, Esq Fil-e INVESTIGATION/SEARCH IIIARRANT BY U. OFFICE 05/08 /20L8 JrC RJC S. Update. Telephone call J. Citron call Rudy Gj-uliani Statement ATTORNEY'S (3x); 0.2s Tglephone issues. Telephone call J 0.75 Citron (5x) Citron (2x); Email J 3 /2078 14057-001M 283958 Hours 05/09/2078 JIC Conference with Bob re: Iatest charges concerning payments to Michael; call with Astorino and Bob re: Gui.l-iani ; miscellaneous RJC No. No. 01 /7"7 1.50 0.00 487.50 0.00 1.75 1,137.50 05/10/2018 JIC Calls wit.h Bob; review of Motion re: Avenati. RJC Review Cohen opposition to Avenatti Pro Vice Motion 0.00 0 .25 1 .00 650.00 05/11/2018 RJC Telephone caII M. Cohen; Email Jeff Citron; Email Michael Cohen re: fighting back 1.50 975.00 05/1412018 RJC Email M. Cohen; Telephone call R. Giuliani 0.50 325.00 1.25 812.50 1.50 975.00 05/15/2018 RJC Conference with J Email- to Cohen Citron; Emai.I Mike Hac Cohen,' with Jeff Citron; Emaif Michael - reviewing media reports on 05/76/2018 RJC Meeting Cohen developments 05/18/2078 JIC Review of, stories; with Rudy. 05 / 23 /20 r.8 JrC RJC call with Bob re: tal-k Conference with Bob. Conference with J. Citron; Email Mike Cohen; Review new Cohen materiafs 05/2-712018 RJC Very long telephone call with M- Cohen (1.75) and followed by legal research acts of concealment 05/29/2018 JrC RJC on Emails; update. Lega} research into "Acts of Concealment"; Email M. Cohen; Emaif J. Citron re: Cohen 1.00 0.00 0.50 0.00 1.50 975.00 2 -15 1,787.50 0. s0 0.00 Page: Michael- Cohen, Esq. INVESTIGATION/SEARCH WARRANT BY OEFICE caII on U.S. Eile No Statement No ATTORNEY'S Hours Sunday O5l30/2018 RJC FoIlowing Court Apperance: Email M. Email- J. Citron (2x) Cohen,' O5l31/2018 RJC Reviewing media developments; Legal research on misprision of felony cases and material-ity standard for bank statements claimed as false 06/0'7l2018 RJC Review Avenatti/Giuliani Fight; TeJ-ephone call- Michael Cohen,' Telephone call Rudy Giuliani; Telephone call Michael Cohen; EmaiI Michael Cohen; Telephone call Rudy GiuI iani 06/0812018 RJC Review new Lawsuit vs. Michael Cohen 06/17/2018 JIC Conference with Bob re Giuliani, Michael-. discussion wi-th 06/L212018 RJC Email M. Cohen,'Telephone call M' Cohen; Email- R. Giuliani; Telephone cal.l- M. Cohen 06/L3/2078 JrC RJC Conference with Bob re: update, his discussion with Michael and his call from Giulani EmaiI M. Cohen re: McDermott firing; Email M. Cohen,' Telephone call M. Cohen; Email M Cohen 05/14/2018 RJC Email M. Cohen (2x); Email M. Cohen 06/20/20L8 JIC RJC Ca1ls; meeting with Bob. Telephone call J. Citron,'Telephone caII M. Cohen; Email M. Cohen re: hiring Petri1lo we are still "on the team" 06/2L/2018 RJC Telephone call R. Giul-iani,'Email- Giuliani; Email M. Cohen; TelePhone cafl M. Cohen O6/22/2OlB RJC Telephone call Giuliani; Email Giuliani; 4 01/1'7 /2018 14057-001M 28 3958 2.00 1, 300.00 2.15 1, 787.50 2.00 1,300.00 .00 1, 300 .00 0.25 162 .50 0. s0 0.00 2 1.00 0.50 650.00 0.00 1.50 97s.00 1.25 812.50 0.50 0.00 2.00 1, 300. 00 s0 975.00 1. Page: Michaef Cohen, Esq. Eile INVESTIGATION/SEARCH WARRANT BY U. OFFICE Email M. Cohen re: 06/25/2018 JrC JIC RJC S. ATTORNEY'S 06/28/2018 JrC Discussion with Bob re: Giuliani meeting. TraveL to meeting with R. Giuliani at 666 RJC Eifth Avenue; Email Michaef Cohen TOTAL CURRENT FEES Billing Jeffrey Citron Matthew Summary Hours Hourly Rate L2 25 4 '75 Yogg Robert Costello 64 00 TOTAL CURRENT EXPENSES TOTAL CURRENT FEES AND DISBURSEMENTS BALANCE DUE $0.00 475.00 650.00 5 /20].8 14057-001M 2839s8 Hours Tom Arno1d FoIlow up. Follow up re: Giuliani Copying text messages Name No. Statement No. 0-t /1.1 1.00 650.00 0.25 0.25 0.50 0.00 0.00 325.00 0.25 0. 00 2.00 1,300.00 81.00 43,856.25 TotaI s0.00 2,256.25 41, 600.00 1.60 43,857.85 s43,857.85 DAVIDOFF HUTCHER & CITRON LLP 605 THIRD AVENUE NEW YORK, N.Y. 10158 FAX FEDERAL I.D. NO. 13 3r386E0 Previous BaLanc Fees Disburs 14057_OO1 INVESTIGATION/SEARCH WARRANT BY OFFICE 0.00 43,856.25 Advances U.S. ATTORNEYIS 0.00 1.60 Balance Payments 0.00 $43,857. B5 Please Detach and Return This Portion With Your Remittance Please Charge I visa Card Number on the following: lMasteoard [Discorer Amount Remitted: f] American Express red) Print Name Card Holder Signature Zip Code Check No.: Statement Oate: 07t17t2018 Slatement No. 283958 Account No. 14057.001 Majority Exhibit HPSCI - Michael Cohen (Feb. 28, 2019) M€ssage From: on behalfof Scnl: Michael Cohen [/o=Trump Org/ou=First Admlnlstrative Group/cn=Reciplentsr.,,-.,,,-,.=.,, Michael Cohen Tol SubJect: entr: lmporlance: Attachm 3 FW: REVISED Trump Tower Moscow Deslgn Study Trump Tounr Moscow_2015-09-23. pdf Hlgh Yours, TRUMP Mldrael Cohcn Extc{lw V.. Pmidcnl.rd TI{E TRUMT ONGANIZATION DEPo$nOll B E E EXHIBIT e 9 H eldL lq*lA : L*+, oda"cu-& ,& \ NicoCn l: " /4i 33 A 1.5.1.23}! 3i. ':' i -( ':, i. :.i !JL ': .li't P'I ili: r 9i. I !;:" t d B . ti${ Effi 'm -'-= .r;_ "lq :#i:'1 #* '#4 f.#ral {rEr ffi r .T, i. ,'-. *itr E I Majority Exhibit 5 HPSCI - Michael Cohen (Feb. 28, 2019) Message Dmitry chilhikov 9l29 ZOLS 6:35 To: Michael Cohen [/O=TRUMP ORG/OU=First Administrative Group/cn=Recipients/cn=mcohen] Subject: Andrey Rozov Attachments: Letter to Trump organization.POF; ATT000O1.htm; ED-presentation.pdf; ATT0OO02.htm From Sent Dear Mr.Cohen, Please, find enclosed herewith Mr. Rozov's letter and the presentation on his company. Being his financial advisorand the person who deals with his overseas projects, I shall be more than glad to assist you should you have eny queries or questions. Please, feel free to contact me. With best regards, Chizhikov ! g EXHIBE sb "'t E bf /'/' db/*-40 COMPANY PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION MDC.H.00060{ #XPERT iNVESI}*ENT COMFAI'IY lr,'lichael Cohen Trump Organization 725 5ttr Avenue New York, NY 100?-2 Dear Mr, Cohen, It was a pleasure speaking with you on Friday. I anr excited about the prospect of developing The Trump World Tower Moscow. The building design you $ent ever is very interesting and rvill be an architectural and luxury trlumph. I believe the tallesr building ln Europe should be in MoscovJ, and I am prepared to build it. I am optimistic that this co-venture tvill be successful, and wilt be a 5hining example of business creating opportunities and slgnificant good wlll betlveen Russia and the U.S,. tlloscow and all of Russia including leaders of politics, business, the arts, and the press would welcome and support this frroject wilh open arms. Mr. Trump has an excellent reputation ln Russia and his luxury standard in development is world renowned. I am attaching a short presentation on my company lC Expert. ln additiort to ourvarious Russian projects vre have 3 real estate projects in the U,S. Namely a completed and successful workforce housing project in Williston, Norlh Dakota. We are p:,eparing to bulld the largest shopping mall on land v;e own and have already received zoning approval for, also in Williston. I also own a 12 story office building in Manhattan at 22 West 38th Street, which I acquired last Decernber as my first deal in New York Clty. For point of reference, and to better acquaint you with my company and rnyself, h the U.S. I work vrith Morgan Stanley for nry personal financial accountt Wells Fargo for corpofate, as rvell as KPMG and Friedman LLP for accounting and tax work. ln real estate my cornpany has a good working relationship wiih Cushman, as well as Jones Lang LaSalle. For our potential joint-venlure contract l.le y,rill use a U.S. corporation and our attorneys viho will handle the legal for this transaction are Moses & Singer at The Chrysler Building 404 Lexington Avenue, NY, NY. I look forwerd to expeditiously preparing the agreenlents and posslbly slgnlng them next week as I intend to be in New York as early as tulonday the 5th of Oct. I look forward to meeting you in person and working on this amazing transaction with the Trump Organization. Sincerely, Ancirey l,[.(' c]irprrl, lnvertrnrnt (. rlmprl1 l:grl ldrlrtrr; 2i Di.l, I Lcninsl:) tcnuri ).1,:.r!Yj'.(, lt!\*i.l. I ili0 I i I'ottll g oddre:r: 11;r1rgr;r:ki, I)i*ricr, tni gf itstliiia lljgi:lvflvr ltr:sircis Cerier rRi3e Lurd,r Lti:ildiog B, u:ur:re J, i"' !11 ilrxr r l,t,rsr<.ir, Rc.qion, Ruriil lil3{21 tcl: COMPANY PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION +7 495 ?rl.oi 09 MDC.H.O00602 z o tr E, o ztJ- J zF tu o ztr o O zo E. F l.U tr o_ o t_ o_ z o- o o ft o (o o o ot EI o o E GSOUI, Or CO?dPAl$ market Right now we are building more tha housing, comrnercial real estate and socr just the beginning ... We create an atmosphere for a comfortable Build kindergartens, schools, hospitals, sho built by us Our work is highly acclaimed by the profe ln 2OL2 the Group of companies residential real estate projects "national "Company of the year-2012 ". encou rages us to strive fu l',2013 launched the COIVI PANY PROPR I ETARY AN D CONFI DENTIAL I NFORMATION MDC-H-OOO604 8*tE -ots - ccJ '" (J-o a L F* #et } }Y'lU E9 ..:a E o I ffiT E H dh q;.9t yl o i4 e**E Ldd> r.o tiO tr\N EI - giSE tufi 3E Ef;E5 IE ro o (o o o o a t I o o = z tr o E. o tL Z J zF I.IJ o ztr o o zo u. F TU tr o- o u ts tr o o o- o- z u; tu olr Y, d. ril c,xo :.' . .- MDC-H-000606 l-' ffi g tH tu o!r \l !. fr I UJ g i: r:: F o (o o o o! EI o o E o z tr v. o ztI J zF IU o zll- o C) zo x. F LU t o- o u o- Z o- o O l* ffi H # trt-" :5 TJ V o E (.) Uq o \l S o q s V z o tr E. o zlJ- J zF tu c] ztr o O zo u F LrJ E, o- o E. o_ z o- lJ, l. \l o f\ L3 o ui Eo & O co o (o o o o t t o o E ject realization timeline: Start of construction: 2 quarter 2013 Start up: 2 quarter 2015 Built-up area:4.6 hir; Total project area: 2L797O39 m2 (3 buildings on 2858 flats) Parking at 1305 cars The creation of social infrastructure on the ground floors of buildings: pharmacies, shops, Bank, children's art school, beauty salons, service ornestic services. The COMPANY PROPR I ETARY AND CONFI DENTIAL I NFORMATION area MDC-H-OOO609 F_ z o E. o zLL J F Z UJ o lr z o (J zo E. F TU E o_ o t 0- z 0- o O o F o o o oI I J. o o E [l c & o u {, #p6d&. W ./ittr WH ,M ffidiff affiiiv)K wwL dr #ffi^ t*fr q## lt.l f{ ,i;: i: r.d ?b, \u!L .tBir' S*l .,,:t,.i. ti \lr 1& "1: kfrr N$f rlt ,^ TJ t*. t#r, E; \i:; ,# Wrn" \{t& ,t# %.8 a:t:#-!!e d@ w*# t**EP' fu*. '*sqe _*a:w tffi' ''r*tti<.*.+ &l$a #'& &-.-# ,;NP *iBI rx Z o tr tr o ztL J ztr LU o z]t o o zo t F LU t o- E. o o_ z o. o (J t0 F F o o oI .L (,t o E $wffi%d4:F*{. *ir.Trii r.'r #f-km$.m#ffis timeline: construction: r 201.1 up:4 quarter 201.5 uilt-up area: 52.4 hectares. I project area: 849526 m2 8569 apartments + social i nfrastructure), incl uding: stage :82569 m2 (1.036 partnrents); stage: 154390 nr2 (2058 flats); stage:457600 m2 (5475 ). Parking on 5719 cars COtM PANY PROPRIETARY AND CONFI DENTIAL I NFORMATION MDG-H-OOO612 3 oI + o 0 o o (., I E' Z o -l 2 -n o n t- z-l m (, z-n o o U Z n -{ m T -o n -U Z ! o C) ,-: ? -t JI al :l 'l-l t:,')' :? g +s='ffro &$ffi\s4ffiffiq ffiq#ffis W*#* ffi$ {}iliil s{iL1ti,v AlCT HXF}EFq'$- :cRoup oF coiltPAfitEs Af ob ect 2 A children's garden with swimming pool2 at 250 locations Area-5327 sq. m Af, t{rc th. rrdlrrllon Object 3 School at 1125 places Area with Pool - 20000 sq. m rudlr.rillon 5 with COIUPANY PROPRIETARY AND CONF IDENTIAL INFORMATION Object 5 cli MDC-H-OOO6{4 Z 4 a c s (, t! a o (, o u) I o o o oI o o E o z tr t o zLL J zF tU (] zLL o O zo v. t--- LU x. o_ o x. o_ z o_ O o i CllOUP OF OOltlPANlES ,.:. W odern the Rentabl Parking: The 3 hoursed restauri anchor te COIVI PANY PROPR I ETARY AND CONFI DENTIAL I NFORMATION MDC-H-OOO616 % I I' H* { r* Irl s a L'L lr {'< trl i3J {trl g" 4) fr& rn o3fr, rJ tft *w' ''# e {f,-a fi S, q\ v) *) t3 A\ (t ,* TE, Cr) v 1\ H\3 lnv tea) ( ffi ?* f\ atl Y l/" ?' frCIfr x"z 6 :;.,.:l ,: fft ffiI (3 I Itt f4, \t1 ".!:? &1 .. v\ '. ::, a/,, {*tu d: z o F t o LL Z J zF LU O LL z o o C) Z t F LLJ t o_ t o o* z o- o O l'. (o I o o o I o o E jvlajority Exhibit HPSCI - Michael Cohen (Feb. 28, 2019) Felix Sater From: 6 LO19lZO1,5l:46:47 AM Michael Cohen [/O=TRUMP ORG/OU=First Administrative Group/cn;Recipients/cn=mcohen] #260 Andrei Molchanov - Forbes.com Sent: To: Subject with nndrey Mo'lchanov on Wednesday to do Trump iloscow on his site. Best b'iggest slte in his stepfather was Gov of st, Petersburg and Putin r,rorked for him, Meet'ing http: / /wvirlt . forbes negard Felix . com,/'l i sts/2008/tO/bi 'l 'l Moscow i onai res08-And re i -Mo'l chanov-5zl c . htm l s, I E E e (, ftfi# EXHBTT ClLil/- t1,OfuA' ytv#o&,.czA @; 36f^ b/^ tJ, rrrgrr, .Ll; fffi!\ 0 COMPANY PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION MDC.H.O00595 Majority Exhibit 7 HPSCI - Michael Cohen (Feb. 28, 2019) From: Sent: To: Felix H. Sa Monday, October 12, 2015 8:06 AM Michael Cohen Andrey L. Kostin - CEO WB Bank SubJect: Good morning Michael, Kostie who is Putins top financc guy and CEO of 2nd largest bank in Russia is on board and has indicated he would finance Trump Moscow. This is major for us, not only tbe financing aspect but Kostins position in Russia, extrcmely power'firl urd rcspected. Now all we need is Putin on board and we are goldeq meeting with Putin and top dcputy is tentativly set for the l4th. Scc buddy I can not only gct lvanka to spin in Putins Kremlin office chair on 30 minutes noticc, I can also get a full meeting. I will call you later today to discuss getting thc LOI signed. Regards Pelix Sater httus ://en,wikipedia. or g/wiki/Andrev L. Ko sti n 3 E g e Andrqy L. Kostin fr Andrey Kostin DEFoSm0it 4tLI# EXHIBTI ffik,ff*rrbr", l *ct\i6V % Uicola-. Andrey Kostin (Axapeil Born Nationality 20t2 Andrey L. Kostin September2l, 1956 (age 59) ![gly, Russia. Rrrssian Alnamaterm I FSHROOOOl Majority Exhibit 8 HPSCI - Michael Cohen (Feb. 28, 2019) From: Georgiy Rukhi Lo/LOlz9Ls 8:45:36 PM Michael Cohen [/O=TRUMP ORG/OU=First Administrative Group/cn=Recipients/cn=mcohen] Re: the residential Moscow Attachments: KSRZ june 2015.pdf; ATT00O01..htm Sent: To: Subject: FYI residential center of Moscorv in doing w my local partners I rvas telling you about. f; I E EXHIEIT a E Uub- ry rc,clu 2 +tt r,n zmal*& COM PANY PROPR I ETARY AND CONF I DENTIAL I NFORMATION MDC-H-000478 z tr o tr o TL z J F Z LU o l.L Z o C) zo v. F uJ E o- o u o- z o- o O o t- v o o oI .L (,I o E vH14KAIIbHbl 14 nPOEKT PflqOM C MOCKBA CVITl Macu:ra6xuri npoelfi AeBenonMeHTa x c ero pa3ghrofi r.lr$pacrpyxrypofi 3xoaorrqecxr qhcroe oxpyr{eHhe - Ha rpaHhqe yqacrKa pacnonox{ex flpecxencxrail flapx h HacxaA l-lpecxeHcxhx npyAoB Tpn crauqxH Merpo B netuexoAxofi 4ocrynHocrr: (yn. 1905 roAa), <,{enoeofi <, Kpennnn, 2 xnn or Ca4oooro Koauqa, 1 xru or Vxrxanusurfi npoexr KBapranbHofi sacrpofixra (6-19 araxeil), paapa6oraxxurfi BeAyu{hM aarnuilcxur,A apxrrexrypHuru 6opo John McAslan + pARTNERS 950 xaaprrap B KoMnnexce o6qeil nnouqa4urc 190 000 xB. M. r,l 115 000 KB. M. npo4aaaemofi nnoqaAH. flnoula4u yLlacrxa - 5,95 [a. O6u:rapnaa coquanbHan raH$pacrpyiffypa: Qrrxec, pecropaH, ranepen,.,qercxNil caA, uxo.na llonyvexo fn3y, rAer npoeKrrpoBaHHe v1 noAroroBKa nnou{aAKh (cnoc, BbtHoc cerefi). flonyuexre pa3peueHHe Ha crporrerbcrBo - 2 xe. 2015 ro4a COMPANY PROPRIETARY AND CONFI DENTIAL INFORIUATION MDC-H-OOO48o L8?OOO-H-COr r NOrl-vruUOlNt tvt]-N3otJNo3 A NV AUV]f IUdOUd NVdY\03 ws 3 kl H 3)t(O UOU 3Vd s s J r0 s tr c0 s o Z o tr x. o LL Z J s zF uJ o LL Z o O o Z u F IJJ t o- o u o- z o- N @ !t o o oI I o tr E AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION BMD. BO Bl43yAnh3Attvu. B14E HA nPytr Iil,' I .:iJ ':r irr ..i.,i: ? ry.-- i:i'! CONNPANY PROPRIETARY AND CONF I DENTIAL I NFORIVIATION i :r ri!. i::r:i 1."? -* i,.'i MDC-H-OOO4a4 v KAx,qOro ABOPA CBOfl flAHElUAOTHAfl M PANY PROPR I ETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL NFORIVIATION I VICTOPlAfl MDC-H-OOO485 ABTOPCKNE CAAbI IN 3EIIEHbI E TEPPACbI SKY GARDENS COMPANY PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION MDC-H-OOO486 F tll o (L E s trt LU o. LU t 'I ,1... . l: 'I { '. :::;:l*!5;. 8r ll .! lh ffi$r I t. I ') I u l n n ,u lx z o F E. o zLL J ztr tu r] zlr 0- z o- t a oo LU F u O o ) zo o )s o m (L TU 3 trt o e o O I i. too o o I o o = TE KyUlt4h CTATyC nnOl1lAtqKl4 $ COMPANY PROPRIETARY AND CO NFIDENTIAL I NFORMATION MDC-H-OOO488 z o tr E. o zlr -J zF LU o ztL o O zo E. F IU x. o_ t o o_ z o_ o o c0 \t o o o! Lt o o E O, APXUTEKTYPA PacnoaoxeHre: . . B oxpyxeHrr napKoB . . . . . KonnQoprHoe paccronHre Ao KpynHbtx Aopox(Hbtx marrcrpanefi K l-laoqa4s o3eneHeHrn paBHa npHMepHo 2 $yr6onsHsrrvr NONFM ' Bynsoap npornlxeHHocrblo 6onee 300 rvrerpoe c pa6ovrnn Ha3BaHHeM 7 ca4oa - xax4urfi ca4 6y4er npeAcraBneH H 3 B ecrH br M e B po n e fi cK M na HAU a Srx u rrvr 6 ro po 14 xH3Hx . : John McAslan + Her BnAoB "oxHo B l4gsecrxurfi MexAyHapo.qxuril apxrreKrop PARTNERS OKono. 25o/" KBaprHp cnpoexrhpoBaHbt c reppacaMh, nprHhMaR Bo BHHMaHHe MhHt4Mr3aqHlO paCXOAOB Ha 3KCnnyaTaqhlo 3ana4xoe KaqecrBo npoeKTa Soauu:oe paccronHtae MexAy AoMaMh oKHo" c oxpylxatoqeil sacrpofixofi - Haqrxan c 5ro 3rax{a - naHopaMHbte BhAbt Ha Mocxsa -CATI, peHy, napK r qeHTpanbHbte crcreMbt noxynarern HylKHo ycraHoBt4Tb Tonbxo BHyrpeHHre cucreMbl. Bcs BHeuHsR pa3BOAXa H cHCTeMbt ycTaHaBnhBaloTcF sacrpoiluqrxom. 2-x n 4-x rpy6nure cucreMbt xoHAHq14oH 14 poBa HHfl . "VMHbte rexHonorrh" yvera H 3RCnnyaTaqHoHHbtx pacxoAoB KoHTponF . . MrHrananbHoe KonnL{ecrBo Ko/roHH B npoAaBaeMbrx nnou4aAnx Bce MexaHHqecKHe hHx(eHepHbre chcreMbr (HVAC) 3aBeAeHbr o6qr,re uaxrbr c epesxofi B xax(Ayro xBaprhpy, rorAa KaK 6onuu:rxcrso .qeBenonepoB npoexrhpylor H crponr croARA (u.rarrur) BHyrph KBaprrp, qro co3Aaer 3Haqhre.nbHbre rpyAHocrr npH nepennaHhpoBxe . .[lr$rur c AocrynoM Ha xnnoi4 3Ta]+( npEMo H3 noA3elaHoil napxoBxh (6er nepecaAxh Ha qoxonbHoM sraxe) npeAycMarpuBalor orAerbHbte npra6opur yt{era 3neKTponorpe6nexnn, oron.neHHE, xo.noAocHa6xennn u BoAonorpe6nexun 4an xaxAofi RBaprrpbr . [lpogorHyrure chcreMbt 6egonacxocru: AOCryna, n KoHTponb poTHBOnOX(a pH ble chcreMbt . SonuuJoe KonHqecroo anexrpnvecxofi BbrAenseMofi xa xaaprr,rpy MoulHocrh, COMPANY PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION B MDC-H-OOO4g1 Majority Exhibit 9 HPSCI - Michael Cohen (Feb. 28, 2019) From: "Felix H. Sa Subject: Fwd: Signe Date: October 13, 2015 al1:30:52 PM EDT To: Michael Cohen < Cc: "Jetfrey M. Davis" Dear Michael, Attached is the signed LOI, by Andrey Rozov. Please have Mr. Trump counter-sign, signed and sent back. Lets make this happen and build a Trump Moscorv. And possibly fix relations between the countries by showing everyone that commerce &. business are much better and more practical than politics. That should be Putins message as well, and we will help him agree on that message. Help world peace and make a lot of money, I would say thats a great lifetime goal for us to go after. Sincerely, Felix Sater Begin forwarded message: From: Dmitry Chizhikov Date: October 1 2015 ,. REDACTED FELIX SA To: Cc: EI\4AIL ADDRESS ., rey Subject: LOI floAnncaso B E g 2 DEPoSm0lr EXHIBtr fi Ol,q^U iAtftp 'i//th.rdr^@-S *U @ 4: (" ilicnQo.- ,4, t I FSHROOO05 IBUTP ICOUISITI IIII, lIG 725 Fifth Avcnuc, 266 Floor Nen' NY 10022 o"to&, /?',2015 LC, Expen Investrne,nt Company 25 Bld. I Lgninsky Avgnue Moscow,.Russia, I I 90?l Anention: Andrey Rozov Rc: Prgposed developmenl of a lirqt class, lrlllury,: fifued use tg he kn-own as Trump llorld Tower Moscov', and located in Moscaut City (lhe ''ProJecl") Dcar Andrey: This letter of intent (this "LOI") sets forth a summa{y of some of the basic terms of a tiCense ogreement (the flliccrise Alrce ment") to be entered into by Trump Acqriisition, LLC. arrd/or onc br rirore' of iis alliliates, 0s licensor f'Llceusor'). aud I.C. Expert. Investment Company and/or one or.more of its affiliates, os licensee ("Licensed'), witlr respect lo the iro;ict (Licetrsor ,and Licensec, collectively, thc "Parties") and in accordance *ith Liccnsor's currcnt form of licensc agrceincnt. This LOI is only intendetl to facilitate further discussions behveen the Parties and solely re.presen6 the 'Panies' curren! intention to ncgotiate for antl anempt to cuter into a mutually acceplable agrccment covering alt aspects of the uansaction, subject, however, to the terrns and conditions herea.fter provided. follows: A gencra) outtnc of ihe propos.ed transaclioo is, as Llcansor: 'trump Acquisition, Llcensee: I,C. Expert Investment Company 'Prcperly: to be knolm as Trump World Tower Moscow and localed in Moscow City, as mutually agreed gpon by the Parties (the "Property"). ,Liceused Mork: lLC and/or one or more of its affiliates andL/or one or more of itq afEliates Real property to be acquired by Licepsee ahd Licensor will grant to Licensee a non-excluSive'right to'use onc oi name. lo be agregd upon .by the mort derivatives of thq t'Trqmp" Parties (the "Llcensed Maiks"), for the purpose of identifiing, promoting and marketing thc Propcrty and cash and cvery.amcnity and componcnt tq be locqtcd thcreon (caeh a "I)evelopment Compoucnt'), sdbject.to the tenps of the License Agrcement. Tcrm: Thc tcrm.of thc Liccnsc Aglqgment slrdll comrnencc on thc date of rhe I-icinsc Agreement and end on the date the License Agreement shall terminate pursuant (o itsterms or by operation of lalv. Development Componenls: In addition to ccrlain otber related amenities, components and facilities as thg Parties shall mutually a$ee upon from time t0 time, the Property sholl contain and consist of the follorving Development Corhponents: /l t//2-FSHR00006 l)evetoDmerif Comnonent Dcstilniioir/Requlrcments Appioximatdly ?50 fi rst class,'luxuly re.tidential condom ini ums. Resid'ential Componenl Onc :first class, hxury Holtl consistiog of apDroximatcly Comp6nent hotgl l5 floors and containing not fewer than 150 holel rooms. One first class; luxqry spa/fihess Recreational Componqtt ccnter' with related rimenilies CommetciAl 'Component A commercial component consistent with the overal) luxury level of the Property. Olfice Compoqent An gfficc comp6nent consistcnt with Parking A.parkiog component consistent with the overall luxury ofthe Propcgy; Class A luxury oflicc properlics. Component Dcvdloitment Standiris: Licensee u,ill design, develop, construct, equip zmd fumish the Property, including tyithout Jimitation, each Devclopmcnr Component, in aceordance with Licensor's Development Slandards, rvhich havc been providdd to Licensee uuder separate cover and rvill !e contained in the License Agreemetrt, Operailg .Slsndaids: Licensee will, at all titnes, operate arrd maintain the Property and each Devclopmeyri Cotnponent and ensure that all uers mainlain those of ownership, operalion and maintenance set forth in Liccnsor's Operating Slandardq n'hich have becn :ilmvided to Licensee undrir separale co!:er and will be contaihed in rhe'Licensc Agreement in. connection with thc Propcrty and each Developmcnt staridards Component. Review of Plotu: Liccosee shall ,delivcr .to Licensor all plurs and specifications, rcndirings, a proposed conftr-uction buggct and.other explanatdry meiterjirls as Licensor shall ieasonably require to convey the design of the Propcrty (coUectivcly, the "Plaus"). All Plans shail be subjcct to Licensorts prior rcvicw and approval, which approval shail not bc unrcasonati,ly wiitrheld or delayed provided that thc P-Jans comply with Licensor's Development Standards and Opcralirrg Staridards, lvhere applicable, Each architect" designer, cngingcr, landscapc designer and consultant retained by Licensee in cooncction rvith the dcsign, construction and dcvclopmqnt of thq Propcrti shall bc subject to Liccnsor's prior written approVal (not to be urireasonably withheld or delaycd). Licensor shall also have reasonable approval over the sales artd marketing agencics retained by'Licorsee to market and promote rhe Pioprty and the f)cvclopment Components as well as approval over all advertising materials and salcs and marketing campaigns. 2 ,4 ul, FSHROOOOT Managemenlot the Property: Licenseg shall €xecutd a Hotel Management Agreemenl with an afliliate of Liccnsor for the opcration of thc Hotcl in accordance with tlie lerms set forth in Scbeduie I hueto and pursuant to Licensor's or is affiliate's custbmary foqgr of hotcl management agreement. Lisensec shall also execute a Rcsi&ntial Managclnent Agrcement at for the management of the Resiitential real estatc comparablc to the Residential Licensor's option, Coodominium by an alfiliale of Licensor, on teros rvhich shall be compctitivc with those terms offcrcd by an cxperienced manager of branded luxury Condominium, as determined by Liccnsor in its reasonable discretion. Tn the went licensor shall elect in its sole discrelidn not to manage thc Resideritidl Condomjnium, the company selecteal by Licensee to mahage the Residentiat Condominium, and any agrecmenl. relating thcrcto, 'anrl the tcrms thcrcot shaU be subjcct to Licensor's prior written approval (not to be urueasooably wittrheld or delayed). ln this case, .l,icensor qhall have the right to supervise the operalions and managemenl of the Rsidential Condominium by tlre seleclcd managcr lo ensure compliancc with the Operuing Standards, and Licensor shall ba entitled to reimbursement of Licensor's cosls and expcntcg for such supervision (the "supervisory Fee'), which Supervisory Fee Liccnsor shall be cntilled !o collect ftom oll residential condonrinium unii oryners of the Property pursuant to an sprplicablc provision to be includeil in the Condominium Documcnts (as defined in the License 4gre9rnep0. Llcense Fezs: Licensco sliall pay to Liccnsor certain non-refuldable license fees as fonh on Schedule 2 attached hereto. set Terminalion The Panies shall ncgotiate applicablc tcrmination rights .giving Tetmlnalloni eveils, including, withbirt limitation, in the event of a default by Liccnscc or. its affiliate undcr, or a ternrinafion of, lhe Hotel Rights/Cross- Licensor certain rigtts to terminate the Liccnse Agreemcnt in certain Management Agrccment or the Residcntial Managctncut Agreement. Licensee TrarclerRights: Except for sales of individual condominium units at tlle Property in the ordiaary course of Liccnscc's busisess and in aeiordance *ittt ttre rerns of the License Agrcement aud certain limited circumstances to be articulated in detail in the License Agreerirent, Licensee sholl be precludqd from conveying all or any portion of its irirerest in the Propeny, any direct orindircct ownership interests in Liccnsee or Any of its right, title and interest to the LiccniE Agreemenl Deposits: All dep,osits, down paymenls, installments and other payments (together, "Dcposits") made by any purchaser of any unit in advance of thc cloSing of such unit shall bc deposited in escrow, antl Licensec shall not, without thc prior written consenf of Licensor, which may be withheld in Licensor's sole discrctipn, restove any portion of thc Deposits from escrow inespective of whe0rer Liccnsec is permitted to withdraw the deposit in questioo from escrow pursuant to the terms ofthe contract of sale governing the salc of sucb unit or pirrsuant to aDy loan documertts with respect to auy financingobtained by Licensee with rcspcc( to the Propcrty J f Lr/:: FSHROOOOs No OtheT Uses: In no event may the Propeny'or, any porlion thereof be iJ"ed for Other Uscs (as hcrcinafter defined) without,thc prior wittcn consmt of Liceosor, wtich may be withheld in Licensoris sole discretion. In the event of a breach of this scCtion, .Liccnsor shall tave the immediate right to terminate the Liccnsc Agrecntcnt. For purposes of this section, the (erm "Otber Uscs!'shall mean all uses other than lhd Dwelopment Components expressly'set forth in this LOI and shall include, without limitation, (A) time shares, residential or resort pernbership gluba, fractional owncrshlp and any similar forms of owtiership that dividc Such ownership according lo speci{ic assigacd calendar periods sirnilar methods, horel condominiums, serviced apartmenls, extcnded stay hotcli or any similar use, (C) golf cowscs and (D) caninos and the ownership, operalion ,or manaBem€nt pf casinos end aly. gaming activities, including, witlrout limitatiqn, any activiiies reiating fo or consisting ofrhc taking oriccciving ofbets or wager upon the requtt ofganrei or (B) ofchance or skill. Expensc Deltosil: Prior to thc dale that Liceruor shall hirc, reuain or otherqise agrce to utilize the scrvices of auy third paflf (iniluding, but not.limiied to, local counsel, la:t counscl, badernark coun3el, condominium co'unset and any accoununt$.foi the provision ofadvice or lcrvices rclatcd to the draftiog and negotiation.of the License Agreemcnr (*Tbird Pofi Services'), LiccnSor slall dclivcr a notioe of such intenl in writing (rvhich may be sent via email) to Licensee, and within rhree (3) days of Licenseels riccipt of such notice, I-iccnsce shall be Ilquiled to deposit with Licensor an Emount cqual to $100,000 (t}re "Erpense Dcposit"). SimulrancOusly wilh thc cxecution of the Licensc Agrctmcnt, the Up,Front Fee (as defined in Scbetlule 2) 1!afl be offsa by tbe firll qmgunt of thc Expen.se Deposit (i.€,, if Licensee has detivered the Expense Deposit to Licenior in accordance with this LOI, Licensee shalt trc obligattd to pay,to Licensor an amount .equal ro $100,090 Upon eiecution of tho License Agtre9r-nent, representing an amount-6qual to thc UpFront Fec Iess thc Elpcnse Deposit). :lf Liceusec has paid the Expense 'Deposit antl rbdrerjfter cither Party in its sole discrctiolr chooles nor 19. execute thO LiCeqie Agrecmeht, thgn t icensor shell rcfunll to ,Liccnsce the portion of such Expcnse Ifcposjt 1if any) that hirs nor been allolatgd to, the paymcnt of costs incuned ba Liceosor for Third Party Scrvices. No Brokirs: LiccDsee rqplFsents and wanants to:Licensor that it has, not dealt with any brokei with respcct ro the transaction conicmplatcd by this LOI urd agrgcs to indcrirni& and hold l-icensor,harmless fiom and against ury claim for any brokerage or otbet comrnission or finder,s fee made by any pe6on or entity ,ciaindng to havc acted on lhe behalfofLiccnsge by reason ofthe transaction contemplated hereitr, l'tre indemniry se! forth in rtris paragraph shall survive tcrmination of this LOI. Principol: the lhat ihe principal of is Andrey Rgzov ("Principal'); who owns 100% of Licensed hereby represeuts and tvarants I.icensee ,4 rl t'/FSHROOOO9 Liccnscc. Non. Dlsturbance: CoiJidenfiatig: ylll provide Licensor with a non.disturbarce sg,reement from .8ll mortgagees, grgund lessors and other superior instrument Licensee holdcr:, ot Licensor's statrdard fonn. The Parties (which.for the purposes of this paraEaph shall include Ihc Parties' respective officcrs, dire-ctors, menibe$, erlplgiecg, agents, crinbactors, consultants, qervants, alsociites or rcpreseritalives) a!f!e t0.kee,p .csnlidential .the titmp of fis !OI, their relationship with the othcr Party and any othcr information disclosed which is pertinent to this tOI, and will only disclosc lhe same to its reprcsentatives, lenden and third paflies on'a need to know basii, Ihe terms of this cpnfidentiality. prOvision slrall survive thetermination of this LOJ. Recoilrse: Principal shall bc required to guqranlq'e the payrnent to Licensor of any loss, damagc, cost or expense, incltding rcasonable counsel fces and disbursernenti, incurred by or on behalf oflicensor by reason of the occurrcncc of ccrtain bad boy acls comrnitted by Licensee. Curtenqt: All references in this tOt (including all exhibits and schedules) to dolldr amouns, and.all uscs of the syrnbo! "$", sball refer to the law{ul currcncy of the United Statcs of Arnciica and all amounts to bc paid hereunder, iniluding, without limilation, aii.Licensc Fces, 5hall be paid in US Dollan. ' Gouerning Ltixt/'llenue: The binding provisions of this LOI shalt be govemed by the laws of the State of Nerv York '(without regard to conflict of laws principles). Atl disputes b.erween firp Parties under the ,pin{ing provisions of tbis LOi shall be settled by bindirig arbitralion in accordance with the Qorhpreherisive Arbitration RulCs and Procedures of JAMS lnternationalArtitration Rules. 'The place of arbitration shall bc Ncw York NY, 'Except for the Brokcts, Confidcotiality and Govcming Law/Vcnuc provisions set forth hcrcin, this LOI shall not be binding on atry patty herelo.. The Parties sgree that untess and untjl a Licensc Agleement bcnvecn-ihe Partics hasbqen cxecutcd pnd delivered, (a) ho party shalt be trnder any legal obligation of any kind wtratsoevcr to consurnmate a transaction hcrgby by virtue of this LOI; (b) this LOI sball not be constnred to be a binding contract bctween the Parties (other than rvith respect to the Brokers, Cohfidentiality and Governing l-awAy'enue provisioos sa forth herein); and (c) no eguitabte cause of action shdtt be asserled by.any party that a contract or agrcelngnt (definitive or otherwisi) exists between the Parties with rispect to any transaction contcrnplated, proposed, or discusscd herii-n: ISTGNATURES FOLLOW THIS PAGE] 5 fi k/..FSHROOOlO Provided yop arc in n"erc-criient with.these terms; plaase countenigrittis LOi.in thc.tpa'ce provided belorv rind:reNm E.copy to my attenlirin. We'look forward t0 yout timcly rcsPonse. Virytntly ,: Ybriis, TRUllrP ACQUSTTTON, LLC THE ABOI{E,rS ACKNO\ryLEqGED, CONSENTED TO A'YD AGREED TO BY:, I;CEXPDRT COMPANY By; FSHROOOl 1 SCHEDULE I HOTEL MANAGETVTENJ AGREEMENf TERlvl SII_EET The folloVing iels.forth on ouiline o! proposed hotCl'tdanagenent agreenient (tfe (each, q'?ayt;r", a4d together, the io the belqv referenced the pfincipal ttms and condltio* of !'HMA) that i?articl") llqle f;oiel mh th'e the' be'lov menlioned parlies tlte intention to negoliate with iespect yoyr ,opptovsl ,o.f ihCse rcr*s and conditions, Opcrator (as deJined below) is piepaied to drq/t ai I MA ond ISA (as herelnafier definecl) fitr yur review. A first c:lass, hxury hotel (he t'Hotet') to be knorvn and operated a9 Trymp Intcrnaiional Hotel & Tower Moscow (or irich ofier name aslhe Parties shall mutually agre-e'qpgn) loCated jn Mosccjrv Hotek City containing approximarely 150 horel ro6ris, LC. Exped lnvestment Company'and/or one atlliates. Owner: Trupp lntemationai Hotets Operqlor; more of its affiliateii. Managemenr, or m6te of [,LC irs and/6r. 60c or The HMA shall expire twenty-five (25) full calcndar years from the date ihe Hotel opCus frir business as a Trump brand hotel acccptihg paying guests iy1 accoidanic v/i!h 'thc, HMA (the "Openln! Dete"), with two (2) consecurive fivc (5) year Tenn: consecutive renpwal term.s, qach df rvhich renewal.tgr-ms shail bc at OperatOfls electiort. Manogement Fea: .Fcc: A basc fec (payablc on a rnonthly basis) for eaqh month during the Term (including any .pa(iot month at thc corhhencemept and e.xpiration or termination of the Tqrm) equal 'Basc .lo: Years l-5: 3.00%q Years G25 (plus renewals): 4.00% of of Gross" Gross Operiting Revenues Operatin! Revenues "Gross Operatldg Reveoues" means all revenue and incomc of any kind derivcd:tlirectly or indirectly from thc operation of thil Hotcl, and expr*ily lncluding.all gross rcvenues generatcd fiom (a) guest rooms.,and other areas, (b) food and beveragc arcas, (c) the op€ratiort of all. banquet, catering and room scrvice functions at the Hotel, inoluding any such services which may be provided off sitc, (d) thc operation ol any parking tbcilitics at rtrc Hotcl or the site or which otherwise provide parking scriccs for llotei guests and yisitors, (e) tease payments, managcmenl or ,4 l'iFSHROOOl 2 opcrating payments, rentals or other paymEnts or distributlons to O-lvner or the Hotel tom any lhird parties that ue {enants of or olherwise manage or opcrate arcas in the Holc1, and (D fecs ior serviccs suoh as intemet and movie, facilities,fees, pcsort fccs,.and similar fces and.all commissiqns rcceivcd; but cgprcssly excluding the follorving: (i) ta.rcs; (ii) rcceipts from tne financing, sble or other disposition of capital asiets and other items nol in, the,ordinary course of the Holcfs opcrafioni ard income deri.red from securities and other property qcquiled.and held for investmeni; (iii) any procceds paid as comperisation foi condemnation or altenitions or phjsicil dirirage to the Hoteli (iv) proceeds of any insurahcc;' ana 1r1 rebatis, discounts or credits piovidcd by opirator to Hotel guests. Incgntive Fbo: Ab incentive fec (payable on a monrhty basis and subjcct to arinuirl r-econciliarion) equal to 20Yo of A justed Gross Operaling Proflt. lAAiuste{ Gioss Opeiatlng irofit', shatl nican Gross Ope,r.ating Profit (as such teim shatl be defined in rhc HMA) Employees: less the Base Fee. is Other than Hbtel t; On Nov 18, 2015, ar 6;51 AM, Dmitriy Klokov r./rote: > Hello Michael - It was p'leasure to speak with you. Getting back to our phone conversation, r'd like to emphasize few F'irstl our person of interest is raady to neet your candidate, second: the visit has to be informal, when you will.be in Moscow, r wi'll introducr you to the c'lose person, who has spokun io person our of interest regarding this potcntial mecting. t{c will then discuss all the detai'ls. i,le wil'l provide all assistance with the.security, transportation and accomodation, Third: I would suggest seParatlng your_negotiations and our pro_p-osal to.meet. f.assure you, after the meeting leve'l-of projects and, their capacity can be completely differ6nt, having the nost important support. rointh: I am notaffi'liated_with any business, r am trusted person, tn this context, my position is political synergy only and potential perpectives that can be achieved afrer lhis mEeting. > Looking forward to hearing from you-regarding your v'ision and thoughts when your introductory visit could take place, You will get our ful'l support including assistance-with acquiring visa, > important aspects, > Best regards, > Dm'i tri y > O'rrrooxrex,r c iPhone B EXHIBITT E e fr Olp,rtc 'rLAbn ).,fr./-*13'/A /h. bd, n;./.- fu,tcl*@ COM PANY PROPRI ETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATI ON MDC.H-000492 Majority Exhibit l6 HPSCI - Michael Cohen (Feb. 28, 2019) Message Felix From: Sent: PM L2/7 Michael Cohen [/O=TRUMP ORG/OU=First Administrative Group/cn=Recipients/cn=mcohen] Please call me To: Subject: tvti chae'l , P'l ease ca1 'l me I have Evgeney on the other 'l ine. a copy of your and Donald's passports they need a scan of every page of the passports. Invitations & visas wi"l 'l be 'issued this week by VTB Bank to discuss financing for Trump Tower iloscow. politica]1y neither Putins office nor I'lin'istry of Foreign affairs cannot issue invite, so they are inviting commercia'l lylbusiness. wB is Russia's 2 b'iggest bank and WB Bank cEo Andrey Kostin, w'i 'l I be at a'lI meetings with Putin so that it is a business meeting not politica'l. we w'i'l'l be invited to Russian consu'late this week to rece'ive invite & have visa issued. He needs Thank you, Fel i x Sater $ 4 E e E EX'IIBII H Ctcu