Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 1 of 62 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK IN THE MATTER OF THE USE OF A SITE SIIVIULATOR TO LOCATE THE CELLULAR DEVICES ASSIGNED CALL NUMBERS AND - - AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF . AN APPLICATION FOR A SEARCH WARRANT being ?rst duly sworn, hereby depose and state as follows: INTRODUCTION AND AGENT BACKGROUND 1. I make this af?davit in support of an application for a search warrant under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41 to authorize law enforcement to employ an electronic investigative technique, which is described in Attachment B, to determine the location of the cellular devices assigned call numbers _1nd (the ?Target Cellular Devices?), which are described in Attachment A. 2. I am a Special Agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation I have been a Special Agent with the FBI since 2009. In the course of my experience and training in these positions, I have participated in criminal investigations into federal offenses involving a wide array of ?nancial crimes, including offenses involving public corruption. I also have training and experience executing warrants for cellphone location data. 3. The facts in this affidavit come ?om my personal observations, my training and experience, and information obtained ??om other agents and witnesses. This af?davit is intended to show merely that there is suf?cient probable cause. for the requested warrant and does not set forth all of my knowledge about this matter. ?til! Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 2 of 62 4. One purpose of applying for this warrant is to determine with precision the Target Cellular Devices? location. However, there is reason to believe the Target Cellular Devices are currently located somewhere within this district because the Target Cellular Devices? owner is knoWn to spend most of his time in this district. Pursuant to Rule law enforcement may locate the Target Cellular Devices outside the district provided the device is within the district when the warrant is issued. 5. 7 Based on the facts set__ forth in this af?davit,there is probable causeto believe that violations of 52 U.S.C. 30116(a)(1)(A) and 30109(d)(1)(A)(1) (illegal campaign contributions) (the ?Subject Offense?) has been committed, are being committed, and will be committed by Michael Cohen and others. There is also probable cause to believe that the location of the Target Cellular Devices will lead to evidence of the Subject Offense, as detailed below. 6. Because collecting the information authorized by this warrant may fall within the statutory de?nitions of a ?pen register? or a ?trap and trace device,? see 18 U.S.C. 3127(3) (4), this warrant is designed to comply with the Pen Register Statute as well as Rule 41. See 18 U.S.C. 3121?3127. This warrant therefore includes all the information required to be included in a pen register order. See 18 U.S.C. 3123(b)(1). PROBABLE CAUSE Introduction 7. The United States Attorney?s Of?ce for the Southern District of New York and the FBI are investigating a criminal violation of the campaign fmance laws by Michael Cohen, a lawyer who holds himself out as the personal attorney for President Donald J. Trump. As detailed below, there is probable cause to believe that Cohen made an excessive in? kind contribution to the presidential election campaign of then-candidate Donald Trump in the 2 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 3 of 62 form of a $130,000 payment to Stephanie Clifford, an individual who is alleged to have had an extramarital affair with Trump, in exchange for her agreement not to disclose that alleged affair on the eve of the 2016 presidential election. I 8. The Target Cellular Devices referenced in this Affidavit are the cellphones assigned call numbers?and - As further discussed below, the Target Cellular Devices are subscribed to in the name of Michael Cohen (the ?Subscriber?). The Subscriber is believedto use the Target Cellphonesand is a Target Subject of this investigation._ is the Service Provider for the Target Cellphones. Prior Relevant Process 9. In connection with an investigation then being conducted by the Of?ce of the Special Counsel the FBI sought and obtained from the Honorable Beryl A. Howell, Chief United States District Judge for the District of Columbia, three search warrants for emails and other content information associated with two email accounts used by Cohen, and one search warrant for stored content associated with an iCloud account used by Cohen. Speci?cally: a. On or about July 18, 2017, the FBI sought and obtained a search warrant for emails in the (the ?Cohen Gmail Account?) sent or received between January 1, 2016 and July 18, 2017 (the ?First Cohen Gmail Warrant?). b. On or about August 8, 2017, the FBI sought and obtained a search warrant for content stored in the iCloud account associated with Apple ID -@gmai1.com (the ?Cohen iCloud Account? and the ?Cohen iCloud Warrant?). o. On or about November 13, 2017, the FBI sought and obtained a search warrant for emails in the Cohen Gmail Account sent or received between June 1, 2015 and November 13, 2017 (the ?Second Cohen Gmail Warrant?). Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 4 of 62 d. On or about November 13, 2017, the FBI sought and obtained a search warrant for emails in the account ?Cohen Account?) sent or received between the opening of the Cohen Account1 and November 13, 2017 (the ?First Cohen Warrant?). 10. The SCO has since referred certain aspects of its investigation into Cohen to the USAO, which is working with the New York Field Of?ce. 11. On or about February 28, and FBI sought and obtained search warrants for emails in Cohen Gmail Account and Cohen Account, among other accounts, sent or received between November 14, 2017 and February 28, 2018 (the ?Third Cohen Gmail Warrant? and ?Second Cohen Warran 12. The above-described warrants are referred to herein as the ?Cohen Emails Warrants? and, with respect to the iCloud Warrant, the ?Cohen iCloud Warrant.? The Illegal Campaign Contribution Scheme 13. From my review of public sources, I have learned the following: a. In or around October 2011, there were rumors published on the gossip website heDz'rty. com that Trump had had an extramarital affair with Clifford, an adult actress whose screen name is Stormy Daniels, in or around July 2006. In or about October 2011, Life cf: Style 1 Based on my review of this warrant and the af?davit in support of it, I know that-the warrant did not specify a time period, but the affidavit indicated that, pursuant to court order, the service provider had provided non?content information for the Cohen Account that indicated that the account contained emails from the approximate period of March 2017 through the date of the warrant. 2 On or about February 28, 2018 and April 7, 2018, the USAO and FBI sought and obtained Rule 41 search warrants authorizing the search of emails and content obtained pursuant to previously issued warrants, for additional subject offenses. Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 5 of 62 Magazine, a tabloid sold in supermarkets, also published an article, based on the report in TheDirly.com, alleging an affair had occurred between Trump and Clifford. Both Trump and Clifford, through their representatives, issued denials in response to the articles. b. Speci?cally, on or about October 11, 2011, Keith Davidson, who identi?ed himself as Clifford?s attorney, sent a cease and desist letter to TheDz?rtyeom, demanding that the article regarding Trump and Clifford be removed from the website. Additionally, on or about October 12, 2011, Cohen, who was then Executive Vice-President and Special Counsel to the Trump, Organization, stated to News that totally untrue and ridiculouslstory . . . emanated from a sleazy and disgusting web site. . . . The Trump Organization and Donald J. Trump will be bringing a lawsuit . . . [and] Mr. Trump and the Trump Organizationwould like to thank and commend Stormy Daniels and her attorneys for their honesty and swift actions.? 14. On or about June 16, 2015, Trump formally launched his 2016 presidential campaign. On or about May 4, 2016, Trump became the presumptive Republican Party nominee for president, and on July 19, 2016, Trump of?cially became the nominee. Based on my review of public sources, I have learned that while it does not appear that Cohen had an of?cial title as part of the Trump campaign, on multiple occasions Cohen made public statements on behalf of Trump or his campaign. For instance, on or about August 18, 2016, Cohen appeared on CNN to defend Trump?s polling numbers. 15. On or about October 7, 2016, The Washington Post published online avideo and accompanying audio in which Trump referred to women in what the article described as ?vulgar terms? .in a 2005 conversation with Billy Bush, who was then the host of Access Hollywood. The following day, on October 8, 2016, Trump appeared in a video in which he stated, among other things, ?I?ve said and done things i regret and words released today on this 5 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 6 of 62 more than a decade old video are one of them. Anyone who knows me knows these words don?t re?ect who I am. I said it. I was wrong and I apologize.? Based on my review of public sources, also know that representatives of the Trump Campaign stated, in sum and substance, that the Access Hollywood comment was an old and isolated incident. 16. Based on my review of public sources, including an article published in Slate magazine by a reporter who interviewed Clifford, that around this same time, in or about October 2016, Clifford wasin discussions with ABC?sGood Morning America and Slate 7? magazine, among other media sources, to provide these media outlets with her statement about her alleged relationship with Trump. According to the article in Slate, which the author based on conversations with Clifford over the telephone and by text message, Clifford wanted to be paid for her story or be paid by Trump not to disclose her accusation. As Cohen summarized in a 2018 email obtained pursuant to the Cohen Email Warrants: ?In October 2016, I was contacted by counsel for Ms. Clifford stating that news outlets, including ABC News, were pursuing the 2011 stoiy of an alleged affair between Mr. Trump and Ms. Clifford.? 17. From my review of telephone toll records3 and information produced pursuant to the iCloud Warrant and Cohen Email Warrants, I have learned that in the days following the Access Hollywood video, Cohen exchanged a series of calls, text messages, and emails with Keith Davidson, who was then Clifford?s attorney, David Pecker and Dylan Howard 3 My attribution of certain telephone numbers to certain individuals as described in this af?davit is based on my review of the vCard (virtual contact ?le) and text messages obtained from Cohen?s telephone pursuant to the iCloud Warrant. Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 7 of 62 of American Media, Inc. the publisher of the National Jil'mguz'rer,4 "l?rump, and Hope Hicks, who was then press secretary for Trump?s presidential campaign. For these text messages and calls?as well as all of the text messages and calls referenced in this af?davit involving Cohen?Cohen used one of the Target Cellular Devices for the communication. 18. Based on the timing of the calls in the days following the Access Hollywood story, and the content of the text messages and emails, I believe that at least some of these communications concerned the need toprevent Clifford ?'om going public, particularly inthe wake . . of the Access Hollywood story. In particular, I have learned the following: a. On October 8, 2016, at approximately 7:20 pm, Cohen received a call from Hicks. Sixteen seconds into the call, Trump joined the call, and the call continued for over four minutes.5 Based on the toll records that the USAO has obtained to date, I believe that this was the ?rst call Cohen had received or made to Hicks in at least multiple weeks, and that Cohen and Trump spoke on the telephone about once a month prior to this date speci?cally, prior to this call on October 4 Pecker is President of AMI and, according to his own statements in public reports, a personal ?iend of Trump. Howard is the chief content of?cer of AMI, who according to public records reports directly to Pecker. 5 I believe that Trump joined the call between Cohen and Hicks based on my review of toll records. Speci?cally, I know that a call was initiated between Cohen?s telephone number and Trump?s telephone number at the same time the records indicate that Cohen was talking to Hicks. After the Cohen?Trump call was initiated, it lasted the same period of time as the Cohen?Hicks call. Additionally, the toll records indicate a and then Trump?s telephone number, which, based on my training and experience, means that the call was either transferred to Trump, or that Trump was added to the call as a conference or three?way call participant. In addition, based on my conversations with another law enforcement agent who has spoken to a law enforcement agent who has interviewed Hicks, I have learned that Hicks stated, in substance, to the best of her recollection, she did not learn about the allegations made by Clifford until early November 2016. Hicks was not speci?cally asked about this three?way call. 7 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 8 of 62 8, 2016, Cohen and Trump had spoken once in May, once in June, once in July, zero times in August, and twice in September. b. Approximately ten minutes after the call ended, Hicks and Cohen spoke again for about two minutes. 0. At 7:39 pm, immediately after the second call with Hicks ended, Cohen called David Pecker (as noted above, the President of American Media Inc., or AMI) and they connected ..for..thirty seconds. Approximately four minutes later, Cohen called Pecker again and they spoke for more than a minute. Three minutes after ending his call with Pecker, Cohen received a call from Dylan Howard (as noted above, the Chief Content Of?cer of AMI), and they spoke for approximately a minute. According to toll records, it does not appear that Cohen and Howard spoke regularly prior to October 8, 2016, as it had been over a month since they had called each other. d. At 7:56 p.1n., approximately eight minutes after his call with Howard ended, Cohen called Hicks and they connected for two minutes. At apprOximately the same time this call ended, Cohen received a call from Pecker, and they spoke for about two minutes. At 8:03 pm, about three minutes after ending his call with Pecker, Cohen called Trump, and they spoke for nearly eight minutes. e. At 8:39 pm. and 8:57 pm, Cohen received calls from Howard and spoke to him for about four and six minutes, respectively. At 9:13 pm, about ten minutes after Cohen and Howard hung up from the second of these calls, Howard sent Cohen a text message that said: ?Keith will do it. Let?s reconvene tomorrow.? Based on my involvement in this investigation, I believe that when Howard wrote ?Keith,? he was referring to Keith Davidson, the attorney for Stephanie Clifford. At 3:31 am, now on October 9, 2016, Cohen sent Howard a text message in 8 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 9 of 62 response that said: ?Thank you.? Eight minutes later, Cohen sent Howard a text message that said: ?Resolution Consultants LLC. is the name of the entity I formed a week ago. Whenever you wake, please call my cell.? f. The following day, on October 10, 2016, at 10:58 am, Howard sent a text message to Cohen and Davidson, which stated: ?Keith/Michael: connecting you both in regards to that business opportunity. Spoke to the client this AM and they?re con?rmed to proceed with the - opportunity. Thanks. DylannOver toyoutwo.? At 12:25 Davidson sent Cohen atext message that stated: ?Michael if we are ever going to close this deal In my opinion, it needs to be today. Keith.? Davidson and Cohen then spoke by phone for about three minutes. Based on my participation in this investigation, I believe that when Howard wrote that the ?client? was ?confirmed to proceed with the opportunity,? he was referring to Clifford?s agreement in principle to accept money ?'om Cohen in exchange for her agreement not to discuss any prior affair with then?candidate Trump.6 g. Based on my review of records obtained pursuant to the Cohen Email Warrants, I know that on or about October 10, 2016, Clifford and Davidson appear to have signed a ?side letter agreement? that stated it was an exhibit to a ?con?dential settlement agreement and mutual release? between ?Peggy Peterson? and ?David Dennison.? The purpose of the document, accordin to the agreement, was to de?ne the ?true name and identi of ersons named 6 As set forth below, AMI was also involved in a payment to model Karen McDougal. However, because these communications were in close temporal proximity to the events involving the negotiation of a payment to Clifford, the execution of the agreement with Clifford, and the payment of money to Clifford, I believe that these communications were related to Clifford. Additionally, based on my review of public statements by McDougal, I have learned that she negotiated an agreement with AMI several months prior to these communications between Cohen and Pecker, Howard, and Davidson. Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 10 of 62 pseudonym in ?con?dential settlement agreement and mutual release.? The side letter agreement specifies the identity of ?Peggy Peterson? to be Clifford, but the space for ?Dennison? 5? identity is blank. The agreement also includes a signature page for ?Peterson,? ?Dennison,? and their attorneys. The signature page is signed by ?Peterson? and his attorney, Davidson, but the document is unsigned by ?Dennison? and his attorney. Based on my involvement in this investigation, I believe that Davidson sent Cohen this partially-signed ?side letter agreement? in ;ord_er;to_facilitateithe closing of a deal between Davidson?s client and Cohenor his client on October 10, 2016. 19. I It appears that on October 13, 2016, and the days that followed, Cohen took steps to complete a transaction with Davidson, including attempting to open an account from which Cohen could transfer funds to Davidson. Speci?cally, from my review of toll records, information obtained pursuant to the iCloud Warrant and Cohen Email Warrants, records maintained by First Republic Bank (?First Republic?), as well as my participation in interviews with employees of First Republic, I have learned the following: a. On the morning of October 13, 2016, at 8:54 am, Cohen sent Pecker a text message that stated: need to talk to you.? At 9:06 Pecker sent a text message to Cohen that stated, called please call me back.? The tolls between Cohen and Pecker do not show a telephone call between 8:54 am. and 9:06 am. However, based on my review of text messages, I have learned that Cohen and Pecker communicate with each other over Signal, which is an communications cellphone application that allows users to send text messages and make calls. b. At 9:23 am, Cohen sent an email that stated ?call me? to a banker at First Republic Bank (?First Republic The email attached documents from the Secretary of State 10 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 11 of 62 of Delaware indicating that Cohen had formed a limited liability company called ?Resolution Consultants on September 30, 2016. As noted above, ?Resolution Consultants? is the name of the entity that Cohen had told Howard he had formed recently after Howard said Davidson would ?do it.? At 10:44 am, Cohen called First Republic Employee?2 and told him, in sum and substance, that he needed an account in the name of ?Resolution Consultants? opened immediately, and that he did not want an address on the checks written out of the account. Later that day, another employee at First Republicemailed Cohen account opening paperwork to complete. Cohen returned the account opening documents partially completed, but failed to provide a copy of his driver?s license or passport, and did not respond to the employee?s question of how he wanted to ?nd the account. As a result, the account was never opened. c. On October 17, 2016, Cohen incorporated Essential Consultants LLC in Delaware. That same day, he ?led paperwork to dissolve Resolution Consultants LLC. 20. Despite these steps taken by Cohen, it appears that the negotiation between Cohen and Davidson was not progressing suf?ciently fast enough for Davidson or his client, Clifford, and they threatened to go public with Clifford?s allegations just days before the presidential election. Speci?cally, based on my review of toll records, information obtained pursuant to the iCloud Warrant, and public sources, I know the following: a. According to an article in he Washington Post, which quoted emails sent from Cohen? 5 email account hosted by the Trump Organization, on October 17, 2016, Davidson emailed Cohen and threatened to cancel the aforementioned ?settlement agreemen Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 12 of 62- if Cohen did not complete the transaction.7 According to the article, Davidson sent Cohen a second email later in the day that stated in part, ?Please be advised that my client deems her settlement agreement canceled and void.? At 4:00 pm. that day, Cohen called Davidson and they spoke for over ?ve minutes. b. Cohen?s 4:00 pm. call with Davidson. and/or Davidson?s threats to cancel the ?settlement agreemen appear to have touched off a ?urry of communications about the settlement . agreement and whether Clifford would go .. Speci?cally: i. At 4:43 Howard sent Cohen a text message that stated: ?I?m told they?re going with DailyMail. Are you aware?? One minute later, Cohen responded: ?Call me.? Based on my involvement in this investigation, I understand Howard?s text to mean that he heard that Clifford was going to take her story of an extramarital affair with Trump to the Daily Mail, a tabloid newspaper. ii. At 4:45 pm, Howard called Cohen and they spoke for over two minutes. Moments later, Davidson and Cohen spoke for about two minutes. At 5 :03 pm, Cohen attempted to call Trump, but the call only lasted eight seconds. This was Cohen?s first call after he spoke with Davidson. iv. At 5:25 Cohen texted Howard, stating: v. At 6:44 Howard responded to Cohen?s text, stating: ?Not taking my calls.? Cohen responded one minute later: ?You?re kidding. Who are you trying to reach?? Howard responded one minute later: ?The ?agent.?? Based on my involvement in this 7 Due to the partially covert nature of the investigation to this date, the USAO has not requested documents ?om the Trump Organization or Davidson, and thus does not possess the email referenced in this article. 12 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 13 of 62 investigation, Iunderstand Howard?s text messages to mean that he attempted to contact Davidson about the matter involving Clifford, but that Davidson was not taking Howard?s calls. vi. At 6:49 pm, Cohen called Howard and they spoke for nearly four minutes. 0. The following day, on October 18, 2016, heSmokz'ngGun. com, a website that publishes legal documents and mugshots, published an article called: ?Donald Trump and the Porn Superstar,? which alleged that Trump had an extramarital affair with Clifford. However, the article notedthat Clifford had declined, to comment. 21. On or about October 25, 2016, the communications between Cohen, Davidson, Howard and Pecker picked up again, apparently concerning a transaction involving Clifford. Speci?cally, based on my review of toll records, information obtained pursuant to the Cohen Email Warrants and iCloud Warrant, as well as my review of public sources, I have learned the following: a. On October 25, 2016, at 6:09 pm, Howard sent Cohen a text message stating: ?Keith calling you urgently. We have to coordinate something on the matter he?s calling you about or its [sic] could look awfully bad for everyone.? One minute later, Davidson sent Cohen a text message stating ?Call me." Cohen and Davidson called each other several times over the next half hour but appear not to have connected. At 6:42 pm, Cohen and Davidson spoke for about eight minutes. At 7:11 pm, they spoke for another two minutes. b. The next morning, on or about October 26, 2016, at 8:26 am, Cohen called Trump and spoke to him for approximately three minutes. At 8:34 am, Cohen called Trump again and connected for a minute and a half. 0. At approximately 9:04 a.m.??less than thirty minutes after speaking with mmp-~ Cohen sent two emails to the person who had incorporated Resolution Consultants and Essential 13 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 14 of 62 Consultants for him, and stated ?can you send me asap the ?ling receipt? and then, in the second email, ?for Essential Consultants That person responded with the ?ling receipt two minutes later at 9:06 am. and with the certi?cation of formation 23 minutes later, at 9:27 am. d. Shortly after that, Cohen contacted a particular employee at First Republic (?First Republic Employee-2?) and told him, in sum and substance, that he decided not to open an account in the name of ?Resolution Consulting? and instead would be opening a real estate consulting company in the name, of ?Essential Consultants?? . Cohen told First Republic Employee-2 that he 7 was at Trump Tower, and wanted to go to a First Republic branch across the street to open the account, so First Republic Employee-2 called another employee of First Republic (?First Republic a preferred banker at that branch, to assist Cohen. At 11:00 am, First Republic Employee-1 called Cohen. 1 know from my participation in an interview with First Republic Employee?1, that around the time of the call he went to Cohen?s of?ce in Trump Tower?on the same ?oor as the Trump Organization?and went through account opening questions, including know your customer questions, with Cohen. In response to a series of know-=your-customer questions about the purpose of the account?the answers to which First Republic Employee?1 entered into a form?Cohen stated, in sum and substance, that he was opening Essential Consultants as a real estate consulting company to collect fees for investment consulting work, and all of his consulting clients would be domestic individuals based in the United States. Based on my review of records obtained from First Republic, it appears that this account (the ?Essential Consultants Accoun was created at a time between 11:00 am. and 1:00 pm. 6. At 1:47 pm, Cohen called Davidson and they spoke for approximately two minutes. At approximately 1:49 pm, Davidson emailed Cohen wiring instructions for an attorney client trust account at City National Bank. 14 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 15 of 62 f. After the Essential Consultants Account was opened on October 26, 2016, Cohen transferred $131,000 from a home equity line of credit that Cohen had at First Republic to the Essential Consultants Account. Following the transfer, at approximately 4:15pm. on October 26, 2016, First Republic Employee?2?s assistant emailed Cohen at his Trump Organization email address to tell him that the funds had been deposited into the Essential Consultants Account. Cohen forwarded that email to the Cohen Gmail Account and then forwarded it to Davidson. At 6:37 Cohen asked Pecker by text message, ?Can we speak? Important.? Cohen called Pecker at 6:49 pm. and connected for thirty seconds. At 6:57 p.1n., Cohen sent Howard a text message, stating: ?Please call me. Important.? Cohen called Howard at 7:00 p.111. and connected for about thirty seconds. At 7:06 p.111., Cohen called Pecker again and they spoke for nearly thirteen minutes. At 7:24 pm, Howard sent a text message to Cohen that: ?He said he?d call me back in 20 minutes. I told him what you are asking for his [sic] reasonable. I?ll get it sorted.? Approximately an hour later, at 8:23 pm, Howard told Cohen by text message to ?check your Gmail for email from my private accoun In an email sent at 8:23 pm. by Howard to Cohen and Davidson, with the subject line ?Confnmation,? Howard stated, ?Thank you both for chatting with me earlier. Confirming agreement on: Executed agreement, hand?signed by Keith?s client and returned via overnight or same?day FedEx to Michael, - Change of agreement to re?ect the correct LLC, Transfer of funds on Thursday AM to be held in escrow until receipt of agreement.? After receiving that email, at approximately 8:27 pm, Cohen asked Howard by text message, ?Can you and David [Pecker] give me a call.? Howard responded: ?David is not around I think. I?ll call.? At 8:28 pm, Howard called Cohen and they spoke for three minutes. 15 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 16 of 62 22. On October 27, 2016, Cohen made a payment to Davidson of with the funds intended for Cliffordwfor the purpose of securing her ongoing silence with respect to the allegations that she had an extramarital affair with Trump. Speci?cally, based on my review of toll records, bank records, and information obtained pursuant to the iCloud Warrant and Cohen Email Warrants, I have learned the follOwing: a. At 9:47 Cohen sent Davidson an email, stating: ?Keith, kindly con?rm that the wire received 27, 2016 shall be held by you in your attorney?s trust account until such time as directed for release by me, in writing. Additionally, please ensure that all paperwork contains the correct name of Essential Consultants LLC. I thank you in advance. for your assistance and look forward to hearing from you later.? b. At approximately 10:01 according to records provided by First Republic Bank, Cohen completed papelwork to wire $130,000 from the Essential Consultants Account?? which had been funded a day prior from Cohen?s home equity line of credit??to the attorney client trust account at City National Bank that Davidson had speci?ed in the wiring instructions he sent to Cohen. The wire transfer was made shortly thereafter. c. At 10:02 Davidson responded to Cohen?s email from 9:47 stating: con?rm that I will work in good faith that no funds shall be disbursed unless until the plaintiff personally signs all necessary settlement paperwork, (the form of which will match the prior agreement). The settlement docs will name the correct corporation, (Essential Consultants LLC). Plaintiff signature will be notarized and returned to you via FedEx. Only after you receive FedEx will I disburse. Fair?? d. At 10:50 First Republic Employee-1 sent Cohen an email con?rming that the payment had been sent and providing him with the wire number. 16 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 17 of 62 23. On October 28, 2016, and the days that followed, Cohen ?nalized the transaction with Davidson. Speci?cally, based on my review of toll records, information obtained pursuant to the iCloud Warrant, public sources, and bank records, I know the following: a. On October 28, 2016, at 11:48 am, Cohen spoke to Trump for approximately ?ve minutes. Beginning at 1:21 pm, Cohen attempted a series of phone calls to Davidson, Pecker, and Howard throughout the day, although it appears he may only have comiected with Howard. .13.. Later that day, at approximately 7:01 Davidson stated to Cohen by text message that ?all is AOK. I should have signed, notarized docs on Monday. You should have them on Tuesday.? Cohen thanked him and said hope we are good.? Davidson responded, assure you. We are very good.? Howard also texted Cohen at 7:08 pm, ?Keith [Davidson] says we are good.? Cohen then responded to Howard and ?Excellent? to Davidson. At approximately 10:30 pm, Cohen spoke to Hicks for threeminutes. c. On October 31, 2016, Cohen called Howard at 8:22 pm. and they spoke for over three minutes. At 8:32 pm, Cohen received text messages from both Howard and Davidson. Howard said: ?You?ll have paperwork tomorrow says Davidson said: ?We are AOK. You will be receiving a package tomorrow.? Cohen responded ?Thank you? to Howard and ?Thanks Keith. Will call you then? to Davidson. From my involvement in this investigation, I believe Davidson was referring to a signed nondisclosure agreement when he told Cohen that he would receive a package. (1. Based on my review of court filings that became public in 2018, I have learned that on or about October 28, 2016, LLC and/or David Dennison? entered into a ?con?dential settlement agreement and mutual release? with ?Peggy Peterson,? pursuant to which ?Peterson? agreed not to disclose certain ?con?dential information pertaining to [Dennison]? in exchange for 17 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 18 of 62 $130,000. The agreement provided that would wire the funds to ?Peterson?s? attorney, who would then transfer funds to ?Peterson.? Cohen signed the agreement on behalf of The agreement stated that the address for which was later referred to in the agreement as ?Essential Consultants, was Cohen?s residence. e. Consistent with the ?con?dential settlement agreement and mutual release,? on or about November 1, 2016, Davidson transferred $96,645 from his attorney client trust account at City National Banktoa bank account in Clifford?s name. The wire ?net settlemen On the same day, at approximately 9:48 am. Davidson sent Cohen a text message with a picture of a FedEx delivery con?rmation, stating that at approximately 9:09 am. a package shipped by Davidson the previous day had arrived for Cohen at his Trump Organization address. On the same day, at approximately 6:14 Davidson sent Cohen an email with an audio ?le attached and said ?Give this a lesson [sic] and then call me.? The audio attachment was titled ?Stormy.mp3? and was a five-minute recording of Davidson interviewing Clifford about recent public allegations made by an adult?lm star named Jessica Drake regarding her alleged past affair with Trump; in the recording, Clifford explained the reasons she believed that Drake was not credible. Less than an hour later, at approximately 7:05 pm, Cohen called Trump, but it appears that they did not connect. Cohen then called a telephone number belonging to Kellyanne Conway, who at thetime was Trump?s campaign manager. They did not connect. At approximately 7:44 pm, however, Cohen received a return call from Conway, which lasted for approximately six minutes. 24. On November 4, 2016, just three days after the Clifford transaction was completed and just four days before the presidential election, the Wall Street Journal published an article alleging that the National Enquirer had ?Shielded Donald Trump? from allegations by 18 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 19 of 62 Playboy model Karen McDougal that she and Trump had an affair. The article alleged that AMI had agreed to pay McDougal to bury her story. McDougal, like Clifford, had been represented by Davidson. Based on my review of toll records, information obtained pursuant to the Cohen Email Warrants and iCloud Warrant, and public sources, it appears that Cohen spoke frequently to Davidson, Howard, Becker, and Hicks around the time of this article?s publication?just days before Election Daywabout the importance of preventing the McDougal and Clifford stories from gaining national traction. Specifically, [have learned the following: a. Between 4:30 and 8:00 pm. on November 4, Cohen communicated several times . with Howard, Pecker and Davidson. For instance, at approximately 4:49 Cohen sent Howard a text message with a screenshot of an email forwarded to him by another Trump Organization lawyer. The forwarded email was from a Wall Street Journal reporter, and asked for comment from Trump and/or the campaign on the story. Cohen also spoke with Hicks several times, including shortly before and/or after calls with Pecker, Howard and Davidson. Indeed, at approximately 7:33 using two different cellphones subscribed to him, Cohen appears to have been talking to Davidson and Hicks at the same time. b. At approximately 8:51 Cohen sent Howard a message, stating: ?She?s being really difficult with giving Keith a statement. Basically went into hiding and unreachable.? One minute later, Howard responded: ?I?ll ask him again. We just need her to disappear.? Cohen responded, ?She de?nitely disappeared but refuses to give a statement and Keith cannot push her.? At approximately 8:55 Howard responded to Cohen?s text: ?Let?s let the dust settle. We don?t want to push her over the edge. She?s on side at present and we have a solid position and a plausible position that she is rightfully employed as a columnist.? Based on my involvement in this investigation, I believe Cohen and Howard were referring to Karen McDougal when they were 19 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 20 of 62 discussing ?she? and ?her.? Additionally, I believe Howard?s statement that ?we have . . . a plausible position that she is right?illy employed as a columnist? was a reference to the fact that AMI had given McDougal payments for her role as a purported columnist for the company. 0. At approximately 8:58 pm. on November 4, 2016, Howard attempted to reassure Cohen about the effect of the forthcoming Wall Street Journal article, texting, think it?ll be ok pal. I think it?ll fade into the distance.? Cohen responded, ?He?s pissed.? Howard wrote back, ?I?m pissed! You?re pissed. Peckeris pissed. ,Keith is pissed. Not much we cando.? Based on my involvement in this investigation, I believe Cohen was referring to Trump when he stated ?he?s pissed.? Cohen asked Howard at approximately 9:00 pm. how the Wall Street Journal could publish its a1ticle if ?everyone denies.? Howard responded, ?Because there is the payment ?'om AM. It looks suspicious at best.? d. At approximately 9:03 pm, Hicks called Cohen and they spoke for two minutes. At approximately 9: 11 pm, Cohen called Howard and spoke to him for ?ve minutes. At approximately 9:15 pm, Hicks called Cohen and they spoke for nearly seven minutes. Again, Cohen used different phones for these two calls, such that he appears to have been on both calls for about a minute of overlap. At approximately 9:32 pm, Cohen texted Pecker, ?The boss just tried calling you. Are you tree?? A minute later, Cohen texted Howard, ?Is there a way to ?nd David quickly?? e. At approximately 9:50 pm, the Wall Street Journal article was published online. Howard and Hicks both sent web links for the article to Cohen. Over the next half hour, Cohen and Howard exchanged several text messages commenting on how the story came across. The next morning on November 5, 2016, at approximately 7:35 am, Cohen texted Hicks, ?So far I see only 6 stories. Getting little to no traction.? Hicks responded, ?Same. Keep prayingll It?s 20 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 21 of 62 working!? Cohen wrote back, ?Even CNN not talking about it. No one believes it and if necessary, I have a statement by Storm denying everything and contradicting the other porn stars statement. I wouldn?t use it now or even discuss with him as no one is talking about this or cares 1? Based on my involvement in this investigation, I believe Cohen was referring to the above- referenced recorded audio statement by Clifford that he obtained from Davidson, and was stating that such a statement could be used to in?uence potential negative media relating to Trump, but was __unnecessary at that time. ,7 Based on a text Hicks to__Cohen, I believe that later that morning, Pecker spoke to Trump. 25. On or about November 8, 2016, Trump won the election for President of the United States. 26. On or about January 12, 2018, the Wall Street Journal ?rst reported that Cohen arranged a payment to Clifford. On or about January 22, 2018, Common Cause, a government watchdog group, ?led a complaint with the Federal Election Commission, alleging that Cohen had violated campaign ?nance laws by making the payment to Clifford. Based on my review public sources following that report, as well as emails obtained pursuant to the Cohen Email Warrants, I have learned the following: a. On or about January 23, 2018, the day after Common Cause ?led its complaint, Cohen began emailing himself drafts of statements describing his payment to Clifford. Additionally, on January 23, 2018, Cohen emailed the following draft of that statement to an individual who appears to be writing a book on Cohen?s behalf: In October 2016, I was contacted by counsel for Ms. Clifford stating that news outlets, including ABC news, were pursuing the 2011 story of an alleged affair between Mr. Trump and Ms. Clifford. Despite the fact that both parties had already denied the allegation, as Mr. Trump?s longtime special counsel and protector, I took it upon myself to match the offer and 21 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 22 of 62 keep the story from breaking. I knew the allegation to be false, but I am also a realist who understands that just because something is falSe doesn ?t mean that it doesn?t create harm and damage. I could not allow this to occur. I negotiated a non?disclosure agreement with Ms. Clifford?s counsel and tendered the funds. I did this through my Delaware LLC and transferred personal funds to cover the agreement. I was not reimbursed any monies from Mr. Trump, the Trump Organization, any third party or the Presidential campaign. At no point did lever advise Mr. Trump of my communications or actions regarding this agreement. As outlandish and unusual as this may appear, the Trumps have been like family to me for over a decade. It?s what you do for family. (Emphasis added.) 7, Based on my involvement in this investigation, lbelieye that the above email is an acknowledgement that the allegation of the affair had existed for some time . .the 20]] story. . but that Cohen was motivated to ?keep the story from breaking? again in October 2016, b. On or about February 13, 2018, Cohen said in a statement to The New York Times that ?Neither the Trump Organization nor the Trump campaign was a party to the transaction with Ms. Clifford. The payment to Ms. Clifford was lawful, and was not a campaign contribution or a campaign expenditure by anyone.? Cohen declined to answer follow?up questions including whether Trump had been aware of the payment, why Cohen made the payment, or whether similar payments had been made to other people. 0. On or about February 14, 2018, Cohen was asked by The New York Times whether Trump had reimbursed him, whether he and Trump had made any arrangement at the time of the payment, or whether he had made payments to other women. Cohen stated in response, can?t get into any of that.? On or about February 14, 2018, Cohen also stated to The Washington Post that: ?In a private transaction in 2016, I used my own personal funds to facilitate a payment of $130,000 to Ms. Stephanie Clifford. Neither the Trump Organization nor the Trump campaign was a party to the transaction with Ms. Clifford, and neither reimbursed me for the payment, either directly or indirectly.? 22 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 23 of 62 d. On or about March 9, 2018, Cohen stated to ABC News that ?the funds were taken from my home equity line and transferred internally to my LLC account in the same ba 27. For the foregoing reasons, there is probable cause to believe that Cohen committed the Subject Offense by making an in-kind contribution to Trump or the Trump campaign in the form of a $130,000 payment to Clifford on the election. Indeed, while Cohen denies having given an unlawful contribution, in his own statements Cohen has admitted that he paid. $130,000 of his ?personal funds? to Clifford and. that the payment occurred less than two weeks before the election, as Trump was facing negative media allegations about his behavior toward women, even though allegations of an affair between Trump and Clifford existed since 201 l. 28. have reviewed records maintained by from which I have learned, in substance and in part, that the Target Cellular Devices are still active. Based on my training and experience, my familiarity with this investigation, and the information set forth above, I therefore believe that the requested data will lead to evidence of the Subject Offense. Speci?cally, information will lead to the present location of the Target Cellular Devices; law enforcement may then obtain evidence from the Target Cellular Devices, by subpoena or search warrant, including but not limited to contact lists containing contact information for participants in the illegal campaign contribution scheme and well as text messages between these participants. WK OF EXECUTION 29. In my training and experience, I have learned that cellular phones and other cellular devices communicate wirelessly across a network of cellular infrastructure, including towers that route and connect individual communications. When sending or receiving a communication, a cellular device broadcasts certain cellular and wifi signals to the cellular tower 23 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 24 of 62 that is routing its communication. These cellular and Wi? signals include a cellular device?s unique identi?ers. 30. To facilitate execution of this warrant to determine the location of the Target Cellular Devices, law enforcement may use an investigative device or devices capable of broadcasting cellular and Wi? signals that will be received by the Target Cellular Devices or receiving cellular and wi? signals from nearby cellular devices, including the Target Cellular _e_vices.WS.uchwa..dexice may ?mction in some respects like a cellular tower, except that itwill not be connected to the cellular network and cannot be used by a cell phone to communicate with others. The device may send a signal to the Target Cellular Devices and nearby cellular devices and thereby prompt them to send cellular and wi? signals that include the unique identi?er of the device. Law enforcement may monitor the cellular and wi? signals broadcast by the Target Cellular Devices for non-content signal information and use that information to determine the Target Cellular Devices? location, even if it is located inside a house, apartment, or other building. The device will not intercept the contents of the Target Cellular Devices? communications, such as telephone calls, text messages, and other electronic communications. Further, the device will not collect any other data stored on the Target Cellular Devices, including e-mails, text messages, contact lists, images, or Global Positioning System (GPS) data. 31. The investigative device may interrupt cellular service of phones or other cellular devices within its immediate vicinity. Any service disruption to non?target devices will be brief and temporary, and all operations will attempt to limit the interference with such devices. In order to connect with the Target Cellular Devices, the device may brie?y exchange cellular and wi? signals with all phones or other cellular devices in its vicinity to determine whether those devices? unique identi?ers match the identi?ers of the Target Cellular Devices. These cellular 24 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 25 of 62 and wifl signals may include cell phone identi?ers. The device will not complete a connection with cellular devices determined not to be the Target Cellular Devices, and law enforcement will limit collection of information Eom devices other than the Target Cellular Devices. To the extent that any information from a cellular device other than the Target Cellular Devices is collected by the law enforcement device, law enforcement will delete that information, and law enforcement will make no investigative use of it absent further order of the court, other than distinguishing the Target Cellular Devices from all other cellular devices. AUTHORIZATION REQUEST 32. Based on the foregoing, I request that the Court issue the proposed search warrant, pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41. The proposed warrant also will function as a pen register order under 18 U.S.C. 3123. 33. I further request, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3103a(b) and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure that the Court authorize the officer executing the warrant to delay notice until 30 days from the end of the period of authorized surveillance, This delay is justi?ed because there is reasonable cause to believe that providing immediate noti?cation of the warrant may have an adverse result, as defined in 18 U.S.C. 2705. Providing immediate notice to the subscriber or user of the Target Cellular Devices would seriously jeopardize the ongoing investigation, as such a disclosure would give that person an opportunity to destroy evidence, change patterns of behavior, and notify confederates. See 18 U.S.C. 3103a(b)(1). There is reasonable necessity for the use of the technique described above, for the reasons set forth above. See 18 U.S.C. 3103a(b)(2). 25 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 26 of 62 34. I further request that the Court authorize execution of the warrant at any time of day or night, owing to the potential need to locate the Target Cellular Devices outside of daytime hours. 35. I ?rrther request that the Court order that all papers in support of this application, including the af?davit and search warrant, be sealed until further order of the Court. These documents discuss an ongoing criminal investigation that is neither public nor known to all of the targets of theinvestigation. Accordingly, there is good cause to seal these because their premature disclosure may seriously jeopardize that investigation. 36. A search warrant may not be legally necessary to compel the investigative technique described herein. Nevertheless, I hereby submit this warrant application out of an abundance of caution. Respectfully submitted, Federal Bureau of Investigation Subscribed and sworn to before 2.1; J, . On: #IWZe-hi-r ii! [if 61?! if?" itngg?m UNITED STKTES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 26 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 27 of 62 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK SITE SIMULATOR TO LOCATE THE Case 1 2971 CELLULAR DEVICES ASSIGNED CALL NUMBERS IN THE MATTER OF THE USE OF A AND ORDER OF AUTHORIZATION Special Agents of the, Federal Bureau 9t Investigation and Other Authorized Personnel I. Findings The Court herebyjfinds: 1. Upon an af?davit of Special Agent - of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (?Affidavit?) and pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41, there is probable cause to believe that violations of 52 U.S.C. 30116(a)(1)(A) and 30109(d)(1)(A)(1) (illegal campaign contributions) (the ?Subject Offense?) have been committed by Michael Cohen (the ?Target Subject?), and that the Target Subject uses cellular devices assigned call numbers ?the (?Target Cellular Devices?), which are described in Attachment A. Further, there is probable cause to believe that the location of the Target Cellular Device will constitute evidence of the Subject Offense. Speci?cally, there is probable cause to believe that the location of the Target Cellular Devices will constitute evidence of those criminal violations, including leading to the location of the Target Cellular Devices, on which there is probable cause to believe evidence of these offenses exist, as detailed below. 2. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3123(b)(1), the Government has certi?ed that the pen register information for the Target Cellular Devices is relevant to an ongoing investigation by the Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 28 of 62 Investigating Agency of the Target Subject and others unknown in connection with suspected violations of the Subject Offense. NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 41, 18 U.S.C. 3121 et seq, and 18 U.S.C. 3103a, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: ll. Warrant and Order of Authorization 3. Warrant. Law enforcement agents and other authorized law enforcement of?cials are hereby authorized to employ an electronic investigativetechnique, which is described in Attachment B, to the determine the location of the Target Cellular Devices, which are described in Attachment A. 4. Data Collection and Retention. In the course of employing the technique, law enforcement agents and other authorized law enforcement of?cials must make reasonable efforts to limit interference with cellular devices other than the Target Cellular Devices, must delete information collected from cellular devices other than the Target Cellular Devices once the Target Cellular Devices is located, and are prohibited from using data acquired beyond that necessary to locate the Target Cellular Devices, absent further order of the Court. 5. Delayed Notice. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3103a(b) and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure the Court authorizes the of?cer executing the warrant to delay in notice until 30 days from the end of the period of authorized surveillance. This delay is justified because there is reasonable cause to believe that providing immediate noti?cation of the warrant may have an adverse result, asidefmed in 18 U.S.C. 2705. Providing immediate notice to the subscriber or user of the Target Cellular Devices would seriously jeopardize the ongoing investigation, as such a disclosure would give that person an opportunity to destroy evidence, change patterns of behavior, and notify confederates. See 18 U.S.C. 3103a(b)(1). There is reasonable necessity 2 . Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page the technique described above, for the reasons set forth above. See 18 U.S.C. 3 103 6. Time of Execution. The Court authorizes execution of this Warrant at any time of day or night, owing to the potential need to locate the Target Cellular Devices outside of daytime hours. 7. Sealing. This Warrant and Order, and the supporting Agent Af?davit, shall be except that the Government may without ?lrther. order of this Court: provide copies of the Warrant and Order or the supporting Application and Agent Af?davit as need be to personnel assisting the Government in the investigation and prosecution of this matter; and disclose these materials as necessary to comply with discovery and disclosure obligations in any prosecutions related to this matter. Dated: New York, New York 7:7 777 tr 77* 777 Date Issued Time Issued w, . ix STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Southern_Disrpict York?; .7 73!, - ?rm, a Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 30 of 62 ATTACHMENT A This warrant authorizes the use of the electronic investigative technique described in Attachment to identify the location of the cellular devices assigned phone numbers - ?whose Wireless provider is and Whose listed subscriber is Michael Cohen. Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 31 of 62 ATTACHMENT Pursuant to an investigation of Michael Cohen for a violation of 52 U.S.C. 301l6(a)(1)(A) and 30109(d)(1)(A)(1) (illegal campaign contributions) (the ?Subject Offense?), this Warrant authorizes the of?cers to whom it is directed to determine the location of the cellular devices identi?ed in Attachment A by collecting and examining: 1. radio cellular and wi? signals emitted by the target cellular device for the purpose of communicating with .. cellular infrastructure. including towers that route and connect individual communications; and 2. radio cellular and wi? signals emitted by the target cellular device in response to radio cellular and wi? signals sent to the cellular device by the of?cers; for a period of thirty days, during all times of day and night. This warrant does not authorize the interception of any telephone calls, text messages, other electronic communications, and this warrant prohibits the seizure of any tangible property. The Court ?nds reasonable necessity for the use of the technique authorized above. See 18 U.S.C. 3103a(b)(2). Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 32 of 62 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK IN THE MATTER OF THE USE OF A CELL- SITE SIMULATOR To LOCATE THE Case No. CELLULAR DEVICES ASSIGNED CALL NUMBERS AND - Filed Under Seal AFFIDAVIT IN SUPPORT OF being ?rst duly sworn, herebydepose and state as follows: INTRODUCTION AND AGENT BACKGROUND .. AN APPLICATIONFOR l. I make this af?davit in support of an application for a search warrant under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41 to authorize law enforcement to employ an electronic investigative technique, which is described in Attachment B, to determine the locatiOn of the cellular devices assigned call numbers ?(the f?Target Cellular Devices?), which are described in Attachinent Special Agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation I have been a Special Agent with the FBI since 2009. In the course of my experience and training in these positions, I have participated in- criminal investigations into federal offenses involving a wide array of ?nancial Crimes, including offenses involving public corruptiOn. I also have training and experience executing warrants for cellphone location data. 3. The facts in this af?davit come from ?my persOnal observations, my training and experience, and information obtained from other agents and witnesses. This af?davit is intended to Show merely that there is suf?cient probable cause for the requested warrant and does not set forth all of my knowledge about this matter. Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 33 of 62 4. One purpose of applying for this warrant is to determine with precision the Target 8 Cellular Devices? location. However, there is reason to believe the Target Cellular Devices are currently located somewhere within this district because the Target Cellular Devices? owner is known to spend most of his time in this district. Pursuant to Rule law enforcement may locate the Target Cellular Devices outside the district provided the device is within the district . when the warrant is issued. 1 5. Based on the facts set forth in this af?davit, there is probable cause to believe that violations of 52 U. S. C. 30116(a)(1)(A) and 30109(d)(1)(A)(1) (illegal campaign contributions) (the ?Subject Offense?) has been committed, are being committed, and will be committed by Michael Cohen and others. There is also probable cause to believe that the location of the Target Cellular Devices will lead to evidence of the Subject Offense, as detailed below. 6. Because collecting the information authorized by this warrant may fall within the statutory. de?nitions of a ?pen register? or a ?trap and trace device,? see 18 U.S.C., 3127(3) (4), this warrant is designed to comply with the Pen Register Statute as well as Rule 41. See 18 U.S.C. 3121?3127. This warrant therefore includes 'all the information required to be included . in a pen register order. See 18 U.S.C. 3123(b)(1). PROBABLE CAUSE Introduction 7. . The United States Attorney?s Office for the Southern District of New. York and the FBI are investigating'a criminal violation of the campaign finance laws by Michael Cohen, a lawyer who holds himself out as the personal attorney for President Donald J. Trump. As detailed below, there is probable cause to believe that Cohen made an excessive in? kind contribution to the presidential election campaign of then-candidate Donald Trump in the 2 . . Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 34 of 62' form of a $130,000 payment to Stephanie Clifford, an individual who is alleged to have had an extramarital affair with Trump, in exchange for her agreement not to disclose that alleged affair on the eve of the 2016 presidential election. 8. i The Target Cellular Devices referenced in this Af?davit are the cellphones assigned call numbers?As further discussed below, the Target Cellular Devices are subscribed to in the name of Michael Cohen (the ?Subscriber?). The Subscriber is believed to use the Target Cellphones and IS a Target subject of this Investigation? ?mowwrt is the Service Provider for the Target Cellphones. I Prior Relevant Process 9. In connection with an investigation then being conducted by the Of?ce?of . the Special Counsel the FBI sought and obtained from the Honorable Beryl A. Howell,- Chief United States District 'Judge for the District of Columbia, three search warrants for emails and other content information associated with two email accounts used by Cohen, and one search warrant for stored content associated with an iCloud account used by Cohen. Speci?cally: a. On or about July 18, 2017, the?FBI sought and obtained a search warrant for emails in the account -Et)gmail. com (the "Cohen Gmail Account?) sent or received between January 1, 2016 and July 18, 2017 (the ?First Cohen Gmail Warrant?). b. On or about August 8, 2017, the FBI sought and obtained a search warrant for content stored in the iCloud account associated with Apple ID -@gmail.com (the ?Cohen iCloud Account? and the ?Cohen iCloud Warrant?). c. On or about November 13, 2017, the FBI sought and obtained a search warrant for emails in the Cohen Gmail Account sent or received betvizeen June 1, 2015 and November 13, 2017 (the ?Second Cohen Gmail Warrant?). Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page about November 13, 2017, the FBI sought and? obtained a search warrant for emails in the account '_:the ?Cohen Account?) sent or received between'the opening of the Cohen Account1 and November 13, 2017 (the ?First Cohen Warran i 10. The SCO has since referred certain aspects of its investigation into Cohen to the USAO, which is working with the New York Field Of?ce. 11. On orabout February 28, 2018, the USAO and FBI sought and obtained search warrants for emails in Cohen?Gmail Account andwCohen Account, among other accounts, sent or received between November 14, 2017 and February 28, 2018 (the ?Third Cohen . Gmail Warrant? and ?Second Cohen 12.' The above?described warrants are referred to herein as the ?Cohen Emails Warrants? and, with respect to the iCloud Warrant, the ?Cohen iCloud Warrant.? The Illegal Campaign Contribution Scheme 13. From-my review of public sources, I have learned the following: a. In or around October 2011, there were rumors published on the gossip website heDz?rty. com that Trump had had an extramarital affair with Clifford, an adult ?lm actress whose screen nameis Stormy Daniels, in. or around July 2006. In or about October 2011, Life Style 1 Based on my review of this warrant and the af?davit in support of it, I know that the warrant did not specify a time period, but the af?davit indicated that, pursuant to court order, the service provider had provided non-content information for the Cohen Account that indicatedthat the account contained emails fromthe approximate period of March 2017 through the date of the warrant. 2 On or about February 28, 2018 and April 7, 2018, and FBI sought and obtained Rule 41 search warrants authorizing the search of emails and content obtained pursuant to previously issued warrants for additional subject offenses. 4 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 36 of 62 Magazine, a'tabloid sold in supermarkets, also published an article, based on the report in heDz?rty. com, alleging an affair had occurred between Trump and Clifford. Both Trump and Clifford, through their representatives, issued denials in response to the articles. b. Speci?cally, on or about October 11, 2011, Keith Davidson, who identi?ed himself as Clifford?s attorney, sent a cease and desist letter to TheDz'rty. com, demandingthat the article regarding Trump and Clifford be removed from the website. Additionally, on or about October Counseletoatheqirurnpa Organization, stated to News that ?[t]he totally untrue and ridiculous story . . . emanated from a sleazy and disgusting website. . . The Trump Organization and Donald J. Trump will be bringing a lawsuit . . . [and] Mr. Trump and the Trump Organization would like to thank and commend Stormy Daniels and her attorneys for their honesty and swift actions.? 14. On or about June 16, 2015, Trump formally launched his 2016 presidential campaign. . On or about May 4, 2016, Trump became the presumptive RepublicanParty nominee for president, and on July 19, 2016, Trump of?cially became the nominee. Based on my review of public sources, I have learned that while it does not appear that Cohen had an of?cial title as part of the Trump campaign, on multiple occasions Cohen made public statements on behalf of Trump or his campaign. For instance, on or about August 18, 2016, Cohen appeared on CNN to defend Trump?s polling numbers. 15. On or about October 7, 2016, he Washington Post published online a video and accompanying audio in which Trump referred to women in what the article described as ?vulgar terms? in a 2005 conversation with Billy Bush, who was then the host of Access Hollywood. The following day, on October 8, 2016, Trump appeared in a video in which he stated, among other things, ?I?ve said and done things I regret and words released today on this 5 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 37 of 62 more than a decade old video are one of them. Anyone who knows me knows these words don?t reflect who I am. I said it. I was wrong and I apologize.? Based on my review of public sources, I also know that representatives of the Trump Campaign stated, in sum and substance, that the Access Hollywood comment was an old and isolated incident. 16. Based on my review of public sources, including an article published in Slate magazine by a reporter who interviewed Clifford, that around this same time, in or about 6,,ClifforcL was in discussions Morning; America Show and Slate. magazine, among ether media sources, to provide these media outlets with her statement about her I alleged relationship with TruInp. According to the article 1n Slate, which the author based on conversations with Clifford over the telephone and by text message, Clifford wanted to be paid for her story or be paid by Trump not to disclose her accusation. As Cohen summarized in a 2018 email obtained pursuant to the Cohen Email Warrants: ?In October 2016, I was contacted by counsel for Ms. Clifford stating that news outlets, including ABC News, were pursuing the 2011 story of an alleged affair between Mr. Trump and Ms. Clifford.? . 17. From my review of telephone toll records3 and information produced pursuant to the iCloud Warrant and Cohen Email Warrants, have learned that in the days following the Access Hollywood video, Cohen exchanged a series of calls, text messages, and emails with Keith Davidson, who was then Clifford?s attorney, David Pecker and Dylan Howard 3 My attribution of certain telephone numbers to certain individuals as described in this af?davit 1s based on my review of the vCard (virtual contact ?le) and text messages obtained from Cohen? telephone pursuant to the iCloud Warrant. Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 38 of 62 of American Media, Inc. the publisher of the National Enquirer,4 Trump, and Hope Hicks, who was then press secretary for Trump?s presidential campaign. these text messages and calls?as well as all of the text messages and calls referenced in this af?davit involving Cohen?Cohen used one of the Target Cellular Devices for the communication. 18. Based on the timing of the calls in the days following the Access Hollywood story, and the content of the text messages and emails, I believe that at least some of these of the Access Hellywood story. In particular, I have learned the following: a. On October 8, 2016, at approximately 7:20 pm, Cohen received a call frOm Hicks. Sixteen seconds into the call, Trump joined the call, and the call continued for over four minutes.5 Based on the toll records that the USAO has obtained to date, I believe that this was the ?rst call Cohen had received or made to Hicks in at least multiple weeks, and that Cohen and Trump spoke on the telephone about once a month prior to this date speci?cally, prior to this call on October 4 Pecker is President of AMI and, according to his own statements in public reports, a personal friend of Trump. Howard is the chief content of?cer of AMI, who according to public records reports directly to Pecker. 5 I believe that Trump joined the call between Cohen and Hicks based on my review of toll records. Speci?cally, I know that a call was initiated between Cohen?s telephone number and Trump?s telephone number at the same time the records indicate that Cohen was talking to Hicks. After the Cohen-Trump call was initiated, it lasted the same period of time as the Cohen?Hicks call. Additionally, the toll records indicate a and then Trump?s telephone number, which, based on my training and experience, means that the call was either transferred to Trump, or that Trump was added to the call as a conference or three?way call participant. In addition, based on my conversations with another law enforcement agent who has spoken to a law enforcement agent who has interviewed Hicks, I have learned that Hicks stated, in substance, to the best of her recollection, she did not learn about the allegations made by Clifford until earlyNovember 2016. Hicks was not speci?cally asked about this three-way call. 7 I Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 39 of 62 8, 2016, Cohen and Trump had spoken once in May, once in June, once in July, zero times in August, and twice in September. b. Approximately ten minutes after the call ended, Hicks and Cohen spoke again for about two minutes. c. At 7:39 pm, immediately after the second call with Hicks ended, Cohen called David Pecker (as noted above, the President of American Media Inc., or AMI) and they connected 7 for thirty seconds. ApprOximately four minutes later, Cohen called, Pecker again and they spoke for more than a minute. .Three minutes after ending his call with Pecker, Cohen received a call from Dylan Howard (as noted above, the Chief Content Of?cer of AMI), and they spoke for approximately a minute. According to toll records, it does not appear that Cohen and Howard . spoke regularly prior to October 8, 2016, as it had been over a month since they had called each other. (1. At 7:56 pm, approximately eight minutes after his call with Howard ended, Cohen called Hicks and they connected for two minutes: At approximately the same time this call ended, Cohen received a call from Pecker, and they spoke for about two minutes. At 8:03 pm, about three minutes after ending his call with Pecker, Cohen called Trump, and they spoke for nearly eight minutes. e. At 8:39 pm. and 8:57 pm, Cohen received calls from Howard and spoke to him for about four and six minutes, respectively. At 9:13 pm, about ten minutes after Cohen and Howard hung up ?om the second of these calls, Howard sent Cohen a text message that said: ??Keith will do it. Let? reconvene tomorrow.? Based on my involvement in this investigation,'l believe that when Howard wrote ?Keith,? he was referring to Keith Davidson, the attorney for Stephanie Clifford. . At 3:31 am, now on October 9, 2016, Cohen sent Howard a text message in 8 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 40 of 62 response that Said:? ?Thank you.? Eight minutes later, Cohen sent Howard a text message that said: ?Resolution Consultants LLC. is the name of the entity I formed a week ago. Whenever you wake, please call my cell.? i f. The following day, on OctoberlO, 2016, at 10:58 am, Howard sent ?a text message to Cohen and Davidson, which statedzv ?Keith/Michael: connecting you both in regards to that business opportunity. Spoke to the client this AM and. they?re con?rmed to proceed with the message that stated: ?Michael if we are ever going to close this deal In my opinion, it needs to be today. Keith.? Davidson and Cohen then spoke by phone for about three minutes. Based on my participation in this investigation, I believe that when Howard wrote that the ?clien was ?con?rmed to proceed with the opportunity,? he was referring to Clifford?s agreement in principle to accept money from Cohen in exchange for her agreement not to discuss any prior affair with then-candidate Trump.6 g. Based on my review of records obtained pursuantito the Cohen Email Warrants, I know that on or about October 10, 2016, Clifford and Davidson appear to have signed. a ?side letter agreement? that stated it was an exhibit to a ?con?dential settlement agreement and mutual release? between ?Peggy Peterson? and-?David Dennison.? The purpose of the document, according to the agreement, was to de?ne the ?true name and identity? of ?persons named by 6 As set forth below, AMI was also involved in a payment to model Karen McDougal However, because these communications were in close temporal proximity to the events involving the negotiation of a payment to Clifford, the execution of the agreement with Clifford, and the payment of money to Clifford, I- believe that these communications were related to Clifford. Additionally, based on my review of public statements by McDougal, I have learned that she negotiated an agreement with AMI several months prior to these communications between Cohen - and Pecker, Howard, and Davidson. Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 41 of 62 pseudonym in ?con?dential settlement agreement and mutual release.? The side letter agreement speci?es the identity of ?Peggy Peterson? to be Clifford, but the space for ?Dennison?s? identity is blank. The agreement also includes a signature page for ?Peterson,? ?Dennison,? and their attorneys. The signature page is signed by ?Peterson? and his attorney, Davidson, but the document is unsigned by ?Dennison? and his attorney. Based on my involvement in this, investigation,1 believe that Davidson sent Cohen this partially-Signed ?side letter agreement? in his client on October 10, 2016. 19. 'It appears that on October 13, 2016, and the days that followed, Cohen took steps to complete a transaction with Davidson, including attempting to open an account from which Cohen could transfer funds to Davidson. Speci?cally, from my review of toll records, information obtained pursuant to the iCloud Warrant and Cohen Email Warrants, records maintained by First Republic Bank (?First Republic?), as well as my participation in interviews with employees of First Republic, I have learned the following: a. On the morning of October 13, 2016, at 8:54 am, Cohen sent Pecker atext message that stated: need to talk to you.? At 9:06 am, Pecker sent a text message to Cohen that stated, called please call me back.? The tolls between Cohen and Pecker do not show a telephone call between 8:54 am. and 9:06 am. However, based on my review of text messages,.I have learned that Cohen and Pecker communicate with each other over Signal, which is an communications cellphone application that allows users to send text messages and make - calls. 9 b. At 9:23 Cohen sent an email that stated ?call me? to a banker at First Republic Bank (?First Republic The email attached documents from the Secretary of State 10' Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page.42 of 62 of Delaware indicating that Cohen had formed a limited liability company called ?Resolution Consultants on September 30, 2016. Asnoted above, ?Resolution Consultants? is the name of the entity that Cohen had told Howard he had formed recently after Howard said Davidson would ?do it.? At 10:44 Cohen called First Republic Employee?2 and told him, in sum and substance, that he needed an account in the name of ?Resolution Consultants? opened immediately, and that he did not want an address on the checks written out of the account. Later that day, Cohen returned the account opening documents partially completed, but failed to provide a copy of his driver?s license or passport, and did not respond to the employee?s question of ?how he wanted to fund the account. As a result, the account was never opened. c. On October 17, 2016, Cohen incorporated Essential Consultants LLC in Delaware: I That same day, he ?led paperwork to dissolve Resolution Consultants LLC. 20. Despite these steps taken by Cohen, it appears that the negotiation between Cohen and Davidson was not progressing suf?ciently fast enough for Davidson or his client, Clifford, and they threatened to go public with Clifford?s allegations just days before the- presidential election. Speci?cally, based on my review of toll records, information obtained pursuant to the iCloud Warrant, and public sources, I know the following: a. According to an article in The Washington Post, which quoted emails sent from Cohen?s email account hosted by the Trump Organization, on October 17, 2016, Davidson emailed Cohen and threatened to cancel the aforementioned ?settlement agreemen Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 43 of 62 if cohen did not complete the transaction.? According to the article, Davidson sent Cohen a second email later in the day that stated in part, ?Please be advised that my client deems her settlement agreement canceled and void.? At 4:00 pm. that day, Cohen called Davidson and they spoke for over five minutes. b. Cohen?s 4:00 pm. call with Davidson and/or Davidson?s threats to cancel the ?settlement agreement? appear to have touched off a ?urry of communications about the settlement whether Clifford would go public. Speci?cally: i. At 4:43 pm, Howard sent Cohen a text message that stated: ?I?m told? they?re going with DailyMail. Are you aware?? One minute later, Cohen responded: ?Call me.? Based on my involvement in this investigation, I understand Howard? 3 text to mean that he heard that Clifford was going to take her story of an extramarital affair with Trump to the Daily Mail, a tabloid newspaper. - - ii. At 4:45 pm, Howard called Cohen and'they spoke for over two minutes. Moments later, Davidson and Cohen spoke for about two minutes, At 5:03 pm, Cohen attempted to call Trump, but the call only lasted eight seconds. This was Cohen?s ?rst call after he spoke with Davidson. iv. At 5:25 pm, Cohen texted Howard, stating: v. At 6:44 pm, Howard responded to Cohen?s text, stating: ?Not taking my calls.? Cohen responded one minute later: ?You?re kidding. Who are you trying to reach??, 373 Howard responded one minute later: ?The ?agent. Based on my involvement in this 7 Due to the partially covert nature of the investigation to this. date, the USAO has not requested documents from the Trump Organization or Davidson, and thus does not possess the email referenced in this article. 12' Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 44 of 62 investigation, I understand Howard? 3 text messages to mean that he attempted to contact Davidson about the matter involving Clifford, but that Davidson was not taking Howard?s calls. vi. . At 6:49 pm, Cohen called Howard and they spoke for nearly four minutes. c. The following day, on October 18, .2016, MeSmokingGun.com, a website that publishes legal documents and mugshots, published an article called: ?Donald Trump and the Porn Superstar,? which alleged that Trump had an extramarital affair with Clifford. However, the 21. On or about October 25, 2016, the communications between Cohen, Davidson, Howard and P-ecker picked up again, apparently concerning a transaction involving Clifford. Speci?cally, based on my review of toll records, information obtained pursuantto the Cohen Email warrants and iCloud Warrant, as well as my review of public sources, I have learned the following: a. On October 25, 2016, at 6:09 pm, Howard sent Cohen a text message stating: ?Keith calling you urgently. We have to coordinate something on the matter he?s calling you about or its.[sic] could look awfully bad for everyone.? One minute later, Davidson sent Cohen a text message stating ?Call me.? Cohen and Davidson called each other several times over the next half hour but appear not to have connected. At 6:42 pm, Cohen and Davidson spoke for about eight minutes. I At 7:11 pm, they spoke for another two minutes. b. The next morning,on or about October 26, 2016, at 8:26 am, Cohen called-Trump and spoke to him for approximately three minutes, At 8:34 am, Cohen called Trump again and connected for a minute and a half. c. At approximately 9:04 a.m.??less than thirty minutes after speaking with Trump? Cohen sent two emails to the person who had incorporated Resolution Consultants and Essential 13 Case 1:18jcr-00602-WHP Document 48-8- Filed 07/18/19 Page 45 of 62 Consultants for him, and stated ?can you send me asap the ?ling receip and then, in the second email, ?for Essential Consultants That person responded with the ?ling receipt two minutes later at 9:06 am. and with the certi?cation of formation 23 minutes later, at 9:27 am. d. Shortly after that, Cohen contacted a particular employee at First Republic (?First Republic Employee?2?) and told him, in sum and substance, that he decided not to open an account in'the name of ?Resolution Consulting? and instead would be opening a real estate consulting company in the. name of ?Essential Consultants.? Cohen told First Republic Employee?2 that he was at Trump Tower, and wanted to go to a First Republic branch across the street to open the account, so First Republic Employee?2 called another employee of First Republic (?First Republic Employee?1?), a preferred banker at that branch, to assist Cohen. At 11:00 am, First Republic I Employee?1 called Cohen. I know from my participation in an interview with First Republic Employee-l, that around the time of the call he went to Cohen?s of?ce in Trump Tower?on the same ?oor as the Trump Organization?land went through account opening questions, including know your customer questions, with Cohen. In response to a series of know-your-customer questions about the purpose of the account?the answers to which First Republic Employee-1 entered into a form??Cohen stated, in sum and substance, that he was opening Essential Consultants as a real estate consulting company to collect fees for investment consulting work, and all of his consulting clients would be domestic individuals based in the United States. Based on my review of records obtained from First Republic, it appears that this account (the ?Essential Consultants Accoun was created at a time between 11:00 am. and 1:00 pm. e. ,At 1:47 Cohen called Davidson and they spoke for approximately two A - minutes. At approximately 1:49 Davidson emailed Cohen wiring instructions for an attorney client trust account at City National Bank. 14 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 46 of 62 f. After the Essential Consultants Account was opened on October 26,. 2016, Cohen transferred $131,000 from a home equity line of credit that Cohen had at First Republic to the Essential Consultants Account. Following the transfer, at. approximately 4:15 pm. on October 26, 2016, First Republic Employee-2?s assistant emailed Cohen at his Trump Organization email address to tell him that the funds had been deposited into the Essential Censultants Account. Cohen forwarded that email to the Cohen Gmail Account and then forwarded it to Davidson. 9? . 1 7 1 Cohen Called Pecker at 6:49 pm. and connected for thirty seconds. At 6:57 pm, Cohen sent Howard a text message, stating: ?Please call me. Important.? Cohen called Howard at 7:00 pm. and connected for about thirty seconds. At 7:06 pm, Cohen called Pecker again and they spoke for nearly thirteen minutes. At 7:24 pm, Howard sent a text message to Cohen that: ?He said he?d call me back in 20 minutes. I told him what you are asking for his [sic] reasonable. I?ll get it sorted.? Approximately an'hour later, at 8:23 pm, Howard told Cohen by text message to ?check your Gmail for email from my private account.? In an email sent at 8:23 pm. by Howard to Cohen and Davidson, with the subject line ?Con?rmation,? Howard stated, ?Thank you both for chatting with me earlier. Con?rming agreement on: - Executed agreement, hand-signed by Keith?s client and returned via overnight or same-day FedEx to Michael, - Change of agreement to re?ect the correct LLC, - Transfer of funds on Thursday AM to be held in escrow until receipt of agreement.? After receiving that email, at approximately 8:27 pm, Cohen asked Howard by text message, ?Can you and David [Pecker] give me a call.? Howard responded: ?David is not around I think.- I?ll call.? At 8:28 pm, Howard called Cohen and they spoke for three minutes. 15 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 47 of.62 22. On October 27, 2016, Cohen made a payment to Davidson of $130,000? with the funds intended for Clifford?for the purpose of securing her ongoing silence with respect to the allegations that she had an extramarital affair with Trump. Speci?cally, based on my review of toll records, bank records, and information obtained pursuant to the iCloud Warrant and Cohen Email Warrants, I have learned the following: a. At 9:47 Cohen sent Davidson an email, stating: ?Keith, kindly con?rm that byuyou in your attorney?s trust account until such time as directed for release by me, in Writing. Additionally, please ensure that all paperwork contains the correct name of Essential Consultants LLC. I thank you in advance for . your assistance and look forward to hearing from you later.? b. At approximately 10:01 according to records provided by First Republic . Bank, Cohen completed paperwork to wire $130,000 from the Essential Consultants Account?-? which had been funded a day prior from Cohen?s home equity line of credit?to the attorney client trust account at City National Bank that Davidson had speci?ed in the wiring instructions he sent. to Cohen. The wire transfer was made shortly thereafter. 0. At 10:02 Davidson responded to Cohen?s email from 9:47 stating: . con?rm that I will work in good faith that no funds shall be disbursed unless until the plaintiff personally signs all necessary settlement paperwork, (the form of which will match the prior agreement). The settlement docs will name the correct corporation, (Essential Consultants LLC). Plaintiff signature will be notarized and returned to you via FedEx. Only after you receive FedEx will I disburse. Fair?? d. At 10:50 First Republic Employee?1 sent Cohen an email con?rming that the payment had been sent and providing him with the wire number. 1 6 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 48 of 62 23. On October 28, 2016, and the days that followed, Cohen ?nalized the transaction with Davids on. Speci?cally, based on my review of toll records, information obtained pursuant to the iCloud Warrant, public sources, and bank records, Iknow the following: a. On?October 28, 2016, at 11:48 am, Cohen spoke to Trump for approximately ?ve 'minutes. Beginning at 1:21 pm, Cohen attempted a series of phone calls to Davidson, Pecker, and HoWard throughout the day, although it appears he may only have connected with Howard. message that ?all is AOK. I should have signed, notarized docs on Monday. You should have them on Tuesday.? Cohen thanked him and said hope we are good.? Davidson responded, assure you. We are very good.? Howard also texted Cohen at 7:08 pm, ?Keith [Davidson] says we are good.? Cohen then responded to Howard and ?Excellent? to Davidson. At approximately 10:30 Cohen spoke to Hicks for three minutes. 0. On October 31, 2016, Cohen called Howard at 8:22 pm. and they spoke for over three minutes. At 8:32 pm, Cohen received text messages from both Howard and Davidson. 1 Howard said: ?You?ll have paperwork tomorrow says Davidson said: ?We are AOK. You will be receiving a package tomorrow.? Cohen responded ?Thank you? to Howard and ?Thanks Keith. Will call you then? to Davidson. From?my involvement in this investigation, I believe - Davidson was referring to a signed nondisclosure agreement when he told Cohen that he would receive a package. d. Based on my review of court ?lings that became public in 2018, I have learned that on or about October 28, 2016, LLC and/or David Dennison? entered into a ?con?dential settlement agreement and mutual release? with ?Peggy Peterson,? pursuant to which ?Peterson? agreed not to disclose certain ?con?dential information pertaining to [Dennison]? in exchange for 17 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 49.0f 62 $130,000. The agreement provided that Would wire the funds to ?Peterson?s? attorney, who would then transfer funds to ?Peterson.? Cohen signed the agreement on behalf of . The agreement stated that the address for which was later referred to in the agreement as ?Essential Consultants, was Cohen?s residence. e. Consistent with the ?con?dential settlement agreement and mutual release,? on or about November 1, 2016, Davidson transferred $96,645 from his attorney client trust account at City National Bank to a bank account in Clifford?s Thewire had the annotation ?net settlemen On the same day, at'approximately 9:48 am. Davidson sent Cohen a text message with a picture of a FedEx'delivery continuation, stating that at approximately 9:09 am. a package shipped by Davidson the previous day had arrived for Cohen at his Trump Organization address. On the same day, at approximately 6:14 Davidson sent Cohen an email with an audio file attached and said ?Give this a lesson [sic] and then call me.? The audio attachment was titled ?Stormy.mp3? and was a ?ve?minute recording of Davidsoninterviewing Clifford about recent public allegations made by an adult ?lm star named Jessica Drake regarding her alleged past affair with Trump; in the recording, Clifford explained the reasons she believed that Drake was not credible. Less than an hour later, at approximately 7:05 Cohen called Trump, but it appears that they did not connect. Cohen then called a telephone number belonging to Kellyanne Conway, who at the time was Trump? 5 campaign manager. They did not connect. At approximately 7:44 however, Cohen received a return call from Conway, which lasted for approximately six minutes. 24.? On November 4, 2016, just three days after the Clifford transaction was completed and just four days before the presidential election, the Wall Street Journal published an article alleging that the National Enquirer had ?Shielded Donald Trump? ?omallegations by. 18 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 50 of 62 Playboy model Karen McDougal that she and Trump had an affair. The article alleged that AMI had. agreed to pay McDougal to bury her story. 'McDougal, like Clifford, had been represented by Davidson. Based on my review of toll records, information obtained pursuant to the Cohen. Email Warrants and iCloud Warrant, and public sources, it appears that Cohen spoke frequently to Davidson, Howard, Pecker, and Hicks around the time of this article?s publication?just days before Election Day?about the importance of preventing the McDougal and Clifford stories from a. Between 4:30 and 8:00 pm. on November 4, Cohen communicated several times with Howard,? Pecker and Davidson. For instance, at approximately 4:49 pm, Cohen sent Howard a text message with a screenshot of an email forwarded to him by another Trump Organization lawyer. The forwarded email was from a Wall Street Journal reporter, and asked for comment from Trump and/or the campaign on the story. Cohen also spoke with Hicks several times, including shortly before and/or after calls with Pecker, Howard and Davidson. Indeed, at approximately 7:33 pm, using two different cellphones subscribed to him, Cohen appearsto have been talking to Davidson and Hicks at the-same time. b. At approximately 8:51 pm, Cohen sent Howard a message, stating: ?She?s being really difficult with giving Keith a statement. Basically went into hiding and unreachable.? One . minute later, Howard responded: ?I?ll ask him again. We just need her to disappear.? Cohen responded, ?She definitely disappearedbut refuses to give a statement and Keith cannot push her.? At approximately 8 :55 pm, Howard responded to Cohen?s text: ?Let?s let the dust settle. We don?t want to push her over the edge. She?s on side at present and we have a solid position?and a plausible position that she is rightfully employed as a columnist.? Based on my involvement in this investigation, I believe Cohen and Howard were referring to Karen McDougal when they were 19 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 51 of'62 discussing ?she? and ?her.? Additionally, I believe Howard?s statement that ?we have . . . a plausible position that she is rightfully employed as a columnis was a reference to the fact that AMI had given McDougal payments for her role as a purported columnist for the company. - c. At approximately 8:58 pm. on November 4, 2016, Howard attempted to reassure Cohen about the effect of the forthcoming Wall Street Journal article, texting, think it?ll be ok pal. Ithink it?ll fade into the distance.? Cohen responded, ?He?s pissed.? Howard wrote back, Keith is pissed. Not much we can do.? Based on my involvement in this investigation, I believe Cohen was referring to Trump when he stated ?he?s pissed.? Cohen asked Howard at approximately 9:00 pm. how the Wall Street Journal could publish its article if ?everyonedenies.? Howard responded, ?Because there is the payment from AMI. It looks suspicious at best.? At approximately 9:03 pm, Hicks called Cohen and they spoke for two minutes. At approximately 9:11 pm, Cohen called Howard and spoke to him for five minutes. At approximately 9:15 pm, Hicks called Cohen and they spoke for nearly seven minutes. Again, Cohen used different phones for these two calls, such that he appears to have been on both calls for about a minute of overlap. At approximately 9:32 pm, Cohen texted Pecker, ?The boss just tried calling you. Are you free?? A minute later, Cohen texted HoWard, ?Is there a way to find David quickly?? e. At approximately 9:50 pm, the Wall Street Journal article Was published online. Howard and Hicks both sent web links for the article to Cohen. Over the next half hour, Cohen? and Howard exchanged several text- messages commenting on how the story Came across. The next morning on November 5, 2016, at approximately 7:35 am, Cohen texted Hicks, ?So far I see only 6 stories. Getting little to no traction.? - Hicks responded, ?Same. Keep prayingll It?s 20 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 52 of 62 working!?- Cohen wrote back, ?Even CNN not talking about it. No one believes it and if necessary, I have a statement by Storm denying everything and contradicting the other porn stars statement. I wouldn?t use it now or even discuss with him as no one is talking about this or cares!? Based on my involvement in this investigation, I'believe Cohen was referring to the above- referenced recorded audio statement by Clifford that he obtained from Davidson, and was stating that such a statement could be used to in?uence potential negative media relating to Trump, but that morning, Pecker spoke to Tlump. 25. On or about November 2016, Trump won the election for President of . the United States. 26. On or about January 12, 2018, the Wall Street Journal first reported that Cohen arranged a payment to Clifford. On oriabout January 22, 2018, Common Cause, a government watchdog group, filed a complaint with the Federal Election Commission, alleging that Cohen had violated campaign finance laws by making the payment to Clifford. Based on my review public sources following that report, as well as emails obtained pursuant to the Cohen Email Warrants, I have learned the following: a. On or about January 23, 2018, the day after Common Cause ?led its complaint,- Cohen began emailing himself drafts of statements describing his payment to Clifford. Additionally, on January 23, 2018, Cohen emailed the following draft of that statement to an individual who appears to be writing a book on Cohen?s behalf: In October 2016, I was contacted by counsel for Ms. Clifford stating that news outlets, including ABC news, were pursuing the 2011 story of an alleged affair between Mr. Trump and Ms. Clifford. Despite the fact that both parties had already" denied the allegation, as Mr. Trump?s longtime special counsel and protector, I took it upon myself to match the offer and 21 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 53 of 62 keep the story from breaking. I knew the allegation to be false, but I am also a realist who understands that just because something is false doesn?t mean that it doesn?t create harm and damage. I could not allow this to occur. I negotiated a non-disclosure agreement with Ms. Clifford?s counsel and tendered the funds. I did this through my Delaware LLC and transferred persDnal funds to cover the agreement. I was not reimbursed any monies from Mr. Trump, the Trump Organization, any third party or the Presidential campaign. At no point did I ever advise Mr. Trump of my communications or actions regarding this agreement As outlandish and unusual as this may appear, the Trumps have been like family to me for over a decade It?s what you do for family. ww(Empha31s added. )__Based onmy involvement in this investigation I believe that the above email is an acknowledgement that the allegation of the affair had existed for some time 20H story. . but that Cohen was motivated to ?keep the story from breaking? again in October 2016. b. On or about February 13, 2018, Cohen said in a statement to The New York Times that ?Neither the Trump Organization nor the Trump campaign was a party toithe transaction with Ms. Clifford. The payment to Ms. Clifford was lawful, and was not a campaign contribution or a campaign expenditure by anyone.? Cohen declined to answer follow-up questions including . whether Trump had been aware of the payment, why Cohen made the payment, or whether similar payments had been made to other people. i I c. On or about February 14, 2018, Cohen was asked by The New York imesz whether Trump had reimbursed him, whether he and Trump had made any arrangement at the time of the payment, or whether he had made payments to other women. Cohen stated in response, can?t get into any of tha On or about February 14, 2018, Cohen also stated to The Washington Post that: ?In a private transaction in 2016, I used my own personal funds to facilitate a payment of $130,000 to Ms. Stephanie Clifford. "Neither the Trump Organization nor the Trump campaign was a party to the transaction with Ms. Clifford, and neither reimbursed me for the payment, either directly or indirectly.? 22 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 54 of 62 d. On or about March 9, 2018, Coheli stated to ABC News that ?the funds were taken from myhome equity line and transferred internally to my LLC account in the same bank.? 27. For the foregoing reasons, there is probable cause to believe that Cohen committed the Subject Offense by making an in?kind contribution to Trump or the Trump campaign in the form of a $130,000 payment to Clifford onlthe- election. Indeed, While Cohen denies having given an unlawful contribution, in his own statements Cohen has admitted that he weeks before the election, as Trump was facing negative media allegations about his behavior toward women, even though allegations of an affair between Trump and Clifford existed since 201 1. 28. I have reviewed records maintained by from which I have learned, in substance and in part, that the Target Cellular Devices are stillactive. Based on my training and experience, my familiarity with this investigation, and the information set forth above, I therefore believe that the requested data will lead to evidence of the Subject Offense. Speci?cally, information will lead to'the present location of the Target Cellular Devices; law enforcement may then obtain evidence from the Target Cellular Devices, by subpoena or search warrant, including but not limited to contact lists containing contact information for participants in the illegal campaign contribution scheme and well as text messages between these participants. MANNER OF EXECUTION 29. . In my training and experience, I have learned that cellular phones and Other cellular devices communicate wirelessly across a network of cellular infrastructure, including towers that route and connect individual cOmmunications. When sending or receiving a communication, a cellular device broadcasts certain cellular and wi? signals to the cellular tower 23 Case DoCument 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 55 of 62 that is routing its communication. These cellular and wi? signals include a cellular device?s unique identi?ers. 30. To facilitate execution of this warrant to determine the location of the Target Cellular Devices, law enforcement may use an investigative device or devices capable of broadcasting cellular and wi? signals that will be received by the Target Cellular Devices or receiving cellular and wi? signals from nearby cellular devices, including the Target Cellular Devices. Such a device may function in some respects like a cellular tower, except that it will not be connected to the cellular network and cannot be used by a cell phone to communicate with others. The device may send a signal to the Target Cellular Devices and nearby cellular. devices. and thereby prompt them to send cellular and wi? signals that include the unique identi?er of the device. Law enforcement may monitor the cellular and wi? signals broadcast by the Target Cellular Devices for non?content signal information and use that information to determine the Target Cellular Devices? location, even if it is located inside a house, apartment, or other building. The device will not interceptthe contents of the Target Cellular Devices" communications, such as telephone calls, text messages, and other electronic communications. Further, the device will not collect any other data stored on the Target Cellular Devices, including e-mails, text messages, contact lists, images, or Global Positioning System (GPS) data. 31. The investigative device may interrupt cellular service of phgnes- or other cellular devices within its immediate vicinity. Any service disruption to non-target devices will be brief and temporary, and all operations will attempt to limit the interference with such devices. In order to connect with the Target Cellular Devices, the device may brie?y exchange cellular and wi? signals with all phones or other cellular devices in its vicinity to determine whether those devices? unique identi?ers match the identi?ers of the Target Cellular Devices. These cellular 24 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 56 of 62 and Wi? signals may include cell phone identi?ers. The device will not complete a connection with cellular devices determined not to be the Target Cellular Devices, and law enforcement will limit collection-of information from devices other than the Target CellularDevices. To the extent that any information from a cellular device other than the~Target Cellular Devices is collected by the law enforcement device, law enforcement will delete that information, and law enforcement Will make no investigative uSe of it absent further order of the court, other than distinguishing the AUTHORIZATION REQUEST 32. Based on the foregoing, I reduest that the Court issue the proposed. search warrant, pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41. The proposed warrant also will function as a pen register order under 18 U.S.C. 3123.? 33. I further request, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3103a(b) and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure that the Court authorize the of?cer executing the warrant to delay notice until 30 days from the end of the period of authorized surveillance. This delay is justi?ed because there is reasonable cause to believe that providing immediate noti?cation of the warrant may have an adverse result, as de?ned in 18 U.S.C. 2705. Providing immediate notice to the subscriber or user of the Target Cellular Devices would seriously jeopardize the ongoing investigation, as such a disclosure would give that person an opportunity to destroy evidence,? change patterns of behavior, and notify confederates. See 18 U.S.C. 3103a(b)(l). There is reasonable necessity for the use of the technique described above, for the reasons set forth above. See 18 U.S.C. ?3103a(b)(2). 25 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 57 of 62 34. . I further request that the Court authorize execution of the warrant at any time of day or night, owing?to the potential need to locate the Target Cellular Devices outside of daytime hours. 35. I further request that the Court order that all papers in support of this application, including the af?davit and search warrant, be sealed until further order of the Court. These documents discuss an ongoing criminal investigation that is neither public nor known to all _o_f._the targets. of the investigation. Accordingly, is good cause to seal these documents because their premature disclosure may seriously jeopardize that investigation. 36. A search warrant may not be legally necessary to compel the investigative technique described herein. Nevertheless, I hereby submit this warrant application out of an abundance of caution. Respectfully submitted, Federal Bureau ot investlgatlon Subscribed and sworn to before me On: AWL. Klan?? pmum UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 26 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 58 of 62 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK IN THE MATTER OF THE USE OF A CELL- SITE SIMULATOR TO LOCATE THE Case No. CELLULAR DEVICES ASSIGNED CALL NUMBERS Filed Under Seal WARRANT AND ORDER OF AUTHORIZATION Special Agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. and Other Authorized, Pei?suffnei I I. Findings The Court hereby ?nds: 1. Upon an af?davit of Special Agent -of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (?Af?davit?) and pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41, there is probable cause to believe that violations of 52 U.S.C. 301 and 30109(d)(l)(A)(1) (illegal campaign contributions) (the ?Subject Offense?) have been committed by Michael Cohen (the ?Target Subject?), and that the Target Subject uses cellular devices assigned call numbers ?the (?Target Cellular Devices?), which are described in Attachment A. Further, there is probable cause to believe that the location of the Target Cellular Device will constitute evidence of the Subject Offense. Speci?cally, there is probablecause to believe that the location of the Target Cellular Devices will constitute evidence of those criminal violations, including leading to the location of the Target Cellular Devices, on which there is . probable cause to believe evidence of these offenses eXist, as detailed below. 2. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3123(b)(1), the Government has certi?ed that the pen register information for the Target Cellular Devices is relevant to an ongoing investigation by the Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 59 of 62 Investigating Agency of the Target Subject and others unknown in connection with suspected violations of the Subject Offense. NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 41, 18 U.S.C. 3121 et seq, and 18 U.S.C. 3103a, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED: II. Warrant and Order of Authorization 3. - Warrant. Law enforcement agents and other authorized law enforcement which is described in Attachment B, to the determine the lo cation of the Target Cellular Devices, which are described in Attachment A. I 4. - Data Collection and Retention. In the course of employing the technique, law enforcement agents and other authorized law enforcement officials must make reasonable efforts to limit interference with cellular devices other than the Target Cellular Devices, must delete information collected from cellular devices other than the Target Cellular Devices once the Target Cellular Devices is located, and are prohibited from using data acquired beyond that necessary to locate the Target Cellular Devices, absent further order of the Court. 5. Delayed Notice. I Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 3103a(b) and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41tf)(3), the Court authorizes the officer executing the warrant to delay in notice until WW 30 days there is. reasonable cause to believe that providing immediate notification of the warrant may have an adverse result, as defined in .18 U.S.C. 2705. Providing immediate notice to the subscriber or user of the Target Cellular Devices would seriously jeopardize the ongoing investigation, as such a disclosure would give that person an opportunity to destroy evidence, change patterns of behavior, and notify confederates. See 18 U.S.C. 3103a(b)(1). There is reasonable necessity 2 Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page the technique described above,'for the reasons set forth above. See 18 U.S.C. 3103a(b)(2). 6. Time of Execution. The Court authorizes execution of this Warrant at any time of day or night, ovving to the potential need to locate the Target Cellular Devices outside of daytime hours. . 7. Sealing, This Warrant and Order, and the supporting Agent Af?davit, shall be .o ftheCourtzpenceptithatitheiGo this Court: provide copies of the Warrant and Order or the supporting Application and Agent Af?davit as need be to personnel assisting the Covernrhent in the investigation and prosecution of this'matter; and disclose these materials as necessary to comply with discovery and disclosure obligations in any prosecutions related to this matter. Dated: New York, New York Date Issued Time Issued 8/ HENEH Pant/mm) UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE IUDGE Southern District of New York Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 61 of 62 ATTACHMENT A This warrant authorizes the use of the electronic investigative technique described in Attachment to identify the location of the cellular devices assigned phone numbers ?Whose wireless provider is and Whose listed subscriber is Michael Cohen. Case Document 48-8 Filed 07/18/19 Page 62 of 62 ATTACHMENT . Pursuant to an investigation of Michael Cohen for a violation of 52 U.S.C. 30ll6(a)(l)(A) and 30109(d)(1)(A)(1) (illegal campaign contributions) (the ?Subject Offense?), this Warrant authorizes the of?cers to whom it is directed to determine the location of the cellular devices identi?ed in Attachinent A. by collecting and examining: 1. radio cellular and wi? signals emitted by the target. cellular device for-the purpose of individual communications; and 2. radio cellular and Wi? signals emitted by the target cellular device in response to radio cellular and Wi? signals sent to the cellular device by the of?cers; for a period of thirty days, during all times of day and night. This virarrant does not authorize the interception of any telephone calls, text messages, other electronic communications, and this Iwarrant prohibits the seizure of any tangible property. The Court ?nds reasonable necessity for the use of the technique authorized above.? See 18 U.S.C. 3103a(b)(2).