Michael Cohen Says He’s “Never” Been to Prague. He Told Me a Different Story.

An alleged meeting in the city between Trump’s lawyer and Russian officials is an ongoing mystery.

Wes Bruer/ZUMA

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Once again, the Michael-Cohen-in-Prague allegation is back in the news, and I found a small piece of evidence pertaining to this mystery.

The story began with the Steele memosā€”those reports filled with allegations (salacious and non-salacious) about contacts between Russians and Donald Trump and a yearslong Moscow effort to cultivate and co-opt Trump. In the October 19, 2016, report Christopher Steele sent to Fusion GPS, the corporate research firm that had retained him for a Democratic-funded project, the former British counterintelligence official, wrote:

[A] Kremlin insider highlighted the importance of Republican presidential candidate Donald TRUMP’s lawyer, Michael COHEN, in the ongoing secret liaison relationship between the New York tycoon’s campaign and the Russian leadership. COHEN’s role had grown following the departure of Paul MANAFORT as TRUMP’s campaign manager in August 2016. 

This report claimed that Cohen, Trump’s well-known fixer, had secretly met with Russian officials in an EU country that August. The next day, Steele sent Fusion GPS a new memo noting this Kremlin insider source had said the supposed Cohen meeting had taken place in Prague.

Ever since the Steele memos became public in January 2017ā€”when BuzzFeed posted the documentsā€”Cohen has steadfastly denied participating in any such meeting. Last week, when McClatchy reported that special counsel Robert Mueller has evidence that Cohen did secretly travel to Prague in the summer of 2016ā€”a report no other media outlet has yet confirmedā€”Cohen revived his denial. He tweeted, “Bad reporting, bad information and bad story by same reporter Peter Stone @McClatchyDC. No matter how many times or ways they write it, I have never been to Prague. I was in LA with my son. Proven!”

What was interesting (at least to me) was Cohen’s claim that he had neverā€”never everā€”been to Prague. 

I was one of the first reporters to see the Steele memosā€”and the first to report their existence in a piece I published on October 31, eight days before the 2016 election. In that article, I did not reveal the sordid but unconfirmed allegations about you-know-what. But I noted two key points: that the memos raised the disturbing possibilities that Putin’s regime was both collaborating with and penetrating Trump’s circle, while collecting possible blackmail information on Trump, and that the FBI was investigating the material in Steele’s memos. 

In the weeks after the election, the details in Steele’s dispatches remained secret, and I spent weeks trying to determine if any of the allegations could be substantiated. The claim that Cohen met secretly with Russians seemed to be one of the tales that might be confirmable. I took a stab at that. While pursuing that angle, I called Cohen. He insisted that there had been no trip to Prague and that he had met with no Russians during the campaign. 

This week I reviewed my notes from that phone call. Here’s the direct quote from Cohen: “I haven’t been to Prague in 14 years. I was in Prague for one afternoon 14 years ago.”

What’s notable? In that conversation, Cohen acknowledged he had once been to Pragueā€”but a long time ago. In his recent denial, Cohen, whose home and office were raided last week by FBI agents seeking records related to the Stormy Daniels case and other matters (including taxi medallions), asserted he had “never” been to Prague. How significant is this discrepancy? There is no telling. But it is an inconsistency. Cohen’s lead lawyer could not be reached for a comment. 

This discrepancy mirrors one that recently emerged related to Trump’s 2013 visit to Moscow, when he presided over the Miss Universe pageant he then co-owned. That was the infamous trip mentioned in the Steele memos as the time when Trump cavorted with prostitutes in his hotel room. (Steele also reported that Trump engaged in other lurid activity during other trips to Russia.) 

In his interview with ABC News’ George Stephanopoulos, former FBI Director James Comey recounted a phone call he had with Trump, after BuzzFeed posted the Steele memos in mid-January 2017. As Comey put it:

[Trump] launched into an explanation as to how I should know that wasn’t true and that he remembered now, from talking to friends who had been with him, that he’d never stayed overnight at the hotel, he’d just changed clothes there and went to the Miss Universe pageant.

And in a memo Comey wrote following a January 28, 2017, meeting with Trumpā€”which was leaked on Thursday nightā€”Comey noted that Trump had told him he had “spoken to people who had been on the Miss Universe trip with him and they had reminded him that he didn’t stay over night in Russia for that.”

Yet Trump did indeed stay in the hotel that night. In our new book, Russian Roulette: The Inside Story of Putin’s War on America and the Election of Donald Trump, Michael Isikoff and I detail Trump’s itinerary in Moscow during that visit, which lasted two days and one night. In fact, Trump’s longtime bodyguard Keith Schiller has told congressional investigators that he escorted Trump to his hotel room that particular night. There is no doubt Trump was in the hotel that evening. Yet he told Comey he wasn’t? That seems odd. Especially for the man who says he has “one of the great memories of all time.”

Back to Michael Cohen and Prague. This week, Cohen dropped the defamation lawsuits he had filed against Fusion GPS and BuzzFeed that stemmed from the publication of the Steele memos and the Prague allegation. It may well be that Cohen was up to his neck in legal woes and could not, as one of his attorneys claimed, manage these lawsuits. But Cohen’s abandonment of this action means that the legal teams for Fusion GPS and BuzzFeed will no longer have the opportunity in the discovery phase to demand information from Cohen regarding his whereabouts and contacts during the 2016 campaign. For now, Cohen’s denial still rests solely on his say-so. 

None of this means that either the Prague or prostitutes allegation is true. But why canā€™t Cohen and Trump get their respective stories straight?

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate