Top Democrat Wants Answers on “Anomalies” in Trump’s Payments to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal

The payments appear to have been far greater than the president stated on his financial disclosure.

Michael Cohen, in his capacity as Donald Trump's personal lawyer, funneled payments to two women who claimed they had affairs with the president.Yana Paskova/Getty Images

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

A senior Democrat in Congress is requesting documents related to payments President Donald Trump made before the election to silence women with whom he was accused of having affairs—and asking for answers about what appears to be inaccurate information on the president’s financial disclosures.

Rep. Elijah Cummings (D-Md.), the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, requested the documents on Wednesday from White House Counsel Don McGahn and Trump Organization official George Sorial. The payments to pornographic film actress Stephanie Clifford, known as Stormy Daniels, and former Playboy Playmate Karen McDougal were funneled through the president’s then-personal lawyer Michael Cohen, who admitted in federal court last month to breaking campaign finance law at Trump’s direction. 

“Mr. Cohen’s testimony—and documents obtained by the Department of Justice—reveal that these payments were far greater than previously reported and far higher than President Trump listed in his financial disclosure forms pursuant to federal law,” Cummings wrote. “These payments include a number of increases, bonuses, and anomalies that raise even more questions about the nature and scope of the services President Trump obtained from Mr. Cohen.” 

Cummings’ request raised a number of questions for McGahn and Sorial, including why Trump has not amended his financial disclosure form to note the higher payment to Cohen. The form Trump filed in May listed a payment to Cohen of between $100,001 and $250,000. But subsequent revelations suggest the actual payment was $420,000.

Unless the Democrats retake control of the House next year, Cummings will likely not see his questions answered expeditiously, if at all. Only committee leaders have subpoena power, and Oversight Committee chairman Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.) has denied previous requests from Democrats on the committee to probe Cohen’s payments and the various, often contradictory ways Trump has characterized his knowledge of them. “Chairman Gowdy never responded to these requests, and the Committee took no action, requested no documents, conducted no interviews, obtained no briefings, and held no hearings,” Cummings wrote. 

House Republicans have drawn sharp criticism from their Democratic colleagues—and even some GOP staffers—for focusing on misconduct by Justice Department officials in lieu of a bipartisan probe into Trump’s personal conduct and finances. Kris Kolesnik, who spent nearly two decades as senior counselor and director of investigations for Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), wrote in an op-ed in the Hill this week that he was “horrified by the assault from Republicans on oversight norms.” He continued, “What Republicans have wrought is downright destruction. If Democrats re-take either chamber of Congress in November, they are obligated to resuscitate that function Republicans have allowed to atrophy in service to their president.” (Republicans are reportedly “getting ready for hell” once Democrats take control of the House, as is widely predicted, according to a recent Axios report.)

Federal investigators, already under near-daily assault by the president, said Cohen sought more than $180,000 from the Trump Organization as reimbursement for his payments to McDougal and Clifford. Executives from Trump’s company “grossed up” his request to $360,000 and tacked on a $60,000 bonus, totaling $420,000. This figure is nearly $200,000 greater than the highest amount Trump could have given Cohen according to the president’s financial disclosure form.

Trump, who has denied having affairs with either woman, has given shifting explanations for the payments. He first denied he knew about the payments? before acknowledging in a series of tweets that Cohen had “received a monthly retainer” to set up a non-disclosure agreement with Clifford. Investigators determined that Cohen had made the payments in an effort to bury potential negative press about Trump before the election, but the president maintained late last month that the payments were not campaign finance violations because they “came from me.” 

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 can’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 won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—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 can’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 won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—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