Michael Cohen claims Letitia James and Alvin Bragg 'pressured' him to target Trump
WASHINGTON, DC: Michael Cohen, the former attorney and legal fixer for President Donald Trump, has publicly claimed that he was “coerced” by New York Attorney General Letitia James and Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg to turn against his one‑time boss.
In a Substack post dated January 16, 2026, Cohen wrote that prosecutors sought testimony from him that fit a predetermined narrative aimed at securing convictions against Trump. His accusations come amid ongoing discussions over Trump’s civil fraud and “hush money” convictions.
Michael Cohen’s claims against Letitia James and Alvin Bragg
In his post, Cohen alleged that from the very start of his interactions with prosecutors, both James’ office and the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office under Bragg wanted to influence him to tailor his testimony in a way that would help secure legal victories against Trump.
He claimed, “Letitia James and Alvin Bragg may not share the same office or political calendar, but they share the same playbook.”
Cohen then wrote that he “felt pressured and coerced to only provide information and testimony that would satisfy the government’s desire to build the cases against and secure a judgment and convictions against President Trump.”
He also said this was evident both prior to and during the trials. Cohan described further that when his responses were not adequate to support the prosecution’s case, he was subjected to leading questions meant to elicit answers that fit the narrative prosecutors were seeking.
Specifically in the case brought by the New York attorney general, Cohen stated that James’ team “made clear that the testimony they wanted from me was testimony that would go after President Trump.”
Cohen suggested his cooperation was influenced by hopes for leniency after serving more than a year in prison for tax evasion, bank fraud, and lying to Congress.
Michael Cohen’s statement on Trump and the legal aftermath
Cohen’s statements come as Trump’s legal teams are actively working to appeal and overturn both his civil fraud conviction, which included a $454 million judgment, and his criminal conviction in the “hush money” case.
His post framed his decision to speak out now as a response to what he sees as dangerous prosecutorial tactics that blur the line between justice and politics.
Cohen wrote that he was motivated to speak out because he had “witnessed firsthand the damage done when prosecutors pick their target first and then seek evidence to fit a predetermined narrative.”
He warned that when political motives merge with prosecution, the result is eroded public trust in the justice system. “Justice must be more than effective; it must be credible,” he wrote.
Cohen also cautioned that the credibility of the legal system suffers when the pursuit of convictions appears politically driven rather than based on impartial justice.
