Michael Cohen’s Substack post on ‘coerced’ anti-Trump testimony triggers MeidasTouch Network exit

WASHINGTON, DC: The progressive media outlet MeidasTouch Network has officially cut ties with Michael Cohen after he claimed that prosecutors pressured him to give specific testimony against President Trump on the "New York hush money conviction."

The announcement ends a long-standing partnership that fueled some of the outlet's most popular anti-MAGA programming.

MeidasTouch ends partnership with Michael Cohen

MeidasTouch, a major media company with more than 5.8 million YouTube subscribers, announced on Saturday, January 17, on X that it will no longer produce or air Cohen’s shows, stating, “Programming note: MeidasTouch Network will no longer by producing or carrying the shows Political Beatdown or Mea Culpa with Michael Cohen.”

The split appeared to happen abruptly, as Cohen had co-hosted a popular episode with the company’s founder just two days earlier.

Even after the announcement, Cohen released a new podcast episode that still featured the MeidasTouch logo, signaling how quickly the split between the two parties unfolded.

Michael Cohen claims prosecutors coerced him to testify against Trump

The fallout began after Cohen wrote on Substack that he felt forced by investigators to provide damaging information during Trump’s recent trials.

Cohen was a “key witness” in cases involving Trump’s business finances and the “hush money” trial, but he now says the process was not fair.

He explained, “From the time I first began meeting with lawyers from the Manhattan DA’s Office and the New York Attorney General’s Office in connection with their investigations of President Trump, and through the trials themselves, I 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.”

Michael Cohen slams legal system for building biased narratives

Cohen clarified that his revelation was not meant to “defend Donald Trump, nor to relitigate his conduct,” but rather to expose what he views as a “predetermined narrative” by the government.

He claimed that “it was clear they were interested only in testimony from me that would enable them to convict President Trump. When my testimony was insufficient for a point the prosecution sought to make, prosecutors frequently asked inappropriate leading questions to elicit answers that supported their narrative.”

He also explained, “You may reasonably ask why I am speaking out now. The answer is simple. I have witnessed firsthand the damage done when prosecutors pick their target first and then seek evidence to fit a predetermined narrative.”

While President Trump called the situation a “SET UP,” Cohen insisted that his goal was simply to warn others about the legal system.