President Donald Trump is demanding New York prosecutors drop all remaining cases against him after his former attorney Michael Cohen publicly claimed he was pressured and coerced into providing false testimony, a reversal that could reshape the legal landscape around Trump's only criminal conviction.
Trump posted on Truth Social on September 4, 2026, thanking Cohen for what he called an act of "Wisdom and Courage" and calling for the immediate termination of cases brought by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg and New York Attorney General Letitia James. The post came months after Cohen published a Substack essay in January titled "When Politics Blind Justice," in which he alleged that prosecutors from both offices steered his testimony to fit a predetermined narrative aimed at convicting Trump.
Cohen served as the prosecution's central witness in two high-profile New York cases against Trump, the 2024 criminal trial in which a jury found Trump guilty of 34 counts of falsifying business records, and the 2023 civil fraud case brought by James in which Trump was found liable for inflating the value of his assets. In both proceedings, Cohen's testimony formed the backbone of the government's case. Now, by his own account, that testimony was the product of coercion.
In his Substack essay, Cohen laid out a detailed account of what he described as systematic pressure from prosecutors in both offices. Fox News reported that Cohen accused both Bragg and James of using the cases to elevate their own careers, seeking credit for "taking down Trump."
Cohen wrote that prosecutors showed little interest in testimony that did not advance their case and frequently relied on leading questions to shape his responses when his answers fell short of what they wanted to hear.
"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."
That passage, from Cohen's own Substack post, is the statement Trump now points to as a full recantation. Cohen went further in the essay, accusing both prosecutors of crossing a line between law enforcement and political ambition.
As the Washington Examiner reported, Cohen alleged that prosecutors used inappropriate leading questions when his testimony proved insufficient to support their narrative. He wrote that "they blurred the line between justice and politics; and in that blur, the credibility of both suffered."
Those allegations land against a backdrop of growing scrutiny of James's office. A deleted email reportedly exposed an alleged internal order to target Trump inside the attorney general's office, a claim that, if substantiated, would reinforce Cohen's account of a prosecution driven by political objectives rather than neutral fact-finding.
Trump's post, published shortly after midnight, treated Cohen's claims as dispositive. He described Cohen as "the Prosecution's Star Witness and, in actuality, only Witness" in both the Bragg and James cases and argued that the recantation should end the legal proceedings entirely.
"When a Star Witness totally recants, and in every way reveals that he was pressured and coerced to give testimony, and when the Prosecutor admits that this Witness was the single reason that the case was brought, there was no other, how can that Case not be immediately dismissed?"
Trump also called for criminal accountability for the prosecutors involved, writing that "their Star Witness said everything they did was WRONG and UNLAWFUL." He praised Cohen directly, saying his decision to come forward was "a Great Credit to the Justice System in New York City and State."
The praise marked a striking turn in the relationship between Trump and his former personal attorney. Cohen had cooperated extensively with prosecutors and testified publicly against Trump in both proceedings. His reversal now puts him at odds with the same offices he once helped build cases for.
Separately, federal prosecutors have met with a whistleblower who claims James's office directed staff to target Trump, a development that adds another layer to questions about whether the investigations were conducted in good faith.
Cohen's recantation did not arrive in a legal vacuum. Trump's legal team has been waging an aggressive appellate campaign on multiple fronts. Newsmax reported that Trump's attorneys filed a 119-page appeal with the New York State Court of Appeals in April, seeking to overturn remaining findings in the civil fraud case. The roughly $500 million penalty in that case had already been eliminated, but an underlying fraud determination still stood.
On the criminal side, a federal appeals court revived Trump's effort to undo his May 2024 conviction on 34 counts of falsifying business records. That court ordered a lower court to reconsider whether the case belongs in state court or should be moved to federal court, a procedural question with enormous consequences for the conviction's survival.
Trump's legal team has been challenging James in New York's highest court, arguing the civil fraud case was unprecedented and politically motivated. The combination of Cohen's recantation and the ongoing appellate battles gives Trump's lawyers new ammunition to argue that the prosecutions were fundamentally flawed from the start.
The criminal case centered on payments Cohen made to adult actress Stormy Daniels during the 2016 presidential election. Prosecutors argued Trump falsified business records by listing the reimbursement to Cohen as a legal expense. Cohen's testimony was essential to establishing Trump's knowledge and intent, without it, the factual foundation of the prosecution narrows considerably.
Just The News noted that Trump's legal path to formally vacating the conviction remains unclear, even with Cohen's reversal. A witness recanting testimony in a Substack essay is not the same as a formal legal proceeding to withdraw sworn statements, and neither Bragg nor James has publicly responded to Cohen's claims or Trump's demand for dismissal.
That silence is itself notable. When the prosecution's only significant witness says he was coerced, the offices that built their cases on his word owe the public an explanation. So far, none has come.
The broader pattern raises questions that extend beyond any single case. A Manhattan federal judge previously rejected Trump's bid to move the hush money conviction to federal court, a decision now under renewed review after the appeals court intervened. Each new development, Cohen's reversal, the whistleblower allegations, the appellate victories, chips away at the foundation these prosecutions were built on.
Cohen's credibility has been questioned from every direction for years. He pleaded guilty to federal charges, cooperated with prosecutors, testified against Trump with apparent enthusiasm, and built a media career around his role as Trump's chief accuser. His reversal invites skepticism about which version of Michael Cohen is telling the truth, the one who testified under oath, or the one now writing on Substack.
But the credibility question cuts harder against the prosecutors than against Cohen. Bragg and James chose to build their cases around a witness whose reliability was always in doubt. They staked historic prosecutions, cases they promoted publicly and used to advance their political profiles, on a man they knew had lied before. If Cohen is now lying about being coerced, it confirms he is an unreliable witness whose testimony should never have anchored a criminal conviction. If he is telling the truth, then two of New York's most powerful law enforcement officials pressured a witness to secure a politically useful outcome.
Either way, the cases look worse today than they did before Cohen spoke up. And the prosecutors who brought them have yet to say a word in their own defense.
When the star witness says the whole thing was rigged, the people who ran the show don't get to stay quiet and hope everyone moves on.
