Michael Cohen Reconciles With Trump 2 Years After Helping Secure Conviction

Q: What does Michael Cohen's return to the President's inner circle signal about the future of their relationship?

Michael Cohen’s reentry signals a cautious, pragmatic thaw rather than a full restoration of the old Trump-Cohen partnership. The reporting shows the relationship has moved from open hostility to regular contact: an initial meeting at Bedminster in 2025, a longer follow-up in 2026, outreach to Trump allies, and Cohen’s stated hope for a White House visit. Cohen now describes the relationship as “cordial and growing,” which suggests both sides see value in keeping the channel open. What appears to be driving the change is not a return to Cohen’s former role as Trump’s personal “fixer,” but a convergence of interests. Cohen has publicly criticized the prosecutors involved in the New York case and said he felt pressured in ways he now regrets. Trump, in turn, appears to have responded positively to Cohen’s shift and to the backlash Cohen says he faced. That creates a basis for cooperation built on shared grievances and mutual utility. Still, the available facts do not show that Cohen has formally rejoined Trump’s inner circle in the way he once occupied it. There is no confirmed official role, and the reconciliation remains recent and developing. The most likely outlook is a limited but meaningful rapprochement: Cohen becomes less of an adversary, more of a sympathetic voice, and potentially a useful ally in public and private, while Trump benefits from neutralizing a former critic. Whether that deepens into real trust will depend on sustained contact and political usefulness.

Q: With a special DOJ fund gone, what compensation options remain for those claiming they were unfairly targeted?

With the DOJ’s proposed $1.776 billion “anti-weaponization fund” canceled, the main remaining path to compensation is the federal Judgment Fund, but only through ordinary legal channels such as lawsuits, settlements, or final court judgments against the United States. That means people who say they were unfairly targeted generally must bring a claim under existing law, most notably the Federal Tort Claims Act or other applicable causes of action. If they win a judgment or reach a lawful settlement, payment can be made from the Judgment Fund, a long-standing permanent appropriation that the Justice Department says has always been available. There are narrower alternatives, but they are limited. DOJ remission or restoration programs can return forfeited assets to crime victims, though that applies only in cases tied to forfeiture and is not a broad remedy for claims of unfair targeting. Private legal action remains available, and some claimants are already pursuing it, including Jan. 6 defendants who have filed FTCA claims and related lawsuits. For people in Michael Cohen’s position, the practical effect is that there is no longer a dedicated administrative fund designed specifically to hear and pay “weaponization” claims outside normal litigation. Any compensation effort now likely depends on proving a legal claim in court or negotiating a settlement with the government, rather than applying to a special DOJ program.

3 articles · Updated · The New York Times · Jul 12

A second, longer meeting this year deepened Michael Cohen’s effort to repair ties with Donald Trump after a yearslong rupture over legal battles and public attacks.
That push began with a brief but significant conversation last summer at Trump’s Bedminster golf club, followed by calls to some of the president’s closest allies.
Cohen’s public posture has shifted too: 2 years after serving as the star witness in Trump’s New York criminal trial, he has attacked the prosecutors whose case helped win the falsifying-records conviction.
In a Saturday interview, Cohen said the relationship had improved in recent months after Trump noticed liberal backlash to Cohen’s criticism of those prosecutors.