Cohen’s lawyers also questioned how the person who compiled the report, lawyer Michael Avenatti, obtained the information.
“Mr. Avenatti has published some information which appears to be coming from Mr. Cohen’s actual bank records, in addition to Mr. Cohen has no reason to believe which Mr. Avenatti is usually in lawful possession of these records,” the filing said.
Avenatti, who represents Stormy Daniels, the adult film star suing Cohen in addition to the president to void a nondisclosure agreement barring her coming from discussing an alleged affair with Trump, said on Twitter which the objections to his report were “baseless, improper in addition to sanctionable.”
Michael Avenatti tweet: Mr. Ryan’s submission on behalf of Mr. Cohen is usually baseless, improper in addition to sanctionable. They fail to address, let alone contradict, 99% of the statements in what we released. Among various other things, they effectively concede the receipt of the $500,000 coming from those with Russian ties.
The rebuttal coming from Cohen’s lawyers came a day after a report coming from Avenatti’s firm alleged which numerous companies, including AT&T, Novartis in addition to Korea Aerospace Industries, had made payments to Cohen’s company, Essential Consultants.
AT&T in addition to Novartis both confirmed in subsequent statements they had made payments to the company.
AT&T said in a statement which the idea had paid Essential Consultants for “insights” into the Trump administration — payments Avenatti’s report claims totaled $0,000 in four installments between late 2017 in addition to early 2018.
The report also claimed Novartis paid Cohen’s company nearly $400,000. In a statement Wednesday, Novartis said which the idea had, in fact, paid much more: The pharmaceutical company signed a one-year contract paying Essential Consultants $100,000 per month for guidance “as to how the Trump administration might approach certain U.S. health-care policy matters, including the Affordable Care Act.”
The court filing coming from Cohen’s lawyers disputes another allegation coming from Avenatti’s report: which a Russian oligarch in addition to his cousin made eight payments to Cohen through the company Columbus Nova.
Cohen’s lawyers say the allegation is usually “incorrect,” citing a Columbus Nova statement which the company is usually owned by Americans, in addition to which neither the Russian oligarch “nor anyone else, various other than Columbus Nova’s owners, were involved from the decision to hire Cohen or provided funding for his engagement.”