In a significant development, One America News (OAN) has officially withdrawn a controversial story that falsely implicated Michael Cohen in an extortion attempt against Donald Trump, with the supposed involvement of Stormy Daniels. This retraction was issued on March 27, marking a closure to allegations that stunned political and media circles.
The Hill reported that OAN conceded to retracting the story as part of a legal settlement with Michael Cohen, which surprisingly involved no financial compensation.
The story, authored by Brooke Mallory and published by the San Diego-based network, suggested a clandestine affair between Cohen and Daniels prior to the 2016 presidential election, alongside claims that Cohen attempted to extort Trump.
With the spotlight on them, OAN soon admitted that their report lacked evidence and was not supported by any factual corroboration. Initially, the article pointed to Michael Avenatti, a now-incarcerated former attorney, as the source of these allegations. Avenatti, however, denied these claims, distancing himself from the controversy.
The quick response from Cohen's legal team, including Justin Nelson of Susman Godfrey LLP and E. Danya Perry of Perry Law PLLC, challenged the veracity of the story, sparking a week of intense legal negotiations. These discussions focused on the potentially defamatory impacts of the report on Cohen's reputation.
The turn of events prompted OAN to act swiftly. As stated by OAN's attorney, Chip Babcock, the settlement discussions were efficiently conducted, culminating in the retraction. "Cohen’s lawyers contacted OAN and OAN asked me to interact with Justin and I did and so it came together in a very short period of time," Babcock explained.
Reacting to the retraction, Cohen’s lawyer Justin Nelson highlighted the significance of the moment. "Today’s retraction by OAN represents a victory for accountability. This retraction is not about money. It is about protecting the truth," he stated. E. Danya Perry echoed these sentiments, emphasizing the relief and vindication experienced by Cohen in clearing his name.
For Cohen, the retraction brought a much-needed rectification of the unwarranted claims. "The notion that right before the election I would extort the man I fervently supported and believed was about to become president, all to make $130,000 that I did not even keep for myself, is beyond absurd. It’s just plain stupid,” was his response quoted by OAN.
Adding further, Cohen appreciated the settlement's contribution to correcting public records. “I am pleased that OAN has agreed to retract this story and has acknowledged that the statement is false... While this settlement cannot undo the harm that the publication caused me, it is important to set the record straight — which is what this settlement does,” he conveyed in a statement.
The retraction was not simply a quiet affair. It garnered significant attention from major national news outlets including The Washington Post and The New York Times, elucidating the broader implications of the misreported story on media integrity and legal accountability.
Meanwhile, Brooke Mallory, the journalist behind the original article, has stayed out of the public eye, with her current status at OAN remaining unclear as attempts to reach her have been unsuccessful.
Further legal ramifications are hinted at concerning those originally involved in the propagation of the false claims. The potential defamation lawsuit against Tony Seruga, identified as a source for the article, remains a possibility, though he remains elusive.
In summary, OAN’s retraction of the erroneous story alleging an affair and extortion scheme by Michael Cohen aimed at Donald Trump, serves as a corrective measure to uphold journalistic standards and legal accountability. This action reflects the importance of veracity in reporting and the potential consequences of defamation in media. No monetary settlement was involved, but the reputational restoration for Cohen signifies a triumph in his pursuit of justice and truth, shedding light on the complex dynamics of media influence and legal integrity.
