Cohen case feds are reassembling papers

PROSECUTORS are sifting through every shred of evidence against President Trump’s personal attorney Michael Cohen — literally.

During a hearing Wednesday regarding the FBI’s raid on Cohen’s law office and residences, Assistant Manhattan U.S. Attorney Rachel Maimin revealed the government was piecing together documents from a paper shredder.

“I don’t believe the contents of the shredding machine are voluminous at all,” Maimin said.

Once reassembled, the shredded papers will be turned over to Cohen’s legal team as part of an ongoing review of his material for attorney-client privilege. Cohen’s attorney Todd Harrison said his team had reviewed 1.3 million of Cohen’s files out of 3.7 million that had been turned over by the government. Four days after the April 9 raid, prosecutors hinted Cohen might have destroyed evidence if he knew FBI agents were coming. They wrote that the nature of his alleged offenses “evidence a lack of truthfulness.”

“Absent a search these records could have been deleted without record, and without recourse for the law enforcement,” prosecutors wrote at the time.

The ongoing review of Cohen’s material is being done with the assistance of a retired judge, Barbara Jones, acting as a “special master,” resolving disputes about attorneyclient privilege. Manhattan Federal Judge Kimba Wood ordered that the review be completed by June 15. Any remaining material warrant, will be turned over to a government “taint team” to determine what is privileged and therefore not fair game for prosecutors.

Cohen — who is reportedly being investigated for campaign finance law violations, bank fraud and wire fraud — has opposed a taint team protocol.

Much of the hearing in Manhattan Federal Court was dominated by Michael Avenatti, the attorney for porn star Stormy Daniels.

Material in the Cohen trove could shed light on the $130,000 hush money payment Cohen made to Daniels shortly before the 2016 presidential election, he argues. The money was intended to keep Daniels quiet about an alleged affair she had with Trump in 2006.

Avenatti had sought to formally intervene in the case due to the potential evidence pertaining to Daniels. But Wood chastised Avenatti for his frequent appearances in the press, which she called a “publicity tour.”

“If you participate here, you would not be able to declare your opinion as to Mr. Cohen’s guilt, which you did. You would not be able to give publicity to documents that are not public. It would change your conduct,” Wood said. “I know a jury, if there is one, is way down the road, and memories certainly may fade, but this conduct is inimicable to giving Mr. Cohen eventually a fair trial.”

Shortly after the hearing, Avenatti withdrew his motion to appear in the case, but noted he could refile the papers "if necessary.”