Hope Hicks’ lawyer sounds off when ‘creepy’ Nadler demands second testimony after doc dump

(Photo by Alex Wong/Getty Images)

House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., seems to be more into Hope Hicks that the former Trump aide is into him.

On Thursday, Nadler demanded that Hicks clarify testimony she gave before the committee on June 19, 2019, regarding conversations she had during the campaign with then-candidate Donald Trump and his attorney, Michael Cohen, about hush payments to porn star Stormy Daniels.

“We write regarding your testimony before the House Judiciary Committee on June 19, 2019, which appears to be inconsistent with evidence unsealed this morning by a federal judge in New York,” Nadler wrote in a letter to Hicks, according to The Hill.

“As I reminded you at the outset of your interview, anything other than complete candor can have very serious consequences,” the chairman said. “Accordingly, I would expect you to clarify this matter before the Committee in very short order—but no later than August 15, 2019.”


The demand came after U.S. District Judge William Pauley III of the Southern District of New York, a Clinton appointee, ordered documents related to Cohen’s case to be unsealed Thursday.

The judge declared the case over, which Jay Sekulow, counsel to the president, saw as a positive sign for Trump.

“We are pleased that the investigation surrounding these ridiculous campaign finance allegations is now closed,” Sekulow said in the statement. “We have maintained from the outset that the president never engaged in any campaign finance violation.”

But Nadler cited FBI’s search warrants on Cohen uncovered in the document dump that revealed a call on October 8, 2016. Hicks initiated the call to Cohen, with Trump joining in sixteen seconds later — the FBI said it was the first call Cohen had received or made to Hicks in a number of weeks.

The call was the day after the infamous “Access Hollywood” tape of Trump talking about grabbing women by the genitals was released.

The former White House communications director testified before the Judiciary Committee that she was not aware of any payments to Daniels at the time it transpired.

“I wasn’t aware of anything. I wasn’t aware of a hush payment agreement,” Hicks said, adding that she was never present when Trump and Cohen discussed Daniels.


It was during that appearance that Nadler was widely accused of ‘creepy’ behavior for repeatedly referring to Hicks as “Ms. Lewandowksi,” which was seen by many as a catty reference to Hicks’ rumored affair with former Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski.

Rep. Devin Nunes, R-Calif., slammed the “old, pervy” chairman for his sexist innuendo — Nunes was not present during Hicks testimony.

Hicks’ attorney, Robert Trout, issued a statement Friday rebuffing Nadler’s suggestion that his client gave false testimony, saying Hicks stands by what she told the Democrat-led committee.

“Reports claiming that Ms. Hicks was involved in conversations about ‘hush money’ payments on October 8, 2016, or knew that payments were being discussed, are simply wrong,” Trout said.

“Ms. Hicks stands by her truthful testimony that she first became aware of this issue in early November 2016, as the result of press inquiries, and she will be responding formally to Chairman Nadler’s letter as requested.”


Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!

Success! Thank you for donating. Please share BPR content to help combat the lies.
Tom Tillison


We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

PLEASE JOIN OUR NEW COMMENT SYSTEM! We love hearing from our readers and invite you to join us for feedback and great conversation. If you've commented with us before, we'll need you to re-input your email address for this. The public will not see it and we do not share it.

Latest Articles