Cohen has claimed the cash was his own way to help Trump by making Daniels' "false" claim disappear.
Michael Cohen paid Daniels, whose real name is Stephanie Clifford, $130,000 as part of a nondisclosure agreement that ensured she would not speak about an alleged 2006 affair with Trump. Cohen reportedly blew two deadlines to reach an agreement with Daniels because he had trouble getting in touch with Trump to secure the funds. The bank started an inquiry into the payment a year after the payment arrived. However, when the paper approached Cohen about his reported grievances, he responded with just two words: "Fake News".
The statement did not say if Trump personally reimbursed him for the payment, and The Wall Street Journal's story on Monday cited people familiar with the matter who said Cohen complained after the election that he had not been reimbursed.
Shaquem Griffin steals show with bench press at National Football League combine
I couldn't believe he got the late invite here. "Just from the standpoint of a football evaluator, he's a helluva player". He had to use a prosthetic hand to complete the drill, yet finished 11th among all linebackers at the combine .
President Trump during a meeting in the Cabinet Room of the White House last month.
In February, Cohen told CBS News that neither the Trump Organization nor the Trump campaign "was a party to the transaction with Ms. Clifford, and neither reimbursed me for the payment". "Not that I'm aware of", Sanders replied.
Cohen, according to the Journal's reporting, had formed the company Essential Consultants LLC to make the payment, with the money originating in First Republic bank and being sent to a client-trust account belonging to Daniels' lawyer Keith Davidson at the City National Bank in Los Angeles.
"As a matter of policy, we don't confirm or comment on inquiries from regulatory agencies or law enforcement, including subpoenas", a City National Bank representative told the Journal. The Common Cause complaint asserts that if the payment to Clifford had been made to influence the election, it would be an undisclosed "in-kind" contribution to the campaign, and if not from Trump personally, it would violate not only the disclosure rules but also the donation limit.