Michael Cohen, the former lawyer of Donald Trump, has cautioned fellow defendants in the Georgia RICO case about the potential for Trump to use them as scapegoats. He has also asserted that Trump’s thought process differs significantly from that of an average human.

Cohen delivered a stark and troubling alert to his co-defendants, stating that Trump holds no concern for their well-being and would readily sacrifice them to save himself.

He remarked, “Donald doesn’t care about you. He doesn’t care about you one bit. He will use you as the scapegoat and the system will use you as the scapegoat in order to get somebody,” he affirmed.

Continuing his point, the former lawyer of Trump delved into his reasoning. “Prosecutors will get them to turn because these three could easily end up in the same situation I ended up in and I can promise you something – it’s not fun. Exactly what happened to me is going to happen to all 18 of the co-indicted defendants,” he declared, presumably referring to notable figures like Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman, and Mark Meadows.

The Hill, a digital political media outlet, explored Cohen’s transformation from a close associate of Trump to a vocal critic who is now aiding New York prosecutors in investigating falsified business records related to hush money payments linked to the former president’s alleged extramarital affairs.

They noted, “Once one of the former president’s closest confidants, he has since become one of his loudest critics.”

MSNBC questioned Cohen about whether Trump’s Georgia co-conspirators seeking an expedited trial hold leverage over him.

Cohen proceeded to express his disapproval of Trump’s treatment during his transfer to Fulton County Jail. He censured the extravagant motorcades, likening them to a victorious procession.

Several days prior to his MSNBC appearance, Cohen engaged with CNN. During this interaction, the former lawyer questioned Trump’s intelligence and alleged that Trump had yet to grasp the importance of not betraying “your lawyer, your doctor, and your mechanic.”

Cohen’s statements resonated across the internet, sparking lively discussions in comment sections. One commenter commended Cohen’s choice to consistently refer to Trump as “Donald,” suggesting it was time to cease using the title “President Trump,” considering the former president’s tarnished reputation.

Other opinions varied, with some criticizing Cohen’s previous association with Trump, while others offered plausible justifications. A commentator stated, “While he shouldn’t be celebrated, the fact Trump’s former lawyer is speaking out against him can be a valuable tool to pull people out of the cult. Not going to say it will change a lot of minds but if it changes a few it is still worth putting it out there.”

Certain responses carried a sarcastic tone. “Oh, an idiot is he? Thanks for that useful insight,” one individual quipped. Another playfully echoed, “Trump’s an idiot? I had no idea! This changes everything.” A third contributor jestingly exclaimed, “Trump? An idiot? No way!”

Certain commenters seemed to suggest that the co-defendants might deserve their fate. One asserted, “These people risked it all to be part of Trump’s illegal effort to overturn the election and that is what Trump requires – unquestioned loyalty. In return, they get nothing. The billionaire cannot afford to help with their legal bills despite his legal bills all being paid by donations.”

Many shared this perspective. Another commenter questioned the co-defendants’ expectations, given Trump’s track record of abandoning individuals over the decades. “What made these people think that they were going to be any different from all the other people Trump has stiffed over past decades?” one individual reasoned.

Other inquiries touched upon legal matters and presidential privileges. “I am genuinely concerned about the Secret Service agents who were assigned to Trump. In the event that Trump is incarcerated, will these agents be required to accompany him during his time in jail?” one person asked.

Another responded based on legal insights, asserting, “Based on what I have heard and read from lawyers, yes. The Secret Service is responsible for protecting him regardless. Personally, I think it is a rip-off for the taxpayer and he should be forced to forfeit such protections and all former presidential perks as should any other former president in a similar situation.”