The prosecution’s key witness Michael Cohen admits to stealing from the Trump Organisation

As Donald Trump’s trial nears an end, the prosecution’s star witness, former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen, undermined his already questionable credibility a second time.

Michael Cohen, former personal lawyer to Donald Trump, leaves his apartment building on his way to Manhattan criminal court in New York.

If Donald Trump’s ‘hush money trial’ were being held in a city less politically biased against him, it would have been pretty much over on Monday (Tuesday Australia time), the 19th day of the former president’s historic criminal trial.

The prosecution’s star witness, former Trump lawyer, Michael Cohen undermined his already questionable credibility a second time, and potentially with it the prosecution’s case.

After last week implying, on the stand, that he might have been lying about an allegedly incriminating phone call to Donald Trump in 2016, Mr Cohen admitted stealing $US30,000 from the Trump Organisation.

“You did steal from the Trump Organisation based upon the expected reimbursement from Red Finch,” Trump lawyer Tod Blanche asked Mr Cohen on Monday under cross examination, referring to funds Mr Cohen was meant to pay to an internet company but instead pocketed himself.

“Yes sir,” Mr Cohen said in response, an admission that adds thief to convicted liar on Mr Cohen’s dubious rap sheet.

Remarkably, Mr Cohen also said he had previously told prosecutors about the theft, but was never charged, a reminder of how arbitrary prosecutions can be when politics is involved.

It was the only clear crime that the trial of Mr Trump, 77, has so far revealed in over three weeks of evidence and cross-examination of witnesses.

The former president is facing 34 potential felony charges over allegations he paid off adult firm star Stormy Daniels in the lead up to the 2016 election to buy her silence over an alleged sexual encounter between the two in 2006, which could have politically damaged the then Republican presidential candidate.

Mr Cohen’s admission of larceny followed an earlier, almost as devastating, implication by Mr Cohen last week that he might have made up the details of an October 24th, 2016 phone call supposedly between him and Mr Trump.

Prosecutors provided a series of texts between Mr Cohen and Donald Trump’s then bodyguard around the time of the phone call that suggested the conversation may have related to a different matter.

“You were actually talking to Mr Schiller about harassing phone calls from a 14-year-old,” Mr Trump’s lawyer Todd Blanche said, referring to Mr Trump’s then bodyguard. Mr Cohen was hardly definitive in reply: “I believe I spoke to Mr Trump.”

Jurors, who are expected to begin their deliberations next week, will need to decide whether during what was a 96 second phone call, Mr Cohen spoke to Mr Schiller about the prank caller and in addition, according to Mr Cohen, was passed onto Mr Trump nearby to obtain his blessing for payments to Ms Daniels.

Convicting a defendant beyond reasonable doubt is a high bar. The prosecution’s case rests in large part on the credibility of Mr Cohen’s testimony: that Mr Trump knowingly authorised the payments with the intent to subvert federal election laws.

The defence has had almost a week to sow doubt in jurors’ mind about Mr Cohen’s credibility: it’s amply clear he loathes the former president, in part because he refused to consider him for a job in the administration after winning the 2016 election.

Could Mr Cohen be exaggerating or embellishing the truth in order to see his former boss behind bars? It’s a distinct possibility given the evidence presented.

An acquittal would be an extraordinary, and unexpected, coup for Mr Trump, given his recent experience with Manhattan courts, which found him guilty in a series of civil trials related to defamation and business fraud.

The sheer number of criminal charges levelled at Mr Trump by both state and federal prosecutors last year created a sense of inevitability that the former president would be convicted on at least one of them.

That’s no longer the case: three of the criminal cases, including related to classified documents and January 6th, are unlikely to begin before the presidential election, if ever.

Mr Trump’s prospects of winning the presidential vote in November have been rising throughout the trial, according to an average of political betting markets tracked by RealClear Politics. Polls released in recent weeks continue to give Mr Trump the edge in critical battle ground states and nationally.

But an acquittal is no guarantee, given the likely political bias of the jury of 7 men and 5 women who are expected to begin their deliberations next week, after the Memorial Day long weekend. Much will depend on their personal feelings toward Mr Trump and Mr Cohen.