Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Event/Special

Testimony Resumes in Trump Trial; Judge Says Trump Can Testify; William J. Brennan is Interviewed about Trump's Trial. Aired 9:30-10a ET

Aired May 03, 2024 - 09:30   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

[09:30:00]

JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Trump was nowhere to be found. Hope Hicks might change that dynamic.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: It will be an interesting Friday to be sure.

SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR: Yes, it will.

BERMAN: All right, that is all for us today on CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

This promises to be a jam-packed day ahead.

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: Absolutely. Thank you so much for joining us. CNN's special live coverage of Donald Trump's trial continues now.

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning and welcome to the final day of the third week of Donald Trump's criminal hush money trial where the former president just reentered the courthouse here in Manhattan where he will again go before the prosecution as they are going to bring a witness back on the stand. A witness that we saw yesterday still in the middle of their testimony when court ended. Soon again Trump will be part of that captive audience that is going to be listening to the prosecution's version of a Trump tale, a sexual encounter with the adult film star that the former president allegedly tried to keep hidden from American voters.

Yesterday, for the first time, the jury actually got to hear Trump's voice in that secretly recorded audio tape.

Good morning. I'm Kaitlan Collins here in New York.

JIM ACOSTA, CNN ANCHOR: Hey, Kaitlan.

I'm Jim Acosta here in Washington. And you are watching CNN's special coverage of Donald Trump's hush money cover up trial.

And minutes from now testimony resumes and zeros in on Trump's former fixer, Michael Cohen. We expect the district attorney's forensic expert who combed through Cohen's devices to head back to the stand. The question now, are there more surreptitiously recorded conversations - we heard some of that yesterday, that the prosecution plans to play for the jury. And will they again feature Donald Trump in his own words. Of course, we heard some of that yesterday when Michael Cohen brought up the issue of payments and Trump talked about cash and Michael Cohen said, no, no, no, no, no.

There is also a lingering question about whom the jury will hear from next. Hope Hicks, the former president's long time communications director and aid always by his side, she could be taking the stand today. She is expected to testify at some point. We're waiting for that.

It also could be Stormy Daniels. That is somebody else we are watching for. The adult film star at the center of this case.

And, of course, CNN's covering this trial from all angles. Our reporters are inside the courtroom giving us a minute by minute update of every word said by witnesses, prosecutors, and the former president's defense team.

And let's go to Elie Honig, who has more on everything we should be watching for today.

Elie, what should we be looking for?

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Well, Jim, it turns out there are tapes, and the jury is now hearing them. Now, when we left off yesterday, prosecutors had called Douglas Daus to the stand. Now, this man works for the Manhattan DA's office. He's an investigator. He specializes in digital evidence. And prosecutors are using this witness as a way to introduce documents and recordings to the jury, including two crucial recordings.

Now, the first one of these tapes was made secretly by Michael Cohen in September 2016, when he was the lawyer for Donald Trump. Michael Cohen had a conversation with Trump about the payouts to Karen McDougal, and he recorded this conversation.

Let's take a quick listen to some of the excerpts.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MICHAEL COHEN: I need to open up a company for the transfer of all of that info regarding our friend David, you know, so that -- I'm going to do that right away.

And I spoke to Allen about it, when it comes time for the financing, which will be -

DONALD TRUMP: Hey, listen, what financing?

COHEN: We'll have to pay (INAUDIBLE) -

TRUMP: No, we'll pay with cash.

COHEN: No. No, no, no, no, no. I got - no, no, no.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HONIG: Now, this is the first time, and perhaps the only time, the jury will hear a recording of the two most important people in this case speaking with one another, Michael Cohen and Donald Trump. Prosecutors will argue this tape shows Donald Trump absolutely knew about those payouts and approved of them. That defense will argue, first of all, why was Michael Cohen secretly recording his own client? Second of all, they'll argue it shows that Michael Cohen was the one who handled the financing, the structuring of these payments, and that's the heart of the crime.

Now, we heard a second conversation, a second recording, between Michael Cohen and Keith Davidson. Keith Davidson was the lawyer for Karen McDougal and Stormy Daniels. Here's another recording that the jury heard yesterday.

Let's take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MICHAEL COHEN: What about me? And I can't - I can't even tell you how many times he said to me, you know, I hate the fact that we did it. And my comment to him was, but every person that you've spoken to told you it was the right move.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

[09:35:05]

HONIG: So, Michael Cohen will argue, and the prosecutors will argue, this shows that Michael Cohen was doing this, was setting up these payments with Donald Trump's knowledge, that he was keeping Donald Trump updated.

Now, the witness, Douglas Daus, also testified he went through Michael Cohen's cell phones and he found texts, which the jury will see throughout this trial. He also found that Michael Cohen had 39,000 plus people in his contacts. That's a bizarre number. That's enough to fill Madison Square Garden twice over. Not sure if there's any significance to that. I suppose we'll find out. And, of course, he introduced to the jury that recorded call that we just heard between Michael Cohen and Donald Trump.

Now, earlier in the day we heard from Keith Davidson. We just heard him on the recording with Michael Cohen. He represented both Karen McDougal and Stormy Daniels. He brokered on Stormy Daniels' behalf the deal with Michael Cohen, where Michael Cohen paid them $130,000 as a hush money payment. Keith Davidson didn't like that characterization. He said, well, it was just - it was just compensation for a contract. It's hush money. Keith Davidson testified about that.

He also testified that the reason for this payment, in his understanding, was that these payments, to keep these women quiet, was - it was intended in some way to assist the presidential campaign of Donald Trump.

Finally, on cross-examination, the defense brought out a couple things about Davidson's testimony. He never had any direct contact with Donald Trump, only with Michael Cohen. They brought out the fact that Michael Cohen was disappointed. He was hoping he would become attorney general under Donald Trump and therefore had some motivation. And Davidson also admitted that he used, quote/unquote, leverage in order to get this money for his clients.

So, that's a summary of what we saw yesterday. When we get back into court today, Douglas Daus will be back on the stand. He's being cross- examined. We'll see what the defense has in mind.

And, Kaitlan, let's throw it back to you in New York to bring us up to speed what's happening there.

COLLINS: Yes, Elie, that transcript from yesterday is worth reading in full because it got incredibly contentious inside that courtroom.

Thank you, Elie, for that. We'll check back in with you.

We have chief legal analyst Laura Coates and our chief legal affairs correspondent Paula Reid here with me in New York.

Something really important just happened as Elie was laying all of that out for us, which is that as soon as Donald Trump and his attorneys got in the courtroom, the judge corrected what Donald Trump falsely asserted yesterday when he left the courtroom, which is that because of the gag order that's in place it prevents him from testifying. Something that Todd Blanche. Trump's attorney, shook his head in affirmation at as Trump said that.

And when Trump entered the courtroom this morning, the judge said, no, it doesn't. It doesn't prevent you from testifying.

PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Yes, this was fascinating because this was the first time we've seen the judge respond really to something that Trump has said outside the court when he addresses the media. And he's clearly correcting the record. He said, no, this gag order does not prevent you from testifying. And we know that since the gag order has been in place, Trump has also repeatedly said that it's possible that he might testify. So I feel like yesterday's statement was intellectually dishonest, a little bit of politicking at the mics there. But it's interesting that the judge took a moment to set the record straight and say, no, that's absolutely not true.

COLLINS: Yes, because when we had this gag order hearing last week, Laura, I mean the judge was making clear that Trump understood what the perimeter of the gag order were. Trump's attorney affirmed that, yes, he did know. And it clearly says nothing in it that Trump himself cannot choose to testify. That he - he can testify if he wants to.

LAURA COATES, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: He absolutely can.

And they even went further than this. You remember there was a hearing called the Sandoval hearing that took place a few weeks ago at this point now where the judge was saying, here are the parameters of what people might be able to asked you if you do take the stand. Now, the Sandoval hearing is a way of saying, here you're on noticed, defendant, if you want to testify, there are things we might be able to bring in that are not necessary charged conduct but prior bad acts. And these might be used to what they call impeach you. In other words, point out inconsistencies or give the jury an insight and some kind of MO. The judge would not have done that, would not have gone through the process if he intended to actually limit the ability of a defendant to testify. And, of course, the whole reason he's doing this is because he knows it's a court of public opinion. That's not these 18 jurors.

If he wants to testify, it's well within his rights. Now, whether he will every - I mean I'm almost salivating right now as a former prosecutor thinking about a defendant taking the stand because you can bring out so many things. It's pandoras box. And once that door is open, it really cannot be closed. They have to be really, really careful. That's why he wants to get ahead of it. He wants to appear deferential and yet not do it.

And we're seeing right now these an argument that - from Todd Blanche, a tweet from "The Washington Post" should not be admitted because it includes a photo of Trump, Billy Bush, and one of the women in the "Access Hollywood" video, which, of course, they cannot show, it's to prejudicial.

REID: This is fascinating. Another first. This is the first time the decision, the appeals court decision related to Harvey Weinstein has been brought up. Just a moment ago, the Trump team, while they're arguing about why this evidence shouldn't come in, sites that decision, but the judge knocked it down saying, quote, the Weinstein decision really doesn't factor into this.

This is something that a lot of sources in Trump's circles have been raising, whether that decision related to Harvey Weinstein's conviction, whether that could potentially help Trump here when it comes to bringing in certain pieces of evidence.

[09:40:01]

But the judge making it clear here, he doesn't see it that way.

COLLINS: Yes, we'll see what the argument is that they're making here. Obviously, the Weinstein decision made in recent weeks was a huge overturn of his conviction.

And, Jim, obviously following all of this closely as this witness that was on the stand when court ended yesterday is expected to retake the stand as Trump's attorneys are going to continue their line of questioning. We'll see who else takes the stand today.

ACOSTA: Yes, it should be another lively day of testimony, Kaitlan. Maybe some surprises. Maybe we'll finally see some witnesses I think that everybody has been waiting for at this point.

Elie, let me go to you first.

Let's button up with they were just talking about a few moments ago. We have Trump coming in yesterday saying, you know, I - because of this gag order I can't testify. Apparently a few moments ago he cleaned that up, tried to clarify it. Let's play a little bit of what Trump said yesterday and talk about it on the other side and then get into what the judge just said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT AND 2024 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well, I'm not allowed to testify. I'm under a gag order, I guess. I can't even testify (INAUDIBLE).

No, we're going to be appealing the gag order. I'd love to answer that question. It's a very easy question. The easiest questions so far. But I'm not allowed to testify because this judge, who's totally conflicted, has me under an unconstitutional gag order. Nobody has ever had that before. And we don't like it. And it's not fair.

ACOSTA: Yes, Elie, I like it when he turns to Todd Blanche and Todd Blanche nods and shakes his head no. Like not knowing what to say. I guess some lies have to be cleaned up and that's what he did this morning.

And then the judge, just a few moments ago -

HONIG: Yes.

ACOSTA: Said, no, you do have the right to testify.

HONIG: Of course.

ACOSTA: The gag order has nothing to do with it.

HONIG: Good gracious. The statement by Donald Trump is so outrageous, so off base it's hard to know where to begin.

ACOSTA: Yes.

HONIG: But the gag order has nothing to do, 0.0 to do with Donald Trump's ability to testify. He has the right to testify. He has the right not to testify. There will be no limits on that right.

And, by the way, the gag order, let's just understand because I always think this - the name gag order is overly suggest. A gag would suggest you can't talk at all. He can say almost anything he wants, he just has to lay off a witnesses, jurors, court staff, and families. I mean we hear him going on rants almost nightly. He did this morning, he did last night about the judge, about the DA, about the indictment. That's all totally fine. So, it's quite a limited gag order.

I think it's worth noting, he's actually not violated the gag order. They should have one of those signs up. Has not violated the gag order. And I think we're on ten days now.

ACOSTA: Yes.

HONIG: So, I don't know, maybe he understands and is complying now.

ACOSTA: But, Jamie, it seems to me the reason why he said that yesterday and he says stuff like this out on the campaign trail as well, he thinks - he knows his supporters are watching.

JAMIE GANGEL, CNN SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT: Right.

ACOSTA: He knows - he knows they're watching.

GANGEL: This is one of the problems with not having cameras in the courtroom, not even having audio the way we do with the Supreme Court. He comes out of the - you know, start of the day, end of the day, and that message goes out.

Yesterday, in addition to the gag order, he was saying things like he just couldn't talk. I mean it gets completely convoluted. But to Elie's point, you know, Judge Merchan was criticized for sort of holding on the gag order. It does seem to be working. And he has not ruled.

So, he came out this morning and we got the usual round of grievances. He attacked the judges, the DA, President Biden, but notably he did not attack Michael Cohen, other witnesses, no mention of the jurors. It is always fascinating. He's really transparent. You know what's getting under his skin. What did he say? The judges is allowing salacious testimony and our side isn't getting anything in.

ACOSTA: Yes.

GANGEL: But then Donald Trump pivot. A few minutes later he says, the case is going fine.

ACOSTA: Yes.

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: I do want to draw attention to what's happening right now because what we're seeing is Blanche arguing that a specific Truth Social from last August should not come into evidence. And that Truth Social actually was a - problematic for Donald Trump in his federal cases as well. Jack Smith filed something.

Now, what he said in that Truth Social was, if you go after me, I'm coming after you.

ACOSTA: Right.

HOLMES: Jack Smith, at the time, raised this with a judge saying that he was threatening witnesses. The Trump team scrambled to say this had nothing to do with witnesses. This was about news reports that someone was spending money against him in the campaign.

Now, it appears it's coming up again and they're having a conversation about whether or not this should be included. Blanche trying to say once more, this was not about witnesses.

I think that's very interesting that now we're seeing the crossover in all of his legal cases, particularly because Donald Trump tends to put his foot in his mouth. This is something that can cause problems.

ACOSTA: Yes, Elliot, (INAUDIBLE), how do you - I mean what do you think about how the judge is handling this balancing act? I mean -

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Oh, look, it's an incredibly hard -

ACOSTA: He's on a tight rope.

WILLIAMS: He's on a tight rope and it's an incredibly hard balancing act. They made a reference just a second ago folks might have seen (INAUDIBLE) malano (ph), this standard in New York for bringing in prior acts of an individual and so on. And there are any number of very gray areas that judges have to sort out.

[09:45:01]

One in this context of things they did in the past, their behavior, these prior bad acts that was the subject of a hearing. But also how you strike a balance between speech that's protected, particularly for a political candidate, and, frankly, the judge, in his gag order, referenced the fact that he wanted to be mindful of the fact that the former president is himself a candidate for office.

But to Elie's point, the former president really can say virtually anything in the world, including very explicit things about the judge or - or even the elected district attorney, and had seemed to behave better.

I would note that in the context of another civil suit, a civil suit in the state of New York recently, it was after the imposition of sanctions on the president, they actually started behaving and didn't -

ACOSTA: Yes.

WILLIAMS: Yes, he was behaving better.

ACOSTA: Carolyn, how do you think the jurors are reacting?

CAROLYN KOCH, TRIAL AND JURY CONSULTANT: Well, let me just say about the gag order -

ACOSTA: Yes, sure.

KOCH: I think the judge is actually doing Trump a favor. You know, Trump has two fronts here. He has the trial and he has the election. But for - as far as the trial is concerned, with the evidence that I've seen, if he can just zip it, he's way better off. So, the judge, by silencing him and threatening punishment, the quieter he is, I think the better that he does.

In terms of how are jurors reacting to this, I'm sure they're sponges. Just like Jamie said, you know, we're just peering through the courthouse door to try and see what's going on. The jurors are seeing everything. They're going to see when somebody has a vein in their temple that's throbbing because they're stressed. They're going to see when people get angry. But they're really focused on facts and jurors. I am a huge proponent of the jury system. And when people talk about

democracy dying, well, as long as we have criminal trials and criminal defendants have rights, no matter who they are, we have a thriving democracy. And these jurors are going to do their job and they're going to focus on the facts, and they're going to scrutinize the motives because that's what an adversarial process forces them to do.

ACOSTA: Yes, one of the key guard rails for our democracy. We'll see if they can keep Trump reigned in, when you said if he can zip it. I thought - when I heard you say that a few moments -

KOCH: Well, if he can zip it. It's hard for him, right?

ACOSTA: That word if is doing a lot of work at this point.

KOCH: Well, I think that's why his lawyers is like, right, you're - you're going to zip it.

ACOSTA: Yes. All right. Guys, thank you very much. We're going to keep the conversation going.

Any minute we expect witness testimony to resume. The judge making a key point of clarification, informing the defendant, the former president of the United States, Donald Trump, that he can testify if he so chooses. So, the gag order excuse is out the window. Trump's, of course, wrong when he said that a gag order bars him from doing so. We'll continue to talk about that. More next.

You're watching live coverage of the trial here on CNN.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:52:06]

COLLINS: The witness for the prosecution just now retaking the stand as cross-examination is beginning again in Donald Trump's hush money trial.

Welcome back to CNN's special live coverage. I'm Kaitlan Collins here in New York.

The former president, we are told by reporters inside the room, was just sitting at the defense table, has his eyes closed, as he has made a habit of his over the last three weeks, as his attorneys are sorting through important legal jockeying with the judge. But now the jury is out to make their entrance into the courtroom.

Joining us now is criminal defense attorney Bill Brennan, who represented Donald Trump's payroll corporation in a tax fraud trial, and Trump himself in his second impeachment trial, and he joins us again now.

And, Bill, right now Trump's attorney, Emil Bove, is continuing his cross-examination. This witness on the stand is not someone that anyone at home knows, or even most people who've been covering this trial very closely. But the importance of having these witnesses come on to verify the authenticity and the data that they extracted from Michael Cohen's phone. Why is that something that's important for them to do in front of the jury?

WILLIAM J. BRENNAN, FORMER TRUMP PAYROLL CORP. ATTORNEY: Well, good morning, Kaitlan, and thanks for having me.

I think, in this case, it appears that the prosecution and defense were unable to agree on stipulations, which is common in most trials in - with the innocuous type witness like this. Most times that testimony is presented by agreement or stipulation. Sometimes though not. And that's apparently the case here. So, the defense is putting the prosecution to its burden of proving the case.

And these meat and potato types of witnesses are important because it shows the jurors how the case is built, and it shows, frankly, where flaws might come in and, you know, cracks in the ice. So, it's - it's a little bit of a snoozer compared to say Cohen or Pecker or Davidson, but important nonetheless.

COLLINS: Yes, and, obviously, there's been wide speculation about what the next high-profile witness that could be called and who that could be.

There was some haggling this morning inside the courtroom over for the "Access Hollywood" tape, which the judge previously ruled before this trial even started that the prosecution couldn't actually show the tape to the jury, but they could read the transcript. And they were arguing over whether or not they could show basically a screenshot of that video that includes Donald Trump, Billy Bush, and the woman who was involved in that - in that tape and in that conversation.

It seems to be suggesting that Hope Hicks could be one of the witnesses that we see soon. Obviously she was closely involved in monitoring the fallout of that situation during the final days of the campaign. What impact do you think she would have on the witness stand?

BRENNAN: I don't know what the offer of proof is for Ms. Hicks, but at some point - we're now, I think, at the end of week three, including, of course, jury selection.

[09:55:00]

At some point the prosecution is going to have the start tying this to the defendant because what we've heard so far is a lot of salacious conversations and sleazy deals between a disbarred lawyer, who was known as the fixer, the publication of a - of a tabloid rag, and a lawyer that makes a living on the bottom selling non-disclosure agreements when people have trouble. So, I mean, the jury's heard a lot of "As the World Turns" soap opera testimony, but they really - the prosecution has yet to tie it to this defendant. They've got to do that. And I assume the possibility is that they're going to try to say that Ms. Hicks, while in her capacity at the White House, was privy to some type of discussion or meeting, but not all - even if she was, that doesn't necessarily tie it to this defendant. And that's not enough. They have to wrap it up with proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the motivation here was to commit another crime. That's what gets them to the felony. And if they don't do that, the felony goes and, frankly, the whole case goes out the window.

COLLINS: Yes, I mean, and Hope Hicks, obviously, is not someone who is a hostile witness to Donald Trump. They are still on friendly terms. She was once one of his top aides and closest confidant. So, that would also seem to have an impact as well. We'll stand by to see who that witness is.

Bill Brennan, hang around with us because we have more questions for you.

We are now seeing the first photos of Donald Trump in the courtroom. Of course there are no actual cameras in there, but we do get a shot of him when he sits at the defense table each day. This is that photo that you were looking at right now as his attorneys are now cross- examining that digital forensics expert for the prosecution, raising issues about the chain of custody in that gap when Michael Cohen turned over his phones to the district attorney's office and when it actually ended up in government custody.

We have more of these minute by minute updates with CNN's special live coverage ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)