Return to Transcripts main page

New Day

Former Trump Lawyer Michael Cohen Sentenced to Prison; Media Organization with Ties to President Trump Cooperating with Special Counsel on Russia Investigation. Aired 8-8:30a ET

Aired December 13, 2018 - 8:00   ET

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

[08:00:00] JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: They did it to influence the election. Who knows what else the company has already or will soon tell prosecutors? This all comes after the president's former lawyer, his fixer, his right-hand man, Michael Cohen was sentenced to three years in prison for campaign finance crimes or other felonies. Cohen told the court he felt it was his duty to cover up the president's dirty deeds.

ERICA HILL, CNN ANCHOR: CNN, meantime, has learned both the House and Senate Intelligence Committees, they want to talk to Michael Cohen again, and it appears he's willing to tell his story before he goes to prison in March. President Trump publicly silent on the Cohen sentence, but privately we are told he is seething.

Also, the president, we're told, had just three words to say about Cohen -- he's a liar. After the sentencing, though, Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani did have more to say. Talking about the Russia investigation, he tells Yahoo! News "Our strategy is to do everything we can to try to convince Mueller to wrap the damn thing up, and if he's got anything, show us."

Well, here's what we know at this point, and here's what Rudy Giuliani knows, too. When it comes to Mueller, so far four people have been sentenced to prison. There are seven guilty pleas. In all 36 people or entities have been charged. One person, former Trump campaign chair Paul Manafort, convicted at trial. And 192 criminal counts have been filed overall.

Let's discuss with CNN political analyst David Gregory, CNN chief legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin, and CNN contributor Garrett Graff. What really stands out as we look at what we learned in this agreement with AMI, there are a number of things, but the fact that there is more to come, that this is not just, hey, we're not going to do this anymore, it is we are cooperating from here on out. And Jeff Toobin, one of the questions is, we're learning about this meeting in August of 2015, and there was another, we told, another campaign member who was in that meeting. Finding out who that person is could tell us a lot.

JEFFREY TOOBIN, CNN CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: Well, every time Mueller's investigation reveals something, it doesn't just reveal the discreet fact itself. It opens new doors to facts that we were unaware of. Think about what we heard from Robert -- from Michael Cohen over the past couple of weeks. The whole expansion of the negotiations over Trump Tower, the involvement of a Trump campaign official in the negotiations with the "National Enquirer." All of this suggests more links to possible illegal activity by the president himself and by people around him.

BERMAN: And Garrett Graff, you've actually written a fascinating new piece in "Wire." And I love it not only because you quote me as now being in the 12 days of Mueller, this every day leading up to Christmas where we seem to get a new revelation, but you point out there are a number of folks who should be more nervous that signs are pointing to them. And you look at the Trump Organization, largely because of what we learned yesterday, that AMI is cooperating here and perhaps cooperating in a way that would lead to further prosecutions.

GARRETT GRAFF, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Yes. The president should be and appears to be rightly quite concerned about the number of people around him providing, quote-unquote, substantial cooperation to federal prosecutors. At this point we know his personal lawyer and fixer Michael Cohen is cooperating. We know that the CFO of the Trump Organization, Allen Weisselberg, is cooperating. And we know that AMI is cooperating, the parent company of the "National Enquirer." And that's a lot of people around you to be cooperating. And you can sort of see these breadcrumbs in each of these new court filings pointing the way towards new suspects and the next person who might face legal jeopardy.

HILL: And there are all these questions, that, as pointed out in our reporting, that both the House and the Senate, Republican-led, we should point out, Senate Intel Committee, not just the incoming Democrats, want to bring Michael Cohen back. And David, what's fascinating about this is we just heard from Eric Swalwell. We told you, John, that one of the questions that they would like to ask Michael Cohen is was he instructed to lie or to cover anything up. And the question out there is, did the White House -- what did the White House know? Could the White House have in any way been involved in that? Those hearings questioning some of these folks are going to be fascinating, David.

DAVID GREGORY, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: Right, and politically charged as well, even after the Justice Department through the special prosecutor goes first in the investigation. What's, I think, critical about Cohen and AMI is here you have a very specific allegation of the president directing payments, the president directing activity. I think there is a lot of that at the core of the investigation into Russia ties, too. Was the president actually the one quarterbacking these contacts, approving people doing this as opposed to the idea that he has said publicly, that he had no idea about Russia, didn't know of any contacts with people with Russia.

[08:05:04] So there is the Trump business world and those contacts with Russia and what he might have been personally directing in terms of digging up dirt on his opponent. Think about the Trump Tower meeting. So I think all of that becomes really important.

There is the loyalty of these people who are now turning on the president. And there is the other piece on obstruction, firing Jim Comey because he didn't like how the FBI was investigating this Russia probe. You have the White House counsel Don McGahn who spent hours and hours with the special prosecutor saying what he knows. So how all these pieces fit together is what is creating a picture that is potentially legally and politically damning for the president. And with Cohen, at a time when he was marginalized, oh, you can't believe him, all of a sudden AMI comes into the picture as corroboration and it becomes a lot more difficult.

BERMAN: Jeffrey, I think it's interesting that we haven't really heard from the president or his lawyers on the specifics of the AMI agreement yet. And I think it's because, perhaps, it undercuts so many of the arguments they have been making in the last few days. And Rick Santorum, who we had on last half-hour, he was suggesting the FEC won't even look at this as a violation. There have been FEC officials who say that payments to women to silence them would be seen as a campaign contribution. It could be seen as personal. But what the AMI agreement spells out and what prosecutors clearly are trying to prove and say they have evidence of is that this agreement and these payments were to influence the 2016 election. AMI in its agreement said it did this principally to influence the 2016 election. From a legal standpoint, why is that concession important?

TOOBIN: Well, because any expenditure to elect a candidate, there are certain obligations that go along with it. There are reporting obligations. There are limits on the amount you can give. And corporations can't just decide to spend $150,000 to help one candidate win without reporting it, without -- and that appears to be what happened here, that this money that went to Karen McDougal who had apparently this long affair with Donald Trump, that was money to help Donald Trump get elected president.

And I think the timing of it is such an important part of the story. It was right before the election. That's when this information could have done so much damage to candidate Trump. And the prosecutors are always going to look at what they call the totality of circumstances. And one very important part of the totality of circumstances is when an expenditure was made. And the fact that it was right before the election is very important.

GREGORY: Let me just add to that. Don't forget, and Jeffrey made this point earlier this morning and I think it's a good one, which is if this information had been known prior to the election, would it have had an impact? We are often so quick to say, oh, this whole question of infidelity is something that has been litigated by the American electorate, Bill Clinton and all that. That's pretty much in the past. But the "Access Hollywood" tape had an impact. One of the reasons why they wanted to quickly change the subject so quickly to WikiLeaks and the question of Hillary Clinton. And it was very clear that Donald Trump felt that it was very potentially damaging for this kind of information to come out when he was already going to be viewed suspiciously among social conservatives who may not look the other way on this kind of activity.

HILL: You know what else it interesting, we have to point out the fact that Melania Trump actually sat down for an interview last night. So Melania Trump is speaking out on a day that all of this is happening, a woman who rarely speaks out, period. And then to put her out there on the day of all of this, there's a certain something there.

Garrett, the other thing that I think you have pointed out that is interesting, we have heard the narrative for so long from President Trump, from the folks around him, about how they view this investigation. The Mueller team, obviously, is keeping quiet. But as you point out, they're moving forward, or with people against whom they have overwhelming evidence, because when you look at it nearly every person targeted has pleaded guilty. That says something.

GRAFF: It really does. And it shows, actually, the opposite of the witch hunt that the president says is being conducted. Mueller is actually pursuing what appears to be a very conservative legal strategy. He's not going for crimes that exist in the gray, that he is going for very black and white crimes that he can prove with overwhelming evidence.

And that's important when you look at, as Jeff is saying, the totality of the circumstances of some of conspiracies involved here around, for instance, the hush money payments. The Trump Organization, the Trump campaign, these are not sprawling thousand-person companies or campaigns.

[08:10:09] So the fact that you have, basically, all of the non-Trump members of the hush money conspiracy now cooperating with investigators says something about where the prosecutors think that they are heading next. And that should be what really worries the Trump family and Donald Trump himself. And there is an old saying with federal prosecutors, if you are not at the table, you are on the table. And this is looking a lot like the Trump family is on the table now.

TOOBIN: Cool. I never heard that expression.

BERMAN: I can tell by Jeffrey's look -- I can tell by Jeffrey's look --

TOOBIN: I'm stealing that.

(LAUGHTER)

BERMAN: Keep your eyes on "The New Yorker" in the next few weeks. It's going to be the headline there that Jeffrey Toobin will invent out of thin air.

Jeffrey, one thing that we have heard and will hear from Republicans is, sure, Michael Cohen, "national Enquirer." It's not Russia. It is not Russian collusion.

TOOBIN: Yes, that's true. And another thing you start to hear is, well, that's just a process crime. I have never heard the phrase "process crime" until a week ago. You know another word for process crime? Crime. People can come up with all the excuses they want. And it remains true that today there is no prospect of 67 votes in the United States Senate to remove President Trump from office. But that doesn't mean Mueller is going to stop investigating. And more stuff keeps coming out. GREGORY: And I just think this fortifies Democrats who don't think

they're going to build an impeachment case based on this kind of campaign finance violation per se, but where there is more cooperation specifically about Russia, other areas of obstruction of justice if that comes out in a final report. I think it starts to all look different to them.

TOOBIN: John, though, one thing I'd like to add -- if you are not at the table, you are on the table.

(LAUGHTER)

GREGORY: That's what all prosecutors say.

TOOBIN: Yes.

BERMAN: We have a saying that I like to quote in all of my writing.

Jeffrey Toobin, Garrett Graff, David Gregory, thank you all very much. Appreciate it.

HILL: An update for you. The three people trapped in an abandoned West Virginia coal mine for several days have been rescued alive.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

(CHEERS)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HILL: Kayla Williams, Erica Treadway, and Cody Beverly reuniting with their friends and family before being taken to the hospital. Authorities say they went into the cave searching for copper wire. One of four people who initially went into that mine managed to get out late Monday, was able to tell officials the rest of the group was alive and provide information on their location.

BERMAN: That's got to be a great feeling.

HILL: Oh, my goodness. Talk about elated. Big celebration there.

BERMAN: Absolutely.

HILL: There are only nine days to go. So will the White House cut a deal with Democrats to avoid a partial government shutdown? We'll discuss next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[08:16:41] ERICA HILL, CNN ANCHOR: We're now in single digits. Nine days to go for Congress to avoid a partial shutdown by passing multiple spending bills. The deadline complicated by President Trump's demand that Democrats give him billions of dollars to fund his border wall.

All of this, of course, playing out in the televised Oval Office meeting.

Here's a reminder.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: If we don't get what we want one way or the other, whether it's through you, through military, through anything you want to call, I will shut down the government.

SEN. CHUCK SCHUMER (D-NY), MINORITY LEADER: OK. We disagree.

TRUMP: I'll tell you what? I am proud to shut down the government for border security, Chuck. I will take the mantle. I will be the one to shut it down. I'm not going to blame you for it.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HILL: Joining us now, CNN political commentators, Joe Lockhart, who, of course, is White House press secretary during the Clinton administration, and Marc Short, recently director of legislative affairs with the Trump administration.

As we look at all of this, the president, Mark, I'm going to start with you with this one, there are plenty of people who say, you know what? The president -- that's fine, I'm OK with the president owning a shutdown, the president needs to follow through on what he needs to do. Was this a win in some ways for President Trump?

MARC SHORT, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: I guess, the way I look at it is, that probably in the short term, both sides can claim victory. I think Speaker Pelosi continued to solidify support among her conference. She'll be, I think, it's all but assured she'll be the next speaker. And for the Democrat base, they show her standing up to the president.

For the president, this is a promise he made on the campaign trail, that he was going to fight for border security funding. It's something that actually Democrats have voted for before back in 2006 with the Secure Fence Act. I think their opposition now is strictly political and the president believes it is a good contrast to say I'm for border security, they're not.

So in the short-term probably both view it as a victory. But in the long-term, unfortunately, it continues to show a dysfunctional government, a dysfunctional -- you know, it's actually been since Joe Lockhart was in the White House, that Congress actually completed its appropriations of bills on time. He was a teenager then, but the reality is Congress continues to not get its job done, and we're left in this brinksmanship era.

HILL: Which, of course, that leads us to the real loser here and that, Joe, would be, as it often is, the American people when we look at this.

JOE LOCKHART, FORMER CLINTON WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: Well, I agree with several things that Marc said with one disagreement. I think Nancy Pelosi did do an important thing and showed her caucus the best way she could that she's the leader, and she will be the leader. I think that has put to rest any of those questions. I do think the process is the big loser. These things are serious. Mark knows this. You go in and there is a reason you take the cameras out, because you work it out.

And Trump has made a show out of it. I think the loser is the legislative process. It is not all Trump's fault. This was a problem, as Marc referenced.

But, you know, when we get to Trump's campaign promise, there's an intrinsic problem here. He's demanding billions of dollars for funds for something he said on the campaign one thousand times I'm going to get Mexico to pay for it. It is all kind of a sham, a political sham.

We're not going to build an actual wall to have border security. None of the experts believe that. And he promised America that we wouldn't have to pay for it.

So, again, short-term politics, I don't think it helps Trump very much. But long-term I agree, the process is the victim.

HILL: And I do want to let folks at home know, we are just hearing from the president for the first time since we learned about the sentencing for Michael Cohen yesterday.

[08:20:00] The president tweeting: I never directed Michael Cohen to break the law. He was a lawyer, and he is supposed to know the law. It is called advice of counsel, and a lawyer has great liability if a mistake is made. That is why they get paid.

Despite that, many campaign finance lawyers have strongly -- and obviously, there's going to be more, so when we get it, we'll bring it to you. We have not heard from him or his legal team in terms of this agreement with AMI. But it will be interesting to see if we get to that as well.

As we get back to our discussion in terms of what happens now moving forward in a government shutdown, the other thing that's fascinating is when we look at the polling, we talk so much about how split the country is, it is fascinating when you look at it down party lines. Should President Trump compromise to avoid a shut down? Democrats, 71 percent say yes. As you can see, Republicans almost as many saying no. Independents tend to lean toward compromise there, 63 percent saying yes, it's a good idea. You both brought up the point that this is where we're at right now. It's been a long time since there was real compromise.

Marc, how do we get to the point where compromise is no longer a dirty word from either side of the aisle?

SHORT: Right. That's a good question when you see a poll phrased that way. Most Americans are going to want to see compromise. They would say that's a good thing.

But I think where the president is coming from is believing that really what we are here is a political sham because again, when Democrats voted on the Secure Fence Act in 2006, it was a clever way of saying we are going to authorize funding but not appropriate it. What that basically means in Washington speak is I can go home to my constituents and say, yes, I support a wall. But at the same time you never give money for it to happen.

So, you know, when Joe says they're not security experts who believe this is what's needed, in fact, the president's plan is what career officials and customs and border patrol put forward. It's not a political document. It's actually something Customs and Border Patrol career agents that have been there for decades have said this is where we need a physical structure. This is where we see human trafficking, this is where we see drug trafficking, this is where we see human smuggling, this is where I need this physical structure.

And that's what the president has put forward, but it has become so politicized that for Democrats, it's like no way can we give Trump a victory. So, the reality is, you are stuck at an impasse that I don't see this is a way to stop. I think this shutdown will be a prolonged one.

HILL: You are shaking your head in agreement, Joe.

LOCKHART: You know, it is about politics, but I would put the blame more on President Trump for the politics. There was the outline, the frame work of an agreement here which Trump in that meeting blew up where there would be some money. And Trump keeps saying, because he promised in the campaign, I have to have this wall that expands the border.

There are Democrats and Republicans who agree on the basic outlines of how you secure the border. It doesn't involve the wall, as Trump describes it, and it doesn't involve Mexico paying for it. Every time they get close, Trump blows it up. So, again, it is politics.

I think, actually, that given the dynamic of this lame duck Congress of people wanting to get home, the president will be a big player in this that Republicans and Democrats will come together because if there was votes for $5 billion to build the wall, Republicans would take the vote. They don't have the votes in the House among Republicans and they still hold a significant majority there.

But I think, you know, between McConnell and Schumer and Pelosi and Paul Ryan, they will come to an agreement that kicks the ball down the road and we'll be back with this with a Democratic Congress. We'll see if that's different.

HILL: That is something that Congress does well, continue to kick the can down the road. So, we'll watch for that they'll say, I want to go home for the holiday break.

I want to come back to the tweet we saw from the president. He still has not finished this thought, in case you're just joining us though. The president tweeting this morning, this is the first we have heard from him since the sentencing of Michael Cohen, since we learned about this agreement, a cooperation agreement, a non-prosecution agreement with AMI, the publisher of "The National Inquirer".

The president saying he never directed Michael Cohen to break the law. He was a lawyer. He is supposed to know the law. Saying that this is why he gets paid as a lawyer.

Despite that, he goes on to say many campaign finance lawyers have strongly, dot, dot, dot. He doesn't finish, saying that he didn't direct Michael Cohen to do this, he didn't direct him to play, to break the law.

I want to play for you, though, the audio recording we have of them discussing this payment. Take a listen.

(BEGIN AUDIO CLIP)

MICHAEL COHEN, FORMER TRUMP ATTORNEY: And, I have spoken to Allen Weisselberg about how to set the whole thing up with funding.

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: So, what do we got to pay for this one? One-fifty?

COHEN: Yes, and it's all the stuff.

(END AUDIO CLIP)

HILL: So we have that tape. We also have the tape of the president being asked about it on Air Force One and denying any knowledge of it. This story has consistently shifted, Marc, when it comes to the president and what he says he knew about it. And now, he's saying, well, I didn't direct him to. It's on the tape, Marc.

SHORT: Well, Erica, I think there's two sort of things. One is to say I did not direct my counsel to break the law. I think there is a great debate as to whether or not a payment of this sort is a violation of campaign finance or not.

[08:25:02] I think it is pretty realistic to say that somebody who is a celebrity who gets sued for these things would not know whether that's a campaign finance violation or not. And again, that's open for a lot of debate. And more concerning --

HILL: At that point, he was no longer a celebrity. When you're running for president of the United States, these are things that you need to know or surround yourself with people who do know that law.

SHORT: Well, that's a fair point that clearly Michael Cohen does not know the law. I think that's a concern. Then he shouldn't be in that position.

But I think more fundamentally a question is veracity. If the president says that he didn't know about it and there is tape that said he did, that's something that the administration needs to address.

But specific to the president's tweet this morning saying that I never directed him to break the law, I agree with that. I believe that. That's not something that his lawyer should know what the ramifications are or not and advise that back.

HILL: So again we haven't seen him finish that thought yet. We don't know what else is coming in the next tweet. Again, he has not referenced this agreement, non-prosecution agreement with AMI, which specifically, Joe, referenced the fact this was a payment made to shelve a story so it did not harm him.

Hold on. We do have the rest of the tweet. Let's see if we could get that up. We can see it there. I can't see without my glasses. So, I'm calling -- bear with me on this one.

John Berman can read it to me because he's sitting right here, and he can actually -- there we go.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Stated that I did nothing wrong with respect to campaign finance laws, if they even apply, because this was not campaign finance. Cohen was guilty on many charges unrelated to me, but he plead -- should be pleaded -- to two campaign charges which were not criminal and of which he probably was not, dot, dot, dot.

HILL: Thank you, John.

So, go ahead.

LOCKHART: I don't know where to start there. First off, you can't believe anything Donald Trump says on this. You have him on tape making the deal. You have him on Air Force One denying he knew anything about it. So you just can't believe it.

In there, he says Cohen was convicted on things that have nothing to do with me. That's not true. Read the filing. It says that he conspired with individual one, the president, and AMI. Everyone else has agreed. Trump says it has nothing to do with him.

But let's take one step back and say, you know what, maybe they will go in and be able to make it on a technicality that he didn't necessarily break the law. This is a guy who was paying hundreds of thousands of dollars to porn stars and playboy models to keep them quiet.

You know, I think we need to focus on the character of Donald Trump here as well as the law.

HILL: We should point out, too, six of these nine charges not related about things like tax fraud issues, taxi medallions. So, that may be what the president was referencing.

Joe, Marc, appreciate it. Good speaking you both as always. Thank you.

SHORT: Thanks for having us.

HILL: John?

BERMAN: All right. This is going to be one of those tweets we need to dissect with some lawyers because I think his language is very specific. He says: I never directed Michael Cohen to break the law. That's different to saying I never directed Michael Cohen to make the payments to the "Enquirer" or Stormy Daniels. I think that is a key distinction at this point. We'll have to discuss that and much more over the course of the morning.

In the meantime, big development on the Democratic side of the aisle. The 2020 race is upon us. That man made a huge move yesterday that I think tells us everything about who the Democrats fear most and who may be driving the narrative on the Democratic side.

Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)