Return to Transcripts main page
CNN Newsroom
CNN International: Now: Trump In Court For Opening Statements In Criminal Trial; Prosecution: Case Is About Criminal Conspiracy And Coverup; Prosecutor Reads Transcript Of Access Hollywood Tape To Jurors. Aired 11a-12p ET
Aired April 22, 2024 - 11:00 ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
[11:00:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
ERICA HILL, CNN HOST: Good morning. Thanks for joining us here on CNN. I'm Erica Hill outside the courthouse in Lower Manhattan where Donald Trump's criminal trial has resumed. At this hour, the prosecution giving its opening statement.
It is unprecedented right now what is happening in the courthouse behind me. For the first time in history, a former American president is standing trial on criminal charges, 34 felony charges. Opening statements, as I mentioned, are underway right now. Prosecutors are laying out their case, talking about the evidence that they will present, talking about what they see as a pattern, talking about Donald Trump's former attorney and fixer Michael Cohen, who paid, they say, to cover up alleged affairs that could have damaged his 2016 presidential run. The defense likely to set their sights in their opening statement on the credibility of witnesses, including Michael Cohen. Longtime Trump friend and former National Enquirer publisher, David Pecker, is expected to be the first witness today, and could really be a critical one.
The former president did take a minute to stop at the cameras, as he often does, before heading into court. Here is that moment.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
DONALD TRUMP (R), FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT AND 2024 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: I just want to say before we begin, these are all Biden trials. This is done as election interference. Everybody knows that. I'm here instead of being able to be in Pennsylvania and Georgia and lots of other places campaigning. And it's very unfair. Fortunately, the poll numbers are very good. They've been going up because people understand what's going on. This is a witch hunt and it's a shame.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HILL: The president -- the former president there calling it a witch hunt, which is what he has many times, of course, in the past, saying that this is orchestrated from the top down, from the White House. There is no evidence to support that claim that there is any coordination, of course, between President Biden or the White House, and Alvin Bragg, who was a district attorney here in Manhattan.
CNN Senior Crime and Justice Reporter Katelyn Polantz joining me now. The former president complaining too that he is not out on the campaign trail because he has to be here. He does, actually. He has to be in court because he is the defendant here. What we're hearing from the prosecution in these opening statements too is they are really starting to lay the groundwork for just how involved Donald Trump was, they allege, in these hush money payments to cover up an affair ahead of the 2016 election.
KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN SENIOR CRIME AND JUSTICE REPORTER: Yeah. They're saying that you -- to the jury that the jurors will hear, in Donald Trump's own words, his interest here. But, what the juror -- jury is hearing right now in these opening statements that are still continuing. So, the prosecutor, Matthew Colangelo, has been talking for more than a half hour to the jury, giving this opening. He is reframing this as election fraud. He says it was election fraud, pure and simple. He says that what they are going to be hearing about isn't just a business records case. It is a long-running conspiracy that Donald Trump was a key person in. It was his motivation, and then it was a conspiracy to influence the 2016 election.
One of the things the jurors just heard, that we likely will see the evidence of later, is a text message from Stormy Daniels' attorney at the time, who had been in on this scheme to silence her, making sure the payments were getting to her, texting the editor-in-chief of the National Enquirer after election night, saying, what have we done?
And so, the prosecutors are clearly going to be talking quite a lot about what was happening, not just in Donald Trump's business world with Michael Cohen, with Stormy Daniels, but what was happening inside the campaign, how the Access Hollywood tape that came out. The jury is not going to hear or see that tape played in court. They are going to hear emails about it and other things about it in testimony that that made Trump so concerned about what he was going to be portrayed as toward the female voters that it put him in a position to want Michael Cohen and others to help him silence women who would allege affairs.
HILL: And that's interesting too, because this is why the prosecution wanted to show that tape.
POLANTZ: Yes.
HILL: They wanted to show this tape that made a number of people uncomfortable in the country, but also sparked such an alarm within the Trump campaign. The judge, though, was very clear, saying this is to prejudice. You cannot show this. However, we can talk about it.
POLANTZ: Yeah. They're likely to talk about it too with core people from the campaign, one witness that's expected here is Hope Hicks, who was a communications advisor, who was part of the response team when that Access Hollywood tape was coming out.
[11:05:00]
There is other things too that paint that picture that prosecutors want to show to the jury of exactly why Trump was so concerned, this conversation that took place in 2015 where he was talking to David Pecker from AMI, National Enquirer, and Michael Cohen in Trump Tower, about how that publication could help the campaign, could be the eyes and ears of the campaign. So, we're going to hear all of that testimony, potentially beginning today, depending on how much longer this opening statement goes, and then how long Todd Blanche, the defense lawyer speaks.
HILL: So, we have been told to plan for about 40 minutes for the prosecution. As you know, we're about 30 minutes or so, and maybe a little bit more. The defense, we're told, maybe about 25 minutes. That's going to focus more on, we're told, really focused on witnesses and trying to chip away at the credibility of these witnesses. There has been a lot made about Michael Cohen and how he may not be the best witness. That's what the defense wants you to think. That's what the defense wants the jury to know that maybe Michael Cohen can't be trusted, even if he is under oath.
POLANTZ: Yeah. It's not just that either. It's Michael Cohen's credibility. He pleaded guilty. He is recounted some things. So, that is something that prosecutors are going to dig in on whenever Michael Cohen is on the stand. Right? They're going to impeach him. They're going to ask him questions to undermine his credibility before the jury, but they also are very likely going to put a portrait out to the jury that Michael Cohen was his lawyer. It was your legal work. And that's what the books say. That's what the checks say that Donald Trump wrote and signed. What's wrong with that?
And so, we're going to see sort of a two-fold approach by the defense team when they present their opening statement. Todd Blanche, he is in court all the time for Donald Trump. Right now, he is in the courtroom --
HILL: Yeah.
POLANTZ: -- in Florida, in D.C., not going to Georgia case, but in this case, and he is quite a convincing and compelling speaker to the jury to be delivering opening statements. So, it's going to be a morning where we're really getting, not just the nuts and bolts of evidence and witnesses, but also the big picture ideas of both sides.
HILL: Yeah. Absolutely. Katelyn, thank you.
Also with us, National Security Attorney Bradley Moss, former Federal Prosecutor Michael Zeldin, the host of "That Said with Michael Zeldin" podcast. Good to have both of you with us.
Michael, just to pick up on something that Katelyn was just talking about in terms of what's going to be laid out here, as we look at the way the case will be made, it's fascinating to see where the -- to her point, where the defense will try to poke holes in the Michael Cohen of it all, and at the same time point to what they say was legitimate work that Cohen was doing. How do you do both things at once, Michael?
MICHAEL ZELDIN, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR, & HOST, "THAT SAID WITH MICHAEL ZELDIN" PODCAST: Well, you try, as the prosecutor, to bolster your witnesses as best as you can with corroborating other witnesses and corroborating documents. The defense tries very hard to poke as many holes in him as he can, but without destroying his credibility entirely with the points that they need him. It's a fine line that they have to walk. I don't think it's really easily achieved in this case, because Michael Cohen is so critical to the prosecution case that if they say Cohen was a real lawyer doing real work as opposed to a lawyer doing fake stories, they've got a difficult problem because they bolster him in the eyes of the jury. So, we'll see if they can walk this fine line. I don't think it's really easily walked.
HILL: As we watch for that, Bradley, these -- as we're seeing the opening statements continue to play out, and as we've talked about briefly in the last hour, the fact that the prosecution has said we're going back to the beginning. We are going to start on day one when this plan, they allege, was hatched for this catch and kill plan to take the negative stories, make sure they don't get out there, to make sure they get killed with some help from the National Enquirer, from David Pecker. They're setting up this narrative and then this timeline. If we get to that first witness today, it's expected, of course, to be David Pecker, where do you imagine they pick up with him? Do they start with him at the very beginning, and how important will he be in weaving this thread?
BRADLEY MOSS, NATIONAL SECURITY ATTORNEY, & PARTNER, LAW OFFICE OF MARK S. ZAID: Sure. Yeah. I think actually what they'll start with Mr. Pecker is sort of outlining the foundation of his relationship with Mr. Trump. It wasn't just something that came out of nowhere in 2015. They had long been friends and he had -- they long had interactions, but then particularly honing in on this 2015 meeting between him, Trump and Michael Cohen, were this scheme, this criminal scheme to essentially use the National Enquirer with Trump as the funds and Michael Cohen as the fixer to catch and kill these stories and further into the campaign, not because they were trying to help Donald Trump in his personal life because this was all about the campaign, this was all about the upcoming election of 2016, and to deprive the public of the right to know what these women's -- what these various stories were about and these accusations against Mr. Trump.
[11:10:00]
So, that is where I expect them to lay this out in direct examination. And let's be clear, it's going to be a very interesting cross- examination, which I expect will be tomorrow, in terms of what Pecker actually was told, what he understood, and the extent of his actual interactions with Trump, as opposed to Michael Cohen.
HILL: Speaking of Michael Cohen. I do want to -- Michael, we're just hearing now in the opening statements. They are addressing that Michael Cohen, if at all, if you will, saying that you're going to hear a lot about Michael Cohen in this trial, and I suspect the defense will go to great lengths to get you to reject his testimony precisely because it's so damning, going on to say he has made mistakes in his past, Michael, it is critical that the prosecution also addressed the shortcomings of Michael Cohen as a witness and be very transparent about that. ZELDIN: Exactly. Prosecutors know, Bradley and I, both have done it, what you do what they call taking the wind out of the sails, meaning you say, look, my witnesses aren't perfect. There are problems. I admit it. Here is what they are. However, at the bottom line, what they are saying is true and that truth is supported by other witnesses, David Pecker for one, as Brad talked about. David Pecker can not only talk about what went on in respect of Stormy Daniels, but that he has done this before with Karen McDougal. So, this is not a one-off mistake. This is a pattern of behavior.
And so, Cohen is to be credited because people like Pecker and the business records themselves will corroborate what he has to say. So, he has got his warts and he did go to jail. But, in this case, for this evidence, with this supporting character of Pecker and others, he is to be believed.
HILL: Bradley, we're also hearing about some of this evidence that is going to be put forth during the trial from the prosecution. They're talking about the recording of a phone call with Donald Trump and Michael Cohen. They're talking about text messages. How important is it going to be to have that type of evidence, the paper trail, if you will, in addition to the witness testimony?
MOSS: That's going to be the heart of all this because, like Michael was saying, Michael Cohen has his warts and he is not the greatest, most credible of witnesses. But, between Pecker's testimony and all these tests, all these documents, all these recordings, that is what will make the foundation for this case if the prosecution is to secure a guilty verdict.
And I'd expect a whole lot of lovely technological imagery, showing this off for the jurors, putting everything in chronological order, maybe split screens between what was going on in the media, what was being reported at CNN, with the text messages between Trump and Cohen and the campaign team, as they're reacting to these various damaging accusations coming out of Access Hollywood, that will be how they outline the story, and that is how they will reinforce the testimony from someone like Michael Cohen. There is plenty of people in jail to this day, who were put there by jailhouse snitches and corrupt former subordinates. Donald Trump would not be the first person convicted on that kind of testimony.
HILL: Yeah, and they're noting too the bank records, the transcripts. Prosecutors are saying in those statements that they say will back up Michael Cohen's testimony.
Katelyn Polantz is still with me here. Katelyn, we're also getting some really interesting detail about what Donald Trump is doing, what the defense is doing, during these opening statements. Obviously, you're watching it very closely. Would it not be surprising, perhaps, to have the defense -- defendant rather, and the attorney sort of looking at each other? But, this is Donald Trump. So, it raises it to a different level.
POLANTZ: Yeah. He is engaged, clearly. What our reporters in the courtroom are saying is he is writing notes. He is passing them to his attorneys. He is not having discernible reactions to what the prosecutor is saying. He was looking at the jury a little bit earlier. He had his eyes closed during the instructing of the jury. But, that engagement of passing notes, talking to his attorneys, they're going to be responding in a lot of ways to what the prosecution says and does. And so, they have to make determinations on the fly.
They might be talking about that. They might be talking about totally different things. I mean, we see --
HILL: What you want for lunch? I mean, in all seriousness, you never know what those notes are.
POLANTZ: Yeah. And the other thing in being in the courtroom with Trump in other venues in Florida --
HILL: Yeah.
POLANTZ: -- for several hours over hearings, he talks to Todd Blanche a lot.
HILL: A lot.
POLANTZ: They're really comfortable with each other. And as proceedings are going on, even really dense legal things, Trump will lean over. He will whisper something. Blanche will chuckle to himself.
[11:15:00]
They talk.
HILL: To pick up on that point, does their relationship seem to be -- you were saying to get along very well.
POLANTZ: Yeah.
HILL: Right? We don't hear a lot of Todd Blanche throwing out some of these wild conspiracy theories or talking points that we have heard other attorneys in the past for Donald Trump throughout there.
POLANTZ: Yeah.
HILL: Does that speak to their relationship? Does it speak to does Donald Trump respect him more as an attorney? Are we -- am I overreaching on that?
POLANTZ: I don't know. I think it's more that everybody has a role to play.
HILL: Yes.
POLANTZ: There is different types of attorneys around Trump and Michael Cohen. At what point was there an attorney for Trump?
HILL: Sure.
POLANTZ: Todd Blanche is leading a trial team. HILL: Yeah.
POLANTZ: Right? And he is leading a trial team not just here in New York, but in Florida, and in D.C. in a lot of ways. So, he is responding to a vast amount of information and the other -- there is a woman, a female attorney, Susan Necheles, who is in the courtroom as well. She is a New York specialist.
HILL: Yeah.
POLANTZ: Blanche is too. He had a long career here. But then, there is another attorney in that courtroom on this case sitting next to them that was out of the team more recently, a man named Emil Bove, who is really well known on the federal side in New York as a national security prosecutor. He worked for the Justice Department for a very long time, was very high up, and is, by all accounts, a very competent lawyer on undermining the law or looking at the law for people either previously as a prosecutor, now as a defense attorney.
So, seeing what they do and how they react to the courtroom, their demeanors, what they say, how they respond to certain points prosecutors bring out, that's why these guys had big careers --
HILL: Yeah.
POLANTZ: -- and that's why they're representing the former president in this case.
HILL: One last quick question for you, Michael Zeldin. In terms of that national security implication, the fact of the attorney who has been brought on, Bove, that that is his background, what does that tell you about the defense, and why they think it's important to have this attorney on that team?
ZELDIN: It's not really clear to me why they would need a national security person on their team. It may be simply that he is just a good lawyer, and they need good lawyers. Trump has had a very few number of lawyers who are considered good lawyers. And so, you might get that. In this case, though, the national security implications of it are remote. They are way more relevant to Mar-a-Lago and to January 6. So, maybe he is giving him a trial run to keep him in his camp. But, I'm not really clear why a national security lawyer would have any real role to play in this trial.
HILL: Yeah, one of many questions right now. All right, everyone. Stay with us. We're going to take a quick break here, as we reset. On the other side, one of Donald Trump's attorneys saying he feels good about their chances to win this trial. We're going to take a closer look at the defense and their case. Stick around.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[11:20:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK) HILL: All right. As we continue to trial -- cover, rather, the criminal trial for Donald Trump here, earlier, one of his attorneys told CNN's Jake Tapper his client did nothing wrong and that this is, quote "a winning case for us." Attorney Scharf saying, the biggest challenge here is going to be getting the jury to focus on the fact and not other, quote "noise".
Joining me now here outside the courtroom in Lower Manhattan is Kristen Holmes. You have covered the former president extensively for years now. Take us inside this legal team. We were talking before the break about Todd Blanche, the lead on this team, and that they seem to have a really good relationship. Donald Trump seems to really like him as an attorney.
KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN U.S. NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: He likes him and he respects him. Todd Blanche has done a very good job at playing the game, which is the game of Donald Trump. And you have to be a very specific personality. You have to be brash. You have to be bold. You have to always give the illusion that you are fighting as hard as possible. Now, the other benefit that Todd Blanche has is that he is a very well-known and well-respected lawyer.
So, on top of the fact that you have this verbal out there defending Donald Trump and looking like a -- nobody wants a killer. Having a killer out there, you also have somebody who has the credentials to back it up, which is not always the case when you look at Donald Trump's various lawyer. So, Todd Blanche has really earned Donald Trump's respect. But, in addition to that, he just likes him. Trump just likes him. He really values him. And we've seen this kind of iteration of the legal team over the last several months. And he has landed here with Todd Blanche really leading the way on a variety of his cases, and that's exactly where Donald Trump wants it.
HILL: So, as we look at that, they are rounding out the rest of the legal team too. It is a little bit different than what we have seen in recent cases, right, in terms of who Todd Blanche has around him.
HOLMES: Well, that's right.
HILL: It all looks a little bit more serious.
HOLMES: It is more serious, and that's exactly what they wanted. That's why they brought Todd Blanche in, in the first place. They didn't want to meet for TV lawyer. They originally had a different lawyer in the case. We won't name him, but it was somebody who wanted to be on television all the time, who sought every opportunity to. That's not what you're getting with Todd Blanche. What you're getting is a serious lawyer who is going to, again, be a killer in the courtroom, which is what he is looking for.
And I do think they take this case very seriously. And I heard that lawyer say or you quoted that lawyer saying that they believe that Donald Trump will be innocent. I haven't talked to anyone who really believes there is going to be an all-out acquittal here. But, what they are hoping for is a hung jury. They want to find one sympathetic juror. And that's why the jury selection was so incredibly important to them. They know where they are. And it is true to say that Manhattan is an area that skews left. But, they are looking for that one sympathetic juror who might be able to make this a hung jury, in which case, they would push this until after the presidential election, which would complicate everything if he was in fact elected.
HILL: Which was interesting too in some of the comments that we saw from Donald Trump on Friday night, saying, and I'm paraphrasing here, that the judge really wanted to move this case long quickly. I didn't, which we know --
HOLMES: Right.
HILL: -- because his tactic has always been delay, delay, delay.
HOLMES: Right.
HILL: But, the fact that jury selection did go so quickly. And by most accounts, the jury itself, I mean, to your point, yes, the city may skew a certain way. But, that doesn't mean everybody in this town, right --
HOLMES: No.
HILL: -- is a registered Democrat or is anti-Donald Trump.
HOLMES: Absolutely.
HILL: And what -- I think what we saw really clearly in this cross- section of New Yorkers who now make up the jury pool is it's actually fairly diverse.
HOLMES: It is. And we saw what kind of news they look at, if they looked at news at all.
HILL: Yes.
HOLMES: We saw what they did for a living. If they -- obviously, everyone knows who Donald Trump is, which was -- is what makes this so hard for a jury, and particularly because Donald Trump himself, as we know, is a polarizing figure. But, we did see a huge cross-section of New York, I actually think that makes it harder for their argument that this could be a biased jury, because of what we saw, because of who we saw come into that courtroom. I mean, you have people who said that they tended to like him. They liked his policies. And I think that was surprising for the former president who thought this was going to be completely crushing when it came to jurors in the city.
HILL: I also want to note, we're getting some of the reports just from inside the courtroom, right? So, Todd Blanche speaking now, talking about in this opening statement, talking about Stormy Daniels, talking about that payment, talking about why the payments were neat, but saying very clearly this was Michael Cohen. He was President Trump's personal attorney, he says -- says Todd Blanche. You will see the documents, important to note too, and saying that there is going to be Michael Cohen's signature, right, on his emails. Important to note, in one of the first days of the trial last week, we
saw Donald Trump, when he would stop for the cameras on his way into court, he said unprompted, you know, these were all legal expenses. This was all legal. This was a legal campaign expense. Interesting that he threw it out there.
HOLMES: Yes.
HILL: There is some question about whether that may come back to haunt him or not. As we get into witness testimony, Todd Blanche is putting that out there too, saying, hey, look, this was all aboveboard.
HOLMES: Right. And that's what really tends to happen with Donald Trump. And what we've seen in the past in various cases is that Donald Trump communicates through other people, and we've heard Michael Cohen, for example, testify at one point. Well, he didn't say this.
[11:25:00]
He was about something else, but he said he didn't say it directly, but I knew what he meant --
HILL: Right.
HOLMES: -- when he said it. Donald Trump tended to, for most of his life, really act through others. He didn't keep cell phone for most of the time. He used other people's cell phones just to make calls. He only started text messaging in the last year, and he didn't do any emails. So, there wasn't a huge record. Now, that's why it is so interesting that we now hear that there is a tape that was recorded on a cell phone. Now, it's not related to Stormy Daniels, but to this other issue with Karen McDougal. But, the fact that there is a taped recording, that's going to be interesting and comes in play, also is going to kind of lead us to wonder if there is other tapes that might come out.
HILL: So, you read my mind on that, because I was thinking the same thing, because what we have seen this pattern of behavior over the years is that Donald Trump does not leave a paper trail.
HOLMES: Right.
HILL: And that's important.
HOLMES: It is. And that's -- well, it's important legally.
HILL: Yes.
HOLMES: And that's why he has been able to kind of walk away from a lot of this stuff, because of the fact that there really is no paper trail, and there is a lot of innuendo. When you're hearing these conversations that people are relaying, it's not always, Oh, he told me to do this. It's that he said get this done, and I knew what he meant.
HILL: Right. HOLMES: And so, that's kind of the conversation we're going to see play out here. And clearly, based on just what we've seen so far, they are going to put this on Michael Cohen. And we've known for a long time that they planned on making him a central witness and painting him as a perjurer, a serial perjurer, a serial liar. Of course, we know that he was. He was. He did lie on the stand. So, that's something that they don't have to make a far stretch for. It's also something that we know that the prosecution has talked to the jury about. They said some of these people are people who are possibly unsavory characters. How would that impact your decision? That's going to be a concern for them as well.
HILL: Yeah.
HOLMES: And then, we know that's what the defense wants to harp on.
HILL: Absolutely. And the prosecution, of course, bringing that up at the end of their opening statement. Todd Blanche sort of picking up with that in the defense's opening statement. All right. Kristen, thank you. We will be chatting more.
HOLMES: Yeah. Of course.
HILL: Just ahead, our special coverage continues here live in New York. Donald Trump's historic criminal trial is in full swing. Again, the defense now presenting its opening statement. More on that after this quick break.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HILL: Welcome back. Just about half past the hour here. I'm Erica Hill in New York, where the defense is now delivering its opening statement in Donald Trump's criminal hush money trial. Prosecutors have, of course, they have the burden here. They need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Donald Trump falsified business records with the intent to commit or conceal their crime. Before heading into court this morning, Trump once again slammed the trial as unfair.
[11:30:00]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
TRUMP: This is done as election interference. Everybody knows that. I'm here instead of being able to be in Pennsylvania and Georgia and lots of other places campaigning, and it's very unfair.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
HILL: Katelyn Polantz joining me now. This is week two now, officially, for this criminal hush money trial. And what is happening in this moment is the defense is offering its opening statement. We're getting these live updates from our colleagues in the courtroom. And we just learned a couple of really interesting things, including there are plans for at least one witness from the defense.
POLANTZ: Yeah. That means the defense plans to present a case. They'll call someone. You don't always have that. Sometimes, it's just up to whether the defendant wants to testify or not. But, they're clearly saying that there is an employee that is going to be talking about these payments. A word from Blanche, though, Todd Blanche, whose is Trump's primary defense attorney, from a quote, "I have a spoiler alert. There is nothing wrong with trying to influence an election. It's called democracy." So, that's the counter-framing that Todd Blanche and the defense team is trying to put forth to this jury.
They just heard quite extensively from prosecutors that their evidence is about how payments to Stormy Daniels and falsified business records are all to try and assist Donald Trump in defrauding voters to not learn about his alleged relationship.
HILL: That is interesting. It's called democracy. It is quite a quote, and I have a feeling we'll be hearing more of that. Also, I think it's interesting too going back on. President Trump had nothing to do with this, right, which is not unexpected from this defense to really lay up the case of he was not involved. First of all, it's not what you think it is. He was not involved here. I mean, sure, he may have had to sign something. This was all -- Michael Cohen was doing this. Michael Cohen was doing this. Hey, look at Michael Cohen.
POLANTZ: Tight. Michael Cohen is there. So, they're going to be trying to create this distance between Trump and Michael Cohen's actions. That is what it appears the employee that they planned to call to testify as a defense witness, that that -- what that person may be attesting to.
Another couple of interesting things here. Todd Blanche is saying to the jury that they don't believe this is a crime. The other thing that he had to address with the jury is that he is going to call Trump throughout this proceeding "President Trump". And what Blanche said to the jury is that's because he has earned our respect. He is the former President of the United States, the 45th president. So, just making sure that they're addressing all of the things, setting the terms. This is how we're going to talk about Trump. In the prosecutors' opening statement, you heard something similar where they were saying some of these witnesses you're going to hear bad things about, but that's not what we want you to look at. So, this is really a framing up of how the next days are going to go.
HILL: It certainly is. And there is going to be a lot to these next several days and several weeks. We also are expected to hear more about David Pecker, who, of course, is expected to be the first witness and his role here, as he helps to, the prosecution hopes, set up this chain of events, but really also set up this plan that was essentially in place.
POLANTZ: Yeah, and he made an agreement with prosecutors years ago that AMI wouldn't be his company, wouldn't be prosecuted in exchange for his information. So, he is testifying under an immunity agreement. So, not the most willing of witnesses, but someone who has information because he was in the room for conversations where Donald Trump and Michael Cohen were talking to him about how the National Enquirer could be used to help the campaign? That's the important part the prosecutors want to emphasize about the gift. And not just a general idea where Trump wanted to make these payments for Cohen for legal services.
And so, David Pecker, he is going to be expected to be the first person to take the stand as a prosecution witness. The prosecutors may even get to him today. It looks like. We're only at 11:30. We have a whole hour of court left --
HILL: right.
POLANTZ: -- to be adjourned, as planned today. So, David Pecker could be called, and he will be questioned by prosecutors to lay out who he is and what he did. There will be evidence that's brought in. Can you show us? We have this email here. Can we show this to the jury? That's how that will go. And then, once his testimony is done, laying out what the prosecutors say they want from him, that he was part of this campaign apparatus to help Trump, that then the defense team will get a shot at questioning Pecker too.
HILL: Which will be fascinating in its own right, right, as we see that cross-examination and all of them. Stay with me. Also with us this hour, National Security Attorney Bradley Moss, and former Federal Prosecutor Michael Zeldin, host of the "That Said with Michael Zeldin" podcast. Good to have both of you with us.
As we're looking at all of this, Bradley, picking up where Katelyn and I were just talking about in terms of the defense now in its opening statements, saying very clearly there is going to be -- we will have witnesses on our side as well. And I found it fascinating too, telling the jury you will hear us refer to the defendant Donald Trump as the president because he earned that.
[11:35:00]
He earned our respect. I've been talking with attorneys in recent days, who were reminding me there is a reason that prosecutors refer to the defendant as the defendant and not by their name. So, it's interesting to see this turn here.
MOSS: Yeah. It's certainly done sort of reduced the prestige, in particular, with respect to Mr. Trump. That's what the prosecutors want to do with these jurors, sort of bring him down to the normal level with everybody else. Obviously, Donald Trump's lawyers are going to do what -- I'm going to preserve for an audience of one and that audience is Donald Trump. He wants them to present him in a certain way. That's what they're going to do.
But, as we hear and we read these snippets from the opening statement from Todd Blanche, what we're getting is essentially what I would describe as the "My Cousin Vinny" response. If the, everything the prosecution just said, that's all BS. That's going to be how they frame this, that the prosecution has misstated and misconstrued the facts. They misunderstand the extent of knowledge of Donald Trump and what Michael Cohen was doing, and that their whole argument is BS. That's how they're going to try to frame this up in their presentation. It sounds like they'll have at least one witness. I, again, have no reason to believe Donald Trump will ever get on that stand and testify. But, that's what they're going to do to try to put some reasonable doubt, hopefully get at least one juror so they can have a hung jury.
HILL: And Michael Zeldin, we were talking extensively about Michael Cohen. Todd Blanche bringing up Michael Cohen right now, talking about Todd Blanche saying how Michael Cohen wanted a job in the administration after the 2016 election, didn't get one, laying out who they believe he is. This is a person that defense really wants to paint as a terrible witness, someone that the jury should not trust, someone that they can't trust, someone who wrote a book called "Revenge". As they bring up each one of these nuggets, how important is it that the defense tie those together for their own narrative?
ZELDIN: Well, it's important that they undermine the Cohen testimony. The problem they have with the Cohen testimony is Cohen is not a sole witness. This is not a he said, he said case. This is Michael Cohen, as supported by Hope Hicks, as supported by David Pecker, as supported by business records, as supported by the absence of any work product that Cohen may have done to merit the $400,000 that he got paid in repayment for the $130,000. So, there is a lot of supporting evidence, and then there is a lot of unanswered questions. Like, if this were a bonafide legal arrangement between the Trump Organization and Cohen, where is Cohen's work product? What did he do to merit this amount of money? And it doesn't exist.
And so, I think that they've got a problem here. Blanche said, as to the business records, these are just 34 pieces of paper. True enough, they are 34 pieces of paper, but they were fraudulent entries in the books and records of a corporation, which were then presented to the state. So, I think he has got a difficult situation. And you saw that in his opening statement when he says, well, boldly, at first, my client is innocent. And then, he says, yeah, but you know, if he is not innocent, there is reasonable doubt. So, you know, maybe he is not innocent, but maybe there is reasonable doubt.
So, he has got to walk a fine line because he knows he has got really no credible affirmative defense. All he can do is try to poke holes. I don't think he is going to get there. But, he is going to do his best because he is a good lawyer.
HILL: Bradley, so there is a chance that David Pecker, who is expected to be the first witness, could be called very soon as soon as the defense wraps the court. It is ending a little bit earlier today, at 12:30 local time. How much potentially could the prosecution get through if they were to put David Pecker on the stand today?
MOSS: Yeah. I don't expect them to certainly finish up direct examination today. It's going to take -- even if it's a full hour, that's going to take some time in terms of laying out the foundation of the relationship between Donald Trump and David Pecker in general, may be getting into the beginnings of the scheme set forth in 2015 for the catch-and-kill operation. I don't expect them to get through everything in a course of an hour. I fully expect that tomorrow, when the jury and trial resumes, that it will be a full day of David Pecker because I expect a very thorough cross-examination from Todd Blanche, especially on the issue of how much Pecker really talked with Trump, as opposed to, we're going to keep talking about this the whole trial, Michael Cohen. How much this was really a scheme with Michael Cohen? HILL: It's interesting, Katelyn, as we're getting these updates from our colleagues in the courtroom. The DA's office are actually objecting to things that are in the defense's opening statement about Michael Cohen lying, which were sustained.
[11:40:00]
This is fascinating. We're watching this play out really in real time how they're reacting to one another's opening statement.
POLANTZ: Yes. This is how it works. You do get objections, and the judge has to figure out what to allow and what not to allow, making judgment calls as the trial progresses. It's really a living, breathing thing that happens in that courtroom in real time. So, what the DA's office is objecting to, according to our reporters there, are two statements that the defense team, Todd Blanche, in his opening to the jury says about Michael Cohen lying. He has called Cohen here a convicted perjurer. He has also brought up some of the other things. Michael Cohen has been charged with and served prison time on.
Remember, though, those perjury charges, I believe were about Michael Cohen lying to Congress on behalf of Donald Trump and then coming clean with his story and becoming this key witness, very outspoken, very well-known witness against Donald Trump, not just in this case, but in the federal investigation that never resulted in charges. So, there is a lot here. But, all of this is just setting the table. This isn't the evidence. This is the presentation of what's to come in this trial.
So, what the prosecutors are saying is, when they opened, you're going to hear from Michael Cohen. You're going to have to judge his credibility. There might be some things that you hear about him that you're not going to like. But, we also have, and we will show you, jurors, bank records, emails, texts, phone logs, business records. What the defense team is doing now is saying, this is how our site is going to work. We're going to question some witnesses very harshly. We're not going to question some witnesses at all, or very little. And this is the stuff that you should remember about Michael Cohen. He is obsessed with Trump. And even just a few hours ago, was talking publicly about how he is excited for this day to have finally arrived.
HILL: Their goal is to say you cannot trust Michael Cohen --
POLANTZ: Yes.
HILL: -- because he is obsessed with the former president. We'll see. We'll see how that all plays out. It is certainly not boring, as opening statements go. We are seeing that there will be likely firing witnesses, but also this really interesting paper trail and these documents that the prosecution has told us they're going to have, to your point, for a recording of a phone call, and for a person like the former president who does not tend to leave a paper trail. It'll be interesting to see what that evidence turns out to be.
POLANTZ: Well, one of the things prosecutors said they have that we haven't heard yet and we are likely to hear in the evidence presentation, likely when Cohen testifies, is a recording, where he is speaking to Trump on a call about paying off another woman, Karen McDougal, to keep her quiet. So, bringing all of that together is going to be really -- it will be exciting to watch because it'll come out piece by piece --
HILL: Yeah.
POLANTZ: -- by piece, question by question. Things will build as prosecutors are questioning these people toward evidence that then gets shown and heard, and then we very likely will be able to see that evidence later on and hear it for themselves if we are not in the courtroom. But, it is going to be a lot for the jury to --
HILL: Yeah.
POLANTZ: -- weigh here.
HILL: It really is.
POLANTZ: And there is going to be a lot of -- and the thing is the evidence is what the face -- the case will be based on. But, sometimes with these witnesses, even the least credible of witnesses, they're there to be narrators, to sort of put the ideas together. And sometimes, even if they're not very credible in the cross-examination, they are people that are charming. You never know how someone's personality is going to come across on the stand when they're under that questioning in the courtroom.
HILL: Although you would think, if the lawyering is being done, they're mapping this out ahead of time, and they're hoping for a particular reaction based on maybe how they saw things play out, as they're getting ready for trial.
All right. Katelyn, thank you.
Stay with us. Our coverage continues just ahead, including a look at how this plays out politically. CNN Political Commentator S.E. Cupp here to discuss how this is going to play out on the campaign trail.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[11:45:00]
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HILL: The defense, at this moment, continuing its opening statement in the criminal trial, the hush money trial against Donald Trump. A short time ago, prosecutors telling jurors in their opening statement, the case is a criminal conspiracy and a cover-up. The former president has pleaded not guilty to 34 felony counts of falsifying business records. This, of course, is connected to the alleged scheme to cover up those payments as hush money payments to an adult film star ahead of the 2016 election to keep that alleged affair quiet.
Katelyn Polantz is with me, along with National Security Attorney Bradley Moss, former Federal Prosecutor Michael Zeldin, and also S.E. Cupp, CNN Political Commentator. Good to see all of you.
S.E., you're new to the party. We're going to you first, my friend. When we look at this and how it's all playing out, Donald Trump has continued as recently as this morning walking into court, throwing out his greatest hits, right, calling this a witch hunt, saying it's unfair. What's interesting, I think, is how his defenders, how his surrogates have been picking up on their messaging over the weekend. The Governor of South Dakota, Chris Sununu, telling our colleague Dana Bash that she -- every single day of the week, she said I will support Donald Trump, and then went on to say there is so much going on here. They're all these confusing cases. The people that I talked to, they're not concerned with that. They're worry about paying their gas bill, putting food on the table.
S.E., how effective is that sort of divergent line of campaigning, if you will, and talking about the former president? How effective is that going to be?
S.E. CUPP, CNN POLITICAL REPORTER: Yeah. Listen, this is a little messy from a political standpoint, from an analysis of the politics of this. On the one hand, Kristen Holmes is right. Most people are not paying close attention to these trials. It's not that they're confused by them. It's that they're not paying attention, and they're focused on other things. For people who are paying attention, either nominally or because they have a real interest, I think they see what most people can see, which is that Trump is in a pretty precarious spot. He is facing some pretty serious legal jeopardy in this trial, and some of the ones that are upcoming. And for MAGA, of course, this is all very energizing. But, most of America is not MAGA.
And when you look at the Republican Party right now, including Kristi Noem and other folks that are having to talk about Trump on trial or defend Trump on trial, here is a really interesting thing. You are being forced to choose between two awful news cycles and figure out which is going to be less distracting and damaging. You've got Trump trials on one hand, and the thing that Republicans have been dealing with for the past month, which is women's reproductive rights. Those are two big drags on the Republican Party. And believe it or not, Republicans might be a little happy to have these Trump trials as a distraction from the reproductive rights conversation, which was not going well for Republicans. So, it's a choice -- it's an unenviable choice to have to make in the Republican Party, but that's where you're at.
HILL: It is fascinating to hear you put it in those, I think, to frame it quite wisely, the fact that the Trump trial is actually at this point, S.E., sort of a welcome distraction.
CUPP: Yeah. I mean, it might be easier --
HILL: And amazing as we see --
CUPP: Sorry. Go ahead.
HILL: It's also, though -- sorry, but I wanted to say too, it's also, perhaps not surprisingly, continues to be a motivation for fundraising. We saw it over the weekend. This is not a surprise. It's also being used to drum up support even if it may not be what they want.
[11:50:00]
This is often an effective fundraising tool.
CUPP: It is and they need it. And so, Republicans are leaning into this and Trump is leaning into this to drive fundraising. They're facing a cash deficit against the Democrats and Biden. So, that's important, and that's been useful for them, of course. But, on the other hand, they know that outside of the MAGA base, this is not good for the president in a general election. So, playing just to the MAGA base is a strategy. Now, Trump has an advantage and that his base is a lot more loyal right now then Biden's base. Biden' base is fractured. Biden's base is telling him that he is messing up on X, Y, and Z issue. His coalitions are more fragile. So, Donald Trump playing to a base that he knows is loyal, might not be a bad idea, but he is going to have to win more voters, and these trials are not going to help them do that.
HILL: So, the defense has just finished its opening statement. Michael Zeldin, one of the last things he said, Todd Blanche saying, use your common sense. We're New Yorkers. It's why we're here. And we trust you decide the case and the evidence, going on to say, if you do that, there will be a very swift, not guilty verdict. Michael, this is it. Now, we are moving in to the trial itself. David Pecker expected to be this first witness here. For folks who are just joining us, what are you watching for in this initial witness that will set the tone moving forward?
ZELDIN: Well, two things. First, in respect of the closing statements, what they said about Cohen was he has a motive, a financial motive to destroy Donald Trump. That is what his livelihood depends on. That's a new aspect of their attack on Cohen. Similarly, we saw, or conversely what we saw the prosecutor saying is, Donald Trump had a motive to do this. So, you have got these battling motives. And so, the question will be, how does David Pecker fit into the narrative that the prosecutors' opening statement set out? And one thing that the prosecution has an advantage here is, they're going to only have direct examination of Pecker before they take a break overnight.
And I used to, in my trials, love that situation where I could get my witness out there, have his story be unattacked, have the juries ruminate on it overnight, come to perhaps a conclusion and then have the defense have the opportunity or the challenge to overcome that. So, I think they're going to try to get as much as they can from Pecker to lay the foundation that this was a case where he knows what Trump's motive was, and he knew what the MO of Trump was. And that that is the basis upon which we'll move forward and see how other witnesses establish the same pattern and practice, which will lead to a vote of guilty at the end of the trial.
HILL: Michael, Bradley, S.E., thank you all. Stay with us. We're going to take a quick break here. We're back with another update for you on the other side. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)
HILL: Welcome back. A quick 10-minute break now underway for former President Trump's criminal hush money trials.
[11:55:00]
A video of him just leaving for this 10-minute break a short time ago. Court will resume in just about five minutes at the top of the hour at noon. Before we get to that, Katelyn Polantz is with me. Real quickly, the defense just finished its opening statement. Wrap up for us when they say they're going to do moving forward.
POLANTZ: Yeah. So the 35 minutes of opening statements from Todd Blanche, the defense lawyer, are largely about three people that they likely see as problematic witnesses for Trump, David Pecker from AMI, National Enquirer, who is likely to take the stand today, Michael Cohen and Stormy Daniels. And not only do they want to undermine the credibility of these witnesses, here is how he said they want to do it. He wants to point out that all of these people benefited in some way, that Michael Cohen has made a career of pushing back publicly against Trump, that David Pecker was trying to sell newspapers of the National Enquirer, and Stormy Daniels was -- has been paid for books, documentary, and that she really wanted to embarrass Trump.
That's likely what they're going to do every single time they get an opportunity to question these people that are called as prosecution and witness.
HILL: That's where we can see them coming back. Katelyn, appreciate it, as always.
Stay with us. Another quick break here. Thanks so much for joining us this hour. Our special coverage will pick up at the top of the hour. I'm Erica Hill.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
