Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Event/Special

Hush Money Trial Underway, Supreme Court Hears Trump Case Soon. Aired 9:30-10a ET

Aired April 25, 2024 - 09:30   ET

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

[09:30:01]

DANIEL DALE, CNN REPORTER: He said there's not a person within five blocks, that is categorically untrue. There was a designated protest zone right across the street at a park, literally right across the street from the courthouse. And the fact is that very few, just a handful of pro-Trump demonstrators have shown up there not being prevented from going there by police as he claimed on social media the other day.

He said a whole bunch of things about a whole bunch of topics, tons of people from prisons and mental institutions flooding cross the border. There's no evidence of that. And his own campaign has not been able well to produce any evidence, but I've repeatedly inquired. He said we built 571 miles of border wall. That's more than 100 miles exaggerated, 458, including much of which was replacement wall, secondary wall, rather than a new wall and unguarded areas.

He said California gas prices were just announced at $7.60. That's something you hear from him a lot. There may be a station or two somewhere in California where that's true. The average though today is $5.41. So, more than $2 off there.

He also complained about the dollar crashing, as you said? Well, he also complained on social media this week that the dollar had just hit a 34-year high against the yen. So he's complaining from both ends of this.

The reality is understand, the dollar is significantly stronger against foreign currencies than it was when he left office and he repeated his claim, you hear a lot from him that we had no wars. Now, generously, you can say that he was suggesting he didn't start any war. But as we know, he certainly presided over a number of wars. He presided over the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, did not fully withdraw U.S. troops, troops in Syria and other countries.

So no war is at very least significant exaggeration.

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: Yeah, the idea that this whole area, too, is locked down, that nobody can get in and out.

DALE: It's not.

COOPER: I mean, as you said, it's just simply not -- DALE: You can you can hail a cab --

COOPER: There were just some anti-Trump protesters blocking a street and they were able to do that. I mean, so there's -- yeah, if people want it to come down and be supporting him, there --

DALE: Yeah. Let me -- excuse me. Let me just add the courthouse is open to the public. If Trumps supporters want to attend the trial, they can go into the courtroom if they line up early enough. You can take a taxi, an Uber, your own car to the front of the courthouse. It is not fully locked down.

So, he's saying this to suggest that's why we don't have this massive pro-Trump demonstration. People, some people can't get close, but they can get close and they're not showing up.

COOPER: Daniel Dale, thanks very much.

Back with Karen Friedman Agnifilo here, and CNN's Kara Scannell.

Let's talk about what we expect to happen today. Before the jury comes in, it's very possible, Judge Jan Merchan may rule on the gag order.

KARA SCANNELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. I mean, that's one thing were looking for today to see if he does rule on this gag order and if he does -- if he addresses Donald Trump to make sure he understands what the judges findings are here.

Of course, prosecutors have asked the judge to fine Trump in contempt for violating gag order. They say ten times, find him the maximum of thousand dollars per violation require them to take down the post and also warn him that he could face 30 days in jail if he continues to violate this gag order. They said they weren't asking for any incarceration at this point.

But as our colleagues have reported, the Secret Service and Department of Corrections are now thinking about what they would do if it comes to that, because of the former president's propensity to make comments and make statements about some of the witnesses in this case.

COOPER: Again, that seems like a very unlikely that it would actually come to that.

Let's talk about what kind of testimony were going to hear today. David Pecker, it's his third time on the stand, third day on the stand. This will be the longest he's been on the stand because court was short, both days prior to this.

He did not really get into there wasn't time for him to get into the Stormy Daniels hush money payment. That's really the heart of this. That's what's going to be talked about today by the prosecution.

KAREN FRIEDMAN AGNIFILO, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes. So he's still on what's called direct examination, which is the prosecutor is asking the questions of David Pecker. We haven't even begun the cross- examination yet where the defense attorney will -- COOPER: So, just to point, Trump is chatting right now with attorney

Emil Bove, who is in the first chair before the judge enters.

Again, just for our viewers who are joining us on the left-hand side of your screen, all morning long, you're going to be seeing a reports from the error, the number before we have both in the courtroom and in the overflow room, Trump is whispering with his attorney right now, Todd Blanche, we're going to be reading those to you as were also discussing what is going on in the big picture.

So, Karen, I'm sorry, continue.

AGNIFILO: Yes. So, the first chair means that's the person who's likely to do the cross-examination and the objections during that particular witness. And with the two tables, the person in the isle of each table is the first chair.

So the fact that Emil Bove is the one who moved over to that chair suggests that he will be doing the cross-examination of David Pecker at that point when that when that time comes.

[09:35:02]

COOPER: Do you have any sense of how long Pecker may be on the stand today in the hands of the prosecution.

AGNIFILO: It's unclear because as you know, he did not -- I have as much to do with Stormy Daniels as he did with the Karen McDougal and Dino Sajudin doorman hush money payment. So, are the catch and kill payment, I should say. And so --

COOPER: Right, Trump sort of said to David Pecker, I'm going to be turning this over to Michael Cohen and that's a lot of the interaction David Pecker might have had with -- was with Michael Cohen.

AGNIFILO: Exactly, and I think that's what you're going to expect the cross-examination of David Pecker to be. It's going to be all the times that Donald Trump was not involved, that only Michael Cohen was because I think the defense attorney is going to want to make this all about Michael Cohen's credibility and distance Trump as much as possible. They've really -- and Trump attorney Todd Blanche is nodding along as Trump speaks with him before the judge enters.

The prosecution has really used David Pecker to kind of set the stage but also kind of narrate the events. I mean, previously, we thought it was Michael Cohen, the person they're going to use to try to narrate this. But they're really relying on David Pecker to kind of set up the big picture.

SCANNELL: And he's a -- he's a cleaner witness as far as his history with Trump goes. So he will appear more neutral in that sense describing their history together, you know, explaining this the when this alleged conspiracy began in this meeting at Trump Tower in August of 2015, and he's able to tell the story but even after he goes -- finishes the Karen McDougal piece of this, explaining how AMI got involved, we're still going to hear a lot of the phone calls and how this transpired --

COOPER: The court is now in session. Judge Merchan is on the bench, because where testimony left off was with him saying how Michael Cohen was anxiously calling him, that his sense of Michael con was under a lot of pressure. He speculated it was from former President Donald Trump who wanted to know what David Pecker's lieutenant's interview with Karen McDougal was going, how it was going.

So we left it kind of at this -- at the brink of them learning how this was going to play off, then there's the stormy Daniels piece of it --

COOPER: The judge has wished Mr. Trump a good morning.

SCANNELL: He does that every morning, despite what Trump's tweets about him and posts about the judge.

But also what David Pecker is going to testify about is what happened after the election and how Donald Trump invited him to the inauguration and then invited him to the White House in the summer of 2017 for what prosecutors described as a "thank you" dinner for helping with his campaign. So David Pecker will also tie it back to the campaign, even though he has less to do with Stormy Daniels.

COOPER: I want to bring in CNN's Kristen Holmes as we continue to follow events and what they're saying in the court. Kristen Holmes is outside the courthouse.

You -- what did Donald Trump do before he came here this morning?

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. Well, he actually had a campaign event where he stopped at a construction site midtown New York and visited with construction workers, some of them were union members, some of them weren't. This was again an attempt by the campaign to kind of bring the campaign to them, given the fact that Donald Trump is in court four days a week. We know that he is expected to have two campaign events next week.

But I do want to mention David Pecker because there's a couple of angles here that I do think are very important, the first being that this is quite the week for this testimony to come out. It has been very salacious. We expect it to be more salacious. We expect conversations around Stormy Daniels.

This is also Melania's birthday this weekend. Donald Trump will be going home to Mar-a-Lago to celebrate and just a reminder that when these reports first came out about this alleged affair around Stormy Daniels, it put an intense -- intense strain on their marriage while he was in office. The other part of this is that I asked Donald Trump specifically about David Pecker, what he thought of the testimony, how long it had been since the two of them had spoke, given that they had been such close friends for so long.

He wouldn't answer that question. However, all he said was that Pecker had been nice to him. COOPER: Kristen, Trump's attorney says that discussed their objections with the D.A.'s office as they made progress though, they still have some issues to work out.

Karen, what is that in reference to?

AGNIFILO: I think it that might be in reference to there was a whole exchange about Steve Bannon and that he was a co-conspirator and they wanted to get into co-conspirator statements it's an exception to the hearsay rule but they said that there was no notice. That is what it could be about. It could also be about other evidence that they're quibbling over whether or not it should come in.

So hopefully, we'll know more as they go on the record. But that seems like that's what's going on, is they're negotiating some things in advance so as to not interrupt the court proceedings with objections.

Let's go check in with Jake Tapper in D.C. -- Jake.

JAKE TAPPER, CNN ANCHOR: Thanks, Anderson.

So just a recap, we saw Mr. Trump there in the courthouse in Manhattan and he actually did what a lot of Republicans have been urging him to do, which was to take the opportunity of this podium, this presentation to the nation to talk about things that he thinks are going wrong in the United States.

[09:40:03]

We had Daniel Dale fact check some of the claims, but at least they were on the topic of what his presidential campaign could be about as opposed to the notion of grievance. Then, of course, he was asked a question about the trials and he did talk about that.

With us here in studio is Congressman Jamie Raskin, Democrat of Maryland, who was on the January 6 Select Committee.

And, first of all, I would just want to get your view on the U.S. Supreme Court case. I'm guessing that you think that Donald Trump should not be immune and should from prosecution for the acts that he committed as president and he says that those acts that he was doing on January were related to his job as president, I'm sure you reject that.

But what about the larger issue of presidential immunity. Do you -- do you do you think there is nuance there?

REP. JAMIE RASKIN (D-MD): The core part of the president's job under Article Two of the Constitution is to take care that the laws are faithfully executed, including the laws relating to the presidential election and the Electoral College. So the idea that he was undertaking his constitutional responsibilities when he levied a mob to come and attack the U.S. Capitol when he tried to get his own vice president to step outside of his constitutional role and just declare Trump president is outrageous. So like the district court found, like the D.C. Circuit panel found, his claims are just utterly frivolous, they're just empty. It's not the president's job to try to overthrow the constitutional order. It's his job to enforce every provision of the Constitution, including one that would have him leave because he lost a presidential election by more than 7 million votes, 306 to 232 in the Electoral College.

So I think it's farcical that we are where we are. You know, the guys appellate adjudications are now interfering with his criminal trials because he's basically bringing the whole system crashing down by his anarchical determination to violate every law and constitutional principle we've got.

TAPPER: And just to just to interject for one second because we are jumping between Trump trials, we have the us Supreme Court case that I was just talking to you about, but in Manhattan the prosecutor has provided the -- that the judge propose an order to hold Trump in contempt. They're talking about the gag order there. He says there's been four violations of the gag order in the last days. This as we are expecting David Pecker, the former tabloid magnate to take the stand again.

Have you been following that case?

RASKIN: Yeah, as much as I can, yeah.

TAPPER: And what -- and what do you think of that? Because I mean, there are those in the legal world who think it is a stretch just the idea of the prosecution itself not that Donald Trump didn't do anything immoral but the idea that these are felonies. There are those who say even people who do not like Donald Trump that this case is a stretch.

RASKIN: Well, he cooked the books um and you know he tried to disguise what were payoff hush money payments as payments to his lawyer. So he definitely cooked the books which is a misdemeanor in New York as I understand it, and apparently did that -- almost certainly did that in order to disguise the payments that he was arranging through Michael Cohen to Stormy Daniels. And that becomes an illegal campaign expenditure and contribution under the federal law.

So that's my understanding of the case and he should be treated uh no more severely and no more lightly than any other defendant in the courtroom if his behavior is incorrigible and unmanageable in the courtroom, he should be treated exactly the way that a judge would treat any other defendant in his situation.

TAPPER: Speaking of his behavior in the courtroom or outside the courtroom right now, there we have been expecting, Laura, Judge Merchan to weigh in on the prosecution's complaint in new -- in New York that Donald Trump has violated the gag order, the judge instructed Mr. Trump not to attack the jurors or the witnesses or members of the family or staff of the court or the prosecution, and the prosecution said he's violated that 10 times and Judge Merchan was going to -- he's heard -- that he's heard the case on that, the arguments on that, and he's waiting to weigh in. And now, the prosecution if you could bring us up to speed here is

saying there have been even more gag order violations since we filed this original complaint.

LAURA COATES, CNN CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: And, by the way, they get a select set of what they thought were the alleged violations. But the key here is there are two available remedies for this judge. On the one hand, he can have a statutory $1,000 fine per allegation or he can step the person back, meaning you're held in jail until this happens. The prosecutors are citing a Trump interview to a Philly TV station where he spoke about both Cohen and Pecker, they're both witnesses in this case.

Remember, the judge himself is not part of the gag order, nor is Alvin Bragg, the Manhattan D.A. But, you know, interestingly enough the former president thinks that he is completely absolved a responsibility because of the First Amendment he believes because he's a candidate in office that's okay in according the prosecutor Trump said that Michael Cohen is a convicted liar and talked about his credibility issues and also that when he made the comment about the jury pool being 95 percent Democrats.

And I'm curious, you know, Congressman, especially with your constitutional expertise, these arguments keeps making that, look, it's my First Amendment right to be able to speak out. You can't muzzle me and not muzzle everyone else.

It's a violation. I've got a campaign. I've got to be able to do this. I mean, it doesn't track what the actual law says.

RASKIN: No. I mean, that that would be news to thousands and thousands of criminal defendants or witnesses or other people in courtrooms who've been held in contempt of court by interrupting the proceedings, by disobeying the judge. I mean, is that an argument that that Trump's supporters would actually universalize, so everybody can disobey a judge's gag order. I mean, the judges often will say we don't want you contacting any of the witnesses, we don't want you making any threats against the witnesses.

I mean, that's kind of the basis of the criminal justice system that we don't allow that kind of intimidation to take place, but he uniquely gets the right to do that? I don't get it.

COATES: And he makes his point just now the judge -- or the prosecution commenting that his statements about Pecker were look, be nice, I'm talking about you. Be nice, sort of the subliminal messages coming down and the judge is not yet ruling on this, and Pecker is taking the stand again without us knowing at this moment in time whether he will violate again or will there be consequences.

TAPPER: That's right and David Pecker, the publisher -- former publisher of American Media Incorporated, which is the publisher of the National Enquirer, has taken the stand again. This is his third time on the stand in his testimony in that case, Anderson.

COOPER: Jake, thanks very much.

Kara, it's very interesting that the -- what Conroy was saying, one of the prosecutors was saying, is that the president earlier today at the construction site said that David Pecker's nice. That Conroy is saying that was a message to Pecker.

SCANNELL: Right. He said it's a message to Pecker and it's message to other witnesses to be nice, when they testify. And that's one of four new violations that prosecutors say Trump has made in the past three days on the gag order, other ones having to do with comments he's made about Michael Cohen and another one that he made in the very hallway in the courtroom saying that the jury pool in New York is, you know, predominantly Democratic.

So they're continuing to raise a lot of these issues to the judge, trying to get him to essentially to stop Donald Trump from making any statements about this. But this one today on David Pecker is very interesting because he's saying it's a message to other witnesses who testify.

COOPER: It's also interesting how he has -- I mean, he's complimenting David Pecker at a time when David Pecker clearly has a lot of information about Donald Trump that he may not even be testifying to but past, I mean he's known Donald Trump for a long time, the way he's handling David Pecker as compared to a Michael Cohen or somebody else.

SCANNELL: Yeah, I think that that's very fascinating. And we've seen in some of the other trials, some of these other witnesses who've worked for the Trump Organization, Donald Trump hasn't gone after them, and some have given testimony that has not been helpful to him. David Pecker's testimony is not helpful to him.

But you have made a good point that he's different from Michael Cohen because David Pecker's a lot of his testimony is about his conversations with Michael Cohen and a lot of Michael Cohen's testimony is about his conversations with Donald Trump.

COOPER: And the -- so now the jurors have entered and are seated so all of those comments were being made before the jurors -- jurors have entered. In terms of Pecker's testimony today, what -- he's -- do you think they're going to immediately start in on the Stormy Daniels?

AGNIFILO: I think they're going to continue on with Karen McDougal because that's where they left off and get a lot of that information out and they seem to be going in chronological order. So where they are now is they are up to the point where Donald Trump has declared his candidacy and that's when David Pecker says everything changed and it became about the presidency and getting him elected.

COOPER: And questioning a Pecker now has begun by prosecutor Steinglass.

The judge did not address the gag order.

AGNIFILO: He has not yet addressed. He's choosing not to address the gag order at this point.

I mean a lot of that is driven by the fact that the jury is there, the judge will not allow the jury to sit around waiting if everyone is there on time, he's going to go back to the witness interview and deal with the issues that don't involve the jury like the gag order when the jury is on break.

COOPER: And Steinglass begins by questioning Pecker as you said, Karen, about Karen McDougal who was alleged a year years long affair with Trump.

[09:50:01]

Karen McDougal, I interviewed said that that she was in love with Donald Trump and that her only regret is that that he was married.

AGNIFILO: For the longest time, Donald Trump really attacked Stormy Daniels and Michael Cohen, but largely left David Pecker and Karen McDougal out.

COOPER: The prosecutor is asking about Pecker's conversation with Dylan Howard after Howard had interviewed Karen McDougal. Dylan Howard was essentially directly under David Pecker, running the "National Enquirer".

AGNIFILO: Yeah, and I think -- I think what they're going to talk about is --

COOPER: Pecker says that Howard told him he believed the story could be true or was true but she had no corroborating evidence.

SCANNELL: Yeah, David Pecker dispatched Dylan Howard to California to interview Karen McDougal to get a handle on whether the story was accurate. That's after Dylan Howard had learned through sources about Karen McDougal's story and what David Pecker has said is that she -- he did not think she really wanted this story to come out, so they were going to try to do one of these catch and kill deals with her. The first thing in order was to get Dylan Howard out there to talk to her and see if it was a true story.

COOPER: We have the first images of Trump in court today. We're going to put those up.

Pecker says that Howard offered Karen McDougal $10,000 to buy her story, and that she refused. These are the first images we're seeing today from inside the court that's Todd Blanche on the right.

SCANNELL: What I found was fascinating about the dollars here is that David Pecker said normally they would pay $250 to $5,000 for a story, $10,000 if it was a big celebrity, and all the dollar amounts we've seen in this case which is part of the prosecution's theory of why this was part of -- everything had changed after the campaign is that now they paid $30,000 to the doorman to buy his story. We know that they paid $150,000 to Karen McDougal but we're seeing that escalate.

COOPER: Pecker says that he had a three-way call with Howard and Michael Cohen. Michael Cohen told me be sure to use Signal, Pecker says. Signal obviously is a more secure communications app.

SCANNELL: Yeah, David Pecker had testified the other day that Michael Cohen only at this point he said he' been talking to Michael Cohen since 2007, but only at this point he said let's move our conversations to Signal, which is encrypted, and then David Pecker laughed because he said he still to this day I know what it was.

COOPER: And even though, I mean, in prior testimony, Pecker is pointed out that even though they had a long relationship, Donald Trump and David Pecker, it wasn't until this 2015 meeting that they began this idea of catching and actually killing stories about Donald -- Donald Trump.

SCANNELL: Right, he says he'd known them for years.

COOPER: Michael Cohen said it's not true which is something he always said --

SCANNELL: Right.

COOPER: -- about the Karen McDougal affair.

SCANNELL: Right, that is -- that was something that also came up the other day where the doorman story. Michael Cohen initially shot it down. David Pecker said when the Karen McDougal story first came to them, Michael Cohen had said it's not true and he said I think we need to vet this one, and that's when he sent Dylan Howard out to meet her.

COOPER: So the relationship again, a lot of David Pecker's dealings ended up on Stormy Daniels' being with Michael Cohen, though the initial meeting in 2015 was between Pecker, Michael Cohen and directly Donald Trump.

SCANNELL: Right. That and that according to David Pecker was at the request of Donald Trump. He asked for that meeting. They had it at Trump Tower and Trump according to David Pecker said what can you and your magazine do to help my campaign?

COOPER: Which is interesting because earlier on, I mean, before this before they were actually on the stand, the idea seemed to be that David Pecker had come to them saying, hey, what can I do for you guys when in fact what Pecker's testifying is that it was Trump and Michael Cohen saying, you know, we want your help on the campaign and specified that it was for the campaign. This wasn't a meeting of we want you to help, you know, because Mr. Trump is concerned about Melania Trump.

Trump is leaning back, looking down at times at Pecker as he testifies.

Again, had the interaction between these two, given their long history, I mean, to be -- you know to be inside the mind of Donald Trump, what he must be thinking as he's watching Pecker right now.

AGNIFILO: Well the risk always when you have somebody who has known someone for a very long time is you don't know what that person as a prosecutor. You don't know what they know. So in other words, what does Donald Trump know about David Pecker, and what does David Pecker know about Donald Trump that that you as the prosecutor aren't aware of.

And so that's always the concern and the risk.

COOPER: Well, also, I mean, if you're Donald Trump, you know that David Pecker because Pecker is now describing how Cohen told him he wanted to buy McDougal story, Pecker has more information about Donald Trump, and that goes back years than he's needs to be testifying about. So the idea, according to the prosecutor, that President Trump -- former President Trump was sending a message to Pecker by calling him a nice guy this morning, I mean, he might be concerned about what else Pecker could say.

Pecker says that Cohen didn't think McDougal wanted to have her story about the alleged affair out there.

AGNIFILO: Yeah, I mean that's true.

[09:55:01]

And what makes this whole thing illegal because, of course, catch and kill is not illegal and paying hush money isn't illegal, but what makes this illegal is that this was all about trying to influence the election.

COOPER: Excuse me, Pecker said -- she said that she didn't want to be the next Monica Lewinsky. She wanted to restart her career.

AGNIFILO: So the -- so what makes this illegal is that by paying money to people that David Pecker was doing on behalf of candidate Trump because that's what he was at the time, if you do that and you don't declare that as a contribution to an election that is in violation of election laws and what makes this criminal is then they wanted to not only do that and make this campaign contribution but then cover it up by falsifying business records. So that that's what makes this whole scheme illegal ultimately.

COOPER: Yeah as we continue to follow the case, Jake, let's go back to you.

TAPPER: Thanks, Anderson.

So the U.S. Supreme Court is about to consider if Mr. Trump can be tried on criminal charges of election interference or if the former president's claim of absolute immunity for official acts is legally and constitutionally sound. The historic oral arguments begin in a matter of minutes and you're going to be able to follow those arguments on the left side of your screen and will continue to follow Donald Trump's hush money trial in New York with constant updates that will appear on the right side of your screen.

You see it right there on the right side of your screen. We have pictures of Assistant District Attorney Joshua Steinglass, and the witness David Pecker, the tabloid magnate and the 9:59 a.m. update. Several of the jurors are taking notes as Pecker testifies. They're turning their heads between the prosecutor and Pecker as they each speak.

Our reporters inside the courtroom trying to bring you there with descriptions of what's going on given the fact that New York does not allow cameras in the courtroom.

Elie Honig?

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: So the payoffs to Karen McDougal which we're hearing testimony about right now, they are not charged as the actual crime. The crime is centered on the subsequent payments to Stormy Daniels. But this is sort of chapter two in an important three chapter story that prosecutors are trying to tell of catch and kill incidents that Donald Trump, David Pecker, Michael Cohen and others pulled off.

The first one we heard about on Tuesday, that was the payoff to the doorman who claimed falsely that he had this story about Donald Trump having a child out of wedlock they paid him off in order to silence him. Now, we're into Karen McDougal which is chapter two, she alleged this affair with Donald Trump they paid her off in order to take the rights to her story and not run it, catch and kill it.

And this will set the stage for the Stormy Daniels incident. And if people are wondering, well, why would prosecutors have charged the Stormy Daniels payment but not the Karen McDougal payment? It's important to remember the crime here is none of these payments.

Hush money is not a crime. The crime is in the falsification of the business records around the payment and they structured these payoffs differently. The Karen McDougal payment was pretty straightforward. There was no falsification. They paid her for a story, they killed the story, no falsification.

The allegation is that a couple months later when it came time for Stormy Daniels, they falsified those payoffs to make them look like legal.

TAPPER: Be but isn't also what happened that Karen McDougal who alleges that she had a 10 or 11-month relationship with Donald Trump. She's 1998 Playmate of the Year, that she was paid $150,000 by David Pecker himself, by the tabloid, the "National Enquirer", and that and that company whereas Stormy Daniels, the payment was made by Michael Cohen, Trump's attorney, and then the allegation is that Donald Trump then paid Michael Cohen back, right?

HONIG: Exactly, and the last part of that is where the crime lies. In Donald Trump reimbursing Michael Cohen --

TAPPER: David Pecker says, when I got on the phone, Mr. Trump said to me, I spoke to Michael. That's Michael Cohen. Karen, that's Karen McDougal, is a nice girl. Is it true that a Mexican group is looking to buy the story for $8 million?

So Trump is saying to David Pecker that he talked to Michael Cohen. This is Trump talking and says Michael Cohen says Karen's a nice girl is it true that a Mexican group is seeking her story for $8 million, and Pecker says he told Trump he absolutely did not believe that was true, $8 million from some Mexican group.

HONIG: And this is important because David Pecker has direct contact here with Donald Trump. A lot of what David Pecker was testifying about before he was communicating with him through Michael Cohen.

O'DONNELL: So Trump says to David Pecker, according to Pecker, what do you think I should do? This is about the fact that Karen McDougal is allegedly out there with her story of a 10, 11-month relationship with Donald Trump. This is in 2016, by the way, when he's running for president. He does not want the story out.

Pecker recalls he told Trump, I think you should buy the story and take it off the market. That's catch and kill, except not by a publisher, by Donald Trump himself.

HONIG: Right. We're seeing catching kill in the works here, but again, if the "National Enquirer" wants to buy stories and bury them. They can do that legally.

[10:00:00]