Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Event/Special

Resumption Of Donald Trump's Manhattan Hush Money Trial; Supreme Court Arguments On Presidential Prosecutions; David Pecker's Testimony On Catch And Kill; Allegations Of Gag Order Violations By Donald Trump. Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired April 25, 2024 - 14:00   ET

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

[14:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ERIN BURNETT, CNN ANCHOR: And welcome back to our special coverage here on CNN. I'm Erin Burnett in New York and Wolf Blitzer down in Washington. And in just a few moments Donald Trump Manhattan Hush Money trail will resume. They're on lunch break. They're coming back in the courtroom for the afternoon session. It comes after the Justice department and Trump attorneys spent more than two hours in front of the Supreme Court earlier today. A different legal team for Trump, off course. There they argued whether Trump or any former president could be prosecuted for actions they took while in office. Wolf.

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Interesting Erin, the former tabloid executive David Pecker will also be back on the stand very very soon. He's been testifying about those hush money negotiations with Stormy Daniels and he went into great detail about the so-called catch and kill deal with former playboy model Karen McDougall. Let's walk through some of the major takeaways from David Pecker's testimony right now. Our senior legal analyst Ellie Honig is over at the magic wall. Ellie walk us through what we need to know at least right now.

ELLIE HONIG, CNN SENIOT LEGAL ANALYST: Yeah, Wolf, as the jury gets ready to come back from its lunch break, let's catch up on some important things that happened this morning. First of all, prosecutors are taking the jury through David Pecker, really deep inside this world of catch and kill. And prosecutors are using David Pecker to really tell a three-chapter story. On Tuesday, they told the story of Dino Sajudin, a doorman who claimed he had a story, turned out to be false, about Donald Trump having a child out of wedlock. He was paid for his story, which was then killed, never ran. Today, the primary gist of the testimony has focused on Karen McDougal, who alleged that she had an affair with Donald Trump. That's the gist of what David Pecker was talking about. So let's go into that for a moment. So Pecker testified he was asked about why Karen McDougal's story was bought and then killed.

Here's the testimony, Steinblast asked whether the reason was so that McDougal's story, her allegation of an affair, did not influence the 2016 election against Donald Trump. David Pecker said Yes, it was. Later, David Pecker testified, We didn't want the story to embarrass Mr. Trump or embarrass or hurt the campaign. Prosecutors are going to say, look, the motive was campaign. Donald Trump's team is going to say, well, there was also a personal motive here for Donald Trump. So look for that on cross-examination. Now, eventually, they enter into a contract with Karen McDougal. AMI. David Pecker enters into a contract that Donald Trump himself was not part of. And David Pecker said the purpose of that agreement was to disguise the true nature of the contract. They didn't want the public learning about Karen McDougal's allegations. Now that brings us to sort of between chapter two and chapter three.

The big thing that happens is the access Hollywood tape came out. No, the jury's not seeing that tape, but they've learned about it. This is where Donald Trump gets caught on camera talking about you can grab them by the blank, etc. We remember that tape. And Pecker said when that tape came out quote It was very embarrassing, very damaging again to the campaign. Important point for the prosecution here. And then where David Pecker's testimony left off, he was starting to talk about Stormy Daniels. Stormy Daniels comes forward. She alleges that she had this sexual dalliance with Donald Trump. They're worried about it and David Pecker decides, we've had enough. He says, I am not paying for this story.

I, meaning the National Enquirer, I am not paying for this story. I didn't want to be involved in this from the beginning. I'm not doing it. So where we leave off in the testimony is AMI and David Pecker are about to hand off the Stormy Daniels mess to Michael Cohen and to Donald Trump and their team. And that's where we're going to pick up this afternoon, Wolf, as we sort of head into chapter three of our three-chapter story that prosecutors are trying to tell the jury.

BLITZER: And he says he didn't want the Stormy Daniels story in the National Enquirer because it would be inappropriate at some of the supermarkets which were selling the National Enquirer. Is that right?

HONIG: Yeah, that's part of the testimony. Interesting where the National Enquirer draws its moral lines. That's not for me to judge.

BLITZER: Yeah, interesting. All right, Ellie, thank you very much. Erin, back to you.

BURNETT: I'm sorry, Ellie. Okay. Obviously, when everyone goes back in that courtroom, it is David Pecker who's going to resume his testimony. And he is, again, the former publisher of the National Enquirer. Bryn Gingrass was in the room for this morning's testimony.

[14:05:09]

So Brynn, you know, you were there and these back and forth, these revelations, these descriptions.

BRYNN GINGRAS, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: I'm not sure what you said to me--

BURNETT: Oh looks like we just lost Brynn --

(CROSSTALK) GINGRAS: but I'm following up on what Ellie--

(CROSSTALK)

BURNETT: so let me just--

(CROSSTALK)

GINGRAS: -- just talked about.

(CROSSTALK)

BURNETT: Yes

GINGRAS: And that National Enquirer, sorry, the Access Hollywood tape, that cannot be shown to the jurors. But there was a lot of detail that Pecker did go into about that tape. And then following up with the fact that he said one of his magazine websites, Radar Online, had a article that was posted that was titled Playboy Man, essentially about Trump and immediately how they worked with Michael Cohen to kill that story online as well. So really, it's quite interesting to listen to David Pecker go into all the inner workings of exactly how this catch and kill scheme worked for all those three cases that Ellie laid out for you right there.

And I've got to tell you, it was surprising. It was surprising to see Donald Trump sort of sitting in his chair and really just keeping his eyes closed, sometimes moving his head to the side or leaning in to listen, but just keeping his eyes closed, almost as if he was like trying to take it all in at word for word, but not really reacting. And we all kind of looked to see if he would react, of course, to that National, I'm sorry, that Access Hollywood tape description, since that was such a pivotal moment prior to his campaign. Really, the only time that he even gave a smirk was when they were talking about sort of this inner conversation. After he became president-elect at Trump Tower, when Trump made the comment about David Pecker, who was meeting a bunch of his advisors, that David Pecker knew a lot of stories about him. Pecker said no one really laughed in that room, but Trump did smirk at that comment.

Listen, he has been on the stand for a total of five hours from Tuesday, rather, into today. And as you heard from Ellie, he's gotten into those two major stories, but not quite yet into the Stormy Daniels story, which is at the heart of this case. And so certainly, we do expect that to happen when it gets picked back up after lunch. BURNETT: All right. Brynn Gingras, thank you very much. Of course, Brynn will be there. Kara Scannell, Phil Mattingly here with me. So, Kara, when she says five hours so far for David Pecker, and I know you anticipate another few hours, so it may be that that does not actually finish until tomorrow morning for the direct.

KARA SCANNELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, I mean, it sounds that way. Prosecutor Joshua Seinglass said around noon that he thought he had two to three hours more. So that was one hour we got. Now, we have the lunch break. So if this goes for another two hours, that takes us pretty close to the end of the court day. Maybe the cross, maybe Donald Trump's people get to start their cross-examination, but it definitely seems like David Pecker is going to be on the stand for a fourth day in a row this week to finish his testimony.

BURNETT: It has been interesting that while we understand they don't speak anymore, Trump and David Pecker, Pecker is the one person that Trump has not, of the potential witnesses, Stormy and Michael Cohen. Obviously, he constantly has disparaged. Nothing but pleasantries about David Pecker.

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN CHIEF DOMESTIC CORRESPONDENT: Said he's nice. So he was asked about it, said he's nice. And it's interesting that Kara and I think were trying to psychologically figure this out during one of the commercial breaks is, you know, is this because they've got decades of a relationship with the prosecution kind of laid out in detail point by point. Is it because of kind of where they come from in the same running in the same circles over the course of those decades? I don't actually know. I think what's interesting is when you look at what he said about potential witnesses or what he said about the judge or the jury, it's gotten him into some trouble. And I think we're still waiting.

And we were wondering if it's going to come this morning, if Judge Mersham would make a decision on whether or not their gag order violations and if there were, what he would actually have to do, would he have to pay money? So the former president was asked about this morning when he did a small gaggle with reporters. But when it comes to David Pecker, who, again, has been testimony testifying for hours over the course of several days and certainly hasn't made the former president look good, given the details he's been able to give into a very seedy world I don't think most normal people know about. He, at least according to the former president, still thinks he's nice.

BURNETT: Yeah. I mean, it's quite suspect. I mean, there's many people that he's cavorted with for many decades that he does not speak or call nice. But but you're right. It's all about the psychology. Right. I mean, so this the gag order that Phil just mentioned, I know that the prosecution came in and they alleged more violations, went three or four this morning--

SCANNELL: Four more --

(CROSSTALK)

BURNETT: -- and yet still no ruling.

SCANNELL: Four more --

BURNETT: Why not?

SCANNELL: Yeah. Four more, including Donald Trump's gaggle with reporters this morning, calling David Pecker nice because what the prosecution said is that is sending a message to other potential witnesses to be nice to him when they testify on the stand. So they're saying that that is an inappropriate comment that Donald Trump is making now that violates the gag order. So now they came in today with four that is on top of the tens. We've got 14 alleged violations. This is all before the judge. He didn't take it up this morning, even after the prosecution raised it. I mean, that could be because the jury is here. They were on time and judges never want to keep the jury waiting.

[14:10:09]

So he could have just thought to himself, he's going to table this until an appropriate break so they can get the testimony underway and keep this trial moving, because one thing the judges said repeatedly is, we're not having any delay, we're keeping this trial going. So that could be one of the reasons, but, you know, this is hanging out there, and what the prosecution keeps saying, and literally every day, is if you don't rule on this, he's going to keep violating it.

MATTINGLY: Which has proven to be the case, apparently. Do you know what's fascinating, though, is when you contrast this, Kara, in the middle of doing all of this, also wrote another story about another legal development for the former president today in the defamation case, where he wasn't going to, correct me if I'm wrong on this, he's not going to get a new trial, based on the E.G. and Carol defamation case. Think back to that trial. He stormed out, he was muttering, he was going back and forth, and while he's got 14 specific issues prosecutors are saying he has with this gag order, he's been very, very different inside this trial. You've seen him in person, we've gotten the readout.

SCANNELL: Seemingly very controlled.

MATTINGLY: Very controlled. Not reacting too much. I think there's a smirk here and there, eyes are closed, passing notes back and forth. But it's a dramatic contrast to past trials. Do we know why?

SCANNELL: Right, and if you remember, the E.G. and Carol trial was also before a jury. And during E.G. and Carol's testimony, Trump was muttering things out loud that when they took a break, the E.G. and Carol's lawyer said he's saying witch hunt, he's saying these words that they thought the jurors could hear. And then during the closing arguments, when Carol's attorney had just started, he stood up and walked out. And that was such a shock being there covering that, seeing him just get up and leave. And the judge even stopped it and said, for the record, Donald Trump just got up and exited the courtroom because he wanted that in the record for any appeal.

In this case, there was just one moment early on during jury selection where Trump was, as the judge is the one who put this on the record also in this case, and he said as the juror was leaving the room, this was somebody they were questioning a social media post on. Donald Trump, as the judge put it, was muttering something and was gesturing in the direction of the juror. And he directed him, he said, you know, there is no juror intimidation in this courtroom. Am I making myself crystal clear? So that, in a sense, was laying down the judge's tolerance for something like this. And it seems like probably his lawyers have spoken to him a lot about this, but also the judge already making a line here that he's not going to tolerate it.

(CROSSTALK) BURNETT: We'll see, maybe to your point, just at the end of the day, just quickly makes a ruling. Trump has just walked in, the former president has walked in to the courtroom. As we said, we are anticipating this fully resuming at 2.15 Eastern time. And right now it's 2.11, 2.12. So he is back in. It looks like they are going to keep this tightly to schedule. There he is. And we're going to take a break and come right back. And I'll be bringing you this trial live as it resumes.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:15:09]

BLITZER: We're continuing our breaking news coverage of Donald Trump's hush money criminal trial. The prosecution will resume questioning of David Pecker, the former publisher of the National Inquirer. That starts minutes from now. Our panel is still with us. And Ellie Honig, let me get your thoughts. Because the judge in this case, Judge Merchant says he signed the order to show cause regarding four new violations by Trump of the gag order.

HONIG: Okay, so these violations, alleged violations, are now compounding. So there are already 11 alleged violations that the DA brought to the judge and said Donald Trump violated your gag order these 11 times. They had a hearing on that on Tuesday. We're still waiting for the ruling on that one, which I hope, I expect, should come any time now, sometime soon. Now, what's happening now is in addition to that, the DA is saying, now here are four more times just in the last day or so where we believe Donald Trump has again violated your gag order. And the judge has said, okay, I'm going to hear you out. We're going to have a hearing on that as well. So he's not yet ruled that Donald Trump has violated the gag order, but now we have sort of two sets pending. We have the original 11 potential violations and now four more.

GLORIA BORGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: When does he have to rule by? I mean this is--

(CROSSTALK)

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: He hasn't ruled at all. He could simply just ignore it altogether. I mean, I think part of the problem here is the judge sort of invited this by not having ruled sooner and given more clarity to the court. Now the question is, does he rule twice? Because he rules, as Ellie said, on the first 11 and then the second four or delay whatever ruling he issues and just do all 15 of them at once.

BLITZER: The assumption has been that he will issue as punishment the ruling of Trump's violating the gag order while the court is in session.

WILLIAMS: Yeah

BLITZER: So Trump's lawyers will hear what he has to say. HONIG: There's a disciplinary element to this. I mean, I think the judge, if all the judge did was adjourn court for the day and then publish a written ruling that popped up on the docket sheet, that wouldn't have any impact. I believe the judge is going to address Donald Trump directly and tell him in so many words, knock it off.

WILLIAMS: And moreover, it is about maintaining discipline and order in the courtroom. There's two different purposes here. One of them is ensuring that the defendant does not continue to engage in the same way in the future, but also reminding the people that step into your courtroom, that you are in charge. This is your domain, not you, Mr. Defendant. You don't get to set the rules for sort of these extra outside statements that are targeting jurors and so on. And I just think the judge has sort of failed in a way up until now. He's done an able job in so many other areas, but in terms of maintaining discipline in this specific area.

[14:20:09]

DAVID CHALIAN, CNN POLITICAL DIRECTOR: These keep coming in in real time, right? Because, the former president did an affiliate television interview with WPVI in Philadelphia, battleground Pennsylvania, earlier this week and trashed Michael Cohen. That immediately became one of the ones that the prosecution then introduced today as yet another violation of the gag order. I think he made other comments about the political makeup of the jury and going right at the jury, which again, the prosecution says is in violation of the gag order. So, with each passing day as Donald Trump tests the boundaries of this, the prosecution comes in the next day and is like, Here's more. At some point, that's going to become a little unruly. One's got to imagine the judge is going to lay out the ground rules here in a more substantial way.

BORGER: The president says, you know, he's just responding to what Michael Cohen is doing. Michael Cohen is now saying he's not going to tweet anymore about Donald Trump, at least that's--

BLITZER: For the time being

BORGER: For the time being that's what he said. So maybe, you know, and the President today did not come out and say anything about Cohen when he went into court. So maybe the message is getting through a little bit.

UNKNOWN: Yeah

BORGER: I mean, we don't know the answer, but I don't know how the judge feels, he can potentially affect Donald Trump. Can anyone? Can his attorneys, can a judge?

WILLIAMS: Yeah

(CROSSTALK)

BORGER: Can a court? WILLIAMS: I mean, who's to say what would be and let's be clear, no more than a $15 thousand fine. It would be up to one thousand dollars per violation. The judge is not going to put the former, I think, put the former president behind bars for these infractions, thus far. In his, I believe his last civil case, it was after the fines were assessed, then raised, and then paid, that the president actually started complying and behaving better. So there might be a way of ensuring better conduct hereafter, but you're right, it's a particular defendant that many people have had a hard time controlling.

BLITZER: If an average citizen Ellie, were to do what Trump has done, 12 or 15 violations of the judge's court order, this, and would that average person be eligible to go to jail?

HONIG: Eligible, and I think quite likely. I'm not being hyperbolic here. This has to be an all-time world record. I mean, I've seen people occasionally breach a judge's order, breach one of the courtroom rules once, maybe twice. And I tried some bad guys who didn't really care about rules but this is 10 times, 12 times, 15 times. This is unseen in my experience. I can't think of any precedent for this.

CHALIAN: but they haven't been yet ruled

HONIG: Well that's--

(CROSSTALK)

CHALIAN: -- as violating the gag order.

(CROSSTALK)

HONIG: Exactly.

CHALIAN: We don't have that adjudication; it's an allegation.

BLITZER: But we're assuming the judge is going to rule that these are violations.

HONIG: Sure.

WILLIAMS: It's really important to note that point that you made, David, which is that we associate Donald Trump's conduct with what happened in other cases and other statements he's given and so on. In this trial, he has not been formally reprimanded in any way, has not had a fine or prison time, which again, not going to happen, I think. And we have to separate those two things. Yes, the former president has a long history of misbehaving in courtrooms, but what matters under New York law is what he has done in front of this judge, what the judge has warned him he can't do, and what fines the judge assesses.

AUDIE CORNISH, CNN CORRESPONDENT: That's within the legal confines of the conversation. Whereas I think he's right now arguing that he deserves immunity for all things in all scenarios, so it's not a stretch for him to march out of the courtroom whenever he wants and essentially speak out of turn. If what you're trying to show to your supporters and voters is a disdain for the system that you believe is corrupt, then you're going to push this line. And this is where this is so complex for this judge to be one of the first people to really have to deal with a former president in this matter.

BORGER: Until Trump believes that it's not doing him any good anymore. And that, and I don't know when he reaches that point. Politically he may have reached that point, started talking about the GDP today instead of talking about the unfair trial. So at some point, when he believes it is actually hurting him politically, maybe he'll change, but I don't know that we've gotten there.

BLITZER: We've just learned that David Pecker, Ellie, is back on the stand right now. He's already testified for more than five hours. He's going to testify this afternoon for at least a couple more hours, and then maybe come back tomorrow. The fact that the prosecution is spending so much time with David Pecker, what does that say to you? How important of a witness is he?

HONIG: I think David Pecker, when all is said and done, will probably be the second most important witness in this trial, after, of course, Michael Cohen. Putting aside the possibility of Donald Trump himself taking the stand, which would certainly change the calculus. What you want in your lead-off hitter, what you want in your first witness as a prosecutor is someone who can take the jury inside, who can lay the foundation. So the jury now understands, I think probably in more detail than they ever wanted, hoped, needed or expected what catch and kill is and how it works. They also understand who the key players are. Okay. On the AMI side we've got David Pecker and then we've got his lieutenant Dylan Howard. On the other side we've got Donald Trump and we've got his lieutenant Michael Cohen.

[14:25:09]

The jury understands who communicated with who. They understand the basics. Now, if the trial were to end right now, it would be not guilty because the prosecution is only beginning to put on its case. They have not established all the elements of the crime, nor could you possibly do that as a prosecutor with your first witness. So if I'm a prosecutor, and we have to withhold judgment until after cross, but I'm pleased with what David Pecker has done so far. I think he's laid the foundation, and I think he's brought the jury into this world.

BLITZER: We just are learning that Todd Blanch, one of Trump's lawyers, leaned over whispering to Trump as Pecker walks up to the stand. Trump pursed his lips and nodded. What do you think?

WILLIAMS: Oh, I do not read anything into what attorneys do at the table. It could be something innocuous, literally, oh, man, I forgot to go to the bathroom. I mean, it could be nothing.

BORGER: Just to add on to what Ellie is saying, I think the important thing about Pecker, obviously, is he'll corroborate Michael Cohen. But he has to be a credible witness. And I think so far, at least, from what we can garner, he has been a credible witness.

WILLIAMS: Yes.

BORGER: He's offered details. He's talked about Michael Cohen and the deals they made, his interactions with Donald Trump.

HONIG: We just haven't seen cross-examination.

(CROSSTALK)

WILLIAMS: That's it--

BORGER: We haven't seen cross-examination yet. But so far, he comes across as credible. We'll see what happens on cross.

WILLIAMS: Both lawyers started leaning when you said that, because that's exactly the point. It's cross-examination.

BLITZER: I'm going to purse my lips right now. Right. So the trial is resuming right now. The jury is back in the courtroom. Everybody stick around. Our special live coverage will continue right after a break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)