Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Trump in Court for Defamation Trial; Trump Fixates on Haley; Economy Grew in Fourth Quarter; Trial Begins For Michigan Shooter's Mother; Misty Marris is Interviewed about the Crumbley Trial. Aired 9- 9:30a ET

Aired January 25, 2024 - 09:00   ET

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

[09:00:40]

KATE BOLDUAN, CNN ANCHOR: Donald Trump soon back on his courtroom campaign trail this morning trying to keep people guessing, will he or won't he testify, but should he?

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: So, an historic trial that asked the question, can a parent be found guilty after their child commits a heinous crime? Opening statements just minutes away.

SARA SIDNER, CNN ANCHOR: And after a botched execution two years ago, an Alabama inmate will be put to death in just hours by a new method never used before in the United States. The ethical concern that is now raising.

I'm Sara Sidner, with Kate Bolduan and John Berman. This is CNN NEWS CENTRAL.

BOLDUAN: All right, right now, Donald Trump is back on the campaign trail and on his way to a New York courtroom. We are now waiting for him to arrive at the Manhattan federal courthouse for the next day of his civil defamation trial. This is the case brought by E. Jean Carroll.

Now, Donald Trump has already been found liable for defaming her and also sexually abusing her. Today, Donald Trump may take the stand, all in an effort to convince a jury to not make him pay more money in damages and also in reality an effort to make his legal problems a pillar of his presidential campaign strategy.

CNN's Kara Scannell is live outside the courthouse for us.

So, Kara, to remind everyone, this trial has been delayed a couple of times. What's going to happen once it resumes?

KARA SCANNELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Kate, so this will be the first time the jury has heard testimony in this case in about a week. And as it is, they only have heard two days of testimony. But we are in the homestretch of this trial with E. Jean Carroll's team expected to put on their final witness today, that's her former editor at "Elle" magazine. She will be testifying for E. Jean Carroll. And then Carroll intends to introduce some clips of a videotaped deposition that Donald Trump gave in this case. He's asked a lot of different questions there. Making these denials, repeating these denials of -- that Carroll has accused him of and also confusing her for his second wife, Marla Maples, in a photo. And Trump, of course, has said that he doesn't know who E. Jean Carroll is and that she's not his type.

So, the jury will hear that testimony as Carroll's team then rests their case. Then the big question is, does Donald Trump take the stand. He is likely to be the only witness that this team calls if they do call him. Now, he says that he wants to testify. The judge has said, though, because this case is not about the defamation or the sexual abuse, it is only about damages and harm, his testimony will be limited. He will not be able to deny raping Carroll. He won't be able to say she lied or that she made up the story to boost sales of her book. So, it will be very narrowly constrained about what he is allowed to say on the witness stand, though we have seen Donald Trump does not always abide by those rules. We saw that in the civil fraud trial just several weeks ago when his testimony turned more into campaign rhetoric than it did the actual substance of the trial. So, this will be the tension in the room if Trump does take the stand.

He's already clashed with the judge who threatened to throw him out of court because Trump was talking loudly to his lawyers, saying things, according to Carroll's team, such as witch hunt and that this was a fraud. So, it will certainly be a moment if he takes the stand. Does he stick to what the questions are? Does he go beyond that? And how does the judge handle this in this case because, in this case, unlike the civil fraud case, there is a jury here. It is important to what the jury is allowed to hear and what they're not allowed to hear to make a decision in this case.

Now, Carroll is seeking more than $10 million in damages. Trump's team trying to say that what Carroll's statements did had -- when she came up with her allegations, the harm that she faced was not necessarily related to Trump's statements. They're trying to walk that line.

Kate.

BOLDUAN: All right, it's all going to start back up very shortly.

Kara, thank you so much.

You can't make -- the difference here between the civil fraud trial and this is there's a jury right there in the courtroom, and that's the big difference as we wait to see (INAUDIBLE).

BERMAN: It's a huge difference. And Donald Trump says he wants to testify. When he says that, though, sometimes he follows through, sometimes he doesn't.

BOLDUAN: Right. It's a (INAUDIBLE). Yes.

BERMAN: We're going to have to wait and see what that decision is. We'll have the answer shortly. What is the current thinking from inside Trump world? Let's get right to CNN's Kristen Holmes, who may have a sense.

What are they thinking this morning, Kristen?

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, in terms of testifying, you're exactly right, look, it's 100 percent possible that he could take the stand.

[09:05:03]

But just a reminder, that despite how fixated he is on this, despite the fact that he's told aides and allies, advisers, that he wants to defend himself, this is not the first time he's been in a courtroom with E. Jean Carroll or in the E. Jean Carroll case. And he was convinced by his lawyers not to testify, despite the fact that he said that he wanted to in that case as well. Part of all of this, again, is a strategy to suck all of the oxygen out of the 2024 race as he's still running against Nikki Haley. Even just the speculation of will he or won't he helps him control the media narrative.

Now, I do want to talk a little bit about the actual campaign and where his head is there and where the campaign's head is, and that is that they are planning on going scorched earth on Nikki Haley in South Carolina. I am told by a number of advisors that they feel really good. He has a 30 plus point lead in the several polls that they have seen. But they still want to go after her. They're releasing names of South Carolina lawmakers who have backed Donald Trump. And I will tell you that it is seemingly that more and more Republicans are circling the wagon around Donald Trump.

John, I just got the numbers from the super PAC that is backing Donald Trump on what they raised the second half of the year versus the first half of the year. They more than tripled their number in donations between the first half and the second half. Meaning, they raised $46 million in the last six months of the year compared to $13 million in the first half. So, it's not just these endorsements that you're seeing, it's also that the money is starting to come in. And I know that was something that his team was very eager to see.

BERMAN: Yes, people like to put their money on the person they think might be winning.

Kristen Holmes, thank you very much. All I will say is, it's not the campaign or the courtroom, he's been using this courtroom very much as a campaign.

Sara.

SIDNER: All right, with us now, senior legal analyst Elie Honig, and CNN chief legal affairs correspondent Paula Reid.

Let's start with you, Paula.

So, you -- looking at this case, is his attendance at the civil trial affective if he testifies? I mean what are you seeing here?

PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Well, what's interesting was watching voters in New Hampshire talk to our colleagues up there. Any time the cases came up, it was clear to me that folks who would vote, right, in this primary, they were swayed by the idea that he is the victim of an unfair system. So, the return on investment here, for him, he does have a risk, right? There is a risk that he could get in trouble, he can get pulled out of court. But, for him, that serves the larger cause, which is trying to drum up drama, which here they have to work at. You have to really work to manufacture things here.

SIDNER: Yes.

REID: There's no big constitutional question. There's no, you know, dispute about facts about what happened in the '90s in this department store. It's about damages, right? He opted not to participate in the trial in the spring. So, here they're trying to drum up drama. And the way they do that is basically acting, you know, upset that they are not -- that they have to follow the rules of the court. So, either the federal rules of evidence (ph) with his lawyers, or for him not being disruptive.

So, this would give him the opportunity on the stand to likely spar with the judge, who's not going to allow him to veer outside the parameters that he has set. They're not going to re-litigate what happened at the department store, right? They're not going to talk really even about defamation. This is focused on damages. So, for him, do I think this is effective to make take the stand and continue with this? What I heard from voters in New Hampshire is, yes, this seems to be working for you. As a lawyer, I'm sure Elie feels the same way, you really just kind of cringe.

SIDNER: Yes.

REID: But, politically, yes, this is effective.

SIDNER: All right. So, you just heard Paula talking about - look, the merits of this case have already been decided. OK, fine. Now we're on to the damages part of this case. If you were to put on, which I know you haven't done, but the defense hat, would you be happy that your client in this case would be testifying?

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Absolutely not. He has the right to testify to be sure. But Paula is exactly right, legally speaking, just strategically legally speaking, there is no reason on earth for Donald Trump to take the stand today.

The issue of, did he sexually assault E. Jean Carroll has already been decided. Not in play.

The issue of, did Donald Trump defame E. Jean Carroll? Already decided. Not in play.

This is only about damages. What relevant information could Donald Trump have about E. Jean Carroll's damages? And so if Donald Trump takes the stand today, do not expect it to last long because he's going to veer outside those line real quick and this judge is going to shut it down real quick. And if Donald Trump's goal here is to get taken out of the courtroom, shut down, be made into a martyr, he's got the right judge for that, because Judge Kaplan will not, especially with a jury sitting right there, will not allow Donald Trump to do what he did over in the New York civil fraud trial. This could be over real quick if he takes the stand.

SIDNER: OK. We're just hearing, by the way, that Donald Trump's motorcade has made it to court. So, the drama will begin shortly.

Paula, what's - what is going to happen, though, in court today? Procedurally, how will this go? And do you have some sense of how quick this might be decided?

REID: Yes, I'm expecting this should wrap up in the next two days, assuming that court goes on, right, because we were all caught a little surprised -- by surprise on Monday, right, when there was a sick juror.

SIDNER: Right. Right.

[09:10:06]

REID: So, assuming things go as we expect, E. Jean Carroll still has probably at least one more witness to put on. Then the question is, all right, what kind of case does the Trump side put on? We expect he would be likely the only witness if he takes the stand. I agree with Elie, that this would likely be pretty quick -

SIDNER: Yes.

REID: Over pretty quickly because the idea, right, is that he's not going to stay in the parameters. He doesn't have much to offer. It's really all about drumming up drama if he wants to do this.

Then you have closing statements. You have jury instructions. Then it goes to the jury. When we covered this trial in the spring, when they were dealing with several more questions, including, you know, allegations of sexual abuse, and then defamation and damages, it only took the jury three hours to come back.

SIDNER: Right.

REID: So, this time they're just dealing with damages. We would expect that that would come back pretty quickly. So, I think we should be done with this by tomorrow.

SIDNER: All right, that is quick, but not unusual in a case like this. There's the preponderance of evidence. It is not a criminal trial.

Elie, we have been seeing a rant by Donald Trump overnight. In the midnight hours he went crazy over this case. Just saying all sorts of things.

HONIG: I'm shocked.

SIDNER: Could - can the judge use this or can a jury use this?

HONIG: So, most importantly, the jury can look at this. This is ongoing. And, in fact, the judge has ruled that all of these statements that Donald Trump has been making over the last several weeks, all of them go into the jury.

SIDNER: OK.

HONIG: And, in fact, E. Jean Carroll's team essentially opened their case by saying, look at all he's done since 2019. The core of this case actually relates to statements Donald Trump made in 2019.

SIDNER: Right.

HONIG: But anything Donald Trump says is fair game. It can be used by the jury. It can be used by the judge for sure.

So, look, he's going down this path of almost self-destruction when it comes to his statements about E. Jean Carroll, but he doesn't care because I think it's quite clear that the agenda is much more political than legal.

SIDNER: And when it comes -

REID: Yes, he wants to be the loud martyr.

HONIG: Yes.

REID: I mean that really is the goal. So, legally, we'd see this one way for anyone else. But for him, again, it's about finding a way to paint yourself as a victim. And really the primary way to do that here is just, don't follow the rules that all of us would be subject to.

SIDNER: And I think the thing that people have to remember, though, this is federal court.

REID: Yes.

SIDNER: It's not like there are cameras.

HONIG: Right.

SIDNER: You're not getting all this drama. You're hearing about it. You're hearing it reported. But the one thing that you mentioned that I thought is possible is that if he gets kicked out of court, that will be a moment that you will see, as he's coming out of the court, and then will be talked about, the whole idea of a martyr. But we've never seen this before, a former president in court facing these charges during a campaign. Things are going to be dramatic.

REID: Absolutely. And that's why we rely on our fabulous colleagues who are inside the court giving us those minute by minute live update. I mean that's how we understand what he says and what the judge's reaction will be. So, we'll - look, he wants us watching, waiting. That's what we're doing.

HONIG: We're ready to go.

SIDNER: You both are doing it more than the rest of us, and thank you for that. We appreciate it, Elie and Paula.

All right, John.

BERMAN: All right, new this morning, just a few minutes ago, fresh data on the strength of the U.S. Economy. The surprising strength of the U.S. economy. In fact, it's not often you see this word, the shocking strength of the U.S. economy. The new GDP numbers beating expectations by a lot.

Rahel Solomon here with that.

RAHEL SOLOMON, CNN BUSINESS CORRESPONDENT: Yes, beating expectations, doubling expectations. So, to put this in context, 3.3 percent on an annualized basis, the expectation was half that, right, 1.5 percent, which would be a cooling economy. So, 3.3 percent, just to put that in perspective, that is an economy that is still solid, still healthy, consumers who are still spending.

In fact, when we looked under the hood here at where we saw the largest contributors for growth it was again consumer spending. The American consumer continues to spend, defying expectations, both on physical goods and services. People are still, according to this report, still going out, spending on restaurants, still going out, accommodations, spending on sort of hotels and that sort of thing.

So, if you put this sort of in the larger context, you can see, the quarter prior was gangbusters, 4.9 percent on an annualized basis. Fine. But you look at the quarters before that, this is - yes, I mean, this is a really strong quarter. So this is a - you know, we put this in perspective these days in two ways. One, it is the sort of broadest picture of the U.S. economy. It's the big picture. The biggest picture of the U.S. economy, which we talk about a lot.

But also in the context of the Fed. What does the Fed do with this next week? It's the first meeting of 2024. They've already indicated they're going to start cutting rates. So, when? So, the expectation for next week, I hate to be the bearer of bad news here, but is that they're not going to do anything with rates. They're going to keep them where they are. But maybe March, the following meeting, there's a 40 percent chance traders see of rates coming then, and then May it sort of increases on and on and on.

So, you put this GDP in perspective with a very low unemployment rate, 3.7 percent, I want to say. We've been under 4 percent for two years. That, in addition to inflation that's cooling. The reason why you saw the markets pop a little bit on this news is because it's a -- it's an economy that is cooling on the inflation front, but still showing growth on the spending front.

[09:15:04]

So, it's sort of what you might have heard as the soft landing, the Goldilocks, exactly what he, Fed Chair Jerome Powell, has been trying to engineer. And some would say it looks like he's doing it.

BERMAN: And Janet Yellen, the U.S. Treasury secretary, told me a couple weeks ago that they think they're in this soft landing. That's what they're seeing. And we're, what, we're 15 minutes away from the open of the market and you say the markets are liking this.

SOLOMON: Yes. They popped a little bit. They were flat just before. They popped a little bit. They're all green last I checked.

BERMAN: All right, Rahel Solomon, great to see you.

SOLOMON: Yes.

BERMAN: Thank you very much.

Kate.

BOLDUAN: So, right now we're also keeping an eye on a Michigan courtroom. The mother of a school shooter is on trial there. The question is, could she be held criminally responsible for what her son did, the heinous crimes he committed, and what happens there could be a first.

Also, a death row inmate in Alabama just asked the Supreme Court again to halt his execution, set to happen in hours. This would be the first known execution using nitrogen gas. And there's a whole lot of controversy around this.

And Nikki Haley is literally telling Donald Trump to bring it. Her plan for her home state, South Carolina, and Donald Trump's threat to Republicans and I guess really everyone, you donate to Nikki Haley, you're out.

We'll be back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[09:20:36]

SIDNER: Opening statements have just begun where the mother of the Oxford High School shooter is on trial in Pontiac, Michigan. Jennifer Crumbley and her husband are the very first parents to ever be prosecuted for their child's actions in a mass shooting. They're being tried separately. But they're both charged with involuntary manslaughter after their son shot and killed four students at Oxford High School in 2021.

CNN's Jean Casarez is joining us now.

Jean, people are going to be looking at this case. Could it possibly set precedent as, unfortunately, this country experiences so many of these school shootings?

JEAN CASAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Absolutely because we are going to watch a trial (INAUDIBLE) but Jennifer (INAUDIBLE) is on trial now. And we are going to watch a trial where we will see what a jury decides if the parents are responsible for the homicide, for the involuntary manslaughter of those four Oxford High School students that died.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) CASAREZ (voice over): November 30, 2021. Fifteen-year-old Ethan Crumbley kills four fellow students and injures seven other people at Oxford High School in Michigan.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Is it your own choice to plead guilty?

ETHAN CRUMBLEY, CONVICTED SCHOOL SHOOTER: Yes, sir.

CASAREZ (voice over): He pleads guilty to all 24 charges.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The defendant shall serve life without the possibility of parole.

CASAREZ (voice over): But his parents are not there. They are defendants in courtrooms of their own.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: You know, Your Honor, we had asked -

CASAREZ (voice over): In a precedent-setting move, James and Jennifer Crumbley, charged themselves with homicide, going to trial for the deaths of the students their son alone shot and killed. Both have pleaded not guilty to charges of involuntary (INAUDIBLE).

KAREN MCDONALD, OAKLAND COUNTY, MICHIGAN, PROSECUTOR: Are intended to hold the individuals who contributed to this tragic (INAUDIBLE).

CASAREZ (voice over): Evidence shows (INAUDIBLE) Ethan was a loner. Not many friends (ph). Ethan's mother allegedly told acquaintances, he wasn't normal.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Did she call him weird?

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Yes.

CASAREZ (voice over): Ethan texted a friend saying he was having hallucinations and hearing voices, but his parents wouldn't help.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: He says, I actually asked my dad to take me to the doctor yesterday, but he just gave me some pills and told me to quote/unquote suck it up.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, sir.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And then seem (ph), my mom laughed when I told her.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, sir.

CASAREZ (voice over): Text messages show he told his mother he was seeing thing in the spring of 2021.

I got a picture of the demon. It is throwing bowls. Can you at least text back.

But Ethan said no one else was to blame -

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: They did not know (INAUDIBLE). I did not tell them what I planned to do. So they're not at fault.

CASAREZ (voice over): However, on Black Friday 2021, James, using money his son earned waiting tables went with Ethan to buy him a gun. That weekend, his mother took him to a shooting range.

At school Tuesday, Ethan was drawing a gun, bullets and blood. The thought won't stop. Help me. Blood everywhere. My life is useless.

Ethan's parents were asked to come to the school where the counselor told them --

SHAWN HOPKINS, OXFORD HIGH SCHOOL COUNSELOR: I am concerned that he needs somebody to talk to for mental health support.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: And did you tell either one of them when that should occur?

HOPKINS: I said as soon as possible, today if possible.

CASAREZ (voice over): The Crumbleys said they had to get back to work, but would take him to a professional within 48 hours.

No one looked into Ethan's backpack. Inside was that (INAUDIBLE) back to class (INAUDIBLE) two hours later opened fire.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: (INAUDIBLE) Scene is not secure.

CASAREZ (voice over): When he heard about the (INAUDIBLE) called 911 -

JAMES CRUMBLEY, ETHAN CRUMBLEY'S FATHER: I think my son took the gun. I don't know if it's him. I don't know what's going on.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: OK, what's your son's name.

JAMES CRUMBLEY: I'm just really freaking out.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: All right, I understand.

JAMES CRUMBLEY: My son's name is Ethan Crumbley.

CASAREZ (voice over): Jennifer texted her son, Ethan, don't do it. But it was to late. Madisyn Baldwin, Tate Myre, Hana St. Juliana and Justin Shilling were dead.

The couple now has separate trials. Jennifer going first after she was overheard blaming her husband.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Do you swear or affirm --

CASAREZ (voice over): A couple once united, now pitted against each other in court.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

[09:25:01] CASAREZ (on camera): And those opening statements have just begun in Pontiac, Michigan. I think we do have some live pictures. Jennifer Crumbley is in that courtroom as the defendant in this case.

There are parents on that jury. So, you have parents (INAUDIBLE) and this is going (INAUDIBLE) to be a precedent-setting case that could go far exceedingly the parents of a mass shooter, right?

SIDNER: Yes. And we are watching pictures of Jennifer Crumbley being sat down in her chair, taken off her handcuffs, and she's in regular clothes, as all defendants usually are when they go to trial.

Thank you so much, Jean, for that story to remind us of what happened and to remind us of the victims also in this case and why they are on trial.

All right, John.

BERMAN: All right, with us now is defense attorney Misty Marris.

Let's talk about why this is precedent setting. Yes, it's the parents of a mass shooter. But from a legal standpoint, what's the issue here? I don't want to oversimplify it. They're on trial for something in a way they didn't do rather than something they affirmatively did, correct?

MISTY MARRIS, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Exactly. That's why this is a very novel, legal theory. This case is seeking to hold Jennifer and (INAUDIBLE) for the acts of Ethan, involuntary manslaughter. What does that mean? It's based on both acts and omissions. Their failure to provide him with mental health services. Their failure to intervene. The standard is that there was a willful disregard for information that they knew or should have known that he was dangerous, that he had a propensity for violence, and their failure to take action on that front.

It's a very different legal theory than we've seen in the past relating parents being held responsible for the act of their kids. Usually it's a reckless endangerment charge. They're not being held responsible for the actual death. Child neglect. Those are the legal theories we've seen before. But to hold them responsible for the actual deaths of these four victims, that is a very, very different legal theory from the legal perspective.

BERMAN: What is the standard that prosecutors will need to prove, that they did know he was going to kill people, or they should have known?

MARRIS: It is willful disregard. That is the standard. There's no allegation by prosecutors that either parent knew that Ethan was going to go to school that day, bring a gun and shoot the school. It's all based upon what (INAUDIBLE) that they just turned (INAUDIBLE) a blind eye to all of these signs that he had a propensity for violence and they didn't intervene. There's going to be a lot of scrutiny on that day, what unfolded. The -- there's text messages between Jennifer and a friend.

BERMAN: Yes.

MARRIS: All of that is going to be really, really a big piece of this trial.

Now, that's the prosecution's perspective. They're going to lay that out, especially since they met with the school officials, refused to take him out of school.

BERMAN: Hours before.

MARRIS: And when you see that drawing, you can't help but say this is a red flag.

BERMAN: So, in Jean's piece, we did hear the killer speaking, which was during his sentencing that he said his parents didn't know and aren't responsible for this.

Two questions, can those words right there be used in this trial?

MARRIS: Yes. John, so you asked a great question, and I expect the defense to really focus on that. So, a couple of things. The defense is going to say that there's a causal break because Ethan is the one who committed these acts. That's uncontested. And that because of that, that causation that's required under the statute that Jennifer Crumbley is responsible was cut off. To - in order to show that, they're going to focus on Ethan's own words.

Now, her defense attorney said that they may call Ethan to testify. His attorneys are saying, we're not -- we don't recommend that. We don't want that to happen because there may be a pending appeal, and it could be problematic for his rights relating to that appeal. It would be incriminating. Whether or not he takes their advice, we don't know.

BERMAN: If he doesn't testify, can they submit those words that were part of his case into the trial?

MARRIS: It is likely that that would become a part of evidence in the trial and that would be admissible.

BERMAN: All right, last question, the two parents, separate trial, perhaps separate interests. Can they play off of each other?

MARRIS: Oftentimes you see this when you're talking about two individuals charged, that they'll be pointing the finger at each other. The cases against both are different, and that's why they asked for separate trials. Jennifer made that petition very early on.

One of the issues, purchasing of the gun.

BERMAN: The father bought the gun.

MARRIS: Yes. And he also signed something that said, I now it's against the law for me to buy a gun for someone else. So, that's another whole issue in his case. But it's going to really depend on the individual acts of each parent. So, I wouldn't be surprised to see some finger-pointing as this case unfolds.

BERMAN: All right, Misty Marris, this really, truly is an important case. Thank you so much for explaining it so well.

MARRIS: Thank you.

BERMAN: Kate.

BOLDUAN: Banned by MAGA. Donald Trump's new warning to anyone donating to Nikki Haily. And Nikki Haley essentially says this.

[09:30:00]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

NIKKI HALEY (R), 2024 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Bring it, Donald. Show me what you got!

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BOLDUAN: And new pictures showing the surface of the moon after Japan's historic moon sniper landing.

[09:30:00]