Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

CNN International: Trump Lawyer Cross-Examines Michael Cohen; Slovak PM In Intensive Care After Assassination Attempt; Fighting in Kharkiv Intensifies As Putin Visits Beijing; U.S. Floating Pier Hopes To Move At Least 500 Pounds Of Aid A Day; Dow Crosses 40,000 For The First Time Ever. Aired 3-4p ET

Aired May 16, 2024 - 15:00   ET

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

[15:00:33]

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST: It's 8:00 p.m. in London, 9:00 p.m. in Slovakia, 10:00 p.m. in Rafah, 3:00 p.m. here in Washington.

I'm Jim Sciutto. Thanks so much for joining me today on CNN NEWSROOM.

And let's get right to the news. There's lots of it.

For a third day in Donald Trump's criminal hush money trial, his former fixer and longtime personal lawyer, Michael Cohen, is on the stand. In nearly six hours of cross-examination by the defense and counting, defense attorneys trying to paint Cohen, not just as a liar, but a bitter one, bent on getting revenge on his former boss for not getting him a job in the White House.

In, Washington, House Republicans are having to reschedule items on the agenda because 11 of their members trek to New York to show public support for the former president. Of course, that's more members than is the number of the majority.

CNN justice correspondent Jessica Schneider joins us now.

Jessica, we knew this moment would come in that the defense would attack Michael Cohen's credibility. After all, he's been convicting -- convicted for lying that there was a particular moment the last several hours, which seemed consequential. And that is the defense zeroing in on Cohen's foggy memory of this October 2016 phone call, which he testified earlier in the week he said that's when he told Trump that the money was paid to Stormy in effect, it had been taken care of.

The defense calling into question his recollection of that phone call.

JESSICA SCHNEIDER, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. I think the defense, this has been their most effective part of their cross- examination. They also actually got into another pretty effective part of it talking about how Michael Cohen would often call reporters without Donald Trump's express knowledge or input. So that kind of cast some question on, was Michael Cohen always acting at Trump's direction? I thought that was really interesting point from the defense. But a bigger point from the defense was really casting question on Michael Cohen's memory of a particular phone call where he had previously testified it was solely about the Stormy Daniels payment and again, it went to this idea that he kept Donald Trump updated at as to every step in this hush money scheme. And now that the defense has cast this cloud over this testimony, it does leave you wondering, will that really erode Michael Cohen's credibility when it comes to the jury, will the jury take this one instance and maybe not take all of his other testimony as seriously? It's a big question.

SCIUTTO: Let me ask you, did he testify that was the only time he kept Trump abreast of events as it relates to the payment?

SCHNEIDER: No, when there was direct testimony, I was going through -- I mean, I counted at least six to eight times where Michael Cohen documented different instances of him keeping Donald Trump updated as to the Stormy Daniels hush money deal. So, you know, taken in totality, this was one phone call, but maybe he didn't quite remember exactly perfectly, you know, will it be enough to cast all those other instances into question?

SCIUTTO: We'll see.

SCHNEIDER: Yeah.

SCIUTTO: Big question for the jury when they get this case, perhaps in the next several days.

Jessica Schneider, thanks so much.

All right. So let's talk to the lawyers about the legal consequences insignificance of all this. They know a thing or two. Criminal defense attorney Joey Jackson, trial attorney Misty Marris.

Joey, first to you, the significance of casting doubt on the stand Cohen himself granting perhaps he doesn't have the fullest memory of that particular phone call, of keeping Trump informed, allegedly of the payments to Stormy Daniels. Significant moment or did other prior testimony outweigh it?

JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: So it's very significant, Jim, for the following reason, right? Good to be with you and Misty.

It's significant because look at what the prosecution has done. They have spent so much time corroborating things that Michael Cohen would say, back to catch and kill and how that all happened, back to the Access Hollywood tape in the Oval Office and had meeting with Trump text messages, emails, et cetera.

But there are some things that are not corroborated. What thing is not corroborated? The nature made conversation that he indicated that he had with the former president in or about toolbar of 2016, going to a timeline wherein he indicated to the president that, hey, were going to close on the Stormy Daniels deal. He has the full blessing of the president, et cetera, the president's brief. He knows. And then boom, the deal is closed subsequently to that days later. That would be a perfect timeline, unless the phone call was a minute and 30 seconds, unless there were text messages leading up to that phone call which gave the indication that your focus was on a 14-year- old harasser, unless the issue was that your preoccupation with that and your call to Mr. Schiller, the president's bodyguard, who is in charge of security operations, who would be handling them.

[15:05:20]

And so, you're going to speak and be preoccupied about that issue. But this is the critical call and what you told the president. And to the extent, Jim, that he was not prepared to deal with that, nor did the prosecution shed light on that prior to it, it just becomes highly problematic and I think that one uncorroborated thing is a big, big problem for the prosecution.

SCIUTTO: Misty Marris, you agree?

MISTY MARRIS, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Yeah. Joey Jackson, my friend, is absolutely spot on, but I'm actually going to take it a step further because one of the jury instructions that's going to be read at the end of this trial. Is that for the jury, if you find a witness lied in any part of their testimony, you can choose to think they lied about all of it.

The jury decides and ways the credibility of each witness and each piece of evidence. So if they find Michael Cohen to be a liar in one piece, they can choose to consider some, all or none of his testimony.

SCIUTTO: OK.

MARRIS: And while probably all 12 would not necessarily agree on that from a defense perspective, you only need one for a hung jury to say, I'm not buying it from Michael Cohen. So you know what? There's not enough evidence here to convict.

So that's really why these credibility issues matters so much, and when it comes down to something very, very critical like this phone call, which he remembered so clearly on direct. But now there's a significant shadow over it on cross, that's something that could absolutely stick in the jury's mind.

SCIUTTO: So, Joey, let me ask you though, because the prosecution knew they had a credibility problem with this witness and you and I and Misty have talked multiple times and other lawyers about how they were laying the groundwork. So, it all did not rest on one mans testimony that they had David Pecker recount conversations in the plan, Stormy Daniels, the accounts et cetera does that groundwork outweigh this instance or is this instance, this phone call, in particular, of according to Jessica Schneider was saying of several times, he spoke to Trump about this does, that take that all down in effect?

JACKSON: Yeah, Jim, I'm concerned if on the prosecutor as to whether it does take it all down and Misty raises a very good point. It's a little inside baseball, right, for us lawyers, but it's very critical, that jury will be in as to the issues of disregarding the totality if they choose of Michael Cohen's testimony are only limited portions of it and that is a big portion.

What portion? You're on direct examination, that's when you get softball questions thrown to you by the prosecutor. You're going over chapter and verse, the timeline of when you spoke to the president, the nature of the conversation. Was it about Stormy Daniels? What specifically was said, did you get confirmation on the deal, et cetera?

And you say chapter and verse about it. You don't mention anything about a 14-year-old, anything about harass you, anything about that being the reason you contacted his head of security and defense brings it up. That's troubling.

If that's an issue and if it's an issue that prosecutors were aware of what prosecutors would do was they would say, hey, on this call, was that the sole basis of the phone call? Were there other issues on that day? And that you would say at that time, there were other issues. Well, what were they?

There was this 40-year-old harassing me, but that was only a limited portion. After that, I spoke to the president. There was nothing said about it.

So, now, the fence brings it out. Now you have to do serious damage control because Michael Cohen didn't say a word. That affects his credibility greatly. I'm concerned and he needs to be rehabilitated or else it could be a significant problem with the ultimate prosecution case.

SCIUTTO: Okay. So, Misty Marris, I assume Joey was talking about rehabilitated in redirect when prosecutors get another crack at this witness. So if you were in that position, what would you need to do at this point to dig out of that hole as it were?

MARRIS: So with respect to redirect, we know that Michael Cohen, obviously, there's considerable credibility issues. There's a lot of contradictory statements that have been out there. And he's admitted to being a liar. He said so as much at his testimony.

I think you've cant get into the nitty-gritty about all of that. You have to be laser-focused on the specific issues that really matter in the case. And as Joey said, one of those would be this phone call to explain.

Okay. Yes. Well, this was a component of what I was speaking about these threatening calls. But in addition to that, at the exact same time, this Stormy Daniels issue was all -- was also happening and that's another part of what this call was, and laser-focused on any issues that relate directly to what the prosecution needs to prove. Don't get stuck in the muck of all of these lies because that's going to be a distraction.

[15:10:02]

Focus on the elements of the case. SCIUTTO: Okay. As he's been under what is often been quite difficult cross-examination. The defense has been trying to clearly get under his skin to break him in effect, Joey, on that stand for a big courtroom moment. They seem to have failed. He's kept his composure. Does that make a difference in terms of earning credibility with the jury?

JACKSON: So it makes a difference, Jim, but at the end of the day, it's about the substance, right? Form is important and how you look and what you say and how you deliver and are you measured and are you totally appropriate? All that's very important. But at the end of the day, what do you saying and what you say? Does it make sense?

Yes. We have all of these hardcore evidence where we have emails and texts back to cetera, phone records are very significant, but they don't tell you what was said on the call. And the only person who could tell you what's said on the call is the security personnel as it relates to this person, Mr. Schiller, or the president.

President has the right not to speak. He may not say a word. Schiller, will we have from him, right, the security person? We may not.

So who do we have to rely on? Cohen. What does it go to? A core issue in the case.

Oh, don't tell me about demeanor and comportment. Tell me about the words coming out of your mouth and are they truthful? And if they're not, then there's a problem.

SCIUTTO: I mean, there also is, Misty, though, just to a big do you believe it question to the jury, right? Do they believe the essential charge here, is that Trump knew about it. And Cohen, who was his guy, his bag man in effect, would have kept him aware of what it was up to and had done so in previous instances, I mean, that's the essential question to the jury. That said, of course, the defense only has to prove a reasonable doubt elements to that.

MARRIS: Correct. The defense has a different goal here and it's to raise reasonable doubt, not necessarily to prove their case. So in this instance, Michael Cohen is really the one that ties everything together. And I say that because many of the conversations that keep Trump close to this transaction, keep him aware of how the business records are being classified and what the documents are and what they are said to be, as well as knowledge about the actual ins and outs, nuts and bolts of this transaction.

A lot of that comes from Michael Cohen saying, will Trump told me to talk to Weisselberg, I spoke to Weisselberg about it. So it's really this roundabout thing which requires the jury to put stuck in Michael Cohen. And that's why his credibility is so central in this case.

SCIUTTO: Misty Marris, Joey Jackson, thanks so much.

We, of course, will have more coverage of the cross-examination of Cohen later in the program. You can continue to follow developments in the courtroom on the left side of your screen there. I do it myself. Still to come, Slovakia's prime minister, Robert Fico, is now

recovering an intensive care after a brazen assassination attempt yesterday. We'll be live from Slovakia, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:16:03]

SCIUTTO: Welcome back.

Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico is now recovering in intensive care after an attempted assassination yesterday, a brazen one. He is in stable, but serious condition after he was shot five times. Police believe the attack was politically motivated. Suspect is in custody, authorities have charged him with attempted murder.

CNN senior international correspondent Fred Pleitgen, he's been covering the story.

Fred, seems some improvement in Fico's condition in the last 24 hours.

FREDERIK PLEITGEN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, absolutely. And one of the things that's obviously big here for the Slovaks is the fact that he seems to be out of life's danger right now, that his life is no more -- is no longer in danger. However, one of the things that they warned us about now today and I spent pretty much through the entire day in front of that hospital getting some of those updates. They said he is still in pretty critical condition and he is still feeling very weak.

In fact, there was one political ally who visited him today. He said even had trouble speaking because he was still so week, which obviously is really no surprise considering those side gunshot wounds that you were talking about, which the doctors there acknowledged have caused substantial damage.

Nevertheless, he is now out of life's danger, but of course at the same time, there is a lot of wrangling here now, politically, and a lot of people who are saying that all of this was politically motivated.

Here's what we're learning.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

PLEITGEN (voice-over): After getting shot five times in broad daylight, Slovakia's Prime Minister Robert Fico's condition remains difficult, officials say, even though the wounds are no longer life- threatening.

This is exactly the place where Robert Fico was shot and you can see on that tree over there that there is a hole with a forensic teams appear to have carved something like a projectile out of the bark. Now, he suffered several gunshot wounds and had to be air medevaced into a hospital nearby. The hospital says two surgical teams had to operate more than five hours to save the prime minister's life. Slovakia's president-elect confirming Fico is now conscious.

PETER PELLEGRINI, SLOVAK PRESIDENT-ELECT: He is able to speak, but only few sentences and then he's really, really tired because he's under some medications (ph) -- some medical commendations (ph). So, of course, it's very difficult for him.

PLEITGEN: Slovakian authorities claiming the attack was politically motivated. The 71-year-old suspect, they say, unhappy among other things with the Russia-friendly Fico's government's decision to cut off military aid to Ukraine.

The country's interior minister stressing though the assailant was not part of a wider network,

MATUS SUTAJ-ESTO, SLOVAK INTERIOR MINISTER (through translator): He's a lone wolf. His disappointment with the government accelerated after the presidential election when he decided to act.

PLEITGEN: Dismay and disbelief in the suspect's neighborhood.

I was very surprised by what he did, this neighbor says. I don't understand how it happens. Something must have clicked.

Robert Fico is often viewed as pro-Russian and critical of the European Union. Slovakia society deeply divided.

But now that the prime minister remains in intensive care trying to recover, politicians from both sides are urging unity and stability.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

PLEITGEN (on camera): And, Jim, that is one thing that people that you speak to have all walks of life have been doing so over the past 48 hours that we've been on the ground here. They will acknowledge there are deep divisions here in the society. And there certainly are politicians who see that something like this, an assassination attempt like that could seriously destabilized society like that. And that is why politicians from all walks of life, like for instance, the outgoing president who politically is very much opposed to Robert Fico says, in the end, what happened there was an attack on Slovakian democracy -- Jim.

SCIUTTO: Yeah, good to see you that by partisan support for the wounded prime minister.

Fred Pleitgen, thanks so much.

Now to Beijing. Chinese President Xi Jinping is hosting Russian President Vladimir Putin for an official state visit.

[15:20:05]

You see them there shaking hands. This trip intended to strengthen ties between the two nations, which the leaders described as a no limits partnership when they met just before Russia's invasion of Ukraine in 2022.

Xi said that China is willing to always be Russia's good friend, neighbor, and partner of mutual trust.

The U.S. has pressed China not provide arms to Russia for its war in Ukraine that U.S. officials say China has been providing other material support, as well as becoming a reliable buyer of Russian oil.

The meeting of great power leaders comes as Russia is expanding its push into northeastern Ukraine. The two expected to discuss the war in Ukraine in informal talks later this meaning -- this evening.

Well, in Ukraine earlier today, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy met with military officials in Kharkiv. Of course, the target it seems of Russia's major offensive in the northeast. Zelensky described an extremely difficult outlook for troops. Officials warned that combat, quote, remains complicated and is changing dramatically. Russian forces have taken control of more than nine villages close to the border since they launched a surprise attack last week.

Joining me now to discuss, former supreme allied commander, General Wesley Clark.

General, thanks so much for joining.

WESLEY CLARK, CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Thank you, Jim.

SCIUTTO: So, a senior NATO commander said today that NATO believes Russian troops don't have the numbers necessary for a strategic breakthrough in Ukraine's Kharkiv region. I wonder if you agree with that assessment or is this more dangerous.

CLARK: I don't have access to the spatial intelligence that General Cavoli might have, but the Russians did achieve a measure of surprise. They did get in quickly and had they been well-organized and prepared, they would've had a breakthrough.

Now, they don't have it yet. And I'm relieved to see the quick response to the Ukrainians to get forces in there. Some of them were border guard and so, it doesn't look like Russia is going to get a quick slam dunk when in this battlefield. But it's one more stretch on the Ukrainians forces. I don't think much U.S. equipment and ammunition yet arrived. And they're hard pressed to hold on and keep the Russian effort from expanding.

SCIUTTO: Secretary Blinken on his visit said that the U.S. and its partners are rushing those weapons that ammunition to the front lines. How soon -- how long does it take to get there in quantities sufficient to help Ukraine push this back?

CLARK: Well, the supply lines are empty. So there's nothing near the front that can go forward. So you've got to take it through multiple echelons. Now, some of this stuff may have been pre-positioned. We haven't been

told exactly what was pre-positioned in Poland, but when you're talking about 155 millimeter artillery rounds and Patriot missiles, no, there's -- so this is heavy stuff. You need a Berlin airlift to get it in, but we won't do it by air into Ukrainian once it gets into Ukraine then its got to go through the supply system to get to the front lines.

My latest report from people I trust over there couple of days ago, so far as they know, not much has gotten through.

SCIUTTO: One advantage that Russia has, particularly in this region, is that they could pummel Ukrainian front lines in defenses from the Russian side of the border. And as you well know, and I know you've criticized the U.S. restricts Ukrainian forces from using us supplied weapons to strike inside Russian territory. Should the U.S. lift that restriction?

CLARK: Well, I don't know if the U.S. is able legally to lift it. I wish we would. But what Secretary Blinken said is, do what you have to do. And I think this is right advice for Ukraine.

The problem is, or maybe some technical reasons some inner interrelated intelligence efforts that may keep them from doing that the way they would like to but this is an existential threat to Ukraine, and they have to appreciate that U.S. interests are not necessarily totally congruent with Ukrainian interests. And they've got to do what's necessary for their survival. And so I hope they will go beyond the border and start pummeling those Russian forces when they get the means to do so that are staging inside Russia.

SCIUTTO: Some NATO partners, though not the U.S., have been speaking about providing trainers, NATO forces to train Ukrainian forces inside Ukraine, not as combat forces mind you, but this would be NATO boots on the ground, on Ukrainian territory. Do you believe that step is wise?

[15:25:01]

CLARK: Well, I think depends on what they're doing. First of all, I'm not sure that outside trainers are going to be that effective in terms of training Ukrainian forces unless it's simply about like maintenance and repair and logistics and stuff.

But that kind of support is important because with a wide variety of equipment that Ukrainians have, they need all the maintenance support and maintenance expertise in that country they can get. This would be helpful.

The -- on the other hand, Jim, you've got to look at what deterrence means. You give the enemy a complete menu and roadmap of how to attack and guarantee 'em and you won't respond, you lose deterrence. And so I think brings President Macron said is you've got to have some ambiguity. So, these NATO allies saying this is helpful, and I hope they will come in and help Ukraine. SCIUTTO: As we reported just before, President Putin meeting Xi in Beijing official state visit, the U.S. has pressured China from the beginning of this war not to provide arms lethal military aid to Russia. In general, it seems China has avoided that at least openly, although the U.S. believes China is providing other material support, perhaps dual use technologies or technologies, while there certainly buying Russian oil, which, of course, funds the Russian war machine.

Is there a distinction? Or is that a distinction I should say without a difference, I mean, is China effectively supporting the Russian military invasion of Ukraine?

CLARK: Well, I think they are supporting it. They're providing heavy equipment, manufacturing tools, and so forth. So the Russians can rebuild their military industrial complex. They're providing things like chips in there and they've had some Chinese intelligence officers in there from beginning -- from the beginning.

So they're collecting information on all less and information about NATO systems. So they're not yet shipping aircraft and tanks in so far as we know. But everything below that and you know, the appointment of the new minister of defense in Moscow is an indicator that Putin is in this for the long haul, and he wants to rebuild his military industrial complex. He wants are for big the confrontation with NATO and he's going to draw on more and more Chinese support.

SCIUTTO: Yeah, this is not going away. General Wesley Clark, thanks so much.

CLARK: Thank you, Jim.

SCIUTTO: Turning now to the war in Gaza and the international response to Israel's ongoing incursion into Rafah. First at the Hague, South Africa appealed to the top U.N. court in an emergency request to end the Rafah operation underway in a city where more than a million Palestinians have sheltered. South Africa's representatives say it represents a new and horrific stage in a war they believe has amounted to a genocide by Israel.

Here's some of the case they made today.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

VUSI MADONSELA, SOUTH AFRICAN AMBASSADOR TO THE NETHERLANDS: Israel continues to show at a contempt for Palestinian life, operating with impunity. South Africa has no other option than two once again seek protection in the halls of justice for the fundamental rights of the Palestinian people to their existence.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Israel's attorney will have -- attorneys will have a chance to respond when the hearing resumes tomorrow.

Inside Gaza, a major development in the acute hunger and humanitarian crisis there. The U.S says it has now completed construction of a temporary floating pier off the coast of Gaza. Gaza city in the north where the U.N. says famine is already setting in. U.S. military officials say they hold at least 500 tons of aid per day can flow through that pier beginning in the coming days.

Following all this is CNN pentagon correspondent Oren Liebermann.

Oren, tell us about this pier. I mean, its one thing to get the pier built. The next thing is to have the operation to get the aid in and get it distributed. But what kind of impact do U.S. military officials believe this pier will have?

OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: It will help, but it is not a silver bullet and the Pentagon has made that clear. This is not supposed to be the primary gateway or entryway or for humanitarian aid. It's simply supposed to augment what should be coming through the four or five land crossings that allow aid in from Israel and the Rafah Crossing in from Egypt.

But because that's not working and we're seeing worsening fears of famine and we're watching a worsening humanitarian catastrophe, this pier, and you can see the aerial view there from earlier today is supposed to help alleviate that crisis. Ships will be able to come up, drop their goods off, their shipments off onto a floating platform essentially. And that then will be brought by truck down that causeway and onto the distribution and offload site in Gaza.

It is supposed to help. But as you point out, it is not operating yet. Now, they have connected the causeway to the beach there. So we are closer to the point where this will begin initially operating. It's been delayed for several days now because of first some concerns over security, but also because as of the sea state.

[15:30:05]

So that has pushed this back a bit. The U.S. very much aware of how badly this is needed. They say there are hundreds of tons of aid on ships off the coast of Gaza waiting to use this pier known as the JLOTS and then thousands of tons of aid are already waiting in Cyprus and essentially in the pipeline to come down this maritime corridor, offload onto that pier down the causeway into the Palestinians who need it in Gaza.

SCIUTTO: So let me ask you about the ongoing differences between the U.S. and Israeli officials about Israel's plan for a Rafah offensive where. Where does a Rafah offensive stand?

And what additional communications, if any of you heard about from the Pentagon to their Israeli counterparts?

LIEBERMANN: So there has been regular communication about this and the U.S. has made its position very clear that it opposes a full-scale invasion or ground incursion of Rafah, even as Israel appears to have the forces around Rafah to make take that happen should the order come down.

Right now, the U.S. describes what it sees Israel is doing -- assesses what it sees Israel is doing as a limited incursion into Gaza. The question, of course, is where this goes from here, and that is certainly the topic of conversations. Now, of course, sitting over all of this is the promise that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has publicly made, that Israel will be going into Rafah to try to destroy the last four Hamas battalions that are there.

The U.S. is absolutely an adamantly opposed to that and has put forward what it calls essentially alternative routes are different means of dealing with Hamas, although they haven't publicly specified what those are and that at least at this moment is one of the big breaks between the U.S. government and the Israeli government, how to deal with Rafah.

The U.S. has been clear that it has not yet seen a credible comprehensive plan from Israel, and what do you do with more than a million Palestinians who have sought refuge there in Rafah in southern Gaza. So that is a major concern for the U.S.

SCIUTTO: Yeah, one of many unresolved differences between the two sides.

Oren Liebermann, thanks so much.

Still to come, the Dow Jones broke through the 40,000 threshold for the first time earlier today. We're going to break down what it means for your bottom line, how lasting it is. Look at it, just over the top there by smidgeons.

We're going to speak with Richard Quest, next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:35:43]

SCIUTTO: It is the final hour of an historic trading day on Wall Street. For the first time ever, the Dow Jones crossed the 40,000 threshold. Look at it there now. It's not still above it, just a few dollars below. We'll see where it ends for the day.

Joining me now, Richard Quest, CNN's business editor-at-large, anchor of "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS".

So you and I remember the book in 1999, Dow 40,000, of course, that didn't work out so well. There was a big crash afterwards in 2000.

Tell us what tip the market over the edge this time at least for a moment. We'll see if it goes back up.

RICHARD QUEST, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST: I will not -- will not saying that things are doing well and they're doing well. And it gave us a boost. We had the inflation numbers that suggested that inflation isn't going to be that bad, or at least the Fed may be people to at least resume some form -- excuse me, some form of cutting.

And as a result, you know, we have this phrase psychologically important. And what I've discovered over the years and it's been technically proven is that markets find very difficult to get through the psychological barriers. They just, Jim, they just can't push through. So it gets towards 40,000 and it dallies and dillies and dallies and dillies.

And then it sort of pulls back and then you just need one sort of impetus. And what we saw today was that Walmart number, up 7 percent Walmart today, because of the prospect of better retail sales for Walmart, massive retailer, largest employer, and that's why it just needed an oomph-o-rama. It got it today.

SCIUTTO: Now, a big portion of the gains have been three of the magnificent seven as they're known, stocks -- Microsoft, Apple, and Amazon. What does that mean? And does it signal some potential top heaviness to the market?

QUEST: The Dow is a price weighted index, and unlike the rest of them, which are market cap based. So, there's only 30 stocks. They say that it's not as representative, is it, as is to say S&P 500 or the Nasdaq.

But the Dow has this cache about it, and it continually does change and emphasize there's no stock in the Dow from when it began in 1896. GE was the closest and that fell out in 2018.

But if I just look at a list, and February of this year, Amazon came into the Dow, Amazon replaced Walgreens Boots. The variety of companies that come in and come out, they say gives the Dow a relevance to ordinary people at the other markets for example, simply don't have.

Now, is it the most effective, efficient? Is it the best barometer? Probably not. But because it's got the top 30, because it's got the names that you and I know, because it is price weighted, it is the one we follow. And when that -- just look at that, Jim, look at that -- I mean --

SCIUTTO: You recognize some of those names. There's good names on there.

QUEST: And you sort of feel if it's not in the Dow, it doesn't matter. You've got fast-moving Apple, Microsoft, you've got Verizon, which is a utility. You've got Merck, which is pharmaceuticals, Honeywell Tech, Travelers, Goldman which is --

SCIUTTO: Yeah, Caterpillar, McDonalds, yeah.

QUEST: Exactly, exactly.

SCIUTTO: Now, if you and I were talking dogs years ago in January 2017, it would have just cross 20,000. I mean, that's a pretty short timeline to double.

QUEST: It is but there's been inflationary pressures, obviously. You are talking about the top tech stocks that are now reflected in the Dow. You're talking about the time value of it all.

And most important of all, companies have been making profits. There is still, I mean, this is the reason why the long-term investor goes into equities because the companies make a profits, the profits go into our 401ks, our pension plans.

And that's why if you want to make money -- I don't mean speculative nonsense.

[15:40:01]

But if you want good, solid, steady gains, it has to be with equities.

Bring out that Dow again, if you've got two seconds, bring up that Dow 30. Look at that list and you -- well, that's the Dow at the moment, at 8 percent, eight points. If I suck my finger and I show you what's happening with the wind, in the economy, I look at the Dow and I can see exactly the strengths and weaknesses of today's economy.

SCIUTTO: And you also see whether Dow, on that long line there we have on the screen --

QUEST: Yeah.

SCIUTTO: Recovered from the big drops in 2008, of course, during the pandemic.

QUEST: Jim, last thought from me, I remember the day the Dow fell 25 percent, 509 points.

SCIUTTO: I remember, too.

QUEST: You know, we thought the world was collapsing, 1980s. So, the world was collapsing. Well, once you've lived through that, Black Monday, Black Thursday, then you've been to dotcom boom and bust, you start to realize over time, equities is the only best gain.

SCIUTTO: Richard Quest, thanks so much.

QUEST: Thank you, sir.

SCIUTTO: Be sure to join Richard at top of the hour for "QUEST MEANS BUSINESS" right here on CNN.

When we come back, more on Michael Cohen's ongoing cross-examination as the court is preparing, just a few minutes, draft for the weekend.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCIUTTO: Back to our story, Michael cross -- Michael Cohen cross- examine.

Jessica Schneider with an update from me.

So, Jessica, sources telling CNN that the attorney Bob Costello, who is actually lawyer for Michael Cohen, former lawyer from Michael Cohen, the defense could call them as witness.

SCHNEIDER: They're considering it. SCIUTTO: Why and under what -- for what reasons.

SCHNEIDER: So Robert Costello actually testified yesterday before a House Judiciary Subcommittee on the weaponization of the federal government. And within that testimony yesterday, he talked repeatedly about what a liar Michael Cohen is, and obviously given the theme of today's cross-examination, that seems to fit perfectly with what the defense wants to continue harping on.

[15:45:04]

You know, Michael -- Michael Cohen did testify as to his relationship with Robert Costello. Robert Costello was the attorney who after Michael Cohen's hotel room was raided and he knew he was under investigation in April 2018, he had his last conversation with Donald Trump, never talk to him again.

That's when Robert Costello came into play. They were in touch and Robert Costello said, look, I'll be your back channel to Trump, and they, you know, Robert -- or Michael Cohen --

SCIUTTO: So, who's interest --

SCHNEIDER: Well, who knows?

SCIUTTO: To Trump's interest or --

SCHNEIDER: Maybe to Trump's -- well, that was part of it, you know, Robert Costello kind of kept kneeling him as in dog flip, and Michael Cohen said they never signed a formal agreement, but he basically considered Robert Costello, his lawyer.

SCIUTTO: Uh-huh.

SCHNEIDER: So they do have somewhat of relationship and I guess the defense would think if they could get on the stand.

SCIUTTO: Could then that -- sure. To there -- could that then be turned on them by the prosecution to say what was -- who was Robert Costello working four when he reached out to him?

SCHNEIDER: And that's the risks when you bring somebody up on a stand because the prosecution will be able to cross-examine the defense's witness.

SCIUTTO: Yeah.

SCHNEIDER: And so, I think this is right now, it's all like possibility. I think maybe Trump saw what kind of testimony Costello gave yesterday in the House committee and said, ooh, I liked that we got to get that guy in the stand.

SCIUTTO: Yeah, it wouldn't be the first time. Trump guided his own defense.

SCHNEIDER: Right. SCIUTTO: Jessica Schneider, thanks so much.

So let's talk to trial consultant Richard Gabriel to discuss some of the takeaways.

Richard, good to have you.

I wonder what your view is and your reading of how the jury would read that moment earlier today when Cohen admitted some uncertainty about a phone call he testified prior in the week in which he initially said he informed Trump that the payment had been made, now expressing in under cross-examination doubts about his recollection of that phone calls. Is that significant in your view?

RICHARD GABRIEL, TRIAL CONSULTANT: Well, it can be, but the truth is that either this jury is going to sit there and say, okay, I don't believe Michael Cohen is a big liar. Obviously, the defense is making a very strong point about that.

But the truth is that we're this for the trial, most of this is a document case, Jim. So a lot of this has already been put in and the jury has a lot of evidence about the payment being made, whether there's a conversation that's been made here or there is kind of immaterial and even though we've focused so much on Cohen's testimony, I think a lot of times, the jury can say, I'm not sure how relevant whether he's a vengeful liar is or not, because we have so many documents that do this connection here.

SCIUTTO: Understood, I spoke, to a lawyer earlier in the day. Who to your point about documents, said that the prosecution has yet to prove an essential element, which is that Trump not only knew about the payments and even if his intent was to hide this from the election. But he did not have or they have not proven that he had specific involvement in categorizing those payments is legal -- legal expenses necessary to prove part of the prosecutions case here that it was ineffective, violate federal campaign laws.

Do you agree that the prosecution has yet to establish that?

GABRIEL: Well, they may have not established a direct connection on that. But if you look back over the testimony over the last few weeks, what they are saying is Trump is a micromanager. He knows everything, he sees everything. He's looking through every document is being here. So they're showing that there's a circumstantial evidence that he has knowledge and he has very direct thing sort of involvement in how these payments are being made.

SCIUTTO: Clearly, the prosecution was aware of Cohen's credibility problems prior to his testimony, they call a lot of witnesses before him to lay out the case so that they could argue the case did not rise or fall with Cohen's testimony here, but it seems like the defense has scored some -- scored some points here, struck some blows on redirect. That is, of course, the prosecutions chance to speak to the witness again, what do they need to do in your view?

GABRIEL: Well, I'm -- I'm not sure they need to do a whole lot. I think they need to re-establish just a few basic thematic points, which is that obviously Donald Trump knew everything, was involved in everything, clearly had spoken to him and also had signed checks and was had seen documents related to the payment of this and thematically just kind of -- the thing that's interesting about his testimony overall is that it also creates this sort of culture of Trump.

It lets -- it's an insight into the whole thing behind the campaign and how he's involved in everything and what they are trying to do with his campaign. So I think just establishing a few of these main thematic points is really what the prosecution needs to do and then move on and close their case.

[15:50:03]

SCIUTTO: Before we go, I've been asking every lawyer this and I'm not going to hold you to it, but given where we are and that we might very well have this case wrapped up perhaps beginning of next week and you getting the closing arguments and then deliberation, where do you think it ends up? Conviction or no conviction?

GABRIEL: I never liked to do the crystal ball forecast because you never know with a jury.

SCIUTTO: Sure.

GABRIEL: We have a very smart jury. I think a lot of times -- I think the prosecution has made a very reasonable, very comprehensive laying in of the evidence there. Whether they think -- and I think what really this comes down to, Jim, is where the jurors started in the case. In other words, whether they believe that this is really fundamentally election tampering, or whether they think this is just politics, whether they think there's really an intent there, whether they think there's just this fundamental, how yeast just trying to further his political career is just politics as usual.

So I think that's where it is, whether they get one juror not really has to do with a personality, and how well these jurors get along in deliberation. That's going to predict the outcome.

SCIUTTO: No question. Richard Gabriel, thanks so much.

When we do come back, a severe weather threat here in the U.S., life- threatening, flash flooding in parts of Texas and Louisiana. We're going to have a forecast when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

SCIUTTO: Dangerous, life-threatening flash flooding expected to occur in parts of Texas and Louisiana tonight as torrential rain continues there, the National Weather Service Weather Prediction Center issued a rare level four out of four high risk of excessive rainfall warning. It's a mouthful.

Earlier today, there are currently more than 500,000 people inside the high-risk zone.

CNN meteorologist Allison Chinchar has the latest. How bad is this going to be?

ALLISON CHINCHAR, CNN METEOROLOGIST: Right. So, that's really the million dollar question. We've already started to see some of the rain begin. You can see that here are lot of these giant clusters of showers and thunderstorms beginning to spread across eastern Texas and also into Louisiana. But notice that other round out to the back. That's going to start sliding across Texas as we go later into the evening.

But it's not just the heavy rain. It's also the potential for those strongest severe thunderstorms. You've got a severe thunderstorm watch that yellow color until 5:00 p.m. central time, and a brand new tornado watch and effect for portions of Texas and also Louisiana. That is valid until 10:00 p.m. Central Time tonight.

[15:55:02]

But yes, the high-risk again, that's this pink color. You see right here. But even the areas surrounding it, even into the so moderate risk and a slight risk, those areas still have the potential for flooding, too, just not quite as high of a chance. But these high risks are incredibly rare. They're only issued about 4 percent of the time. But given that, they account for 80 percent of flood damages and roughly a third of flooding fatalities.

One of the other concerns is a lot of the rivers, creeks, and streams in this area would some of them still have not come down from flood stage from all of that heavy rain about a week-and-a-half to two weeks ago. You've got one river gauge still at major flood stage, just about a dozen. It moderate flood stage in nearly 40 at minor flood stage. So those are going to be some areas we keep an eye on as well.

Look at all of the rain has fallen in the last 30 days. This white spot right here, you're talking more than 20 inches, but even this pink color here, you're talking roughly a foot of rain. And now were going to be adding more on top of it.

And for some perspective, because yes, this area does normally get a lot of rain, but even for them, you're talking 600 percent of their normal rainfall. Again, in a changing climate, you're going to start seeing that though, that increase of what we would normally see in extreme precipitation change about 37 percent for states like Louisiana, Texas, you're talking about 21 percent higher than average. And most of these areas, next couple of days could add about three to five inches.

SCIUTTO: Allison Chinchar, thanks so much.

And thanks so much to all of you for joining me today. I'm Jim Sciutto in Washington.

"QUEST MEANS BUSINESS" is up next.