Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

CNN International: Trump Guilty on All Counts, Sentencing on July 11; Trump is First Former U.S. President Convicted of a Crime. Aired 4:30-5a ET

Aired May 31, 2024 - 04:30   ET

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

[04:30:00]

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Kristen Holmes, CNN, New York.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

MAX FOSTER, CNN ANCHOR: For more analysis we are joined by Thomas Gift, director of the Centre on U.S. Politics at University College, London. Thomas, thank you so much for joining us.

Just your reactions, first of all, when you heard it was like late in the evening, our time, wasn't it, here in the U.K.?

THOMAS GIFT, DIRECTOR, CENTRE ON U.S. POLITICS, UNIVERSITY COLLEGE OF LONDON: Absolutely. Max, thanks so much for having me, as always.

I mean, typically a criminal conviction just months before an election would be a death knell for a politician, but we know that Trump isn't a typical politician, and there have been so many fatal blows to Trump, supposedly fatal blows to Trump, and he's either endured them or come out stronger on the other end.

So I have to say, whenever I heard this verdict, I was somewhat surprised, but not entirely shocked. Obviously, it's unprecedented, but we're used to using the word unprecedented with Trump.

FOSTER: Yes, I'm just trying to work out really what it means, though, because we had some polling suggesting that this could actually help him in the presidential election, combined with the fact it seems pretty unlikely, according to a lot of legal experts, that he's going to go to prison. What does that actually mean for Americans?

GIFT: Well, I think for Trump, it's the same story. He's going to frame this, obviously, as a witch hunt. It's a personal vendetta. It's selective prosecution. It's the weaponizing of the judiciary. I think we're already seeing a flood of supporters rushing to Trump's defense, Republican Congress members, right-wing media, online surrogates, certainly helping fundraising.

I think the one thing that it does is not allow Trump to say that he was exonerated, like in his two impeachment trials. So when we're thinking about the political ramifications of this, Max, I do think it's worth reflecting on how this verdict plays relative to the counterfactual, which would have been not guilty, where Trump didn't just leave the courtroom being able to say that he was exonerated. He would have been able to leave the courtroom and really gloat and say, look, I told you so.

So I think even worse for Democrats than if charges had never been brought against Trump all would be for Democrats to actually lose. And so they were at least relieved as well as being energized by this outcome.

FOSTER: A lot of Republican voters, obviously, you know, they're traditionalists, aren't they? They may, you know, buy into the narrative of Donald Trump, but might they ultimately have an issue going into a vote and putting their tick next to a convicted felon? There's something that's going to, you know, clang with them about that, isn't there?

GIFT: In a normal world, yes. In an insane world, yes. And in a world before Donald Trump, absolutely.

I just don't see that happening. I think Trump has been so effective at leveraging this brand of grievance politics. Like so many Republicans do view this as a witch hunt and a political vendetta that he's not going to lose many Republican votes. If anything, it's just going to galvanize the far right. It's going to outrage them.

I do think that at least according to polling, Trump could lose a few percentage points as a result of being found guilty, but those are mostly moderate voters, voters in the middle. That's not much, but as the segment that was lead into this suggested, in a close election, even a few points could be decisive.

FOSTER: We spoke to a legal expert earlier warning Donald Trump not to poke the bear. He's got a press conference coming up today. He's been very critical of the judge, of the court, of the legal system. That could backfire, couldn't it? If you have a judge like this, who's very clear on not being afraid of sending him to prison, it could make the sentencing more severe if he continues like that. Do you think that's going to affect what he says?

GIFT: There's always that risk. Donald Trump seems willing to take that risk because I think he's playing this more in the courtroom of public opinion than in the actual courtroom. I don't think ultimately Trump will face jail time.

The charges themselves are class E felonies in New York, which is the lowest level of felony. I think technically he could face between 16 months and four years in a state prison, but he doesn't have a prior criminal record, at least not yet, which is a mitigating factor. And I think it's much more likely that he's going to face probation or a fine or be given some type of conditional discharge.

Also, Trump's going to put this on appeal. So that's going to push it down, probably beyond November 5th. But you're right.

I mean, a typical defendant would say, don't poke the bear, try to respect the rules, but nothing that Donald Trump has done up until this point has respected the rules. He has violated gag order after gag order.

FOSTER: Yes, and in terms of what he does next, how do you think he's going to play this in terms of, you know, going up to the sentencing, receiving the sentence? Do you think anything's going to change in terms of his story?

GIFT: I think absolutely nothing is going to change. I mean, again, he's going to frame this as a witch hunt, a personal vendetta, say it's selective prosecution.

[04:35:00]

It's what he's done over and over and over, and it's worked for him, at least it's worked for him with the GOP base. So there's no reason for him to change, unfortunately.

FOSTER: And just, I just wanted to ask, that thought came to me, you probably saw, but it was, you know, just about Joe Biden's pretty low- key response, just a social media post. I mean, a lot of opposing politicians would see this as a great gift, something they can really lean in on, but Biden's not doing that. Just explain why you think that is.

GIFT: I totally agree with you, Max. Biden's really been a bystander in this whole situation. He hasn't wanted to give credibility to an accusation that he's being prejudicial or putting his thumb on the scales of justice.

I think that's technically correct, but it also means that Biden's fighting with one hand tied behind his back. Trump's real liability is the perception that he's corrupt, that he's unethical, that he doesn't respect the rule of law. And when Biden can't comment on Trump's malfeasance, except in broad generalities, I do think that it puts him in a bind politically.

Of course, the other thing that this does, Max, is create a huge media vacuum where just all of the cameras are pointed at Trump 24 hours a day. So every time a voter picks up the newspaper or turns on cable news, all they see is Trump, never Biden. Maybe all press isn't good press, but I think it's hard to quantify what impact that has on just preventing Biden from conveying his message in the campaign trail.

FOSTER: OK, Thomas Gift, thank you so much for your insight today, appreciate it.

Trump's expected sentencing date comes just days before the Republican National Convention, as we were saying, where he could announce his running mate as well. In the hours after the verdict, GOP lawmakers thought to be on the list for the vice presidency came to Trump's defense and lambasted the jury's decision.

VP contenders like Florida Congressman Byron Donalds called the verdict a travesty. Ohio Senator J.D. Vance accused Democrats of inventing a felony to get Trump. New York Congresswoman Elise Stefanik echoed a similar sentiment and rallied voters to stand with Trump and never surrender.

And former Republican presidential hopeful Tim Scott had this to say on CNN following the verdict.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

SEN. TIM SCOTT (R-SC): This is the weaponization of the justice system against their political opponent. This is a justice system that hunts Republicans while protecting Democrats. This was certainly a hoax, a sham. This was devastating for the average American watching.

It's one of the reasons why Americans, and frankly, even some of your viewers are going to DonaldJTrump.com to actually invest in the future of this country and to protect our American legal system against this kind of travesty of justice. It is a hard day for the American people.

When you have a jury made up of 96 percent of Manhattan are Democrats, they've already said most of them don't like Donald Trump. So when you find yourself in a justice system where the jury aren't people that are actually objective and open-minded, but people who've made up their decisions before the case starts, it questions the results of -- they question the results. They question the results of the justice system.

Everyday Americans all across this country, even the never Trumpers are now calling and joining the team. Donors who sat on the sideline are now joining the team because November 5th is a day of reckoning and America will be spoken, will be heard. Our voices will be heard loud and clear.

And I can guarantee you that the American people, we the people, will be on the side of Donald Trump. November 5th is a day of reckoning.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

FOSTER: Well, Trump then has yet to show any contrition or take responsibility for his crimes. Could that be a factor in his sentencing? We'll look at the possibilities.

Plus, we'll hear from two veteran journalists about the ways that Trump's verdict could impact an already divided nation. Do stay with us.

[04:40:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ALVIN BRAGG, MANHATTAN DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Today, we have the most important voice of all, and that's the voice of the jurors. They have spoken. Donald J. Trump has been convicted of 34 counts of falsifying business records.

(END VIDEO CLIP) FOSTER: Former U.S. President Donald Trump is now a convicted felon. A jury has found him guilty on all 34 felony counts in his New York hush money trial. It took jurors nearly 12 hours to reach their verdict.

Trump's sentencing is set for July the 11th. He could get probation or a maximum 20 years behind bars, but his legal team is planning to appeal. The presidential candidate was convicted of falsifying business records to cover up a hush money payment to adult film star Stormy Daniels before the 2016 election.

During the trial, the former National Enquirer boss David Pecker testified that his publication paid for stories to squash them.

Ronan Farrow, who wrote an entire book about the catch and kill scheme, says this story became public because of investigative journalism and sources wanting to speak up. He spoke earlier with Anderson Cooper.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

RONAN FARROW, CONTRIBUTING WRITER, THE NEW YORKER: I think it's meaningful to note that this is a story that came out through investigative reporting first, not just at The New Yorker, where we broke some of these stories, but also a whole circle of publications. The Wall Street Journal did amazing work, exposing the first stories about Stormy Daniels. That's worth noting because it is a reaffirmation of how important the press is to our democracy.

And a lot of us who worked on this story, you also were in receipt of some of this when you did your interview with Karen McDougal, really got a lot of blowback. When I was first exposing the rumor of the love child and the suppression of that story that Karen McDougal details, the Enquirer and AMI --

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: They came after you.

FARROW: -- they came after me so hard. And it was my job at the time to not linger on that or talk about it publicly too much.

But I do think it's worth noting now in retrospect because it was a hard price to pay. It messed me up for a long time and I'm still kind of recovering from some of the things they did.

COOPER: Have you talked to sources you had in that industry now about this verdict, what'd they think?

FARROW: Yes, and it's fascinating because of course, the flip side of how vindictive that empire was in going after people is that there were good people within it who became sources for the Wall Street Journal, for the New Yorker, for people like you at CNN. And they helped expose this thing. And that's really meaningful too.

And for a lot of those good people who did help with that exposure, what they're telling me even in conversations today is, A, we wish we weren't associated with this sort of filthy enterprise of catching and killing stories for the Enquirer. And B, that they kind of knew at the time that the good people started leaking because they knew that they were too closely associated with something that might not just be sleazy, but also illegal.

COOPER: It's interesting that the jury wanted to hear back David, the testimony from David Pecker. I mean, you've talked all along as we've been talking throughout this trial of Pecker's importance, prosecutors put him first for a reason.

FARROW: Yes, that's right. And I think in retrospect, it's going to be regarded as a really canny move that the prosecution led with that context because the Stormy Daniels transactions and their concealment don't make sense without first establishing that there was this conspiracy between AMI and Donald Trump, that that meeting at Trump Tower in 2015 really did hatch a plan to subvert the election, as prosecutors said. And the thing about that earlier meeting and the prosecutors telling it to the jury that it's a significant, and the jury then asking afterwards really was the first bellwether that the verdict was going to go the way it did.

I have sources within AMI who told me today when we heard that news, when we heard they were asking about the Trump Tower meeting, asking about Pecker, we understood that the jury bought the premise being given to them by the prosecution.

[04:45:00]

COOPER: Which is interesting because Todd Blanche in his closing spent a lot of time basically undercutting, trying to undercut that meeting and undercut the importance of the National Enquirer and saying, well, it's absurd to think that, you know, that they care, that the Trump campaign cared so much or thought that this was such an important publication. They clearly did. They held this meeting and it was Trump and Cohen approaching Pecker, not Pecker approaching them about how can I help? It was them approaching Pecker about what can you do for the campaign.

FARROW: And that's why it's relevant that so many sources around this, people who were in those rooms or close to those rooms executing these transactions, had these misgivings at the time, knew what it was and saw it the way the prosecution ultimately framed it for this jury.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

FOSTER: Earlier, legal analyst Areva Martin weighed in on Trump's guilty verdict. She spoke with CNN's Kim Brunhuber about the upcoming sentencing phase and potential mitigating factors for the judge to consider.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

AREVA MARTIN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: I don't think Donald Trump's team is going to come into court and do what a typical defense team would do, provide those factors that you just identified as mitigating factors, talking about his age, talking about this being the first time offense for him. I think their arrogance and their hubris, they're probably going to come in and continue to argue that this was a sham trial, that Michael Cohen was a liar, that this verdict is, you know, should be thrown out because it was based on Michael Cohen's testimony. I don't see them making the standard mitigating arguments that you would expect from your typical defendant.

And as you indicated, there are multiple, multiple aggregating factors. The fact that he has not shown any remorse, that he's not accepted any responsibility, that he continues to violate the gag order, that there are at least 10 documented violations of that gag order. He left court today and again, attacked the whole process, attacked the judicial system, attacked the judge. He didn't come out and accept any personal responsibility.

So I think it would be almost impossible for this judge not to sentence him to some jail time, even if it's on the lower end of the four years.

KIM BRUNHUBER, CNN ANCHOR: Really? Jail time. You think, I mean, you know, being a presidential candidate isn't supposed to factor into it, but I mean, the reality is the reality, right? You really think he will serve jail time here?

MARTIN: Well, again, set aside the fact that he was a former president of the United States. If he were any other defendant, he would probably be facing jail time at the higher end of the range, given his conduct, given, as I said, his lack of contrition, his lack of accepting any responsibility, his repeated attacks on the process. Those aren't things that normal defendants get to do without facing very, very significant penalties for their conduct.

And I think this judge has proven that he's not going to treat Donald Trump any other way than any other defendant that is in his courtroom. He's going to hold him to account and he's going to treat him in the same way any other defendant would be treated. And again, if this were any other defendant, he would be facing jail time without doubt.

BRUNHUBER: Really? All right. Well, we shall see. Obviously, Donald Trump will appeal. Any idea on what grounds? I mean, misconduct by the jury, for instance. What do you think his team will be honing in on here?

MARTIN: Well, the one thing that they have been consistent in asserting to this court is the unreliability, the credibility issues with Michael Cohen. That has been their argument from day one. That has been the defense that they have asserted throughout this entire trial.

And I expect that that will be the same playbook that they will run with respect to an appeal. They will make arguments about Michael Cohen and the fact that the jury relying on, in their estimation, any testimony from Michael Cohen automatically nullifies the decision by this jury and renders its decision null and void. But I don't think that's going to be a winnable argument at the appellate level. It wasn't a winnable argument with this judge.

And I think the reality is Donald Trump has to, like anyone else that commits a crime in the state of New York or any state, he has to be held accountable. And he is not above the law.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

FOSTER: Well, it's worth a reminder that the hush money trial was just one of the four criminal indictments against Trump. But all of the other cases are in legal limbo. The Trump-appointed judge overseeing the classified documents case in Florida has indefinitely postponed the trial. That was supposed to be starting this month.

The federal election subversion case is on hold whilst the U.S. Supreme Court considers his claims of presidential immunity. And the Georgia election interference case is paused while Trump and his co- defendants try to disqualify the prosecutor.

We'll be right back.

[04:50:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

FOSTER: More on our top story. For the first time in U.S. history, a former president has been convicted of a felony. A New York jury deliberated for nearly 12 hours before finding Donald Trump guilty on all 34 counts of falsifying business records in his hush money trial. All part of what prosecutors say was an illegal conspiracy to undermine the integrity of the 2016 presidential election.

Trump is also the first nominee of a major party to be convicted in the middle of a campaign for the White House. Sentencing is set for July the 11th, just days before the Republican National Convention starts in Milwaukee.

If he wins the election in November, Trump will be the first sitting president in history to be a convicted felon.

Veteran American journalists Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward, who covered the Nixon Watergate scandal decades ago, weighed in after the verdict. Bernstein says it'll further divide the country and U.S. politics over the next few months.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

CARL BERNSTEIN, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: It's momentous that we have a former president of the United States is a convicted felon in a case in which the facts were evident. There's no question that the rule of law has prevailed here.

But it still is incendiary in terms of where this country is right now. It's like pouring gasoline on a fire that's already burning.

Trump's response that we've heard already, saying that this emanated with President Biden, that he's responsible for this prosecution. I have to say, I know of no one in the White House, Bob might know of someone, who wanted this prosecution to proceed. That in fact, the view in the White House was that this was not a good idea, that there is a very serious case of a January 6th, the incitement of a seditionist riot by the President of the United States. That's the case that people in the White House would like to see go forward and ought to go forward.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

FOSTER: Well, Bob Woodward says Trump may be right when he said the real verdict will be decided on election day in November. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

BOB WOODWARD, INVESTIGATIVE JOURNALIST AND AUTHOR: I first saw and did not expect a quick verdict. And so I thought, oh, maybe the country's not as divided as I thought. And then to be honest, I tuned into Fox News and it's just another chapter in the political wars.

This is not about the law or whatever. And there are people who may love the verdict and people who hate it, but that's the battleground. And one thing I think we have to agree with former President Trump on is this is going to be decided on election day, November 5th.

It's not going to be decided back and forth. And what has happened here is a little bit of a blip. Frankly, everything's a blip because it all feeds into the narrative of this completely divided country that can't agree on much of anything. And it hopefully will be settled November 5th.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

FOSTER: Well, Trump may be the first former U.S. president to be convicted of a crime, but some legal analysts have compared his hush money trial with other so-called trials of the century. CNN's Brian Todd reports.

(BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)

TRUMP: There is no crime.

BRIAN TODD, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Former President Donald Trump's hush money trial is historic and unprecedented.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: In what's being called the trial of the century.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is the trial of the century.

[04:55:00]

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: What just might be the trial of the century.

TODD (voice-over): There have been other trials that have gripped the nation's attention, many of them in the last century. Some analysts say for media coverage, there's one trial that rivals Trump's.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The O.J. trial is the only case that compares to the sensationalism of this case. TODD (voice-over): The former football star, accused of murdering his

ex-wife, Nicole, and Ronald Goldman. A fallen American icon, in court, on TV, all day, every day, for about eight months.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: We, the jury, in the above entitled action, find the defendant, Orenthal James Simpson, not guilty of the crime of murder.

NORM EISEN, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: You have two individuals who are viewed in such polarizing terms. In the O.J. case, the polarization was around race. In the Trump case, it's around politics. But it illuminates a key moment in our life as a nation to see those stark divisions. That's what makes a trial of a century.

TODD (voice-over): Then there was the impeachment trial of a sitting American president, Bill Clinton, in 1999. Impeached by the House, which had charged him with perjury and obstruction of justice, relating to the Monica Lewinsky investigation, Clinton was acquitted by the Senate. America had been introduced to the concept of a gut- wrenching trial of the century more than 60 years earlier.

In 1932, the 20-month-old son of legendary aviator Charles Lindbergh was kidnapped from the family home in New Jersey. The child's body found more than two months later.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The Lindbergh case is a historical trial because obviously Lindbergh had a hero's following.

He crossed the Atlantic. So that had all the drama.

TODD (voice-over): After a more than two-year investigation, a German immigrant carpenter named Bruno Richard Hauptmann was arrested for the Lindbergh baby's murder. Hauptmann professed his innocence until the moment he was executed. His guilt still debated to this day.

It's their purely compelling nature, analysts say, that's made Americans become glued to all these trials, from Hauptmann to O.J., to Clinton, to Trump.

EISEN: Every trial of the century must capture the zeitgeist, the moment that we're in.

TODD: The analysts we spoke to said one of the strongest common threads with all these trials, a heavily anticipated verdict. And many of us will remember where we were and what we were doing when it came down.

(END VIDEOTAPE)

FOSTER: Well, thank you for joining me here on CNN NEWSROOM. I'm Max Foster in London. CNN "THIS MORNING" is up after a short break.