Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

Soon, Trump Speaks After Being Convicted of 34 Felonies; Allies Rush to Defend Trump After Conviction, Biden Fundraises; Concerns Grow for Jury Security After Verdict. Aired 10-10:30a ET

Aired May 31, 2024 - 10:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:00:00]

ERICA HILL, CNN ANCHOR: Good morning and welcome to CNN's special coverage of Donald Trump's conviction. I'm Erica Hill in New York.

In just one hour, we will hear directly from Donald Trump, the 45th president, now also a convicted felon. He is set to speak from Trump Tower following yesterday's historic verdict. A Manhattan jury found Trump guilty on all 34 felony charges of falsifying business records.

The seven men and five women deliberating for about 12 hours over two days to reach that decision. This, of course, marks the first time in American history a former president has been convicted of a felony. Sentencing is set for July 11th, an appeal expected to follow in short order.

Following the verdict, Donald Trump repeated some all too familiar falsehoods and made clear his focus is the 2024 election.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT, 2024 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: This was a rigged, disgraceful trial. The real verdict is going to be November 5th by the people.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HILL: Manhattan D.A. Alvin Bragg also weighing in.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ALVIN BRAGG, MANHATTAN DISTRICT ATTORNEY: Many voices out there. The only voice that matters is the voice of the jury and the jury has spoken.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HILL: Let's get straight to Kristen Holmes. They're at Trump Tower. So, Kristen, what are we expecting to hear from the former president this morning? KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, Erica, I was told by senior advisers to expect a lot of the same messaging, saying that this was election interference, that this case should have never been brought, talking about how this is political persecution, and really what we've heard from the former president since before this trial even started.

But I will note that while his senior advisers have briefed me on that, it is unclear that Donald Trump will stay on message. Since just moments ago, they had a teleprompter set up that was taken down. And as you know, when Donald Trump and I think it's a very when the president goes off the cuff, he tends to say almost anything. So, we'll stay tuned to see what kind of messaging he has.

I will say that after being shocked, stunned after that verdict came out, I am told by sources close to him that he started being in better spirits after being told by donors, allies, lawmakers that they would all stand by him. I think one of the most critical pieces of this, we talked a lot about how historic this is that a former president of the United States has now been convicted felon. But the other part of this is that he is still the presumptive Republican nominee. And in fact, the sentencing set for July 11th is just days before he is expected to become the actual Republican nominee for president at that convention in Milwaukee. It's very difficult now to separate the political and the legal here, something that has been hard now for months, but just gets harder every single day.

Now, while his team is promoting confidence, they just said that they had fundraised in the last 24 hours since that verdict, $34.8 million. Now, of course, this is not cooperated yet. We don't have that FEC filing, but that is what they're saying they got in donations. They did crash that small donation website, Win Red, yesterday after the verdict. They are saying they feel good, but there are still a lot of questions as to how this actually plays out in November.

We have seen poll after poll. It is a very small margin of Trump voters who say they are less likely to vote for him if he is convicted, but that small margin matters a lot in an election like we are expecting in November, where that margin of the winner is going to be so narrow, Erica.

HILL: Yes, it's an important point. And you can bet I think we all know that those pollsters right now trying to get out there, get back to some folks to see what the feeling is now post verdict. Kristen, appreciate it as always. Thank you.

Donald Trump will have no shortage of mentions in the history books as a businessman, a reality T.V. star, the former president, of course, and now convicted felon after a jury of his peers considered that evidence and ultimately found him guilty on all 34 charges.

That, of course, is how the justice system works in this country. Trial by jury is a fundamental principle of this democratic republic.

[10:05:00]

Here's how Donald Trump's lead attorney characterized the jury's verdict on CNN last night.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: Do you accept that he did have his day in court and it was a jury of his peers that made this decision?

TODD BLANCHE, ATTORNEY FOR DONALD TRUMP: Well, no, not at all. We were indicted for, for conduct that happened in 2015, '16, '17 in a jurisdiction that, that, that it was very hard for us to get a fair trial.

Every single person on that jury knew Donald Trump, either as president, as candidate, from The Apprentice. And so I don't accept that this was a fair place to try.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HILL: Joining me now, Donald Trump Attorney Will Scharf, who's also running for attorney general of Missouri. Well, good to have you with us this morning. I'd love to pose that same question to you that Kaitlan asked Todd Blanche. Do you accept that, your client, that Donald Trump did have his day in court, that this was a jury of his peers?

WILL SCHARF, ATTORNEY FOR DONALD TRUMP: Well, I think, first of all, you said in your lead-in that President Trump would be in the history books as a convicted felon. We don't believe that's the case. We're going to vigorously appeal this verdict. I think this case is replete with reversible error. We are going to take this as high and as far as we need to, including to the U.S. Supreme Court, to vindicate President Trump's rights, because there was nothing legal, there was nothing normal about what happened in this New York courtroom over the last month-and-a-half.

We moved for a change of venue here. I completely agree with Todd Blanche that it was impossible for President Trump to have a fair trial in Lower Manhattan. We also moved to recuse the judge off of this case. We believe that he was irretrievably conflicted and biased and there was no way that he ever should have been presiding over this case.

So, look, in the days and weeks and months ahead, we are going to be challenging this verdict. I do not believe that it will end up standing. And as President Trump said last night, the ultimate verdict is going to be that of the American people at the ballot box next November. And I believe that they will be so outraged by this verdict that, if anything, it will help his chances, not hurt his chances of gaining back the White House.

HILL: You know, when it comes to the jury, just yesterday, you spoke with my colleague Jake Tapper. This is less than 24 hours ago, and you were complimenting this jury for how they were handling those deliberations. I want to play that moment.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) SCHARF: And most of all, I'm just enthusiastic about the fact that the jury seems to be taking its duties very seriously. They're considering the law. They're considering the evidence. We believe if they do that, they'll end up at a just verdict here, which is an acquittal.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HILL: Understandably, this is not the verdict that you wanted, obviously. But is a jury no longer thoughtful, serious, or considerate simply because you didn't get the outcome that you wanted?

SCHARF: Well, I think one of the key issues here is the jury instructions. I think Judge Merchan essentially led the jury to this guilty verdict. We're obviously going to be challenging aspects of those instructions on appeal. A judge has a lot of control over his courtroom, and that's one of the reasons we moved so aggressively to have Judge Merchan recused off of this case, because we believe that he does have irretrievable biases that under New York law clearly warranted a recusal.

HILL: Will Scharf, we are out of time, but this will not be the last time that we speak. Thank you.

SCHARF: Good to be with you. Thanks.

HILL: Still to come here, what is next for Donald Trump after his historic conviction? Could the former president actually go to jail? We'll discuss next as CNN's special coverage continues.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:10:00]

HILL: Former Trump fixer Michael Cohen is speaking out following Trump's guilty verdict, stressing that it was, in his view, the evidence overall, not necessarily his testimony, that really sealed the verdict.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MICHAEL COHEN, FORMER TRUMP ATTORNEY AND FIXER: This is a case that is going to come down to the documentary evidence and the testimony of others. And what ultimately was demonstrated was the fact that all of the testimony by the other witnesses that I had involvement with corroborated what I've been saying for six years. And all of the evidence, the documentary evidence, emails, text messages, documents themselves, again, corroborated what I've been saying for six years.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

HILL: Joining me now to discuss, CNN Legal Commentator and former Trump Attorney Tim Parlatore. Tim, great to see you this morning.

You know, I was struck as we look at where we ended up yesterday afternoon with this verdict, you told my colleague, Kasie Hunt, this morning, I believe you said talking about Todd Blanche saying at times it didn't seem there was a strategy there, whatsoever, a lot of attacks but let's focus on the case itself. Do you think that was the fatal flaw here for the defense?

TIM PARLATORE, CNN LEGAL COMMENTATOR: I do. I think that this is a case that was, you know, very defendable. I mean, this is a case where there is a lot of angles for attack, but I didn't see them actually take those angles. You know, it seems like, you know, during the trial, right from the opening statement, there needs to be a very clear theme, a very clear story that the defense is telling as to why you should not believe, you know, what the prosecution is saying.

And they didn't really have a clear theme from the beginning. It was, you know, attack Michael Cohen's credibility. And then when you go through the cross-examinations, that kind of carried through. You know, the cross-examination of Michael Cohen specifically, it seemed like there were a lot of times where -- and I wasn't in the courtroom, I was watching the live feed, you know, here at CNN, but it seemed like so many times he was circling up, getting ready to make a good point, and then before actually hitting the point, he just walked away.

[10:15:03]

And then get to the closing and the same thing. It was just kind of meandering all over the place as opposed to a very clear message to the jury, something that the jury can take back there and say, okay, here's what the defense's theory is.

So, I thought that is something that could have been very well defended, but wasn't.

HILL: I also want to bring in Randy Zelin, who's with us. You know, Randy, from a defense perspective here, in your mind, who was running that defense? Was it Todd Blancher? Was it the client, Donald Trump?

RANDY ZELIN, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: It better have been both because that's the way that it works. It is a relationship. One does not necessarily run roughshod over the other. That is a recipe for a disaster. Ultimately, and I hate to do this, but I would be remiss if I didn't. Whether you were driving in a Ford or a Ferrari, if someone gives you bad directions, you're going to end up lost. And those jury instructions were just a complete -- just take the Constitution, throw it out a window, burn it, shoot it and hang it.

HILL: So, you're not a fan of those jury instructions. You know, we just heard from Will Scharf, who wasn't either. Tim, when you look at it, they're obviously going to bring that in on appeal, as we just heard from Will Scharf. Do you think that they may have a case there on appeal, in terms of the jury instructions?

PARLATORE: I do. I think that the jury instructions had, you know, a very key flaw here, which is, you know, the falsification of business records had to be in furtherance of some other crime, and there wasn't really great instructions on what that other crime was. You know, under New York State law, they're not required to say which it is, but when they do, the judge has to instruct them on that specific crime.

And the problem here is, you know, they don't have to prove that they actually committed that other crime. They don't have to prove that they actually had, you know, FEC violations, but they have to show that what they intended to do was, in fact, a crime. And that, I think, is really the shortfall in the jury instructions is the lack of an explanation to this jury as to the federal election law.

HILL: Coming up next, sentencing on July 11th. Randy, what do you think the potential impact could be for Donald Trump of his multiple violations of this gag order and continuing to attack the judge here, who is not covered by that gag order, but continue and go after the judge and even anonymously go after the jury? How much could that figure in its sentencing?

ZELIN: It should, but it shouldn't. It is an unbelievable turn of events here because Donald Trump checks off every box, not to go to jail, not even to be put on probation. He should be given something called a conditional discharge, which is a piece of paper that says, stay out of trouble. But when you have made a career out of bashing the same judge that's going to sentence you, where you have shown an abject disregard, having even a modicum of respect for the law, demonstrating, hey, I will do this again, I don't give a crap what you or anybody else says. If it were me, if it were anybody else, you're damn right you would be thrown in jail. I just don't see how the judge could possibly do that and make this look even more partisan and political than it already is.

HILL: It is not a position that I would want to be in. That's for sure. Tim, Randy, really I appreciate both joining us this morning. Thank you.

ZELIN: Thank you.

HILL: Just ahead here, their service in the courtroom may be over, but the aftermath of this trial is only just beginning for those 12 jurors. So, what are the protocols in place to keep members of the court and the jury safe?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:20:00]

HILL: Welcome back. We do expect to hear from former President Trump just about a half-an-hour from now. These will be his first formal comments since Thursday's conviction, and we will bring you that news conference live, so be sure to keep your T.V. right here on CNN for that.

Meantime, what happens next for this jury? The jury itself took about 12 hours over the span of two days to find Donald Trump guilty on all 34 counts of falsifying business records. And the judge in this case, as we've noted, went to great lengths to keep jurors' personal information private. During jury selection, he urged the news media to limit reporting any personal information that could unmask these individuals, and he urged that for their own safety. I want to bring in CNN's Chief Law Enforcement and Intelligence Analyst John Miller and Trial and Jury Consultant Carolyn Koch. It's good to have both of you with us today.

You know, based on this trial, how high profile it was, what is your gut, Carolyn, on whether any of these jurors may want to speak out?

CAROLYN KOCH, TRIAL AND JURY CONSULTANT: Well, that's a really good question. And I was thinking about that before you even ask the question. That's a really -- we'll see. I would think that they would want to retain their anonymity. This case is just so volatile on both sides. I think, I mean, honestly, I think a person would have to be crazy to expose themselves to vitriol from strangers who weren't in the courtroom. So, my guess is they'll keep quiet.

HILL: You know, John, after court each jury member was escorted out of the building by security. What about staying safe now that that job is done? What kind of instructions would they be given? And how do they do that?

JOHN MILLER, CNN CHIEF LAW ENFORCEMENT AND INTELLIGENCE ANALYST: Well, the instructions they would be given are, this is up to you whether you want to reveal yourself, talk to the media, and so on.

[10:25:03]

And I know that today different media outlets are reaching out to them to make those offers, but, obviously, they understand the inherent risk in that we've seen kind of the volatility around the threat streams that come with these cases. And, you know, it's one of those things where they have thought this through.

Now, some juror may actually make the calculation, well, I'm going to write a book about this experience, and I'm going to, you know, be able to organize that in my own way. But I agree that most of them will probably stay under wraps, at least for the immediate future, and if they get threats, there is a system. They can report that to the NYPD. The Intelligence Bureau has a threat assessment team. If protection is required, they'll get it.

HILL: I was speaking with a juror from Derek Chauvin's trial. That jury of course found him guilty in the death of George Floyd. And one of the things that he told me is he found people really did, Carolyn, when they got in that room, they put their emotions aside. They took their job very seriously. They took a lot of pride in that job. And they wanted to do their duty.

We talk about this often with attorneys when we're looking at high- profile cases. Have you found that it changes anything for jurors when they know they're involved in a high-profile case or do you find that same level of pride and sense of duty regardless of who is the defendant?

KOCH: Another good question. High-profile changes everything. I would say until I got involved myself in a few high-profile file cases involving police brutality, that jurors always want to do their job, they want to follow the rules, they want to do the right thing, and it's very inspiring when you see jurors across the nation, take their oath so seriously.

However, in a case that really hits a chord, makes people angry. I've also seen jurors not be truthful about their true biases and had the personal experience of discovering during jury selection that a juror who filled out a written questionnaire under oath talking about how fair she could be has social media posts that were the exact opposite. And I think that this Trump jury selection, they encountered people who were not truthful in open court during jury selection as well.

So, I think the high-profile changes the stakes. And as we even seen with the Trump trial, not everybody is a truth teller, and that applies to jurors as well.

HILL: And we did see some of that challenge in court, whether by the attorneys or even by Judge Merchan himself, really drilling down on, based on some of those social media points, did people really believe that they could look at this in an unbiased fashion and be fair?

John, look, security in New York City is a whole different ballgame than most other cities in this country. I spent a number of weeks down there at the courthouse watching it all as this trial was unfolding. What changes now? Do you believe that there will be any changes based on what we saw over the last several weeks and how people, how the public handled this high-profile case? Do you think that would be any cause for changes to security in general?

MILLER: Well, it's interesting, Erica, because what changes now is a giant exhalation at that courthouse in that day-to-day business goes back to normal. The courthouse is not just about one trial, where other trials are happening in the background. It goes back to day-to- day business. The key thing here is going to be the sentencing date, if that remains, 11th. And why is that the key? Because that puts a distance between the verdict and then the prospect of Donald Trump being sentenced to 400 hours of community service, or perhaps a year or more in prison or heavy fines. And that is the kind of thing where there is time to organize demonstrations, rallies, supporters, counter-protests. So, this is something that they're going to be looking at very carefully in terms of what kind of resources they're going to need, what is the social media telling them, what's in the threat stream, and so on.

HILL: John Miller, Carolyn Koch, I appreciate your insight and expertise. Thank you.

Just ahead here, the White House and President Biden's campaign have mostly stayed silent when it comes to Donald Trump's legal woes, but that is now changing how they're looking to leverage now this verdict in Democrats' favor.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:30:00]