Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Newsroom

CNN International: Trump Airs Grievances After Being Convicted On 34 Felony Counts; Biden: Israel Has Offered Proposal For Gaza Ceasefire; International Reaction To Trump's Criminal Conviction; Blinken: Biden Authorized Ukraine To Use U.S. Weapons Inside Russia. Aired 3-4p ET

Aired May 31, 2024 - 15:00   ET

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

[15:00:36]

JIM SCIUTTO, CNN INTERNATIONAL HOST: It is 8:00 p.m. in London, 10:00 p.m. in Kharkiv, 9:00 p.m. in Prague, 3:00 p.m. in New York, and here in Washington. I'm Jim Sciutto. Thanks so much for joining me today on CNN NEWSROOM.

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

We begin with the verdict, sending shockwaves through us politics, 34 times guilty of felonies. Today, a seething and embittered former President Donald Trump tore into the judicial system that yesterday made him a convicted felon, a first for any U.S. president, giving freewheeling remarks where he positioned himself as a martyr once again who, of course, is now seeking a second term in office.

Here are some of what he said.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT: We're living in a fascist state.

You saw what happened to some of the witnesses that were in our side, they were literally crucified by this man who looks like an angel, but he's really a devil.

Now, I would have testified, I wanted to testify.

It all comes out of the White House, crooked Joe Biden, the worst president in the history of our country.

I really think that this is an event what took place yesterday with this judge. Look, we have conflicted, but he's a crooked judge. And you'll understand that.

And I say that knowing that it's very dangerous for me to say that. And I don't mind because I'm willing to do whatever I have to do to save our country and to save our Constitution. I don't mind.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Strong words from the former president there with many, let's be clear, familiar and false statements about the legal system and President Biden's involvement. He was not. This was New York state prosecutor. Reminder, these 34 felony convictions on falsifying business records were delivered by a jury of Trump's peers, 12 Manhattan residents who sat for five weeks of evidence heard from more than 20 witnesses, spent more than 12 hours deliberating, including sending questions for clarification to the judge.

It is an enormous moment in American history with many unknowns now. Trump's legal future, potential prison time, at least possible, his political fate as he seeks another four years in the White House.

We have a lot of analysis ahead. We do begin with the facts of the case and CNN's Jessica Schneider.

Jessica, tell us what comes next. Sentencing scheduled for July 11. Is that a hard date regardless of what happens with an appeal?

JESSICA SCHNEIDER, CNN JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Right now, it's a hard date. It's possible that Trump's attorneys could try to move that date. The judge had wanted to have something as soon as sometime in June, but given the other cases against Trump, they were able to get it to July 11. So that looks like that'll stick. They'll probably pursue appeals while that sentencing date is coming upon them because even if Donald Trump is sentence, they could continue in their appeals.

What's interesting is before sentencing July 11th, Donald Trump will actually undergo a review by a probation officer with the New York City Department of Probation.

SCIUTTO: Review, face-to-face?

SCHNEIDER: Face-to-face. He'll sit in a room, most likely. He'll undergo an interview, mental health evaluation, and then that probate probation officer will help compile a pre-sentencing report, a few pages that he'll submit the judge. That helps inform the judge's decision as to what sort of punishment Donald Trump will get.

And then of course, the defense team, the prosecution, they will also weigh in and Donald Trump is free to submit letters from supporters as well. You know, he does face a maximum of four years per each count. But given the fact that he doesn't have --

SCIUTTO: Just set that aside, that's not going to happen.

SCHNEIDER: No.

SCIUTTO: Yeah.

SCHNEIDER: So, yeah. Given the fact that he doesn't have a criminal record, it's more likely that his jail time would just be about a year if that's what he got. You know, it's also possible he just get probation or home confinement. So that is up to the judge something likely the judge will be considering in these next six weeks before sentencing.

SCIUTTO: Quite a thing to consider. Jessica Schneider, thanks so much. Please do stay with us.

No question, the White House and President Biden's reelection campaign against Donald Trump, of course, have been following the events very closely. The president addressed the verdict directly for the first time today, just ahead of remarks about the ongoing war in the Middle East, in Gaza, and details of a peace proposal there.

Biden did have some strong words particularly about the former president's targeting the judicial system.

[15:05:01]

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: They found down some guilty on all 34 felony counts. Now he'd be given the opportunity, as he should, to appeal that decision just like everyone else has that opportunity. That's how the American system of justice works. And it's reckless, it's dangerous, it's irresponsible for anyone to say this was rigged, just because they don't like the verdict.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: All right. So for a look at not just the political, but legal ramifications of Trump's conviction, let's speak to three reporters who've long covered Trump, presidential politics, and our criminal justice system. Jessica Schneider still with me, plus political reporters, Isaac Dovere and Steve Contorno.

Steve, we heard a bit from Trump at the top of his comments there, certainly angry, certainly a consistent theme of his, which is him as a victim of all this, and also repeating lots of lies and a lot of quite personal attacks on a number of people involved. I wonder in public, Trump and his supporters say this is good for them. It's rallying the base, American voters are going to rally around him.

In private, do they believe that or are they worried about the potential damage to his campaign?

STEVE CONTORNO, CNN NATIONAL POLITICS REPORTER: Well, look, Jim, they have been bracing for this outcome for months now. Our colleague, Kristen Holmes, has consistently reported that Trump's team believed that they would end up with a guilty verdict of some kind and they have been stealing themselves for the outcome for a while.

And yes, they believe -- there's at least some suggestions this could help them at least on the fundraising front that has been a source spot for them going back months and they have said that in the last 24 hours after the verdict, they've brought in upwards of $35 million to their campaign. That is small dollar donations, that is money that they can use directly, not through a super PAC. So that's really important to them.

But nobody knows what the impact on the American voting public is going to be. And there are -- there's a small sliver of undecided voters in this country, and even smaller amount who are going maybe swayed by the outcome in this case. And the Trump campaign can't pretend to know what is going to happen and it's in the uncertainty is reflected in their upcoming schedule.

Trump doesn't have any events on the calendar in the coming days. They had been believing that they needed to be close to Manhattan in case this jury was in deliberations for more than a week or so, and they don't have any plan political activity. And so that they are now scrambling to figure out how are we going to message around this? How are we going to hold events around this? And what is our pitch to our base and to those undecided voters in an over the next five months.

SCIUTTO: Jessica, the former president's comments were riddled with falsehoods, as often happens. And it's -- we've been ticking through those throughout the afternoon. One of which is that this was the Biden administration that came -- came after him with its just explained in simple terms who actually prosecuted this case. And perhaps we should note that the Biden's Justice Department passed on this case. They didn't -- they didn't pursue this from federal angle, although we should note that Michael Cohen did plea guilty to federal charges for his involvement in this number -- a number of years ago.

SCHNEIDER: Yeah. That was under the last administration that Michael Cohen pleaded guilty. I mean, much to the contrary, you know, Alvin Bragg is a district attorney at the state level in New York, not at all associated with the Department of Justice or the Biden administration. In fact, when Alvin Bragg, first came into office, he was very reluctant about this case.

And in fact, one of his assistant district attorneys resigned in protest saying that --

SCIUTTO: Because he didn't pursue it.

SCHNEIDER: Exactly, because Alvin Bragg was not pursuing this. Alvin Bragg said the case isn't strong enough if we want to bring this case, we have to make it stronger. He was very leery of just relying on Michael Cohen and his testimony.

So I mean, to the contrary, the Biden administration is not at all involved in this. Donald Trump has some weight because Alvin Bragg is a Democrat. So it's, you know, a Democrat district attorney, but that's quite common in Manhattan.

But no, this has nothing to do with the Biden administration. In fact, the Department of Justice is running two other cases. The classified documents case in January 6, but those are at a different level. That's run by a special counsel who's completely autonomous from Merrick Garland, the attorney general.

SCIUTTO: And we should know that Trump, while he attacks the Justice Department for the indictments against himself in the classified documents case in January 6, he celebrate the Justice Department indictments of, for instance, President Biden's son Hunter Biden, as well as Democratic senator from New Jersey, Bob Menendez.

[15:10:03] Isaac, you cover the Biden campaign. It was interesting to hear Biden comment on this case. Of course, it was likely he was going to comment on this case to some degree, right? Although to date, he's deliberately kept these various legal proceedings at arms length.

I wonder, do you believe that his comments today from the White House are the last we hear from him. Does he attempt to return to focusing on other things and trying to keep a distance from the legal cases or is this going to become part of a central campaign message?

EDWARD-ISAAC DOVERE, CNN SENIOR REPORTER: I think we're likely to hear from him and his campaign discussions of Trump being a criminal or a felon. But getting into the details of the case is not what we should expect to hear out of Joe Biden especially because he now goes into the weekend next week, early next week, he heads to Europe, of course, the D-Day commemorations. And so he'll be actually out of the country, not involved in the political fray day-to-day for a while.

By the time that he gets back to it, we'll see if were still talking about the verdict in the same way that we are right now and whether help you pushed on it. But look, this is for a while now, we have been leading up to that first debate that's on June 27th, and one of the things that you will hear constantly from the Biden campaign is that this is all about presenting the choice between Donald Trump and Joe Biden.

That's what they want the debate to be about. And that's what they want this month leading up to the debate to be about. And so, now, they say here's another point to make the contrast that to make that choice between Joe Biden and all the things that are there about him, good, bad in voters' minds, and Donald Trump who now has convicted felon, in addition to all the things that were there, good and bad about him, in voters' minds.

SCIUTTO: Last night, Trump's defense attorney Todd Blanche spoke about what comes next, what their plans are. Have a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TODD BLANCHE, TRUMP'S ATTORNEY: We have motions due in a couple of weeks in front of Judge Merchan, which we're going to vigorously fight and restate a lot of what I'm saying to you tonight and other things that happened in the trial that we think just made the trial unfair, including the testimony of Ms. Daniels. If that is not successful, then as soon as we can appeal, we will.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: There's a long legal process ahead, is there not, Steve Contorno, for the Trump team and we should note if, I have this right, Blanche is also involved in the other Trump cases, so they're going to be hopping from one courtroom to another.

CONTORNO: That's right, and this is going to loom over their campaign for the foreseeable future. The sentencing dates that has been set is just days before the Republican National Convention. I think Paula Reid earlier today was saying on our network that the Trump legal team is uncertain whether they even want to move the date. They kind of like the optics potentially of having the sentencing be right before this convention and using that as part of the messaging.

So yes, this legal case and the cases against him are going to continue to be a dominating presence on the campaign trail, though I don't think any of them are objected to have any sort of finality to them quite like what we saw in the last week here.

SCIUTTO: We'll see. A lot depends on the Supreme Court as they decide this immunity question.

Jessica Schneider, Isaac Dovere, Steve Contorno, thanks so much to all of you.

Well, the other news this afternoon, President Biden has declared Israel's latest ceasefire proposal to Hamas a, quote, decisive moment in the Israel-Hamas war. As he announced the details of the agreement, but also it seemed push both sides to agree to it.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

BIDEN: Now, after intensive diplomacy carried out by my team, my many conversations with leaders of Israel, Qatar and Egypt and other Middle Eastern countries, Israel has now offered -- Israel has offered a comprehensive new proposal. It's a roadmap to an enduring ceasefire and the release of all hostages.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Biden's announcement comes at a critical time. He has been facing significant pressure as Israel ramps up an offensive in Rafah, despite his quite public opposition to such an operation. This morning, the Israeli defense forces confirmed that IDF forces are now in central Rafah.

Biden addressed the devastation in Gaza, saying quote, the Palestinian people have endured sheer hell in this war. And, quote, it's time for the war to end and the day after to begin, making his position clear on next steps.

CNN's Alex Marquardt joins us now.

And, Alex, you look at these three phases as described by the president today, phase one, six weeks of a full and complete ceasefire, release of the female and child hostages, phase two, all remaining hostages, male hostages, including soldiers, cessation of hostilities permanently, and then the third phase of Gaza reconstruction -- I wonder, are there any specific details of that outline that are new?

[15:15:12]

Or is this quite similar to the deal that's been on the table for some time? ALEX MARQUARDT, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: It really is quite striking. There are some new details. It was a remarkable level of transparency from President Biden. I would say, Jim, from the way that you laid it out, phase one is essentially what we knew dozens of Israeli hostages, both dead and alive, would be released. There would be a six-week pause in the fighting. Hundreds of Palestinian prisoners would also be released by Israel.

But the really interesting part, Jim, is that phase two and the discussion over a permanent ceasefire. This is something that Hamas has been demanding. This is something that Israel has been loathed to talk about. The fact that Israel is willing to put in this roadmap a discussion about a permanent ceasefire does move them closer to that Hamas position.

Is that enough for Hamas to accept it? That we don't know, certainly President Biden saying today, now the onus is on Hamas to accept this. But Hamas has been demanding, stipulating that there should be an agreement that the ceasefire will eventually lead to this complete cessation of hostilities before this goes into effect. That is something that Israel has not been willing to agree to.

So there is movement on the Israeli side. But the question now, is it far enough for Hamas?

The other major thing that struck me here, Jim, is that President Biden is saying that this isn't Israeli roadmap that is on the table. This is something that they have agreed to, but then an almost the same breath he saying, this needs to be accepted by Israeli leadership. A clear recognition of the fact that this has not yet been recognized or been agreed to by Prime Minister Netanyahu. There's some comments from him just moments ago in which he said the war will not end until all of its goals are achieved, all of Israel's goals are achieved.

Clearly, they feel they have not achieved all their goals in terms of dismantling Hamas. So there are still some major questions here, Jim, but clearly the president saying that he wanted wants this war to end and sees this ceasefire as a way to reaching that, Jim.

SCIUTTO: Yeah. Netanyahu statements seemed to almost like a rebuttal to Biden's statements and they got a ways to go.

Alex Marquardt, thanks so much.

Just after the break, how America's allies and adversaries are reacting to the historic verdict against former U.S. president, current candidate for president.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:20:37]

SCIUTTO: Welcome back.

As news of Donald Trump's historic conviction spread around the world, leaders and politicians reacted to the news rather predictably. Many Western nations are either declined to comment or giving a somewhat muted response.

But the former president has received support from the Kremlin, Hungary's Prime Minister Viktor Orban and Italy's deputy prime minister, who is a right-wing politician.

I want to bring in Ian Bremmer president and founder of Eurasia Group and GZERO Media.

Ian, good to have you on.

IAN BREMMER, PRESIDENT AND FOUNDER, EURASIA GROUP: Jim, good to see you.

SCIUTTO: Let's begin, if we can, with the Kremlin's response. Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov giving what I could only describe as a rich statement on this, he says in general, if we talk about Trump, it is obvious that political rivals are being eliminated there through all legal and illegal means.

Blackly -- darkly comical, given Russia has eliminated political rivals via poisoning, assassination, attempted assassination and imprisonment. Can we though, setting that aside for a moment, read that as a Russian Kremlin public statement of support for Trump?

BREMMER: I don't know. It sounds like approval of Biden.

(LAUGHTER)

BREMMER: I mean, come on. It's an auto -- it's a dictatorship. They systematically have show trials, imprison the innocent, promote the guilty, and destroy the population. And I don't think we should take seriously.

U.S. democracy is not showing well right now, and a lot of democratic allies of the United States are very deeply concerned about that. But countries like Russia who are chaos actors that want the Americans to fail, they are enjoying the fact that the U.S. is so divided over the rule of law in this country, are so divided over legitimacy of its own judicial system.

This is good news for Russia. The more divided and more dysfunctional the U.S. political system gets, the more people don't believe in a free and fair transfer of power, the better off the Russians are in their own region and globally. And that, that is precisely what they've tried to put the finger on this scale for.

SCIUTTO: No question. Listen, it's a series of events right over time where you see a loss of us soft power. I did see China -- China, particularly on Weibo, talking about this, the government, the official government line here basically highlighting the point you're talking about.

It's just try to -- just devils advocate for a moment here. Of course, China doesn't have a leg to stand on, too, because there's no legal process in China that would ever hold a Chinese president to account for alleged crimes. We should -- we should note that as we described this, particularly when it comes from those corners.

Is there any -- and I'm not like sort of hunting here fishy -- but is there any positive message here that in the U.S., a president who goes book beyond before a jury of his peers, 12 average New Yorkers can be convicted of a crime if they believe the evidence warrants?

BREMMER: Of course, the fact that justice is done is important in a system that is managed by rule of law. The question though, Jim, is justice seen to be done? And here, the fact is that the case that Trump is being convicted of is in reality the least serious of the convictions that Trump is potentially up for. The others have been delayed. They won't be resolved before the election. That, of course, benefits Trump.

The fact that almost every GOP leader in the House, in Senate running for president, governors, that they are almost to a man and woman supporting Trump after this guilty series of conventions sections, and indeed saying that the system of this trial was itself illegitimate and blaming it being politicized, blaming Biden as wanting to throw the opposition in jail.

And these are not just -- it's not just Marjorie Taylor Greene. I mean, this is -- it's people like Susan Collins.

[15:25:01]

It's folks like Nikki Haley. It's folks that you and I know are serious politicians who engender a level of support in the United States and around the world that absolutely delegitimizes the U.S. political system, rule of law, and its democracy.

And we have to be worried about that for the long term, not just in terms of the selection.

SCIUTTO: Yeah. You, I know, have been hearing like me from leaders, officials around the world, particularly among U.S. allies who were watching this election very closely. Some of them quite concerned about what a Trump reelection would mean for us alliances, NATO, South Korea, Japan, et cetera.

But I wonder if it's fair to say that regardless of the outcome, there's nervousness because those allies will be worried about just the, the continuing internal divisions in this country, right? Because if Trump were to be elected, you can imagine him going after his own political opponents if he loses, but doesn't accept the loss, once again, you have those sorts of division.

I wonder if -- if that is a concern you hear that regardless of who comes out ahead there, this is going to be a more internally focused America going forward?

BREMMER: Yeah, yeah. Yes. I do.

I mean, this near term panic among some allies about a Trump presidency, and certainly the Europeans, especially the frontline Europeans like the Poles, the Baltics, the Nordics, their most concerned about that. But more broadly, there is the question of, can we trust the United States? Will it stand by its long-term commitments to us as allies to multilateral institutions that the Americans historically stood up, right, like the international court of justice, like the World Trade Organization, like the United Nations?

I mean, these are organizations that right now, the Americans -- many Americans are tearing, tearing down many American leaders are tearing down. And by the way, not just Republicans, Jim, Democrats, too.

And so when you, when you see that, and these are institutions that the rest of the world, America's allies really stand by, the Canadians, the Japanese, the Europeans -- I mean, around the world they worry very deeply that they are not going to be able to rely on not just their ally, but the most important ally that they have in the world. That's a very -- it's a long-term concern and its one that's been growing quite consistently. I mean, we've had almost four years of Biden's presidency. And most American allies wanted Biden to win. They didn't want Trump.

But I will tell you that most American allies have also watched these problems get worse over the last several years. So it's much deeper than just whether you like Biden or Trump.

SCIUTTO: And one thing that America is adversaries have with those political quarters tearing down international institutions is they want to see those international institutions go down to happy to see that structure dissolve or weaken.

Ian Bremmer, good to have you on. Thanks so much.

BREMMER: Sure, Jim. See you soon.

Coming up, U.S. Secretary of State Blinken says, quote, the stakes couldn't be higher in Ukraine.

We're going to have more details right after a quick break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:31:33]

SCIUTTO: Today, Secretary of State Antony Blinken gave new details on the authorization President Biden has now given Ukraine to fire U.S.- supplied weapons into Russia.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

ANTONY BLINKEN, SECRETARY OF STATE: Over the past few weeks, Ukraine came to us and asked for the authorization to use weapons that we're providing to defend against this aggression, including against Russian forces that are massing on the Russian side of the border, and then attacking into Ukraine and that went right to the president. And as you've heard, he's approved the use of our weapons for that -- for that purpose. (END VIDEO CLIP)

SCIUTTO: Blinken reiterated this decision was specifically a result of Russian actions and advances toward Kharkiv. When asked if the door was open for the U.S. to allow Ukraine to strike with U.S. weapons beyond the border area. Blinken said the U.S. would continue to adapt and adjust moving forward.

Joining me now to discuss this and more Democratic congressman from Illinois, Mike Quigley. He is co-chair of the Ukraine Caucus.

Congresswoman, thanks for taking the time.

REP. MIKE QUIGLEY (D-IL): Thank you. Glad to be back.

SCIUTTO: So, first, to this decision by the U.S. to allow Ukraine to use these us supplied-weapons to strike inside Russian territory. The right decision?

QUIGLEY: Absolutely. What's frustrating to be quite frank here is that since the first day of the war, I understand the president has been cautious about escalation, but the requests for anything coming from Ukraine is always first met with no.

We thought this war would be over in weeks, so we were going to -- you know, defensive weapons, small arms for a battle of insurgency, and then every time we went from something else, long-range firing weapons, tanks, and so forth. Initial answer was always no and then it gets to yes. And unfortunately, that puts Ukraine behind the schedule of dealing with this. And frankly, I think the Russians game for that.

SCIUTTO: Do you believe that the risk of escalation is real with a decision like this, or do you believe as some Eastern European leaders have told me, that the U.S. exaggerates the risk of escalate with Russia and that Russia takes advantage of that in effect?

QUIGLEY: Well, Russia certainly takes advantage of it. I take the risk very seriously, but there's a risk associated with the challenge at hand and why it's so important. We simply can't let a sovereign democratic country be wiped off the face of the Earth and, the devastation that's taken place moving forward. And as you know, with the -- with the ambitions beyond Ukraine that Putin certainly has.

So, yes, there is absolutely that risk. But we have to understand that there's a risk of not doing something that goes well beyond Ukraine, to our other allies, and to the U.S. itself.

SCIUTTO: The criticism of the sort of slow-rolling of each of these weapons decisions over the last several months and two years is that the U.S. doesn't have a plan for Ukraine to win this war, just, in effect, to hold the ground that it has now, hold the line, not lose too much territory, defend itself, et cetera.

Do you agree with that criticism?

QUIGLEY: I think it's had the effect of having that result. I think that -- you know, I think that President Biden and those that support Ukraine, always wanted them to win, and have certainly given a tremendous amount of aid.

[15:35:08]

But the slow-rolling on some of the issues and then weaponry that were talking about is had that effect. You know, I think it was valid to remember what President Zelenskyy said when he spoke to Congress. He said help us win quickly. And I think there's -- there's an extra reason to be concerned about that, and that's the battle of attrition, what Ukraine's population is a third of Russia and there's a difference as well with Putin using conscripts and prisoners and be willing to use his people as cannon fodder. And this battle something Ukraine isn't willing to do.

That has a very dangerous effect that concerns me, that Putin feels like he can just wait it out and game the U.S. and Western allies. And what they are, are not willing to do to win the war.

SCIUTTO: I want to turn now to the Trump trial and his conviction yesterday. Both Trump and Biden are fundraising off of it. You've run a lot of election campaign, so I'm not asking you to speak for the entire American voting public of 160 million voters.

But -- but what is your best sense as to the degree of impact this conviction has on the presidential election? I know there's been some polling that shows that the vast majority if voters a conviction would not change their minds. But some say yes and I wonder how much hard data their actual, actually is. What is your political sense of this? Is it impactful?

QUIGLEY: It is, but in a more subtle way than people may first look at this. It's not going to impact the president's base. It's certainly not going to impact former President Trump's base at all?

But look, President Trump won by what, 80,000 votes in three states in 2016. So it doesn't take much. And the other part of pulling that we don't do well is turnout so that Nikki Haley voter, who's still stuck at what, 14 percent, 19 percent, a lot of these later primaries, how many of them will stay home?

The data I saw that I thought was interesting was those double-haters I thought were trending toward Trump. And I don't think that's the case anymore. So it may be nuanced, but this is going to be a narrow margin election. And so it won't take much to make a big difference.

SCIUTTO: Before you let me ask you arguably a more difficult question and that is -- are you worried about the precedent here? I'm not asking you to judge the decision of 12 jurors. They listen to the evidence. They did their work. They sent questions back to the judge and they came to a guilty verdict. That's how the system works.

Are you worried though that this does lay the groundwork for politicians of each party to attempt to at least go after their political opponents via the courts. QUIGLEY: You know, there's always that risk, you know? But the

opposite of that is perhaps worse. I mean, if you take the opposite argument to, as you would in logical extreme, you'd never be able to prosecute a president or former president, regardless of what their crimes are.

And here, a jury of his peers decided unanimously and rather short order that the president was guilty. And the protestations this morning by the president I thought were amusing when he alluded to witnesses that could have rebutted all this. I never criticize a defendant for not testifying themselves, that's their choice. But don't tell us that someone's out there that could have changed this, and you didn't even try to do them.

So the fact that the reaction was so political, instead of assessing this, you've got to respect the rule of law and the justice system. And if anything, that's president should -- former president should be grateful that he has been held accountable before.

SCIUTTO: Congressman Mike Quigley, thanks so much for joining.

QUIGLEY: Thank you. Take care.

SCIUTTO: And we will be right back with more news right after a short break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:42:36]

SCIUTTO: A conviction of a former president is a first in American history, a major political moment and would be if he -- even if you he weren't running for reelection this year. But, of course, he is and 34 felonies cast what's been a remarkably close and stable race between Trump and President Biden into uncharted waters.

Frankly, we don't know how this will affect the race. Trump's campaign says the verdict brought in a massive fundraising haul, nearly $35 million in the hours after the verdict. Of course, we cannot verify that number until the campaign files FEC reports.

Is this a game changer, though, for the election?

I want to bring in two campaign experts to discuss. Meghan Hays, former special assistant for President Biden, Scott Jennings, senior -- CNN senior political commentator, former special assistant to President Bush.

Good to have you both on.

First on the politics of this, a Democratic view, a Republican view.

I'll give you the -- ladies go first. Meghan, does this impact the race? And if so, how? MEGHAN HAYS, CNN POLITICAL COMMENTATOR; I think it does impact the race. I think it's -- as you were saying, it's unprecedented territory, to be convicted of 34 felony counts. That's a huge thing.

I don't think it's going to -- we're not going to see how its going to impact the race until later, but I do think these undecided women, these Nikki Haley voters, are going to pay attention. They don't want someone to be their president that's now a convicted felon.

SCIUTTO: Okay. Scott Jennings, your view?

SCOTT JENNINGS, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR: Too soon to tell. The cohorts I'm looking at our senior citizens and sort of the disengaged voters who don't consume a lot of news, but maybe just see fleeting headlines. I've surmised that those are the two groups that would be most likely to be impacted by this, particularly seniors. You know, this is the one group that's keeping Joe Biden afloat in some places.

And so, you know, my suspicion is they remember the before times when presidents didn't spend so much time in court, and they probably don't love the details of this case.

If those groups do not move, and if the debate at the end of June doesn't move anything, then that means Joe Biden still going to be stuck in the mud on July 1st, and it will make me ask, is anything capable of changing the dynamics of this race?

SCIUTTO: Okay. I'm going to ask you both a precedent question here. Just to get your gut on this and I'm not going to ask you to judge the jury's decision here, 12 jurors, Donald Trump's peers in New York made a decision. They looked at the evidence and they voted to convict.

Do you, Meghan, worry about a precedent being set whereby -- well, in this case, it's a blue state jury against a red state Republican president, although that is his home-state, we should note, deciding convicted.

[15:45:06]

This lays the groundwork and makes it more likely that you have what are characterized as partisan prosecutions of political opponents.

HAYS: I don't. I think that this is you for given a fair jury, a fair trial and a jury by your peers. That's what our justice system is all about. So I don't think it sets about precedent.

I don't think anyone's going to say that Hunter Biden's case is political. So, you know, we're just all -- people break the law. I'm not saying Hunter broke the law, but people are accused of thing think they go to trial. They have a jury --

SCIUTTO: Right.

HAYS: -- decision. And that's how we should move forward. So I don't think it's precedent. SCIUTTO: So, Scott, I'm going to ask you a different precedent

question here and some of this Meghan teed up in that the Trump attacks on the judicial system happened only with those investigations are indictments are charges that are on his team, right? I mean, if you look at -- I mean, he's against the Justice Department because it's indicted him on the January 6 charges and on the classified document charges.

He has no issue. In fact, a celebrated the indictment of Hunter Biden, president's son or Bob Menendez. And you could say the same thing about elections, right? I mean, the 2020 election was rigged because he lost. 2016 was fine because he wanted except the popular vote, which she lost.

I mean, do you worry about a precedent being set as it relates to the judicial system that were a candidate for president says it's rigged, says his voters and the American people, they cannot trust it because it went against me.

JENNINGS: Well, I worry about a precedent being set where someone who's running for president or really anyone involved in politics is brought up on what his party or her party believes are contrived to charges. I mean, you know, the general Republican viewpoint today as the Trump was railroaded over a campaign finance issue that doesn't exist. He has never been indicted or convicted of the underlying campaign finance theory of this case, although that's what he's being rung up for in New York.

I also worry about this, that there's going to be calls for people to retaliate and then that puts us on you know, a slippery slope, a tit for tat, whatever you want to call it, it's probably not good for the country either. So, yeah, I am worried about where this takes us. I don't know where exactly its going to take us, but its nowhere good is my estimation.

SCIUTTO: Okay. And by the way, it's unpredictable at this point. We don't know how far or how people are going to react, whether they'll even be violence, right? I mean, this is this is a genuine concern.

In terms of next steps, Meghan Hays, you're going to have a sentencing hearing for the former president, current candidate for president on July 11. You know, he may not go to jail. He may get we just don't know. Again, it could be probation, but still it's going to happen that sentence at least and that could get punted. And during the appeal process.

That's going to happen in the race - in the -- in this race, in the midst of the election.

HAYS: Yeah.

SCIUTTO: Yeah. While you also potentially have other prosecutions underway, perhaps at trial on January 6, the most likely, though, no guarantee that it happens. How does that affect this campaign, this race? HAYS: I think, look, I'm one of these people who think that the more time that Trump is spending in the courthouse, it's actually bad for the election. It's bad for the American people. I think there needs to be a contrast.

You know, we talk about the difference between the two all the time, but it's hard to see what Trump stands for when he's not out there campaigning.

So I think it's better for him to be out there campaigning. I would prefer him to be out there campaigning, so it shows the kind of president that Joe Biden will continue to be. And what he'll do for the American people for the next four years.

But we can't do that when he's sitting in a courtroom. So let's get him sentence. Let's move on. Let's move to November and let's get this election underway.

SCIUTTO: Goodness. Well, I guess it's underway.

Meghan Hays, Scott Jennings, and it won't be the last time we talked about it. Thanks so much to both of you for joining.

JENNINGS: Thanks.

SCIUTTO: So now, we've discussed the politics. Next, we're going to look at the legal implications of this historic conviction, and as well as legal next steps. That's coming up.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[15:51:31]

SCIUTTO: Well, after conviction, the countdown to July 11 is now underway, as the country waits to hear how former president of the United States will be sentenced. Trump's lawyers are already preparing to appeal the verdict.

I want to bring in trial and defense attorney Misty Marris, who has been closely following this trial with us throughout the last several weeks.

So, Misty, if I remember correctly, when we spoke yesterday before that conviction, you were skeptical of a conviction. Do I have that right? Were you surprised by the result?

MISTY MARRIS, TRIAL ATTORNEY: So, Jim, you know what? I thought there was a high problem, high possibility that it could be a hung jury, that not everyone would be sold.

And I thought that because, of course, the issue of Michael Cohen and his credibility and whether or not the jury took his account into -- and put all that weight of the evidence on it.

But once they said that the jury was returning a verdict yesterday, I thought it's definitely a conviction. SCIUTTO: So let me ask you a response now because you've heard the arguments and were hearing it all de from virtually every Republican lawmaker that this was a long shot. It was a stretch. It was an esoteric little corner of the law that hasn't been tried before. What's your response to that criticism?

MARRIS: Well, look, it was a -- it's a legal theory that is novel. However, it really -- Alvin Bragg was able to put it together and the district attorney was able to do so by utilizing, of course, the falsifications get a business records statute, which is a commonly used statute in conjunction with the New York state election law, and then showing the unlawful means by several different areas that the jury did not have to actually agree upon.

That's not abnormal in the criminal law or abnormal in New York law. So while it is a novel theory that absolutely will be tested on appeal, I don't think it should be described as esoteric or something that is truly a stretch.

SCIUTTO: All right. So this is a class E felony, the lowest level of felony in the state of New York. I almost hate mentioning this, the maximum penalty, because they couldn't happen, but the maximum penalty per count is four years. Other options are probation, home confinement, a fine. What is the most likely sentence that Trump might face in this, are the range of sentences?

MARRIS: So it could be any thing from probation to a suspended sentence, that would mean no jail time. Many first-time offenders under the statute if they're sentenced to jail time, it's under a year. The idea that it would be four years is really not realistic because there's various factors and there's standards that are set in New York. There are guidelines.

And the judge is going to look at those guidelines, and obviously, I'm sure he's grappling with this, how to handle a case like this because there's so many implications beyond the courtroom. But what the judge is going to do, he's going to look at how other defendants who have been convicted under similar circumstances with this particular charge, falsification of business records. And what those penalties have been.

I think it's very unlikely that we actually see jail time, but that doesn't mean there couldn't be some conditions attached. For instance, if you commit another crime in the interim, maybe some restrictions or approvals on leaving the state. So it's still serious, even if jail time is not what ends up happening.

SCIUTTO: His team has already said it's going to appeal. What's our best understanding of the timeline for appeal in this case?

MARRIS: So appeals take a really long time in New York, I have a few pending for years, but the way that it happens, yeah, absolutely.

[15:55:04]

So they appeal. Next step would be the appellate division. If the appellate division declines, then you go to the court of appeals. If the court of appeals says it says no, denies the appeal, then there's the possibility of asking the Supreme Court to look into it.

That timeline, Jim, is a really, really long time. I'm not aware of any way to expedite it, but I'm sure they're looking into how to do so, but I don't think we're going to have any resolution on the appellate issues before the election.

SCIUTTO: Wait, how could the Supreme Court pipe in on a state case?

MARRIS: So if it goes to the court of appeals, there's actually a mechanism where the defense can ask the Supreme Court if they will look into it. A lot of times they decline, then there's the possibility of seeking federal relief, but you have to exhaust all the remedies in the state first before you can even get into that federal area.

SCIUTTO: Understood, Misty Marris, thanks so much.

MARRIS: Thank you.

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

"QUEST MEANS BUSINESS" is up next.