Return to Transcripts main page

Connect the World

ICC Seeks Arrest Warrants for Hamas & Israeli Leaders; One Dead, 30 Hurt on Flight that Suffered Severe Turbulence; Funeral Ceremonies Begin for Ebrahim Raisi; Judge Cleared Courtroom Monday after Fiery Exchange with Defense Witness, Robert Costello; Trump Trade Plan Could Cost U.S. Billions; UK Court: Prince Harry Can't Expand Suit Against Sun Publisher to Include Allegations Against Murdoch. Aired 9-10a ET

Aired May 21, 2024 - 09:00   ET




BECKY ANDERSON, CNN HOST, CONNECT THE WORLD: Well, it is 2 pm in London. I'm Becky Anderson. You're watching "Connect the World". This hour

President Biden outraged by an international court's decision to seek an arrest warrant for Benjamin Netanyahu, we'll be live in Jerusalem and in


ERICA HILL, CNN HOST: And I'm Erica Hill here in New York where we continue CNN special coverage of Donald Trump's criminal hush money trial. 9 am

here, Donald Trump is making his way to the courthouse at this moment. Court of course set to resume Becky, just about 30 minutes from now.

ANDERSON: Good stuff. And the stock market in New York will open about 30 minutes from now as well. And if we look at the numbers, the Indices seem

to lack some direction to be honest, it could go either way. The most exciting thing Monday was to see the NASDAQ Composite closing a new record

high tech investors looking ahead to NVIDIA's earnings due out tomorrow all things AI, of course.

We begin with worldwide reaction to the decision by the International Criminal Court which is seeking arrest warrants for Israeli and Hamas

leaders, while the U.S., UK and Germany are all condemning the move France breaking ranks saying it supports the ICC's decision.

Well, the charges relate to war crimes and crimes against humanity over the war in Gaza and the October 7th attacks that preceded it. A reminder of

what the ICC's Chief Prosecutor exclusively told CNN's Christiane Amanpour as he broke the news.


BENJAMIN NETANYAHU, ISRAELI PRIME MINISTER: The outrageous decision by the ICC Prosecutor Karim Khan, to seek arrest warrants against the

democratically elected leaders of Israel is a moral outrage of historic proportions. It will cast an everlasting mark of shame on the international


Israel is waging a just war against Hamas, a genocidal terrorist organization that perpetrated the worst attack on the Jewish people since

the Holocaust. Hamas massacred 1200 Jews raped Jewish women burnt Jewish babies took hundreds hostage.

Now in the face of these horrors, Mr. Khan creates a twisted and false moral equivalence between the leaders of Israel and the henchmen of Hamas.

This is like creating a moral equivalence after September 11th, between President Bush and Osama bin Laden, or during World War II between FDR and


What a travesty of justice? What a disgrace? The prosecutor's absurd charges against being Israel's Defense Minister merely an attempt to deny

Israel the basic right of self-defense. And I assure you one thing, this attempt will utterly fail. 80 years ago, the Jewish people were totally

defenseless against our enemies. Those days are over. Now the Jewish people --


ANDERSON: All right, well, that clearly wasn't the Chief Prosecutor for the ICC. That was Benjamin Netanyahu. The chief prosecutor, of course has asked

for these arrest warrants. For the latest reaction Jeremy Diamond in Jerusalem while Priscilla Alvarez joins us from the White House. It isn't

Benjamin Netanyahu, who is in the frame here. It is, of course, Jeremy also, Yoav Gallant who is the Defense Minister. What else are we hearing in

reaction from Israel and Israeli officials?

JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, across the Israeli political spectrum, both the Israeli Prime Minister and his allies as well as his

rivals all of them expressing outrage at the ICC's decision, not only at the substance of the decision to seek arrest warrants for the Israeli Prime

Minister and the Defense Minister, but also for this moral equivalency that you heard the Israeli Prime Minister talking about there.

Yoav Gallant the Defense Minister, who is implicated in these charges this morning, talking about that parallel as well calling this decision by the

ICC despicable and insisting that the Israeli military is fighting in accordance with international law, and that it is also working to

facilitate humanitarian assistance to Gaza.

Which is of course, one of the issues that at the heart of this -- of these charges that the ICC prosecutor is seeking to level against the defense

minister and the Israeli prime minister is this notion of using starvation as a weapon of war? And this morning, we just heard from the Israeli Prime

Minister on ABC, where he not only continues to call this decision absurd and outrageous, but he also talks about all of the humanitarian aid that

Israel has allowed to go into Gaza.

But of course that is not the whole picture. We know that that there were long periods of time where only a trickle of aid was really getting into



And humanitarian aid officials for months had been urging Israel to allow more aid in and once more pressure came in from the United States it was as

if Israel turned the spigot back on suggesting that there was more that they could have done and certainly sooner.

Now, beyond the issue of humanitarian aid, we are also watching that there is no indication that this ICC decision is going to slow down the Israeli

military's campaign in Gaza, nor is it going to prevent Israeli leaders from continuing to allow the expansion of this military operation in Gaza.

They plan to continue to expand operations in Rafah in southern Gaza. And at the moment, we are currently watching them engaged in serious major

combat as well as airstrikes in the northern part of the Gaza Strip as well.

ANDERSON: Let me bring Priscilla in at this point. The prosecutor being accused of drawing a moral equivalence between Hamas and Israel his

argument is this is about upholding international law and holding decision makers accountable. This is not about genocide, or about apartheid.

This is he says -- you know he believes there are reasonable grounds to believe that Netanyahu and Gallant should be held accountable for the war

crime and crime against humanity of starvation of civilians as a method of war.

What's been the reaction in the White House? Is this wasn't unexpected? We know that and we know that there have been threats against the prosecutor

from a number of key individuals in U.S. Congress.

PRISCILLA ALVAREZ, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, there's similarly wide condemnation here in Washington among U.S. officials and also lawmakers on

Capitol Hill. President Biden putting it quite bluntly in a statement, released yesterday, calling it quote outrageous in that statement. He also

doubled down during an event later in the evening, marking Jewish American -- take a listen to what he said.


JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: Let me be clear, we reject the ICC's application arrest warrants against Israeli Leaders. These

warrants may apply, there's no equivalence between Israel and Hamas. And its clear there isn't much to -- can to ensure civilian protection. But let

me be clear, contrary to allegations against Israel made by the International Court of Justice, what's happening is not genocide.


ALVAREZ: Now, of course, what you heard there from the president is quite similar to what we've heard elsewhere, which is that issue of equivalent

footing between the Israeli Prime Minister and the leader of Hamas, but this is a notable moment.

Of course, it is marks the first time that the International Criminal Court has sought an arrest warrant, a warrant for a leader of a top U.S. ally.

This essentially puts the Israeli Prime Minister in similar company as Russian President Vladimir Putin.

But, Becky this also comes against the backdrop of tense relations between the U.S. and Israel as Israel continues to wage its war on Hamas in Gaza.

The two leaders have had frank phone calls over the last several months, the president going so far as to put conditions on offensive weapons that

he would provide Israel if they are to continue with their major ground operation in Rafah, that area of southern Gaza where more than a million

Palestinians are displaced.

And also here in Washington, the president is having to navigate the politics of all of this as he continues to receive fierce pushback from his

Democratic allies, who say he's not doing enough to rein Israel in, particularly as we continue to see the worsening situation in Gaza.

So all the cross currents coming together here in Washington with this announcement from the ICC but what it remained very clear yesterday and

into today, is that the U.S. still remains supportive of Israel, as you heard there from the president's remarks and is taking issue with this

decision by the ICC. Again, the president going so far as to call it quotes, outrageous.

ANDERSON: Jeremy, let me bring you back in, let's just remind ourselves that the ICC prosecutor's request for arrest warrants for Hamas is -- or

for Hamas leaders, is for war crimes and crimes against humanity committed on October 7th the crimes of extermination of murder, of torture, rape and

of taking hostages.

And we have of course, heard response from Hamas assets. Let's just talk about what that response has been. At the same time, of course, the UN very

alarmed by the growing difficulty in collecting and distributing aid in Gaza at this point, Jeremy.

DIAMOND: Yeah, that's right. I mean, first of all, on Hamas they are interestingly making a similar argument to the one that Israel is making

about this notion of equivalency.


In Hamas' his view, the Palestinian people are the victims and the Israeli military and Israeli governments are the aggressors. And so they struck out

at the notion that they would be charged in the same breath as the Israeli government.

Of course, the crimes as you just laid them out, Becky, that Hamas is being alleged to have committed relate not only to October 7th and Karim Khan,

the ICC Prosecutor actually traveled to many of those communities Israeli communities along the Gaza border where Hamas killed a hundreds of innocent

Israeli civilians and also relating to the ongoing taking of hostages and the fact that there are nearly 130 hostages still in Hamas captivity,

allegations of sexual violence against those hostages also being leveled by the ICC.

As it relates to aid in Gaza and this gets to the critical notion of whether or not Israel is doing enough to get aid in. UN officials are

continuing to warn of very difficult conditions for getting aid in. And a lot of that has to do with the ongoing military offensive in Southern Gaza

where not only do you have the Rafah border crossing, which has been closed for more than two weeks now as a result of that Israeli military offensive.

But the Kerem Shalom Crossing between Israel and Gaza is also in the southern part of the strip there. And while the Kerem Shalom Crossing as

one UN official said today is open in principle, it is extremely difficult for aid organizations to be able to actually access trucks, including

trucks that are brought in by the Israelis, to the other side of Kerem Shalom and Gaza to be able to actually access those trucks and distribute

them because of the ongoing fighting.

And we are also watching a security conditions are making it difficult for the entry of aid via that new floating pier that was set up by the United

States last week. U.S. military officials had hoped that there could be some 98 trucks per day coming off of that pier very quickly.

Instead, the number for today Becky is just 14 trucks that were transferred from that floating pier to Gaza, UN officials saying that a lot of that has

to do with the security conditions as well as some of the tricky logistics involved in this matter.

So again, we are seeing aid coming into different parts of Gaza. But there are warnings right now warning sirens going off that not enough aid is

getting in including not enough fuel to be able to facilitate the logistics and the delivery and the distribution of that aid that actually gets into


ANDERSON: Good to have you both. Thank you. What a frightening and deadly incident in the sky? Singapore Airlines says one person has died and other

passengers or crew are injured after a flight from London to Singapore encountered quote severe turbulence.

Now the company says the plane a Boeing 777 diverted to Bangkok and has since landed. There were 211 passengers and 18 crew on board. People are

currently receiving medical attention on the scene. Marc Stewart is live in Beijing. And at this point, what do we know about what happened Marc?

MARC STEWART, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Right Becky. Let me run through the start as to how we believe this played out. Again, this is a Singapore Airlines

flight 321 from London to Singapore. It's a 13 hour flight and roughly about halfway through that flight is when the severe turbulence hit.

I don't know if there was warning. We don't know if the seatbelt sign was on. But it is very clear from some of the images that we are seeing on the

ground that the injuries are very severe. In fact, we have some pictures from the airport in Bangkok, that tarmac near that plane has basically been

turned into an arsenal an army of ambulances and medical workers.

We have learned in the last hour or so that 30 people were taken to the hospital of that 30 -- 18 people were admitted, the other 12 are being

treated on an outpatient basis. The extent of the type of injuries we still do not know that's in addition to other people who may have been cut or

scrape or bruise who are receiving treatment at the airport.

But this is a very large aircraft. This was a Boeing 777, it was the 300 ER variant. It's the largest Boeing 777 there is. It's flown on so many routes

between Asia, the Middle Eastern Europe as well as from the U.S. over the Pacific Ocean over the Atlantic Ocean.

This is a very strong plane. A true and tried plane with a very good safety record but even with the best of design, the turbulence sometimes can be

that severe that we are seeing injuries and a situation like this.


We were looking at a flight tracking app. And it appears that the flight was around 29 to 30,000 feet when this happened. And then, based off of the

images, the flight plan that we are seeing the pilots made a very quick descent. Obviously, Bangkok was probably the nearest airport, they knew

there were injuries and that people had to be treated.

Again, the video shows the extent of all of this. We are waiting to hear from people on board that aircraft but I mean, Becky, it is more than safe

to say it. I'm sure it was very terrifying, just based off of these images that we're seeing in the aftermath on the ground.

ANDERSON: Yeah. Marc, just as you've been on air Reuters, the news agency now reporting seven critically injured and that is based on information

given out at a press conference, which is happening now. So at Reuters reporting seven critically injured based on information, just having been


Marc, I'm going to leave it there. Thank you very much indeed for joining us and more on that later in this show. Let's get you to CNN's Erica Hill

she in New York where Donald Trump's hush money trial is about to kick off for another day Erica.

HILL: Yeah Becky, thank you. That trail set to resume just about 15 minutes from now. Today the defense is expected to rest its case. This of course

comes on the heels of a very dramatic day of testimony Monday here CNN's Kara Scannell with more.


KARA SCANNELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): After four weeks of testimony, prosecutors rested their case in Former President Donald Trump's

criminal trial just after their star witness Trump's former fixer Michael Cohen concluded more than 17 hours of dramatic testimony over four days.

Trump's Attorney Todd Lynch intensely attacked Cohen's credibility over multiple days trying to paint him as a liar who's motivated by money.

MICHAEL COHEN, DONALD TRUMP'S FORMER LAWYER AND FIXER: I just want to get through this so that I can start my own life again.

SCANNELL (voice-over): Blanch got Cohen to admit that he stole from the Trump Organization. Cohen confirmed he paid a tech company $20,000 instead

of the $50,000 that was owed by Trump, but Cohen asked Trump to be repaid the full amount which was doubled to cover taxes.

Ultimately, Cohen admitted he kept around $60,000 for himself. Blanche asked, so you stole from the Trump Organization? Yes, sir Cohen replied.

Cohen said he was angry about getting a low annual bonus. Earlier in the trial Cohen told prosecutors he requested the full reimbursement because

that's what was owed.

And I didn't feel Mr. Trump deserves the benefit of the difference. On Monday, Cohen admitted it was wrong to have taken the money. Cohen defended

his character during testimony to Congress in 2019.

COHEN: I understand. I have lied, but I am not a liar. And I have done bad things. But I am not a bad man.

SCANNELL (voice-over): After cross examination concluded prosecutors tried to clean up some of the damage done to Cohen's credibility. Prosecutor

Susan Hoff -- asked about repayments Cohen received from Trump for the $130,000 in hush money he provided to adult film star Stormy Daniels, which

is the crux of the case.

DONALD TRUMP (R), FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT AND 2024 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: This is why I'm here because we call it a legal expense payment lawyer.

SCANNELL (voice-over): Cohen testified that despite the 11 checks referring to a retainer agreement, he said no agreement existed because there was no

legal work that I was to be paid for. Prosecutors played an audio clip for the jury of Cohen talking about Trump to Daniel's lawyer Keith Davidson,

about the payment.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: And I can't even tell you how many times he said to me - - you know I hate the fact that we did it. And my comment to him was but every person that you've spoken to told you was the right move.

SCANNELL (voice-over): After the prosecution rested, the defense started calling witnesses, including Robert Costello, who once served as a legal

adviser to Cohen. Costello was visibly frustrated as the judge sustained several objections from the prosecution audibly saying geez and rolling his

eyes. Judge Merchan became so angry he briefly cleared the courtroom and address Costello Kara Scannell, CNN New York.


HILL: And CNN's Senior Crime and Justice Reporter Katelyn Polantz who's also been covering this joins me now. So a good recap there we got from our

colleague Kara Scannell on what happened Monday. Court set to resume just about 10 minutes from now. Costello will be back on the stand. How long do

we expect that questioning to last today? What do we expect from it?

KATELYN POLANTZ, CNN SENIOR CRIME AND JUSTICE REPORTER: Erica, we expect another hour or so of testimony and then very likely the defense case will

be done. They will have presented all of the witnesses that they want to use to rebut what the prosecution has put out in evidence.

Largely the defense presentation to the jury has been about undermining Michael Cohen. Reiterating that they believe he's a liar should not be

trusted and should not be considered a credible witness for jurors.


What Michael Cohen I'm sorry, what Robert Costello will be testifying about today is likely more about Michael Cohen though he's only being cross

examined now by prosecutors.

The bulk of his testimony did occur yesterday, when he said that Michael Cohen at one point in 2018, when Michael Cohen wanted to cooperate with

federal prosecutors get out of his own issues that he was facing legally and flip on, Donald Trump was saying he didn't have anything on Trump to

share, and that he -- that Trump knew nothing about the payments to Stormy Daniels.

So that's the defense case, that is being presented as the defense presents evidence, but it's likely not going to be the full extent of the arguments

they make, they will be harping on Michael Cohen quite a lot in their closing arguments. We fully expect that they'll weave in a little bit of

what Michael about of what Robert Costello testified to, but they also are very likely when they close at earliest on Tuesday of next week.

They are very likely to try and convince the jury that the prosecutors just didn't prove the case of criminal intent by Donald Trump, here in this

falsification business records case.

HILL: Though as we wait for all of that to pick back up, we wait for court to get started again today. Katelyn, we're also being keeping a close watch

on some activity in the State of Arizona, where some of Donald Trump's closest allies, Mark Meadows, Rudy Giuliani. They're facing a judge in

Arizona this is overcharges in the state's election subversion case, what will happen there today?

POLANTZ: That's right. These are election fraud cases against 18 different people. People who were fake electors as well as people very close to

Donald Trump, after the election top advisors Boris Epstein, Mark Meadows, Rudy Giuliani, John Eastman, he's already been arraigned.

But what this is in Arizona, is this election fraud case kicks off with each of these individuals coming into the judge and entering their initial

pleading very likely of not guilty. We do expect that to happen. The proceedings could be quite short and sweet, not much meet to what happens

at an arraignment.

John Eastman had his very short arraignment in the courtroom in Arizona last week. But today, people like Giuliani, Mark Meadows, very well could

be going before the judge for the first time in that Arizona election fraud case, just underlining the legal troubles that are still spilling out

against these individuals since the 2020 election.

And people like Rudy Giuliani, Mark Meadows now would be facing two sets of charges that they very likely will want to be fighting given that they

continue to fight charges that are very similar in the State of Georgia.

HILL: Yeah, absolutely. Katelyn, appreciate it. Thank you. You're watching "Connect the World". Still ahead here memorial ceremonies beginning for

Iran's President and others killed in that helicopter crash and lingering questions about just what caused the crash. Plus, a new report warns Donald

Trump's tariff plans could actually cost middle class families in the U.S. a lot some $1,700 a year. We'll take a closer look at those details,

straight ahead.



ANDERSON: Well memorial ceremonies are underway in Iran for President Ebrahim Raisi and the other eight who died on Sunday in a helicopter crash.

Huge crowds flooded the streets as the bodies of those killed move through Tabriz, the largest city in the region, where that chopper went down.

Raisi's body arrived in Tehran and will eventually be moved to his birthplace Mashhad. State media reports that Iran's Supreme Leader

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei will conduct the prayers there. Meantime an investigation is underway to determine the cause of the crash, which was

initially said to be due to a technical failure.

Ben Wedeman, connecting us from Rome and as that investigation continues, so we are learning more about the funeral plans for Raisi at the -- Foreign

Minister, of course, and others. And what do we know at this point?

BEN WEDEMAN, CNN SENIOR INTERNATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, we understand as you mentioned, that the funeral processions or formalities began in Tabriz,

near where that helicopter went down on Sunday afternoon, the body was flown to Tehran from there and it was taken to the City of Qom -- of

course, the holy city where many clerics that have their headquarters.

Then it's going back to Tehran, the big funeral will be tomorrow in Tehran, the capital. It's not altogether clear how many foreign dignitaries

however, will be attending, I took a quick look at a possible list we're talking about the Prime Minister of Iraq, Mohammed Al Sudani will be there.

The Turkish Vice President and Prime Minister, the Taliban Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister, the Russian Head of the Duma or the Russian

parliament, but not any sort of big regional figures are going to be attending the funeral as far as we can tell.

And of course, it's always interesting to see these funerals of -- shall we say authoritarian leaders now, I remember, Becky, in June of 2000, covering

the funeral for the late Syrian dictator Hafez Al-Assad. On that occasion, when we would show up in front of crowds, they wouldn't lift up the camera,

they would start to wail and cry and as soon as you put the camera down.

Well, they light up cigarettes and go back to chatting. So we shouldn't take images from a state run television as fact. We know that many people -

- were not great admirers in Iran of the late President Ebrahim Raisi, Becky.

ANDERSON: Thank you, Ben, Ben Wedeman on the story. You're watching "Connect the World". I'm Becky Anderson for you. Still to come, the defense

poised to rest its case in Donald Trump's criminal trial after what was a dramatic Monday in court with sparks flying between the judge and a

witness. And tech firm Open AI in hot water with a Hollywood A-lister. We'll tell you why, a little later.



ANDERSON: Welcome back, I'm Becky Anderson in London. You are watching "Connect the World". It is half past 9 just after in New York so the

markets have opened their. Futures ahead of the open showed a mixed opening and that's pretty much what it is there's no real sparks flying.

Tech stocks certainly feeling buoyant ahead of NVIDIA's earnings though on Wednesday. So do keep an eye on that NASDAQ market. It did have a rip

yesterday so perhaps it's no real surprise that it is trading slightly lower today, but as we say, no real spots on these markets, perhaps just

treading -- a little bit ahead of those big earnings, big AI earnings from NVIDIA out on Wednesday.

Let's get you back to Erica, who is in New York. She is not watching the market. So she is keeping a steely eye on the hush money trial which of

course has restarted, Erica.

HILL: That it has we've got everybody in the courtroom now, Becky, jury was just called back in. Tensions running high this morning as a defendant

witness, who already angered the judge is back on the stand at this hour that witnesses Robert Costello, whose testimony was rather heated


He was audibly complaining in court, rolling his eyes at one point that prompted the judge to clear the courtroom. So he could admonish Costello.

Prosecutors said to wrap up their cross examination of Costello today. Then of course, it'll be back to the defense, who has signaled, they are ready

to wrap up their case into --

CNN National Correspondent Brynn Gingras is live outside the courthouse in New York. So we have a little bit more to come from Robert Costello, today.

They're on the witness stand. What is the defense hoping to get out of him, Brynn?

BRYNN GINGRAS, CNN U.S. NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yeah, so this is a rebuttal witness basically for the defense. It's really their only witness they

called two but one was just to get some records into evidence. It basically they're using him because they argue that the prosecution put forward

testimony that said Michael Cohen was under a pressure campaign after his home was raided in 2018.

And Robert Costello is an attorney who Michael Cohen talked to. Costello said that he was close to Rudy Giuliani, who of course, is the Former Mayor

of New York City had been put into, excuse me, Trump's camp as a lawyer. And so they're trying to basically refute the idea that the Michael Cohen

was lying about the fact that he was under pressure to do anything from the Trump camp.

So that's the point of Robert Costello. You laid out perfectly for viewers exactly what happened when he was on the stand yesterday, some major

fireworks there at one point, when the judge had cleared the courtroom. He basically told Costello if you try to stare me down one more time, I will

remove you from the stand and he told the defense attorneys that he will strike all of his testimony if that continues.

So it was a little bit less fireworks once that had happened and everybody returned back to the courtroom, but we are understand, there's about 30

more minutes of prosecution giving their cross of Robert Costello and then like you said Erica, we could see the defense resting its case it really

even possibly this morning.


HILL: Right we'll be watching for all of it. Brynn appreciate it, thank you. Also joining me this hour, Former State and Federal Prosecutor, David

Weinstein, David, good to have you with us as always when you look at what we learned in testimony from Robert Costello yesterday, did he help the

defense at all?

DAVID WEINSTEIN, FORMER STATE AND FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: Well, Erica, I don't really think that he did, if the sole purpose of putting him on was to show

that there was no pressure from Trump or his camp on Cohen, I'm not sure that point didn't get lost and everything else that went on.

He was disrespectful of the judge that imparts poorly on the defense, the jury is watching this so on, they're not thinking very much of him. And

then, as to other things that Cohen told him, he reiterated some lies that he was told by Cohen, but Cohen's explanation for those lies was that he

didn't want it to get back to Giuliani or to others and that's why he said what he did. So in some ways, this testimony even bolstered what Cohen had

to say earlier in the case.

HILL: There's a lot of back and forth before he took the stand about what he could and could not be asked there in court. He was in part of his

answers. Part of what seemed to annoy the judge is that he wasn't just answering the question. He was perhaps adding more detail than had been

asked for. Just walk us through why that is, in your estimation, a good or a bad idea for your witness?

WEINSTEIN: It's a horrible idea for your witness. Look, we saw a little bit of that from Stormy Daniels as well, she had to be admonished by the judge

just answer the questions. Look, if Costello in the defense camp, don't like the rulings the judge made, they're going to just have to live by

them. But you have to abide by what he said.

And by trying to undercut the judge's rulings and then allowing the prosecution to object at the objection sustained. It makes it appear to the

jury that you're trying to sneak something in, and that you're not playing by the rules here. And so it's important to whether you like it or not just

abide by the ruling.

And if that's all you're going to be allowed to testify about, then don't try to slide in the back door, what the judge told you, you can't get in

through the front door.

HILL: The fact that the jury was not in the room for this, but the judge clearing the courtroom so that he could then admonish Robert Costello.

Again, the jury wasn't in the courtroom, but they knew everybody was being cleared out. Do you think that's the kind of moment that could stick with

the jury? And if so, what could the impact be?

WEINSTEIN: Well, I think it's one of those moments, Erica that does stick with the jury. Here, you've got the lone defense witness in the middle of

his direct examination, and there's chaos going on in the courtroom. The judge is clearly upset with the defense with the witness, he clears out the

jury, the jury has to wonder what is it that the defense in this witness was doing that so angered the judge.

And juries tend to take note of things and whether or not you think they are. They're watching, and that's something they might hold against the

defense and all of the points that they made with Cohen on the cross examination, they could easily have been quickly lost in the chaos that

erupted afterwards with this one and only witness. So I think that it was a bad move by the witness and imparts poorly on the defendant.

HILL: I'm just curious, your thoughts on you know, from our colleagues, my colleagues in the courtroom there, when the judge cleared off the

courtroom, the jury was sent out, he sent out the media, obviously, the attorney, state prosecutors events are sent out that row of public

spectators right, who are allowed to come in each day, but not Donald Trump's supporters. How would you read that if you were one of those

attorneys in the courtroom?

WEINSTEIN: I read that as I've got something I'm going to say here. It's going to go poorly for the defense. But I want witnesses. And I want

witnesses who are going to take the defendant side so that when everybody comes back in and when the day in the court is over, nobody is going to say

I treated the defense harsher than I treated anybody else.

And that's why he let those people stay in there. Look, it's on the record. We can read the cold words as to what he said. But at the moment, he wanted

everybody out. And he had something to say and it wasn't going to be kind, but he wanted some witnesses there and witnesses from the other side, so

that nothing could be said outside of the courtroom that he was treating the defendant.

HILL: Interestingly, though, not witnesses in terms of members of the press, as you point out, we get the transcripts later in the day, but still

interesting in that moment. When we look at where things stand that defense expected to rest its case today the judge has said very clearly, we're

going to see closing arguments after the holiday weekend.

Of course there's no court tomorrow. There is no court on Monday here in the United States or no court on Monday. No court Friday. Monday is a

holiday here in the U.S. So closing arguments on Tuesday, waiting that long. Does that help the defense the prosecution more?


WEINSTEIN: Erica, I think that helps the prosecution immensely. Look, the last three or four days of testimony have been the defense scoring point

after point with Michael Cohen on their cross examination, and showing him to be who he is. The prosecution then tried to rehabilitate him and did a

decent case.

And the time they did, but a week later, that's just going to be a distant memory in the minds of these jurors. And instead, what they're going to

focus on are the closing arguments. Had, the closings happened a lot closer to the end of the case and the cross examination? I think the sting from

the cross would have been a lot more severe than it is right now. So I think this works and let's savor the prosecution by delaying the closings.

HILL: All right, we'll be watching for all of it, David, always great to have your insight and your expertise, thank you. Still to come this hour,

Donald Trump, vowing to double down on his trade strategy if he is elected in November. Well, new report warns those proposals from Donald Trump could

cost middle class families in the U.S. a whole lot of money.

Those details are straight ahead. Plus why one Oscar nominated star says she is shocked and angered by a tech giant, a new controversy involving

artificial intelligence and how our hiring of some legal help may have impacted this latest move. That's ahead.


ANDERSON: Former President Donald Trump says that he will put new tariffs on all imports to the U.S. if he is re-elected. For imports from China, he

is calling for a rate of 60 percent on all goods. It will build on the tariffs that he first imposed during his first term. President Biden has

mostly kept those in place, and did recently add to them.

Well, Trump says the new tariffs would protect lower and middle class families. But a new report suggests it would do exactly the opposite. Matt

Egan has written or is a fascinating piece for all of this for CNN digital and he joins us now there was a U.S.-China trade war back in 2018, 2019,

Matt, during the Trump administration, this new research suggests this could be even worse. Explain if you will.

MATT EGAN, CNN REPORTER: Yeah, Becky, it could be five times as bad. Now remember Donald Trump, he loves tariffs so much that he called himself the

tariff man and he is promising that if he's reelected, the sequel is going to be even bigger than the original. As you mentioned, he's proposing a 60

percent tariff on goods from China.

That's massive, right that would add everything from toys and furniture to iPhones. And he wants at least a 10 percent tariff on all U.S. imports all

U.S. imports. Now, he's using tariffs and saying that this is a way to protect middle class, working class Americans.


But this new research from the Peterson Institute does suggest the opposite, right. They find that these tariff proposals would cost American

consumers $500 billion a year that's 1.8 percent of GDP, nearly five times the impact of the last trade war. And they say that this would cost the

typical middle income household at least $1,700 a year.

And the researchers stress that this is really just the tip of the iceberg. This is just a minimum cost impact because it doesn't even account for the

almost definite retaliation that you would see from China, Europe and other countries. Remember, during the last trade war, other nations they

retaliated against American farmers, against Harley Davidson motorcycles, Kentucky Bourbon, and there's no reason to think that countries would take

this line down this time.

Now, the caveat here is that we don't know how serious Trump is? How much of this is just talk and how much of it is real? But we did learn during

the last trump administration that the President has vast powers when it comes to trade. So we do have to take these threats very seriously.

We've reached out to the Trump campaign. They're pushing back against this research, saying in a statement that the American people don't need papers

from alleged experts to know Bidenomics has robbed them of thousands of hard earned dollars and that they will have money back in their pockets

with President Trump back in the White House.

The Trump campaign says that when Trump is back in power, he will cut good trade deals that will lift up the American worker. Of course, this research

suggests otherwise.

ANDERSON: Yeah, it's fascinating, isn't it? We are also hearing, not only hearing we are seeing very specific policy with regard trade from the Biden

administration. So explain for the benefit of our viewers what the difference is, between Trump's trade plan and what Biden is done to date?

EGAN: Yeah. Becky, exactly, to both Trump and Biden are using tariffs to send a message to China and frankly, to voters, right. I mean, President

Biden, he's had almost three years to roll back the Trump era tariffs, he has not done that.

In fact, he just ramped up tariffs, and the Peterson Institute estimates that the new Biden tariffs are going to cost the typical middle income

family about $30 a year that is pretty small, relative to the estimate of $1,700 a year for these Trump tariff proposals.

But just to remind people, just last week, the Biden administration did just raise tariffs on Chinese goods, everything from computer chips and

electric cars, solar panels, aluminum and steel. The big difference, though, is this scale, right. The Biden Administration targeting $18

billion of goods from China, the Trump administration or the Trump proposal is for tariffs on $3 trillion of imports.

So one of them is taking a surgical targeted approach, the other one is basically a sledgehammer. But I think when you zoom out one of the other

big takeaways here is that no matter who wins in November, tariffs are not going anywhere, right? Tariffs are in. Republicans or Democrats, they don't

agree on much.

But they do agree on using tariffs to hold China accountable, and to really send a message to voters that they're tough on China. And that's despite

the fact Becky, that economists are worried that tariffs are going to just raise costs for consumers and just keep upward pressure on inflation.

Protectionism is in right now, clearly.

ANDERSON: Isn't it? And it's so funny. I'm sitting here and I'm thinking when I was at college and studying economics, and we were talking about

protectionism as opposed to free trade. You know, we've lived through a whole era of what 25 years since China got into the WTO.

We just haven't been seeing this as part of our narrative and its bad like you say in vogue at present very squarely in the U.S., The U.S. asking the

Europeans to also sort of buy in -- on the China front as well. Fascinating times! Be interesting to see where this goes. Thank you, Matt, Matt in New


Scarlett Johansson's lawyers have some questions for tech firm Open AI the Hollywood star says she is shocked and angered after hearing its ChatBot

saying it's voice sounds like hers. The updated ChatGPT voices prompted comparisons with a fictional voices isn't played by Johansson in the 2013

film "Her".

Open AI is the voice was not derived from the actress but that's being met with a little bit of skepticism, since the Oscar nominated star declined an

offer from the company last year to let it use her voice CNN's Clare Duffy, standing by with the very latest, Clare.


CLARE DUFFY, CNN BUSINESS WRITER: Yeah, Becky, look, I mean, as soon as this updated version of ChatGPT launched with the voice mode, people

started drawing comparisons between its voice which Open AI called Sky and Scarlett Johansson's voice in this 2013 film Her, in which she voice is an

AI assistant.

It's sort of a quasi-dystopian film about the relationship between technology and humans. So Monday evening Open AI or Monday morning, I

should say Open AI announced that it would be pausing the use of this voice because of some of the criticism that it had received. But Monday evening,

we get this statement from Scarlett Johansson, which sort of suggested that their decision to pause may have had more to do with "Her".

She said that Open AI CEO Sam Altman approached her in September asking if she would voice the new ChatGPT, she declined for personal reasons. Then

just two days before the launch, he again approached her agent and asked her to be involved asked her to reconsider, and they didn't get a chance to

discuss it and Open AI went ahead and launched it anyways.

Johansson said that she had her lawyer sent two letters to Open AI asking them questions about where this voice came from. And that then the company

decided to pull the use of the voice. Now, Open AI does say that this is not Scarlett Johansson's voice. Altman said in a statement that it was

never intended to resemble hers.

It was created with a different actress, but that the company decided to pause, the use of sky out of respect for Mrs. Johansson. Now, it's

interesting this timing because there are so many concerns that creative could have their likeness, their work used by AI, recreated by AI and that

AI companies then would profit from that without any compensation for those creative, so not a great look for Open AI here, even if it wasn't actually

created with Johansson's voice.

ANDERSON: Now, this artificial voice has actually been widely mocked for what some are calling its flirtatious tone. How much does this criticism

highlight broader concerns about the potential biases of technology designed by tech firms which are largely led or funded? As be quite clear

about this by white men?

DUFFY: Yeah, it's a really good question, Becky. Look, the criticism of sky went beyond the comparisons to Johansson users said it was weirdly

flirtatious, it was giggly. At one point, the voice told an Open AI developer that it was -- that he was making her blush just kind of weird.

And I think this does get at the question of what happens when you have technology being created by a group of people that don't necessarily

reflect the broader world. Developers could think that sounds really good and personal, and then you get it out into the world and users think it

sounds kind of creepy.

This also again really gets at this question of how AI companies are getting permission from and crediting the creators whose work is used to

train these AI models. This is a huge question in Hollywood among writers and authors. Just last week, we saw another lawsuit from two voice actors

complaining that a different AI firm had used their voices to create AI clones and profited from them, so a huge question for this entire industry,


ANDERSON: No, it is. It's going to be fascinating to see how this plays out. It's good to have you Clare as ever, Clare Duffy, in the house, thank

you. Just ahead on "Connect the World", Prince Harry suffers a setback in his legal battle against Rupert Murdoch's Son Newspaper more on that, after



ANDERSON: Right, just time for this Prince Harry will not be allowed to amend his lawsuit against the publisher of Britain's Sun tabloid to include

allegations against one Rupert Murdoch.


That is the ruling of the U.K. High Court. The lawsuit was originally filed back in 2019. And it accuses News Group, newspapers of phone hacking and

other illegal invasions of privacy. Prince Harry and dozens of others had hoped to expand at the suit to include claims that Rupert Murdoch was

personally involved in covering up wrongdoing.

Well, Elvis Presley's historic home is at the center of a lawsuit over the future of the iconic Graceland estate in Memphis, Tennessee. Presley's

granddaughter is suing to stop a foreclosure sale of the late singer's house, which is scheduled this week. Actress Riley Keough has been granted

a restraining order against any sale before a court rules on her application for an injunction.

She says the company behind the sale is committing fraud and has no rights to the property. That's for the show this hour. I'll be back after the

break with the second hour of the show "Connect the World" with Becky Anderson, after this.