Return to Transcripts main page

First Move with Julia Chatterley

High-Stakes Report; Israel May Have Used American Arms Inconsistent with International Law; Israel Breached International Law in Gaza; Palestinians in Shadowy Detention Center; Israeli Prison Abuse Claims; Chinese Tariff Restructuring; Zeekr Zooms. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired May 10, 2024 - 18:00   ET



JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: Up next, the New York Hush Money cover up case and a retired judge who's been inside the courtroom to watch throughout the

trial. He's going to join my friend Wolf Blitzer next in "The Situation Room." I'll see you back here on "The Lead" Monday.

And before that, we will have trial coverage on Monday morning, first thing. That's when I'll see you next. Have a great weekend.

JULIA CHATTERLEY, CNN HOST: It's 7:00 am in Seoul, 8:00 a.m. in Sydney, and 6:00 p.m. here in New York. I'm Julia Chatterley. And wherever you are in

the world, this is your "First Move."

And a warm welcome once again to "First Move." And here's today's need to know. The Biden administration says Israel may have used U.S. weapons in

ways inconsistent "with international humanitarian law."

Michael Cohen set to take the stand in Donald Trump's hush money trial.

A solar sensation, a geomagnetic storm that could take the Northern Lights as far south as Alabama.

And the art of investing in art. Renowned author, entrepreneur, and art collector, Magnus Resch joins to discuss that conversation and more coming


But first, a new report from the Biden administration that says it is "reasonable to assess" that Israeli forces have used U.S. weapons in Gaza

in ways that are "inconsistent" with international humanitarian law. The details drafted by the State Department stop short of saying Israel

violated the law. U.S. laws, of course, prevent Washington from providing assistance to foreign security forces that violate human rights.

Kylie Atwood joins us now from the State Department. Kylie, a lot of people waiting for the release of this report, and I was choosing my words very

carefully here. Just walk us through the details.

KYLIE ATWOOD, CNN U.S. SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Yes. So, as you said there, this report says that it is reasonable to assess that Israel has used U.S.

weaponry in a way that's inconsistent with international humanitarian law, as you said, but it doesn't have a definitive conclusion as to whether

international humanitarian law has been violated or has not been, saying that there are still ongoing investigations into this matter, into these

specific incidents that raised serious alarm with regard to those strikes that have been carried out by Israel in Gaza since October 7th.

We should also note that the report doesn't find that Israel stood in the way of the delivery of humanitarian aid into Gaza, even though our own CNN

reporting has revealed that our reporting is that they have. Now, the important thing about this report, it points out the challenges of making

determinations on this front because of the way that this war has had to be carried out, because of the fact that Hamas hides behind civilian

populations, hides behind civilian population centers and infrastructure, which makes it challenging to make determination as to whether Israel

violated international humanitarian law with U.S. weapons in certain specific incidents or if they didn't.

It's also noteworthy that the report very clearly says that Israel has the capabilities, they have the expertise to avoid a high number of civilian

casualties, but -- that the United States thinks that there are "questions as to if the IDF use those capabilities and is using them effectively."

So, where do we go from here? Well, this report has been shared with Congress. There aren't any policy implications that must come out of this

report. But what we're really going to watch to see is the ongoing dialogue between the U.S. and Israel on this front.

According to a senior State Department official, Israel has provided information when the United States has asked for that information regarding

specific strikes in some instances, but said that there have been gaps. They haven't provided all of the information that the U.S. needs in order

to make these determinations. But there isn't a time frame in terms of when Israel has to share that information.

So, this is a pretty open-ended continuation after this report has been provided to Congress. And I think it's worth noting that Senator Van

Hollen, who's been pushing for this report, saying that his need to make sure -- review these instances to make sure that Israel is acting in

accordance with international humanitarian law.

He has received the report, and he said that is, ducking the key questions." He does not believe that it adequately digs into the details

that he believed this report needed to. And he said that there are political reasons for that. Basically, making the case that the

administration didn't want to come out and say in a lot of these specific instances that there were violations of humanitarian law.


CHATTERLEY: Yes. And of course, it comes in the wake of the message by President Biden and the decision by the Biden administration to restrict

weaponry, certain weaponry to Israel, of course, if indeed we see an expansion of the operation in the Rafah part of Gaza. Kylie Atwood, great

to have you with us. Thank you.

Let's get more context on this now. I'm joined now by Major General James Spider Marks. Major Marks, fantastic to have you on the show with us. Just

translate this report into English and military what this means or may mean for what we're seeing in Gaza, and I think specifically Rafah too.

MAJ. GEN. JAMES "SPIDER" MARKS (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST: Yes, Julia, thank you for letting me join you. I think there are several things that

are -- that we do need to explain about this report. Number one is, frankly, it's not surprising that weapon systems might be used

unintentionally, and that's one of the points as well, is what is the intent of the use of these weapons systems by the IDF if there is specific

intent to go after civilian targets, then you've got a significant problem. That's not the issue here at all.

What we're talking about is what's known as collateral damage and those estimates that exist a priori the delivery of those weapons systems. In

other words, you go through the collateral damage assessment piece, then you make a determination as to whether this weapon system is the right

weapon system to be used against this target so you can minimize the damage to the noncombatants.

The other thing that's, I think, not surprising is the State Department up front said, look, this is based on incomplete information. This is not

everything that we can get our hands on. So, the initial assessment, not determination emphatically, but the assessment is, there may be some

actions on the part of the IDF that do not comport with the international humanitarian laws.

But again, I'm not surprised in that every weapon system that's ever been used, sadly and unfortunately, you migrate into some of the determinations

that there is some collateral damage that you'd like to try to avoid.

CHATTERLEY: There are a number of elements in this, to your point, and I spotted that immediately. As you said, the U.S. does not have complete

information to verify many cases. One, because as they point out, they don't have representatives on the ground that can assess this. They also

point out, as we've heard time and time again, Hamas seeking to hide behind civilian populations, which complicates the picture.

You understand the challenges of operating in a battlefield environment and the challenges and the decisions, to your point, that have to be made at

this moment. To the point of -- that Kylie was making about, there are ways, perhaps to avoid civilian casualties.

Do you think this is damning in the sense that it's suggesting that the IDF could do better, in many respects, to avoid the loss of human life? And

what are the implications, because as we've seen, President Biden has chosen to restrict certain forms of weaponry if indeed we see a greater

escalation of violence in Rafah?

MARKS: Yes, perfect point. Look, the challenge this administration has from the outset, or at least over the course of the last couple of months have

gone to the IDF, gone to Netanyahu and said, look, you guys need to moderate the way you're conducting this operation. Now, that's very

difficult from the standpoint of the IDF.

You've got a nation that's been very generous, incredibly supportive, but they're looking over your shoulder and they're saying, this is how we want

you to prosecute this fight. I can understand where the IDF might say, thank you very much, but we've got a significant problem and we're going to

go this -- we're going to go after this problem alone if we have to. Thank you very much for the support, but please don't get into the details of how

we're prosecuting this fight. So, you've got this type of tension that always takes place.

Look, when the United States provides military assistance to another nation, they do it conditionally say, look, here it is. We know what you're

trying to achieve, but here are the rules around which you cannot use this type of weapon system. It makes it very hard for this administration to say

at the same time -- this is what's incredibly politically different -- difficult. I'm not a political individual here.

But our administration is saying, we are completely behind the Israelis and their right to establish and defend their sovereignty. However, when you

have that semicolon, however, now it becomes qualified to a point where you can start picking it apart. And that's why it's very, very difficult for

this administration.

But what we've seen on the part of the Israelis is, yes, we're getting your input, America. Thank you very much. But they have stated very clearly and

very dramatically, right, that we will fight by clawing our way to a victory, if necessary, if we can't get the support that you, United States,

has been very generously providing up to date.


CHATTERLEY: Yes, that challenge both militarily, I think, and politically, most definitely highlighted in this report. Major General James Spider

Marks, thank you, sir.

OK. Now, to a CNN exclusive report. Since the war began in Gaza, a growing number of Palestinians are being held in a detention center in Israel's

Negev Desert.

CNN has spoken to some whistleblowers from inside the Israeli military who describe the systematic pattern of abuse there. They say they're speaking

out as a matter of conscience and at great personal risk. Matthew Chance has more.


MATTHEW CHANCE, CNN CHIEF GLOBAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): It's a place the Israeli military doesn't want us to see.

CHANCE: How many Palestinians are there in there right now?


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Give me please, now.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Hang on, what is it that you want? My camera or my card?

CHANCE (voice-over): But CNN has gained exclusive evidence of Palestinian prisoner abuse from multiple Israeli whistleblowers.

At the Sde Teiman facility in Southern Israel, we joined human rights activists amid growing public concern for the detainees being held inside.

CHANCE: This is a protest by Israeli citizens outside a detention center close to Gaza where we know hundreds of Palestinians have been held. You

can see it's a closed military facility. It's behind a barbed wire fence. We're not permitted access.

CHANCE (voice-over): And there's hostility from passersby.

CHANCE: We just had somebody drive past in a car and they shouted out to us in Hebrew, you're defending murderers. You're defending -- what do you --

how do you --

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: No, no, no. We're defending basic human rights.

CHANCE (voice-over): And eyewitnesses are now speaking out. Away from the military facility near the beaches of Tel Aviv, one young Israeli army

reservist agreed to speak about scores of detainees at Sde Teiman he says are kept in cages or pens, constantly shackled and blindfolded many for

weeks on end. We've hidden his identity and voice to shield him from prosecution.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We were told they are not allowed to move and must sit upright. They're not allowed to talk or peek under their blindfolds.

CHANCE: And what happened if they if they did do that? What kind of punishments were meted out?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: We were allowed to pick out problematic people and punish them, having them stand with their hands above their heads for an

unlimited time. If they didn't keep their hands up, we could zip tie them to the fence.

CHANCE (voice-over): The Israeli military says detainees are handcuffed based on their risk level and health status. But the account tallies with

photographic evidence obtained by CNN of Palestinian detainees inside Sde Teiman. And with hand and wrist injuries shown to CNN by dozens of

Palestinians released back into Gaza.

I was zip tied and blindfolded, says this former detainee, and tortured in a way I never imagined. One source telling us the restraints were so tight

they had to amputate a man's hand.

CHANCE: The view that I've heard expressed is that, you know, how do you think Israeli hostages are treated by Hamas?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This sentiment was voiced in the facility, but I think that if Hamas is so abominable, which I agree with, then why use Hamas as a

bar? It's a descent into dehumanization.

CHANCE (voice-over): A descent that's accelerated since the rampage by Hamas on October 7th last year, the killing and abduction to Gaza of

hundreds of Israelis provoked outrage and a brutal response. Amid Israel's wrath, tens of thousands of Palestinians have been killed and thousands

detained for interrogation transported to facilities like Sde Teiman where one Israeli guard now tell CNN prisoners are routinely beaten. We've hidden

his identity and voice too.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You can take them out and hit them, maybe four or five times with a club. It's not done in the face, so you don't see blood. The

detainees lie belly down, being hit and kicked, people screaming and dogs barking at them. It's terrifying. Some detainees are taken away and beaten

really hard, so bones and teeth are broken.

CHANCE: So, you saw people who were subject to these beatings, who had their bones broken, and who had their teeth broken?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Yes, it's a practice which commanders know about. They want intelligence, but they also want revenge and punishment for what

happened on October 7th.

CHANCE (voice-over): The Israeli military hasn't approved CNN's requests for access to Sde Teiman. At the gates of the facility, we challenged the

Israeli guards.


CHANCE: How many Palestinians are in there right now?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don't know. I prefer not to answer it.

CHANCE: Do you know if they're being handcuffed? Are they being blindfolded?


UNIDENTIFIED MALE: This is a facility --

CHANCE (voice-over): As we leave, masked soldiers approach.

CHANCE: Hello. How are you?

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Can you stop filming please?

CHANCE: I'm filming this way.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: You cannot film anything here.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: It's a property of the army.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Who are you guys?

CHANCE: We're CNN. Who are you? Are you the police?

CHANCE (voice-over): They tried to take our cameras.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Give me please, now. Give me please, now.

CHANCE: Hang on. What is it that you want? My camera or my card?

CHANCE (voice-over): Then order us to leave.

CHANCE: Well, we're driving now to meet one Israeli with personal experience of the Sde Teiman facility. It's experience that he says has

left him shocked at the condition and the medical treatment of Palestinian detainees there.

CHANCE (voice-over): He told us he treated Palestinian detainees with gunshot wounds fresh from the war zone in Gaza but was appalled at the lack

of equipment and expertise.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: The problem is, Gazans who are brought in are labelled as terrorists, and it is very popular opinion over here that terrorists

deserve to die, so they do not deserve the same medical care as everyone else.

CHANCE (voice-over): Satellite imagery obtained by CNN shows how the Sde Teiman facility was expanded after the October 7th attacks, with detention

facilities and makeshift medical bays being added after public hospitals in Israel refused to treat injured Gazan suspects.

Eyewitness accounts describe a field hospital with 15 to 20 patients virtually naked and blindfolded, with hands and feet shackled to their beds

and wearing diapers. One eyewitness told CNN painful procedures were carried out by underqualified medics. Treatment the medical worker told us

amounts to punishment.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: In my view, it's the idea of total vulnerability. If you imagine being unable to move, being unable to see what's going on, that's

something that borders, if not crosses, into psychological torture.

CHANCE (voice-over): The Israeli military says prisoners are stripped for security checks and that investigations are opened when there's suspicion

of misconduct. Still, accounts from Israelis and Palestinians inside and the shocking images paint a disturbing picture.

Matthew Chance, CNN, at Sde Teiman, in Southern Israel.


CHATTERLEY: The White House has now responded to CNN's report saying the allegations raised are "deeply concerning." The Biden administration says

it's now reaching out to its Israeli counterparts to get more information about the claims.

OK. We're going to take a break here on "First Move," but coming up and straight ahead, Northern Light delights. Why millions could be to a

spectacular and highly unusual geomagnetic display this weekend.

Plus, Zeekr Zooms, the Chinese EV company, racing ahead on its first day of trade on Wall Street. The A to Zs of Zeekr, just ahead.

And the Apple press mess. The tech giant is apologizing for its controversial new iPad ad called Crush. Apple's crushing blow and more.

Stay with us.



CHATTERLEY: Welcome back to "First Move." And TGIF to all our first movers in the United States, U.K. and Latin America. And to everyone in Asia, we

hope you're having a wonderful Saturday morning.

Now, topping today's "Money Move," the Dow winning streak has yet to peak. Allegedly, that's unsolicited. Investment advice there. The Dow rising for

an eighth straight session to close out its best week of the year. The S&P pushing higher as well. And the Nasdaq, as you can see, they're pretty much

unchanged overall.

Some troubling economic data from Friday too. Consumer sentiment taking its biggest hit of the year, the biggest drop amid the frustration perhaps over

inflation. The U.S. releasing fresh inflation data next week, too. And we've got major retailers providing their earnings reports as well.

In the meantime, green arrows across Europe. The London FTSE hitting a fresh record high on news that the U.K. economy has clawed its way out of

recession. That may pave the way to rate cuts, of course, too.

And nice gains in Asia with Hong Kong, the outperformer, it shares hitting a nine-month high. Now, Asian investors are bracing for what could be an

eventful week ahead, particularly across Chinese markets.

The Biden administration is expected to announce a sweeping restructuring of Chinese tariffs as soon as next week, including a rise in tariffs on

Chinese imports like minerals, solar components, and EVs. Now, EV firms could see tariffs rise from 25 to 100 percent. So, that's incoming into the

United States. The news pulled the plug on Chinese EV makers that trade on Wall Street. Shares of Nio and Xpeng fell some 5 percent Friday. Li Auto

also fell some 2 percent.

But shares of Zeekr raced ahead on its first day of trade on the New York Stock Exchange, rising more than 30 percent Friday. The luxury brand

spinoff of Chinese auto firm Geely priced shares at the top of their range and raised more than $400 million. It's the first major Chinese IPO in the

United States since 2021.

Dan Ives, senior equity analyst at Wedbush Securities, joins us now. Dan, great to have you with us. Just let's talk about the EVs in general. I

guess this has been pretty well discussed and rumored, the idea that the tariffs could rise. Do you think this is a bit of a case of buy the rumor,

sell the fact in reverse? They've given a lot of ground.

DAN IVES, MANAGING DIRECTOR, WEDBUSH SECURITIES: Yes. Look, but it's a shot across the bow.


IVES: I mean, from the Biden administration towards what we're seeing in Beijing from electric vehicles. And I think this is just continuing to be a

game of thrones battle between US and China. Ironically, talk about, you know, what we saw today in terms of the IPO, the ironic timing just showing

how successful some of these Chinese EV players are.

CHATTERLEY: I mean, tariffs from 25 to 100 percent is pretty prohibitive. And I think the danger is if you're looking at Europe as an option here,

they're going to be looking at the United States and saying, we probably need to protect ourselves as well. Where do you go?

IVES: Well, I think the other thing, you're going to see the Chinese players aggressively go after Europe. I think that's the next step. When

you look at BYD, Nio, and others. But when it comes to the U.S., look, it's a matter of time. I mean, they are going to come here. And when you look at

the 313 area code and what's happening in Detroit, a lot of EVs. I mean, there's a lot of, you know, credibility on the line here for GM, for Ford,

and others by the administration, you're starting to see more and more pressure. That's why we're seeing these tariffs.


CHATTERLEY: So, Zeekr and the team there, and obviously the ownership is important to discuss. This is no ordinary Chinese EV maker, but it's surely

the same story. They've chosen to list in the United States, but they're eyeing Europe for the growth opportunities. How concerned should we be

about that?

IVES: I think they're actually a little more of a gold standard. I think part of why that's been a successful play, you know, some of the other

issues that some of these other EV players have, they don't, I mean, they've been very successful. I think strategically done a great job.

You look at that Europe market, that's going to be front and center. And I think this is important in terms of the reaction, because in an EV

environment, I mean, you've talked about for a long time, demand softened and globally, and this is -- we're going to continue to see this sort of

game of thrones play out among EV players.

CHATTERLEY: And perhaps consolidation if you are looking for the gold standard, to your point. Very quickly, I mentioned it's the biggest IPO

since Didi, which of course is the Chinese ride hailing app. I mean, a week later, they were tackled by the Chinese government. And a year later, they

delisted. Any concerns with that kind of thing with Zeekr if investors are interested in this one?

IVES: Yes, I don't think there's a concern. I think a lot of that's already been vetted. You know, the fact that actually got here and rang the bell.

And I think, also, it's important in terms of we saw for New York Stock Exchange in terms that IPO. And, look, this -- we are going to see some of

these IPOs come through, but it's going to be a much more restrictive process, but I do not expect what we saw with Didi to see a similar thing


CHATTERLEY: And I apologize to our viewers if they could hear strange squeaking in the background there because I could hear it. I'm not sure

what it was. Dan Ives, managing director of Wedbush Securities and senior equity analyst. Sir, great to get your wisdom on the show. Thank you.

IVES: Thank you.

CHATTERLEY: Now, moving from electric vehicles to an electrifying display. The Northern Lights may be visible across parts of North America this

weekend, even as far south as Alabama and Northern California.

The U.S. has issued a severe geomagnetic storm watch for the first time in nearly 20 years heading into the weekend. And actually, seeing the Northern

Lights all depends on one thing, of course, and that's the weather. For more on that, at least I'm joined by Chad Myers.

Now, if my memory serves me, the Fantastic Four were created by some kind of solar storm like this, which actually got me very excited. You're

fabulous already, of course. But, Chad, there are there are downsides to this too.


CHATTERLEY: Let's be clear.

MYERS: Sure. I mean, it is going to be unbelievable show across the Southern Hemisphere and the Northern Hemisphere there along the poles. How

far does it get closer to the equator? We don't really know. But right now, the numbers on the charts here that we're seeing are almost off the charts.

We're in a G4. The highest you can go is G5. Haven't been this high and in quite some time. Auroras seeing much farther south. But what this could do

as the flares came out on the 7th and 8th and what we call coronal mass ejections came out on the 9th.

And how we know that these are coming to the Earth compared to just going off into space like they usually do is because when you look at this, you

see a puff of cloud. It's not a cloud. It's plasma. I guess plasma cloud. But the puff actually goes all around the middle part that's blocking out

the sun. That means it's getting closer to the Earth rather than going maybe toward Mars.

So, this is a very concerning event here for the power grids, for your electronics, for anything that uses power that needs to be stable, that

needs to be the same voltage all the way across.

Now, power companies really knew this solar maximum was coming, and they've done a great job trying to keep our power stable, but this is a very large

coronal mass ejection moving over the Earth. In fact, there are six of them still lined up compared to the one that we got about five hours ago, I


And so, if your power grid didn't go off in the past couple of hours, you're in good shape, but there's still more of this to come.

I want you to think about what it looks like when there's an earthquake out there. You see the seismograph come by and nothing's happening, nothing's

happening. But then, all of a sudden, it starts to shake up and down. Well, that's what happened to the solar wind today.

All of a sudden, we were stable, all day long and then here it comes. And there it is. And it's still coming in. All of this coming in. And we're

seeing some amazing displays across some of the pictures we're getting really from New Zealand now. But I think Europe is starting to pick up,

because I'm seeing some pictures there that are very, very purple. And purple is a pretty rare color to get here.

Here's what we expected at 5:00 to 8:00 Eastern time, and right now, we're in the 6:00, only minor. We're not minor. We are up here in strong to

severe. So, what happens overnight when we were supposed to be strong to severe? We'll see, because we obviously got hit very, very hard about six

hours ago.


All the way down across probably latitude, maybe 40 degrees north. It's almost a sure thing. We're already seeing the pictures there out of

Northern Italy. Some amazing pictures there. We're seeing them out of New Zealand. We're seeing them out of a lot of the European countries because

now it's getting dark. Not seeing any pictures here from North America. Well, one, because it's going to be cloud across the Northeast. Not many

seeing the skies tonight.

But the thing is, Julia, this is not a one-day event or a one-night event. This could happen for many, many days in a row as the solar wind continues

to come at the U.S. Watch out for your electronics today. If you're not going to be using your washing machine or your dryer, it wouldn't be a bad

idea to shut off the breaker. I did, but that's just me because I don't like spending a thousand dollars U.S. for a new washing machine just

because the power surged. So, do what you can do.

CHATTERLEY: I think that's great advice. Unplug in general is always great advice.

MYERS: Yes. I'm a worst-case scenario kind of guy and I just don't -- some of this stuff isn't going to be insured by the insurance company. So, you

have to be careful. You have to just spend what your policy says, of course.

CHATTERLEY: You're my risk manager for today, Chad. Thank you so much. The fifth member of the Fantastic Four, at least in my eyes.

MYERS: Sure. Thank you.

CHATTERLEY: Have a great -- have a good weekend.

MYERS: You too.

CHATTERLEY: Stay with "First Move." We'll be back.


CHATTERLEY: Welcome back. And it was a short day in court for Donald Trump on Friday, the former U.S. president's hush money trial wrapping up early

with the judge deciding to end proceedings at lunch. Prosecutors called in witnesses to establish a record of phone calls, messages, and transactions

and a star witness. Trump's former personal attorney, Michael Cohen, is expected to testify on Monday. Kara Scannell has more.



KARA SCANNELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Prosecutor's star witness, Michael Cohen, is expected to testify on Monday in Former President Donald

Trump's hush money trial. Cohen, Trump's former attorney and fixer, is at the crux of the criminal case against him. Prosecutors say Cohen paid off

adult film star Stormy Daniels on Trump's behalf to kill her story of an alleged affair before the 2016 election. Trump denies the affair.

DONALD TRUMP, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT AND REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Somebody paid a lawyer. And in paying the lawyer, so it was a legal

expense, that somebody happened to be me, I didn't do the bookkeeping, I didn't even know about it. This is what the case is about.

SCANNELL (voice-over): Cohen told his "Political Beatdown" podcast co-host on Thursday that he looks forward to testifying.

MICHAEL COHEN, DONALD TRUMP'S FORMER ATTORNEY: Sooner this thing starts, the sooner this thing finishes.

SCANNELL (voice-over): After a defense request, Judge Juan Merchan told prosecutors he wants Cohen to keep quiet about the case before he takes the

stand. But he can't issue a gag order on a witness. Something Trump expressed frustration about as he left court today.

TRUMP: There is no gag order to Michael Cohen. What the judge did was amazing, actually. Was amazing. Everybody can say whatever they want. They

can say whatever they want. I don't know. I'm not allowed to say anything about anybody. It's a disgrace.

SCANNELL (voice-over): Today, prosecutors called witnesses to stand to help lay the groundwork for Cohen's upcoming testimony. An AT&T analyst

introduced Cohen's phone records. And back on the stand, Trump's former White House aide, Madeleine Westerhout, testified about Trump's reaction to

the release of Daniels' story in 2018.

Westerhout testified Trump was upset by it, and her understanding was that it would be hurtful to his family. She later clarified Trump did not

specifically speak about his family in that conversation. Trump's lawyer suggested he made the $130,000 hush money payoff to Daniels in order to

protect his family.

Meanwhile, prosecutors argue he did it to influence the 2016 election, which was two weeks away, and came on the heels of the Access Hollywood

tape damaging his campaign.

TRUMP: And when you're a star, they let you do it. You can do anything.

SCANNELL (voice-over): Trump's lawyer, Susan Necheles, asked Westerhout about the process of Trump signing checks. Westerhout said Trump would sign

them while multitasking, doing things like talking on the phone or meeting with people. She described FedExing the signed checks back to the Trump

organization. Prosecutors used Westerhout to show the chain of command of checks, like the one sent to Cohen to reimburse him for the hush money.

Cohen testified before Congress about the allegations in 2019.

REP. ELIJAH CUMMINGS, U.S. HOUSE DEMOCRAT: Donald Trump wrote you a check out of his personal account while he was serving as president of the United

States of America to reimburse you for hush money payments.

COHEN: Yes, Mr. Chairman.

SCANNELL (voice-over): Today, another witness, a paralegal at the district attorney's office, read one of Trump's tweets about the monthly payments to

Cohen, which Trump called a retainer. Trump said, Mr. Cohen, an attorney, received a monthly retainer not from the campaign and having nothing to do

with the campaign.

The tweet came around the time his former lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, told Fox News host Sean Hannity that Trump reimbursed Cohen for the hush money, that

Cohen paid for it out of his own pocket.

RUDY GIULIANI, DONALD TRUMP'S FORMER ATTORNEY: Having something to do with paying some Stormy Daniels woman $130,000, I mean, which is going to turn

out to be perfectly legal. That money was not campaign money.

SEAN HANNITY, HOST, FOX NEWS: They funneled it through the law firm?

GIULIANI: Funneled it through the law firm, and the president repaid it.


CHATTERLEY: OK. Coming up on "First Move." Going Once, going twice, sold to art enthusiasts of painting the town red in New York as spring auction

season gets underway. But is art really a smart investment? Well, stick around because we'll discuss, next.



CHATTERLEY: Welcome back to "First Move." Now, there's no better sign that spring has sprung in New York City than when art fairs like Frieze and TFAF

arrive, and of course, when art collectors begin raising their paddles at the spring auctions.

Now, over the next week or so, big auction houses like Sotheby's, Christie's, and Phillips will be selling major works by Picasso, Monet,

Basquiat, as well as some lesser-known artists, of course.

Now, the auctions will test what some are calling a softer art market this year. It's also seen as a type of confidence gauge for the ultra-wealthy.

But is art a good investment? Well, if you look at this chart, then your answer would be yes. It compares returns on investment art versus the S&P

500 Index over the past two decades.

But come on, how are we defining art as a potential collector? Why are you buying it and where are you buying it from? And of course, that assumes

you're even brave enough to ask the price. Yes, I've been there. My next guest has written a number of books to help navigate one of the last

remaining unregulated markets in the His most recent one is called "How to Collect Art."

Magnus Resch is author, art market economist, entrepreneur, and collector, and he joins us now. Magnus, great to have you on the show. Now, I did

actually read your book in one sitting, which says something, but I think the straight answer that I got at least from the book was actually, for the

most part, art's a terrible investment, but it's way more interesting than that.

MAGNUS RESCH, AUTHOR, "HOW TO COLLECT ART" AND ART MARKET ECONOMIST: Well, yes, you're right. Art is a bad investment. Most art. 99 percent of all art

doesn't return any money.

If you only look at the top end of the market, yes, this is where art actually outperforms other indexes, like you showed us before, but this

really only looks at a tiny, tiny number of artists. Think about that. 20 artists make up 50 percent of the total value of the art market.

CHATTERLEY: Wow. I mean, that's just a crazy stat to begin with. I think the other thing that I learned, and that was your chart, by the way, I

stole it. You point out in the book that there's, what, 60 million plus pieces of artwork that are produced every year.

I mentioned the auctions and actually what sells at auction each year is a tiny fraction of that. What's also fascinating is what then sells again in

the secondary market. It's teeny. It's like 1 percent of that. But we have to understand what we're dealing with here in a market that, for most part,

we don't really understand on any level, and that's what you help with.

RESCH: Well, yes, think about this. So, roughly 60 million artworks get created every year. Out of these, 3 million ever make it into a gallery.

Put yourself into the shoes of an artist. Think about that. It's so hard to actually get into a gallery. 60 million and only 3 million are ever being

offered to be sold.

And then out of these 3 million, only a tiny fraction ever makes it into an auction. And then out of these, a tiny percentage, and we're talking here

about less than 001 percent of the 60 million that were created ever are sold twice in an auction. And this tiny percentage are the ones that are

creating those indexes.

So, you get an idea, when you hear these numbers, a small little fraction of artworks are creating those indexes. And yes, for those art is a good

investment, but for everything else, it isn't.


CHATTERLEY: Yes. So, if I'm an artist at this moment, then those shoes that you pointed out are feeling incredibly uncomfortable at this moment, and I

can dump my illusions of being an art investor at the door. Why should people invest, whether it's for love, to invest in a community, as you

point out, which I think is quite fun? Why should people invest and how should they be thinking about this? What is the investment? Yes.

RESCH: So, what I do in my book, "How to Collect Art," is I explain to people, all right, if you're here as -- and looking for the next

investment, the next Basquiat, then most likely this is not the right industry. So, buy for other reasons. I call it responsible buying.

So, what you should do is you should consider art as an investment in yourself, in a gallery, and in an artist. So, by buying art, you're not --

it's not a financial transaction, but it's almost a philanthropic act where you're supporting a whole community.

Now, when you free yourself from the investment idea and you are aware that most art that you buy, you'll never see the money again, this changes the

entire game, because now you're free. You can buy what you like knowing that you will never see the money again.

CHATTERLEY: Some people's philanthropy could also be discussed as sort of throwing the money away, to your point, make you feel better about bad art

that you buy. A lot of people say to me as well, they don't have any taste. How do you know even what to buy in this sense? How do you approach that,

Magnus? Because you also invest or at least you buy art.

RESCH: So, the book is based on a large research study that I did, where we looked at half a million artists and millions of price points. I

interviewed, on top of this, 200 of the most prominent art collectors, just to find out what makes an artwork and an artist successful.

Now, the outcome of this study is a -- it took us six years. We published it in "Science Magazine." I wrote it together with a couple of Harvard

professors. And we were able to show that the actual art piece does not drive value. What really drives value and what makes an artist successful

is the network that the artist is in.

CHATTERLEY: OK. Explain that more, because you also in the book, and I love this chart, and I think to my audience it might look quite complicated, but

it's actually very simple in terms of who's in charge, particularly at the higher end of the art market, and I know we're talking in broad terms here,

but who drives what's perceived as valuable, and also, what is valuable, and it's a very small network, and it's actually concentrated in New York.

Can we bring up this chart? And Magnus, you can explain this as one piece of that, at least.

RESCH: Yes. So, what you can see here is a map with a lot of dots. Now, some dots are small, others are bigger. Here are two things that are

important. The size of the dots and the proximity of the dots to each other. As you can see, there are -- there's only one area where all the big

dots are.

Now, every dot is an art institution, a gallery or a museum. Now, we were able to show that only a few dots are -- only a few institutions are

relevant for the success of an artist, and those are the big dot institutions. What you can see is that they're all closely connected to

each other. That means for an artist, if you like to have success, you need to be part of this one central network that consists of a few institutions,

most of them in the U.S.


RESCH: And as you can also see, most other institutions have no impact on the financial success of an artist.

CHATTERLEY: Yes. So, the key here, I think, is don't worry if your taste doesn't fit, what, those four big players like Place (ph) Gallery and

Gagosian Gallery and a couple of museums say because they're perhaps dominating, at least, the top end of the art market and shouldn't.

OK. Final question. Why should people buy the book?

RESCH: Well, the book is a guide to the art world. I think everyone is interested in a few key questions. What should I buy? Where should I start?

Is this price fair? How do I get tickets to Art Basel? And what's the difference between Art Basel and SCOPE?

So, I provide answers in this book. It's based on research. It's not based on my personal opinion. It's -- and it's a guide book to help you navigate

the art market. So, if you like to be the expert at your next dinner party, go and buy this book. If you don't want to lose any money in the art world

and be very knowledgeable when you purchase your next art piece, go ahead.

It's like an art adviser in your pocket and you can get it for less than I think $35. So, I wouldn't wait anymore.

CHATTERLEY: OK. Shameless plug. And an art adviser definitely cost more than that. Magnus, great to have you on the show. Thank you.

RESCH: Thank you very much.

CHATTERLEY: Magnus Resch there. OK. We'll be right back. Stay with us.



CHATTERLEY: Welcome back to "First Move." And to a surfer who says he feels at peace while taking on mother nature. Sebastian Steudtner may just have

broken his own world record by surfing a titanic 28-meter wave, that's more than 90 feet high, in Portugal of course.

In this report, he tells us just how he does it.


SEBASTIAN STEUDTNER, BIG WAVE SURFER: It's a mountain of water. It's the largest physical energy in the ocean, which is about to explode on the

shore. And I realized how small, little insignificant and nothing we are as humans compared to nature.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (voice-over): He set the Guinness World Record for the largest wave ever surfed back in 2020, surfing an 86-foot behemoth.

But now, big wave surfer Sebastian Steudtner may have broken his own mark. His latest feat came in February this year when he surfed a wave

provisionally measured at almost 94 feet, taller than a nine-story building. The height still needs to be ratified and that process will

culminate in November.

STEUDTNER: We were, for the first time, surfing the biggest waves in stormy conditions, and that was considered unsurfable. So, we made that possible.

And that to me is what's special from that day.

Whenever I get scared and whenever I have fear of something risky that I'm doing, and I face it, I work my way through it. I take the responsibility

of minimizing the risk. I spend more time in the preparation and getting ready for it than actually, you know, surfing the wave.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (voice-over): Steudtner and his team go to extensive lengths to ensure that he's physically and mentally prepared for the

immense pressure he inevitably comes up against in his quest to surf ever larger waves, but as well as pushing the limits of his body and mind

Steudtner also pushes the limits of science and technology to help him find and safely surf, some of the most dangerous swells in the world.

STEUDTNER: When I broke the world record in 2020, I was on the limit as far as my equipment goes. I can surf quicker. I can be faster as an athlete. I

can -- I trust that I'm able to surf bigger waves, but just physically, we kind of hit a wall.

So, what we did is we looked at the sport from a scientific point of view. We started using sensors in the surfboard, on my body, in drone technology,

and we created data to be able to change the equipment.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE (voice-over): Despite the imminent dangers, Steudtner has become a master of his craft. Not only surviving, but thriving in the

chaos that is mother nature.

STEUDTNER: You would think -- as an outsider, you would think it's a terrifying -- it's almost like a horrific experience, but it's so peaceful.

Everything becomes simple, you know.


Being exposed to this radical, physical, ginormous energy and being humbled by it makes you -- makes me really peaceful. Very, very at peace with



CHATTERLEY: And finally, on "First Move," precious news for "Lord of the Rings" fans.

Oh, and it's not working. But you get the sense. Two new Warner Brothers movies based on characters by J. R. R. Tolkien have been announced. And the

first one is tentatively titled, as you saw there, "The Hunt for Gollum." It reunites the team behind the original "Lord of the Rings" and "The

Hobbit" trilogies. As of now, Peter Jackson will produce. Actor Andy Serkis will direct while playing the title role.

Now, Warner Brothers, of course, owned by CNN's parent company, and the first film isn't due before 2026 at least. So, don't put your elf ears on

just yet. Maybe I will.

That just about wraps up the show. Thanks for joining us. Have a great weekend. I'll see you Monday.