Return to Transcripts main page

First Move with Julia Chatterley

Trump Calls Trial a Scam; Trump Planning to Appeal Guilty Verdict; Biden "No One is Above the Law"; Marian Robinson Dies at 86; Biden's New Israeli Proposal for Gaza Ceasefire; Hamas Welcomes Biden's Ceasefire Proposal; U.S. Permits Ukraine to Strike Within Russia Using U.S. Weapons; Trump Facing Three More Criminal Cases; Trump First U.S. President Convicted of a Crime; Real Madrid and Borussia Dortmund in Champions League Final; Bruhat Soma Wins 96th Scripps National Spelling Bee. Aired 6-7p ET

Aired May 31, 2024 - 18:00:00   ET



WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: Tonight, Donald Trump is plotting his next legal and political moves as he seizes over his historic criminal conviction and

lashes it out at just about everyone he blames for the verdict.

CNN's Kristen Holmes has more on what Trump is saying and doing on this, his first full day as a felon.





LYNDA KINKADE, CNN HOST: -- in Australia, and 6:00 p.m. here in Atlanta. I'm Lynda Kincaid and for Julia Chatterley. And wherever you are in the

world, this is your "First Move."

A very warm welcome to "First Move." Here is today's need to know. Donald Trump calls his hush money trial a scam as he vows to appeal his guilty


President Biden says it's time for this war to end as he sets out a new Israeli proposal for a ceasefire in Gaza.

And Real Madrid and Borussia Dortmund prepare to face each other in the Champions League Final. All that and much more coming up.

But first, it was a scam. It was unfair. The judge was conflicted. Nobody has seen anything like it. Donald Trump reciting a familiar monologue less

than 24 hours after a jury found him guilty of 34 felony charges in the New York hush money trial.

Taking aim at the Biden administration, the Department of Justice, his former fixer, Michael Cohen and others, Trump's speech was littered with

false claims. Kristen Holmes has more on his speech and the latest reaction.


DONALD TRUMP, FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT AND REPUBLICAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: If they can do this to me, they can do this to anyone.

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): A defiant Donald Trump lashing out Friday, a day after a New York jury found him guilty on

all 34 counts in his criminal hush money trial.

TRUMP: Oh, we're going to fight. I'm wired in such a way that a lot of people would have gone away a long time ago.

HOLMES (voice-over): Trump aired grievances with the trial and leveled attacks at the prosecutor and the presiding judge, Juan Merchan.

TRUMP: It was a rigged trial. We wanted a venue change where we could have a fair trial. We didn't get it. We wanted a judge change. We wanted a judge

that wasn't conflicted. And obviously, he didn't do that. There's -- nobody's ever seen anything like it.

HOLMES (voice-over): Even as the former president remains under a gag order that blocks him from speaking out about witnesses, jurors, and others

closely tied to the case, Trump singled out ex-attorney Michael Cohen, a key witness in the case, without using his name.

TRUMP: I'm not allowed to use his name because of the gag order. But, you know, he's a sleazebag. Everybody knows that. It took me a while to find

out. But he was effective. He did work. But he wasn't a fixer, he was a lawyer.

HOLMES (voice-over): In a statement to CNN, Cohen called Trump's remarks a "crazy avalanche of broken brain word manure."

TRUMP: No presidential candidate's ever been under a gag order before. I'm under a gag order, nasty gag order. Think of it, I'm the leading candidate.

HOLMES (voice-over): Trump also claimed Friday he wanted to testify in the trial, but suggested one of his lawyers encouraged him not to do so.

TRUMP: Now, I would have testified, I wanted to testify. The theory is you never testify, because as soon as you testify -- anybody. If it were George

Washington, don't testify because he'll get you on something that you said slightly wrong and then they sue you for perjury.

HOLMES (voice-over): Trump's allies and supporters swiftly rallied behind the presumptive GOP nominee. With the campaign announcing it had raised

more than $34 million dollars in the hours after the verdict. At one point, even crashing the fundraising platform used by Trump's campaign.

While top Republicans, including several vice-presidential hopefuls, joined Trump in criticizing the conviction.

REP. BYRON DONALDS (R-FL): What happened in New York was a travesty of the justice system.

SEN. J.D. VANCE (R- OH): You cannot say that this trial was anything more than politics masquerading as justice.


KINKADE: Our Kristen Holmes reporting there. I want to bring in Duncan Levin, a former federal prosecutor. He's now a criminal defense attorney

and the managing partner at Levin & Associates. Good to have you with us.


Appreciate it.

KINKADE: So, Trump is facing four years in jail for each of the 34 felony counts. What's the likelihood that he'll face any time in jail? And what

are the options the judge will consider?

LEVIN: Well, it's ultimately unilaterally in the hands of Judge Merchan, who's the trial judge overseeing the case, and he has a whole menu of

options available to him. Incarceration is one option. He also could give what's called a conditional discharge, just giving conditions where the

conditions could be community service or drug testing, those types of things. He could give probation and he could give some combination of both.


I think that it's a -- on some level, a low-level E felony and it's a first offense, a first-time conviction for somebody, for a 77-year-old man,

nonviolent, and you'll see those arguments coming from the defense. The arguments coming from the prosecution will be for -- likely for

incarceration, because to the extent that an E felony in New York is punishable by up to four years, this is a defendant who has thumbed his

nose at the justice system, been found in criminal contempt of court for 10 different violations of the court's gag order, has threatened the court

staff, the D.A.'s office has made a mockery of justice. And so, I think they'll be likely asking for some incarceration here.

And I think that Mr. Trump's speech today further inflamed matters by sort of poking at the judge and further breaking the gag order by making

reference to Mr. Cohen without using his name. So, I think you're likely to see arguments for incarceration from the prosecution.

KINKADE: And so, a convicted felon in the State of New York can still run for president and he could still vote so long as he's not incarcerated at

the time of the election, right?

LEVIN: This is something that the founders of the United States constitution never probably thought about, whether a felon would actually

get elected president of the United States. So, there is no bar in the Constitution to a felon becoming president.

Under New York law, the only way that you can be barred from voting as a felon is if you're currently incarcerated on election day. So, unless he's

incarcerated on election day, it is most likely that he will be able both to vote for himself and actually assume the office of the presidency if

he's elected.

KINKADE: And so, take us through what you thought of the case as a former federal prosecutor. Given that the jury agreed unanimously that Trump made

these payoffs to an adult film star and that it -- that, of course, he falsified business records to cover up in order to -- ahead of the last

election. What did you make of the prosecution's case and where did the defense case fall apart?

LEVIN: Well, the prosecution put together a pretty compelling narrative that was simply told from beginning to end. They showed through the

testimony of people like David Pecker, who was at the National Enquirer, this conspiracy between the National Enquirer and Michael Cohen and Donald

Trump himself to promote Mr. Trump's election by what's called unlawful means.

And the unlawful means where these hush money payments to stormy Daniels and to Karen McDougal, and to others and that he then took steps to cause

others at the Trump Organization, Allen Weisselberg, who was the CFO and Michael Cohen to cover this up by false business entries. They told a very

compelling story from beginning to end.

And the defense really -- their whole job is to sow confusion. All they need to do is try to create a little bit of reasonable doubt and show that

the narrative told by the prosecution is faulty for some reason. And I think where they fell apart, really, is that they tried the case for a jury

of one, they tried the case for their client. They made some critical missteps by denying the sexual encounter with Stormy Daniels, which I think

the jury probably found to be absolutely uncredible, and by attacking her in the way that they did.

And they also probably made a very critical misstep in denying that the money to Mr. Cohen was a -- was for -- was a repayment. They said it was

for legal services, even though there was no invoice for Mr. Cohen. There was never any retainer agreement. It was just sort of a patently uncredible

story that they were telling. And it seems like they were really making this argument for public consumption, not for -- to win the case. I think

they lost the case because they were trying more to appeal to the public perception of what happened than to actually win the case as litigators.

KINKADE: So, of course, Trump's team wants to appeal. What are the strongest possible grounds for an appeal in this case?

LEVIN: Well, it's a good question. I mean, I think he's likely, on the one hand, to throw his lawyers under the bus and try to argue ineffective

assistance of counsel. His lawyers were criticized at one point by the judge. They tried to make a mistrial motion after the Stormy Daniels

testimony, because Stormy Daniels was an uncontrollable witness for the D.A.'s office. She testified to things that were -- I mean, as he puts it,

salacious. I think they were appropriate because they showed the salacious nature of the story that Mr. Trump wanted to bury.


But in any event Mr. Trump's lawyers didn't object to most of that coming into evidence. And so, the judge criticized them for that. I think he's

likely to make an ineffective assistance of counsel argument.

He's likely to make an argument about the fact that the jurors did not need to all agree on the "unlawful means" by which he promoted the election. So,

New York State law basically makes it illegal to conspire with others, to promote an election by unlawful means. That was the predicate that made

this falsifying business records case -- a felony instead of a misdemeanor.

The judge gave a jury instruction that said that the jurors did not need to agree what the unlawful mean was. For example, one juror could think it was

the payment to stormy Daniels. One could say it's the payment to Karen McDougal. One could say it was a seriatim filing of false business records.

They could all disagree about that.

I think there's some argument he'll make that that violated his right to due process and under the 6th Amendment of the constitution. Most of these

are unlikely to win and carry any water at the end of the day. He basically has very limited appeal rights, and it's unlikely to win, even if he can

get over to federal court on some sort of appeal.

KINKADE: All right. Former Federal Prosecutor Duncan Levin, good to have you on the program for that comprehensive response. Much appreciated. Thank


LEVIN: Thanks for having me. Appreciate it.

KINKADE: Well, U.S. President Joe Biden says the verdict shows that no one was above the law and that the legal process worked, calling the justice

system the cornerstone of America.


JOE BIDEN, U.S. PRESIDENT: They found Donald Trump guilty on all 34 felony counts. Now, he'll 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.


KINKADE: Well, for months, pundits have been wondering how Donald Trump's trial would impact his presidential campaign, and so far, it seems to be

paying off. As we mentioned, Trump's campaign says it raised almost $35 million in small donations in just six hours following the verdict.

Supporters gathered near Trump's Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida.

Some Republicans are also rushing to support Trump. House Speaker Mike Johnson says Trump will win on appeal, while Senate Minority Leader Mitch

McConnell says the charges should never have been brought.

Well, joining me now as Republican strategist and senior political commentator Scott Jennings. Good to see you, Scott.


KINKADE: So, I have to ask you, to begin with, about the fundraising effort post this verdict. Almost $35 million in a matter of hours. This has

energized the base. Is this case a disaster for those who don't want Trump to become president?

JENNINGS: Well, every time Trump has had an engagement with or an entanglement with the legal system, we have seen his base time and again

get energized and donate to him in big numbers. So, this happened during the previous indictments. This is the first time he's actually stood trial

and faced a verdict, and it's happened again.

So, yes. I mean, I think that if you are someone who doesn't want Donald Trump to be president again, you should be worried that this is galvanizing

Republicans behind him. And just anecdotally, based on my own conversations with, you know, people who aren't all that much of a Trump fan type

Republicans, they're pretty livid about this as well.

It reminds me of the case back in 2018, when we had the Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court confirmations going on, that was sort of a unifying moment

where all corners of the Republican Party came together and decided that Kavanaugh was being railroaded. Well, now I think all corners of the party

are deciding that Trump is being railroaded. And it's probably helping him gather up some people that were previously skeptical of supporting him in

the general election.

KINKADE: And speaking of that support from the Republican Party, I just want to play some sound from Republican politicians who've rallied around

Trump in light of this verdict. Let's just listen.


SEN. TIM SCOTT (R-SC): This was certainly a hoax, a sham. This was devastating for the average American.

SEN. MARCO RUBIO (R-FL): This is the most outrageous travesty I've ever seen. And the problem here is Democrats have crossed this line.

SEN. JD VANCE (R-OH): Yes, I've never heard constituents so frustrated and so angry at what they've seen.

SEN. TED CRUZ (R-TX): This was not law. This was not criminal justice. This was politics. This was a political smear job. This was an attack job.

This is what you see in banana republics.

REP. MIKE JOHNSON (R-LA): People see what is going on. They see that the Democrats are so desperate because President Trump is crushing Joe Biden in

the polls. They see the Democrat Party and the left so desperate to stop him that they'll risk the destruction of our entire legal system to do it.


KINKADE: Scott, back in the lead up to the 2016 election and certainly in Trump's term in office, there were Republicans who were willing to stand up

to Trump like the former house speaker, John Ryan. Is there anyone in the GOP who would do that now?


JENNINGS: Well, I mean, look, Trump is a former president and he is the current nominee of the Republican Party or presumptive nominee. The

convention comes in July. And so, he's very firmly in control of this party. So no, you're not going to have many Republicans at all out there

say, I oppose Trump on this.

I'll give you an example. Senator Susan Collins of Maine has been one of the biggest Trump skeptical Republicans in Washington the whole time Trump

has been on the scene. Even she, last night, put out a statement saying that this case shouldn't have been brought, that it was a case that was in

search of an outcome to get Trump, not an outcome to serve justice.

So, even the most Trump skeptical Republicans were saying, I don't like this, and I don't like where this is taking our country. So, for that

reason, I think you're highly unlikely to see too many Republicans publicly saying, I'm against Trump in the wake of all this.

KINKADE: Trump's sentencing is July 11, just days before the GOP Convention. Will that help or hinder him?

JACKSON: Well, it's certainly going to turn the convention into a supercharged environment. I don't know whether the prosecutors in this case

are going to be dumb enough to ask the judge to give him jail time. They certainly could. But if they try to throw Donald Trump in jail a few days

before the Republican National Convention, I don't even know what's going to happen at that convention or in this country.

I mean, we're already a deeply divided country. This trial and this verdict has divided us even further. Donald Trump is ahead in the polls, nationally

and in the swing states. And if they try to throw him in jail on the eve of his getting the Republican nomination, this does not take the United States

anywhere good at all, and I worry very much about Democrats in New York trying to do that.

KINKADE: The polls show that this race is very tight between Joe Biden and Donald Trump. And interestingly, a Quinnipiac survey found about 6 percent

of Trump supporters are less likely to vote for him if convicted. That was a survey obviously done before that conviction verdict came in. If that's

true, even if only half of those voters turned away from Trump, wouldn't that sink his chance?

JENNINGS: Well, you're right to identify that small numbers of people could make a huge difference. Go back to 2020. It was about 44,000 people

in three states that delivered Joe Biden the presidency. Now, we're a country of 330 million people. So, that's a very small number that could

swing the election. So, it wouldn't take very many people and say, Georgia, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Wisconsin, you know the states, to change the

outcome from one to the other.

So, that's why every single thing that happens, whether it's a trial, whether it's a debate, you know, whether it's, you know, some other moment

in the campaign, every single thing here matters, because at the end of the day, I agree with you, it's a close race. Either person could win. And very

small numbers of people in key areas could swing the election from one to the other.

So, I absolutely agree. This is going to be impactful. I'm just not sure which way yet.

KINKADE: Yes, exactly. The jury's still out on that one. We will discuss this again, no doubt, in the coming months. Republican Strategist and CNN

Senior Political Commentator Scott Jennings, thanks very much.

JENNINGS: Thank you.

KINKADE: Well, still to come on "First Move," President Biden urging Hamas to embrace a new Israeli ceasefire proposal in Gaza. We'll bring you the

response from Hamas next.

And we'll introduce you to the 12-year-old Brainiac who is literally minding his P's and Q's at this year's U.S. National Spelling Bee. His

secret to spelling success, coming up.



KINKADE: Well, some sad news just coming into CNN. Marian Robinson, the mother of the Former First Lady Michelle Obama, has passed away. She was 86

years old. A statement from the Obama and Robinson families said she passed away peacefully. Michelle Obama posted on social media saying my mom,

Marian Robinson, was my rock, always there for whatever I needed. She was the same steady backstop for our entire family. And we are heartbroken to

share she passed away today.

In the past couple of hours, Hamas has said it welcomes a new proposal by Israel for a permanent ceasefire in Gaza, as well as the release of all

hostages. The plan was announced by the U.S. President earlier, who called it a comprehensive roadmap towards lasting peace. The plan would take place

in three stages, beginning with a ceasefire and the withdrawal of Israeli troops from Gaza. It would be followed by the release of hostages and end

with a reconstruction plan.


BIDEN: The United States will work with our partners to rebuild homes, schools and hospitals in Gaza, to help repair communities that were

destroyed in the chaos of war. And with this deal, Israel could become more deeply integrated in the region, including -- it's no surprise to you all,

including no potential historic normalization agreement with Saudi Arabia.


KINKADE: Well, Jeremy Diamond is following the story and joins us live from Jerusalem. Good to have you there, first, Jeremy.

So, certainly, the president there trying to put pressure on Hamas to come to the table saying this could be a decisive moment for this war. What are

the sticking points in this proposal?

JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Yes, no question about it. I mean, there are a few things that are really interesting about this Israeli

proposal as laid out by President Biden. This is the first time that, first of all, the president has gone into so much detail laying out a proposal,

giving you a sense of just how much the White House wanted to leverage, the bully pulpit wanted to leverage President Biden, bringing public pressure

to bear not only on Hamas, but also on the Israeli government to try and move these negotiations forward.

Then if you look into the details of this, first of all, this is the first time that we've actually seen Israel talk about the notion of a permanent

ceasefire in the second phase of this agreement so explicitly. And it does so in a way that's really interesting in terms of going from the first

phase of this agreement, a six-week ceasefire, the release of those elderly wounded and female hostages.

Going from that first phase to the second phase is a negotiation that would not only happen over the course of those six weeks of ceasefire, but could

actually be extended further. As long as those negotiations go on, the ceasefire will be extended, and that appears to be a kind of elegant

solution to one of the key problems, which has been the unwillingness of Israel to agree to a permanent ceasefire on the front end of these


And Hamas is insistence that Israel agree to a permanent ceasefire at the very beginning of these negotiations. This could at least allow Israel for

a six-week ceasefire to go on and be extended as these two parties work out their differences. But the key question will ultimately be, is Hamas

willing to accept this rather than its demand that Israel agreed to a permanent ceasefire in order to allow any of the hostages to go free?

And we are getting Hamas' response to President Biden's speech. They say that they viewed his speech positively and that they're willing to engage

in negotiations on any proposal that has a permanent ceasefire as the basis for negotiation.


So, certainly, there are some key Israeli concessions in this latest proposal. But as all of this is happening, as we're hearing President Biden

talking about this permanent ceasefire and the fact that these negotiations could lead to that, we're also hearing from the Israeli prime minister's

office saying that this war will not end until all the goals of the war are achieved. Not only the release of the hostages, but also the destruction of

Hamas in Gaza, and those two things appear to be at odds.

Now, is that just the kind of politics at play here, Netanyahu and his office needing to keep that in mind as they move forward, or is it a more

serious disagreement here? That remains to be seen. But certainly, at the moment, it does appear like there is a more substantive Israeli proposal on

the table, one that makes several concessions in the direction of Hamas. Will it be enough? And is this a proposal that the Israeli prime minister

can get through his right-wing government? All fundamental questions to be asked in the days and weeks ahead.

KINKADE: Yes, and we will continue to follow this closely. Jeremy Diamond, staying up late for us in Jerusalem. Thanks very much.

Well, the Kremlin claims Ukraine is already trying to strike targets inside Russia with U.S.-made weapons, and a top Russian official is warning that

those strikes could put the West in danger. U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken has now confirmed that Washington has eased restrictions on

military aid. He said Ukraine wants to fend off cross border attacks.


ANTONY BLINKEN, U.S. 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.


KINKADE: Oren Liebermann is at the Pentagon. Good to have you with us, Oren. So, Ukraine can now strike inside Russia with U.S.-made weapons.

Could this change the war, and if so, how?

OREN LIEBERMANN, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Well, there are limitations to how Ukraine can use U.S. weapons, and very specifically. A lot of this

discussion and how we got to where we are right now is because of Russia's newly launched offensive in Kharkiv in north and West Ukraine. The U.S.

knew this was coming and watched Russia prepare for it, and Russia believed it could mass its forces and simply go a few miles across the border and

attack, believing that their forces were safe because Ukraine couldn't use U.S. weapons to attack in Russian territory, regardless of what senior

Russian officials say there.

Well, the U.S. realized how important it was that if you're going to try to fend off this attack and hold back, you have to be able to strike where the

Russian forces are gathering. And that, ultimately, is what led to the decision being made by President Joe Biden to allow Ukrainian forces to use

U.S. weapons in this way. And we had gotten hints of it.

Secretary of State Antony Blinken, while visiting Kyiv on the 15th of this month, his language got a little ambiguous when it came to this topic. And

we learned, in hindsight, that's because the decision-making process was churning to allow Ukraine to use these weapons in this way.

Could it make a big difference? Certainly. That's because Russia was able to keep its forces essentially right over the Russian border, very close to

the front line, which means you have short supply lines, Ukraine can now attack those forces and those supply lines. That has been a problem for

Russia since the beginning of the war. And we'll see what effect it has in the weeks ahead here.

Russia responding, perhaps very predictably, effectively saying this won't change anything, accusing the West of escalating, as they have done so many

times before, and saying that the weapons will be destroyed regardless of where they're used and threatening that Russia will attack not only the

weapons themselves, but also any country from which these weapons are launched.

So, frankly, Lynda, a fairly typical response from what we've seen from Russian leaders over the course of the past two and a half years.

KINKADE: Yes, certainly sounds that way. Oren Liebermann for us at the Pentagon. Thanks very much.

Well, ahead. One down, three to go. A discussion of when and even if former U.S. President Trump will stand trial in three other cases. Stay with us.



KINKADE: Welcome back to "First Move" with a look at more international headlines this hour. South Africa's ruling party, the African National

Congress, looks set to lose its majority after 30 years in power. Final election results are due Sunday. Early returns show the ANC leading with

about 40 percent of the vote, meaning it will likely have to build a coalition.

On Sunday, Mexico will likely elect its first female president. However, the election has been marred by extreme violence, which has increased in

recent days. The Mexican government says at least 15 candidates have been killed across the country since September. Independent organizations say

the actual death toll could be more than twice that number.

Well, Donald Trump confirmed on Friday that he and his lawyers will appeal his conviction on felony charges related to hush money payments. The former

U.S. president making the announcement at Trump Tower in New York. During a more than half hour speech, Trump blasted the prosecutors for bringing the

case as well as the rulings by Judge Juan Merchan.


TRUMP: This is a scam. This is a rigged trial. It shouldn't have been in that venue. We shouldn't have had that judge. He should have allowed us to

have an election expert. He wouldn't allow us to have witnesses. He wouldn't allow us to talk. He wouldn't allow us to do anything.


KINKADE: Well, outside, police had their hands full with the dueling demonstrations for and against Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee.

Well, a couple of hours after Trump spoke, President Joe Biden made his first public comments on the verdict saying justice was served.


BIDEN: The American principle that no one is above the law was reaffirmed. Donald Trump was given every opportunity to defend himself. It was a state

case, not a federal case, and it was heard by a jury of 12 citizens, 12 Americans, 12 people like you.


KINKADE: Well, the political fault lines in Washington have only deepened since Thursday's verdict. Jim Jordan, a top House Republican, now wants

Manhattan district attorney, Alvin Bragg, and one of his prosecutors to testify on Capitol Hill.

The hush money trial might be the only Trump related case to be heard by a jury before election day in November. There are, of course, three other

criminal cases pending against him, in Florida, Georgia, and Washington, D.C. Fifty 54 more criminal counts in all. The cases deal with Trump's

possessions of classified documents, his alleged efforts to overturn the 2020 election results.

Well, Zach Cohen is following the story and joins us now. Zach, good to see you. Let's start in this first case because Biden made it clear, the only

way to get Trump out of office is at the ballot box. What else did he say?


ZACHARY COHEN, CNN NATIONAL SECURITY REPORTER: Yes, Lynda Biden's message was very clear, it was no one is above the law. That's what the Trump

verdict. And according to Biden showed -- and he showed -- Biden really stressed that it shows that Trump was treated just like any other criminal

defendant and that the jury was selected just like any other jury is selected in a criminal case, whether it's just a normal American or a

former president of the United States.

And that's a really stark contrast to what we've heard from Donald Trump, both post and pre-verdict in this case, he's constantly railed against the

judge in this case, he's constantly rail against prosecutors in this case. And in fact, he's even claimed, without any sort of evidence, that this

whole case was orchestrated by Joe Biden, his political opponent.

And Joe Biden actually addressed that. He was asked about that today as well. And Joe Biden said, "I didn't know I was that powerful," when asked

about Trump's comments that he orchestrated this case, this criminal case against him.

So, this will continue to be a theme of the 2024 presidential election, though. It will be interesting to see if Joe Biden steps up his attacks and

his rhetoric really highlighting and emphasizing the verdict -- the guilty verdict against Donald Trump.

But for now, Joe Biden is sort of taking a more tepid approach. He is reinforcing the rule of law and that the process worked, but he's not

really using it as an attack against Donald Trump politically.

KINKADE: So, one case down, one major conviction on 34 counts, guilty for every single count. There are three other criminal trials facing Trump in

D.C., in Florida, here in Georgia. They seem to be moving at a much slower pace.

COHEN: Absolutely. And there's still a long road ahead for Donald Trump in terms of these other legal cases. You mentioned there's three more

outstanding. One, of course, is the federal Mar-a-Lago documents case in Florida. It's focused on Donald Trump's handling or alleged mishandling of

classified information.

The other is the federal case, also overseen by Special Counsel Jack Smith in D.C. It's about the Donald Trump's alleged efforts to overturn the 2020

election. And then there's the state level case in Georgia that's also looking at Donald Trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election results

there. So, all three of those still up in the air.

We'll start with the classified documents case because that one is still very much bogged down in legal work. Judge Aileen Cannon has been

criticized for the pace in which she has moved things along in that case. Even today, we saw another filing, Jack Smith trying to implement a gag

order on Donald Trump, but we still have months -- or months away from that case being ready for a trial. They're still going through their pretrial

motions and pretrial hearings.

Now, the other two are a little more interesting because we could get more clarity about a potential trial and a timeline for that by the end of this

month, that's the federal and state level election cases in Georgia and in D.C. That's going to really hinge on what the U.S. Supreme Court rules on

this issue of presidential immunity.

Donald Trump has claimed that he should enjoy vast immunity powers as a former president. He should basically be immune for anything he did while

he was president and after. So, the Supreme Court could go a couple different ways here. If they rule that Donald Trump does have extreme

immunity protections, that could mean we don't see a trial in the federal election subversion case or the case in Georgia. Those are both sort of

tied together.

But if the Supreme Court hands back a ruling that says, look, there are some things that Donald Trump is protected from, but there's other things

he is not, we could see that handed back down to the lower court and the federal election subversion case would be the one to go first. So, it's

possible that we could see another trial.

But as of right now, there's too many question marks to really know for sure what that timeline will look like and if we get any other trials of

these three cases before the 2024 election or even after.

KINKADE: All right. Zachary Cohen for us coming to us live from D.C. Good to have you. Thank you.

Well, let's take a step back and break down why Thursday's conviction is so important. This is the first time a former U.S. president has been

convicted of a crime. Trump is now a convicted felon found guilty of falsifying business records, but that doesn't keep Trump from running in

November. However, it remains to be seen how Trump's conviction will impact his campaign and the presidency.

I'm joined now by presidential historian Alexis Coe. Good to have you with us.


KINKADE: So, a convicted felon now the front runner for the Republican Party for this coming election. This is a first in history, right?

COE: It is. Yes, we have never had a convicted felon who is also running for president.

KINKADE: So, the constitution, of course, sets up the government, defines the government, protects the basic rights of the people. And of course, the

rule of law is the foundation for the constitution, which establishes that everyone must obey the law, including the government, including leaders. No

one is above the law.

How does that apply here? And what does the constitution -- what did the framers of the constitution say about the presidency?


COE: Well, it's interesting. George Washington presided over the constitutional conventions, and he did not intend to be the first

president. But everyone was looking at him on stage, thinking, OK, we know we can trust him. He's given up power once after the American revolution,

and that shocked the world. It won the respect of countries that were ruled by kings and queens and despots. It's not something you did.

So, they thought, you know, we have a lot to figure out. Let's simply leave that to George Washington to figure out in office. And he did for the most

part. And when precedents were violated, such as serving more than two terms with Franklin Delano Roosevelt, then we had additions to the

constitution. Things were codified.

But I have to tell you that there is nothing that the framers could have anticipated in particular about this situation. Richard Nixon comes close,

but that's about it.

KINKADE: Yes, I wanted to ask you about the Nixon case. Because President Nixon and the Watergate scandal, at that time, there was a very sharp

divide between the left and the right in America. That sharp division exists right now. It's becoming more entrenched. What are the similarities

and differences between Nixon and Trump?

COE: There are tremendous similarities and differences. For one, the Republican Party had started to hold Nixon accountable, which they have

refused to do consistently with Trump. There was a moment when their own personal lives were threatened on January 6th. But after that, they rallied

around him and have been really consistent since then.

With Richard Nixon in order to avoid any sort of legal action, he resigned and then, of course, was pardoned. When Ford was considering the pardon,

Pew Research Center was conducting a poll with Americans and across the political spectrum, they thought that accountability was important, that no

one was above the rule of law.

Another big difference is that Nixon wanted to retire once he left the White House. He wanted to publish books, do speaking tours, but he didn't

want to bring any attention. You know, he was happy that he had gotten away with what he did. He was not looking to tempt anyone into, you know,

putting him back in a courtroom.

We know that's not going to happen with Donald Trump, and that's significant. This is, though, something that George Washington also feared,

which was political parties, that they would be more interested in power than the rule of law. The irony, of course, is that the Republican Party

claims to be the party of law and order.

KINKADE: And so, it's interesting when you look at the fact that we've got this upcoming election. What could this conviction mean for this this

election, when you look back on history?

COE: Well, it's another interesting moment. I've spent so much time since Trump came onto the political scene as an actual contender and then as

president saying, there's no precedent for this, but there's truly no precedent for this. History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme.

And so, we can look at past conventions and wonder what will happen, if a president, even a popular president, popular within his party, one term is

primaried, meaning that there's a challenger that emerges during the convention, they might survive, but they don't do quite as well. We know

this from Ford. Ronald Reagan challenged him, and though he lost by just a bit, he was the one who got away. And that was a different scene because,

of course, the candidate was at the convention, and it's really unclear if Donald Trump can travel to the convention.

He'll be conducting -- he'll be -- you know, is four days before the convention, and I'm not certain that he's able to leave the state. So, is

he going to zoom in? That's not powerful. Someone like Nikki Haley, who came in second, is there. People are looking at her and thinking she's the

one who got away and she aggressively goes after the delegates. It could be a really interesting time.

KINKADE: Yes, you make a good point. If he can't attend the convention, how will that play out? Good to have you with us, Presidential Historian

Alexis Coe. Thanks so much.

COE: Thank you.

KINKADE: Well, still to come on "First Move," we're going to have much more after a very short break. Don't go anywhere.



KINKADE: Welcome back to "First Move." I'm Lynda Kinkade. Last day of May, Wall Street turnaround tops today's "Money Move." The S&P and the NASDAQ

bounced back strongly in afternoon trading on Friday after earlier weakness. And the Dow rallied 1.5 percent, boosted by news that a key U.S.

inflation number posted its smallest increase this year.

Dell computer was a weight on the NASDAQ, falling 17 percent over concerns of a weak A.I. server demand. And it was a volatile day for shares of Trump

Media, a publicly traded parent company of Donald Trump's Truth Social site. Shares finished the day down more than 5 percent after Trump's

criminal conviction. And it was a mixed day in Asia with Chinese stock falling amid weak factory data.

Well, let's turn now to our "Weather Move." Parts of Southern China are bracing for flooding and heavy rains as Tropical Storm Maliksi makes

landfall. Our Chad Myers is at the World Weather Center and joins us live. Good to see you, Chad. So, what's expected?

CHAD MYERS, CNN METEOROLOGIST: You know, a very slow-moving storm, and even though it's not going to have any wind with it, it's still going to

have the power to bring in very muggy air, very humid air, onto mainland China. And that will cause heavy rainfall over the next few days.

Right now, Haikou is getting some very, very heavy rainfall, could even pick up 300 millimeters just in the next probably 12 hours or so. I know

150 millimeters have already fallen. 150 millimeters is about three inches. So, just kind of -- you do the conversion there. But notice how long it

takes just to go 24 hours and not very speedy, somewhere around 10 to 20 miles per hour, 30 to 40 kilometers per hour. So, a very heavy rainfall

event here just to the north of Hong Kong and all of that water runs back down into the ocean.

They would love to have some of this water, any type of monsoon into India, where Delhi had 49.9 degrees Celsius. Celsius. That's 122 Fahrenheit. Just

a brutally hot day. How it cools down is when the monsoon comes in, the humidity goes up and it rains all day or at least most of the afternoon.

So, things cool down. That is not going to happen. Monsoon is not in the forecast for at least another two to three weeks. So, more afternoon highs

in the forties, well above 100, 110.

Here's where we are right now with the monsoon. Here's where it's raining, very heavy rain over here on the east side, Myanmar and then off, finally,

finally getting to Delhi somewhere from about three weeks from right now. Lynda,

KINKADE: Anything over 40 degrees is just way too hot. Chad Myers, good to have you with us. Thank you.

Well, still to come gearing up for the top prize in club football. A preview of what we can expect in the champion league's final, when we come




KINKADE: Welcome back in our "Sports Move." We are less than 24 hours away from the Champion League's final with Borussia Dortmund and its yellow wall

taking on the favorites Real Madrid. The match at London's Wembley Stadium pits two of England's brightest stars against one another. Real's Jude

Bellingham versus Dortmund winger Jadon Sancho, who's been on sensational form throughout this tournament. Our Don Riddell joins us now. Don, what

can we expect?

DON RIDDELL, CNN WORLD SPORT: Hopefully a great game, Lynda. Of course, we know it's always a great occasion. The Champions League Final is the

biggest club game in the world. It is the climax of the European club season.

And on paper, this one is a bit of a mismatch. We've got Real Madrid, the 14-time European champions who've won the last eight Champions League

Finals that they've been in. They've just won La Liga in Spain. So, they're on terrific form coming into this one. And they're going up against

Borussia Dortmund, a team that's only ever won the Champions League once. They've only ever played in two finals and they just limped into fifth

place in the Bundesliga.

So, if you look at it on paper, nobody's giving Borussia Dortmund a chance. It really does look like a huge mismatch. If history can be our guide, the

last four finals have only been 1-0. They've all been very, very tight. So, this one could also be a very, very tight affair.

And I'm glad you pointed out the two English stars in this one. Of course, the game is being played at Wembley. It's a different venue every year for

the final. But this one is in Wembley, in London. And whatever happens one English player is going to get his hands on the trophy, even though it's a

Spanish team and a German team in action. And both Jude Bellingham and Jadon Sancho have terrific stories this season.

KINKADE: So, if you're a betting man, Don, who would you place a bet on and what would the score be?

RIDDELL: Yes, look, it has to be Real Madrid, doesn't it? But nothing is guaranteed in sport. That's why we play the games. And if I could point to

an example of maybe why Dortmund have a chance. In 2005, I went to Istanbul to cover the Champions League Final that year. it was against -- between

Liverpool and AC Milan. I think Liverpool had finished fifth in the Premier League that year. Nobody gave them a prayer and somehow, they pulled it

off. They call it the miracle of Istanbul. So, maybe Borussia Dortmund could do something similar.

And by the way, for all that Madrid have got all the way to the final, they've actually not looked convincing in a lot of their games. They've had

to pull rabbits out the hat late in a lot of their games in order to make it to the final. So, maybe they're not quite as good as they look on paper.

Certainly, Dortmund believe they've got a chance, even if no one else believes it.

KINKADE: Well, everyone loves an underdog to win. We'll see how it goes. Don Riddell, good to see you. Thank you.

Well, finally on "First Move," winner, W-I-N-N-E-R. Bruhat Soma is America's new national spelling bee champion. The 12-year-old taking home

the grand prize of $50,000. Soma defeated all seven other finalists in the contest, winning the final spell off.




















KINKADE: Wow. He is so fast. Speaking to CNN after his win, Soma said you can't spell success without preparation.


SOMA: When they first announced that there was a spell off, my heart was pumping so fast. But then I realized -- because I was practicing spell offs

for six months, I realized that maybe I have a shot at winning. And I did.


KINKADE: Good on six months of practice paying off.

Well, that wraps up our show. I'm Lynda Kinkade. Thanks so much for joining us. I hope you have a wonderful relaxing weekend.