Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Event/Special

Now: Jurors Seeing Trump's Tweets As Paralegal Testifies; Now: Jurors Seeing Text Messages About Stormy Daniels. Aired 11:30a-12p ET

Aired May 10, 2024 - 11:30   ET

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

[11:30:00]

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: To the jury when your client's words are printed out right there on the screen in front of them.

RON KUBY, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: With great difficulty verging on impossibility. So, what you're going to expect is that they attack Michael Cohen's credibility, which is an easy thing to do. But if you're going to win, you also have to attack the underlying story. You have to show why the account that he is giving doesn't make sense, isn't corroborated, and is totally made up. And that they are simply not going to be able to do.

The prosecution has spent a lot of time putting this case together, tightening the noose of nexus between Trump and Michael Cohen, and it is all gone in as the prosecution plan. That is, there's been no breakdown of witnesses, sudden hurdle speed bumps, or the like. Up -- you know, look, you don't know how it's going to end. But the prosecution's case has gone in remarkably smoothly.

COLLINS: And one thing that I think that's important to notice. Obviously, prosecutors have met with all of their witnesses that they are using here. And as Stormy Daniels was testifying yesterday -- or testifying the other day, and there was an argument over what she said, the prosecution made this argument to the judge that well, the defense had access to what she was going to say because after we interviewed her back in December, they had this transcript of her interview. Is it a similar situation do -- would you assume with Michael Cohen that they have an idea of what prosecutors have asked him before when they've interviewed him, and what he's going to be asked about on the stand starting on Monday?

KUBY: Well, thanks to, what we call in New York, discovery reform in 2020, where we stop the process of trial by ambush. And now, almost everything in the prosecution's possession has to be given over to the defense. Conservatives didn't like that, but they're kind of appreciating it more now at this trial.

The defense has everything. They know what's coming, and they have plenty of time to prepare. Nothing should be a surprise to the defense in this case.

COLLINS: Ron Kuby, thank you for that. We'll continue to see if something is a surprise to the defense once Michael Cohen takes the stand on Monday. I should note that as we speak, jurors right now are being shown Trump tweets inside of court, also text messages between Stormy Daniels -- Stormy Daniels' then-publicist, and Dylan Howard of the National Enquirer being asked if he was working in favor of Trump. He said their CEO, that's David Pecker, the first witness that we saw in this case, has endorsed him, but I am not. We'll see more of these text messages being read to the jury right now inside court as you are watching CNN's special live coverage.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[11:37:34]

DANA BASH, CNN ANCHOR: Michael Cohen, Paul Manafort, Rudy Giuliani, all subjects of Donald Trump tweets. All messages were read out inside court moments ago. Welcome back to CNN's special live coverage. I'm Dana Bash.

Right now, prosecutors are again asking questions to Georgia Longstreet, the first repeat witness so far in the Trump hush money trial. Why she's there is she's reading text messages about Stormy Daniels. Texts sent between her then-lawyer and a tabloid editor. And, Kasie Hunt, it's interesting. We were just talking during the break about this tactic to use Georgia Longstreet who is a paralegal --

KASIE HUNT, CNN ANCHOR & CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Right.

BASH: Paralegal rather, in the DA's office just almost as a narrator.

HUNT: Right. Because she's just the one who had the unfortunate task --

BASH: Yes.

HUNT: Of having to read --

BASH: Yes. Is that right?

HUNT: His piles and piles.

BASH: It's like the house clerk. Yes.

HUNT: Of correspondence.

BASH: Yes.

HUNT: Right? I don't know.

BASH: But talk about why this is so important, the content of what she's saying.

HUNT: Sure. So, she's talking here about what Trump did or didn't say and did or didn't do for Stormy Daniels in this period of time. And she also was talking to him about whether or not she was ready to tell her story, which of course, are two kind of key narrative threads here. And now, we see more texts showing that she followed up several times asking about AMI using the Daniels' story. And again, she ends up getting paid to stay quiet, right as opposed to telling her story here. But I am interested to know where they are -- have been going with all of these other tweets that they are putting into evidence, some of these things where Donald Trump is attacking Michael Cohen. On the one hand, his lawyer.

But defending Paul Manafort, who he would eventually go on to pardon for crimes that Manafort committed that were -- as part of all of this because that -- I have not seen the connective tissue on that yet. I don't know if you have.

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: I agree. I've been wondering the same thing. I mean, yesterday, they read a couple of excerpts from Trump's old books where he says I value loyalty. And anyone who turns on me, I turn on them. OK, I mean, if you're trying to show he's a jerk, fine. But what's the relevance of that? Meaning, negative posts about Michael Cohen. I guess I can see the relevance there that there's bad blood between the two of them.

HUNT: Right.

HONIG: But --

HUNT: It seems like there's a comparison going on though. And I'm really interested to know where they're going.

HONIG: Yes. But the Manafort, I don't get at all. I don't -- well, who cares about that? Yes.

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: You know, I don't get the Manafort thing. I -- they're going to come into evidence one way or another. And it's in the prosecution's evidence -- interest, I think, to put them on the record themselves to frame how they want -- to frame the text messages, how they -- in their own way. So, to not -- so, as to not give the defense an opportunity to do it.

[11:40:16]

MICHAEL MOORE, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Yes. I don't get the man -- I'll tell you --

WILLIAMS: Yes.

MOORE: I don't understand the Manafort thing. And I mean, I think there's going to be the development of the bad blood theory between Cohen and Trump. I mean, ad nauseam.

HONIG: That's undisputed.

MOORE: Yes. Right.

BASH: Yes.

MOORE: So -- I mean, I don't really know.

BASH: But I think if you're -- OK. So, you're a prosecutor. Where do you think they're taking this right now with getting these text messages on the record?

MOORE: I mean, I think that's right. I think by and large, they'd rather get it in themselves, they'd rather lay it out and be able to tell their story about it. They know it's likely to come in.

None of this evidence is coming in as a surprise to anybody, right? I mean, they've exchanged pretrial discovery. They all know what's there.

BASH: But it's the jury.

MOORE: That's right.

BASH: Yes.

MOORE: And so, they're each now deciding which piece they will want to play. And maybe you want to play it in your case in chief-so that you can talk about it as opposed to having your witness question about it. You know, these are things that will go into the strategy.

The Cohen staff. I mean, I think probably putting in the tweet or whatever the Trump was talking about going. I mean, that's just sort of anticipatory of like, look, don't be surprised next week when his lawyers get on his case, this is going to -- be this isn't unexpected that he doesn't like him anyway. So, that's where they should be going.

BASH: In politics, it's like putting the APO dump out yourself.

MOORE: That's exactly -- that is exactly what they did out there.

(CROSSTALK)

BASH: Yes.

JEFF ZELENY, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: And a witness in any case is not perfect.

WILLIAMS: Right.

ZELENY: A criminal case that particularly usually your witnesses are not perfect. So, I think -- I mean, in this case, Michael Cohen and Donald Trump have a ton of bad blood. The jury likely is not up to speed on all of the bad blood.

I mean, they don't know that he wasn't a good lawyer, as Donald Trump said. It is one of the reasons he didn't bring him into the White House because he was not seen as someone who was up to speed to be the White House Counsel, for example. I mean, he was a New York lawyer who handled this kind of business. So, I think it just is laying that in a relief here. So, just an interesting timeline, all these tweets and texts are.

BASH: Yes, definitely. I want to bring in criminal defense attorney Bill Brennan. He previously represented Donald Trump's payroll Corporation. Thanks so much for being here. Good to see you again. What do you think the importance of what we have seen so far this morning? We were talking about the fact that as we speak, you have a paralegal reading into evidence, some past tweets and text messages, I should say, about Michael Cohen, about Paul Manafort, and others. But talk about that, and also about Madeleine Westerhout's testimony this morning. What do you think is the most crucial that we've seen so far today?

WILLIAM J. BRENNAN, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Well, good morning, Dana. I agree largely with the panel. It's a good strategy if you have a damaging potential cross to get it out on direct.

But this week has seen this trial devolve into a sideshow. I mean, this witness, Stormy Daniels, went off the rails. And frankly, I don't know that she did it on her own.

The prosecutor, Susan Hoffinger, with impunity, flouted Judge Merchan's Twitter. He gave a crisp, clean order before she took the stand. She can say they had sex and that's it. And Hoffinger just ran wild.

BASH: Why he think she did that?

BRENNAN: Frankly, because I've -- because I think that's what she does. She overplayed her hand. She does whatever she wants. And I'm shocked that Judge Merchan let her do that because I have a lot of respect for him. I tried that last case in front of him.

And it really -- the mistrial -- although I didn't expect it to be granted. The mistrial really was very close. And who knows -- if this doesn't go the defendant's way on appeal, who knows what will happen?

And now, she's off the stand and she's on social media taunting the defendant. There's another grounds for a mistrial. I mean, every defendant in our country who is charged with a crime has the right not to testify, and the judge will charge -- the jury at some point.

BASH: Yes.

BRENNAN: If a defendant doesn't testify, no adverse inference can be drawn. She's on social media saying real men get on the stand and testify. It's a disgrace. And this really is going to play --

BASH: But -- so, I just want --

BRENNAN: I think in my hands of the defense. We haven't heard anything about the ultimate crime here, campaign fraud.

BASH: Well, I just want to let you know that what we're doing right now is showing our viewers the tweet that you were referring to. And you see it right there. Real men respond to testimony by being sworn in and taking the stand in court. Oh, wait, never mind. I mean, just -- on just there might --

BRENNAN: Dana, it's a disgrace. This is -- this is an intimidated witness. She's playing to the crowd. She loves every minute of this. This man's on trial.

Forget that he was the president of the United States. This is a citizen of our country. It could be you. It could be me. It could be anybody watching this broadcast.

It's a disgrace that this witness is out there on social media, sticking a finger in the defendant's eye. And it's a ground for a mistrial. I asked the judge --

BASH: How is it?

BRENNAN: I've got every juror pooled, did they see this tweet, and did it affect them?

[11:45:09]

BASH: Yes. OK. So, that was going to be my question, which is about whether or not -- I mean, you certainly can make the argument as you are that this kind of behavior is untoward. But as it plays into the actual case, and the ground rules of that -- not only this judge but that every case like this should follow. How is this ground for a mistrial?

BRENNAN: No, having sex with a guy you met a couple of hours earlier in a Lake Tahoe Lounge is untoward. This is mistrial material. This is -- this is having testified as a prosecution witness, she should have went back and hid somewhere and kept her mouth shut.

Now, she knows the defendant is gagged, and now she's sticking a finger in his eye by putting this post out. And it really -- look, jurors aren't supposed to look at social media. They do. These jurors should be pulled individually, each and every one of them, the 12 and the four --

BASH: Yes.

BRENNAN: The older and it's -- did you say anything that could it affect your decision?

BASH: I should add that your former client, the former president, denies that there was that encounter that you just talked about in pretty colorful terms.

BRENNAN: Yes.

BASH: So, we should put that out there on the record that that is the case. Thank you so much for joining us this morning. Appreciate it.

BRENNAN: Thank you, Dana.

HUNT: Wait. Just -- I get that he says that having sex is untoward. But I just think it's worth noting that like being married and --

BASH: Well, hold on. Yes.

HUNT: Inviting someone into the hotel, you're coming on -- sorry. BASH: I was going to -- I was -- I was going to get -- no, it's OK. I was going to get to that. I was going to -- I was going to get to that --

HUNT: OK.

BASH: With the panel here.

HUNT: Just to be clear.

BASH: I have several questions. Because you brought that up, let's start there.

HUNT: OK. I just -- you know, you can characterize it that way. I just think that it's clear that we're in a different phase of conversation about some of this stuff with women. And sure, you could say it's untoward of her to do that.

But is it more untoward of her to do that, or is it more on toward of the powerful man who is married, you know, twice, almost three times her age -- twice her age at the time, takes off her clothes -- takes off his clothes -- (INAUDIBLE) But which is more untoward? I'm sorry. I just --

KAREN FRIEDMAN AGNIFILO, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: I also think it's ironic that you know, we're sitting here talking about this mean tweet that Stormy Daniels sent out when who is the person who talks about and does these mean tweets every day all day about everybody, right? He's like, clutching his pearls about this one tweet.

BASH: Yes. Can I --

(CROSSTALK)

BASH: Can I assess? Because you worked as a prosecutor. What about the allegation before he got to the hole -- what you just talked about -- (INAUDIBLE) About the fact that the prosecutor went over the line with the questions to Stormy Daniels with the details of their alleged encounter over the rules that the judge put in place, and whether that's grounds for a mistrial.

AGNIFILO: So, if you read the transcripts about what the judge said you could do and not do. What they agreed to was they weren't going to have graphic descriptions of genitalia. That's what the prosecutor said. They had this whole argument about who can say what.

And the thing is -- and the --what the judge found was that the defense opened the door in their opening by saying it never happened, that she's lying. And anytime her credibility or any witness's credibility is called into question about something, you're allowed to ask details, and you're allowed to challenge that. They opened the door to it. So, I think he's not exactly right that they crossed over a line.

BASH: Yes.

AGNIFILO: And the judge didn't grant a mistrial motion.

BASH: I think Mr. Brennan is still with us. So, two things. First, I would -- I would love for you to talk about -- again, just for the record, your client -- your former client, I should say has said that this encounter didn't happen. But what you said about it being untoward for her to have sex allegedly with Donald Trump, Kasie's point about what about his responsibility with the wife and a brand- new baby.

BRENNAN: I agree with Kasie. I agree with you. If it happened, there's Freddie -- there's plenty to spread around.

HUNT: But wait a second. You just basically said it was untoward -- it did happen. It was untoward.

BRENNAN: -- (INAUDIBLE) the vow to criminal trial to the court of moral police here.

KASIE: You seem to have just acknowledged that it did happen though, and that it was untoward in criticizing Stormy Daniels. Look, I take your point about the tweet. In this case, he's --

BRENNAN: No, no, no. no, no, no. I can --

HUNT: All right. Go ahead.

BRENNAN: How can I acknowledge, I wasn't there? She said it happened. She said it happened based on her sworn testimony. I made that comment. I don't know what happened.

ZELENY: I MEAN --

HUNT: All right. OK.

BASH: OK. Hold on. I just want to ask you to follow up on what Karen just said. A little bit more mundane, but very important when it comes to the other idea that you brought up that there could be a mistrial. Certainly, you believe there's grounds for a mistrial because of the way that the prosecution asked questions outside the parameters of what the judge laid down when it comes to that alleged encounter. Karen's saying that's not right because of the fact that this whole situation was already out there.

[11:50:17]

BRENNAN: Well, I did -- respectfully and I disagree with Karen. I think what she just said is that the prosecution was allowed to go into this area of questioning because the defense opened the door in its opening. I wasn't in the courtroom, but we were all together that day, most of the members of the panel and myself. My understanding was that Judge Merchan in a pre-trial ruling -- a pre-daily ruling, before the jury came out, said she can say they had sex and that's it. So, that's what the rule was for that day. And Hoffinger completely violated that if that was the ruling.

AGNIFILO: But what -- BRENNAN: But I -- you can't have a witness on direct on the stand and

say, well, the opening opened the door when in the middle of that, Judge Merchan said, they can say they have sex. And that's it.

AGNIFILO: I think one other issue here, though, is that the defense attorney did not object to any of the specific questions that they then later asked for a mistrial. And I think that's one of the other issues with it. That --

BRENNAN: I'm glad you -- I'm glad you brought that up because I do have a thought on that. When -- and Karen knows, and the lawyers on the platform who try cases know. They objected -- you know, and I tried for two months with the -- with this prosecution team, most of it, and Judge Merchan.

You have to remember that you're trying to that jury. If you object to every single question, objection, objection, objection, it makes you look worried and weak. It's a fine line between when you object and when you don't.

They objected a lot. And I'm surprised that Judge Merchan on his own, didn't just call them up to the stand and say, hey, this is -- this is not what I ruled. So, you know, you can't point the finger at the defense when you're the judge and you've made a ruling and it's being ignored. My opinion.

BASH: OK. Thank you for joining us and engaging with all of us here, Mr. Brennan.

BRENNAN: Thanks for having me.

BASH: Appreciate it. And I just want to touch back on what's happening as we speak in the courtroom. The paralegal who we told you about, Georgia Longstreet, who is effectively acting as a narrator to get information into the record is going over text messages, including one showing Daniels' publicist telling the National Enquirer editor "We're not going --we're not going the Trump deal."

HONIG: Probably a typo --

BASH: I think that -- yes. We're not doing or we're not yet.

HONIG: Yes.

BASH: But it said going.

HONIG: So, we --

BASH: Quickly. The texts being shown to the jury provide firsthand information from Rodriguez and Howard. Rodriguez being a representative of Stormy Daniels. Howard being an editor at the Enquirer at the time --

HONIG: Yes.

BASH: About what was going on in 2016 without their direct testimony. HONIG: So, what this is doing is laying out for the jury. Without calling these people as witnesses, the communications that were happening -- and just to refresh people as to the who's who, on the one side on behalf of the Trump Organization, Donald Trump, maybe the Trump campaign, you have Michael Cohen represent -- negotiating along with Dylan Howard, who's over at AMI, over at the National Enquirer, and they're sort of working with Stormy's people, which is this Ms. Rodriguez, who was her PR agent and her lawyer, Keith Davidson. And this is the text of that -- back-and-forth texts between the parties. And there was a lot of stops and starts.

It looked like the deal was on, then it was off, then it was on again. Maybe she was going to sell her story to another media outlet. Ultimately, of course, Stormy Daniels ends up entering into the nondisclosure agreement, the hush money agreement with Michael Cohen and hence the Trump people. The Enquirer backs out. All of this is setting the stage for Michael Cohen because Michael Cohen is going to tell the jury about these negotiations, and prosecutors are going to back him up by saying, and here's the text that proves exactly what you just told us.

WILLIAMS: Agreed.

(CROSSTALK)

BASH: Your Honor, I rest my case.

WILLIAMS: No.

AGNIFILO: No further questions.

WILLIAMS: No, that's so funny because I saw Michael nodding and I thought you were a --

(CROSSTALK)

WILLIAMS: Sorry about that. Sorry.

MOORE: Let me -- yes. Let me -- let me say a couple of things to Mr. Brennan's point.

BASH: OK, go for it.

MOORE: And I think you're right. So --

BASH: OK.

MOORE: I mean, I do think a prosecutor owes a duty not to cross a line. I mean, and I think to the prosecutor's duty, just like a judge's day. This is a criminal case system. Protect the rights of a defendant, even though sometimes that may not be the most strategic or sexy thing to help your case.

So, getting into extraneous information just trying to get there and then saying, well, but they didn't object to it, to me is pretty weak because -- I mean, frankly, your job as a prosecutor too, is to both protect the system, protect the case and protect the defendant's constitutional rights. Because they do have rights. What I find objectionable about the tweet from Ms. Daniels is that it essentially calls into question a defendant's right to not testify. And like it or not, she's seen as a witness belonging to the state in this case.

I mean, she's their witness, just like you might have a victim of a crime. They are -- they're the -- they're seen as being attached to the state. And so, it's almost like this -- the witness for the state or who's identified as a friend of the state is now challenging him to testify.

WILLIAMS: Yes.

MOORE: And I think that's a problem.

WILLIAMS: It's so --

BASH: And I just want to -- before you jump in --

WILLIAMS: Yes.

BASH: I just -- again, just touch on what's actually happening right now. The paralegal is still in this -- in the chair. Now, the former president's defense team is cross-examining her asking about how she reviews social media. The prosecution is now objecting, and that was overruled. The question was about whether or not she reviewed Michael Cohen's TikTok recently, which is a way to get in there that Michael Cohen is being quite aggressive --

WILLIAMS: Quite aggressive.

BASH: When it comes to his hatred for Donald Trump.

AGNIFILO: Yes, so that'll be interesting next week, I was just going to say you bring up a really, really good point on that. And I -- and I do think that if they wanted to, the defense could ask --

BASH: Yes.

AGNIFILO: That the jury be polled as to whether any of them saw that --

Moore: Right.

AGNIFILO: Tweet that Stormy Daniels.

BASH: I want you to weigh in, but let's do it after --

Moore: Sure.

Bash: After the break. Everybody, stick around today. A trailer. The prosecution getting bad -- backs out of the way as we now expect Michael Cohen to testify on Monday. You are watching CNN's special live coverage.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK) END