Return to Transcripts main page

CNN News Central

Donald Trump's Hush Money Case Trial; Defense Won't be Informed by Prosecutors Which Witnesses They Want to Call First; Trump Hush Money Jury Consists of Five Women and Seven Males; Initial Remarks in Trump's Hush Money Trial Anticipated on Monday; Overnight, Israel Launched an Attack Inside Iran; World Leaders Urge Iran and Israel to Reduce Hostilities. Aired 1-1:30p ET

Aired April 19, 2024 - 13:00   ET

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

[13:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

JESSICA DEAN, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: A jury is set. Former President Donald Trump back in a New York courtroom, opening statements could start on Monday for this historic trial. We're going to have a preview of that.

Also, Israel hits back. Retaliating against Iran. The Biden administration saying, the U.S. was not involved in any offensive operations and now the focus is de-escalation. So, what comes next?

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN NEW DAY WEEKEND ANCHOR: Plus, a rare show of bipartisanship now setting up a final vote that could finally send U.S. aid to Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan. But that very same vote could also cost Speaker Mike Johnson his job. We're following these major developing stories and many more all coming in right here to "CNN News Central".

DEAN: We are tracking day four in the historic Trump hush money trial as jury selection could be close to wrapping up. 12 jurors and two alternates have been seated. One more was selected just a few moments ago. Four additional alternates are now needed, and the judge thinks they are on track to start opening statements on Monday.

Now, ahead of that, the prosecution is playing hardball with the witness list, refusing to tell Trump's attorneys who they're -- they will call to stand first. They are not extending that courtesy due to Trump's repeated posts about the case. The defense even offered to assure the court that the former president would not post about anyone on the list. But Judge Merchan appeared skeptical that they could hold him to that.

CNN Chief Legal Analyst and Anchor Laura Coates is outside the court. Laura, we're learning more as this process continues. How are things progressing today?

LAURA COATES, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: Well, this has been quite the day. Very exciting at times to know we were that much closer to having the coveted 18 jurors. Remember, we already have the 12 who are to sit and going to deliberate. Then you have to have the six alternates.

Now, there were questions today where they could actually get to that number, given that yesterday, even those two jurors who had already been seated were that eventually dismissed. One because she felt she could not be impartial, given that her anonymity she felt had been compromised. The other who apparently had been disingenuous on a form in response to that jury questionnaire.

The question now has been whether there will be the ability to get those six alternate jurors who, we are told, are likely aware that they indeed will be alternate jurors, but they will have to still be focused, nonetheless.

I want to bring in Evan Perez because we're learning a lot of information today, Evan. It's interesting because we know that Donald Trump coming into this has said in no uncertain terms, he does not think he can get an impartial juror. That there will not be jurors in Manhattan who would be partial to him in any way. Well, the question this afternoon tends to say something very different.

EVAN PEREZ, CNN SENOR JUSTICE CORRESPONDENT: Oh, absolutely. I mean -- first of all, I mean, just think about how quickly we've actually gotten here. I mean, we had some doubts yesterday morning when you had a couple of jurors who got dismissed after they had been seated.

But the questions you see that both sides are asking are getting some very interesting response. Some of them very emotional responses from some of these prospective jurors, including people who have gotten -- went through some tough times in their life and didn't feel like they could actually serve on this on this jury.

COATES: Yes. One person had a conviction that she was found -- very personal about and the other was overwhelmed with the stress of this.

PEREZ: Just the stress of this. And you know, what really, I think it reminds us about this process, Laura, is that, you know, these are just average people. These are average New Yorkers. Average people from, you know, from Manhattan who are going to be serving on this jury. And, you know, some of them are -- actually seem to have very positive opinions of the former president.

So, the idea that everybody here in Manhattan is stacked up against him is just not true. And what you're seeing is that people are a lot more thoughtful, frankly, in the way they -- they're responding to some of these questions from the lawyers.

COATES: That's a good perspective for the idea of the justice system. A couple points on that.

One woman was saying that she believes that his policies are in line with what she wants. And he's been good for the country. But she was asked, would she feel pressure by her friends that they don't -- who don't like Trump?

PEREZ: I don't feel pressure.

COATES: She said she would not feet pressure at all.

PEREZ: She says, I don't feel pressure.

[13:05:00]

COATES: Yes. Another jury said, look, about being -- I'm not star struck. I'm from New York. We're paraphrasing here.

PEREZ: Yes.

COATES: And then there was also this question by the attorney, Ms. Necklace (ph), who has said, I'd asked the question, would you essentially have an issue with the allegation that he has been unfaithful? Which goes to the heart of it -- I mean, part of the allegations. Talk to me about that.

PEREZ: Well, yes, I mean, that's part of the response that you saw from this, where, where people are, like, having to put aside their own personal bias.

Everyone, obviously, has, their biases and that's one of the things that lawyers bring up to some of these jurors. and it's not surprising, I guess, because, you know, when you walk around New York, you know, people -- New Yorkers are kind of different, you know. And so, it's not surprising that, for example, people who are -- have views about infidelity or extramarital affairs, you know, are like, look, that's just the kind of thing that happens.

COATES: And, you know, it's interesting in this case, Jessica and Boris, because on the one hand, whether or not there is veracity to the allegations of an affair, might not even have to go to the heart of what the prosecution has to prove, right? They have to prove that there was an intent to engage in some kind of fraudulent behavior to falsify business records.

And if there was the allegation alone to motivate that, that might be part of it. But, you know, the good news in terms of looking at this whole system is that, look, you have the opportunity for impartiality. The bad news if you're Donald Trump's defense team, these are alternate jurors we're talking about. Not the primary 12 who might be ultimately deliberating.

By the end of the day, any one of the 18 who will be sat might have to take on the role of the ultimate deliberator and decide the fate of a former president of the United States some 200 days before a presidential election.

DEAN: Yes. The stakes are very high and history is being written as we go.

All right. Laura Coates for us. Thanks so much. And Evan Perez, Boris.

SANCHEZ: Let's dig deeper now with CNN Legal Analyst, Carrie Cordero. Kerry, thanks so much for being with us this afternoon. Your view of how jury selection has gone so far? I CARRIE CORDERO, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: I think it's gone pretty quickly. Really, I mean, given the high-profile nature of the defendant and the fact that this is a former president. The fact that they have been able to, sort of, keep order within the courtroom. I'm sure there was, you know, very intense security issues that go on with having the former president there all the time.

So, I mean, really sort of the smoothness with which this process has taken place this week, I think is a really great testament to all of the court personnel, of the security personnel, the way that the judge has ruled the proceedings, it's gone about as smoothly as I think one could expect given the high-profile nature of it.

SANCHEZ: I chuckled when you said keeping order in the courtroom because as we've seen before with Donald Trump and given the gag order that he's facing, that can be a challenge. I do want to ask you about the witness list because the prosecution isn't sharing which witness they're going to call up first with the defense team, something that is typically seen as a courtesy, not something that they have to do. How uncommon is that?

CORDERO: Well, so, with respect to New York law, so I'm not a New York lawyer, so I would want to know, you know, sort of those who have had that particular background in terms of the practice there. But I think, you know, it's up to the prosecutors if they have the jurisdiction to make that decision as to whether or not to share the information. Normally you would disclose that.

I think one thing the prosecutors will need to keep in mind, and the judge will have to accommodate as well, is the defense is going to be looking for every single potential opportunity to reserve for appeal in this particular case. And so, if there's any deviation from practice or precedent, then that is going to be an area that the defense is going to latch onto and they are going to use that in the future.

So, everything related to the jury selection, everything related to the introduction of evidence, all of those things, the defense is going to be laser focused on to preserve issues on appeal.

SANCHEZ: That makes perfect sense. The prosecution is essentially arguing that they are doing this. Our understanding is because of the way that Trump has posted on social media about different folks. The way that he has violated other gag orders in the past. And they're concerned that it could potentially affect the case.

Now, the defense tried to assure the court that if the witness list was shared, Trump wouldn't make a post about, say, Michael Cohen or others that are involved. The judge didn't seem to buy that argument. He seems skeptical. Could that potentially hinder the defense if they don't know who's coming up first to the witness?

CORDERO: Sure, I mean, because they have to cross-examine. And so, they want -- I mean, it certainly is in the defense's interest to have all of the information about which witnesses are going to be called so that they can adequately prepare. They have an idea of who it's going to be. But to know that on this particular day, which is always, you just -- as a lawyer, you want to be as well prepared as you possibly can be. And so, they would want to have that information.

[13:10:00]

But the security considerations, both as it pertains to witnesses and it pertains to the continued anonymous nature of the members of the jury are really important considerations in this case considering all of the attention that is given to both of them.

SANCHEZ: So, as you were answering that question, a producer got in my ear to let me know that a third alternate juror has been selected. So, they are moving at a pretty quick pace, and we could see opening arguments set for Monday. What would you be expecting then?

CORDERO: Well, for the prosecution, they are going to have to really lay out the theory of their case. So, far, based on their briefings, it appears that their theory of the case and their charging documents is that the underlying intent to influence the election is what is the basis for the felony nature of these document -- what is really a documents case. Falsifying of records. And so, they're going to have to lay out how those connections take place.

They also are going to have to lay out what they intend to present as evidence in terms of the knowledge that the former president had and the intent that he had. So, they have, I think, a tall order in order to do that.

SANCHEZ: As you were speaking, a fourth --

CORDERO: We have another one?

SANCHEZ: -- a fourth alternate juror has been empanelled. Stepping back, what's the fundamental difference in what a juror that's been empanelled on the initial 12 experiences and what the alternates experience?

CORDERO: So, the alternate, I mean, really, they should experience the same thing in terms of receiving all of the evidence and observing all of the proceedings because the purpose of the alternates is that in any circumstance that a sitting juror can't continue to serve.

And there could be a whole variety of reasons. There could be something that actually comes up, like we've seen earlier in this week where someone is then dismissed, that indicates the judge decides that person can't sit on the jury anymore. You know, it could be if someone talks to the media. I mean, there's a whole range of issues or it could be something personal of nature, you know, somebody gets sick or has a family issue and so they just can't continue to serve.

So, those alternates, particularly in this case, given the scrutiny that both the prosecutors and the defense are going to give the jurors on an ongoing basis, I think these alternates are so important.

SANCHEZ: They might wind up getting called up fairly quickly. Carrie Cordero, thanks so much for the analysis.

CORDERO: Thanks.

SANCHEZ: Appreciate it.

Jessica.

DEAN: Let's go now to the Middle East. Today, a global call for restraint after Israel appears to follow through on its vow to retaliate against Iran overnight. Explosions were reported about 200 miles south of Tehran near a major Iranian military air base.

Iran claiming it shot down three drones there. Satellite images exclusively obtained by CNN show no extensive damage at that site, and the U.S. says it was not involved in the attack. As Secretary of State Tony Blinken says, the focus is on de-escalation to avoid a broader war in that region.

CNN's Nic Robertson is in Jerusalem for us. Nic, what, if anything, is Israel saying about this attack?

NIC ROBERTSON, CNN INTERNATIONAL DIPLOMATIC EDITOR: Well, it's interesting because Israeli officials aren't saying anything about it at all. And it really does seem to indicate that we're into a period now of ambiguity and not escalation. And this is a sort of strategic off ramp that both Israel and Iran appear to be taking. The reason I say that is a few hours after the explosions were reported in Iran, I contacted a regional intelligence source who told me from all the information he had didn't appear that Iran was going to respond.

And what we heard from Iranian officials today was saying that this -- these incidents were under investigation. That the air defense systems that have been triggered earlier in the night had intercepted some objects, which in Iranian political speak really is nothing to see here. The reaction that we did see in Tehran were clearly government sanctioned, protests on the streets of Tehran, anti-Israeli -- anti- Israel protests taking place.

So, the voice that the government is speaking with is not missiles, and that was the threat, of course, by Iran's foreign minister almost as those strikes were taking place. He told CNN's Erin Burnett that there would be, instant and devastating response if Israel was to strike.

So, we don't seem to be in that place. And the ambiguity is also on the Israeli side because we're not hearing from the Prime Minister or anyone else saying, yes, we responded. We did our job. This is what we did. X, Y and Z. It's not that.

The only thing that we've heard was from a far-right member of Prime Minister Netanyahu's cabinet, Itamar Ben-Gvir. Taking to the social -- social media platform X saying, lame. And he was quickly lambasted by opposition, politician Yair Lapid, who said that this was damaging to Israel's security interests, something that could be heard from Tehran to Washington. Even neither of them actually saying that Israel had carried out the strikes, implicit in the statements. [13:15:00]

But yes, ambiguity rather than escalation. And of course, that's what, all regional partners here, the United States, European allies as well, have all been calling for. It doesn't mean the war and the tensions are over between Iran and Israel. It just means that the direct strikes are not going to happen at the moment. The red lines though are really unclear about what prevents another strike.

DEAN: Yes, it's really what underlining ambiguity, not escalation. Nic Robertson said so well. Thank you so much for that.

So, what message did Israel intend to send with this strike on Iran? And where does the risk for wider conflict stand right now? Colonel Leighton is standing by with more on that.

And a potential school shooting in Maryland foiled. Police say, a high school student wrote a nearly 130-page manifesto detailing his plans for a mass shooting. How his plot was thwarted. That's ahead on "CNN News Central".

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:20:00]

SANCHEZ: We're continuing to follow breaking news from the courtroom in Manhattan where former President Donald Trump is being tried in his hush money case. Four alternate jurors have been selected in that case. Around two more are still needed. The process is still ongoing, but moving very rapidly. Three alternates were selected just this afternoon, two of them in the last 20 minutes or so. At this pace, opening statements could start as soon as Monday. Of course, We'll keep you updated with the very latest from Manhattan.

Jessica.

DEAN: We're also going to continue to follow developments out of the Middle East as U.S. officials say Israel carried out a military strike on Iran overnight. It follows the missile and drone attack that Iran launched against Israel last weekend.

And I'm joined now by CNN Military Analyst, Retired Air Force Colonel Cedric Leighton. Always great to see you, Colonel. So, now we're kind of getting a little bit more information about what transpired last night. So, walk us through what we know about this attack and how it unfolded.

COL. CEDRIC LEIGHTON (RET.), CNN MILITARY ANALYST, FORMER MEMBER OF JOINT STAFF, PENTAGON, AND FORMER DEPUTY DIRECTOR FOR TRAINING, NSA: Yes, Jessica, there is -- so there are a lot of different things that we can talk about here. But just to show some of the video that we've seen from Isfahan here is some flashes in the sky, indicate that air defense assets were trying to shoot down whatever object was coming toward them.

So, there's several theories as to what those objects actually were. There's a lot of reporting about drones possibly being used by the Israelis. And that indicates that the Iranians at least saw something on their radars that they were going to use to go after, you know, before it hit intended targets in Tehran.

DEAN: And what about the logistics? If it was drones about --

LEIGHTON So --

DEAN: How would they travel? How would that work?

LEIGHTON: So, that's a really great question, because the distance that you have from Israel all the way to Iran is, depending on how you fly, is somewhere between 800 to 1,000 miles. And there's no way that a drone like a velociraptor drone, the ones that you can buy in a hobby store, can make it all the way without, you know, without crashing.

So, what probably happened there, if it was that kind of a drone, is that they were launched either in Iran itself or possibly in Iraq, depending on exactly what type of drone it was. So, there's some kind of mechanism or facility that the Israelis used to actually go ahead and go into an area where they could actually use those drones in a way that that would actually work and especially if they were hitting here. Chances are that they were launched from somewhere in this region.

DEAN: And as we learn more, that would be quite telling if that turns out to be the case. I also want -- if you can pull up the nuclear sites, because there are several nuclear sites here in Iran and kind of around the area where this strike happened. What kind of -- which -- what does that tell us about where they were going with this?

LEIGHTON: So, Isfahan is a fairly large city. It's about 2 million people and it has a military installation -- several military installations, actually, and a nuclear research center. That's actually the biggest research center in Iran. it is not the same place, so that's right here. It is not the same place as Natanz, which is about 120 kilometers, about 70 miles away from Isfahan. And that is actually, really, the key enrichment facility.

So, both of them are key to the Iranian nuclear program. The fact that the Israelis did not hit either one of them indicates that they had the distance and the capability of hitting them, but they chose not to.

DEAN: And that is a message in and of itself, isn't it?

LEIGHTON: It is, absolutely. And that fact that they didn't hit them was a message to the Iranians that we can do this, but we're not going to do it this time. We know that your air defense systems are vulnerable to us. We know that we can, in essence, go anywhere within Iran and destroy the things that we think we need to destroy. But the key thing is this, we can do this at a time and place of our own choosing, and you cannot stop us.

DEAN: And so, here we are now. We just heard from Nic Robertson, who categorized it as ambiguity, not escalation. And obviously the world, the U.S., very invested in this not spilling out to a broader conflict, not escalating in that region. Where do you think this goes now? Because militarily, we've had a kind of a back and forth. They're almost communicating with each other using weapons, right?

LEIGHTON: Right. Absolutely.

DEAN: And so, where do we go now?

So, one of the key things -- so, what we know what happened so far is that, you know, they extended everything in two miles -- as far as 200 miles from Tehran. And as we talked about it, it's the site of the largest nuclear research facility also a home to a military base.

But where do things go now? Well, we've had all of these things happen from the Hamas-led attack on Israel on October the 7th, to Israel invading the Gaza Strip 20 days later, then the Israeli airstrike on the embassy in Damascus, then Iran retaliates. And then, of course, Israel retaliates in response to that.

[13:25:00]

So, what will happen, I think, is that things are going to go back into the shadow war world where everything goes according to special operations dictates, according to cybersecurity type events. Things like the Shamoon virus, which Iran, threw against Saudi Arabia back several years ago.

And of course, you have things like Stuxnet, which was allegedly an Israeli -- an American project against the Iranian nuclear system. So, those kinds of things can happen and probably will happen as part of this shadow effort to really have this conflict between Iran and Israel. That conflict is not stopping, but it is going back into the recesses.

DEAN: Yes. And to remind everyone, Hamas is, of course, a proxy group of Iran and connected with them as well. So, it all ties back together. All right. Colonel Cedric Leighton, thanks so much.

LEIGHTON: You bet, Jessica.

DEAN: Opening statements could begin Monday in the historic hush money case of Donald Trump. And today's order of business, finding the last two or so alternate jurors that they're going to need. So, up next, we'll talk with a jury consultant about what both sides are looking for. Stay with "CNN News Central".

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:30:00]