Return to Transcripts main page

Laura Coates Live

Laura Coates And Guests Discuss The Latest In The Federal Trial Of Sean "Diddy" Combs; Diddy's Close Friend Speaks Out; Laura And Guests Answers Viewers' Questions; Musk Formally Ends Time In Government; One Year Since Trump Was Found Guilty OF A Felony. Aired 11p-12a ET

Aired May 30, 2025 - 23:00   ET

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

[23:00:00]

ABBY PHILLIP, CNN ANCHOR AND SENIOR POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT: Here's more home cooked meals.

ARTHUR AIDALA, CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: Yey. Friday nights.

PHILLIP: My friends. My friends, Chef Ginevra, thanks for cooking for us.

GINEVRA IVERSON, EXECUTIVE CHEF, FOOD NETWORK: Thanks for coming. Thanks for being here.

PHILLIP: And to our friends of the show, thanks for being here.

Thank you, everyone, for watching, and to the Food Network for letting us crash for a night. Thanks for watching "NewsNight." We will see you tomorrow morning at 10 a.m. with our conversation show "Table for Five." Don't miss it. And you can also catch me any time on your favorite social media platforms, X, Instagram, and TikTok. "Laura Coates Live" starts right now.

LAURA COATES, CNN HOST AND SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Well, tonight, the defense for Sean "Diddy" Combs gets their chance to challenge one of his accusers. Will the jury see a victim or a contradiction? Plus, President Trump wading into the case after he is asked if he would consider handing Diddy a pardon. All this on a special edition of "Laura Coates Live: Diddy on Trial."

Well, good evening, I'm Laura Coates, and welcome. On day 13, here we are, the trial of Sean "Diddy" Combs. There was a tense back and forth between the defense and the second woman to accuse Diddy of sexual abuse.

In just a moment, my team of legal experts and court insiders will look at whether Diddy's legal team moved the needle in challenging one of the prosecution's arguably strongest witnesses.

And we heard a lot from the former assistant known to the public only under a pseudonym, Mia. She recounted more instances of abuse, of blackmail, saying that she feared not just losing her job, actually, but her life. Now under cross, the defense suggests that she made up her sexual abuse claims. The jury also saw several social media posts showing media -- Mia praising Diddy even after the alleged sexual assaults.

Before the defense took their shot, Mia had a lot more to say about Diddy's threats. She described one trip that she and Cassie took to South Africa, a trip that quickly turned dark. Diddy, he was back in Miami trying to get Cassie to talk after she found out that he had been with another woman. Mia testified that Diddy flooded her with threatening text messages over a period of days, saying, he was threatening my job, and then he threatened to kill me.

Now Mia claimed that Diddy attempted to blackmail her on that very same trip, saying that Diddy threatened to tell Cassie what he had done to Mia, as if the alleged sexual abuse was somehow Mia's fault or that she was a willing participant.

The jury saw one text from Diddy to Mia that said this: If you don't call me now "F" it all. And I'm going to tell everything. And don't ever speak to me again. You have 2 mins. "F" her.

Now Mia, she eventually left her job in 2017. But that wasn't the last time she heard from Diddy. She told the court that Diddy and his longtime security guard, mentioned throughout the entire trial, D-Roc, reached out to her. When? Well, it was after Cassie's lawsuit was filed in 2023, saying, Puff wanted D-Roc to get me and make sure that I wasn't a threat.

And just before lunch, defense attorney Brian Steel got his chance to cross- examine Mia. He put up several posts from her own Instagram account. Now some of those showed photos of Mia standing close to Diddy. Others showed her showering him with praise, calling him a mentor and inspiration.

Steel pressed her. Quote -- "On the fifth anniversary of the initial sexual abuse, you are saying to Sean Combs on your social media account for everyone to see: Thank you for being the good kind of crazy and continuing to inspire me every day, right? Mia replied, I don't think people wrote bad stuff about their life on Instagram back then.

Now the defense also suggested that she outright fabricated -- fabricated her sexual assault claims three different times. In one exchange, Steel asked, isn't it true that Mr. Combs never had unwanted non-consensual, forcible sexual contact with you, isn't that true? Mia responded, what I said in this courtroom is the truth. I have not lied to anyone at all.

Steel asked why she worked for Diddy so long and for so long, and spoke positively about him despite her claims of physical and sexual and emotional abuse. She told the jury, I was young and manipulated and just eager to survive. Nobody was there to say these things that were happening were wrong. I was always in trouble, and I was always just trying to find a way not to be in trouble.

You know, we are now three weeks into this trial. [23:05:01]

But the drama is not limited to Courtroom 26-A in Lower Manhattan. Today, the president of the United States, Donald Trump, weighed in. He was actually asked if he would consider or had considered pardoning Diddy.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: I haven't seen him. I haven't spoken to him in years. He used to really like me a lot, but I think when I ran for politics, that relationship busted up, from what I read. I would certainly look at the facts. If I think somebody was mistreated, whether they like me or don't like me, it wouldn't have any impact.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Let's begin with editor-in-chief of All Rise News, Adam Klasfeld, our eyes and ears in court today. Adam, you were there. You saw the way this cross and the testimony came in. The defense suggested three different times that the woman who is called Mia made up the allegation of sexual abuse and assault. The exchange, the way you read it in the testimony and transcript, seems harsh. How did it play in person in front of that jury?

ADAM KLASFELD, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF AND CO-FOUNDER, ALL RISE NEWS: It was just as combative as the transcript suggests. Brian Steel didn't hold back. He didn't soft pedal the question.

And as you saw in the transcript, Mia didn't back down. She seemed a little taken aback, she -- as if she didn't understand the question at first, but then she said very firmly and assertively that she was telling the truth, that she was lying to nobody.

And that was something that was a constant throughout her testimony, that she was confronted with these social media posts, primarily her Instagram posts. And she acknowledged that these were hers. These were things that she wrote. And she was very confident in talking about that. She said that that's just related to her trauma.

COATES: She was very emotional throughout her testimony. Her voice almost a whisper at times, I understand. And she was -- did not want to be there. She wanted to take a lot of the information that she says happened to her. And she testified today that there was nobody -- this stuck out -- there was nobody around us that ever even flinched at his behavior.

Obviously, this goes towards this notion of an enterprise of people working together to silence those who were being victimized allegedly. But how did the jury react to the way that she was testifying and even that part about nobody flinching?

KLASFELD: That's -- it's very interesting, you point out that line, because at that very moment, I was looking at the jury and jurors were taking notes. And, as you noted, Laura, I mean, that line is very significant because of the top racketeering charge. Prosecutors are alleging a criminal enterprise.

And multiple jurors, it resonated. They were pretty much all business for hours, just seeing the exhibits of the social media posts. They were doing their jobs and -- and passing around the sketchbook at one time.

But when it came to that testimony, they started scribbling in their notepads. Now we don't know what caused that, we don't know what precipitated that, but we knew that they were engaged, and we know that that's very important testimony to the prosecution's case.

COATES: It really is. And, of course, trying to read those tea leaves in the version of notes in those moments really can be impactful. Adam, thank you for being our eyes and ears. Glad to have you on.

KLASFELD: My pleasure. Thank you.

COATES: Well, my all-star attorney panel is here with me as well. We've got Monique Pressley, who has represented in the past Bill Cosby, constitutional attorney and white-collar defense lawyer Seth Berenzweig, and Benjamin Chew, former co-lead counsel for Johnny Depp during his defamation trial against Amber Heard.

Ben, I want to start with you because in our conversation, even yesterday, we were trying to figure out how the cross was going to go. The optics, because she was so emotional. Even more so, frankly, in terms of the tears and the sobbing than even Cassie Ventura had been throughout the course of her testimony. Not comparing the traumas that they had both alleged, but it was notable just how emotional she was.

And you thought that the defense had to handle her with care. Did they accomplish that?

BENJAMIN CHEW, CO-LEAD COUNSEL FOR JOHNNY DEPP IN HIS DEFAMATION TRIAL: No, I don't think so. I think with a witness like that, as we discussed last night, you have to be very careful. This is a likable witness, a credible witness, and you have to have a much lighter touch.

To say abruptly, isn't it true you didn't have forcible sex with Diddy? How, of course, is she going to answer that? But, of course, it's true. I would never make this up. And -- and as your reporter said, she had a very strong, firm response to that. I don't know what he gets out of that. And this other question, what if you're not the victim? Well, I am the victim. I don't think any of that would have played well before the jury.

COATES: What do you think? You -- you're a defense attorney and have done a lot of work in this area. How would that approach have resonated with you?

[23:09:59]

Would you have taken the approach of challenging her in that way? I mean, in a way, Diddy is fighting for his life, and his attorneys have to perform for him as well. Would you have taken that tactic? MONIQUE PRESSLEY, TRIAL ATTORNEY: Right. And sometimes, it's not even the tact you take, it's which lawyer you use for the tact that you take. And so, I was more interested in the choices being made because, as you said, if they're going to go hard and they feel like they have to for whatever reason, maybe they've got facts. We don't know about yet.

And so, they view the witness on the stand as being a fraud, being a liar, being someone who's pretending with all of these tears but really behaved a different way.

Well, if you're going to show me that in this cross-examination, I need to see it early on or you're running the risk of really alienating the jury. But then, unfortunately, we're still in a very sexist society and you don't know what jury you're dealing with. So, if you have a woman who maybe could handle these hard questions in a softer way, maybe you use that strategy.

But I didn't have an issue with the fact that they had to ask these hard questions because I think, frankly, that's their obligation. You can't soft pedal with a witness who, from their perspective, is on the stand crucifying their client and -- and falsifying testimony before the jury.

You've got to figure out a way to get somewhere in the middle of the road, and I think maybe it's with strategy instead of with the actual words on the page.

COATES: Really important point. He's got, like, eight or nine attorneys, by the way, several of whom are women. And I -- I wondered about the tactic they've used, which counsel. By the way, the prosecution, also all women. So, the idea of how they have decided to divvy up the work is also great (ph). They all have different styles and personalities.

But to the point of what they have to prove in the prosecution -- I mean, they had testimony that came in, that Diddy was trying to blackmail her as well, either taking photos off her phone, putting them on his own phone, dangling this idea that she had sold sort of a comedy series to ABC and then saying, I'll -- I'll get rid of that unless you have Cassie call me back, all these things. Does that fit the kind of pattern that you need to establish th0at RICO charge?

SETH BERENZWEIG, WHITE COLLAR DEFENSE LAWYER: In my view, it does. And I think the prosecution has done a very solid job so far. Now, make no mistake about it. There's still a long way to go in this case. And they have to continue to -- to develop the evidentiary scaffolding.

But I thought that they have done a tremendous job with the witnesses. Let's just continue to focus on Mia. One of the things that was interesting, you talk about a criminal business enterprise, which is --

COATES: Uh-hmm.

BERENZWEIG: -- one of the evidentiary requirements. They covered a lot of that with her, other witnesses as well, but they're covering members of the business enterprise who are essentially, you know, participants in this whole element.

And, you know, you were talking about some of the underwhelming questions that counsel asked today in identifying the elements of the business conspiracy. Remember, this is a corporation. This is -- this is a historically rare theory that a business, extremely rare in recent modern American business history, has been used to facilitate -- basically him running an empire as a sex mobster. They talked about, for example, the H.R. department.

And one of the questions that they asked Mia was, and this takes victim blaming to a whole new level, they said, well, did you report the sex "freak-offs" to H.R.? And she said, no, of course, I didn't because they're just going to protect him.

COATES: Yeah.

BERENZWEIG: So, I thought that was pretty underwhelming as well.

COATES: That's an important part because that goes to the idea of the -- the inner circle and the realm that they're trying to establish. But just playing devil's advocate, I mean, you know, RICO cases are very hard to prove. And checking those dots in real time to a juror who's watching and wondering, am I seeing a toxic, harmful, violent relationship? Am I seeing RICO? How can you bridge it? Of course, the closing will do a lot of that.

But then there was this moment about her testimony where she said that she believed that she -- she had -- he had reached out to her last year, around the time that lawsuit came out from Cassie Ventura. D- Roc, the security guard, has also been mentioned. That to kind of make sure she wasn't a threat. If you're the defense counsel, how do you guard against the idea of witness tampering?

CHEW: I think that's very difficult. And those -- those facts are -- are really bad. And the fact that D-Roc was involved makes it seem much more like an enterprise. It's not Diddy himself making the call, it's one of his employees. So, I think that's a damning fact.

COATES: He called as well. But you're right, D-Roc was a part of it in thinking it. But then, again, when you're building a case for defense, you want to know who might be in your camp. Right? You have to explore in some respects who -- who does not have this vision of you. They have to build a case. Right? A defense.

PRESSLEY: Yes. And also, the fact that if you're, like, a close to billionaire person running 30 different businesses, you don't make every call about anything. You don't make most calls. So, the -- the obligation for the defense, if they choose to put on a case, will be to do some of what the assistant did, where the assistant was trying to explain.

[23:15:03]

Now, he wouldn't have known how many bottles of baby oil there were because he was -- he's running a global empire and that's just not the things that they do.

And I think maybe some people, typical jurors, might not have understanding how little of a person's life, like Mr. Combs, actually touches grass, as the kids would say, and how many things are actually done by other people, and to not import meaning into that that isn't there.

And I'm not saying it is or isn't there in this instance. Maybe D-Roc was the henchmen who did all of the strengthening of situations for him and shoring it up and fixing it.

But it could also be the case that this is just not a person who did a lot of anything on his own. Everything that happened was call this person, get this done, do that, while he focused on other things.

So, I think that that will be their job, to bring that kind of revelation to a jury.

COATES: A really important point. And just to remind people, we'll -- we'll come back with more information. Cassie Ventura testified that D-Roc was one -- and his wife were a couple that she went to when she needed to feel safe at times. You have to bring that into how that -- how the defense will bring that into the conversation. As much as he was part, she claims everything else.

I'm curious to see how, when she comes back on the stand, Mia, on Monday, that sort of cooling off period where the jury has to remember key moments, how they'll play it.

We have a lot more to talk about. Stand by. Much more to get to, including reaction from one of Diddy's close friends who has been at court most days. That friend is actually standing by. Plus, you all sent in a lot of questions on this case. We're going to answer them ahead.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:20:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: Well, while some people in the industry are dropping Diddy, others are standing right by his side. One supporter was in court today to support Combs, music producer and longtime friend of Combs, Charlucci Finney. He even walked out of court with Combs's kids. And he insists that Combs is innocent of the sex trafficking, the prostitution, and the racketeering charges that he faces.

And Charlucci Finney joins me now. Charlucci, I see you outside of court nearly every single day. You --

CHARLUCCI FINNEY, FRIEND AND SUPPORTER OF DIDDY: Yes, ma'am.

COATES: -- are wearing "Free Puffy." People know that you are in full support of him. You have been speaking to him as well. Can you tell me and share how Diddy is feeling about how this trial is going? FINNEY: He's -- he's just confident, he's prayed up, and he just -- you know, he's just pretty much confident about telling the truth and getting the truth out there, and explaining his version of what's going on.

COATES: You know, when you watch him in court, he is staring straight ahead. He is hearing from people who were very close to him at one point, Cassie Ventura, his ex-assistant Mia among others. He almost seems very stoic and not like he's reacting in real time to it. Has he shared any thoughts about what it was like to hear people like Cassie Ventura allege the things that she has, or Mia, as she's known in court, allege what she has alleged?

FINNEY: It's for sure heartbreaking. Right? Because these are people that you trust, people that you actually help make money with in and for, and people that you looked at as family, and to -- and to -- and to hear the outlandish things that they're saying. Right? And then -- and -- and then try to embellish even more on top of it is -- is incredible. And then to be the victim of hearing it is crazy.

COATES: Why are you so confident that it is embellishment? Tell us about what you know about Diddy that makes you confident that you think he'll be acquitted.

FINNEY: Well, only God knows if he's going to be acquitted. Right? So, I -- I -- we -- we -- we have prayed up. And as far as we know him, I know the man. Right? I know him. He's a father, he's a brother, he's a -- he's an uncle, he's a cousin, he's a producer, he's a philanthropist. We all fall short sometimes. We all make mistakes. Right? And -- and this is not about the mistake he made. This is about something else.

COATES: What is it about to you? Because they talk a lot about -- I mean, you're calling them mistakes. And, obviously, the allegations, they go beyond, you know, a slap on the wrist. They're talking about rape. They're talking about predatory behavior, among so many other things.

FINNEY: Yeah.

COATES: What -- what do you think is this -- this is really about if it's not about pursuit of trust?

FINNEY: I don't know. I -- I -- I really don't know what it's about, but I know that, like you said, it's allegations.

COATES: Uh-hmm.

FINNEY: It's -- it's one person, two people telling you a story. It's a story. It's something -- something somebody is telling you. But we -- that's why we -- that's why we're in the court of law and that's why we're on trial, to prove his innocence.

COATES: He is --

FINNEY: Two sides of the story. COATES: He is presumed innocent.

FINNEY: Hundred percent.

COATES: You will not get argument from me. And, of course, it is the prosecution who has to carry that burden. And we -- we don't know how the jury is seeing and viewing any of this.

FINNEY: Um --

COATES: Go ahead.

FINNEY: What I can say is that the jurors -- the jurors are smart jurors. They're paying -- they're paying close attention.

And the judge is a young but very smart, no nonsense judge. I like this judge. He's not -- he's not going for no kind of craziness on his -- on his watch. He's checking the defense. He's checking the government. And, you know, he's giving clear and decisive information and direction to the jurors. And they're paying attention.

So, you know, I feel good about where we're going, and I feel good about when our team delivers our case.

COATES: You know, I -- I certainly appreciate the way the judge is handling this.

FINNEY: Yeah.

COATES: There is an element of fairness, and I don't think either side has escaped his notice or critique at times.

[23:25:01]

FINNEY: Absolutely.

COATES: But you mentioned putting on the defense case. Do you think Diddy is going to testify? Do you have any idea of who might go and be on the stand?

FINNEY: I don't think you'd be able to keep him off there.

COATES: Really?

FINNEY: Because I don't -- I just don't think so because he's -- he's charismatic, he's smart, and -- and -- and he doesn't have anything to hide. He doesn't have anything to hide.

COATES: Well, you know, with all the allegations that have come in, I have to tell you, I'm not sure how many more skeletons could allegedly be in one's closet than what has come out in terms of what they have alleged. It's that end.

I have seen his family in court. I've seen his mother, his sister, his children, his daughters. Of course, his sons are there as well. Not the youngest among them. What has it been like for his children, some of whom lost their mother tragically just a few years ago?

FINNEY: Yeah. I want people to take -- understand that as well. These are -- these are children. Right?

COATES: Uh-hmm.

FINNEY: The only living parent is Puff. Right? They have to sit there, maybe 10 feet, 15 feet away from their father. They can't hug them. They can't kiss them. They got -- they got to whisper to him and throw signs and stuff like that to show them that they love him. And, you know, it's -- it's heartbreaking for the girls. He wasn't there for the graduation.

COATES: Uh-hmm.

FINNEY: He wasn't there for the prom. You know, he wasn't there to, you know, to send him off to school and none of that. So, you know -- you know, it's heartbreaking.

COATES: You know, I did have a conversation last night. We had Suge Knight on the program. He was calling in from prison. He was talking about similarly what you talked about, whether Diddy should testify. He seemed to think that it was in his best interest to testify. Otherwise, people would be, like, he has something to hide.

Now, obviously, the jurors are going to be instructed that you cannot hold against somebody who doesn't choose to testify.

FINNEY: Right.

COATES: But one thing he did say was he believed that Diddy would be okay because he thinks that President Trump would ultimately pardon him if he were convicted. President Trump was asked about that today, if he would pardon Combs. And he didn't dismiss the idea. But if Combs is pardoned, do you think -- if convicted, will the president pardon him?

FINNEY: I would -- I would hope that he do. I would hope that he would look at this case and see that this is -- this is a bunch of trumped- up charges because if you look at it, only thing they've shown you, right, to date, this is probably what, the second, third week of trial. Right?

COATES: Uh-hmm.

FINNEY: Everything the government promised you, they have yet to show you. They promised you -- they promised you all this stuff. Only thing they showed you was domestic violence, drug abuse. They have not showed -- they have not showed you the machine. They have not shown you racketeering. They -- they showed you the man. They showed you drug addiction and domestic violence. They haven't showed you anything else.

And this case is not about domestic violence, it's about the other charges that they brought upon him, and he has yet to prove that. COATES: Well, of course, they will try to show these so-called predicate crimes fall into what you've described. But hearing about domestic violence, about the drugs, were you surprised when that testimony came in? Do you believe any of it?

FINNEY: I mean, you saw what I saw. So, the drugs, I was surprised about the drugs. I didn't -- I don't know -- I don't know -- I don't know Puff do drugs. Right? So, me hearing it for the first time, yeah. You know, we were shocked, his kids were shocked, his mom was shocked. We didn't -- we didn't know he was doing drugs. We didn't know Cassie was doing drugs. We didn't -- this is a part of their life that they kept to them. That was their thing.

COATES: The violence? How about that?

FINNEY: I mean, they had a strange toxic relationship. You know what I'm saying? John B had a record a long time ago, and the song went, they don't know about us. That's their -- that's their connection. That's their love. That's their strange way of connecting. I mean, they don't work for you, don't work for me, but that's them, that's their relationship.

COATES: Somewhere, I hear John B saying, don't bring my name into this case, thank you very much.

(LAUGHTER)

Somewhere, I hear it, Charlucci Finney.

FINNEY: I'm talk about the song.

COATES: Okay. I know. I know the song. I love the song. Charlucci Finney, thank you for joining.

FINNEY: Thank you.

COATES: Do any of you have a burning question about the Diddy trial? Well, just ask us. Go to cnn.com/diddyquestions because our legal experts are answering your questions next.

And ahead, it was Elon Musk's last day in the White House. Is the bromance really over?

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:30:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: Well, you all sent in tons of questions about the case. So, tonight, it's time for "America Asks: Diddy on Trial" edition. And for those of you who are at home who want to participate, you can go send us your questions by going to cnn.com/diddyquestions.

My panel is back with me, and I'm glad they are. So, let's see. Ben, this is for you. Our first question is from Ashlyn from South Carolina. Given the high-profile nature of this case and Diddy's celebrity status, what steps are being taken to ensure that jurors remain impartial and are not influenced by media coverage or public opinion?

CHEW: That's a great question. Judge Subramanian has instructed the jurors not to discuss this with anybody else, including other jury jurors, until they begin deliberation, nor are they allowed to watch any social media or any show like this that has to bear on the trial.

COATES: Well, that seems unfair. This is Laura Coates, so it's fine. Monique, I have a question for you. Martin from Maui asked this: If convicted, can the defendant receive a pardon from the president and walk free of all the charges? And if so, how soon after sentencing could the president pardon the defendant?

PRESSLEY: Oh, hello there, Martin. He doesn't have to wait for a sentencing at all. He can decide right this very moment because these are federal charges that he wants to take out that pen that he has been using for pardons quite a bit lately.

[23:35:06]

I don't know what the going rate for one is right now in the United States. But whatever that rate is, he's got a lot of money. So, it's possible before the end of this trial. We don't know if it's going to happen. But I think when the president was asked, the fact that he didn't say no, no, I'm going to wait to see what the jury does, is an indication that it could happen.

COATES: We'll see. I saw -- I heard the shade about the money aspect of it. Preemptive pardons, as you articulate, though, are something that even President Biden also engaged in critically, many thought.

Seth, this is from Judy in California. And here is her question. Why was Diddy not charged with drugs and weapons in his hotel room when he was arrested?

BERENZWEIG: Well, I think that was because they were basically incorporated into the predicate acts for the RICO action. You -- you have the evidence that's laying out the foundation for the corrupt business enterprise. So, you're talking about arson, kidnapping, coercion, and -- and all of those pieces and -- and guns, prostitution.

So, I think those are incorporated into the overall texture of the case in terms of the predicate acts that make up the RICO, and those pieces of evidence have always been very persuasive.

So, keep in mind, and this really points to an interesting element, when those search warrants were executed and even when they went to arrest Diddy, they found, and the FBI agent testified to this, they found cash, lubricants, drugs --

COATES: Light machines?

BERENZWEIG: Yeah. It was -- it was -- it was pretty incriminating. So, since you have those pieces, those are going into the predicate act foundations that the prosecution is putting forth in their case here.

COATES: Well, we'll see if those are part of the pattern of the so- called "freak-offs" that we're talking about in this.

Ben, Lauren from New York asks, why didn't the defense question Cassie about her financial situation? Was the defense concerned that probing into her finances might be too risky?

CHEW: Yeah. That's another great question. I think that's part of it. It -- it also goes back to the old adage, don't ask a question on cross-examination to which you don't know the answer. They may not know the answer, so they stayed away from it.

COATES: And she's not required to hand over her data. It's the government who has to hand over their evidence only.

CHEW: Exactly right.

COATES: Monique, here's a question from you. Avery from Scottsdale asks, what is the difference between domestic violence and sex trafficking?

PRESSLEY: So, there's -- there's a big difference. Sex trafficking involves intimate partner or actual sex in traveling across state lines for those purposes. Domestic violence can be emotional abuse. It is physical abuse. It can be holding against one's will. It all involves an intimate partner-type violence, but not necessarily sex.

And what we're seeing in this case is that we are hearing a lot of evidence about one thing, domestic violence that, perhaps, some years ago could have been charged against this defendant, but is now not -- not able to be because of the expiration of the statute of limitations.

And there's sex trafficking. And I'm not really certain. I hear my colleagues, but I'm not really certain at this point whether the people who were trafficked are actually part of the scheme that the prosecution is trying to prove. That's something that's going to remain to be seen over time.

COATES: You're all so sharp. Thank you so much.

Much more on the Diddy trial on my new CNN podcast, "Trial by Jury." You can listen to it on CNN.com or wherever you get your podcasts.

A golden key, a black eye, and a goodbye. All of that at the White House as Elon Musk formally ends his government gig. I'll take you there next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:40:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) TRUMP: I have given it to some, but it goes to very special people, and I thought I'd -- I'd give it to Elon as a presentation from our country.

ELON MUSK, CEO OF TESLA MOTORS, LEADER OF DEPARTMENT OF GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY: Thank you.

TRUMP: Thank you, Elon.

MUSK: Thank you.

TRUMP: Take care of yourself.

MUSK: Thank you.

(APPLAUSE)

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: And that's a wrap. President Trump thanking Elon Musk for his service today with a golden key to the White House as Musk finally bids farewell to DOGE in Washington.

What started off as an ambitious project to slash wasteful spending didn't exactly go as planned, but it has been quite the journey, starting with that unusual Oval Office press conference where he held his son on his shoulders, the time he pulled out the so-called chainsaw of bureaucracy, to Musk stealing the show at the first Cabinet meeting. Who can forget the Tesla car show on the White House lawn?

Well, today may have been an official goodbye for Elon, but both he and Trump did acknowledge it's certainly not the end.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Elon is really not leaving. He's going to be back and forth, I think. I have a feeling. It's -- it's his baby, and I think he's going to be doing a lot of things.

MUSK: So, I look forward to continuing to be a friend and adviser to the president, continuing to support the DOGE team.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: With me now, CNN media analyst and senior media reporter for Axios, Sara Fischer. Sara, welcome back. Glad to have you here. I mean, you heard Trump, and he said that Elon is not really leaving. Earlier in the week, though, there was a group of people, investors from Tesla, who wrote a letter to the board demanding that he commit to a full time 40-week work schedule. So, which is it? Is he really not leaving or is he going back?

SARA FISCHER, CNN MEDIA ANALYST, SENIOR MEDIA REPORTER FOR AXIOS: He's leaving. But Trump, I think, is saying that because he wants to keep this relationship together. He has so much to benefit from being affiliated with Elon Musk.

Remember, Elon Musk still owns the most important social discourse platform in the world. Donald Trump has, you know, nearly 90 million followers on X. X is favoring Trump -- pro-Trump accounts. So, Trump wants to keep this relationship together.

[23:45:00]

Elon Musk has donated a lot to Republican campaigns. So, I think when Donald Trump says that, you know, he's not going anywhere, it's not because Elon Musk is actually staying and he's not actually going back to Tesla, it's because he just wants to make sure that relationship stays put.

COATES: Well, he certainly is staying put with his goal. He is still touting the successes of DOGE or that prospectively could happen. He told reporters that he is confident that we'll see a trillion dollars in waste and fraud reduction. That was the original goal. We haven't seen the full transparency or even that trajectory panning out as of yet. But how realistic would that be?

FISCHER: I mean, outside experts put the amount that's actually been saved with DOGE at about 16 billion. So, you're looking at a pretty big delta to get to 1 trillion. We also just -- you know, the House passed this big, beautiful spending bill. So that also makes it tough when you think about cutting waste and government waste.

But I think for Elon Musk, what he realized in this entire experience is that there are a lot of challenges that you're going to face when you try to cut red tape. In particular, the courts.

A lot of what they tried to do, various agencies, in cutting back spend, got taken to course and it became very difficult for them to cut what they wanted to cut.

It's a little bit different from the private sector. I think that he felt like he could move a little bit quicker than he could in government. I wouldn't be surprised if he got frustrated and maybe even, Laura, a little bored.

COATES: I want to read for you what "The New York Times" is reporting. And it's about his drug use, they say. That during the 2024 campaign, it was quite more intense than previously known. And they added, Mr. Musk's drug consumption went well beyond occasional use. He told people that he was taking so much ketamine, a powerful anesthetic, that it was affecting his bladder, a known effect, by the way, of chronic use.

CNN has reached out to Musk's representative for comment, and here is what Musk had to say about the reporting. Listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

UNKNOWN: There is a "New York Times" report today that accuses you of blurring the line between -- MUSK: Is the New York -- "New York Times." Is that the same publication that got a Pulitzer Prize for false reporting on -- on the Russiagate? Is -- is it the same organization?

UNKNOWN: I got to check my Pulitzer -- my Pulitzer counter.

MUSK: I think it is. I think it is.

TRUMP: It is.

MUSK: I think they -- I think the judge just ruled against "New York Times" for their -- their lies about the Russiagate hoax, and that they might have to give back that Pulitzer Prize. That "New York Times," let's move on.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Well, last year, he did publicly acknowledge using a small amount of ketamine. Why do you think his tune has changed? Obviously, they're talking more than a little.

FISCHER: I just think this was an opportunity to hit the "Times" and hit the mainstream media. I don't think Elon Musk is actually that ashamed of his drug use.

One thing that's really interesting, Donald Trump is the most sober person in politics. Like, he has a family that came from alcoholism. He has been very clear with his kids. No alcohol, no drugs, no tattoos. And so, it's funny to see them juxtaposed right next to each other. Right?

Elon Musk, you know, being sort of open about his drug use and his recreational life. Donald Trump, say what you will about him, is a pretty buttoned-up guy when it comes to substances.

And so, it's funny that they have this great relationship and that he had to address that in front of Trump, and Trump just seems to sit there and nod along when he hits the "Times."

COATES: Compartmentalization for whatever reason, I think, is quite clear. He -- but Musk did try to distance himself from the Trump White House in a new interview. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

MUSK: It's not like I agree with everything the administration does. So, it's like there's -- I mean, I agree with much of what the administration does, but we have differences of opinion. You know, the things that I -- I don't entirely agree with. I don't want to, you know, speak up against the administration, but I don't want to -- I also don't want to take responsibility for everything the administration is doing.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

COATES: Explain what you think is going on here. FISCHER: Oh, that's the Tesla manufacturing in China rolling in the back of his head, Laura. He's got to run businesses that need to do business with other countries that we're currently in trade and tariff standoffs with. And so, when he goes back to his job at Tesla and his other companies, the number one thing that he's going to have to focus on is the economy and working with those partners. Of course, he wants to distance himself from the chaos up back home.

COATES: Sara Fischer, thank you so much.

FISCHER: Thanks, Laura.

COATES: One year ago, in a downtown New York courthouse, the president was found guilty of a felony. Does it matter anymore? You know, I'm going to ask the man who wrote the book on the case, "New York Versus Donald Trump," next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[23:50:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COATES: You know, one year ago, then candidate Donald Trump was found guilty on all 34 felony counts of falsifying business records by a jury of his peers. The hush money case was once described as the runt of the litter, juxtaposed to the other three criminal prosecutions that were brought against Trump at that time.

And as a new book points out -- quote -- "Jack Smith and his admirers underestimated Trump's knack for tying the federal system in knots. To the horror of those who wanted to see Trump destroyed, Alvin Bragg's trial would be going first."

As the story goes on, that was the one and only case to reach a trial.

[23:55:00]

Now, one year on, Trump is still fighting the verdict.

With me now, criminal justice reporter for "The New York Times," Jonah Bromwich. He's the author of the brand-new book, "Dragon on Centre Street: New York vs. Donald J. Trump." It's available in stores right now. Really compelling.

Jonah, a year after Trump was found guilty in that hush money case, how is Trump reshaping in a way the judiciary?

JONAH BROMWICH, AUTHOR: What we're seeing from Donald Trump right now, just a kind of a year after his case, is that he is attacking judges throughout the country in the same way that he attacked judges during that criminal case in Manhattan. What we saw there was him really going after Juan Merchan, who was presiding over the trial, as corrupt, as biased, as somehow unable to sit over the trial and make sure that it was fair. And we're seeing that same thing in kind of a more broad view as Trump acts really energetically, really aggressively to enact his agenda. So, any judges that get in his way are kind of receiving the same treatment that Merchan received in Manhattan.

COATES: Is he more powerful now? Obviously, with the elevated platform, he can amplify all of his concerns. But this is second term, post-conviction. Is the power different now?

BROMWICH: I think he's significantly more powerful now, and there's a couple of reasons why. One is the Supreme Court's presidential immunities -- decision, which prevents Trump from being held accountable for acts he takes in office. That's really important, and it gives him kind of free rein to do a lot of things that, I think, he would have been constrained from doing in his first term.

There's always also, of course, the fact that he has filled the Department of Justice and other high-level roles with people who are really loyal to him and people who understand his desires and his policy aims and how to go about executing them. So, that's a big difference.

And then, finally, I think that this Manhattan criminal trial really taught Donald Trump that the rule of law, even kind of giving him its best shot at a criminal conviction, didn't stand to harm him in the way that so many of his critics imagined it might.

So, put all those three things together, and I think you see Trump unchained in a way that he was not during his first term.

COATES: You know, you're right about the -- the unique credibility that his followers believe he now has as well as a result of having gone through this trial.

And you actually underline, I'm quoting here, "A large part of their strategy involved burying the judge in aggressively worded motions, some of them repetitive, requesting everything from a change in venue to overturning the gag order that kept Trump from attacking witnesses and jurors."

Now, when you look at how the administration really is testing the courts today, Jonah, that strategy hasn't changed. In -- in many respects, it has exponentially increased.

BROMWICH: That's exactly right. The trial is really the dress rehearsal, I think, for so much of what we see in Trump, too, including exactly the strategy against judges, not only attacking them outside of the courtroom but within court, filing motions, requesting them to look at issues that many lawyers would normally never ask to be looked at because they're not the kinds of things that lawyers usually bring.

But Trump's lawyers are very aggressive in fighting on these procedural grounds, on these kinds of ticky-tack grounds.

COATES: Uh-hmm. BROMWICH: And in doing so, they often manage to -- to push issues to appellate courts and often even to the Supreme Court. And in doing that, they delay the proceedings, they stretch out the proceedings, and the executive branch and Trump have more time to execute their policies while the judges are deciding what's legal and what's not.

COATES: Speaking of his attorneys, he has elevated a number of his former personal attorneys. Emil Bove has -- from him to a powerful role to federal appeals judge. You got Alina Habba to interim U.S. attorney for New Jersey. Todd Blanche is serving as deputy attorney general. They actually lost the cases they worked in. But how did they fail up in the end?

BROMWICH: Yeah. It's a good question. So, to take Todd Blanche and Emil Bove for a moment, aside from Alina Habba, they handled three of Trump's four criminal cases. And so, there's really only one that went to trial, the one that I read about in the book, and that's the one they lost.

But the two federal ones, they won, and they won not by going to trial and seeing that Trump was acquitted, but by delaying those trials until

after the election by following Trump in his belief that the political is paramount and the political Trumps the legal every time.

And so, I think Todd Blanche and Emil Bove, despite losing the Manhattan criminal trial, really understood the politics that animate Trump, understood that he never really wants to concede anything that would compromise his image as he likes for it to be understood by his supporters. And in doing so, they -- they -- they carried out his desires, and I don't think it's any surprise then to see them so high up in the Department of Justice.

[00:00:01]

COATES: Jonah Bromwich, thank you so much for joining. The book again is "Dragon on Centre Street: New York vs. Donald J. Trump." And, hey, before we go, be sure to check out the new episode of the CNN Original Series, "My Happy Place." This week, Octavia Spencer, she finds comfort in New Orleans. That's Sunday night at 10, only on CNN.

Thank you all for watching. "Anderson Cooper 360" is next.