Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Event/Special

First Criminal Trial Of A Former President Underway & Jury Selection Starts Soon; Kurt Volker, Former U.S. Ambassador To NATO, Discusses U.S. Coordinating Diplomatic Response To Iran, Seeks De- Escalation, World Leaders Urging Restraint; Tim Parlatore, A Former Trump Attorney, Discusses Donald Trump's Criminal Trial. Aired 1:30-2p ET

Aired April 15, 2024 - 13:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:33:36]

ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: I'm Erin Burnett and you are watching CNN special coverage of Donald Trump's criminal trial. It is the first one in American history of a former U.S. president.

And Trump has just re-entered the courtroom after the lunch break. Attorneys are now back in, working to select that jury.

And our Kristen Holmes joins me now.

And, Kristen, I know, obviously, we understand Trump has been very involved in court today. Present for all of it. And now back in that courtroom again. How focused is he, how concerned is he about this trial from your sources?

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes, Erin, everyone -- I'm talking to these sources -- say that no matter what is involving Donald Trump, he wants to be a part of it.

So it's not surprising to them that he is passing notes with his lawyers, that he is engaged in this process, that he wants to have his opinion known with his lawyers and the court, making different facial expressions, for example.

But when it comes to how concerned they are about this case, well, looking at the actual punishments of this case, they don't believe it's like that he's going to get something jail time.

They believe that it's like -- more likely he would get probation. They're not as worried about it in terms of the actual criminality.

However, we have to remember what is at the core of this case. And it's incredibly embarrassing to the former president at a time in his life that he really does not want to relive on cameras at a time that puts stress on his marriage with Melania Trump, the former first lady.

It's the heart of this entire issue. It's an alleged affair with a porn star and then hush money payments to cover up said alleged affair. Again, this is incredibly embarrassing and potentially damaging to the former president ahead of that November election.

[13:35:12]

BURNETT: Yes, absolutely. And as you point out, the personal plays a significant role in this as well.

So, Paula Reid, you've been obviously covering every single detail of this from -- and look, we had a gorgeous day today.

PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Thank god.

BURNETT: But you've sat -- you sat through some -- a few of icy-held days, shall we say?

OK. But now they're going back in that courtroom.

REID: Yes.

BURNETT: And you're finding out some more details here. For example, this is going to last weeks. The jury selections, weeks, but they're going to be going during Passover, which raises a lot of questions for potential jurors.

REID: It does raise a lot of questions, not only for potential jurors, but also for former President Trump, because he is, of course, trying to campaign while he is a criminal defendant here.

We know we're going to get Wednesdays off. And earlier today, you heard a warning shot from the judge that if there are unnecessary delays, he will actually start holding court on Wednesdays.

But then they also talked about Passover. And if you read the transcript from the last time this issue came up, the Trump defense team asked to have next Monday and Tuesday off so that at least one member of the team could observe Passover.

The judge appears to say, yes, that shouldn't be an issue. But a short time ago, when they were discussing this in court, he backtracked and said, no, we are going to have court in those days, but it'll get out at 2:00 p.m.

Now, the Trump team, the legal teams is, obviously, inside court, but I would expect that this might become a bigger issue.

Because they could potentially argue that folks who are very observant, potentially Orthodox Jewish members of the potential jury pool, may not want to participate, right, on Monday or Tuesday while they're selecting a jury if this is how it's going to go forward.

So I think this is an issue, while it seems like scheduling, this could become something more significant.

BURNETT: Absolutely, it would seem right because they think, well, that was then prevent jurors who may be, you know, more -- more likely to want to hear Trump's side of this from -- from joining the jury to begin with. So you know what's interesting, as we talked about, and the president

has been at every sidebar conversation, in the room every day, not only does this deviate from what he has done in the past, but it also shows maybe something -- you know, you've got up the sourcing and the thoughts on this.

But sure, if he's guilty here, he can spin it and say it's a witch hunt. He can do that. But it's still better to be exonerated.

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Oh, no question about it.

(CROSSTALK)

MATTINGLY: Or try and find a way to frame it as an exoneration, even if it's not by the technical sense of the word.

BURNETT: Yes.

MATTINGLY: But I think, what Paula gets to the point that I think is, bigger picture, really important, you may be looking at today and saying the jury went on a lunch break and they haven't even actually started the selection process yet, what the hell has been going on over the course the last four or five hours?

It's shaping. Everything that's been happening, the back-and-forth between the judge and the defense team, the judge in the prosecution, the president deciding that he wants to go up on sidebars, shaping what lies ahead, knowing that every single day of this trial -- Kristen hit at the very, very personal nature of what's going to be happening.

There's kind of a big picture narrative of, well, this trial is the least of the problem -- the least problematic of the four indictments. This is the --

(CROSSTALK)

BURNETT: I want to know what --

MATTINGLY: -- is the runt of the litter, if you will. There are legal questions. There are actual -- if he gets convicted, those questions, what it would actually entail.

The reality is what his defense team is doing, what the former president has been doing on social media repeatedly, what he's apparently going to be trying to do it in the courtroom as well, everything is driving towards trying to shape the perception of what happens in the weeks ahead.

They know how embarrassing these issues are. They know how deeply personal these issues are. They're trying to grab that narrative, regardless of the outcome, and seize it on the front end. It's something they're going to do throughout the next couple of weeks.

BURNETT: One quick thing here. I've been part of jury selection multiple times, 25-year New Yorker. So different courtrooms, different courts.

But it is amazing to imagine, just from the perspective of the jurors walking in, knowing that they're potentially part of this.

REID: Yes.

BURNETT: Often, I will admit, when I've walked in there, it's sort of are you kidding me? Can we please not get selected?

But -- but yet, they are walking into the situation, just regular people, on this momentous day right now, right? They go to Chinatown, have their lunch. There are certain rituals of New York jury duty that New Yorkers are aware of.

And yet, this is an unprecedented moment for these jurors.

REID: It is. It's historic. It's one of the key factors in this case, which is pretty much everyone in that pool of potential jurors will know former President Trump. And will have an opinion about him.

And that's why his lawyers believe they're going in at a disadvantage. They said, look, this jury pool is going to be skewed against our client. And they believe that the system that is designed to weed out bias is not going to be sufficient.

That's why they tried unsuccessfully to move the venue. But they're going to ask people, if you can't be impartial, to leave, right, in those for-cause dismissals.

And then they're going to go through a smaller pot of people and ask them more detailed questions to try to get a group of people who can listen to the facts of this case -- that people know at least a little about it -- and possibly make the right decision about this defense.

BURNETT: Well, and people that -- all citizens hope they make -- you know, make the right decision. They're part of history. And these are serious moments.

Paula and Phil, thank you.

[13:40:01]

All of us, of course, still staying here. And much more of our coverage of this historic trial ahead.

And another story were watching as well right now, Israel deciding how it will respond to the barrage of missiles launched from Iran. And we are learning more details right now about the Biden administration's response at the White House. That's right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: Welcome back to our special coverage. I'm Wolf Blitzer in Washington.

The U.S. secretary of state, Antony Blinken, says the United States has spent at least 36 hours coordinating a diplomatic response aiming to prevent a broader escalation following Iran's attacks on Israel.

[13:45:01]

And President Biden is making it very clear the United States will not take part in any counterstrikes against Iran.

I'm joined now by Kurt Volker. He's the former U.S. ambassador to NATO.

Ambassador, thank you so much for joining us.

What do you think the U.S. is doing behind the scenes right now? Give us a little sense.

KURT VOLKER, FORMER U.S. AMBASSADOR TO NATO: Well, I think they're looking at alternatives to military action, to put some kind of pressure back on Iran. I think they are definitely talking with our allies in Europe, but also allies in the Middle East region, particularly the Arab states.

And they are trying to do so in order to reassure Israel that there'll be a sufficient response to Iran that would justify Israel not taking more military action itself.

I have to say, I think that this is unclear whether this is going to succeed. The issue I think in the Middle East region is that Iran has struck Israel directly from its own territory and would appear to be getting away with it if there's no further military response.

And that creates perceptions in the Middle East about lack of U.S. support for Israel, our resolve about Iranian strength in the region.

BLITZER: Good point. In addition to a potential military response, we're now told the Israeli war cabinet is also mulling various diplomatic options to further try to isolate Iran on the world stage. What options might that include?

VOLKER: Well, it's going to be very difficult because you have Russia that is going to stand with Iran. China will probably not take part in any diplomatic sanctions against Iran either.

So it will be regional, perhaps. You might get closer alignment between Arab states and Israel and European allies. But that might be as bad as far as it goes.

And there would probably be some effort to sanction Iran economically as a way of putting some counter pressure on them again.

BLITZER: President Biden has urged Israel not to retaliate and says the U.S. won't take part in any counterstrikes against Iran.

What do you see Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu doing here? It's obviously a very, very sensitive -- very, very sensitive, and potentially extremely dangerous situation.

VOLKER: Well, it's a very difficult situation. And taking options off the tables, such as saying that, well, the U.S. will not take part in any strikes against Iran, that is actually giving the Iranians more confidence and it is putting Netanyahu in a very difficult position.

In the earlier segment, you were talking about the Gulf War when we persuaded Israel not to respond to scud missile attacks. But that time, the U.S. was directly involved in military action on its own. And Israel could have confidence in that.

This time, we're telling Israel not to respond and it's unclear what will be happening. And we are making clear that we will not be taking part in any military action.

BLITZER: Very quickly, before I let you go, Ambassador, you're the former U.S. ambassador to NATO. Israel is not a member of NATO. But what -- what do the NATO allies do as a group, if anything, in dealing with this crisis?

VOLKER: Well, there's two aspects to this year. The first thing is that the U.S. is going to be taking the lead in setting the tone, setting the policy. And our European allies will want to be as supportive as possible.

And it's noteworthy that France and the U.K. took part in the defense of Israel the other night alongside U.S. forces.

But the other aspect of this is that NATO is an Article Five security guarantee. And the idea is that if there's an attack on one, it's considered an attack on all. And there is meant to be a military response.

People assumed that the relationship with Israel would be very much the same as if it were in NATO. But just a bilateral commitment from the U.S.

And having this now where there is an attack on Israel and no direct military response and the U.S. taking military options off the table, I think there could be very worrying for some of our European allies facing Russia?

BLITZER: Yes, it's an important point.

Ambassador Kurt Volker, thanks so much for joining us. Thanks for all your service as well.

[13:49:09]

And we'll have much more coming up. Our special coverage of the criminal trial of Donald Trump has now begun in Manhattan. What does the former president's previous history tell us about how this case may actually unfold. We'll discuss with the former Trump lawyer. That's coming up next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:53:09] BURNETT: And were back now with our special live coverage of the criminal trial of Donald Trump. And court resumed moments ago, with jurors back in there for selection.

And joining me now is one of Donald Trump's former attorneys, Tim Parlatore.

And, Tim, really appreciate your time.

So you have obviously worked with him. You've been in situations in front of these judges. What do you make of the reporting here that Paula has been breaking, that Trump has been present. It says he's going to be present at every single one of the sides bars that happens in the courtroom.

We haven't seen him do that before. So what do you think it says that he's going to do that? And as an attorney, how does that make you feel?

TIM PARLATORE, FORMER ATTORNEY FOR DONALD TRUMP: Well, it's not something that I usually like for clients to do.

You know, if -- if the client comes up with you at every single sidebar, whether it's to question the juror during the jury selection, or whether it's to discuss some point of law with the judge, I think that it is something that can be potentially disruptive.

Potentially, have the judge in an off-the-record setting not be quite as open with the attorneys. And so it's not something that I would normally prefer for a client to do.

But it is something I've seen clients do, particularly when they have concerns about their legal team or when they want to try to -- try to project an image that they are involved.

BURNETT: And obviously, you would -- in this case, you think it's which one of those were both?

PARLATORE: I think it's probably a combination of things. I think that he definitely wants everybody to see that he's involved, I think he's kind of learned that lesson from the Jean Carroll case. And so I think that's probably the primary motivator here.

BURNETT: So, Tim, I know that you have obviously argued in front of Judge Merchan. What's your opinion of him?

[13:55:00]

PARLATORE: So I liked Judge Merchan. I tried a case in front of him several years ago, the World Trade Center base jumping case. That was another media case. And so he had to sit through jurors, half of whom had read all the news reports about the case.

And I found that, you know, outside the presence of the jury, was he a pro prosecution judge? Absolutely. Did he beat the hell out of me outside the presence of the jury? Absolutely. But once a jury came into the room, he was very good at keeping it

fair, not letting the jury know where he sat on the case. And moreover, giving the attorneys leeway really try the case the way that we each wanted to ensure that the jury came to a fair and just verdict.

BURNETT: I want to bring Paula in because I know, Tim, Paula has some new reporting about what's happening in the courtroom right now.

And what are you learning, Paula?

REID: So we're learning that one of the last things they're going to do before they bring in this pool of potential jurors, they're going to have a hearing that would set the parameters of a possible cross- examination if Trump testifies.

Now, I'm told from my sources this is still very much a possibility in this case.

Tim, if you were still representing Trump, what would you advise him about testifying in this case?

PARLATORE: Well, it's very risky to me to ever have your client testify. It's not a decision that I would ever make until after the prosecution rests. And you really have to see, have they met their burden? Do we need to?

Because far too often, having a defendant testify is one of those unforced errors that, if you're ahead, just let it be.

And because once the defendant takes the stand, the jury will look at that and they'll say, do I think that he lied to me about anything? Because if they think that the defendant lied to them about anything, no matter how minor, they're going to be much more likely to convict.

BURNETT: And Tim, to that point, who's on the jury is going to matter so much.

What -- what can you take away from what we understand so far? Right, obviously, we've got this 42-question questionnaire that some of the jurors are going to get when they kind of get through the first screening.

That the judge is talking to them individually and asking, quote, unquote, "intimate questions", whatever that may specifically mean. What do you think about it?

PARLATORE: I think that the process that Judge Merchan is putting in place, he really wants to try and avoid appellate issues. I mean, we've had major trials that have been overturned on appeal based on improper jury selection issues.

I mean, most recently, the death penalty case in the Boston Marathon bomber was overturned because of that. So I think that that's really what he's trying to focus here on. Because we want to know as much as we can about each individual juror to make sure that you see 12 people and two alternates that can really put aside any of their personal prejudices and listen to the facts and evidence and decide the case based solely on.

So I think that's really what he's going to try and bend over backwards to do.

BURNETT: All right. Well, Tim, thank you very much. We all appreciate it.

PARLATORE: Thank you.

BURNETT: And next hour, we have much more on this historic moment here in New York, outside the courtroom where I am with Phil Mattingly and Paula Reid. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)