Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Event/Special

Testimony Begins In Trump's Trial; Trump Defends Financial Recordings; Trump's Campaign Concerns And Potential Impact On Campaign. Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired April 22, 2024 - 14:00   ET

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

[14:00:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

WOLF BLITZER, CNN ANCHOR: It's the top of the hour. We're tracking the first day of testimony in Donald Trump's historic New York criminal trial. I'm Wolf Blitzer in the nation's capital. Erin Burnett is outside the courthouse in New York. Today, the former president was in court as his longtime friend, the tabloid executive David Pecker, took the stand. Prosecutors say he was a co-conspirator in the scheme to pay adult film star Stormy Daniels to keep her silent about her alleged Trump affair. Prosecutors allege false business records were used to cover up the payment, but Trump says it was standard bookkeeping.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD TRUMP (R), FORMER U.S. PRESIDENT, 2024 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: They called a payment to a lawyer, a legal expense in the books. They didn't call it construction. They didn't say you're building a building. They called a payment to a lawyer because as you know Cohen is a lawyer. He puts in an invoice so, whatever, a bill and they pay him and call it a legal expense. I got indicted for that. What else would you call it? Actually, nobody's been able to say what you're supposed to call it. If a lawyer puts in a bill or an invoice and you pay the bill and in the book, it's a little line that's a very small little line, I don't know if you could even write more than two words. It's not like you could tell a life story. They marked it down to a legal expense. This is what I got indicted over.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ERIN BURNETT, CNN ANCHOR: And the jury and the former president are going to hear much more from David Pecker tomorrow when the prosecution resumes direct examination. So let's go to our Kara Scannell. She was inside for the trial. So, Kara, you're actually there with all of the extra perspective such a tangible presence entails. What did you see today?

KARA SCANNELL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: So, Erin, I mean, this was opening statements. The big moment in this case really kicking off the trial. I would say the mood inside was serious, but there was laughter at times, too. The judge gave the jury the opportunity to take notes if they wanted to. And before openings began, more than half the jurors raised their hand, indicating they wanted to be able to do that. So notepads were handed out, pens were handed out. And then opening statements got underway with prosecutors saying that this was a conspiracy that Trump was involved in to try to bury negative stories before the 2016 election. One of the prosecutors said it's election fraud, pure and simple, really trying to focus on these catch and kill deals all around the Stormy Daniels payment that then the alleged crime was the cover-up.

That was the falsification of the business records, marking it as legal expenses when it was, in fact, according to the prosecution, paying back Michael Cohen, who advanced the $130,000 payment to Daniels. When Trump's lawyers began, we saw Trump's demeanor switch. He had initially been staring straight ahead, looking at a screen when the prosecution was talking. But when his attorney, Todd Blanch, began addressing the jury, Trump turned in his chair and was watching both his attorney and the jurors, who all were paying close attention to both the prosecution and Trump's lawyer. And Trump's lawyer saying that this was not a crime, saying that you're not going to hear from any witnesses in this case who will say, Trump told me how to book this as a legal expense in the record. So trying to distance Trump from this.

He said Trump did fight back when these allegations came out, but he said he's just like you and me. He's a husband. He's a father. So trying to make it that he was trying to protect his family, and less that he was trying to influence the election. The first witness was called David Pecker. That's Donald Trump's longtime friend. David Pecker entered the courtroom from the side door, so he had to walk directly behind Donald Trump's chair on his way to the witness stand. Now, when he was testifying, Trump was watching him intently, but Pecker didn't appear to make any eye contact with Trump. He was instead speaking to the prosecutor and turning at times to talk to the jury. Now, he was just setting up what he did as publisher of AMI.

[14:05:09]

They published a national inquirer at the time. So they haven't gotten to what the core of the case is, this conspiracy just yet. But he is setting it up for the jurors so they could understand what his job is and that they were in the business of checkbook journalism, as he put it, meaning that they would buy stories. And so establishing what his role was in this. Now, when he got off the stand after just a brief part of testimony, maybe less than half an hour, as he was leaving the courtroom through that same path, he looked over at Donald Trump's table, said hi and smiled. It was unclear if Trump had reciprocated. We couldn't see his face at that moment based on how the officers are stationed in the courtroom. But, you know, really just kind of this first day of this historic moment, as we're going to get now into the witness testimony and the core elements of this alleged conspiracy that prosecutors hope to prove.

BURNETT: All right, Kara Scannell, thank you very much with exactly what happened in that courtroom today. And what was interesting from what Kara and others have been saying and reporting here for us was that inside the court today, Trump did hold back visible reactions, which maybe is a bit of a contrast to what we had seen in some of the jury selection days, you know, when he was admonished by the judge for muttering under his breath very clearly when one juror was up for consideration. But outside the court, when he walked out today, he did have plenty to say about the witness testimony today and about how the trial he says is cutting into what he wants to be doing with this time right now, which is campaigning.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: This is what took me off and takes me off the campaign trail because I should be in Georgia now. I should be in Florida now. I should be in a lot of different places right now campaigning. And I'm sitting here. And this will go on for a long time. It's very unfair.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BURNETT: And just to be clear, in this trial, criminal trial, Trump is required to be there. In the other trials, we have emphasized that it was a decision. So we'd say, oh, I have to be here and not the campaign trail. That wasn't true. But in this case, it is. Kristen Holmes is outside the courthouse in Manhattan, obviously covers Trump and the Trump campaign. So, Kristen, how concerned is Trump's team about this trial schedule, which minus Wednesday's is anticipated to go for what, at least five, six weeks or more?

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, look, just to be clear. Donald Trump, even on a good week, is not campaigning more than two days. We have not seen that since the primary. Even during that cycle, he occasionally had several events, but it was very rare. So that is not really impacting the schedule. But I will tell you, talking to senior advisers, particularly now that it's dawned on them that they are resigned to the fact he is in this courtroom nonstop for four days a week, there is a little bit of concern. We have seen Donald Trump utilizing the cameras. But when I talk to senior advisers, they're just not sure that that's going to be enough. Now, we saw him and his team celebrating after he had this politically motivated stop at a Harlem bodega last week. But then they were dealt a blow when he was supposed to appear in North Carolina for a rally that was then canceled for weather, because there's not a lot of wiggle room here. There are only two real days that he can do any sort of campaigning, any sort of fundraising right now. So we talked to various advisers. They tell us two things.

One, you have the people who continue to insist that this is going to be good for him, that this is going to help with fundraising like we saw during primary season. This is going to help secure voters. But there are others who really aren't so sure. They know that we are in uncharted territory. They're not entirely sure how this is going to be managed on the campaign trail. And whether or not this could actually sway voters towards Donald Trump or away from Donald Trump, that's a big question for them. So right now you're seeing his team really huddling together, trying to figure out how exactly they are going to manage this schedule, looking at possible events within the New York area. But, of course, no area in New York that would possibly be more popular for Donald Trump or more conducive to having Donald Trump there, like Staten Island, for example. But now they're really trying to come up with those ideas that they hadn't really gone through before.

BURNETT: All right. Well, Kristen, thank you very much. In unprecedented times, and we are now in this unprecedented moment, Wolf, of history being made. BLITZER: Yeah, it's only just starting, too, Erin. Thank you very much. My panel joins me now. And I want to start with former Manhattan District Attorney Prosecutor Karen Friedman Agnifilo. We should note Karen is counsel for a firm that does represent Michael Cohen. But she has no contact with Cohen, does not work on his case, and there are no restrictions on what she can say about this case. Karen, why are prosecutors deciding to bring David Pecker to the stand first?

KAREN FRIEDMAN AGNIFILIO, FORMER CJIEF ASSISTANT DA OF THE MANHATTAN DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE: I think David Pecker tells a story and paints a picture of this entire catch and kill scheme that was involved in the election, trying to influence the election. And so he really has the bird's-eye perspective. And he's a co-conspirator. He's one of the criminal conspirators. He's one of the co-conspirators with Donald Trump who can talk about what their scheme and their conspiracy was. So I think it was smart for prosecutors to call him to paint that picture.

[14:10:09]

BLITZER: You know what was interesting, Elliot Williams, who's also with us. In the opening statements, Trump's defense team really called Michael Cohen an admitted liar, said he has an obsession with getting, those were their words, an obsession with getting the former president. What do you make of the way they went after Cohen?

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR: I am not surprised by that at all. A core element of what defense attorneys do is undermine the credibility of prosecution witnesses. I say this as someone who worked on narcotics cases a lot, where you've got guys with homicide convictions or sex assault convictions that you're calling up as witnesses, and the defense capitalizes on that and says that, look, ladies and gentlemen of the jury, you can't believe this person. Michael Cohen does have at least one prior conviction for lying under oath. Now, everything he's expected to say is likely to be corroborated by, number one, documents, and number two, the testimony of other witnesses. But the defense would have been remiss if not hammering Michael Cohen's credibility issues. It is defense attorney work 101, and they did it quite effectively today.

BLITZER: Some audio recordings, I take it, as well. I want you to listen to what Trump said after court today. Listen to this.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TRUMP: Cohen is a lawyer, represented a lot of people over the years. I'm not the only one. And it wasn't very good in a lot of ways, in terms of his representation. And also, the things he got in trouble for were things that had nothing to do with me. He got in trouble, he went to jail. This had nothing to do with me. This had to do with the taxi cab company that he owned, which is just something he owned, and medallions, and borrowing money, and a lot of things, but it had nothing to do with me. And when are they going to look at all the lies that Cohen did in the last trial? He got caught lying in the last trial. So he got caught lying, pure lie.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: Is he violating the gag order, Trump?

WILLIAMS: That's the enduring question of our era, which is what has Donald Trump said today that stepped up to or over the line of violating a gag order? What he did there was disparage a witness, which is pretty explicitly in violation of the gag order. Now, he can make an argument by saying that Michael Cohen is a public figure, and I'm merely engaging in public debate. But once you call into question a witness's reputation for truthfulness, which is a core aspect of their role as a witness, a judge could credibly say that he's violated the gag order here, and this is all going to be a part of this hearing that's coming up tomorrow.

GLORIA BORGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Which the lawyer could presumably do in court, right?

WILLIAMS: Sure, but different rules apply in court than, you know, with respect to, pardon me, as compared to a defendant who has already been put under a gag order to not disparage court personnel and court witnesses.

BORGER: Right.

(CROSSTALK)

WILLIAMS: So this is as close to the line as anything could be.

BORGER: You know this relationship between Michael Cohen and Donald Trump is so Shakespearean. They were so close. He admired Donald Trump, did everything for him, was the fixer proudly for Donald Trump. And now he can't stand the guy. And the feeling is mutual. And what Donald Trump wants to do is leave Michael Cohen for roadkill during this trial. That is exactly what the attorneys are going to do. And that is exactly what you heard Donald Trump doing there. And it was, you know, it's a relationship. Lots of relationships have been destroyed. David Pecker used to be close with Donald Trump, but none so much as Michael Cohen and Donald Trump here.

DAVID CHALIAN, CNN POLITICAL DIRECTOR: But as with all relationships with Donald Trump, the relationship is a one-way relationship. So while they certainly were close, I don't think anybody who knows anything about Donald Trump and how he operates would say that Donald Trump ever considered Michael Cohen some inner family member and good friend as Michael Cohen hoped he was perceived--

BORGER: But he was a fixer.

CHALIAN: -- but he certainly was his fixer. They worked closely together.

BORGER: Right. CHALIAN: But as Michael Cohen and almost everybody else that enters a relationship with Donald Trump learns, that is not an equal relationship that goes back and forth.

BLITZER: You know, I think it's interesting that while Trump is in the court trying to defend himself, sitting there listening, paying attention, he has no choice. He's got to be there, according to the judge. President Biden is out there campaigning. He's in Virginia and Florida this week, two key battleground states. This is a sharp contrast in what's going on in the presidential campaign.

CHALIAN: Yeah, and he'll be raising money for his campaign in New York at the end of the week. The contrast will be on full display at all times. I mean, today, the Biden-Harris campaign is represented by the vice president in Wisconsin talking about abortion rights. Tomorrow, as you noted, Wolf, Joe Biden, the president, will be in Florida talking about abortion rights. They're getting out to critical states, talking about issues that they think advantage them. And Donald Trump is stuck in a courtroom. And that is going to be the reality of the next six weeks here. And, yes, the courtroom has become his campaign trail.

[14:15:09]

But the courtroom also puts very strict parameters around his time. And what is the most valuable asset inside a campaign? A candidate's time.

BLITZER: He's got to be there on Monday, Tuesday, Thursday and Friday, off on Wednesday, off Saturday and Sunday. So three days a week, potentially he could go out.

CHALIAN: And look what just happened this weekend. Weather delayed him and that postponed an event in North Carolina.

BORGER: But I would argue that Donald Trump could take the opportunity. He's got the bully pulpit there outside the courthouse. He could take the opportunity to campaign a little bit if he wanted to. But instead, what he's doing is talking about Michael Cohen, talking about the unfair trial, et cetera, et cetera. But he's not going out there and saying, you know, what Joe Biden is doing on Israel is terrible or Marjorie Taylor Greene made a mistake or the Republican Party on abortion. He could use the opportunity to campaign a little bit.

BLITZER: You mean when he walks out of the court?

BORGER: When he walks out of the courtroom. But he's not doing that because he's obsessed, of course, with the trial and with trying to tell everyone how unfair it is. And that's worked for him in the past. But as you see Joe Biden out there on the campaign trail, there has to be a little bit more of a contrast drawn. And if I were working for Donald Trump, I'm wondering if the people in his campaign are saying to him, you know, you have an opportunity here. You can use it.

BLITZER: Let's see if he does. All right, guys, everybody stand by. We have more to discuss and we'll have much more of our special coverage of this extraordinary day that's coming up, including a closer look at the 18 men and women at the center of the courtroom drama. The jurors who will decide on Donald Trump's guilt or innocence. That's next.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:20:09]

BURNETT: As former tabloid executive David Pecker took the stand this afternoon here in Manhattan, more than half of the jury raised their hands when the judge asked if they wanted writing materials to take notes. And the judge has told the jury, seven men and five women who are on the 12 formal members of this, that they may take, quote, brief notes, but they shouldn't be distracted from watching the proceedings. All right. Our chief legal affairs correspondent, Paula Reid, is with me, along with CNN anchor and chief domestic correspondent, Phil Mattingly. So, Paula, I want to talk about the notes in just a moment. But first, the people sitting in that room, you've got 12 jurors, you've got six alternates. Juror number nine goes up to the judge today, or the judge has a conversation with juror number nine because this person had expressed concern about media coverage. Person went back to their seat and stayed on the jury. But we do know in the jury selection process, two people dropped out overnight, one night. So how steady is this jury?

PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: I'm actually surprised, Erin, that we haven't seen another juror remove themselves because we had those two jurors who were removed. One person just said, look, this isn't for me. People have already, I think, identified me. I want out. And then someone else who, was removed, I believe, if I recall correctly, it was by the prosecution. But here you had juror number nine come forth and say that they were concerned about the media attention. This was very much expected because we thought, OK, the jurors have had a couple of days to really absorb the task in front of them, the risks associated with this, both for them and for their families. And it was very much expected they could have an issue with a juror. She went into the side room with lawyers and the judge and came out and decided to remain on the jury. But I think this is an issue that we could see pop up again over the next five or six weeks.

BURNETT: And so the alternates really matter here. I mean, they're always there as a safety.

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN CHIEF DOMESTIC CORRESPONDENT: Right.

BURNETT: But in this case, when you consider the possibility of people leaving the trial today, it was an alternate who had a dentist appointment, I guess, and that caused the whole court to be released early.

MATTINGLY: Right. And for those who might be wondering, well, why does it matter if it's an alternate? Well, the alternate is doing the same exact process that the 12 that are actually seated is going through right now. And I think the question and to some degree is heightened by what happened today. And to Paula's point is, are six actually going to be enough? The way this trial is going to play out, the intensity of it, and I think the stakes as everybody kind of sits there and recognizes this moment and what it all means and what it's going to mean over the course of the next five, six or seven weeks. And it's only going to get more intense. And I think there's very real concern when you talk to people kind of in the political sphere is if names start coming out, people can quickly identify who's who, if they're missing from the office, if they're missing any of these types of atmospherics. There's real concern about what that would mean going forward. I guarantee you these individuals understand that. And if they don't quite have their hands around it yet, it's certainly going to become quite apparent in the weeks ahead. 12 and six, that's a lot of people. This is going to be a lengthy trial. What's going to happen? We saw today with a dentist appointment.

BURNETT: And what happens, Paula, if there is an issue, if you don't, you run through alternates or people keep leaving the jury, what actually happens to the trial?

REID: So we'd expect that would be a mistrial. If you go through all your alternates and then you're down one juror, if you get down to 11 jurors, now the defense could agree to continue with the trial with just 11 jurors. But why would they do that? That's why there's so much concern, too, about any negative attention or threats or anything that would infer a threat against the jury, because there is a valid concern about people getting spooked, those numbers dwindling and potentially creating a mistrial.

BURNETT: All right. Now, what about the notes? I want to talk about that. It's interesting. OK, this is a glass half full glass, half empty. And we're all journalists. So I'm going to just say we're biased on this. I mean, I'm thinking what? No notes like I'd be like---

(CROSSTALK)

MATTINGLY: That was literally my first thought as well. How could you not be taking notes right now.

[14:25:09]

BURNETT: So more than half raised their hand. Does that surprise you that there were only more than half? Or I mean, would you think all the would want to take notes?

MATTINGLY: I mean, I guess, again, that our bias is showing in terms of like I have to take notes on everything. I respect those who apparently have an encyclopedic slash telegraphic knowledge of everything that's happening right now. I think it's a processing. Right. We've all served on juries. I think at some point at one point or another and everybody kind of has a different way of going through the process with which they want to do things. Again, my I think what I was caught off guard by was how could you not have that to begin with? Why did the judge have to belatedly be like, hey, do you need paper and pencils on this one? That would seem to be a pretty important thing to offer from the get go. BURNETT: I mean, and Paul, I guess it also raises the question of then what is available to them sort of day in and day out. Right. So if you're sitting there, you're taking and this is going to be I mean, there's a lot of technical in here. There's a lot of who signed what when. There's a lot of detail that even if you're taking notes, you may not be able to write down. So do they have a chance at the end of every day to see what happened that day or do they not even get a transcript?

REID: So during deliberations, they would have access to a transcript until weeks from now. And that's something the judge emphasized. He said, look, your notes should not serve as your transcript. Because you can only imagine you go in with 12 different people with 12 different notes. Everyone's arguing, well, she said this, she said that. No, you can have the actual transcript requested if you need it during deliberations.

MATTINGLY: It's also the interesting point of don't focus so much on your notes that you miss what's happening in front of you right now. Right. Like the notes should not be a distraction from the actual process that you're going through watching this because so much is on the line right now. Take notes where it's helpful, but make sure you're paying attention that everything's happening.

BURNETT: So what are you understanding, Paula, happened today in terms of I mean, I know we had the first witness in these opening statements. They were long. Was everyone sitting back and listening or were there notes taken of key words and key things that were said?

REID: So it appears that the jurors were very attentive during opening statements. Trump not as attentive during the prosecution's opening statement. It does appear that they're engaged. Look, it's a group of 12 people over the course of a given day. Some people do get a little distracted, look more interested than others, but they only had about 30 minutes today of witness testimony.

BURNETT: Are they allowed to have their phones on them?

REID: Are the jurors allowed to have their phones? I do not think they're allowed to have their phones in the actual juror box. I'm sure that they are allowed to have them somewhere on the premises, but not in the juror box.

BURNETT: Wow, Can you imagine? Can you imagine these people are going through withdrawal?

MATTINGLY: Your bosses can't get a hold of you?

BURNETT: I guess. I just I think on one level they must be panicking. I mean, you're taking a phone away from a human being for eight hours a day.

MATTINGLY: Sounds great. What was interesting when you listen to the jury instructions at the very beginning, a lot of it is, I think, stuff that we would all expect in terms of, you know, the presumption of innocence that the former president has in this, that it's incumbent upon the prosecution to be able to prove their case here. But also the stuff about what you can watch and not watch. Pay attention to outside of the hearing or outside of what we're seeing in court every day, because that was challenged right off the bat, right after today's session ended when the former president came out and spoke about a number of different things that simply would not be permissible or admissible in court at all. Jurors are now basically have to be locked down. And it's not like they're in a room where there's no electronics, there's no television, there's no media or anything like that. That's going to be challenged every single day. The level and the scale of what the jurors are dealing with, given the intensity of media attention on this trial, I don't know that there's much that's comparable to it.

BURNETT: And by the way, it's impossible to avoid in any way, shape or form if they go into any part of life when they walk out of there to not see coverage of the trial, not just as anywhere in this country, but they live in New York. All right. Thank you both. As we continue our coverage here, of course, this trial is unfolding against the backdrop of a presidential campaign. And we're right in the heat of it now. We're going to go live to the White House for the Biden reaction as he's trying to take advantage of this and be on the campaign trail. Our special coverage resumes after this quick break.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)