Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Event/Special

Donald Trump's Hush Money Trial; Judge Questioning Trump's Lawyer and Not Receiving a Response; As Gag Order Hearing Grows Heated, Judge Speaks Up at Trump Attorney; Judge Says Trump's Post on the Jury was His Own, Not a Repost; Day Two of Trump Trial's Testimony. Aired 10:30-11a ET

Aired April 23, 2024 - 10:30   ET

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

[10:30:00]

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: Clearly, that argument is not going over well with Judge Merchan and how Todd Blanche is defending it. Right now, you see Todd Blanche saying, "No, he's attacking the people and the system for not prosecuting Michael Cohen for lying." That's because they're talking about a post where Trump went after and asked why the district attorney here, Alvin Bragg, who brought this case, did not prosecute Michael Cohen for lying here.

So, they are going through every specific post that Trump has. And CNN's Paula Reid is back here with me. And Paula, what's notable is Judge Merchan is kind of going through what we have seen, you know, Trump do on social media, his kind of tactics that you obviously, we remember well from the Trump White House.

But when Trump says, well, I just found this. I just saw this. And Trump posted that the other day saying, I just saw this statement from Stormy Daniels from six years ago where she was denying having a sexual encounter with Donald Trump. And Todd Blanche is now arguing there are two systems of justice saying that Allen Weisselberg, a former CFO of the Trump Org. and arguing about what happened to him. He's obviously in jail right now.

And the judge is arguing to Todd Blanche, there are no -- there's two systems of justice going on in this courtroom. It's not going well for Todd Blanche.

PAULA REID, CNN SENIOR LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: It's not. And let's talk about who Todd Blanche is, right? He's in the top tier of Trump lawyers. This is a serious attorney who did not show up to court today to antagonize the judge or make a scene, which we have seen with some of Trump's other lawyers. He is trying to make the best argument he can in a situation that his client has made pretty unwinnable for him.

And he, what he is trying to do is make macro arguments. About the constitution, about the system as you see there, and the unfairness. But the judge wants to go micro and go post by post by post. And arguably, Kaitlan, some of these posts are indefensible in the context of the gag order, and that's why the judge is getting really frustrated. COLLINS: And -- I mean -- but to the fact that this is where this argument is right now, where the judge is saying, oh, are you arguing that there's two systems of justice happening right now here in this courtroom? Because obviously that's what this judge cares about. He's not arguing about the broader, you know, justice system. Todd Blanche is saying, well, this is an argument that Trump has been making for a long time.

REID: And here is where things diverge between the courtroom, where that argument is not going to go over well with the judge, and then the court of public opinion. I mean, this is what Trump is trying to get across to his supporters. That this is unfair. That he can't attack Michael Cohen, but Michael Cohen can attack him. But that, in a court of law, that's how gag orders work if he is a witness.

COLLINS: And you see there, the judge responding that's just silly to the latest argument from Trump's attorney where he was saying that because the D.A.'s office in the court is not taking action for every single violation that the gag order is waived.

REID: Well, that is just silly. I mean of all the constitutional, I love a good political speech argument --

COLLINS: So, this --

REID: -- but like the idea that they waived it because they're not arguing every single violation, I mean that's absurd.

COLLINS: Yes. The judge was saying that Todd Blanche is suggesting that -- because -- arguing that the D.A.'s office and the court are not going after every single one that it's waived. I mean, that's essentially blaming them for not listing every single time that Trump has violated this gag order.

REID: It makes no sense. And then you're also inviting or suggesting that there should be more litigation, perhaps a hearing every day before court starts. That is not a serious argument. I mean, throughout this hearing, Blanche is trying to make some serious arguments about what they perceive as unfairness. These are not going to carry the day. There's not going to be winning legal arguments, but it's pretty much the best he can do given what his client has done.

COLLINS: Yes, and as we are watching this hearing right now go on, on whether or not Donald Trump has violated his gag order in this criminal hush money case, the judge is not taking well to the defense coming from Trump's team so far. He's now getting into the specifics and the nitty gritty with Trump's team. Asking how to repost to get on Truth Social. Basically asking, is the defendant here, Donald J. Trump, responsible for that? Because several of those repost that Trump has been posting are about witnesses in this case.

We are watching this all very closely to see how the judge decides whether or not Trump violated the gag order and what the repercussions for that are. We'll be right back in just a moment with another update.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:35:00]

JIM ACOSTA, CNN ANCHOR: All right. We want to give you some more tidbits that are happening from inside the courtroom. This was just happening a few moments ago. Todd Blanche, the former president's attorney, saying that Trump has a, "Group of folks who work with him and find articles that they think Trump's audience should read."

This is all pertaining to, whether or not some of these posts violate the judge's gag order, about talking about people who are involved in the case and the jury. And then this was a very important moment when the judge said there is an active action required to repost things and he doesn't buy that by calling it a repost. Your client can wash your hands of it.

That seems to be a reference to the Truth Social post where Trump was quoting Jesse Watters, who is a Fox commentator who was saying that perhaps the jury has been stacked with Democrats who lied their way onto the jury. The judge not buying some of the explanations coming from former president and his legal team.

And Merchan said at one point he wants to hear an assertion, this is important, under oath that Trump believed he wasn't violating the gag order when he made the posts at issue now. So, it sounds like the judge is turning up the heat a little bit on the former president.

I want to talk about this a bit further. Former Trump Campaign Advisor and CNN Senior Political Commentator David Urban joins me now to discuss. Our legal panel back with us, Elliot and Joey.

David, let me go to you first. You -- you've been dealing with Trump for a long time. I mean, you know that he is -- he's pretty much on top of what goes out on social media under his name. So, when he's quoting Jesse Waters like that, he knows what he's doing, right?

DAVID URBAN, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL COMMENTATOR, FORMER TRUMP CAMPAIGN ADVISER, AND REPUBLICAN STRATEGIST: Look, the former president, if anything, is very, very media savvy, right?

[10:40:00]

And he -- he's sharp. So, I don't understand, and pardon my Neanderthal brain here, but I'm not sure I completely understand that is -- that Judge Merchan asking if Trump is aware of what Jesse Waters had posted previously?

ACOSTA: Yes. David, I -- and I'm sorry to interrupt, but the judge is now saying to Trump's attorney, "You're losing all credibility." It doesn't sound like this is going well. Back to you, David.

URBAN: Yes, I was just going to say. So, I'm not sure the underlying -- what the underlying text was that Jesse Watters was putting up, but Donald Trump knows what he's put -- what he's posting. And look, the crux of this, if you take it back to what Paula was saying, I think, what particularly is irritating to the former president is that, that Michael Cohen is going, you know, on these various social media platforms every night for hours and, you know, taking a pipe to Donald Trump. And Donald Trump is not permitted to, kind of, punch back at Michael Cohen.

I think that's it, really, is the nub of the issue here. And that's what's rubbing Trump wrong.

ACOSTA: But he's got a gag order, right, David? I mean, so --

URBAN: No, no. I -- Jim, I'm not arguing --

ACOSTA: Life is tough. You know, people talk about you all the time when you're the former president of the United States --

URBAN: Yes, but you know --

ACOSTA: -- especially when your name is Donald Trump.

URBAN: Yes.

ACOSTA: Here's my question, David, because you know him well, do you think he is trying to bait the judge? Is he trying to dare the judge into doing something --

URBAN: No --

ACOSTA: -- like putting him in a holding cell or something like that --

URBAN: No.

ACOSTA: -- because he thinks it will be politically advantageous?

URBAN: No, I'm not sure that Donald Trump wants to be in a holding cell for 30 seconds. I'm not sure, you know, you see the reports from folks inside the courtroom. You know, Donald Trump doesn't do well sitting still for hours on end, right? So, I'm not sure he wants to be -- wants to go into any type of holding cell.

I just think he's just pushing back on a matter of fairness. And at some point, the judge as you -- as we're seeing here in real-time, the judge is pushing back on him and saying, look, are you telling me here under oath that you didn't know what you were doing, right? I mean, that -- that's what he's asking him right now. And we'll see how it plays out.

But again, the macro issue here is what he's -- that they're trying to argue and his lawyer is trying to argue is that there's some unfairness here where those who are on the other side of this are punching Donald Trump in the face every day, every day, every day. And he can't punch back. That really is under -- getting under his skin as you can see.

ACOSTA: Well, David, I don't mean to cut you off again, but we're looking at the side panel again and these excerpts coming from the courtroom. The judge -- Trump's former -- or Trump's attorney, I should say, saying to the judge, the court should make crystal clear what it means with the reposts. He adds that they didn't read the gag order the same way.

Joey, what do you make of that? I -- gag orders are pretty clear. Last time I -- you know, I looked into something like this, but what do you think?

JOEY JACKSON, CNN LEGAL ANALYST AND CRIMINAL DEFENSE ATTORNEY: So, they are, Jim. You know, Paula Reid made a very significant point, and that is that Trump has put his attorney in a very difficult situation.

And so, what his attorney is doing is he's trying to defend, in some respects, the indefensible. The reality is, is that, to your point, the gag order is crystal clear. You need to follow it or you're in violation of it. And let's talk about the issue of fairness. Fairness would permit him to lambaste, the D.A. day and night, the district attorney. Talk about the fact that this prosecution shouldn't have been brought. Talk about its lack of significance. Talk about why it's problematic and politically motivated. Act day, night, and in between. You can't attack witnesses, jurors, or families. What is so hard and complicated about that?

And so, you could still propagate a message if you're Trump, campaign if you're Trump, say the things you want to say, but there are limits. And not respecting those limits are highly problematic. Last point, Jim, and that's this, the judge faces a significant challenge. He has to -- the tone and tenor now. We just started the trial.

If the judge -- is to keep going and he can't do it that way.

ACOSTA: Yes. And Elliot, I mean, it says right now, one of the excerpts we're getting is the gag order here and grew heated as Merchan became increasingly exasperated with Blanche. This does not -- I mean, the judge is saying you're not giving me anything to hang my hat on. Elliot, that -- I mean, is this the way you want to start a trial if you're the defense attorney?

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST, FORMER FEDERAL PROSECUTOR, AND FORMER DEPUTY ASSISTANT GENERAL, DOJ: It's not the way you want to start a trial. But look, Joey Jackson is a skilled trial attorney. He's been there. I certainly have. There are times when you simply don't have the judge on your side and can still win at the end of the day.

But in the heat of a hearing, the judge sort of pounces on you. I think what we're seeing here though is -- you know, the judge has to put aside everything that we think or know about Donald Trump's past conduct prior to this trial, and simply focus on the specific statements at issue here. There are a few reasons why the judge has to do that. He can't simply start sanctioning Donald Trump because he's a guy that is out in the media, and for years has had a Twitter account or whatever else.

[10:45:00]

What are the specific statements in the context of this trial that might warrant either monetary or, if it came to it, a penal, you know, behind bars sanction.

And some of this is for the judge's own protection if this comes up on appeal down the road that he went too far. You know, he needs to have substantiated what he's doing. So, I think the judge is really being careful here and has to identify the specific statements and what exactly is good or bad about them.

ACOSTA: Yes. And, Elliot, we should note, one of the experts we're just getting in, the judge saying he is reserving decision on the gag order violations. We're going to get some more information as to what that means, but it sounds like maybe he's not ready to slap the former president on the wrist just yet. We'll see how it plays out.

Guys, thanks very much, for all of those insights. David, we'll get you back. Press you a bit further on what Trump has been saying around all of this. We'll -- I would like to have you back on that. Joey and Elliot, thank you as well.

And thanks very much for joining this morning. I'm Jim Acosta. Our special coverage of Former President Trump's criminal trial in New York continues after a short break. Have a great day.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[10:50:00]

COLLINS: A live look at the stage for an American drama with the biggest consequences. This morning, we have been following a hearing at 100 Center Street here in Manhattan to decide whether the first president to ever stand to criminal trial will also be the first American president to ever be held in contempt.

The judge scolding the former president's attorneys over and over. Telling Trump's counsel that his client cannot wash his hands of posts going after the witnesses and attacking them, and also commenting on the jury. Posts that potentially violate a gag order and also an ominous warning from the judge that Trump's attorney is losing all credibility with the court.

Good morning to our viewers in the United States and around the world. I'm Kaitlan Collins in New York.

JAKE TAPPER, CNN ANCHOR: And I'm Jake Tapper in Washington. You're watching CNN's special live coverage of Donald Trump on trial. Right now, court is in a quick break, but any minute, the first witness in the hush money cover-up case resumes his testimony on the stand.

That witness, David Pecker, has already walked prosecutors through some key facts about how he ran his tabloid business. Prosecutors today plan to show how Pecker chased down stories that were potentially damaging to Donald Trump and his brand, to hide them from the public. As well as how Pecker used the magazine and the "National Enquirer" newspaper to boost Trump's 2016 presidential run by attacking his opponents, Republicans and Democrats.

The Trump defense team will also get to cross-examine David Pecker. In opening statements, they previewed the plan to undermine Pecker's motives. The prosecution also plans to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Pecker, along with Trump's former attorney Michael Cohen, were at the heart of a scheme to keep the wool over the eyes of the American voters. "This was election fraud. Pure and simple."

Kaitlan is standing by in New York. Kaitlan.

COLLINS: Yes, Jake, but first, before David Pecker even takes the stand, there has already been plenty of drama inside that courtroom, with this judge and with Trump's attorneys in the prosecution. Here with me, I've got CNN Chief Legal Affairs Correspondent Paula Reid, and also CNN Chief Domestic Correspondent Phil Mattingly.

And Paula, ostensibly, this was about whether or not Trump violated the gag order, but it was actually deeply revealing and potentially problematic for Trump's attorney who just really put himself on bad footing with the judge on really what is just day two of this trial.

REID: It was a disaster for the defense. I know when speaking with them, they went in with a very well thought out plan. Now, it wasn't necessarily going to win on the merits, but they were going to argue about what they see as the unconstitutional nature of this gag order, the unilateral aspect of Michael Cohen being able to attack Trump, but Trump can't attack him back.

And this just went completely off the rails because while they wanted to do macro, big picture, the judge wanted to go post by post through each of these alleged violations of the gag order that in many instances are indefensible. I mean, you have a judge here suggesting that Blanche had already undermined his credibility with the court, as you said, on day two.

And even at one point suggesting that Trump should take the stand and say under oath that he didn't mean to violate this gag order. I mean, I knew this wasn't going to go well legally for the team, even though they had some meritorious arguments. But this was much worse than I could have expected.

COLLINS: Yes, I mean, he was basically daring Trump to say, OK, well, get on the stand under oath and say that your reposts are not what -- essentially, what we can all see that they are.

And, Phil, you know, what's notable about it is Trump has always kind of had this style of being able to say something and say, well, oh, it's just a repost, or I was just quoting someone. But the judge was getting into -- this wasn't even just a quote. You were adding words on to quotes that weren't even actually said.

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN CHIEF WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: Yes, and his lawyers actually had to answer for that and eventually acknowledge it to the point where they actually had to bring out a laptop for -- on the -- at their table and showed the tweets or posts or truths in question to verify, yes, actually judge your right about what you're talking about.

I think you make such a great point because you guys have so often broken down the complexity of being Trump's lawyer behind the scenes. But we haven't really seen it be totally laid bare in the courtroom, in front of a judge. And point after point after point from our intrepid reporters who are in the room about all of the different ways that Todd Blanche got crosswise with Judge Merchan.

All the different ways he could not answer questions. All the different ways he was challenged about his answers and was very -- it was made very clear by Judge Merchan that the answers were not fulsome enough. Did not actually answer the questions at all, and put him in a really bad position.

[10:55:00]

And, to Paula's point, it's day two. The first witness is still coming back in the next couple of minutes.

COLLINS: He hasn't even taken a stand yet today.

MATTINGLY: Yes, yes.

REID: It could come sooner than we expected, if he keeps this up. I also want to talk about who Todd Blanche is, right? He is in the -- really, the top tier of Trump lawyers. This is not someone who came to court today to score political points or antagonize the judge and then stand outside and antagonize the judge some more. This is a serious lawyer who knows that he is representing the former president in a historic case.

Now, yes, they absolutely filed some arguments that we know are just not going to win, but this is also part of aggressive advocacy of your client. But today, that really blew up in his face.

MATTINGLY: Also, I mean, I think one of the questions coming out of this is if you're a serious lawyer and there's no question about Todd Blanche's resume or what he brings to the table here, and you're arguing whether or not retweets equal endorsements. There was an actual back and forth whether or not a repost or retruth or whatever it's called, actually means the president is behind it.

With Merchan making it very clear, that takes action. You actually have to hit buttons to be able to repost. And if you're Todd Blanche, you're sitting there arguing whether or not your client actually meant or took action by retruthing something, that's where they're at right now. And how do you feel if you're at that point at this stage in the trial already?

COLLINS: Yes, it is a tough day for the retweets or not endorsements crowd.

And Laura Coates and Elie Honig are at the Magic Wall. And Laura and Elie, I mean, we're -- the judge did not make a decision on Trump violating the gag order. We're waiting to see what he decides. But any moment now we are going to see that witness, David Pecker, get back on the stand. And today could be quite revealing of why prosecutors want David Pecker as their first witness. LAURA COATES, CNN ANCHOR AND CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: It promised to be another big day in court. And of course, David Pecker, we'll remind everyone first, Elie, who exactly David Pecker is. Remind us all about the role he has played generally.

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST, FORMER ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY, SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NY, AND FORMER FEDERAL AND NEW JERSEY STATE PROSECUTOR: Yes. So, David Pecker, the prosecution's first witness and a very important one. He and Donald Trump are old friends. They go back to the 1980s together, most importantly for this case.

David Pecker was the chairman and CEO of American Media Incorporated. You'll hear them referred to as AMI. They're the company that runs the "National Enquirer", the famous or infamous tabloid. And the crux of David Pecker's testimony goes to this practice that they would engage in called catch and kill, where they would purchase the rights to a story that would have been unflattering to Donald Trump and then kill it and then not run it.

And they're going to focus specifically on three incidents of catch and kill in this trial. First of all, Stormy Daniels. This is the charge. The charge relates not to the act of catching and killing. That's not the crime, but the financing behind it.

COATES: That's also not a crime, right?

HONIG: Right, exactly. Not a crime to catch and kill. Not a crime to pay hush money. But the financing that went behind it, the allegation is that was falsified. Also, not charged in the indictment, but it will come into evidence. The scheme to catch and kill the story from Karen McDougal, who, like Stormy Daniels, alleged that she had a sexual encounter with Donald Trump. That's going to come into evidence.

And finally, there was a third catch and kill scheme relating to a doorman, Dino Sajudin, relating to untrue allegations that Donald Trump had a child out of wedlock.

Now, we got a sense of David Pecker's testimony from when he started testifying yesterday. First thing he said that was interesting. He said for the tabloids, meaning "National Enquirer", we used checkbook journalism and we paid for stories, meaning they paid sources. They used the power of their finances to shape their coverage.

Another thing David Pecker said is that the only thing that was important was the cover of the magazine. We've all been in the supermarket checkout line and seen the covers of those magazines. And finally, David Pecker said, Dylan Howard reported directly to me. Dylan Howard was David Pecker's primary lieutenant. Probably not going to testify in this case, but we're going to hear that name a lot.

COATES: But here's why it becomes important. This August 2015 meeting, right?

HONIG: Yes. COATES: It all goes back to not only his job description, but whether he was the eyes and ears of Donald Trump for these moments, which lays the foundation for why he would be called first by this prosecution team, right? That he would be somebody to say, this is all part of an overarching scheme to try to prevent this from harming the election.

HONIG: Eyes and ears, key phrase relating to David Pecker. And look today for testimony from David Pecker about this crucial August 2015 meeting. The participants included David Pecker, Donald Trump himself, and Michael Cohen, who of course will be testifying later in the trial.

And this we believe is the meeting where they first got together and discussed, OK, Donald Trump's throwing his hat in the political ring. He's going to be running for president. We need to work together to find stories that might be harmful to him and to suppress them. And also, by the way, to put out stories that might be harmful. So, when you hear reference to the August 2015 meeting, this is what they're talking about.

COATES: But really important here, Kaitlan, is that the prosecution has to actually establish, not through innuendo or intimation, that there was some sort of an agreement. Remember Michael Cohen famously testifying on the Hill and beyond to suggest that Donald Trump does not give explicit orders, more along the lines of, oh, this is a nice place you got here. Hate to have anything happen to it. They've got to actually prove some kind of connection here to give this witness the most gravitas. Kaitlan.

COLLINS: Yes, it will be fascinating to see what David Pecker could say that he heard from Trump.

[11:00:00]