Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Event/Special

Pecker Admits He Killed Stories "To Help A Presidential Candidate; Soon, Fourth Day Of Testimony In Trump Hush Money Trial Resumes; "MisinfoNation: The Trump Faithful" Aires Sunday Night At 8PM ET/PT. Aired 1:30-2p ET

Aired April 26, 2024 - 13:30   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:31:35]

WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: Welcome back to CNN's special coverage of former President Trump's criminal hush money trial. Courts is now in recess for a little bit longer.

Tabloid executive, David Pecker, will be back on the stand in minutes. But before the break -- they took a lunch break a little while ago -- prosecutors were trying to re-establish David Pecker's credibility after the defense exposed some small inconsistencies in Pecker's statements.

I want to bring in jury consultant, the president the Decision Analysis, Richard Gabriel.

Richard, thanks so much for joining us.

There was a moment today where Trump attorney, Emil Bove, drilled down on David Pecker's 2018 interview with the FBI and some inconsistencies between notes from that interview and Pecker's current testimony emerged.

How do inconsistencies like that weigh in a jury as they look at a case?

RICHARD GABRIEL, JURY CONSULTANT & PRESIDENT, DECISION ANALYSIS: Well, I think it's more about how the jury already has viewed the witness, whether they feel that he's been authentic and sincere and straightforward with them.

If they feel that he's been kind of a little bit shady in some of his answers, even on the direct testimony, they don't particularly like him, then they can see those inconsistencies as really key to credibility problems.

But a lot of times, we do focus on sort of minor points and whether that really does it. And sometimes, it's a forest for the trees-type of issue. The jury is really looking at, well, what does this really say? Is this really a bad conduct here? What does it really say about the witness? These small inconsistencies tend to not have that great an impact unless there's sort of a big blow to the witness' credibility. So I'm not sure it's going to have a tremendous effect at this point.

BLITZER: Yes, interesting.

Many of the key points the defense is trying to make are very, very nuanced, shall we say? Does the defense run the risk of making an argument too complicated for a jury?

GABRIEL: There is that definition. The problem here is that it's trying to establish what it needs. The credibility is one thing, but I think one of the things they are trying to establish here is just, again, trying to normalize the behavior.

So as opposed to saying he's not necessarily credible, they're saying, look, this is something, and it's one of the primary arguments that the Trump team I think is making in the case, which is this is just politics. This is not necessarily a criminal conduct.

And I think he's hoping to reach some of the jurors on here. This is why jury selection can be so important.

Because you've got two lawyers, two engineers, people in wealth management, and whether they're going to interpret this testimony to really say, OK, is this actually illegal versus just politics as usual.

BLITZER: Trump's attorney, at one point -- I thought this was interesting -- also apologized to David Pecker over confusion in the questioning of whether Hope Hicks, former Trump aid, had come up in an interview with the FBI.

From your experience, does a defense attorney apologizing to a witness have any sway on jurors?

GABRIEL: Typically, no. I mean, it depends how -- how big it is. I mean, you know, it really has to do with how hard they're going. It doesn't sound like they're going after him very hard on this.

And so it's -- it's sort of this convivial type of thing. There's always this sort of delicate balance because the attorney can lose credibility also if they go too hard after the witness because then it highlights their testimony.

[13:35:01]

To a certain extent, I think they want to make a few points and then get this witness off the stand hoping to make stronger points on credibility with Michael Cohen and some of the other witnesses.

BLITZER: Does the mood change, Richard, in a courtroom when the defense gets to cross-examine a prosecutor's witness?

GABRIEL: Well, yes. I mean, it -- what the defense always hopes is that they can take over the case at that point, because obviously the prosecutors control the evidence and the flow of the facts at that point.

And so it is an opportunity for the defense attorneys to sort of try to take back control, try to reestablish some of their themes, try to impugn the credibility of the witness, try to score a few points.

But ultimately, it's -- they have to make a judgment call in terms of how strongly do you then want to highlight the witness' testimony? Because the more time and energy you put into cross-examining that witness, also it can tend to highlight some of those things or the witness can do very well.

And so it's a judgment call for a lot of attorneys, do I stand or do I get out and cut my losses?

BLITZER: Our team in the courtroom, Richard, they've been paying very, very close attention to the jurors, the 12 jurors, who they say have been following with their eyes the back-and-forth between the Trump attorney and Pecker, for example.

What does that say to you about how intently the jury is paying attention to this case?

GABRIEL: Well, we -- obviously they know it's a pretty important case. So they're very tuned in. And you know, this is the first witness on the stand. So jurors' attention is at its highest on the first witness.

Opening statements are critical because they sort of established the story that both sides are trying to tell. And the first witness sort of -- it's kind of, OK, how is the evidence going to support either the prosecution's case or the defense's case.

So they're tracking it very closely. You've got very smart people on this jury who clearly want to pay attention. So I think obviously they're very keen on trying to figure out, what does this witness mean? If this goes on for weeks and weeks and weeks, you may see some of their attention wain.

And also, I think both sides have to be careful because sometimes redundancy can tire a jury out and they can kind of go like I kind of got the point here and they want to move on.

Even though the attorneys want to score that one little extra point.

BLITZER: And they're paying really, really close attention right now, as they clearly should.

Richard Gabriel, Thanks so much for your expertise.

GABRIEL: Thank you.

BLITZER: And just ahead, we'll have much more of our special coverage of this historic hush-money trial of Donald Trump, a week unlike we've ever seen before. Court resumes in about 40 minutes. Much more of our special coverage right after this. (COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[13:42:18]

BORIS SANCHEZ, CNN HOST: Welcome back to CNN special live coverage of Donald Trump's historic first criminal trial.

Any moment now, former tabloid executive, David Pecker, is set to return to the witness stand to continue his fourth day of testimony. Earlier today, he underwent cross-examination by Trump's defense team before facing redirect questioning by prosecutors.

Pecker has been on the stand for just under 10 hours over the course of these four days.

We're joined now by John Dean. And he's a CNN contributor, former White House counsel in the Nixon administration. He also co-wrote the book, "Authoritarian Nightmare, Trump and His Followers."

John, thank you so much for sharing part of your afternoon with us.

So David Pecker, nearly 10 hours on the stand. What moments most stand out to you from his testimony?

JOHN DEAN, CNN CONTRIBUTOR: Well, I think he's a good witness from what I've read and I've read the transcript of the first couple of days.

He's an excellent witness. When he doesn't know something, he admits it. When it's something unpleasant, he'd probably rather not address, he openly addresses it.

And so he's a -- he's going to be a very credible witness. And I think the redirect today cleaned up any -- any doubts in the jury's mind?

SANCHEZ: Much of the testimony so far is effectively setting the table for the prosecution's argument, right? We haven't heard much about Stormy Daniels and the arrangement that former president had with her through Michael Cohen.

How do you think this early stage of testimony will play into the bigger picture?

DEAN: It -- it really does, as you said, set the table. What it does, in legal terms, it establishes the conspiracy and shows who the players were and how they operated within a conspiracy.

And the Stormy Daniels is just an ongoing part of this conspiracy that the prosecutors are now laying out. And that has a lot of implications for evidence and for the way they proceed.

And I think the jury will get it as the pieces get filled in now from this broad outline that Pecker has given through the prosecutors.

SANCHEZ: One of the big questions, of course, is who is set to testify after the testimony of David Pecker wraps up. The former president said yesterday that he would testify if it's necessary.

Do you think his defense attorneys are probably kind of talk him out of that?

DEAN: I suspect they are. He is not a good witness. He's -- the few times he's been on the stand and in depositions at some length, we can see he's not a good witness.

[13:45:03]

So this is a little bravado for his base because there are obviously political implications of great dimension for him in this trial and the others.

SANCHEZ: We also haven't gotten a decision from Judge Merchan on whether Trump violated the gag order. The prosecution wants him held in contempt of court for more than a dozen instances in which they say that he violated a gag order that would have prevented him from speaking out about witnesses in the case, about even staff in the courtroom.

What do you make of the delay in a decision here? Does that create ambiguity or is it an indication that the judge wants to focus on the facts of the case and not necessarily the distractions that the defendant potentially is causing on social media?

DEAN: Well, of course, the prosecutors have filed additional violations of the gag order and they =- I think they're trying to hope that the judge will be able to take this under deliberation.

I think what the judge is trying to do is not distract from the progress of the trial with the gag order issue. He probably is measuring that the fact that the jury, if they're following their instructions, are not becoming aware of Trump's out-of-court statements and attacks on witnesses and the jury itself.

But rather, they want to -- judges want to move their cases along because juries do get tired. And so that's I think his main focus.

I frankly thank he's going to have to say something very soon because he's giving Trump too much leash to just continue to violate without any sanction.

SANCHEZ: John Dean, appreciate your perspective. Thank you so much for being with us.

DEAN: Thanks, Boris.

SANCHEZ: Of course.

Stay with CNN because our special live coverage is set to continue right after this. Court expected to resume at 2:15. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) [13:51:52:]

DONIE O'SULLIVAN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: National media headlines about you is: "January 6th insurrectionist, now he's running for Congress." What do you want people to know about you beyond that big headline?

DERRICK EVANS, (R), WEST VIRGINIA CANDIDATE FOR U.S. SENATE: I love my family very much. I love my community. I love my country. And I think it's despicable that the media, and particularly CNN, has helped paint this false narrative of insurrection.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

BLITZER: That's from the documentary, "MisinfoNation" with CNN correspondent, Donie O'Sullivan.

Just about six months away from the presidential election right now, the battle for facts is playing in social media feeds, churches, and even in the homes of so many Americans.

Donie looks at how conspiracy theories and online misinformation are tearing some Americans apart and effecting potentially the upcoming presidential campaign.

Let's discuss with Donie O'Sullivan. He's joining us right now.

Donie, I know you spent a lot of time with the Trump faithful. What did you learn?

O'SULLIVAN: Hey, Wolf. Yes, that clip we just played there for you is Derrick Evans. He is a -- he was convicted and served three months in prison for his role in January 6th, and he is now a primary -- a Republican primary candidates in West Virginia for the U.S. House.

We actually spoke to him on the three-year anniversary of January 6th, back -- back just a few months ago. And it was at a church in Florida where he was speaking with the likes of Marjorie Taylor Greene.

And this is what we're kind of seeing across the country is the use of Christianity, specifically, what is now known as Christian Nationalism, and this melding of conspiracy theories, a kind of warped sense of what it means to be an American and just seeing -- seeing this all play out.

So really what we're trying to show in the "Misinformation" documentary that's airing on Sunday really is just all the forces, the ideas that maybe we once thought were fringe. They are false. But they're no longer fringe.

I mean, I think about a third of Americans, a third of all Americans don't believe that Joe Biden was legitimately elected president in 2020. And something like a quarter of Americans believe that -- falsely, that the FBI staged or had a hand in the January 6th attack.

So really what we're trying to show here is that this stuff that is happening on the dark corners of the Internet and podcasts and everywhere else, it really is affecting the American political mainstream.

BLITZER: Donie, are conspiracy theories growing about former President Trump's court cases now?

O'SULLIVAN: Look, I think that just plays -- it all -- a lot of the folks that were speaking to are very much the Trump base, right? They're not going to deviate from that.

Of course, we have polling that shows that some Republicans might change their mind on voting for Trump if he is convicted. But for the folks that we meet at events like this, these sort of Christian Nationalist events, I mean, it's bizarre world.

[13:55:59]

We were at a church down in Florida where there was conspiracy -- popular conspiracy theorists, people who stream online all day, spouting conspiracy theories, and they're up at the top of a church where normally one would be praying and they're talking about conspiracy theories about 9/11 and everything else.

And so when it comes to the -- the Trump trials, this really just, for the people who believe this stuff, believe that Trump is being unfairly pursued.

BLITZER: Donie O'Sullivan, thanks so much for all your excellent reporting. Appreciate it very much.

And to our viewers, be sure to tune in to an all-new episode of "THE WHOLE STORY" with Anderson Cooper, one whole hour, one whole story. It airs Sunday, 8:00 p.m. Eastern and Pacific, only here on CNN.

And minutes from now, the former tabloid executive, David Pecker, will be back on the witness stand. Prosecutors are set to resume redirect. We're going to bring you all the latest developments from inside the courtroom right after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)