Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Event/Special

Prosecutors Call Employee For Court Reporting Company To Testify In Trump Hush Money Trial; Prosecutors Play Clip Of Trump Deposition In E. Jean Carroll Case; Prosecutors Play Clip Of Trump Being Asked About "Access Hollywood" Tape; Now: Ex-Attorney For Stormy Daniels & Karen McDougal Testifying. Aired 12-12:30p ET

Aired April 30, 2024 - 12:00   ET

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

[12:00:00]

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST & CHIEF WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: Welcome back to CNN special live coverage. The former president's eyes are reportedly closed again as he listens to testimony from the third prosecution witness of the day. He is Phillip Thompson. He's an employee at a court transcription company. That company was subpoenaed to provide video and transcripts of Trump's deposition in the E. Jean Carroll defamation case. We're waiting to see just exactly where the prosecution goes with this line of questioning.

And Kasie Hunt, what's interesting here is we are -- as courtroom junkies and courtroom drama junkies used to so stipulated, meaning that the defense and prosecution are both agreeing that this video of Donald Trump saying that all the women are lying, who are accusing him is actually video of him saying that, but in this case that's not happening.

The defense apparently refused to agree to such a stipulation proposed by the prosecution for their witnesses. So right now, you have Mr. Thompson -- Phillip Thompson, who's just a court reporter, testifying that the transcript of the video deposition of Donald Trump for the E. Jean Carroll case is actually the transcript.

But before I go to you, I want to bring up the Jane Rosenberg sketch that I requested before. It's Donald Trump listening in intently as a connoisseur of courtroom sketches, I find this entry cool. Get rid (Ph) of that lower third, I just want to get the wrenching of the neck, the captured. You know, I'm chilling it. All right, anyway. And that's Gary Farro, Michael Cohen's banker on the stand. They're being redirected by or being cross examined by Trump's attorney. Anyway, Kasie --

KASIE HUNT, CNN ANCHOR & CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: It's so evocative. I mean, that is -- how many times have we seen -- have we seen Donald Trump take that pose when he's listening to someone who're in a press conference. It's a really fabulous thing.

TAPPER: Well, I just wanted to show you, but anyway. It's just like -- but if you really -- if you look at this -- they're not sure, they cut off the neck for some reason. But it's Donald Trump listening intently in the courtroom sketch anyway. HUNT: Yes. No, I --

TAPPER: We're not -- we're not allowed to -- there's no court cameras in the courtroom. So, we have to go by these sketches and descriptions. And in this one, he is listening intently. And I thought that was interesting.

HUNT: Yeah. No, I mean, I think one of the most interesting reporting that I feel like we're getting out of there is kind of the texture and color from our reporters who are actually able to be there in the room. Because, you know, I think we know -- and again, I keep going back to this as much as I'm into the courtroom drama, it's not my area of expertise. But this really does have such a political situation, a political context around it.

And so, the things that Donald Trump is interested in -- he's writing these long notes to his lawyer. It does show that he does have to be very engaged. And I can't remember if it was you and I that were -- that we're talking about this, but we touched on the length of the trial and the stipulations that we're now seeing here, do prolong the trial.

TAPPER: Let me just interrupt for one second. I apologize. Prosecutors, again, the fallback -- the -- you know, we don't get to see the trial.

HUNT: Such a cultured.

TAPPER: So, I mean, interrupting wiser people than myself, like you and everyone else here. But prosecutors, we're told are playing a clip from the E. Jean Carroll deposition of Donald Trump, in which Mr. Trump describes what Truth Social is. That's his social media company. His alternative to Twitter and that is being played right now. Please continue. I apologize.

HUNT: Interesting. No, I'm interested to see where they're going with this. But you know, we talked about how -- first of all prolonging this trial. You were saying that might play fine with the jury. There's the point about him being off the campaign trail for all this time. But there's also a question of the physical stamina required to sit through a trial and the stress of that. I mean, how do you think that factors in?

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Absolutely. Being on trial is grueling. I mean, it is physically exhausting. It is mentally exhausting for everybody. So, I probably for the defendant more than anyone else. As a prosecutor, I was always paranoid about I did not want the jury to think this is dragging. I did not want the jury getting bored. I did not want them looking at their watches --

TAPPER: Resentful.

HONIG: Resentful, because they're going to blame you as a prosecutor. You're the one with the burden of proof. You're the one calling the witnesses. You're the one putting on their case. And I always believed that jurors have way shorter attention spans than we give them credit for. And so, to me, when we got to the -- to the point where it started to feel like things were dragging that would really bother me. I would worry about that from the prosecutor's perspective.

[12:05:00]

LAURA COATES, CNN ANCHOR & CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: And look right now, I mean we're the jurors, likely for all of them. The very first time they're hearing Donald Trump's voice in this courtroom is through the videotaped deposition. I think about the timing of this Elie's point. As this law is -- as you got the ebb and flow of attention spans. You go from documents to transcripts to the front page.

Now you have Trump saying in the clip, it's a platform that's been opened by me as an alternative of the Twitter. They have a second clip they're playing where he confirms that he has been married to Melania Trump since 2005. He is -- they're having his voice. He's not testifying, but his voice in the courtroom now.

Now imagine the jurors all of a sudden pepping right back up, right? There now remembering this part of the trial as opposed to even earlier. He's leaning in close the monitor in front of him while the video is being played. Those jurors are going to have a bit of a Wimbledon neck, forget the wrench neck and pay attention. But looking back and forth to figure out how is he responding to this, wondering now they're intrigued.

Remember, it's a performance by these prosecutors. They are putting on a performer. Now he's being asked the next clip about the Access Hollywood tape. Well, welcome to the espresso shot in this courtroom today. They now are invested from all the wins the defense team may have had before. Pointing out about Michael Cohen, maybe that -- maybe being an aggravating client difficult and beyond.

Now we're back to what the prosecution wants to refocus on. The person who is the defendant in what he's saying. And so, as it ebbs and flows, expect to have more pops of color, like this or not because they're aware.

TAPPER: And just the point here, just to reiterate, is that the prosecution has the burden of proving that Donald Trump was engaged in this hush money scheme, was engaged in the cover up of the hush money scheme and was doing so substantially because of his -- as the prosecution quotes it, election interference.

I don't know that it's what I would call election interference, but he was certainly trying to impact the election. But by hiding information as opposed to Bill Brennan's point about the defense is going to say this is about his marriage, not about his campaign. And that is the context they're trying to provide here. A, Donald Trump and Melania Trump had been married since 2005. B, this alleged interlude with Stormy Daniels happened in 2006. C, the act that Access Hollywood tape breaking at the beginning of October 2016.

JAMIE GANGEL, CNN SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. Can I suggest two other reasons why they may not be stipulating this addition to dragging. One is, what do we know? Thanks to Maggie Haberman and Jonathan Swan this morning. Trump does not feel his lawyers are fighting enough being aggressive. This is one way for his lawyers to show. You see, we're just going to go at them. I don't know.

TAPPER: Yes. In the deposition. This is from the E. Jean Carroll deposition. The Trump has asked, that's you in the video speaking. And he says, yes, correct. There's not going to be any cross examination. And now we have a new witness Keith Davidson, who is the attorney -- former attorney for both Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal.

But the prosecution there interviewed this testimony, but this gentleman from the court reporting organization and all this information was -- all this evidence was introduced. And then the defense did not cross examine him, which is a form of stipulation, I suppose. Kaitlan Collins?

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: Yeah. From the executive director of the C-SPAN archives to a court reporter to now Keith Davidson. This is quite a whirlwind for this jury inside this courtroom, Jake. And Paula and Karen -- Paula and Karen. I mean, Keith Davidson is at the center of all of this because he was the attorney x, I should note its Stormy Daniels would probably emphasize that -- had she been on this panel.

PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: He no longer works for her.

COLLINS: Yes, she is. Anytime she would like to come and speak. He is no longer representing her, but he was the one who is negotiating these agreements on behalf of Karen McDougal with the National Enquirer, David Pecker, but also for Stormy Daniels in contact with Michael Cohen directly.

REID: Yeah. That's why he's such a key witness. I think this is going to pick up a little. I agree all of these witnesses who have gone on the sand, they are important in their own way. And it probably is fascinating to the jury to hear about pools, or the C-SPAN archives or even depositions.

Mr. Davidson's testimony is really going to get to the heart of this case. As we noted, he represented both Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal, but he is the one who approached the executives at the Enquirer in 2016 about these alleged affairs. And he was encouraged by Cohen to reveal details of the clients' deals.

So, this is a significant player when it comes to the allegations at the heart of this case. Why Stormy Daniels was paid? How she was paid? Why it was set up the way it was? Why he received the money from Cohen? How it was paid back? This is a very significant witness.

[12:10:00]

COLLINS: Well, and Karen, I should note Trump glance to Keith Davidson, who was this attorney for Stormy Daniels as he walked past and made his way to the witness stand. Prosecutors are going to begin with that, obviously you will then be cross examined by Trump's team. What a prosecutor is going to start with to kind of lay the groundwork for what he did and how central he was to this allegation here? KAREN FRIEDMAN AGNIFILO, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, clearly, he's a very important witness because you've got one of the lead attorneys Joshua Steinglass who's doing the direct examination of him. And that's a signal, I think of how important they think this witness is. He's going to talk about what he exactly he negotiated. Who he represented. And anything that can corroborate what Michael Cohen is going to say. I think he's going to come out through this particular witness.

Now, if he can corroborate what Michael Cohen is going to say about how this was election related, this was the purpose was about the election. I think you're going to be see Trump's defense potentially changed to, well, I had nothing to do with it.

COLLINS: Well, and let's not forget. When they were talking to David Pecker, Keith Davidson was the one who texted on election night in 2016, asking what have we done? Because clearly, they were trying to make the point. They believed that what they had done benefited Trump in this election.

And I should note, Paula, that Keith Davidson is the person who essentially received this money on behalf of Karen McDougal and Stormy Daniels. It was not wired directly to them. He was the one who facilitated this and receive this. And they are walking through his employment history. He owns his own law firm -- law firm in Los Angeles. You can look at his website. Karen McDougal's pictures on there. She is not happy about it. But he is a central figure in all of this and how he initiated these payments.

REID: He is, and you make a great point, because you're connecting the testimony that we heard from Mr. Farro earlier to what we're about to hear from Mr. Davidson. Mr. Farro testified that the money that was put in that shell company went to Mr. Davidson, not to Stormy Daniels. Eventually, they learned that was the purpose for it.

But as far as that banker knew this was just money from one lawyer going to another lawyer for what he thought was a real estate transaction. So now, we're starting to see this evidence that they had to get in through some of these lesser-known witnesses. Applying to the main plotline here. And Mr. Davidson will likely talk about receiving that payment and how it was reimbursed.

Now asked about 2015 to 2017, Davidson said, at that time my practice was heavily involved with media cases, which of course explains probably how he came to work with and for Karen and Stormy.

COLLINS: Maybe an understatement of the year given what we know. We also have Judge George Grasso with us, who was a retired judge from the Queens County Supreme Court. And Judge, I know you've been inside the court every single day that this case has been going on watching all of these witnesses come forward and testify.

I should note, Keith Davidson is on the witness stand right now. He is confirming that his work frequently involved NDAs, these non- disclosure agreements. He is the one who drafted for people who remember the agreement between Donald Trump and Stormy Daniels where they use those pseudonyms Peggy Peterson and David Dennison, that we now learn. What do you believe is the significance of having Keith Davidson on the witness stand?

GEORGE GRASSO, RETIRED JUDGE, QUEENS COUNTY SUPREME COURT: That's a great choice by the people. You know, David Pecker testified for about three days last week, and significant portions of his testimony involved. Keith Davidson has not only been a lawyer for Stormy Daniels, but the source in this case as well. And he explained under oath. Mr. Pecker how unusual it was for a attorney to also be a source for the National Enquirer.

So, he's going to be doing and it was just mentioned in the panel discussion, has much corroboration is could -- is that people could possibly pull together to what they anticipate Michael Cohen is going to testify to for the jury ahead of time and do it in a way you just can't have bankers and secretaries' day after day. You got to spice it up for the jury a little bit too.

And I think that the Keith Davidson testimony will be quite interesting testimony. I'm looking forward to seeing it myself this afternoon. And he's going to be a major piece of this puzzle. And if he holds up, then it's going to put Michael Cohen in a much, much stronger position to be ultimately perceived as credible by the jury.

COLLINS: Yeah. And Judge, I should note that he also just testified that he has immunity to testify to the grand jury, but he did not seek it. He said, he's testifying today pursuant to a subpoena. That's important because David Pecker also had immunity. He signed a non- prosecution agreement when all this was first beginning. And now Keith Davidson says, he also has immunity to testify.

GRASSO: Yeah. Well, you would kind of expect that in a case like this, especially given the rat a surreptitious role that has already been described by David Pecker that Mr. Davidson played in all in this entire scenario here.

[12:15:00]

COLLINS: What do you think about the significance of what Keith Davidson texted on election night 2016 where he asked -- you know, after all of this happened, what have we done? That, of course, was when Donald Trump was elected president. I mean, he clearly believed that they had an election related rolling (Ph) on all of this.

GRASSO: Yeah. Well, you know this -- well, here we are at 100 Centre Street in Manhattan, right, recovering live, little background noise there. Well, there's a lot of -- there's a lot of that that's coming out that, you know, people, people have had -- you know, since David Pecker's testimony.

You know, why the David Pecker, one of the most interesting parts of his testimony, that kind of ties into this whole thing and people's growing concerns is originally David Pecker was very concerned about the $150,000 that AMI laid out for Karen McDougal.

And he was pushing Michael Cohen and thereby pushing Trump very hard to come up with the money. And Michael Cohen went so far as to set up an LLC, which was testified by the banker this morning, to actually receive money to get back to Donald, to get -- to get -- to be a pass through, so to speak for the $150,000 from Trump and the Trump organization back AMI.

But when AMI I took the whole thing to the lawyers, whatever they said to David Pecker, all of a sudden David Pecker was like, you know what, forget about everything, tear it all up. And this was in -- this was all taking place in October of 2016. So, a lot of people have a strong sense as this thing continued to develop right into election night that there were problems.

COLLINS: Yeah. Judge, thank you for that. And I should note. There is a lot of background noise. Trump has been encouraging his supporters to come to the courthouse because he's been disappointed that there haven't been enough of them out there. So that is the background noise behind me. Judge, thank you.

And Karen and Paula, we're now learning that Keith Davidson is confirming relationships that he had with Stormy Daniels as publicist at the time. And with Dylan Howard, who's the editor-in-chief of the National Enquirer. And he says, he rarely negotiated the sale of stories to the tabloids, which was -- and he's also looking at the jury as he is answering these questions, making that direct connection as he's getting the question to the prosecutors and looking at the jury as he's answering.

REID: Well, the fact that he rarely negotiated to sell her stories to tabloids, again suggests that what was happening here was unique. He said he usually dealt with NDAs more straightforward, non-disclosure agreement. It's nothing wrong with that.

If you want to pay someone to keep quiet about something that has occurred, no crime there. But he's helping the prosecution to set up the idea that what the National Enquirer did, specifically with Karen McDougal, and what Michael Cohen eventually did with Stormy Daniels was out of the ordinary.

COLLINS: And with the immunity comment there that he is saying -- he didn't seek out immunity. He was subpoenaed to be here. Prosecutors seem to be going to great lengths to say, --to say that these are not witnesses who sought out being her care and that they weren't raising their hand to come and testify that they had to come and testify.

AGNIFILO: Yeah. So, in New York State, anybody who testifies in the grand jury, automatically gets immunity for their testimony. It's just an automatic thing that happens by law. That's what I think he was getting to there. And yes, these are people who are subpoenaed to be here.

I think -- I think one of the reasons that they're making sure that this -- that they come out and say this is because they want to send a message to Donald Trump and to Donald Trump supporters who sometimes come out against people and people who have had their lives, their homes, docks, or their lives threatened. I think they want the message sent out there that they're not here willingly. They're here under subpoena. So that message gets told loud and clear because I think people are worried about their own safety. COLLINS: And Paula, Keith Davidson was testifying that he had very little contact with David Pecker. He said he only spoke to him three or four times. But he is now explaining his relationship with Michael Cohen, Donald Trump's former attorney. His personal fixer saying that they have known each other since 2011, dating back to Donald Trump.

REID: Yeah. They say that there was a blog post back in 2011, about Stephanie Clifford and he clarifies that Stephanie Clifford, more commonly known as Stormy Daniels. So, it suggests there was some baseline relationship here before we get to 2016 and this alleged hush money payment.

COLLINS: And Keith Davidson, though can shed light on -- he had these direct conversations. You know, we talked about Michael Cohen and the corroboration and the documents. I mean he spoke to Michael Cohen directly. He may be able to shed light on the pressure Michael Cohen felt and what Michael Cohen was being instructed to do as they kind of been trying to say, well, Michael Cohen was acting on his -- on his own accord.

[12:20:00]

REID: Yeah, that's a great point. Because remember Davidson is the one who receives the money from that show company and we heard earlier from Mr. Farro. Just how urgent Mr. Cohen seemed in this entire matter, how quickly he was trying to move things along and how swiftly that movie -- money moved to that account and then back out to Mr. Davidson.

So, Davidson's testimony here about what was happening with Mr. Cohen, with that money at this critical time shortly after the Access Hollywood tape days before the election, this is really going to set the stage for the prosecution's case.

COLLINS: We also talked about NDAs so much, these non-disclosure agreements. And Todd Blanche when they were talking about them previously, and David Pecker kind of tried to make it seem commonplace. You know, he talked about efforts with Arnold Schwarzenegger and Mark Wahlberg and others, Tiger Woods, other celebrities.

And Karen, I mean, I wonder how that sits with a jury who do -- some of these are regular people, some of them have probably never signed a nondisclosure agreement or aren't super familiar with them. I wonder how having Keith Davidson walk through that is helpful to the prosecution?

AGNIFILO: So, Keith Davidson just testified to somebody pretty important. He says, Cohen was working on Trump's behalf when they interacted over Daniel's blog posts. So, Keith Davidson knew that Cohen was acting on Trump's behalf at that time. I think that's really significant. But back to you --

COLLINS: Why do you think that's significant?

AGNIFILO: Because it's not just about Michael Cohen, right? This is about Trump. And this is all about Trump, who's the person who's on trial here. And the defense is going to try and make this all about Michael Cohen, and almost put Michael Cohen on trial here and to say that this was all about Michael Cohen and this is what he did. And he's a liar and he's been convicted of different crimes.

But the more that this is connected to Donald Trump, I think this is what is -- that's what this trial is about, right? It's connecting all of this to Donald Trump. And so, Keith Davidson went to Michael Cohen, who was acting on behalf of Donald Trump because Stormy Daniels had nothing to negotiate directly with Michael Cohen. She was negotiating with Donald Trump.

COLLINS: When also Stormy Daniels and Keith Davidson that were so worried, Michael Cohen wasn't going to pay them as he was rushing around on October 26. Obviously, this is Keith Davidson. He is now on the witness stand. He is the attorney as Karen was noting that handled the hush money agreement at the center of this entire case.

The question is, what else is he going to say much more especially, as cross examination is going to be up after the prosecutors questioning? You're watching CNN special live coverage.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:25:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

TAPPER: Donald Trump is apparently passing notes to his attorneys as prosecutors lead a critical witness through direct examination. Right now, Keith Davidson, he is the attorney who handled the Stormy Daniels hush money agreement is on the stand. And we are getting bits of reporting from inside the courtroom from our journalists there.

For instance, right now, Keith Davidson, Stormy Daniels' attorney who shown in June 15, 2016 email that he sent to Karen McDougal, the 1998 Playmate of the Year with whom Donald Trump also had an alleged relationship in which they are talking about his representation of her.

The June 2016 email also contains a retainer agreement. Kasie Hunt, now we're getting to the nitty and or gritty of it all. Having to do with the attempts to hide these women's stories. Karen McDougal's and Stormy Daniels, different experiences. Both of them allegations. Donald Trump denies both of them.

HUNT: Right.

TAPPER: The jury has been shown a portion of the retainer agreement that explains the scope of the work. I believe this is regarding Karen McDougal's agreement.

HUNT: Yes. That does seem to be the case here according to our team inside the room. And again, it seems to me that this is part of establishing everyone's roles here. We know that we walked through Karen McDougal with David Pecker and how he had dealt with her story, of course, the one with Stormy Daniels and what really matters at the end of the day.

But, you know, I am interested in how he came to represent both of them, kind of this having similarities that were going on --

TAPPER: It wasn't each professional.

HUNT: It does, although, I apparently, it potentially was a lucrative one.

TAPPER: Yeah. He is in this world. He sort of ends up in the middle of a lot of these accusations.

HONIG: If you're a lawyer, do you get a third of this business?

(CROSSTALK)

BILL BRENNAN, FORMER TRUMP PAYROLL CORP. ATTORNEY: Yeah. He's website says, if you've been violated, we'd get you paid.

TAPPER: OK.

BRENNAN: You know, they can bring out all of the Peckers and all of the McDougal's and all the Clifford's and this guy, Davidson. They can bring them all out for the next month. But if they can't tie it into election interference or election fraud or campaign finance cases out the window, that's what this is about.

We had a very well-known -- very talented criminal defense lawyer in Philadelphia many years ago. And the federal government indicted him for income tax evasion, and he defended himself. And his defense was, I owe the government. I owe my bookies. The bookies break your legs. And he was acquitted.

If defense creates reasonable doubt that this was for political purposes, it's not guilty. They don't have to prove anything. They have to simply create reasonable doubt. And Jake as you said earlier, you only need one.