Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Event/Special

Donald Trump Hush Money Trial Resumes With Key Attorney Testimony; Trump Faces $9,000 Fine Over Gag Order Violation, Removes Social Media Posts; Prosecution Presents Multiple Witnesses Before Lunch In Trump Trial. Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired April 30, 2024 - 14:00   ET

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

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:00:39]

ERIN BURNETT, CNN HOST: Welcome back to CNN's special coverage of the historic Donald Trump hush money trial. I'm Erin Burnett, outside the courthouse in Manhattan, along with Wolf Blitzer in our nation's capital. In just moments, the former president will be back in the courtroom, and the prosecution will resume questioning a key attorney at the center of this case, Keith Davidson. Keith Davidson began his testimony this morning; he represented both Karen McDougal and Stormy Daniels, two women who say they were paid to stay silent about alleged affairs with Donald Trump,, Wolf.

WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: lots of drama unfolding today. Erin, before Davidson took the stand this morning, jurors heard from the banker who says he unwittingly structured the Stormy Daniels hush money payment. Also today, as the New York Times reports, Trump is frustrated with his own lead defense attorney. Trump was hit with a $9,000 fine for nine social media posts that violated the judge's gag order. He has just taken down those posts as ordered. Let's start right now with some of the major takeaways from the testimony, very dramatic testimony so far today. Our senior legal analyst, Elie Honig, is over at the magic wall. Elie, walk us through what we learned from the testimony so far today.

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: So, Wolf, busy morning. The prosecution has put on four witnesses already, even before the lunch break. Now the day started out with Gary Farrow on the stand. He's a banker from First Republic Bank and let me show you why his testimony was really important to this case. The way the payoff to Stormy Daniels worked is first, Michael Cohen directly paid Stormy Daniels, through her attorney, $130,000. And then later, Donald Trump, through his businesses, repaid Michael Cohen through a series of checks. And this is the crux of the crime that happened here. The allegation is they structured this to make it look like legal fees rather than a hush money payoff. This witness, Gary Farrow, testified in detail about this money, the way Michael Cohen got that money by taking out -- drawing down on his mortgage, and the way Michael Cohen came to him with a sense of urgency, needed to get this money, and we know the reason why was to make this payoff to Stormy Daniels.

Then we heard from two witnesses, one from C-SPAN and one from a court reporting company. The reason prosecutors called these witnesses is simply as vehicles to get videos and depositions in front of the jury. And then they started to show some of those videos to the jury. For example, one clip from October 2016, when Donald Trump on C-SPAN said, quote, I have no idea who these women are. No idea who these women are. We know that ended up being false, and so prosecutors are going to argue, gee, why would he be untruthful about whether he knew who these women are? So those were the second and third witnesses. And finally, we left off at the lunch break with the fourth witness of the day on the stand, and this is Keith Davidson.

Now, he's an attorney who represented both Karen McDougal and Stormy Daniels. And the reason he's really important is here is because in negotiating the deals, the cash money deals with McDougal and Stormy Daniels, Michael Cohen dealt with Keith Davidson. He was not dealing on the mechanics and the logistics of it with McDougal and Stormy Daniels. So right now, we're in the middle of Keith Davidson testifying about the negotiations that were happening between him on behalf of these clients and Donald Trump's camp and with other outlets. Now, who's next? I suspect Keith Davidson is going to take the rest of the day or close to the rest of the day with his testimony and cross-exam. We don't know. Prosecutors have been playing it really close to the vest. It feels like they are setting the stage for Stormy Daniels to take the stand at some point soon. Of course, later in the trial, we're looking for Karen McDougal. Prosecutors may call. Hope Hicks could take the stand. And, of course, the most important witness, Wolf, will be Michael Cohen. Lots to watch this afternoon.

BLITZER: Yeah, lots of drama unfolding. Elie Honig, excellent report. Thank you very, very much. Erin, back to you.

BURNETT: All right, Wolf. And so here with Paula and Phil, just think back into the courtroom, it's interesting. People have talked so much about Trump's body language. And he's very professional and very controlled from what I saw. You know, he stands when he's told to stand. He walks in and out. He doesn't look one way or the other. I mean, he doesn't look like he's a happy person, but he certainly isn't making light of it or a mockery of it or making faces or anything like that. You know, there were times when he would sort of, you know, be leaning back, listening, head back, as people have been talking about. What was interesting is there was a witness from C-SPAN.

[14:05:09]

And the whole point of this witness was to bring into evidence a few pieces of video, all of which were Trump at various rallies saying how horrible all these women were and that he's never met any of them, you know, who are accusing him of these affairs, never met any of them, they're liars, it's fabricated, and basically to play those words again and again. And this was a very sleepy witness in terms of the audience. (LAUGHTER)

(CROSSTALK)

PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: No surprise at all (ph)

(CROSSTALK)

BURNETT: Until, I mean, -- It wasn't his fault --

(CROSSTALK)

PHIL MATTINGLY, CHIEF DOMESTIC CORRESPONDENT: Look as a C-SPAN evangelist, I am -- watch yourself here, Burnett.

(CROSSTALK)

REID: (inaudible)

BURNETT: Well, I'm not saying he was bad, I'm saying, you know, they're sort of saying exit, you know, I mean, we're talking about exhibits, just Phil, for your benefit, (LAUGHTER) just so you know, 409B. Okay, so you can imagine how you feel when you're on exit 409B.

REID: Fair.

BURNETT: But then they play the little clip, and Trump goes from this, and listening, not asleep, but leaning in because he has a little monitor right in front of him. Trump watching Trump. Trump watching Trump is a fully engaged, very invigorated individual.

REID: That does not surprise me at all. I have noted, too, that I believe he has behaved as most defendants are expected to during a criminal trial. But that is certainly a contrast to what we saw in the civil cases just a few blocks from here. His behavior during those proceedings, extremely disruptive, and it did not pay him dividends in the long run because he lost that case and he lost that case badly. So it is notable that he is being sort of a consummate executive, a well- comported defendant, if you will, inside the courtroom because he must know on some level that it is not going to play well with the jury if he starts acting out.

BURNETT: And he had, as you mentioned, interaction with his son, Eric, when he came in, and that was a personal moment between the two of them. And then his interactions with attorneys. And that was constant, whispering, you know, quick consultations, a decision, I think, at one point whether Todd Blanche was going to do a cross-examination on a witness who had kept the transcripts of depositions. Decided with Trump, decided not to. So very involved throughout today, but not, -- but there was no testiness, at least that I could see from my vantage point, between Trump and his attorneys.

MATTINGLY: I think Paula notes the contrast between the former president in this trial and past trials. I think there's a contrast with the attorneys as well, both in terms of where they came from, the resume that Todd Blanche brings to the table here. I think it's widely regarded. And I know Ellie talks about his time at the Southern District of New York and the teams that are often put together. I think it's a very different moment. The stakes are certainly significantly higher, given the fact it's a criminal trial. And I think what you see from the president is, or former president, is, at least in some part, and Paul would know this better than me, reflective of what his legal team is telling him behind the scenes and the approach that they have taken up to this point.

REID: You make a great point, because if we're talking about tension behind the scenes of the Trump legal team, I said this earlier, it's like sand at the beach. It's part of the environment. And it's part of the environment for a lot of reasons. One, because it's a criminal prosecution. It's inherently stressful. But also the makeup of the Trump legal team. They're the folks you see in court, but there's a lot of folks behind the scenes who have a say. There's people who are just calling him from random universities, giving him advice. And then the client himself is a very challenging, difficult client. So, there's always tension behind the scenes. It doesn't matter if it's a state-level investigation or Supreme Court cases where the stakes are incredibly high. There's always tension behind the scenes. But speaking of the sources, in Trump world, I'm told that he and Todd Blanche at this point, they're fine. Obviously, they're in court today. You could see they seem to have a perfectly good relationship.

(CROSSTALK)

BURNETT: They seemed it. There was a point, you know, Todd Blanche comes over and puts his arm on Trump's shoulder, sort of in a collegial way, --

REID: Yes.

BURNETT: -- is how I would best describe it. I mean, like I said, there was certainly not tension visible from where, my vantage point.

REID: Yeah. And I'm told it's just the usual tensions in Trump world as part of the situation. And again, Todd is really in the top tier of Trump lawyers. And any suggestion that he's not being aggressive for his client, I just don't buy that. Because he's not engaging in antics in the courtroom or getting in fights with a judge does not mean that he is not aggressively advocating for his client.

BURNETT: Right.

REID: We saw in the lead up to this case, he filed pretty much every motion you could imagine and has tried to preserve every right. So, yeah, I think this might be a little overblown.

BURNETT: And what did those seem, one thing that stood out to me, you know, earlier on in this, remember when he was referring to Trump as Mr. President again and again and again and was reprimanded for doing that. Today, he did it once, corrected himself and said Mr. Trump. And then he used the words President Trump to refer to Trump. In the context of he was referring to something Trump had posted while president. So, it was very clear he wanted to do it when he could, but he was respectful of what the judge had said.

And -- that sort of respect in the courtroom, the decorum of the courtroom, that was very much at play today. And you could feel it from all aspects, including the jury, which was so very engaged.

(CROSSTALK) MATTINGLY: Varying snapshot (ph) and people would say, well, that's a very small observation that you have in your notebook, which is very wholesomely filled. (LAUGHTER) But I think it captures the balance there, right? Between client and court. You know, the case that's actually at hand here, the stakes that they're actually dealing with. And also, I think there's a recognition, Paula makes a great point in terms of what Todd Blanche has been confronted with in his cross and in his opening up to this point. Remember what's coming. There will be plenty of opportunity, given some of the witnesses we expect, certainly Michael Cohen, potentially Stormy Daniels as well, for as much aggression as a lawyer can possibly put on the table.

[14:10:19]

And how he actually formulates that, and what at least the start of this has been. We've talked so much about the prosecution kind of setting the foundation for what's to come. How much is Todd Blanche setting the foundation for what the defense is going to be doing over the coming weeks? Keep that in mind. It's crucial. (TECHNICAL DIFFICULTY)

BURNETT: And at least today it's very clear. They're trying to put Michael Cohen on an island of operating on his own by his own volition. I mean, you could even get that feel, despite non- confrontational style by Blanche today, of what they're trying to do. All right. Well, we continue to be here outside the courthouse. Wolf, back to you.

BLITZER: All right, Erin. Thank you. I want to bring in jury consultant and attorney Renato Stabile. Renato, thank you so much for joining us. Help us better understand a bit how the jurors inside the courtroom are likely to be processing all of today's pretty dramatic testimony.

RENATO STABILE, JURY CONSULTANT AND ATTORNEY: Yeah, I mean, look. I think they're going through a lot of mechanics today. Quite frankly, it is not the sexiest testimony. I mean, that's coming when Michael Cohen gets on the stand and, of course, Stormy Daniels. But, of course, they have to go through all this. But, you know, my understanding from Trump's defense and from the opening statement, he's going to say, well, I didn't know anything. So, fine, there were financial transactions and there were banking records that are going to be introduced. But that all, -- you know, he will say, he will argue, goes to Michael Cohen. It has nothing to do with him.

BLITZER: How do you keep the jurors, Renato, focused and engaged? While some of these smaller name witnesses and technical procedures to enter evidence into the court actually play out before the bigger name witnesses, the stars, if you will, like Stormy Daniels and Michael Cohen, actually take the stand?

STABILE: Well, you've got to keep it moving. And I think that's what you're seeing the prosecutors doing. They know they have to do this. These are pieces of evidence that they need to complete their case. And I think for the -- defense attorneys also, you're not going to really harp so much on these witnesses. You're going to move through them quickly. You're going to make the points you need to make for your summation. Remember, you're constantly thinking about what you have to argue in summation to make your case for both sides. So that's what they're trying to do with these witnesses.

BLITZER: As you know, the jury heard directly from Gary Farrow, the banker who said Michael Cohen actually deceived him about the Stormy Daniels payment. They will hear that Cohen later pleaded guilty to charges connected to that transaction. If prosecutors use Cohen as a witness, how do they overcome the potential credibility issues?

STABILE: Well, that's why they fronted it in their opening statement. I mean, that's what you have to do whenever you put on any type of cooperating witness. You know, they're going to be coming with baggage. They obviously will have pleaded guilty to something and they have may have lied other times. So, I think they did a pretty good job fronting it. But they're going to say, look, we're not going to ask you to like Michael Cohen. But when it comes to this, you should believe him. And why should you believe him? Because there's other information. That. Corroborates what he's telling you.

BLITZER: Based on your experience, Renato, what's the impact of Trump's son, Eric, being there today? Do jurors take note if a defendant's family shows up or not?

STABILE: A hundred percent. You know, we would always encourage people to have support, family members, friends, whoever you can bring to the courtroom, because jurors are looking at those people and they want to know that, look, the person's family is standing behind them. They have friends. They have supporters and that means a lot to a jury in terms of sort of judging the character of the person who's on trial. Now, I realize it's a little different when somebody who is known to everyone, but it's always a good thing to have some support in the courtroom because jurors do take note.

BLITZER: Yeah, lawyers always tell the defense defendants, if you could bring your wife, your kids, your family in, that probably will help you with the jury. Renato Stabile, thank you so much for your expertise.

STABILE: Thanks, Wolf.

BLITZER: And still ahead. We're going to have much more analysis with our panel of lawyers. Legal and political experts who are with me. Plus, happening now, protesters are on the lawn over at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. We have a reporter there on the ground. We'll give you the very latest when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:15:09]

BLITZER: We're following the breaking news of the Donald Trump hush money trial in New York. The former president is back in the courtroom today. Judge Mershon is back on the bench. Keith Davidson has just been called back to the stand. Our panel of experts back with us. Wlliot Williams, let me start with you. How significant is Keith Davidson's testimony for the prosecution's case?

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: It's a very important testimony, well, for a big reason. In general, valuable witnesses are ones that had proximity to either defendant or critical witnesses. And Keith Davidson, having been attorney to two major witnesses here, can't speak to the particulars of his legal representation. That's protected by attorney-client privilege. But things like when were Stormy Daniels and or Stephanie Clifford paid, and how, and how were they contracted with the Trump Organization, it's relevant evidence for the trial. Something we're seeing a lot of today is that witnesses have to establish not just the sexy details that make it into the newspaper, but the entire factual record. And that includes how a criminal scheme, as alleged, worked. And that's a very important purpose someone like that can serve.

BLITZER: Is it unusual for a lawyer to be testifying? Because usually there are legal boundaries as to how far a lawyer can actually get into a courtroom and testify.

[14:20:00]

HONIG: It is unusual, Wolf, and in this case, what they're doing, it appears, in order to protect the attorney-client privilege, because let's remember, Mr. Davidson represented both Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal, is they're not going into those conversations. What did you, Mr. Davidson, discuss with your client? Instead, they're talking about what did you discuss with Michael Cohen, which is not protected by the privilege. And that's really Keith Davidson's relevance here.

Michael Cohen handled his dealings with Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal through Keith Davidson. And I think the key sort of battle line here is going to be, to what extent was Michael Cohen acting on Donald Trump's behalf, but working out the details on his own? And to what extent was Michael Cohen working out those details with Donald Trump's knowledge? Because this case all comes down to the details, specifically how was this funded, how was it accounted? And if Donald Trump knows that stuff, he's going to be guilty. And if he does not know it, then we could have a different verdict.

DAVID CHALIAN, CNN POLITICAL DIRECTOR: We've been hearing constantly, and you know this too, that Michael Cohen has all this documentation and all these receipts. I would assume if indeed he does, it is to get at that point, right? That -- that's what the prosecution will use beyond Michael Cohen's testimony to actually prove Donald Trump's involvement. But it seems to me it's a big bet on the prosecution's part here because it might be in each of these instances, very difficult given the way Trump operates, to get Trump's actual direction.

GLORIA BORGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: Well, I think the question has to be asked, did Michael Cohen ever talk about the boss, as he called him, and what would make the boss happy and what wouldn't, and sort of whether Keith Davidson says that it was very clear that Michael Cohen was acting on behalf of Donald Trump. And I'm sure they're going to try and get to that with Keith Davidson, who in a way will corroborate Michael Cohen, because he'll talk about the dealings they had, et cetera. But I think the real question will be, did Michael Cohen make it clear to you that he was acting on behalf of Donald Trump, or did you just assume that?

WILLIAMS: But an assumption can be enough, depending on how clear the assumption is.

BORGER: Exactly.

WILLIAMS: It really just gets down to how much the jury believes what they're told.

BORGER: Right.

WILLIAMS: Does the witness testimony they've received seem credible to them? And are there enough other documents and things and C-SPAN videos and so on in the record that can help establish and -- allow them to trust what the prosecution wants them to do? Now, certainly, Michael Cohen's being on the record saying to Donald Trump, please pay this money to hide this porn star information from voters. Of course, that's what prosecutors want. But you can also get there with what's called circumstantial evidence.

BLITZER: And we're just being told by our folks who are inside the courtroom that Trump is sitting back in his chair looking up at the messages on the screen being showed to Keith Davidson. He is intermittently commenting to Todd Blanche, one of his attorneys.

HONIG: To David's question earlier, the whole trick here for prosecutors is to corroborate, to back up Michael Cohen every single place that he can. If he said that, you know, we order pizza for lunch that day and you have a receipt showing they order pizza, it's irrelevant, but you still want that because you need to bolster him as much as possible. And my take so far is that Michael Cohen is substantially corroborated, but not necessarily all the way corroborated.

There's going to have to be. Some leap of faith by the jury. And the key question, there's no question at all. Michael Cohen was acting on Donald Trump's behalf. But was Michael Cohen just telling Trump, I got it. You don't worry yourself about the details. Or was Michael saying to Donald Trump, OK, we're structuring it this way. We're going to say their attorney's fees. And Donald Trump said, yeah, OK, great. Those are the two different stories here. And I see we're getting some of the texts, Davidson texted Howard, I can't quote, I can't believe they are asking me to go back for another 25, meaning $25,000. The deal is. It was accepted at 150,000K. Can you do that? Dylan Howard, of course, worked at AMI, the National Enquirer --

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: He was the senior editior.

HONIG: -- he was the senior editor of the National Enquirer. Yes.

BLITZER: (inaudible) BORGER: You know, there is a tape recording of Donald Trump -

(CROSSTALK)

HONIG: Yeah.

BORGER: -- talking to Michael Cohen about the $150,000, --

HONIG: The McDougal.

BORGER: -- the McDougal thing, you know, saying something to the effect of what's it going to cost? One hundred fifty? So I'm sure that'll be important in this case.

HONIG: That tape is so important. It's coming up probably later. And you can look at that. It's public. I think CNN broke the story --

BORGER: CNN had it, yes.

HONIG; -- if I remember, it's on the Internet and you can look at that tape and they're going to argue it both ways. It sounds -- Trump knows some of the details, so that'll be good for the prosecution. But the defense will say, look at this tape. Trump is just sort of deferring to Michael. I don't know. You know, I'm fine with the payment. You handle the nuances.

BORGER: But the fact that he knew about it -

(CROSSTALK)

HONIG: Yes, valuable.

BORGER: -- and approved it is important.

HONIG: Valuable to the prosecutors. Yes.

BLITZER: And we know that the prosecutor, the attorney, Joshua Steinglass, is continuing his questioning of Keith Davidson. Right. Now, we're going to continue to monitor that. Everyone stand by. Much more coming up. Still ahead, how the Trump camps are reacting to today's testimony. We'll get more on that when we come back.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:29:45]

BURNETT: Welcome back to our special live coverage of Donald Trump's historic first criminal trial. Right now, Keith Davidson, an attorney who represented Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal, is back on the witness stand. Mark Lauder is a former special assistant to President Trump who also served as Trump's 2020 director of strategic communications. And he joins me now.