Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Event/Special

Now: Former Trump Org Executive Testifies In Hush Money Trial; Now: Defense Cross-Examining Former Trump Org Executive. Aired 12- 12:30p ET

Aired May 06, 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]

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: Document by document, payment by payment, handwritten note by handwritten note, the prosecution right now is laying down the building blocks that they are going to use to try to corroborate the word of the star witness that we had get to see in this case. It is just a few seconds past New York, (Ph) Manhattan. You are watching CNN's special live coverage of Donald Trump's hush money trial. I'm Kaitlan Collins.

Right now, Jeffrey McConney is on the stand. He is a Trump Organization insider. He was the keeper of that ledger that is at the heart of this case, and it includes payments from the Trump trust, his personal one to Michael Cohen, which were labeled as legal expenses, payments. The prosecutors say in reality were just reimbursements for money at the fixer. And Trump personal attorney allegedly funneled to Stormy Daniels as part of a scheme to silence her.

I'm here with CNN chief legal affairs correspondent Paula Reid, and also the former Manhattan district attorney prosecutor Karen Friedman Agnifilo. Great to have you both back here. And right now, what they're walking through is basically how Michael Cohen got paid.

And one thing that stands out and would be my question. Maybe if I was a juror is, well, if Trump was just reimbursing Michael Cohen as the defense is claimed, why not just do a one for one payment? Why are we looking at each of these different checks of him paying Michael Cohen $35,000 a month in the year 2017?

PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Yeah. Look, I think it's a great question. Obviously, Trump is focused on the screen in front of him. Our colleagues inside report that Trump has been as focused on McConney. During his testimony as he has been on any other witness. I think that's fascinating, right?

You can read that one of two ways. One, he knows this is significant. But also, this is something that he who -- someone who worked for him for decades, the Trump Organization is paying McConney's legal fees, and he expects loyalty. But now they're going through his ledger at line by line, as you said, they are noting how each line item -- lists the retainer agreement payment to Michael Cohen.

And this is significant because each of those entries -- those are tied to each of the 34 counts of falsifying business records. But I've said this multiple times this morning, the one thing that we haven't seen this morning is a direct link to the defendant to any of these documents to any of these payments.

COLLINS: But you know, when they're looking at this, though, and they're looking at these payments. I mean, it does seem clear that it was money disguised as income. If they're sending in these $35,000 a month, and it's ultimately adding up to what Allen Weisselberg. And this employee right now sat down and decided -- and computed, which was what Michael Cohen needed in order to prevent him from taking a tax at for just 130k. And also, to give him the 60 grand he was asking for to essentially fulfill his bonus, as he argued.

KAREN FRIEDMAN AGNIFILO, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: I mean, without a doubt a crime was committed. The question though, is how do they link that to Donald Trump? And that's what's been missing so far. I mean, they've proven 10 ways to Sunday that this was a false century. That this was not just a reimbursement that this was disguised to look like income, so that they can pay some in taxes, and Michael Cohen will get more money.

But Trump will just say, look, that was Michael Cohen. He devised this scheme. And Allen Weisselberg, who's in jail. He went along with it, and but it had nothing to do with me. I was busy. I was president. This was all during 2017 when Don -- you know, my sons Don and Eric were running the company. I was busy managing the country. So that -- that's what he's going to say, we have yet to hear that direct link.

COLLINS: As a former prosecutor, I mean, the fact that Trump is more attuned to this testimony than anyone else, then Hope Hicks, then David Pecker, then Keith Davidson. What does that say to you? What would you read into that if you were sitting at that prosecution table?

FRIEDMAN AGNIFILO: I mean, look, he knew where -- he knows where all the bodies are buried, right? Jeff McConney worked there for 30 plus years. He dealt with all the checks, the ledgers, the entries with Allen Weisselberg who has gone to jail now twice on behalf of Donald Trump. He had lunch with him every day. So, let's see what he's going to say. I mean, I'm not surprised that he's staring at him and focused.

COLLINS: And McConney right now is explaining the 1099 for $420,000 that was sent to Michael Cohen for the year of 2017. He says he's helped prepare Trump's annual financial statements to the Office of Government Ethics. This is someone who was closely involved in Trump's money.

[12:05:00]

I think that's another key -- maybe why Trump is paying so close attention. And maybe it's big -- some point that prosecutors have been making all along is that Trump cares deeply about his money and who's handling it. And now he's watching the person who's been doing that for 30 decades do it.

And the update that we're getting right now is that Trump had to file the financial disclosure reports from the time he was a candidate for president. Of course, we know that. And part of this is also that this was not on here that you paid Michael Cohen this much money for this reason.

REID: That's right. Because these 34 counts of falsifying business records are charged as a felony because prosecutors allege that this was all done as part of a conspiracy to help Trump in the election. Again, we're talking about, you know, his disclosures for the time he was a candidate, his ethics reports, even though the general ledger. These are all great details to have about the Trump Organization. But McConney has not provided any evidence that Trump is directly involved in any of this.

I think the defense is going to argue. I would expect that McConney and Weisselberg and others, this was their job. And while Trump was involved in a lot of aspects of his business, he was nowhere near as involved once he became the leader of the free world.

COLLINS: But I do wonder because as a candidate and as president, he did have to file his financial disclosure forms, and we'd get them, we'd look through them, we'd see how much money he made, what he lost. You know, this was at the time that Trump was -- it was really the only indication we had an insight into Trump's finances because he was refusing to release his taxes as every candidate dating back to.

I think Nixon had released their tax returns. And he, throughout his entire four years in the White House claimed he was under audit. So, we've really only got to see these forms. These are forms and this employee who -- former employee is now testifying was the one in charge of preparing them.

REID: Yeah, absolutely. It's still how we get a lot of information about how much money he's paying his lawyers, which firms are doing the most work. But that's not the way they charge the case. They charge the cases falsifying business records. And I'm sure that you have some ideas too, about exactly how they've tried to tie this into election interference.

But right now, this is about falsifying business records. We've gone through them the way that this was set up this payment to Michael Cohen. And there's no evidence that Trump was directly involved. Now, the first time they went through the document, McConney says they went through it, a to z. So, they're talking about his financial disclosures. Maybe this is where we're going to get to some direct evidence tying these allegations and these business records to the defendant.

COLLINS: Yeah. Obviously, Dana, we are seeing the prosecution walk through each of these documents. And we are told that the jurors are paying very close attention despite the fact that it's a bit repetitive at times, they are talking about each invoice, each payment to Michael Cohen. And McConney is saying that as he was helping Trump fill out those financial disclosure forms that he had to fill out as a candidate and then later as president, he said one point is four o'clock in the morning that they were filing those documents. DANA BASH, CNN HOST, INSIDE POLITICS: Wow. Thank you so much, Kaitlan. And back here, the point that Kaitlan made about how -- you know, this is maybe getting a bit mundane, when you're talking about invoice after invoice, document after document. This is the idea of documents and what did and didn't happen vis-a-vis Donald Trump and Michael Cohen is at the heart of the prosecution's case, maybe not these particular documents. But as you were saying, Andy, so well and it bears repeating. They're trying to build the case brick by brick.

JOHN KING, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Trump's team is going to say Cohen is a liar. Cohen is going to say Trump is a liar or they're going to question each other's credibility, maybe they don't use the term liar. So, if you have a document and you say here it is in black and white. And you have an accountant who says, this is how the process worked that helps you get through the flame throwing and there's going to be flame throwing about the credibility of these witnesses.

BASH: And McConney says, after that they split it up. He says he handled Melania Trump's -- forgive me, I missed that. Melania Trump's issues and not necessarily Donald Trump's -- Trump's legal team raises another objection over the financial disclosure document. Lawyers are at the judge's bench.

KING: Can I ask you that you guys were talking about this, I think during one of the breaks that Trump's team has objected to just about every document. What's your -- just your experience? And what is the jury think of that when they watch it every time something comes up that they jump up in objective. It's their right. It's how it works. But is there -- is there a tipping point at some point?

LAURA COATES, CNN ANCHOR & CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: Well, remember, they are not allowed to do what's called speaking objections where they're going to say objection and then give a whole list of the reasons why, trying to get some argue in front of the jury. They'll say objection. The judge will either sustain or overrule any argument happens at the bench, probably out of the earshot of the jury.

For the very reason, you're probably implying that the jury is going to get exhausted by thinking what's happening here. Is there an issue. Normally you wouldn't want to have the visible notion that you are objecting to everything because it makes you say, well, what's the problem with this, but just to go back to the mundane aspect of this.

I want to go to my tablet here because we're on what, this is week three or four of this drought --

(CROSSTALK)

[12:10:00]

COATES: You don't know because you already know. All the number of people, who you really believe and probably had the most testimony from this than -- from David Pecker on the catch and kill scheme and now Jeffrey McConney. That's the person who has the two connections here about the money and the actual records. That's important to think about here.

Also remember, for each of these documents, look at the indictment. You have 34 counts that look just like this for a jury, right, where they have to prove the following things, intent to defraud, intent to commit another crime, aid and concern the commission of it. And of course, the false entry in all of the documents.

The documents is the most important part of this, which brings you to why it's so mundane. They have to have all these different documents that have to -- really it come in as evidence, but they were actually falsified in a way. This is why this particular witness is going to be so important and thinking about all these things.

And remember, it comes down to the numbers here. You're talking about a total of $420,000. Why is this important? It was all said to be put as legal fees. Now the course the prosecution wants you to think that the reimbursements were not legal fees. They were not. They were about trying to shield it from the actual general public in the campaign statements.

But keep in mind who we're talking about. Jeffrey McConney, he's been here before. Testifying for days on end in the civil fraud trial, about the overinflation of assets in the past. And look at what he said, breaking down on the stand when he had for a fourth day of testimony.

He talked about why he gave up his job. I just wanted to relax and stop being accused of misrepresenting assets for the company that I love working for, I'm sorry. Guess why he's here today for the misrepresentation by not himself, but by Donald Trump potentially as he's been accused of in this very notion.

BASH: And we should also underscore that he is there as a proxy of sorts for Allen Weisselberg, who is not testifying for several reasons, not the least of which is that he's in jail.

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: Yeah. And to John's question about objections. This is a sort of courtroom tactic. When you're in law school and you're taking evidence or trial advocacy workshop, you are taught to -- I mean, oh, that's technically incorrect. I object.

When you get into the real world and you're in a courtroom, someone once told me a supervisor, this is not law school here. You don't object to everything. Because every time you object, the jury takes notes and goes, oh, they must be worried about that. They must be concerned about that. So, you want to keep a poker face. I was always sort of an under objector. I would just let things go because --

KING: Unless your client is telling you.

(CROSSTALK)

COATES: You want him to be more aggressive.

HONIG: Exactly.

COATES: Not necessarily what you want as the lawyer, but it's also how can I appeal to him as well. BASH: And the judge just accepted that.

COATES: And by way, in court. I noticed when I was there, there was a moment when Trump -- I mean, he wasn't just like sending a note over. You're behind him. He is like slapping the elbow of Todd. I mean, like -- literally like Todd Lynch's arm move. He's slapping it every time and tying himself in to come over here. He is very involved. He believes he is his best defender.

KRISTEN HOLMES, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Yes. So, he believes that when he's telling his lawyers is the right way to defend him. Now, obviously, if you are a lawyer, you know how a court of law works -- Donald Trump is not.

ANDREW MCCABE, CNN SENIOR LAW ENFORCEMENT ANALYST: So, he is satisfying the client. But just to take the opposite side of the argument. He's also -- although, they're losing all these objections, they are preserving them for the record as things that they could potentially bring up on appeal. And quite frankly, it's a way tactically to break up the flow of the prosecutors' question to the witness.

So, if you're worried that the jury is actually following this mundane document evidence in the way I am, you break that up. You throw in these interruptions, and it makes it harder to remember.

BASH: And Laura, I'm glad that you brought up the fact that you were there. You were inside the courtroom because we're getting these wonderful notes on a minute-by-minute basis from our colleagues who are in there, but it's not the same as actually the look, the feel. All of the senses that you might have.

COATES: Oh, my goodness. Well, one thing that strikes me immediately, having been in so many courtrooms, right, is the how ordinary this courtroom is. I mean, you have -- the only thing that's extraordinary about the courtroom is that Donald Trump is inside of it. You have him not guarded by a slew of a perimeter of secret service.

But instead, court personnel who are armed, who are blocking your ability to get to him. The witness is pointing directly towards the jury who by the way is intently taking notes, leaning in. They have screens in front of them to be able to see the documents are falling along each time. Their faces are almost ping pong in between the question by the prosecution or defense, right to the witness, very few are looking over towards where Donald Trump is sitting.

It's really fascinating. Think about how routine this matter is. As is the fact that most of the time in many cases, there are going to be routine amounts of evidence. You're not going to have the Perry Mason or the law in order movement -- moment that comes in. They're going to be following on the documents.

And of course, here you go. McConney identifying Trump's signature saying, he's seen it many times. Remember why this is important? Because part of what the evidence has to be are these signed falsified allegedly business records. And so, the jury -- they've heard from the likes of course of David Pecker about catch and kill. They think they're going to hear from likely maybe Stormy Daniels, Michael Cohen, et cetera. Probably not Karen McDougal at this point because that would go backwards in time, back to the catch and kill, prior to now the bills records, but it's possible. They're going to have to get settled in.

[12:15:00]

But what I saw are these jurors that are paying attention. They are leaning forward. They are literally taking notes. And even in the moment when Hope Hicks began to cry other day, they stopped writing, looked very intently, leaned in. And that was the moment they look towards Donald Trump to see what his reaction was.

BASH: And what was it?

COATES: Well, Donald Trump's reaction was actually when I saw concern. When she walked by him, his eyebrows raised as if to show some concern as he looked right at her. She's sort of shielded her face with her hair going to one side of her neck, and almost shrunk herself, going behind his table to then leave the room, followed by prosecution because of course, remember, she's their witness. Not as a cooperator. Not as like anyone, but we got subpoenaed, but they had to know she could keep going on.

BASH: All right everybody. The accountant giving the nuts-and-bolts details of what is at its core and accounting case. Direct examination of a Trump insight are still underway right now. You're watching CNN special live coverage. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:20:00]

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

COLLINS: Welcome back to CNN special live coverage. Just now inside that courtroom behind me, the cross-examination of a key Trump Organization insider has started, with Trump attorney Emil Bove doing the questioning. Prosecution step down moments after the witness. His name is Jeff McConney, identified Donald Trump's signature on a financial documents, and he had seen it many times.

And my panel is back here with me. Paula Reid and Karen Friedman Agnifilo. And this is getting interesting because this is Trump's attorney questioning this longtime Trump employee. We know Trump isn't paying very close attention. And he just said, President Trump did not ask you to do any of the things that the prosecutor described to you.

And McConney, this longtime Trump employee said, he did not. And he is saying that he didn't have a lot of interaction with Donald Trump. He said they did not speak directly very often. He's listening several years, asking if McConney talked to Trump in 2016, 2017, 2018 or ever. I did not. REID: This is the defense's case. We knew they were going to get up and they were going to say, Mr. McConney, did the defendant ask you to do any of these things? Because throughout McConney's testimony, he provided no direct evidence that Trump was involved. We have an update. The defense attorney says, McConney testified to a series of emails involving Cohen, but asked if he ever spoke to Cohen about any of the issues. No, talk to Michael. No. So, he's saying he did not talk to Michael Cohen.

So, at this point, McConney has not provided direct evidence linking the alleged crimes to the defendant. And I think you're going to see the defense attorneys just hammer this again and again. I mean, McConney says, he didn't even talk to Trump for three years, including 2017, which is the year when this alleged criminal conduct occurred. So, this feels like it could be a feeding frenzy for the defense attorneys.

COLLINS: How does the jury hear that? I mean, it just listened to him walk through. Obviously, a person who is intimately familiar, Karen, with the Trump Organization. He worked there for three decades. He had lunch with the CFO every single day. How did they hear him say, well, I actually don't have all that much interaction with Donald Trump.

FRIEDMAN AGNIFILO: I think the jury is going to be paying very close attention because here they see that there is a crime that has been committed, but they're looking to link it to the defendant, and the defense attorney is doing a good job at seizing on the one issue. The one thing they have to focus on, right, because you can't -- there's no -- with the paper case, papers don't lie, right? Documents don't lie. They are what they are.

But here they have a lot of room to work with in terms of the fact that it didn't deal directly with Donald Trump and it's a big hole in the prosecution's case so far when we haven't seen everything yet.

COLLINS: Yeah. This is just getting started is the cross-examination of this Trump Organization insider is happening. We also have Robert Hirschhorn here with us. He is an attorney and a jury consultant. And he's walking through every step of this trial with us. And Robert right now the cross-examination is happening.

Trump's attorneys asking this witness, showing him emails from Michael Cohen in 2017, where Cohen signature block is there. And it says attorney doesn't say fixer, which is often what Michael Cohen is known as. And he just said, it doesn't say fixer. Does it McConney confirms no. What do you make of this line of questioning from Trump's attorneys?

ROBERT HIRSCHHORN, LAWYER & JURY CONSULTANT: Yeah. Kaitlan thanks for having me back. Cases are won and lost on cross-examination, not direct examination. And the fact that -- you know, what he's trying to do is, you know, the whole idea of the monitor of the fixer. You know, that's not what this case is about. This is an accounting case. This is a crucial witness. He's an accountant.

If anybody did anything regarding how to record these records. How to put them in the books. It's the accountant, he's not Trump. And the fact that this witness said that he never had direction from Trump to falsify any records. That's a huge problem for the prosecution's case.

COLLINS: Well, and also, I imagine this question may be something -- and the prosecution I should know will get a chance to requestion this witness. But McConney was just asked if he knows one way or another, whether or not Michael Cohen actually did legal work for Donald Trump in 2017. He says, I do not know now.

[12:25:00]

We know there are other instances out there. People like Rudy Giuliani saying that Michael Cohen wasn't doing any illegal work that he was getting paid, but they're trying to make the point and draw some distance that McConney himself doesn't know. And that Cohen was not using a Trump org email account -- a Trump Organization email account. He was just using his own personal Gmail. What do you think of that?

HIRSCHHORN: Well, look, I also think the prosecution is also using the wrong guy. The guy that the prosecution ought to have up on the witness stand is Allen, who's currently in the crossbars' motel. And by the way, if President Trump keeps violating the gag order, he's also going to get a little taste of the crossbars' motel if he's not careful.

So, here's the point. This is the only person the prosecution could have that talk about the accounting side, at least so far. He's the highest one up so far from the Trump org side. He has not provided, Kaitlan, that crucial link between the crime and the defendants, either knowledge about it or ordering that the documents be falsified. It's a big problem.

And I'm telling you. If they don't fix this problem, what you're looking at is this kind of verdict right here of a not guilty. Even from a predominantly democratic jury, they have to follow the evidence in the case. And if this -- if the state doesn't link all this up, you're coming in with a not guilty.

COLLINS: Yeah. We'll see if that reasonable doubt gap there is created. Robert Hirschhorn, thank you for that. And as we are monitoring this, this key Trump insight is now being cross examined by Trump's attorneys. Right now, they are pointing to an invoice for Cohen asked Weisselberg to he was just referring to who's serving time at Rikers right now to call him to discuss an open foundation matter.

And Karen and Paula, you know, Trump has been very closely paying attention to this testimony. Interesting, it seems more closely than he did with Keith Davidson, or David Pecker, or Hope Hicks. How is the jury? I mean, they're not just watching the prosecution and the witness and the defense attorney. They're also watching the defendant at times.

FRIEDMAN AGNIFILO: They're watching everything. Juries notice everything. They're going to notice who's in the courtroom on behalf of Donald Trump, for example, and who's not. Eric Trump's there, Alina Habba is there, but they haven't seen Melania. They haven't seen his other children. And so, they're going to notice that what they do with it, who knows, but they're going to notice all of those things.

They're going to notice what the defendant is doing. What Mr. Trump is doing, if he's focusing on a witness. If he's sleeping. If he's -- whatever it is. They're going to notice that he really cares about this witness if he's really focusing on it. And this is important.

COLLINS: I'm starting to see a new line of defense. It appears from Trump's team, which is that how much the way the Trump Organization did business changed once he went to Washington?

REID: Yeah. And that's why you heard McConney, really one of his first answers talked about, yes, Trump is hands on. He knew everything that was going on up until 2017. And the problem for prosecutors is that what they have alleged is 34 counts of falsifying business records. All occurred in 2017.

So now you're going to see defense attorneys really drill down on that. How dramatically did you need to change the way you did business, once the head of your organization right had to divest from the business, pass it off to his sons and Allen Weisselberg, and also became the leader of the free world.

Right now, the defense attorney asked when Trump moved to D.C. and took office, the Trump Organization internally was in flux and chaos. That's putting it mildly, McConney says. And this is really going to be significant because they're going to argue that what transpired here wasn't the result of a conspiracy.

Instead, it was the result of chaos, which so often, as we know in Trump world, is the explanation or at least the defense against conspiracies. But they're just not organized enough to engage in them until we have another update. McConney says, the way of doing business at the company, once Trump became president had to change dramatically. He says, I don't remember seeing him in New York at all after Trump became president.

COLLINS: As we're seeing this, Karen, if you were in there and you're at the prosecution's table. What do you get back up and say to this witness? How do you tried to redirect this line of questioning? If the jury is just hearing this guy never talked to Trump, that the way they did business drastically changed after Mr. Trump became president, and that it was a chaotic situation to put it mildly.

FRIEDMAN AGNIFILO: Look, you know, the reason all this stuff about Allen Weisselberg and Michael Cohen is coming in normally, that would be hearsay. But it's all coming in, because it's co-conspirator statements, which is an exception to the hearsay rule. So, I think they're going to focus on the pieces of evidence that are strongest to their case involving them. And they'll just highlight that from McConney.

But like the prosecution, they know what other evidence they have coming down the road. They know the things they're trying to corroborate that Michael Cohen is going to testify to. So, there might be things in here that are much more important that we don't know about because they haven't tied it all together yet in summation. [12:30:00]