Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Event/Special

Hamas Accepts Ceasefire Proposal; Israeli Government Reviews Hamas's Response, Uncertainty Over Agreement's Details; White House Monitoring Situation; CIA Director And Qatari Prime Minister Key Mediators; Israeli Evacuation Order Raises Questions; President Biden And Prime Minister Netanyahu Discuss Developments; Trump's Hush Money Trial Continues; Week Four Of Historic Criminal Trial In New York; Testimony Highlights Financial Records; Prosecution Aims To Establish Reimbursement Scheme; Allegations Of Falsified Payments; Defense Emphasizes Lack Of Direct Link To Trump. Aired 2-2:30p ET

Aired May 06, 2024 - 14:00   ET

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

[14:00:00]

BRIANNA KEILAR, CNN HOST: Welcome back now to our special coverage of former President Trump's criminal trial. First, though, we do have more on this significant breaking news out of the Middle East. Hamas has agreed to a ceasefire deal proposed by Egypt and Qatar, and the Israeli government says it is now reviewing Hamas's response. Wolf.

WOLF BLIZTER, CNN HOST: Potentially, Brianna, very, very significant developments. Right now, we're awaiting reaction directly from the White House. The press briefing there is set to begin. In just a few minutes, we'll hear what the National Security Council spokesperson has to say on this apparent agreement by Hamas, announced by Hamas, that they've accepted this ceasefire proposal. We'll share those remarks with you live as soon as they begin over at the White House. CNN's Jeremy Diamond is joining us live from Jerusalem right now. Jeremy, we know Israel helped craft this potential deal, and a source tells us it was readying an operation in Rafah, a military operation in Rafah, in order in part to pressure Hamas into accepting a deal. Is there any reason to believe Israel will not agree to this proposal that Hamas says it has accepted?

JEREMY DIAMOND, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, that certainly is a possibility, Wolf, and it is a possibility for a few different reasons, the first of which being that we don't know yet officially whether or not what Hamas has agreed to is the same framework that was on the table over the course of the last week, which Israel did significantly weigh in on. And which, as of yesterday, a Hamas delegation had left Cairo without agreeing to. We don't know if any changes have been made to that framework. The second thing to keep in mind here is the fact that the Israeli government, while it did have significant input into that framework, it made some new concessions, including allowing the unrestricted return of Palestinians to northern Gaza as part of this framework. It had not formally agreed to every component of this latest Egyptian framework. It was expected that should Hamas agree to this framework that it was very likely that the Mossad director, David Barnea, would travel to Cairo, where the negotiators were meeting this weekend, and then pursue negotiations to finalize an agreement around that framework.

And so, as of yet, that has not happened. And we have yet to actually get an official response from the Israeli government. But I have learned, Wolf, that in the last hour or so, the Israeli government has indeed formally received Hamas's response from the mediators involved in these negotiations. The Israeli negotiating team is currently reviewing that response from Hamas, but we have yet to get an official comment from the Israeli prime minister's office. We also know from a diplomatic source familiar with these talks that Hamas's agreement to this framework, whether it has changed or not, but Hamas's agreement to this framework came after a days-long meeting between the CIA director, Bill Burns, who is in Doha, Qatar, and the Qatari prime minister. The mediators it seems, including Qatar and Egypt, brought enormous pressure to bear on Hamas to get them to accept this current plan, with that source now telling our colleague Becky Anderson that the ball is now firmly in Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's court. So, we are awaiting any kind of official reaction from the Israeli government. But as we understand it, this proposal, this agreement from Hamas, is now in the hands of the Israeli government. We don't yet know how much it has changed.

[14:05:09]

And we also don't know, Wolf, how much Israel's order to evacuate about 100,000 people in eastern Rafah, setting the stage for that major ground offensive that it has been threatening for months. We don't know how much that played into Hamas's decision-making today.

WOLF BLITZER, CNN HOST: So I just want to be precise, Jeremy. What I hear you saying is that the chief Israeli negotiator in all this, the head of the Israeli intelligence service, the Mossad, David Barnea, he has not been in Egypt in recent days working on this latest proposal, but he's heading there soon. Is that what you're saying?

DIAMOND: No word that he's heading there soon, Wolf. But my understanding was that if there was a framework agreement, that he would then travel to meet the other negotiators who over the weekend had indeed been in Cairo, but that Hamas delegation left Cairo last night, I believe. Today, there have been subsequent meetings between the negotiators in Doha, Qatar, including with the CIA director, the Qatari prime minister. And as we understand it, Hamas's political head, Ismail Haniyeh, then made a phone call to the Qatari prime minister, to the head of Egyptian intelligence, and he informed them of his agreement to this latest proposal. We don't have any word yet on an Israeli delegation heading to Qatar or to Egypt to pursue these negotiations. As we understand it right now, they remain in Israel. They are currently studying this latest response from Hamas, and we are waiting. Any kind of official government reaction here.

BLITZER: Just a quick technical question while I have you, Jeremy. We know that Israel and Egypt have diplomatic relations and Israeli officials go to Cairo for talks, but Israel doesn't have full diplomatic relations with Qatar. Are Israeli officials, have they been going to Doha, Qatar to participate in these negotiations? Would David Barnea, the head of the Israeli intelligence service, head to Qatar, even though there are no formal diplomatic relations between Qatar and Israel?

DIAMOND: Yeah. He certainly would, Wolf. And despite the fact that they don't have those formal diplomatic relations, there have been open lines of communication between the Israeli government officials, namely David Barnea and his Qatari counterparts. The Qatari prime minister, who also serves as the foreign minister, has been the main interlocutor here, as has the CIA director, Bill Burns, and the Egyptian head of intelligence, Kamel Abbas. Those are all of the key players, and certainly they have been traveling to each other over the course of the last several months desperately trying to broker a deal, which hundreds of thousands of people in Gaza have been waiting for, for seven months now as they have faced this war.

We have seen images of them celebrating in the streets tonight, although, again, we do not yet have a final agreement between the parties. And then, of course, Wolf, of course, there are the families of the Israeli hostages. We could see 20 to 33 Israeli hostages released in a first phase of this agreement if that framework that we were talking about last week still stands. So, again, enormous promise here for innocent people on both sides of this conflict, but also a lack of certainty at this stage about whether or not this will actually lead to a final agreement.

BLITZER: Yeah, very significant developments indeed. Israel, of course, would release Palestinian prisoners being held in Israel as part of this deal if, in fact, it happens. Jeremy, stand by. We'll get back to you. I want to go to the White House right now. MJ Lee is standing by. Momentarily, we're told that John Kirby, the national security council press spokesperson is going to be briefing reporters there. Is that still going on?

MJ LEE, CNN SENIOR WHITE HOUSE CORRESPONDENT: That's right, Wolf. And actually, we've heard from the State Department that the U.S. received Hamas's response within the last hour or so. So what's happening now is that U.S. officials are going through the details of this framework and the response from Hamas before actually responding in any kind of detail. But you're right that the White House press briefing is also set to begin in the next few minutes or so. And that is when we expect to get the first and most fulsome White House reaction to this potentially significant news. You know, U.S. officials, of course, have been pushing really hard for a number of months now for all of the parties to get to some sort of agreement on a temporary ceasefire and a hostages release deal.

We saw over the weekend CIA Director Bill Burns was in the region, and he actually ended up staying in Doha longer than initially was expected to try to push on this deal. And as Jeremy mentioned, according to a diplomatic source telling our Becky Anderson, both Bill Burns and the Qatari prime minister played significant roles along with other mediators in really putting the pressure on Hamas to accept this framework. But I do think until we have gotten that official response from the Israelis, noting really a sense of caution here is really important, just given that in the months of reporting on these ongoing negotiations, we have had other moments like this of real optimism, where we appear to be on the brink of a potential deal. And then for whatever reason, that deal has fallen apart. [14:10:09]

And in fact, coming out of this weekend, it did appear that we were actually quite far from anything materializing out of the ongoing talks that we saw over the weekend. I just think all of that gives you a sense of how up and down these ongoing negotiations have been. I should also remind our viewers that, of course, President Biden and Prime Minister Netanyahu spoke earlier today. And of course, these ongoing talks was one of the topics that the two leaders discussed, as has been the case for all of their recent phone calls. So again, we'll see what the White House's official response is to this news that Hamas has accepted this latest framework and whether they believe that the Israelis would accept this deal as well, Wolf.

BLITZER: And was there any official White House readout on the phone conversation between President Biden and Prime Minister Netanyahu?

LEE: We have gotten a readout from that. And as I said, you know, this ongoing negotiation to try to get to a temporary ceasefire and hostages deal, that was one of the issues that was discussed. It also said that the president made clear his views on a Rafah operation. That, of course, is a reference to how much U.S. officials have cautioned their Israeli counterparts in recent weeks that it would be simply unacceptable to this White House and this administration for the Israelis to go ahead with a major incursion when they do not think that the many civilians that are in southern Gaza can be properly protected. They also discussed a number of other topics, including the issue of humanitarian aid. So a number of important topics were discussed. But we know, again, that this framework, this agreement that Hamas appears to have agreed to, this was one of the overarching topics that the two leaders did discuss earlier today, Wolf.

BLITZER: Very interesting. MJ Lees, our senior White House correspondent, you're getting ready to go to that briefing. We'll monitor it, of course, and hear what John Kirby has to say from the National Security Council. MJ, thank you very, very much. I want to go back to Brianna in New York. Brianna.

KEILAR: Yeah, and Wolf, obviously, to MJ's point, the backdrop for all of this is what we're seeing happen in Rafah the IDF issuing an evacuation order for eastern Rafah, what has been a long delayed offensive there. And it has raised questions about whether Israel is prepared to go ahead with that. Certainly, Hamas has an interest in at least trying to delay that, if not stop that. And that is very much, you know, the possibility. We've seen that discussed, asked about at the State Department briefing, at least. We'll see it as well at the White House briefing. Let's bring in CNN chief national security correspondent Alex Marquardt. Alex, what are you hearing?

ALEX MARQUARDT, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL SECURITY CORRESPONDENT: Well, Brianna, Hamas also has an interest in making it look like Israel is rejecting a deal. For the past few weeks, what we've heard over and over, again, from U.S. officials is that the ball is in Hamas's court. It is on them to accept what has been called an extraordinarily generous offer that Israel was on board with. And so we hope to get a lot more details from John Kirby at the White House in just a few moments. We didn't really learn much of anything from Matt Miller at the State Department, the State Department spokesman, except that they had gotten this response and that they were reviewing it. And the big question for me, Brianna, and I've been covering this for months now, the ins and outs of what this deal could look like, is, what does it look like in the later phases of an agreement? So the questions to John Kirby should essentially be, did Hamas- is Hamas still insisting that Israel discuss an end to this war and the withdrawal of the IDF from the Gaza Strip?

The first phase of this agreement is generally pretty well laid out. And it appears that both Israel and Hamas have all but agreed to what that first phase would look like. And that would be some 33 Israeli hostages who would be released in exchange for hundreds of Palestinians prisoners. And Gazans in the southern part of the Gaza Strip would get to go back home to the north in an unrestricted way. So that appears to be rather settled. And that's why the U.S. has said that this was a generous offer, because Israel has agreed to fewer hostages and they've agreed to allow those Palestinians to go home. But, Brianna, where it gets really complicated and where the major sticking point has been for a long, long time is in the second and third phases, because Hamas is insisting that Israel start talking about ending this war and pulling back their troops. And Israel has rejected that. We heard yesterday from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who mentioned just this and said the state of Israel cannot accept this. So back to Jeremy's point, it really remains to be seen what Hamas has agreed to tonight. And is this a ploy by them to be able to say, well, look, Israel is rejecting this deal. This is on them. But we really just don't have a sense of exactly what it is Hamas has agreed to. This is what we're asking all of our sources right now, Brianna.

[14:15:09]

KEILAR: Yeah, if Israel has proposed ABC and Hamas is accepting AYZ, then we can see there obviously are quite a big area that does not overlap here. And Alex, we're awaiting that. That is what U.S. officials and officials in the region are going through. Alex, thank you so much for that great reporting. We are awaiting the White House press briefing. We are going to bring that to you as soon as it begins. And we will continue to cover this breaking news as well. The court is about to resume here in New York, where former President Donald Trump is standing trial. We have reporters in the courtroom following every update. Stay with us.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[14:20:09]

BLITZER: Welcome back to our special coverage. We'll, of course, stay on top of the breaking news coming out of the Middle East. Hamas accepting a ceasefire proposal. We're expecting to hear directly from the White House at any moment. You're looking at the White House briefing room right there. John Kirby, the National Security Council's press spokesperson, is going to be briefing reporters. We'll have live coverage. Stand by for that. But in the meantime, I want to turn back to the legal drama, dramatic legal drama, unfolding once again in New York City. It's week four of Donald Trump's historic hush money criminal trial. Let's discuss with my panelists here. And we just learned, Ellie, that there's a new witness. They've wrapped up the testimony from Jeffrey McConaughey, the Trump organization controller, and now they've just announced a new witness.

ELLIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: So this makes perfect sense because this is a natural continuation of this morning's testimony, which came from Jeffrey McConaughey, who essentially was the number two accountant, more or less, in the Trump organization under Allen Weisselberg. Now, this is essentially the number three person, Ms. Tarasoff. It's important to keep--

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: Deborah Tarasoff.

HONIG: Right. It's important to keep in mind throughout, the Trump organization was a small operation. They have a lot of employees out at their golf clubs and hotels. But in terms of who ran the corporate side of it, it's really just a dozen or so people. Now, there was an important moment that Jeffrey McConaughey testified about this morning. He sent an email at one point to the witness who's taking the stand now, Ms. Tarasoff, where he wrote to her, quote, please pay from the trust post to legal expenses. I'll say that again, post to legal expenses. And that's really the heart of the alleged crime here, that this was actually reimbursement for the Stormy Daniels hush money. But Donald Trump, they argue, artificially said, we're going to call this legal expenses. I think the testimony this morning was effective in providing a building block. Here's how the accounting worked. What's still missing, though, is that direct link to Donald J. Trump.

BLITZER: We're just getting word in that one of the district attorney's assistant, District Attorney Christopher Conroy, just said, while they were generated by Capital One, they were produced by the Trump organization from their records. What does that say to you, Elliot?

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Well, I think, and this is just to pick up on the point that Elliot made, and let's look at not just this morning's testimony, but the testimony we saw over the last week. What prosecutors appear to have done is lay out their theory with respect to the 2016 election, and noting that the Trump organization and individuals inside were aware of the hysteria about 2016 and how Donald Trump might have behaved in response to it. Today's testimony has set up, number one, that money was moved. Number two, that these were not legal expenses. And that number three, and I think what I think they hope to get to, is that some of these things were directed by the former president. And so this is important testimony. I think it may come across as boring in the sense that it's going to deal with financial records and how money was moved. But this is critical for establishing what they need to establish, which is that these payments were falsified.

DAVID CHALIAN, CNN POLITICAL DIRECTOR: That's what we mean by this being a paperwork case. And these are the people that can actually testify to how that paperwork was conducted and who was directing that paperwork to be conducted as it was. And the critical point that I hear here from our legal experts, Wolf, is that nobody has yet directly connected the defendant in this case, the former president of the United States, to these actions. And that is going to be a big question that hangs over this jury as the prosecution moves forward with its case.

GLORIA BORGER, CNN SENIOR POLITICAL ANALYST: She was just a vehicle. She was asked in February of 2017 to get these checks and send the checks to--

BLITZER: You mean Deb Tarasoff?

(CROSSTALK)

BORGER: Yes, Deb Tarasoff.

(CROSSTALK)

BLITZER: The accountant.

BORGER: To send them to Michael Cohen as a reimbursement for legal services. So she's just the vehicle for doing it. I think what we haven't seen, really, is solid proof, that Donald Trump was the architect of all of this. And so what we see the defense lawyers talking about is how it was chaos in 2017. Once Donald Trump got to the White House, you know, it became chaotic at the Trump org. So the question is, was it chaos, or was there really a conspiracy that was led by even then president of the United States, Donald Trump? You do have his canceled checks. You do know that this came from his personal account, most of these reimbursements.

BLITZER: To Michael Cohen.

BORGER: To Michael Cohen. So the question is, is that enough, or does there need to be more?

WILLIAMS: Some of this depends on-all of this depends on Michael Cohen's testimony.

BORGER: Right.

[14:25:09]

It remains to be seen what he will say. Now, at least in the testimony this morning, there was some insinuations made such that one was, there was some other money he, which is Michael Cohen, was owed, right? And they are, it is clear that they're at least attempting to establish that everyone on all sides knew what they intended to do with the money and what it was, but the words that are missing are Donald Trump said so. Now, again, you don't need the, you know, Donald Trump's explicit statement that he is engaging in a particular act. Insinuation is enough if there's enough of it. And it, what remains to be seen is what the rest of the testimony, particularly from Michael Cohen says.

HONIG: To Gloria's point, as we see the juries being brought in now, the dispute that was happening moments ago was over those canceled checks.

(CROSSTALK)

BORGER: Yeah

HONIG: There's a little bit of a technical dispute about are they authentic or not. They're going to come in. The jury's going to see them. The short answer, I think, about those checks, some of which were signed by Donald Trump, not others, the ones that came out of his personal account.

(CROSSTALK)

BORGER: In the Oval Office.

HONIG: In the Oval Office. That's very important evidence for the prosecution. It's not game over, right?

(CROSSTALK)

BORGER: No

HONIG: There could be many reasons. And I think what the defense has been building is a defense here that Michael Cohen just saw the opportunity to enrich himself. And he set up this structure and all Donald Trump knew was, hey, you owe money to your lawyer. Fine. Who do I sign the check to? So they're trying to build a sort of a wall between his knowledge of the accounting structures that we heard of this morning and sort of who was actually executing. He's trying to say that was happening way down in the weeds. I was way up here in the clouds.

CHALIAN: One thing just to add. We know from testimony in this trial and from covering Donald Trump, you just owe money to your lawyer. Fine is not usually the response--

(CROSSTALK)

HONIG: Right

CHALIAN: -- that just gets paid. He's in the weeds on this stuff. He wants to understand how much is being paid, for what purpose does this bill really have to be? We know lots of lawyers in his orbit who are still waiting to get paid for work that they believe they're owed money for. So that's also a piece of this story that the prosecution team is trying to incorporate into this.

BLITZER: the other thing we've learned about Trump over the years, not just recently, is that when it comes to money, he wants to be involved in every nickel and dime.

HONIG: Yeah, I mean, that argument goes both ways. That's one argument the way David phrased it. He wouldn't, he would never part with a dime that he didn't know exactly what it's for. I think the counterpoint the defense is going to make is why would he knowingly reimburse Michael Cohen, who had laid out $130,000? Why would he knowingly reimburse Michael Cohen for $420,000?

(CROSSTALK)

BORGER: Right

HONIG: And essentially, they're going to argue that he was duped by his own internal apparatus, by his own lawyer.

BORGER: Well, that Weisselberg laid out a plan and said, OK, you know, Stormy Daniels was $130,000. We're going to double that because of tax reasons. We're going to put a bonus in there for Michael Cohen, which he believes he is owed. And then some other some other stuff was thrown in. It's not like Donald Trump to understand that he owes someone $130,000 and then pay them $420,000. That is a bit out of character.

WILLIAMS: But again, what we are imposing is what we know of Donald Trump, the individual, which makes total common sense to everyone here and probably many people.

CHALIAN: But not to a jury.

WILLIAMS: But not to a jury. And some of that's not going to be relevant. And when I say relevant, I don't mean common sense relevant. I mean, relevance in the eyes of the law, where it seeks to prove or disprove.

BLITZER: The jury is now back in the courtroom. The prosecutor, Christopher Conroy, has called Deborah Tarasoff, a former accountant from the Trump organization, to testify. We're monitoring all of that. Everybody stand by. Much more of our special coverage of the Donald Trump hush money case. That's coming up just ahead. We're also waiting to hear directly from the White House, looking at live pictures from the White House briefing room. Expected to hear from the National Security Council press spokesperson. John Kirby is getting ready to brief. There's Karine Jean-Pierre. She's walking in. I think she's going to probably introduce John Kirby to brief the reporters on this so-called Hamas ceasefire deal. We'll monitor this. Let's listen in to Karine Jean-Pierre right now.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

KARINE JEAN-PIERRE, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY:--John Kirby, who will share more updates in the region.

JOHN KIRBY, NSC COORDINATOR FOR STRATEGIC COMMUNICATIONS: Good afternoon, everybody. As Karine noted, there has been a response from Hamas to the hostage deal. We're currently reviewing that response, and we're discussing it with our partners in the region. Director Burns, as you know, is there, and he's working this in real time on the ground. I won't be able to comment any further on this until we know where things stand. I hope you can understand that. I know everybody's curious about what's in this response, what the Israeli reaction to it is. I'm just not going to get ahead of the process. We want to get these hostages out. We want to get a ceasefire in place for six weeks. We want to increase humanitarian assistance. And the last thing that I want to do is say anything at this podium that's going to put that process at risk. Regardless, as we've said before, we still believe that reaching an agreement is the absolute best outcome, not only for the hostages but for the Palestinian people. And we're not going to stop working to that outcome.