Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Event/Special

Now: Michael Cohen Testifies About Karen McDougal Story; Now: Michael Cohen Testifies About "Access Hollywood" Tape; Now: Michael Cohen Testifies In Trump Hush Money Trial. Aired 12-12:30p ET

Aired May 13, 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]

ELIE HONIG, CNN SENIOR LEGAL ANALYST: And we turn individual one into federal defendant one, there was a series of internal deliberations, non-political and the decision was no. The other thing is, it's not quite correct. I know it's become a little bit of a slogan. Its not quite correct to say, Michael Cohen already went to prison for this. It's not quite for this.

Michael Cohen, as he agrees -- Michael Cohen pled guilty to the federal campaign finance violation. That's a part of the state crime charged here. The prosecutors do have to show a campaign finance violation, but they also have to show falsification of business records. That was actually not part of the charge against Cohen. So, it's a distinction but an important distinction.

JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST & CHIEF WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: So, they used when Cohen and somebody else at AMI, the tabloid empire, are texting and discussing possible names for Trump -- for -- from Michael Cohen's shell corporations in Delaware. They're using the signal app to communicate, Cohen says. Prosecutors are showing a screenshot of possible names and calls made on signal.

This is again, as we've been told by our attorneys, our panel here, our law firm to my left. The idea that everything Michael Cohen says whenever and wherever possible, prosecution attorneys are coming forward and saying, and here's evidence of this that you just said, and here's evidence of that that you just said. Here is evidence of the phone call.

Even if they don't actually have the substance of the phone call. They're just trying to make it clear that he's not making the story up. Here's all the evidence behind it. September 30, 2016, record shows an AMI employee messaged Colin, I will be at your office in a few minutes. Again, just trying to boost Cohen story to say, like everything he's saying has been adhered to the contours of the evidence and the facts in this case.

Because they know, Kasie Hunt, and Daniel Rothstein and Cohen signed the agreement to transfer the rights of the McDougal story, but the agreement was ultimately never executed. We know that they know Cohen formed the company Resolution Consultants LLC to handle the payment that's the shell corporation resolution consultants. It's one of the two he sets up. We know that they know that the defense is going to come at Michael Cohen, like a hippo, like a rhino. Like a giant feast. Have you ever seen a hippo? Have you ever seen what they do? It's not a small thing. They are cool animals. They are -- they are vicious. Who don't even know this?

That is, yes. Hippos are one of the nastiest creatures in the world. Anyway, they're going to come at him like a battering ram -- they're going to come at him like a battering ram that has credibility. They're about to introduce to them whenever they get their shot. They're going to have like, an hour's worth of lies, Michael Cohen told.

KASIE HUNT, CNN CHIEF NATIONAL AFFAIRS ANALYST: The hippo was actually the unofficial mascot of my alma mater, George Washington. You can look at that tonight (Ph). So yeah. I mean, look, this is what they were saying. You know, show followed up with documents, at every turn with recordings, with any sort of evidence that can show that, well, in this case -- in this particular instance, Michael Cohen is telling the truth.

And, you know, this is the problem that we have gone back to this again and again and again, about Michael Cohen being a flawed witness. I mean, one thing I'm curious, and I'm really watching for here too, is there are the technical issues of this, right? Did he actually lie? Is he telling the truth?

There's also this kind of broader picture about Michael Cohen as someone who has a vendetta against Donald Trump and whether that undermines his credibility with the jury. And I'm not sure I've seen anything here that, you know, that's going to be something that the defense is going to talk about. I have yet to see something where the prosecutors are addressing that really, well, we'll do it at the end.

ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Before the end of the day, if not the day to day, the day tomorrow, they will bring up all of those things. There's no question about that because they have to prepare the jury for this.

HUNT: Because this is a guy who's on TikTok like every night and he was wearing a t-shirt that had, like what looks to be Donald Trump behind bars.

TAPPER: So, Michael Cohen says, the LLC's purpose was quote, to use this entity for the assignment of the MacDougal matter, as well as the other information that AMI had about Trump. Again, Michael Cohen wanting to make sure David Pecker is happy and is paid back by the spoiler alert. He's never paid back.

Because of all the other dirt that David Pecker had allegedly on Michael -- on Donald Trump. And so, Cohen in trying to make sure David Pecker is happy is doing again the bidding of Donald Trump. Whether Donald Trump knows it or not. Two points. One, hippos kill 500 people a year in Africa, lions only killed 22.

(CROSSTALK) WILLIAMS: OK. Hippos will trample to death anyone or anything that crosses --

TAPPER: Yeah. Hippos are --

WILLIAMS: -- own body in water.

TAPPER: Don't sleep on hippos.

HUNT: So, this is actually very good.

TAPPER: Don't sleep, don't sleep on hippos. Second of all -- second of all, we have -- we have the courtroom sketch of Christine Cornell that I want to show you. We brought you Jane Rosenberg's earlier and here's Christine Cornell. There we go. And so, -- then Michael Cohen in the -- in the juror's box there and attorney Susan Hoffinger asking him questions.

[12:05:00]

You see, Judge Merchan, his hand in his face and his hands as he often does. Donald Trump looking down. And again, there are a little artistic license and that's Alvin Bragg in the foreground. A little artistic license because Donald Trump's desk is actually not facing Michael Cohen, it's actually Judge Merchan.

But again, these are artistic interpretations. We love the work of Christine Cornell. We love the work of Jane Rosenberg, but they are artistic interpretations because New York apparently still thinks it is the year 1830 when it comes to broadcast capabilities and its courtrooms. Anderson?

ANDERSON COOPER, CNN ANCHOR: And Jake, just to put the deadliness of hippos in perspective. From memory I remember that great whites only kill about six people every year. So, hippos are very, very dangerous.

Kaitlan and Paula are back with me.

(CROSSTALK)

COOPER: So, what's interesting, Michael Cohen has now testified -- has testified that he made that recording for David Pecker. Does that make sense? The idea that Michael Cohen would record his employer and then play that recording to David Pecker, a friend of his employer, who without now -- and he didn't do this without Donald Trump's knowledge. And then David Pecker -- what have David pecker said to Donald Trump. Oh, you know, you're -- I mean, if I'm a friend of Donald Trump, I would say to him, you know, your lawyer recorded you secretly.

PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: It's strange credulity. If it is true, it shows me a lack of advanced planning or advanced thinking on Michael Cohen's part, also not getting the permission from his boss. It's a moment that I'm sure jurors are going to pause and really contemplate what were his true motives. Is he being honest? And we have an update. Cohen explains that the agreement with AMI was $125,000, not 150 because AMI agreed the compensation to McDougal for articles and covers was worth $25,000. So here they're going through the details of the payment to Karen McDougal, who actually received ultimately more than Stormy Daniels. She did not receive all of the $150,000. Her lawyer took a significant cut, nearly half. Now the prosecutor asked Cohen, if he was planning to own the life rights to McDougal story?

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: You know, the Michael Cohen recording Trump and saying that was the only time he ever recorded him. It is a question of how the jury looks on that. It also reminds me of Evan Corcoran, Trump's attorney who is now departed his team because he's become a witness in the classified documents case.

After meetings that he had with Donald Trump about the classified documents and the searches for them. He recorded these voice memos to himself, which a lot of attorneys have commented how rare that is. But it was -- it was in essence, it's unclear what the intention was, but it protected him innocence in this because he said that Trump was the one instructing him to defy a subpoena.

Right now, Cohen is saying what he was doing was at the direction and for the benefit of Mr. Trump. Obviously, Michael Cohen to a degree will benefit from the idea that he recorded Donald Trump in this conversation.

COOPER: Jurors now being shown the call logs during Trump and Cohen spoke for seven minutes and 14 seconds on September 29, 2016. I mean, if Michael Cohen had said -- Cohen said he'd let Trump know it was being taken care of and that the matter was being resolved. If Michael Cohen had said, yeah, I was concerned that I knew this was important. And I was -- I wanted to record this for my own protection. That would have been one thing --

REID: Much more credible.

COOPER: Much more credible than this idea that he was going to show it to David Pecker.

REID: Because usually if you're taking notes, a lot of folks thought that Michael Cohen -- excuse me, Evan Corcoran was trying to protect himself, right? See why, especially when you see what happens to so many of Trump's lawyers.

It's much more credible to say that you are trying to somehow protect yourself than to protect someone else, particularly when you think of Cohen's loyalty to Trump how he viewed him. The fact that he would record Trump without his knowledge to help or to appease David Pecker. It doesn't quite make sense.

COLLINS: The other thing this goes back to though, is what they were arguing about before the jury was brought in the room this morning was the prosecution wanted to be able to show the jury the severance agreement that Allen Weisselberg signed. And so, it's basically an agreement where there was a list of conditions, but he would get $2 million if he never spoke disparagingly about the Trump Organization.

And that if he only complied with legal matters, if he was subpoenaed that he never was compelled, or volunteer to go and talk to investigators or prosecutors in any manner or shape or form. Obviously, you know, they could have subpoenaed him here. The expectation when you talk to people familiar with the prosecutors thinking here is that, essentially, he would have gotten on the stand and just pleaded the fifth the whole time.

But what Michael Cohen is testifying to is that Allen Weisselberg was deeply involved in every single deal and every single agreement, the intimate details of this. I mean, here's the other missing piece here that could really verify so much of what we've seen and what we're hearing.

COOPER: Cohen is being shown the invoice from Investor Advisory Services, AMI's third-party entity used for the transaction. I mean, we talked about this before. The invoice describes a flat fee for advisory services. Hoffinger asked Cohen whether that was truthful. We've talked about it before. But again, Allen Weisselberg not testifying for the prosecution. Not testifying at all is a huge gift for Donald Trump.

[12:10:00]

REID: It is a huge gift. And if you're a jury, you're asking, why aren't we hearing from Allen Weisselberg. And that's why there was so much litigation at the end of the day Friday, and the judge had to come in and weigh in on just how much the jury can hear about why he's not testifying. And this is significant because Cohen appears much more relaxed on the stand. He's looking at the jury while answering questions about the McDougal deal.

I think we said earlier. Let's see how he does after the break because that was an opportunity for the prosecutors to really just pointed out to him that maybe he's not looking at the jury enough. And that is likely something he should start to do as they try to build trust, particularly as we get to a part of the story that has not been corroborated by other witnesses. And from Michael Cohen is really the only person who could speak to it.

COOPER: I want to turn to Anna Cominsky. She's the Director of the Criminal Defense Clinic at New York Law School. Adam Kaufmann is back. He's a former prosecutor in Manhattan district attorney's office. Anna, I'm wondering what you make of Michael Cohen claiming that this audio recording he secretly made of his client Donald Trump was to be played ultimately. Or given to David Pecker -- to show Pecker that he was going to be repaid. Does that make sense to you?

ANNA COMINSKY, DIRECTOR OF CRIMINAL DEFENSE CLINIC AT NEW YORK LAW SCHOOL: Well, Anderson, there's a lot of things about this case that don't make sense. And there's a lot of things about this that are quite unique. Typically, attorneys do not record their clients. And so that is not unique at all. It's also strange, as I've listened to you discussed this morning. You know, it is strange to hear that he would be recording his client to play for someone else. But on the other hand, as we've seen with Cohen, nothing that he does seems to be within sort of the normal bounds of how an attorney usually behaves.

COOPER: But I mean, I don't want to harp on this, but it -- what does make sense is Michael Cohen recording his -- this important conversation with Donald Trump to use its future leverage or as to protect himself down the road if this thing goes south as it did?

COMINSKY: I mean, you know, what's interesting about this is sort of thinking as an attorney, right? How do you deal with a client who perhaps you don't trust, or you are worried that maybe doing something to break the law? And I think what's actually unique here is, you know, if I was in a situation where I was concerned about an interaction with a client, I wouldn't record that conversation. I would have there be another witness to that conversation, be that a paralegal, or a secretary or another colleague of mine.

But I certainly wouldn't record it. I might record it on a piece of paper, you know, what the interaction was, but this -- I mean, this is really outside of the normal interaction that you see between a client and attorney. But as I just said, we've really seen all sorts of things with their relationship.

COOPER: And have there been any moments in particular so far that you think were especially damaging for the defense or for the prosecution?

COMINSKY: Well, you know, with respect to Cohen, we're just -- he's just sort of getting warmed up, so to speak. You know, the prosecution's just starting to dig into this. And what's -- what struck me so far that in the sort of the positive column for the prosecutors is that from the reports that we're getting based on, you know, how he's been behaving in court -- how Cohen has been behaving in court. He hasn't been the loose cannon that we thought he would be.

And you know, he's a very dangerous witness for the prosecution. Because if he says something that's really outside the bounds of the trial, he could cause a mistrial. And so, the prosecutors have to be very careful as they -- you know, navigate this with him. On the other hand, he is a great witness, so to speak, for the defense because there's just so much going against him and we've yet to see that cross unfold.

COOPER: Michael Cohen said, he was in London for his daughter's birthday -- wedding anniversary when he became aware of the Access Hollywood tape is the first mention. We've heard of the Access Hollywood tape so forth today with Michael Cohen. Adam, I'm wondering what you make of how Michael Cohen has done so far.

ADAM KAUFMANN, FORMER EXECUTIVE ASST. D.A. MANHATTAN DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE: Well, I mean, so far, it's the easy part, right? So far, so good, no cross examination. Look, I share the skepticism about the story of recording his client to share with Pecker. An attorney wouldn't do that, right? You're waiving privilege by sharing this -- the conversation with a third-party. And I agree with you. It would have made sense for him to say, I was protecting myself down the road.

Taking it a step further. If I'm the defense attorneys, I'm listening to that tape and I'm hearing -- I'm all over this. I got this. And then couple that with his recording it for himself. And I'm building that to make the case that Michael Cohen just went off and did -- whatever Michael Cohen did Donald Trump. No evidence that Donald Trump knew about it.

[12:15:00]

And then I would couple that with the fact they're not calling Weisselberg. And that's it. Big hole in the case. You know, I wonder there's something in the law called an add -- a missing witness charge and missing witness charge comes at the end of the case. And it's a charge and instruction from the judge to the jury that said, you know, the prosecution should have called this witness, and they didn't.

And you members of the jury are allowed. If you want to, you don't have to, but you're allowed to consider whether this witness would have testified in a manner adverse to what the prosecution is claiming. And so now, I'm wondering if we're going to get into a missing witness charge, because Weisselberg is not there and how that plays out.

COOPER: Adam, talk about why you think the prosecution didn't call Allen Weisselberg. I asked this question a number of people over the last -- and most of the answers I got were, well, they don't know what he is going to testify to that he's gone to jail for Donald Trump. He could have given testimony against Trump and probably avoided a jail sentence. He's actually in jail right now.

KAUFMANN: Yeah. That's a huge -- I mean, it would be hugely risky. It's almost damned if you do and damned if you're don't for the prosecution. I mean, he's obviously a witness with knowledge at the center of the case. He has remained steadfastly loyal to Mr. Trump. You know, a lot of times with a witness like that, you can put them in the grand jury and freeze their testimony.

In other words, you can get them under oath. You can question them up, down and sideways. But in the state of New York, if you do that, you give immunity to the witness -- complete immunity. They can't be prosecuted for whatever the conduct is. So, it's either very boxed in for the prosecution. And I think they had to just make a judgment call that putting him on the stand a witness who is sympathetic to Donald Trump, and who they don't have the ability to control was to greater risk.

COOPER: And Anna, are they bringing in the Access Hollywood tape now, just to bolster the prior testimony about the impact the Access Hollywood tape had on Trump world? Prosecutors previously showed this email chain to judge during Hope Hicks' testimony.

Adam, do you think that's why they're showing -- they're having this testimony from Michael Cohen because they want him to kind of testify to the bombshell that it was in Trump world?

KAUFMANN: Yeah, definitely. Again, it's part of trying to lay the foundation to tie this into concerns about the election. You know, not that it was concerns about his family. And we're going to see evidence from the defense that that there was deep concern about the family. So, the impact that Access Hollywood had on the outlook for the election becomes crucial in laying the groundwork for what was going on at the time the Stormy Daniels, the hush money came up.

COOPER: Michael Cohen wrote to see Bannon who was covering the campaign on October 7, saying it's all over the place who's doing damage control. Here Cohen says, he wanted to ensure that things were being taken care of properly and that Trump would be -- would be protected. Anna, what is to you the significance of Cohen weighing in on Access Hollywood?

COMINSKY: Well, you know, I agree with what's already been said. I mean, what the prosecutors have to do is they have to prove up that underlying crime. And I don't mean that they have to prove that a crime was committed, but they have to show some evidence. There has to be something to show that there was this conspiracy to corrupt the election.

And so, one of the ways that they do that is by showing how damaging that tape was. And more importantly, how it affected the inner circle and how it affected Trump and Cohen, obviously, is someone who's going to speak directly to that.

COOPER: Cohen said that he was in London October 8, when he had several calls with Hope Hicks, including one call that Trump actually joined. Anna and Adam, thank you so much. Appreciate your perspectives on this busy morning. Cohen also spoke separately to Trump that day, he says. I'm back with Paula Reid her and Kaitlan Collins outside 100 Centre Street, the phone logs which were admitted in (inaudible) last week show two calls were made.

COLLINS: One thing that was interesting that happened just before they got to the fallout of the Access Hollywood tape was Michael Cohen was explaining why he believed David Pecker backed off of demanding repayment for Karen McDougal why he wanted them to pay him back. And Michael Cohen says that David Pecker decided it actually been a good deal for the company that it had helped them.

[12:20:00]

The jury already heard though from David Pecker who actually testified. He was worried. He was committing a crime. He'd spoke to his attorneys, his general counsel. He himself personally researched campaign finance violations and he was so worried that that payment to Karen McDougal could have constituted a campaign finance violation that he backed off wanting repayment to be reimbursed from Trump world.

And so, that speaks to just the environment that they're operating in as the Access Hollywood tape is happening. And now it's coming down to Michael Cohen to be the one who's responsible for footing the bill for Stormy Daniels on her behalf. And these are calls that are happening as Trump and Cohen were speaking because Michael Cohen was in London when the Access Hollywood tape came out. And Steve Bannon, who was running the Trump campaign at the time was kind of monitoring and managing the fallout.

COOPER: Cohen recall stepping out of dinner with his family and friends in London and take the calls with Trump.

REID: And at the time, a lot of people, even some of his most loyal advisors thought the Access Hollywood tape met game over for Trump's chances of getting in the White House. So, hearken back to Michael Cohen's earlier testimony where Trump said, there will likely be a lot of women coming out if I run for office. Now, Cohen said of Trump, he wanted me to reach out to all the contacts in the media, we need to put a spin on this.

So here Cohen helping him spin this story in the media, post Access Hollywood tape concerns about stories coming out, anything about illicit sexual activity with women outside of his marriage suddenly become a huge priority to suppress in the days ahead of the election.

COLLINS: And any idea that that it had no impact on the campaign as Madeleine Westerhout out who was a lower ranking official at the RNC testified to last week. It is just beyond belief, because really what was happening here is Trump was sitting down with his advisors, asking whether or not he was going to need to drop out or lose the election.

Ryan's previous was one of the ones who told him that he was going to lose the election in a landslide at that time. Steve Bannon was one who encouraged him to stay on, but it was this moment where they would -- he's having people reach out to the media. They put out this rumor to reporters that they needed to really pay attention to what Trump said before that debate on Sunday that you moderated because he may drop out of the race.

And then that was when Donald Trump brought the Bill Clinton accusers in. It speaks to just kind of how they handled this media environment and how -- they didn't know how to handle this kind of -- something of this magnitude. But how they were, you know, spinning reporters and trying to get them to think it was going to be one thing. So, they put attention on it. And then it turned out to be something they believed would help them.

COOPER: Michael Cohen saying something that Melania had recommended, or at least he told me that's what Melania had thought it was. And the jury is now being shown text between Cohen and Chris Cuomo, who at that point was at CNN.

REID: So, here Cohen actively involved in spinning, right, a very damaging story soon to be involved in suppressing or with his own money, incredibly damaging story in the days ahead of the election. All of this speaks again to how this is upgraded as a felony, because while he's not charged with interfering in the election that is what prosecutors have alleged.

Now, Cohen said, he received calls from many contacts in the press. Of course, it was a huge story. But notable, it's been unclear. Most people have said, no Cohen didn't have an official role in the campaign. But here he's acting as an official spin doctor during one of the biggest crises they face.

COLLINS: And this is so interesting what at the moment we just missed the update about Melania Trump. Michael Cohen is saying, it was Melania Trump's idea to say that the Access Hollywood tape, the words that Trump used on that tape were locker room talking. We don't know if that's true. This is Michael Cohen's testimony of what he claims Donald Trump told him. But it is notable that, you know, that moment when everyone is watching to see how Melania Trump would handle that, but it was actually her idea to say that that was just locker room talk.

REID: It's kind of undercuts the defense's argument that all of this was to protect his family when his family here is well aware of his extracurricular activities, and perhaps trying to help him tamp down the story to win the White House.

COOPER: And the recording is quite damaging. They wanted comment. I actually did the interview with Melania Trump when she spoke -- the first interview after that tape. And she reiterated those -- that phrase, I believe, if memory serves me correct, locker room talk. Again, we have had testimony before about the impact of this tape on the campaign.

Hope Hicks testified, she was the one who first got the inquiry from (inaudible), who at that point was at the Washington Post. He's now at the New York Times, asking for comment. She testified that she was concerned -- very concerned, I think was her term. I mean, that seems to be an understatement. And certainly, from Hope Hicks, it seemed like Hope Hicks was being conservative and how she was describing it based on her actions, it was a five-alarm fire.

REID: Absolutely, one of the biggest crises that any campaign has ever faced. And if you put yourself in the context of that time. Again, even people like Kellyanne Conway and others, they believed that this was probably going to prevent him from entering the White House. And so, the reason this is significant in the context of this criminal case, is the campaign at this moment is under such enormous pressure.

Here Michael Cohen is trying to do anything within his power to help spin this story in a favorable way. And we know in a matter of days, they are going to get now pressure from Stormy Daniels to pay her for her story. And what Cohen has done very successfully so far for prosecutors is established just how aware of Trump was of all these damaging stories. How involved he was in these efforts to suppress them.

[12:25:00]

Now, can he do that once we get to the Stormy Daniels repayment? He's the leader of the free world. He's signing checks at his desk. Can they prove beyond a reasonable doubt? He knew what was going on with the ledger. I don't know. It's not clear. But up until now through the other stories, Michael Cohen has been a decent witness for prosecutors, but we haven't gotten to the tough part yet.

COLLINS: And it does make you wonder if the Access Hollywood tape had never come out, if it never -- whoever leaked it to the Washington Post and provided it. And as Michael Cohen is saying, it was going to be significantly impactful especially with women voters. You know whether the Stormy Daniels deal ever happened, because it was the Access Hollywood tape and the uproar over that. That is what fueled them ultimately to pay Stormy Daniels the money because before they had balked at the idea of giving her a six-figure deal, the Access Hollywood tape change that.

COOPER: Let's go back to Jake at D.C.

TAPPER: All right, Anderson. Thanks so much. I want to bring in Will Scharf right now. He's an attorney for Donald Trump, not involved in the hush money case. He's also a Republican candidate in the Missouri attorney general's race. Good to see, Will.

So, Michael Cohen testified that Donald Trump knew about the Karen McDougal reimbursement. She's paid $150,000 by American media, incorporated, and then there is discussion of Donald Trump reimbursing them. According to Cohen, Trump said, don't worry, I'll take care of it. Do you think that's damaging for Mr. Trump?

WILL SCHARF, TRUMP ATTORNEY: You know, I'll say this. John Henry Wigmore once said that cross examination is the greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovery of the truth. I think it's relatively easy for a witness to present a compelling case on direct after months and months and months of prep. The real test of all of this testimony will be under cross examination.

And what we have as we've said repeatedly in court pleadings is a witness here who has -- is a serial perjure, who has been found liable for perjury on numerous previous occasions. That's all going to come out. The solidity of this story will continue to weaken over time. And I think we'll see that play out in court in the coming days.

TAPPER: Whenever they could, the prosecution has made sure to bring forth evidence beyond Michael Cohen's word to bolster the narrative that he's telling, whether it is records of phone calls, an audio recording of Cohen speaking with Mr. Trump, a document written by Allen Weisselberg.

Cohen is review -- just in court right now. Cohen is reviewing an email from Dylan Howard saying, he deleted a 2008 story, Donald Trump playboy man. I guess that that had been up on the whatever National Enquirer website or whatever. But in any case, what about the fact that they are bolstering wherever they can Cohen's testimony with more concrete evidence?

SCHARF: Over the question, Jake, is what they're bolstering. At the end of the day, this is not a hush money trial. This is not a tabloid trial. This is a business records fraud trial. And we barely have one iota of evidence introduced over the last two weeks, including today, that President Trump committed any business records fraud, much less proof beyond a reasonable doubt, which is the evidentiary quantum that the prosecution is obviously required to meet here.

So, to me all of the smacks of the distraction, the smoke and mirrors campaign, we've been seeing since the start of this trial. We're talking about a very simple, alleged offense here at the heart of the matter, which is business records fraud. And nobody seems to have any evidence whatsoever that President Trump committed business records fraud, I believe, because he didn't -- that he actually did nothing wrong here.

TAPPER: So, are you arguing that Michael Cohen didn't pay Stormy Daniels the $130,000 that he didn't set up the shell corporations to do so? The Donald Trump didn't reimburse him, or the Donald Trump didn't know what he was reimbursing him for? What exactly are you suggesting?

SCHARF: So, what the prosecution has to prove here is that President Trump ordered entries in his personal ledger to be made that those entries were not just inaccurate, but that were fraudulent that were made with fraudulent intent. And they also have to prove that the reason for those fraudulent business entries was to cover up another felony offense.

Now the felony offense that they're alleging is this somewhat nebulous election related conspiracy. But at the heart of this case, is still that business records fraud issue. Did President Trump order entries to be made in his personal ledger with fraudulent intent to cover up another crime?

And I just don't think we've seen any evidence of that so far from Cohen or any of the other witnesses. And unless the prosecution can prove that basic fact beyond a reasonable doubt, this case shouldn't be a directed acquittal. If it makes it to the jury, the jury should certainly acquit. That's I think the situation that we're dealing with here.

We have this smoke and mirrors campaign by the prosecution to pollute the jury. The jury's understanding of this case with a lot of irrelevant highly prejudicial material.

[12:30:00]