Also today, a porn star and a former president of
the United States are once again facing off in a
New York courtroom.
Lawyers for former President Donald Trump are cross examining adult
film actress Stormy Daniels.
They're trying to pick apart her story of a sexual
encounter in
2006 and a hush money payment a decade later as
Trump ran for president.
Daniels is defiantly defending her graphic testimony from Tuesday under
intense questioning from one of Trump's lawyers.
Joining me now to dive deeper into this case is
Justice correspondent Jamal Andrews and Richard Roth.
He's a white collar attorney for Roth law firm in
New York.
Thank you gentlemen for being here,
Richard. Let's start with you.
Stormy Daniels, already on the stand being cross examined this
morning.
How's she doing?
She did relatively well. From everything I've read,
they're really poking holes in,
trying to poke holes in everything,
and that may not be a good defense strategy.
I mean, they're trying to
poke holes on whether she had dinner that night.
They're trying to poke holes on whether she was
surprised when he walked out in his underwear,
saying you're a porn star,
you see men in underwear all the time.
Her answer was no, but it's an old man.
I didn't expect that. It wasn't.
I wasn't on the set.
So she's actually doing very well.
I don't know if it's necessarily the best defense strategy
to poke holes and all that.
I think the big issue here which will come up
is the fact that she doesn't know much about how
the money was sent,
the agreement that was reached,
who paid. And so that's there's going to be a
lot of,
I don't knows, which I think will somewhat help the
Trump team.
But I I it may be a mistake to go
after her credibility because I don't think they're really doing
that good of a job.
So what should the defense do today with her on
the stands?
So what they should do is very simple.
They should go through. You don't.
You agreed to a dollar amount with your lawyer,
correct? You never had a conversation with anyone other than
your lawyer about how the money was paid,
about who was paid about when it was paid,
about The agreements are rather than to about whether or
not what Michael Cut said to show that she doesn't
know.
Remember this prosecution. This trial is about fraud in connection
with business records of the Stormy Daniels,
if you will. The whole incident and this show she
doesn't know anything about.
That is going to be much better than trying to
poke holes in the story because what it does it
it it sort of backfires,
it buttresses the fact that Trump was very worried about
the story leaking,
which is the reason why he paid the money.
So I'm not sure if I necessarily agree with all
the the attempts to try to poke holes in the
bad evening.
Jamal, let's talk about Trump's lawyers who are now asking
the appellate court to expedite their ruling on the gag
order.
What is the strategy behind that?
Yeah, Yeah. Well, I think this strategy checks a lot
of boxes for the defense first and foremost.
You know, it keeps your client,
the former president of the United States,
happy. You know, he has spent nearly every day in
the morning and after court is adjourned railing against this
judge,
railing against this gag order.
And so, you know, he's also heavily involved.
You see him constantly whispering back and forth,
or you read about him constantly whispering back and forth
to his attorneys,
passing notes and so forth.
And so he's obviously very involved in this decision and
in constant communication with his attorney.
So it may just be pacifying your client for one.
But two, it could potentially keep him out of jail,
depending upon how this all works out.
Obviously, he's been held in contempt of court 10 separate
times for violating this gag order.
And last week Judge Marshawn made his most direct threat
of potential jail time that we've seen thus far writing
in an official
court order that jail is on the table for the
former president.
Not only that, you know,
he said in court that he understands the magnitude of
this decision,
the history making moment that he's in,
but he has a job to do is what Judge
Marshawn said.
So again, depending on how this all works out,
you may have a relaxing of that gag order that
could enable former President Trump to to to be a
little to speak his mind a bit more like he's
used to after court. Now it's important to mention these
motions are sealed and so we don't know the exact
argument that the prosecution has made,
nor do we know the response.
Excuse me, the the response by the prosecution and the
order or the motion by the defense,
but this judge, this appellate judge has ruled against the
defense before,
ruled against President Trump before not postponing this hush money
trial in the 1st place and showing skepticism about actually
changing this gag order at all.
Carolyn, so let's let's talk hypotheticals.
If the judge finds that Trump does violate the gag
order and and sends him to jail because he's threatened
that jail time,
as you mentioned, what does that look like?
Because you've got Secret Service and other things that are
needed for a former president.
So what would jail time look like,
Jamal? Yeah. Yeah. Well, it's it's it's going to be
a spectacle for sure.
You know, you remember when he had to go take
his mug shot in Atlanta and how big of a
spectacle that was.
You have media all over the place,
protesters, Secret Service casing the area
and and, and and and,
you know, the president entering somewhere that typically presidents do
not go either way.
He has lifelong Secret Service protection and so he would
have to be protected
if he was to enter
a jail. Now, there's a lot of theories about how
this would work.
There's been the idea that maybe he stays at a
military base or or or a hotel,
rather than staying in an actual jail and being confined
in,
you know, somewhere as infamous as Rikers Island,
right? There's also the idea that maybe he's only in
jail for a few hours rather than overnight in order
to cut down on the risk to his safety.
But if this was to go through,
you're looking at Secret Service screening his food background,
checking and screening the people who are going to interact
with him inside the jail,
surely having him insulated from all the other inmates that
are being held at that facility.
And so a lot, a lot of work that go
into this
in the kind of threat assessment that the secret servant
has to do at a university or at a rally
just really
pushed up about as high as it can go.
Carolyn. Yeah, for sure, Richard,
if I can add to
Jamal's point. If I can add to Jamal's point.
Judge Marchand does not want Donald to put Donald Trump
in jail.
He's made it very clear.
He said, I understand you were the former president.
I understand you may be the next president.
I do not want to put you in jail.
I will do everything not to put you in jail,
but there's a system I have to protect.
So I don't know if this judge,
no matter what Donald Trump does,
is going to actually order that Donald Trump be imprisoned.
I think he'll keep sanctioning him.
I think he'll keep warning him.
Remember, this travel is going to be over within a
couple weeks.
The judge has a has to balance.
It's a balancing judges generally do not want to put
anyone in jail.
And when you're dealing with someone of this magnitude,
it's a balancing he has to do.
And I think he's going to threaten it a couple
more times.
I don't think he's going to actually ask
order the Donald Trump be in prison because of the
complications,
because how he'll be looked at as a martyr.
But he's really telling Donald Trump,
just do not, do not make comments about the jury
pool,
about the witnesses, about me and my staff.
And and thus far, Donald Trump has,
as Jamal said, gone over the line 10 times.
I think this judge is going to be very loath
to imprison
Donald Trump. But he's made it pretty clear he doesn't
want to do so
let's talk about what's to come,
because former Trump attorney Michael Cohen is set to testify
soon,
many saying speculating that this is a risky call to
have him on the stands.
So Richard, how could he make or break this case?
So Mike Michael Cohen he's needed.
I mean he is the most important witness in this
case which both is both good and bad.
He can, he will make or break it.
He will be the person to fill in all the
financial gaps.
Packer never talked to. Well,
talk to Trump about other other
issues, but not about Stormy Daniels.
Stormy. Stormy doesn't know and nobody,
Hope Hicks doesn't know. Michael Cohen's going to say,
I met with Donald Trump.
I spoke to Donald Trump and we orchestrated this methodology
whereby he would pay me as a fake retainer.
So it didn't go look directly to him.
And he paid me and I paid.
And he's going to basically lay it out.
And so he's very pivotal to this case for the
prosecutor.
When the defense is going to have a fun time
cross examining it,
they're going to say isn't in fact true.
You lied to Congress. Isn't in fact true.
You're a convicted felon. Is it in fact true?
You know, and they're going to go on and on
and on but that.
But Michael Cohen should be and and you've been all
over the press.
Michael Cohen though should be very strong and saying listen
I I had a client,
I had a former president.
I had somebody who I was 100%
devoted to. So yes I did this for him.
But but this case rise and falls with Michael Cohen's
testimony
quickly Before I let you go Richard,
the fact that the jury in this in this case
making the decision ultimately on this
there are attorneys on this jury who does that benefit.
Attorneys are always risky. I've never been picked on a
jury for that reason.
It's very risky because what happens is juries attorneys may
sway the jury.
I believe I I believe it may benefit
Trump because they may be over analytical about proving what
Trump Trump knew and what Trump did.
But again, it it's irrelevant if Michael Cohen comes,
comes true as a very honest
witness who basically go to the sorted details of the
money and how it was exchanged and how it was
implemented,
that it may not make a difference whether there's a
lawyer or not on that jury.
Richard Roth with Roth Law Firm in New York and
justice correspondent Jamal Andrews.
Thanks guys.