call us now good evening from new york for the tabloid publisher who said the former president was a mentor to him described today what he did to help that mentor when the winehouse hi from washington where the supreme court heard arguments today for and against making any former president immune from criminal prosecution for acts in office. >> and letting this one off the hook for trying to stay in the white house despite losing the election to courtrooms. >> two cases, one person at the center of both, which in itself is something that a single individual should be you are responsible for today's legal traffic jam and tonight's split-screen special primetime coverage here in new york, the former president's criminal trial continued with more testimony from his onetime friend and former tabloid publisher, david pecker. in it, pecker described his role in suppressing the stories of karen mcdougal and stormy daniels, who both said they had a ferrets with donald trump this photo, one of several admitted into evidence. today shows pecker and the former president walking past the white house, rose garden. former president asking him, at

that moment, according to pecker house, karen doing two which pecker says he replied, quote, she's doing well, she's quiet. everything is going good in another conversation, pecker said trump preferred to mcdougal is our girl. pecker also suggested that trump was angry about the interviews i did with her and stormy daniels when each broke their silence will bring you excerpts in our coverage tonight. >> in washington, the supreme court oral arguments were underway and the conservatives who as we know, have a majority on the court, appeared to embrace at least some form of criminal immunity for presidents, the liberal minority, by contrast, focused on the temptation that might be it for a future president if they have that what i'm i more worried about using to be worried about the president being chilled. i think that we would have a really significant opposite problem if the president wasn't chilled if someone with those kinds of powers, the most powerful person in the world with the greatest amount of authority

could go into office knowing that there would be no potential penalty for committing crimes i'm trying to understand what the disincentive is from turning the oval office into the seat of criminal activity in this country in a moment, i'll be joined by former trump council, jim trusty, and also former white house counsel and the nixon administration, john di, who was central to the last case at the supreme court, decided on whether presidents are above the law anderson, of course, first with a criminal trial and that transcript that just came out from today. yeah. >> kaitlyn with me here, criminal defense attorney or their eye dala, also former federal prosecutor, just jeffrey tube and jessica roth from her house january 6 select committee senior investigative counsel can be aganga-williams, cnn senior legal analyst, elie honig, and cnn's bring jin grass, who was in court today. a lot of billable hours right here at the tail. >> so bring let's talk more about what but the scene was

like inside the courtroom. >> yeah, it was i found it interesting the contrast between the finishing up of the direct and the cross right. direct. we have seen over the last couple of days, it's very methodical. they go through every single detail, pulling back the curtain on those catch-and-kill schemes with pecker at bringing in the evidence text messages, how they discussed signal apps with michael well, cohen. and then once we got to the cross, it was rapid fire. right? the defense was basically walking him through exactly, poking holes into what the cross had just spent days and hours doing with pecker. so i found that very interesting. another thing i thought was so interesting and you just mentioned your interviews that you did also what was brought up, of course, as the access hollywood tape and all these details that very likely these jurors have heard prior to the 2016 election, they were extremely enthralled. enthralled. we were learning that they're ping, ping, ping-ponging back and forth between the questions that were being asked and pecker's answers. so that was interesting. meanwhile, the former president sort of sat back particularly during pickers direct. he sack back with his arms crossed i'm kinda closing his eyes,

listening in a little bit more, but really not reacting much at all to what his former friend was saying on the stand, just feet away from him. so there was a lot of sort of quiet drama in the sense inside the courtroom, but you could certainly feel it, but you want to get quick, quick takes from everybody about what stood out. i mean, le which notice for the reason brands saying process security is no, you do not high five at the end of direct exam, that's the easy part. and the change in pace and tone, the brand noted, i think was interesting and i do think the defense has started to score some points and chip away at pecker's testimony for example, they established this catch and kill stuff, this capturing stories, doing favors for celebrities, putting pressures on celebrities, donald trump did not invent that. that's been going on since the beginning of tabloid journalism. that's important context for the jury to understand. michael cohen. i thought i think they scored a nice point when they established michael cohen is always playing an angle for himself. >> they got that out of the state's witness, out of the da's witness. >> and the last thing i think was there's a contradiction in an important part of pecker's testimony one where he says now

that hope hicks was at this crucial meeting where they first started discussing this plan. but it turns out he didn't say that the first time he was asked by investigators now, not saying he is ruined as a witness, but this is the back-and-forth. i think he did a good job on direct. i'd be happy with it if i was the prosecutor, but now sit back because now he's taking taking on some damage yes. >> speaking from my time as a prosecutor, i agree. i think i would be happy if this were my witness. i think what stands out as something we talked about the other night actually, is that it's quite easy to point the finger at someone else, but i think what happened today is that pecker point they figured himself he basically admitted that he was part of a criminal conspiracy and he talked importantly about election crimes his own concern that exactly what they were doing, violet with that he actually had raised concerns and said they sought out legal counsel on that at the time exactly. >> i think that's incredibly damaging because the real one of the competing narratives here is, are we talking about a personal matter in this hush money, which is what everyone does. it's what rich people do two stories are we talking about a campaign violation? are we talking about people

entering into conspiracy because they know they are trying to influence an election. and that is at the core of the prosecution's case. and today, david pecker said, that's exactly what was going on but what i heard about and elie, i believe he's absolutely correct the cross-examination, they made some points right out of the box and the way you described the britain go and pull bubble, bubble, that's what you want. >> and you only get one chance to make a first impression on this jury. this is the first big cross-examination you want the jurors? to know right off the bat here, you're going to hear all these nice prepared totally rehearsed a direct examinations, but watch what happens. watch what happens, watch how we fillet that once we dig into the details and apparently, i a friend who was in the courtroom, he said after that we'll first hour-and-a-half& cross examination. i want but they take a shower after hearing how filthy that tabloid industry is. and he really i don't know the details, but apparently it was a lot about 100 schwarzenegger when he was

going to run and all the things that they buried with, right right. >> pecker was testifying that orange schwarzenegger hit actually been in contact with him about essentially doing the same kind of catch and kill sort of stuff. >> yeah. i think i made the analogy today that like, well, what's the big deal about bringing it out if a jury is there and they're listening to a crime and there's someone's like taghi about how horrible double parking is. but then you have 18 other people's i double park and you double park and you double park. this kinda slant eggs into that jury nullification basket like so this is standard operating procedure. this isn't like donald trump is the only one who's ever done this. the this is what all politicians do. they paid a berry stories or have someone in this help them just going to pick up on that point that which is to say what are the things that's significant about establishing that that ami did this for lots of a there are people is it tends to negate the idea that this was done for an election purpose, right? if they're catching and killing stories for lots of other celebrities, schwarzenegger was, was running for governor, ryan walberg wasn't right. i mean, there are other people for factor was

saying we would do this and so i think at the end of the day, pecker was still a very effective witness for the prosecution. >> i think there's lots of answers to this. >> he talked about how we got close to the election for president trump that the concern that trump expressed was about the effect on his campaign. >> but nevertheless, so i think establishing that this was your standard operating procedure normalizes it, makes it seem arguably like it's less related to the campaign itself, which is important. but overall, i thought he was an excellent witness and also significantly, he showed no bias toward trump. i mean, not only was he not deflecting responsibility for his own criminal conduct, but he was saying that he still considered the former president he didn't come off sounding like he had an extra group. >> he wasn't he wasn't holding anything back end. he had no ax to grind if i were donald trump, i would be so happy about what happened in washington today. >> i wouldn't even care what happened in the courtroom today because i think the supreme court i'm really signaled that we are not going to see any other trials this year. we'll get to that later tonight. i

know. >> but the value to the prosecution of pecker is that he laid out the frame of the story. now, the jury understands that there were these three three witnesses, three paid that is all going to be filled out. maybe they'll believe it may they won't you know, your idea that this is so terrible and, and, and this is just business as usual, who was their partner in all of this? donald trump? you don't think the jury is going to be somewhat offended that this guy who's running for president in the united states is involved with all these sleeves that he buried, that he buried is sex story you heard from their witness, so did this through celebrity sorted that celebrities this celebrities sort of celebrity, so this celebrity that happens all the time, it's not this unique. oh, god, they came this isn't watergate. that's my point. that watergate was a very unique time. it's the first time it's something like that is ever happen. what came out of cross examination is this happens all the time, but bringing it back to a temidayo said a moment ago, but this

time they consulted their lawyers and then they started to back off because they realized that they were veering into territory with respect to the campaign that made them nervous about it the money with the money that's what matters here, is the money. >> but if i could jump out off of what you were saying on the stand, pecker is very composed during direct. he's very composed if he doesn't know an answer, he wouldn't say he would say i don't know. he wouldn't hesitate. he was very believable and credible when he was testifying on direct they didn't get to the crux of what this case is, which is stormy daniels because of course, pecker didn't pay stormy daniels, right? he said i'm not a bank after paying the other two stories. so the question is now sure he's credible, but most of the story is not going to come from him. so are they going to find michael cohen credible who has an ax to grind against donald trump. pecker like to your point? point but said he was my mentor. he was very nice. he was very believable and this real stories coming from someone else and further in the trial, this is a classic dilemma that you see it all trials when

prosecutors are almost always going to build their case to some extent on testimony from people who are involved in the crime, cooperating witnesses, people who've been given immunity, like david pecker and defense lawyers say, how can you convict based on the heart of this sleazebags? how can you base convict based on the word of this convicted liar coming up later, et cetera. and prosecutors, we have our standard thing. we've all done it where you say, guess who chose this guy, right? the defendant chosen when chose to go into business with him when he chose michael cohen is his lawyer, so that's who we're going to show you. that's how we're going to prove this. this case two, and the task for prosecutors now is jessica was pointing out is explaining why this transaction was different from mark wahlberg or schwarzenegger and different in a way that takes it over the line of criminality. >> it isn't are seeing that all of the people who are going to be in that courtroom where people in orbit of donald trump. i mean, it's not as if they are random strangers. they are the people who trump chose to have in his life. i think when we talk about this dirt that spread around, i think if my abdominal froms laura is i'm worried about that dirt being on donald trump. >> right? this is this is the former president. i think

that's what's really going to be important here right now. i think the standard of this the watergate that's not the standard here. right. and i think a jury where they get their jury charge from the judge, that's not going to be the charge is going to give them they don't have to find that this was i don't know. no charge is going to get one over, though. it's not it'd be that it has to be the crime of the century. that's not a majority. >> i do these fascinating when you see that black and white photo of donald trump walking past the rose garden with david pecker. >> and we've seen heads of state walking down that we've seen people consequence walking down that and to know who david pecker is now, and to know what i'm trump is saying right there, which is essentially house karen doing she going to shoot up later in the trial. we are going to see checks that donald trump signed two. >> according to the prosecution, to pay michael cohen back for the money he gave photo and black and white and you feel it's historic and these are important people and talking about important things.

>> and they're talking about a hush money deal and and talent were signed in the oval office while he was president of the united states, might means more what we're learning from the courtroom transcripts, which is just fascinating. >> and next, caitlin back with as jeff mentioned, a moment ago, today's supreme court oral arguments and presidential immunity. what the justices as both sides and the case that justice gorsuch, today's said, quote, we are writing a rule for the ages you got better things to do than clean out clog gutters, calling filter today, and never clean out clog gutters again, we filters technology keeps debris out of your gutters for good, guaranteed. >> colleague three through the filter today, morphism the filter.com university of maryland global campus is a school for real life, one that values as successes. you've already achieved, earn up to 90 undergraduate credits it's for relevant experience and get the support you need from your first de to graduation day and beyond. what will your next success p. you know, i spent a lot of time thinking about dirt

at three in the morning and you try what people don't know how is that not all dirt is the same. you need dirt with the right kind of nutrients. look at this new organic soil from miracle grow, everybody should have it great for us. this is as good as gold in any garden if people only knew that it really is about the dirt, your dirt nerd huge i'm proud of it oh, yeah. ticket from your inner child. what you really need in life is some fricking torque dodge cornered rt, that totally torqued out crossover luck and good guys. >> the cations are better with the credit god's on your side comment for rewards once available to the few are now accessible to the many earn points for travel with credit one bank and live large work play blank relief.

>> work, play, blake, really, the only three in one extended release formula for dry eyes start your de, with nature me. >> the number one pharmacist recommended vitamin supplement brand more real estate professionals list properties with realtor.com than any any other site. really really trust the number one app, real estate professionals trust, download the realtor.com. today you may like it never even happened, happens, serve bro crap. now,

we got to get france something. wait we could use these new gift mode. >> all right done left to do four her uncle's unhappy. i'm sensing an underlying issue. it's t-mobile. it started when we tried to get him under a new plan. but they they unexpectedly unraveled their “price lock” guarantee. which has made him, a bit... unruly. you called yourself the “un-carrier”. you sing about “price lock” on those commercials. “the price lock, the price lock...” so, if you could change the price, change the name! it's not a lock, i know a lock. so how can we undo the damage? we could all unsubscribe and switch to xfinity. their connection is unreal. and we could all un-experience this whole session. okay, that's uncalled for.

mattresses made affordable well the white house correspondents dinner live saturday at seven eastern on cnn after nearly three hours of oral arguments before the supreme court today, the justices did not seem willing to embrace former president trump's anything goes interpretation of presidential immunity but instead, much of the hearing instead focused on where to draw the distinction between the official acts of a president. and they're private conduct. >> here's conservative justice amy coney barrett questioning the president's attorney, john sauer you can see the private acts don't get immunity. we do. okay. i want to know if you agree or disagree about the characterization of these acts is private. petitioner turned to a private attorney, was willing to spread knowingly false claims of election fraud to spearhead is challenges to

the election results private, dining, we dispute the allegation but private two sounds but petitioner conspired with another private attorney who caused the filing and court of a verification signed by petitioner that contain false allegations to support a challenge. >> sounds private three private actors to attorneys, including those mentioned above, and a political consultant helped implement a plan to submit fraudulent slates of presidential electors to obstruct the certification proceeding and petitioner and a coconspirator attorney directed that effort you ready to quickly i believe that's private so of today's arguments also focused on for president richard nixon and his legal entanglements and held that precedent reflects on today and what that means. i'm joined tonight by the more counsel to former president trump, jim trusty, former federal prosecutor, elliot williams georgetown law professor victoria nurse, and former federal prosecutor. can woo and also someone very familiar with the legal legacy left behind by richard nixon, the former president's onetime white

house counsel, john dean and john, let me start with you, given how watergate i think we all knew it was going to come up at some point, but this is how trump's attorney responded when justice congee brown jackson raised this question about president nixon what was up with a pardon for president nixon i think if everybody thought that presidents couldn't be prosecuted than what was that about? well, he was under investigation, froze private in public conduct at the time john, given that, i wonder what you made of how just over ten minutes after that trump's attorney also acknowledged that that allegation by jack smith and that indictment includes both private and official acts my reaction was that there's a very thin read there for them to draw upon ford clearly thought president ford clearly thought that nixon could be prosecuted. >> and deed. he thought he was getting confession from nixon when he issued the pardon, he

actually had carried around in his, in his pocketbook are in his wallet, a site of a case that said in essence by the supreme court that acceptance of a pardon was admission of guilt. so the whole assumption back then was that presidents had no immunity. they it could not commit crimes without having exposure. and unless there was just a passing by the department of justice on taking action, indeed, they were had jeopardy, so the situation is dramatically changed and nixon's onetime prediction that if the president does it, that means it's legal, seemed to come to beyer today on the conservative justices on the court. >> yeah, i was remembering how we reported at the end of trump's term in office, he actually forbade people from bringing up nixon comparisons to him, often with a lot of expletives because he was tired of hearing those comparisons. but but on the argument that trump's attorney did can concede today thank that. some of those accusations are

private acts that that trump did. what did you make of that shift well, i thought it was a surprising admission since i've set of stonewalled it on everything. >> they just couldn't get around arguing that some of those acts were enough official acts, even though trump has pretended that everything he did while he was still president was an official act so we'll see how far that goes. they are the issues he conceded to. he must think he has a factual argument that he can make that somehow diminishes the impact of what's going on but kaitlan, i was just surprised at the courts focus and seeming determination by the republican members to write them an immunity of some kind. for president's. it is just not the right case to do that. and it's just going to really be a threat to democracy. to have them foolishly write something just for the sake of this case. >> yeah, it was remarkable to

listen to it and victoria, when you hear that you're shaking your head? yes. what john dean was just saying there. >> you know, i've been a law professor for about 30 years and i study the separation powers and the text of the constitution. and i have to say, i was it's just very sad today i've never heard anything like this. they said in dobbs that women don't have a right of abortion because it's not in the text. they believe their textualists, but they're just about to make up some checks for donald trump. so they did not they had an opportunity to put country above party and they did not. they refuse to talk about the facts. this official immunity doctrine is only applied in civil cases, not criminal cases. so i have to say it was a dispiriting moment for me because i teach my students at georgetown to follow the rule of law i tell them i'm a moderate because i have no friends on the left or the right and it was really a dispiriting de from me. >> well, jen trustee, i mean, you were on trump's defense team. obviously, you are not any longer, but what did you make of of how the arguments

went today? >> i'm not crying in my beer that this was a breakdown of law and order that's not actually beer. well, not yet. >> but it's only about 8:15. >> know. look, i mean, honestly, i give a lot more credit to the conservative side of the bench on this. i'll say a couple of things. one is i actually i like to sit in judgment on the advocacy of the parties, whatever my stake is, whatever my interest says, and i've done my dreeben for a long time. i don't know sour but but i actually was arguing on behalf of the federal. am i actually think that it was a really intellectually interesting debate going on today, and that the party, i didn't, i didn't agree with everything that either side said but i thought that the way they presented themselves or comfort in the supreme court is something that's pretty impressive. so if i'm talking to my students, i'd say whatever wherever you come out on this, watch the advocacy, watch how they respond to the court, watch their knowledge of history and the history of the supreme court and learn something because there's something to learn for both sides. but in terms of the court, there's a couple of things they are looking at context and texts and trying to figure out the history, whether

it supports executive immunity but they're also not blind to the current context and the current context is craziness of ambitious prosecutors around the country, throwing together very unique, very the aid of ways of going after the, the conservative justices didn't really seem to address the trump factor of it at all. they seem to talk about what it meant for future presidents while not dealing with the allegations about this former and potentially future president, right? >> well, yeah, the one thing that's here's the real sad part of the story, which is they can come up with this line, this kind of mark in the continuum between personal and presidential and say this is the line where immunity begins or ends. however you want to phrase it, they'll probably do that. they're not in a position to make the factual call on these cases. so what's going to happen? i think if they established that there is in fact this kind of qualified are limited form of immunity, not the absolute kind of craziness, but if there's a limited form, it's going to go back to the trial courts to figure out, are these facts

when and how do i figure out if the facts of this case give rise or don't give rise to immunity. so we may be seeing trial courts dealing with this issue circuits supreme court saying going the supreme court saying we you guys gave it this test a year ago. we're back. well, notable to hear you say craziness of trump's absolute immunity claim, elliott, what did you what do you make of what jeff? no, i think you're absolutely right right. i think the court in sort of recognizing i think trump's team in conceding that some things might be official acts and some things are not really opened the door to the supreme court to say, well, we can't decide what's an official act and what isn't. we're just going to send it back down to lower courts to figure out now to be clear, the supreme court could have resolved on this issue back in december, and we're not even talking about that hearing at which remember, judge florence pan talked about the drone strike by seal team six or whatever, long before that, the supreme court have this issue because jack smith's team took it to the supreme court, said, we would like you to expedite this ruling. can you please rule on

this issue and they chose not? two for this reason. they want to keep their hands out of it to some extent and push it back down to lower courts. >> and because jack speedy trial thing was absurd on its face. well, given can we talk about justice alito in shan was he raised today which was essentially, if you do allow former presidents to be prosecuted, then the least worried about being prosecuted once they leave office that they'll do unlawful things to stay in that office. >> it was a complete reversal of that argument. yeah. i'm not sure he understood the effect of that point. i think justice ketanji brown had indicated that it would become the seat of criminality rather than seat of power. if you allow that type of absolute immunity, i miss whole notion that they may send back or establish a test, i think is just nonsense because they basically want to have a bunch of mini-trials in every scenario to determine, is it an official act or not? and you know, something we already have a system to determine that it's called a criminal trial and they should just let it go forward because the way that they're fashioning this is completely unworkable and it's

never been needed for the past 250 years and probably won't be needed again for another 250 years were you surprised by justice amy coney barrett? >> all right. who seemed to kind of agree with that in the sense that these are questions a jury could answer. >> yes. i mean, i think that's what's going to happen. but the problem is the whole framing around official immunity that's in a civil case, not a criminal case so they took trump's framing of this question and then they're running with it and that is going to cause enormous delay and confusion. they mentioned the state cases and georgia in new york so if i'm a lawyer in those cases, i'm going to bring that up. so the problem is they had a statesman like option which has said the president is not immune. and they didn't choose it. >> we'll see what this ruling looks like when we actually get it coming up. we're gonna go back to anderson in new york and what we're learning from the transcript, the full quotes of what happened today and that manhattan courtroom, john berman is going to be with us with some of the biggest moment from today's testimony does it

like a snack if all pistachios get cracking at fisher investments, we may look like other money managers, but were different you can't be that different. >> we are we have a team of specialists, not only an investing, but also in financial and estate planning and more, your clients rely on you for all that? yes. and as a fiduciary, we always put their interests first, but you still saw commission-based products, right? no. we have a simple management fee structured, so we do better when our clients let's do better. >> we're more different than i thought at fisher investments work different. >> our biggest challenge uncertainty hidden fees surcharges, who knows what to expect? back turns shipping to your advantage keep it simple with clear up pricing with usps ground advantage my moderate to

severe plaque psoriasis held me back. now with sky rizzi, i'm all in with clear skin thanks again we've sky rizzi three out of four people achieved 90% clear skin at four months and most people were clear even at five years sky rosie is just four doses a year after to starter doses, serious allergic reactions and an increased risk of infant objections or a lower ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms had a vaccine are planned to now, the time ask your doctor about tyrosine. >> the number one dermatome colleges prescribed biologic and psoriasis learn how api can

help you save a look at here guys everything down from design and products to removal and installation, rebound this with you through every step of your remodel color visit, rebuffed.com for your free in-home design consultation, felt breeze. we live our lives on our homes fabrics, and though we come and go, are odors stay, it's called odor transfer left untreated. those odors get trapped inside fabrics and then really smells into your ehr. >> you need for brief fabric refresher its formula proven to deliver long-lasting odor fighting power you can enjoy ball, laughing, precious, even hours after spraying the more everyone phrase the fresher doc

preferred better science, better results closed captioning brought to you by mesobook.com are firm only represents mesothelioma victims and their families. >> if you or a loved one has been diagnosed with ms ophelie oma call us now moments ago, we

received the full transcript from today's hush money trial testimony during our live coverage of the trial, we have a number of reporters providing real-time tax about what's happening and being said. >> but the transcripts really give a fuller picture of what occurred. john berman joins us now, i know you've been going through them. there's a lot of pages what stands out, i can speed reading literally we just got the last bit right here. are there are a tear their one of the thing that jumps out to me is how many times david pecker testified to having conversations specifically with donald trump was mostly about karen mcdougal, but there is one point and the transcript where he talked to trump about stormy daniels and i miss that initially during the day, what had happened and this is part of that cross-examine. this is actually during direct josh steinglass, the prosecutor said, did mr. trump contact you in connection with ms daniels appearance on anderson cooper? pecker says, yes, he did. steinglass. can you describe for the jury have that conversation wet? david pecker

says, when mr. trump called me, he said to me the same. he asked me if i saw the stormy daniels interview with anderson cooper. i said, yes, i did. he said that we have an agreement with stormy daniels that she cannot mention my name or do anything like this in each time she breaches the agreement, it's $1 million penalty. and based on the interview with anderson cooper, stormy daniels, ols, donald trump, donald trump talking about himself 24 million josh steinglass says, that's what donald trump told you. pecker. that's what he told me i'm jeff. >> you recently interviewed stormy daniels. does she there is some money. she'll well, it's a desperate problem for stormy daniels when she was represented by michael avenatti of blessed memory suu donald trump on her behalf for defamation. that case was not only thrown out of court, but the judge in california awarded attorney's fees to donald

trump because the judge said the case was frivolous those were assessed against the client. stormy daniels, not against the lawyer. that debt which has been multiplying over the years is currently about $670,000. so stormy daniels, owes donald trump at this moment, about $670,000 and has essentially no chance of discharging that debt because it's been appealed and it's been upheld. this is something that i suspect the trump's lawyers are going to use when she testifies to talk about her bias and anger now, she has lots of things in her favor. she is actually a very good witness. she testified against michael avenatti in his criminal trial in manhattan, and the jury clearly believed her. i mean, she is a believable person, but she does have an ax to grind against donald trump. and that is going to be brought out in front of the sure. i mean, it was interesting because trump will also pecker testified that he

gotten angry call from trump also about another interview i did which was with karen mcdougal in 2018 pecker said, so mr. trump said when he called me, he said, did you see anderson cooper interview with karen mcdougal? >> i said yes. he said i thought you had and we had an agreement with karen google that she can't give any interviews or beyond any television shows. so i said yes. i said we had an agreement by amended it to allow her to speak to the press. does trump got very aggravated when he heard that i amended it. he couldn't understand why i said karen had a two-year agreement. she was flooded with requests from the press for interviews and i amended her agreement at that time, trump said, well, then you paid her. i said yes, i paid her an amended the agreement. he was very upset. he couldn't understand why i did it and quote, i just want to play what karen mcdougal actually said during the interview or, not, we don't have it why would he have why would he have amended? >> i don't understand why would david pecker have amended that agreement with karen

mcdougal? >> it's not clear to me either. i mean, the he had an independent business relationship with karen mcdougal. she was a columnist for one of his outdoor fitness magazines he i don't know why he wanted to do that, and obviously, trump did know why either and he was and you seem to be off donald trump. >> what's up and down that well it's not the first time. >> what i think is also significant about these passages is that it shows direct contact between david pecker and donald trump a lot of data pecker's testimony was going through michael cohen, the vast majority of its communications about karen mcdougal and stormy daniels. we're through michael cohen, but as prosecutor, you want to be able to point to these exact excerpts and say donald trump himself knew what was going on. it was very invested and not just conversation, direct conversations, but conversations and statements saying like, we have an agreement with stormy daniels, according to pecker, which gets to donald trump's state of mind that he knew there were these

agreements in place because they refer his benefit. and that's the thing is that one of the issues here is did donald trump thing like why did these agreements take place? the agreements took place for donald trump's benefit to get elected president the united states. those quotes which you just read show that he knew that's what these agreements were in place, and he was angry when he thought they were being violated. >> the fact that pecker saying that there was a catch and deal killed deal with arnold schwarzenegger is reportedly before he ran for governor, he said he testified that he suppressed a story about rama manuals have failed the verb run manuals, brother ra, who's a big time agent, i guess we've seen and has reached out for comment from them and others mentioned today, i should point that out. does any of that matter, what is the significance? >> yes, i will the significance is looked it's going to be an underlying current year by the defense of jury nullification, like so what so what let's you should say, everything the prosecutor says is true and

they satisfy the elements of the crime, which crazy crime, but so what big deal everyone else is doing it, everyone's and what this would this case is all about. it's not a crime. and figuring out who did it. it's we got this guy here and now we got to figure out what he did to try to convict him, you think in the case of this magnitude, a case with all this attention? >> here's one with this one. well, but the jury is going to say, well, we just won. we think he's guilty, but we're going to just find him not guilty you are you kidding me? >> i mean, cope you don't think there's someone who could be so annoyed that a guy who's running for president united states is sitting there for six or eight weeks when he shouldn't we outdo at something fundraising campaigning, or golfing with people who matter and they're holding me, you don't think there's one or two people out there like this was totally a crime that's a bs little crime and they just did this to keep

him. that's election to fill that maybe one person who does that, i think your mistake, i think in any trial it could always be one person, but i think what's more likely is there people are going to be offended that in an election that's supposed to be about the will of the people. they're not getting all the information about the candidate. and i think that's what the prosecution is going to keen on. we can talk about this like it's not the big crime and whatnot, but i think what they've effectively done, it showed that donald trump thought that it was the ports, the chance of him running the free world, that when he was attacking his other candidates like ted cruz, he thought this was so important that he should drag them down so i think yes, there's always a concern about jury nullification, but his defense lawyers cannot argue that you are not permitted to organize the jury, that they should not follow the law and what the judge told them at the start is that you are obligated to follow the law. this is told okay. and you know what i tell them, i say he's a justice of the supreme court. this says justice, but you know who determines what justice is in this courtroom. the 12 of view, you determine what justice

dictates. you determined with the outcome of this case also wanted them raised sorry that doesn't also raised questions about what other secrets does down trump have business-relate d, whatever that might compromise him in office? >> i mean, if he's walking down in the white house chatting with david catches and we think he's doing the people's vision. nobody is actually hush money business i mean, aren't there all sorts of questions like how else is he potentially compromised? >> can you say about everyone, a bill, about bill clinton, you couldn't say about bill clinton, who i think was a great president. >> certainly, a lot of other things on his mind. i don't know that every politician is like that. i don't know i want about every politician, but i think what you're at that level and to get to that level yet there's always some, some something in your background. >> i don't think stormy daniels is probably the worst thing donald trump ever did. i agree there's probably a lot more stuff he needed to cover up. then this but this is this is the issue of the moment coming up next, we'll take a short break for this story to bringing my conversation today with the parents of hersh

goldberg-polin, an american israeli has been a hostage in gaza, going on 202 days its parents had not gotten any word whether he was alive or not. >> they knew his left-handed been blown off. part of his left arm finally, they got a proof of life videos that was just released yesterday. i'm going to talk to them about it they slept on me for 15 years, things like collected pollen, dust, dander all that time. >> they could have protected me. >> mallory's mattress protectors. what, 99.9% of dirt, dust, and allergens for cleaners ease had allergies find it where you by betting. >> know application fee. >> if you apply by may 31st at university of maryland global campus and a university, that's transformed adult lives for 75 i'd use you're not waiting to when you're ready to succeed again at umg c dot edu there's some things that were qatar together like your workplace benefits and retirement savings presentation

looks great thanks boy, provides tools that help you make the right investment and benefit choices. so you can reach today's financial goals that one and look forward to more confident future. >> that is one dynamic duo well-planned, well invested, well-protected if advanced lung cancer, as you searching for possibilities, discover a different first treatment. >> immunotherapies work with your immune system to attack cancer, but up devo plus your voice is the first combination of two amino therapies for adults newly diagnosed with non-small cell lung cancer that has spread tests positive for pd-l1 and does not have an abnormal egfr or alk gene up devo plus your voice is not chemotherapy works differently. it helps your immune system fight cancer in two different ways. up devo in your voice can cause your immune system to harm healthy parts of your body during and after treatment, these problems can be severe and lead to death see your doctor right away if you have a cough, chest pain, shortness of breath, irregular heartbeat, diarrhea, constipation, severe

stomach pains, severe nausea or vomiting, dizziness, fainting. i problems, extreme tiredness, changes in appetite, thirst, or urine, rash, itching, confusion, memory problems promes muscle pain and weakness, joint pain, flushing or fever these are not all the possible side effects problems can occur together and more often, one up diva was used with your voice. tell your doctor about all medical conditions including immunity their nervous system problems. if you've had or plan to have an organ or stem cell transplant or receive chest radiation. your search for two immunotherapies starts here ask your doctor about up devo plus your voy a chance to live longer sometimes the lows of bipolar depression field darkest before dawn with cap later, there's a chance to let in the light kept later is proven to deliver significant relief across bipolar depression unlike san medicines that only treat bipolar one gets lighter treats both bipolar one and two depression. >> and in clinical trials, movement disorders in weight gain, we're not common, call your doctor about sudden mood

changes. >> behaviors, or suicidal thoughts, antidepressants be increased these risks and young adults, elderly dementia patients have increased risk of death restrict okay. report fever, confusion, stiff or uncontrollable muscle movements which may be life-threatening or permanent. these aren't all the serious side effects calculator can help you let in the light, ask your doctor about capital ada, find savings and support and kept blight a doc i'm kevin liptak at the white house. >> and this is cnn for more than six months, jonathan polin, original goldberg have lived as best they can in a nightmare, hoping that their son, hersh, she was abducted by gunmen last october 7 during the hamas terror attack. >> was still alive. they're last images of him were from this video. we're treated from the body cam or phone of a gunman hersh, his left hand, and part of his arm had been blown off, likely by a grenade being forced into the back of a truck. i was initially shown this video by an israeli soldier and i recorded it, john and rachel had not seen the video when i happened to interview them a couple of days

later realizing it was their son, i'd seen i call them after the interview and i then sent them this video was the first time they saw their son being taken. they later decided to make it public so people could see what hamas did to their child. and so many other innocent people we've been talking with john and rachel ever since as they waited for word any word of their son yesterday, they got it a hostage video. we're only showing a frame of it unclear when it was made. seems recently, but his wound appears to have healed and he is alive on it. he are was alive at least when this was made on it. he said, he loves his parents and he this is them. i spoke with john and rachel earlier today original john. thank you so much for talking to us how did you learn about this video? did you know it was about to come out? >> we knew that. it was both come out maybe 45 minutes before it came out. i got a call from there was representation from the us and

from israel on the saying, we haven't seen it, we don't know what it is, but there is a video coming out on telegram and that's how we found out. and then we saw it when the rest of the world sought i what was that like you know, it's actually interesting that you're asking this because i think that it was a lot like when we saw the video that you shared with us, although for us now, it was after 201 days i mean, we were sobbing, tears and emotional overwhelmed feelings. >> we're just a bounding we weren't even listening to what he was saying, just hearing his voice. and seeing him moving. and that he was alive. was like my heart started racing and we were just solving i would say

that it was hopeful. we've had hoped because we have two for 202 yesterday, 201 days but there's still something about seeing and hearing your loved one for the first time. and so long mixed with concern, which is to say that we parents know our kids best and we know what her looks like and not only is his arm missing, which we've known about since we got your video on de tenor 11. but he doesn't look right coloring is off, but you'd expect that after 200 plus days in a tunnel. but he looks a little bit puffy, his face, his neck shoulders could be due to a number of factors but there's mixed mixed emotions here. it lights a fuel, it lights a fire under is even more than we've already had to bring him and

the other hundred and 32 hostages home as fast as we can from the earliest days that we have all talked with each other, you had told me when we sat down in jerusalem in your house that doctors had reached out to you saying that the wounds that they saw in the video looked treatable& that gave you hope. >> and then even months later you heard from veterinarians when word got out that another hostage had been treated by veterinarians, veterinarians reach out to you to say you know what, don't worry about that. because actually a vet could even work on hersh's hand and it would be okay. i mean, when i saw this, i looked at the video not so much to hear what he said, but more to see how he was and you could tell that wound seems to have healed yeah. >> i mean, we did hear from many surgeons explaining that

it's healing well, but that they were explaining what the next steps are that he needs to have treatment the sooner the better in terms of permanent nerve damage in terms of getting a prosthesis that will behave the way it's supposed to. you have to have certain stimulation rehabilitation done as soon after the mutation as possible, which obviously this has been a huge delay in treatment so we are concerned about that. but he's alive and there are so many families that don't have that proof that we just feel very blessed, that we got that and to hear him say, mom and dad, to hear him say, you know, your your daughters names? >> that must have just been incredible well, it's

interesting because you know, we never use hebrew with our kids. >> so it was it was kind of like, you know, kissing someone through a veil because that's not the language that we use at home. but it's his voice and we appreciated that message at the end that you're describing when he talks directly to us and the message was very clear and i don't know how scripted it or where it was coming from, but i'll take it he also mentioned anderson to the first two minutes and 15 seconds of the video. maybe somebody else scripted it, maybe it's hersh's words. i don't think so it doesn't even matter i've just was immediately grabbed by those last 30 seconds. and

touched by an obviously and sending all of the same sentiments right back at hersh, hoping that he hears and knows and sees that we love him. we miss him, and we are working to get him home as best as we can, just as he said in the video with the other thing that really struck me about what he said is that he said i'm not quoting directly, but i know you i know you've been doing everything you can and and he said you stay strong for me and it was just interesting because as you know, i've probably said 1 million times, over 1 million times at this point over these 202 days, i love you, stay strong, survive. i love you stay strong, survive. and so to hear him use that sort of language which i'm assuming he has not heard us say and to say, i know you're

working so hard i don't know if he knows that, but it was it was very meaningful for us and powerful for us to hear that you want your family just celebrated passover this week. i mean, it's a celebration of freedom of hope that no matter how dark things get, there is a way out. did i mean did how was this passover well, passover is actually a week long, but the first two days when you're outside of israel, you do a seder dinner. >> when you're in israel, you do just one night of seder dinner and we were very nervous going into this dinner, because as you said, it's normally a commemoration of the jewish people leaving captivity leaving egypt and going on to be a free people. and the idea that we were going to celebrate freedom when our entire being

in seoul and heart is being held captive, just felt perverse it was not a celebration of freedom. it was a plea and beseeching of asking for freedom for hersh and the other 132 hostages families of hostages don't need any reminder ever of the fact that we are dealing with real people but maybe the world needs that reminder. >> maybe the negotiators sitting in rooms need that reminder. and if this video plays one small piece in reminding the negotiators that you are dealing with real human beings with aspirations and families who loved them and our work every day to bring them home. maybe that's a little bit of good that comes out of this for the process today was a milestone 17 of the 25 nations that have citizens who are still being held in gaza in

captivity along with her, signed a joint statement demanding for the release of their people and the truth is, it shouldn't take that but we're glad that it happened. >> that that people are starting that country's leaders are starting to galvanize and say, this is absolute insanity. it's been over half a year. these people need to come home and especially we believe that that would be a real diffusion of such tremendous tension that we have throughout the region right now and there's six words, rachel, that you always say, which is, i love you, stay strong, survive and keep thinking about that over and over in my head. >> i mean, what one more is there to say? that's it says it all yeah. and i really you know, we have hundreds of thousands of people who reach out to us it is truly

empowering. >> they're all different types of people from all different backgrounds, from all different places on earth and they say we are saying that to him. and i don't know how the universe works. >> but he might hear you. so you should really try to say it to i love you, stay strong, survive rachel goldberg, jon polin. >> thank you thanks, andrew lot more in the next hour on the two big legal stories of the de were continuing to go through the batch of court transcripts we've just gotten in the trump hush money trial and kaitlan back from lunch with interview with one of the former president's attorneys who was at the supreme court this morning for oil this is the story of the one the one who believes being prepared is not just a way of life it's how we help everyone stay safe he sweat the small stuff before it becomes big stuff for the one being an unsung hero in a

building full of every heroes is just how how he likes it the industrial products you need deliver fast call, click grainger.com or stopped by great journey for the ones who get it done you know, i spent a lot of time thinking about dirt at three in the morning. >> and he time what people don't know. is that not all der the same? you need dirt with the right kind of nutrients. look at this new organic soil from the miracle grow, everybody should have it, it worked great for us. >> this is as good as gold in any garden if people only knew that it really is about the dirt your dirt nerd, huge turret nerd proud of it we're still going for that nice catch. >> we're still going for that perfect pizza. and with higher stroke risk from aphid not caused by a heart valve problem, we're going for a better treatment than warfarin eloquence, eloquence reduces stroke risk and has less major bleeding over 97% of eloquence

patients did not experience a stroke. >> don't stop taking eloquence without talking to your doctor as this may increase your risk of stroke, aliquots can cause serious and iran carcases fatal bleeding, don't take eloquence if you have an artificial heart valve or abnormal bleeding while taking, you may bruise more easily or take longer for bleeding to stop, get help right away for unexpected bleeding or unusual bruising, it may increase your bleeding risk if you take certain medicines, tell your doctor about all planned medical or dental procedures, the number one cardiologist prescribed blood thinner. ask your diet you're about eloquence, higher shipping rates may be the cost of doing business. but at what cost turned shipping to your advantage with local? pause ground shipping from the united states postal service who are you? >> i'm in a child less what you really need in life is some freakin torque. why? >> what keeps you going with torque get you going what happened to my inner child?

>> greedy love and acceptance? how do you it? he said dr. dawna coordinate r2 but totally torqued out crossover life is better with the credit god's on your side. rewards once available to you, are now accessible to the many credit one bank. >> get cashback rewards. the lids large, juvenile, there's no t in skechers what he's told me it's always been scheduled z and these get too slippery get to slip bands

this is a shell energy 100% renewable electricity plan lighting every soccer match at shell energy stadium. we're moving forward with the houston dash. because we're moving forward with everybody. shell. powering progress. powering progress, i'm caitlin polantz at the federal court in washington, and this is cnn 9:00 p.m. at the end of a historic day here in new york, where the former president is on trial for what he allegedly did to become president. >> and here in washington anderson history was being made

as well. and i supreme court case, which flows from his scheme to remain in office and his claim that he should not be held criminally accountable for that. i'm joined tonight by one of the attorneys representing donald trump in the immunity case before the supreme court will scharf who was that today's supreme court oral arguments. i should note. he is also running from missouri attorney general. we're not gonna get into that tonight. it's great to have you or you were sitting in the second seat as these arguments are playing out today, i heard something today that i had never heard from your team before, which was john sauer saying that yes, some of the allegations and jack smith's indictment are indeed private good x what led to the change from your team? >> well, i think we've always conceded, first of all, that there is no presidential immunity for president's private acts in office. i think we've also conceded that obviously president trump engaged in many private acts during the time period in question. i thought in many respects the much more damning concession, if you could call what we did a concession at all? oh was michael dreeben essentially admitting the attorney for the special counsel's office essentially