The Lead with Jake Tapper Aired April 23, 2024 - 17:00 ET THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED. [17:00:00] JAKE TAPPER, CNN HOST: Welcome to The Lead. I'm Jake Tapper. This hour, new blame for all the divisions in Congress these days. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell is pointing the finger at a specific political commentator. Who is it? We'll tell you. Plus, a new settlement in what may be the biggest scandal in the history of athletics. What the U.S. Justice Department is saying about its deal to try to close the books on its investigation into the Larry Nassar sexual abuse case against girls and women in gymnastics. We're going to get reaction from the attorney representing the gymnast survivors of Larry Nassar's abuse. And leading this hour, a major day in the New York City hush money cover up case. A key witness for the prosecutors was back on the stand, his name, David Pecker, a former tabloid publisher. And he detailed how he says Donald Trump used the National Enquirer tabloid to help his 2016 presidential campaign. CNN's Paula Reid has a look now at today's testimony as former tabloid executive Pecker went from killing damaging stories about Trump to spilling all on the witness stand. (BEGIN VIDEOTAPE) PAULA REID, CNN SENIOR LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT (voice-over): Former National Enquirer publisher David Pecker back on the witness stand today, where he shared details of his decades long friendship with Donald Trump and how he eventually used his position to help Trump in his 2016 election. Under questioning from prosecutors, Pecker described a meeting he had with Trump and his former attorney Michael Cohen in 2015, where they asked, "What can I do, and what my magazine could do, to help the campaign?" Pecker testified that he responded, saying, "What I would do is I would run or publish positive stories about Mr. Trump and I would publish negative stories about his opponents. I said I would be your eyes and ears." He told the jury he saw the agreement as mutually beneficial, "It would help his campaign, and it would also help me." Pecker said he began meeting with Cohen, "A minimum of every week." And "If there was an issue, could be daily." He said he would go directly to Cohen when confronted with a negative story about Trump. The prosecution questioned Pecker in detail about a doorman who tried to sell a story about Trump allegedly fathering a child with another woman as Trump sat in court and shook his head. Pecker said he directed the editor of the Inquirer "To negotiate a number, a price to buy the story and take it off the market." The doorman was paid $30,000 for the story, even though it later proved to be false. Pecker told the court if the story "got out to another publication or another media outlet, it would have been very embarrassing to the campaign." Pecker claimed if the story were true, "It would probably be the biggest sale of the National Enquirer since the death of Elvis Presley." But then admitted if it were true, he wouldn't have published the story until after the election. But before Pecker even took the stand, the proceedings began with a heated hearing on the gag order imposed on Trump in this case, the prosecution asked the judge to order Trump to remove specific posts they allege violate the gag order and fine him $1,000 for each of the alleged violations and remind him that incarceration is an option should it be necessary. The defense attorney, Todd Blanche, argued that Trump did not willfully violate the gag order and claimed Trump believes reposting others assertions or content is not a violation. But the hearing became heated at one point, with the judge telling Blanche, "You're losing all credibility with the court." (END VIDEOTAPE) REID (on camera): And there was no decision from the judge on that gag order. But court will be back in session on Thursday. Pecker will be back on the stand, likely facing more questions about Karen McDougal, the woman who allegedly had about a year-long affair with Trump. The National Inquirer bought her story and then never published it. That is likely prosecutors will move on to press Pecker on how he came to learn a woman named Stormy Daniels was also shopping her story. Jake. TAPPER: All right, Paula Reid in Manhattan for us, thanks so much. Let's discuss with our legal panel. And Elliot, let's take a look at this important exchange as the prosecution questioned tabloid magnate David Pecker today, the prosecutor said, quote, "Prior to the August 2015 meeting, had you ever purchased a story to not print it about Mr. Trump?" And Pecker replied, "Ah, no." The prosecutor asked, "Did that part help the National Enquirer at all," the not publishing a story that you paid for? Pecker said, "No, that didn't help." So Pecker is confirming here that positive stories about Trump, or a mutual benefit, or even potentially, I guess, theoretically, negative ones, would be a benefit for the National Enquirer. But stopping stories from being printed about Donald Trump would only benefit Trump, it would not help the National Enquirer. How important is that? ELLIOT WILLIAMS, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: Nothing illegal about it, right? [17:05:01] TAPPER: Right. WILLIAMS: Nothing stops National Enquirer from running positive stories about whoever they want to run stories about. Now, at the center of this case is this catch and kill scheme and falsifying record to cover up some of the details in some of these articles, you have to establish that there was a pattern of suppressing stories that were unfavorable to Trump and pumping up stories that were favorable to him in order to get to the point where you're talking about, you know, hiding business records to cover up what they're doing. So really what they're doing is laying the groundwork for what should come out if the prosecutors get the testimony they want, which is that these business records were falsified in order to protect the president and help the campaign. TAPPER: And, Adam, the prosecution established that the National Enquirer's catch and kill tactic, buying negative stories and just so as to not run them to protect Trump, and it was used for the Stormy Daniels story, was first employed in other stories. The prosecutor, Steinglass, asked David Pecker why the National Enquirer in 2015 paid for one particular story that was not true. Pecker replied that if the story "got out to another publication or another media outlet, it would have been very embarrassing to the campaign." Not, oh, boy, that sucks, because we would have lost a scoop to a rival publication, but that it would have been embarrassing to the campaign. What's your response? ADAM KAUFMANN, FORMER PROSECUTOR, MANHATTAN DISTRICT ATTORNEY'S OFFICE: So, to me, one of the key things we have to focus on is not that what the Enquirer was doing with the catch and kill. You know, when you get down to the gravamen, the center of the crime, it's about the payment for it and the use of funds and whether that's a campaign violation, that's what makes this -- transforms this from a misdemeanor to a felony. And so, the catch and kill, the idea that a newspaper would cover certain stories, not cover other stories, as Elliot said, that's fine, not a crime. What we have to focus on, and this is all the groundwork, we have to focus on the business records and whether there were false entries in the business records. And then, as the next step, did those payments constitute a campaign violation, a federal campaign violation that they were covering up. So it's not, you know, to say election interference election interference. It's sort of not quite accurate for what the case is truly about, which is the payments, the payments were illegal, and they -- and the records were falsified to cover that up. TAPPER: Right. I mean, there's nothing illegal about this sleazy relationship they had, such as when the National Enquirer to help Trump falsely accused Ted Cruz's father of having somehow been mixed up in the Kennedy assassination. And let's -- and let's run this clip. This is Trump calling into "Fox and Friends" back in May 2016. Now, just to remind people, it's basically, at this point, it's basically between Ted Cruz and Donald Trump for the Republican presidential nomination. And Trump calls into "Fox and Friends" to bring their attention to this National Enquirer story. Listen. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) DONALD TRUMP, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: His father was with Lee Harvey Oswald prior to Oswald being, you know, shot. I mean, the whole thing is ridiculous. What is this, right, prior to his being shot? And nobody even brings it up. I mean, they don't even talk about that. That was reported and nobody talks about it. But I think it's horrible. (END VIDEO CLIP) TAPPER: Again, not illegal for the National Enquirer to do that or for Donald Trump to call into "Fox and Friends," or for "Fox and Friends" just to sit there and let him do it, right, Elliot? WILLIAMS: No, absolutely. And what you're seeing here is a pattern of conduct where the National Enquirer would, number one, suppress bad stories about the former president. Number two, push stories that were critical of his opponents, Ted Cruz and Hillary Clinton, again, not impermissible. But the prosecutors here are attempting to establish a pattern of conduct that ultimately leads to exactly what Adam was talking about once you start getting into the financial transactions to cover it all up. TAPPER: And Adam, this morning's hearing on whether Trump violated his gag order, the orders to not insult or attack publicly, witnesses or the jury, that hearing got heated. The attorney for Donald Trump was trying to defend a Trump social media post about the jury. And Trump's team was like, just trying to pretend it was just a reposting something that somebody on Fox, Jesse Watters, said. But the judge pushed back and Trump's team had to acknowledge that it wasn't simply a reposting because Trump had added words to it. And Judge Merchan then told Trump's team, quote, "You're losing all credibility with the court." What do you think would have been a better way for Trump's team to defend their client from what seems a pretty cut and dry example of him violating the gag order? KAUFMANN: I mean, words that, as the attorney in the courtroom, you never want to hear the judge say to you you're losing all credibility with me. So that's painful. You know, I think that probably -- I would probably argue along First Amendment grounds that it's, you know, protected speech, that it didn't directly attack anyone, that it wasn't his words. But I think for the defense team, it's a very tough situation because you have a client who has his own sort of political agenda, who feels the need to speak out. He's running for the highest office and it's going to be really hard for them to control him. [17:10:26] And it's going to put Judge Merchan in a very difficult position of trying to maintain control and order of his courtroom. The prosecutors will keep pushing for sanctions. I think that, you know, he may sort of draw a line in the sand now and say, I'm not going to penalize you for what went before, but going forward, there will be financial sanctions and there is the possibility of incarceration if you don't toe the line. So I think it's a tough position for the defense team and a tough position for the judge. And I think that Donald Trump knows how to push those buttons very well. TAPPER: Adam, you're a former assistant district attorney with the Manhattan district attorney's office. Judge Merchan, typically, we're told, has a quiet demeanor, but he was clearly annoyed, even exasperated by that whole exchange in the gag order hearing, according to our reporters in the courtroom. Could that have a broader impact on the trial itself? KAUFMANN: I don't think so. I mean, look, you know, you sit through a trial, parties get annoyed with one another, judges get annoyed with the parties. All of that happened out of the presence of the jury, which is appropriate. And, you know, a judge might lose his temper, but I don't think he's going to lose his overall judicial disposition. I've known Judge Merchan for a long time. He's a pretty even keeled guy. And I think he may get annoyed and may express that and may get frustrated, but all in all, I think he's going to sort of stick to the rules and the playbook and make sure that everything is done fairly to give a fair trial. TAPPER: All right, Adam Kaufmann, Elliot Williams, thanks so much. Appreciate it. The big day in the hush money cover up trial comes as voters in a key battleground state or commonwealth are voting in a republican presidential primary. How Trump may be trying to use that to his advantage. And the side eye comment today from Republican Senator Mitt Romney, who gave his two cent on Trump's trial so far. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) [17:16:27] TAPPER: All right. Our 2024 lead. Can we get the campaign music, please? You know it. Thank you very much. I enjoyed the campaign jam. The election music, of course. How appropriate. Both President Joe Biden and former President Donald Trump have already locked up their party's nominations. But tonight, voters in the pivotal swing commonwealth of Pennsylvania will add to the polls. And that could give us some insight on where the race stands six months from the general election. Here now is our political panel, Mike Dubke, Gloria Borger, Bakari Sellers, who we should note has a new book out today. It's called "The Moment, Thoughts on the race reckoning that wasn't and how we can all move forward now. Bakari, how's the book going? BAKARI SELLERS, CNN POLITICAL ANALYST: That's a lot of words. It's going really well. And I would not want to be anywhere else but between you and Glo (ph). You're OK, but you and Glo -- GLORIA BORGER, CNN CHIEF POLITICAL ANALYST: Thank you, Bakari. SELLERS: -- are my book dad. Thank you so much. TAPPER: President Biden's on the campaign trail today. Donald Trump is stuck in court. Last night, Mr. Trump had a very friendly chat with Republican radio host John Fredericks. Just to illustrate how friendly this chat was, here's how the host helped Trump talk about the criminal trial. Just listen up. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) JOHN FREDERICKS, RADIO HOST: Let's get to this scam communist soviet manifesto trial that's going on in New York City. You are being politically persecuted. Our justice system is now perverted and weaponized. How does this play out, Mr. President? TRUMP: Well, it is, and this is all Biden. (END VIDEO CLIP) TAPPER: So we can, you know, we can move on from there. But first of all, I want to take this moment to show you somebody who was actually a victim of a scam, Russian judicial system. Today, a Moscow court denied Wall Street journalist Evan Gershkovich latest appeal against his unjust detention on charges, the U.S. government says are bogus and politically motivated. That's somebody who's actually a victim of soviet repressive court. But Donald Trump wants to, you know, reframe what's going on as a politicized trial. Gloria, let me start with you. Do you think that there's an audience for this beyond his base? BORGER: Look, I think it's going to get old really quickly. And today, you know, they had the hearing on the gag order and he's going to try and flip that on its head and say, I'm being gagged, I can't talk about this, the judge is unfair, they won't let me, and he'll continue to do it day in and day out. I don't know what impact that's going to have with voters beyond his base. Because when you look at the topics of this trial and how tawdry it is, let's talk about suburban women, let's talk about Independent voters. Let's see how well that plays. You know, he's got an opportunity to talk about other things. He's got an audience when he comes out of court, but all he does is complain and deny. TAPPER: Didn't you say last time you were here that Trump should take these opportunities of these televised little press conferences? Was that not you? MIKE DUBKE, FORMER WHITE HOUSE COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR: That was not me. TAPPER: OK. It was another wise Republican -- DUBKE: But it was -- yes. It's a wise point. Look, I think it's good that of all the trials for the president to start with, this is probably the best one for him from -- politically. TAPPER: Because it's -- politically, because it's the weakest? DUBKE: I think it's -- you're taking misdemeanors, the statute of limitations run out, you get a creative DA in Manhattan, turns it into a felony. It just becomes this tawdry, to use your words, case that he can use against all the other cases, some of which might have more, you know, real bearing on the election than this one. So this is a good place for him to start, I think. And he will use the gag order to his benefit. [17:20:01] BORGER: Yes. Totally. TAPPER: What do you think? SELLERS: I mean, look, I think that Donald Trump and many Republicans confuse the word persecution with prosecution. Like, he is not being persecuted by any stretch, he's being prosecuted for the crimes he committed. I do actually agree, I don't know if we need to sound a buzzer or whatever, I do agree with you that this is actually the weakest -- DUBKE: That's the campaign music. SELLERS: -- the weakest case of the four. But here we are talking about a man who has five kids by three baby mamas, he's charged with 90 felony counts or 90 -- TAPPER: Eighty-eight. BORGER: Eighty-eight, yes. SELLERS: I'm rounding up. Sorry. OK. I apologize. TAPPER: Well, three of them were dismissed, anyway. BORGER: Yes. SELLERS: Yes. So 88 now and he's in four different jurisdictions, and he's literally the standard bearer for the Republican Party. TAPPER: And he's beating Joe Biden in polls. SELLERS: Well -- TAPPER: So how do you account for that? SELLERS: So slow down. I think I -- Donald Trump has what we say is a very low ceiling and a high floor. And I don't think these trials are going to help him. To Gloria's point, I think a lot of people are desensitized to Donald Trump, it's kind of baked in. But there is enough around the fringes in the outskirts of Detroit or the suburbs of Philadelphia or Clark County or Tempe or Georgia or Raleigh Durham, where this election will be won. And I think college educated white women are going to have a problem with you sleeping with Stormy Daniels while your wife is pregnant. TAPPER: So -- BORGER: Well, if he's convicted -- TAPPER: Yes. BORGER: -- polls show that people would be less like -- a sizable number of people would be less likely to vote for a convicted felon, period. TAPPER: So, Mitt Romney was asked about it today, Senator Mitt Romney, a Republican from Utah, and here's what he had to say. (BEGIN VIDEO CLIP) SEN. MITT ROMNEY (R-UT): I'm not getting into the trial. There's a trial underway, and the jury will make the decision -- MANU RAJU, CNN CHIEF CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: What did it say about his -- what do you say about his character? ROMNEY: I think everybody has made their own assessment of President Trump's character. And so far as I know, you don't pay someone $130,000 not to have sex with you. (END VIDEO CLIP) TAPPER: I mean, you know, I know about as much of it as Mitt Romney does, but it does seem to make sense. You don't pay $130,000 to somebody to not have sex with you. Or to -- DUBKE: It's a fair statement or to keep. TAPPER: Or to keep quiet about something that didn't happen -- DUBKE: A fair statement. Right. TAPPER: -- necessarily. You know, it's interesting, Marco Rubio was asked earlier today about what's going on, and he basically said he belittled the report from the National Enquirer, said something, isn't that the same publication that says -- National Enquirer, that's the same publication that said Elvis was alive and living in Curacao. But he was asked about the tactics of negative stories about him being planted in the National Enquirer to help Trump during the republican primaries, and he said, I know people I ran against for president in 2016 that use mainstream publications -- DUBKE: Yes. TAPPER: -- to print stuff like that that wasn't true DUBKE: Yes. BORGER: Why excuse it? SELLERS; But he has -- I mean, Marco Rubio has the backbone of a squeegee. Like, I don't understand why he is afraid to stand up for himself, stand up for the people he ran with. Like, literally, they sabotaged you and you're learning about it now, you're learning how it was done, but he's still afraid to call out Donald Trump. BORGER: Well, look at Ted Cruz, though. Ted Cruz was probably the worst example. TAPPER: Yes. BORGER: You know? SELLERS: Yes. BORGER: And taking on Ted Cruz, taking on his father, taking on his wife, taking on Cruz personally, and now there's no distance between Ted Cruz and Donald Trump. DUBKE: Look, they all knew Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz all knew about these stories in real time and knew who was planting them. So this isn't a surprise to any of them. TAPPER: But this was -- this is also -- DUBKE: And a fairly typical campaign. You -- there are -- when you're running a campaign, you know, the publications that are going to be friendly to you and you know those that you go to, you know, give opposition research and other information that are going to be -- TAPPER: OK. DUBKE: --- detrimental to your opponent. TAPPER: Sure. But -- DUBKE: But sometimes that is the mainstream media. TAPPER: Absolutely. DUBKE: Often, as a Republican, I will say we believe it's the mainstream media. TAPPER: Well, it works. Absolutely, Democrats do it and absolutely Republicans do it -- DUBKE: Yes. TAPPER: -- and campaigns do it. And certainly there were lots of publications that were dropped against Marco Rubio in the 2015-2016 period in which in conservative publications accusing him of being soft when it came to, like, for instance, immigration, right? Stephen Miller didn't like Marco Rubio when Stephen Miller was a Senate aide -- BORGER: Right. TAPPER: -- and Marco Rubio was working on immigration reform. DUBKE: Right, right. TAPPER: I'm just saying. DUBKE: Yes, yes. TAPPER: But that's not the same thing as accusing Donald -- accusing Marco Rubio of having a child from outside his marriage. I mean, that's what the National Enquirer did or these wild parties, these foam parties, we don't have to get into, but those were the stories in the Enquirer. DUBKE: Well, if I remember correctly in 2008 with McCain, there was -- there were -- BORGER: Yes. Child android black. Yes. DUBKE: -- (inaudible) stories prior to Donald Trump. So, I mean, I guess the point I'm trying to make is this is not atypical for a presidential campaign. I could go back to Grover Cleveland, but I'll stop with our history now. BORGER: It may not be atypical for the National Enquirer, but it is atypical in terms of real journalism, I would have to say. And I would like to point out that there is a difference between what the National Enquirer does and what real journalists. TAPPER: Mike Dubke taking up the Benjamin Harrison mantle here -- DUBKE: Yes. TAPPER: -- on the panel. All right. Well, stick around. Coming up next, the head turner comment from just a few hours ago from Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell. He singled out one specific person on one of the most divisive issues right now in his Republican Party. Stay with us. (COMMERCIAL BREAK) …