Lies, and that audio tape, Donald Trumps hush money trial, has taken a detour into the seedy underbelly of hollywood the lawyer who played the gobetween between each trumpled effort to buy stormy daniels. Silence gave the jury some critical facts about the pan, the pain process to get this deal done now that lawyer also got a dose of hardball from trumps lawyers now did it poison his credibility with the jury . Well, well find out. Im abby phillip, and youre watching a Special Edition of this slide. And im laura coates in todays day in court and it was filled with unsavory stories to say the least. I mean, the sex and there was plenty of that and not just a rumor, trysts between the former president or a porn star or a playmate. The defense put Keith Davidson life on display for the story and his noir like character arc, apparently as the guy who makes things go away for the rich and the very famous the lie is now, there were plenty of those from the former president , including, well, this one well, im not allowed to test if i am under again idea im not allowed to testify unconstitutional gag order. Nobody has ever had that before. We dont like it, and its not fair again that is a lie. And maybe most importantly, there was the audio tape today, this surreptitiously recorded conversation between then candidate donald trump and his thenfixer, Michael Cohen about that cash deal that trump wanted to use to bury those stories about these alleged encounters i need to open up a company for the transfer of all of that info regarding our friend david so im going to do that right away. And i spoke to alan about it when it comes time for the financing, which will be listened what well, ive get hold on. I got no, no will be hearing and hearing about that audio tape. A lot here with this some studio is robert wray and navarro, joey jackson, jennifer rodgers, and dante mils so much to unpack there. But lets start with the audio tape. Actually, robert, im curious about, you your take on this i mean, that tape, it really gets at the heart of this, which is trumps voice. The jury hearing it really for the first time but also trump weighing in on this deal talking about how it should be done to a degree and acknowledging that he understood what was being done on it his behalf. Yeah, i suppose so except that thats not really what the charges the charges, whether or not he had the intent to conceal as part of Advantaging A campaign or to commit a Campaign Finance violations. So yes, they have him on tape. The question is is that indicative of intent to conceal . Yeah. Well, its around he wants to do it in cash. Well, its people would agree that would be something someone would do if they dont want to paper trail. Its around the edges, but it doesnt really get to the heart of it, which is the question of which is what makes it a felony . The issue about whether or not it was done are intended to benefit a campaign. And that the prosecution doesnt have what they hope to have is enough other surrounding atmospherics where it would be reasonable theyre going to argue in summation for the jury to infer that donald trump had that requisite intent. So theres a lot of atmospherics that happened today, and i concede the interest in the public interests and the salacious and the unseemly and the hollywood and the sort of quote, unquote extortion then that goes on to do catch and kill and all the rest of this thats going on. And i guess were in day ten of this but the question is, whats its impact ultimately, i, robert just threw out a bunch of bob. I know you the ultimate question which is whether or not he has criminal when so let me give you the counterpoint to that salma defense guy, but ill be prosecutor person just to respond to that, this is critical information. Whats critical critical with respect to Donald Trumps knowledge and that conversation between cohen and donald trump, why is that . Heres why. Number one, now, granted, they were talking about the Karen Mcdougal deal, correct . The Karen Mcdougal deal was not that was the playboy, right . Excuse me . He play mate. But what it does is it gives trump some knowledge with respect to what cohen is doing. It gives trump some knowledge with regard to what his fixer is up to. It gives trump some knowledge with respect to deals like this being made. So what you can do is argue and you know, thats l4. You can argue to the jury reasonable inferences. So trump knew about the stormy excuse me. He knew about the camp mcdougal deal. He spoke with you with regard to how it would be finance hit you had every conversation with him about that, but he knew nothing about stormy daniels. He had no knowledge as to what was going on there. Thats just not a reasonable inference. So yes, you can argue that its on the periphery, et cetera, but i think it goes directly to a very core issue with respect to what he was doing and whether Michael Cohen, which just out there acting on his own, or whether he had right. Knowledge and he was acting at the behest of trump. And thats significant, of course, none of this is in a vacuum. We know, we know that is not television. Remember what the judge said that very beginning where this is not going to be like a law and order, a perry mason episode. Theyre going to have to build upon each of their witnesses and not one is going to give everything. But you look at the jennifer and thank and youre putting the jigsaw piece those together, trying to have a clear picture. Theyre looking to build on this this witness said this this witness said that the inferences are not just for one person, but from the jurys recollection. Yeah. I mean, less than they started with david pecker who had a meeting with donald trump and Michael Cohen. All three of them together talking about during this campaign, you can be our eyes and ears and youre going to figure out if there are problems for us and helps solve those problems. Thats where we started. Then we had a few parents hey, mason moments talking about made for television with the cross of Keith Davidson and the jury sits up and says, well, wait a minute, maybe the defensive scoring some points and then prosecutors come back and say, well, wait a minute, we have a tape and were going to leave you with the last thing that brings us back to donald trump, the weakness of davidson of course, was that everything he did was with cohen kind of leaning being into this defensive. It wasnt donald trump, it was Michael Cohen and then prosecutors come back and say, no, no, no. We have donald trump, dont worry, were getting there piecebypiece as you say, laura, what a thing is when you when you talk about proving this tastes, you do a intent for you had this stylish that he knew that this was going on and asked what their phone call does. He knew he knew he knew that payments are being made but you also had the establish intent and i dont know if thats there yet. If you look at the defense, what theyve been doing, crossexamination, theyre making it clear that everybodys doing this, right. This is something that highprofile people celebrities, theyre paying people off and not necessarily because of elections, because these people werent running for office theyre doing it to save their reputation. Why cant donald trump do it to save his reputation generally, to protect the interest of his, his family. Right. And if thats the case or the jury believes he was just doing what all other celebrities were doing, then it doesnt meet that felony level of trying to impact an election thats the part that i think is different though is okay. So we may not have established Donald Trumps intent, but theyve pretty much established everybody else around him. Intent has very close circle, right . Whether its pecker cohen, davidson, you talk about theyre all talking about the campaign. Theyre all talking about what it means. Theyre all talking about the timing theyre all cd characters. Theyve also i think establish that but theyre the characters that donald trump chose to surround himself with and they certainly knew what they were doing and why they were doing an anna, to that point, joey, i know you have bit of the transcript that goes exactly to that, which is all the folks around them as head of was just say they were like, oh, wait, hold on. This worked. They really war. So lets give you a sense of some of the transcript. Its like if you were auditioning for apparently mason, my read in court today questionanswer. All right. So here it is heres the question. What did you mean when you say what have we done . Answer. I think that there was an understanding that this is a text between dylan howard and i write hes the content guy from national enquirer. And that there was an understanding that our efforts may have in some way, i should strike that. That our activities may have in some way assisted a president ial campaign of donald trump question and how did dylan howard respond to your text . Answer, oh, my god. There you have it. If i can push back a little bit. Got pushed back a little bit. What, does his impression of why trump, donald trump did it matter . It comes down to why trump did it. Not why anyone else surrounding it did it. So on the other side, those payments were made, right . Weather stormy, daniels new those payments were made for a specific reason, are not mcdougal new four specific reason not davidson new force pacific reason or not . It comes down to why trump did it happen the answer is that jurors, we always say when were parading in front of them, you use your common sense and good judgment to anna navarro is point, right . Everyone around you knows whats going on. The coconut. Everyone around you, the coconspirators. Remember the theory of the problem . This is about a conspiracy and a coverup. A conspiracy indicates that they are those around you who are conspiring with you collectively to break the law. To cover up is in the paint and so right now, theres never going to be i wont say never because sometimes feel really guilty and it shows, but sometimes its not a smoking gun sometimes you have to rely upon jurors to bring their everyday experience into a courtroom with them. And if everyone knows the bucha knows the baker knows the Candlestick Maker must know two. Thats the donald trump in this get out personally rivaling. No im good this wednesday, im not gonna hear dramatic reading but what if what if a juror hurry differently and heard instead of what have we done, we may have assisted as if you didnt intend to in the first place. The fact that hes saying, what have we done . I could see one juror, perhaps again themselves wait a. Second. Did we just do what we think we did as opposed to what should have been joe Mission Accomplished, that thats one risk of this that could possibly happen when it falls into the sowhat category and also falls into the category of look, these this guy Keith Davidson quite clearly testified that his agenda, among other things, included using the leverage of the election in order to extract the payment. Thats a very odd way of saying or being able to conclude that the purpose of all this was to influence a camp payne, i think the crossexamination was subtle, but pretty effective when you to suggest that, look, whats going on here in this unseemly world is a lot of shenanigans by people who have an agenda the 40 slice of the action that this attorney makes with regard to a recovery and what they were angling and aiming to do in this environment, even though there was a Campaign Going on, had edit anything. But to do with the campaign, but had everything to do with using somebody who is a candidate in order to figure out how to obtain an a. I do want to make just one obtain an objective for a client that was financial. I were the attorney stood to make an enormous slice of that actions are always thats the purpose represent client i want to just make a difference. I want to make too factual notes here so Keith Davidson says he was paid 10,000, which is not an enormous sum of money. But secondly, on redirect the thing about the, the, the was actually correct and he said he misspoke it was not attributed to him or to stormy daniels, but two hi, my boyfriend boyfriend of the publicist. Okay. So what sort of tell but the point is, it wasnt coming from them, it was from someone who was actually sure. Yeah, totally tangential to this doesnt change what the migration i do it changes it changes where that motivation came from, which i think if youre in the jury, that would matter. I do want to go to Katelyn Polantz because she has some more about Keith Davidson as well yeah. Laura gnaby. Lets look at Keith Davidson on the Cross Examination where the defense team is questioning him, not just about these situations where hes talking to Michael Cohen and die donald trump, but theyre also trying to distance him and discredit him from all of whats going on there. And the way that emil bove did that, Donald Trumps defense counsel, in this crossexamination, is he tried to make the point to the jury that Keith Davidson, over many years, like a decade, worked for a lot of difference celebrities or worked in the realm of different celebrities representing people who had stories about them that could be negative. To silence them so those people include Charlie Sheen, how cogen, manny pack you, lindsay lohan, tele tequila. She was out there in the mix as well, and what was happening in those situations as far back as ten years ago, one of the clearest examples is with Charlie Sheen, where there were women that Keith Davidson was representing that had stories about Charlie Sheen and then those stories were somehow buried what . Emil bove, the Defense Lawyer was trying to say in his crossexamination of Keith Davidson, is he kept asking him about extortion or extraction, about how his memory might have been fuzzy around all of these clients he was representing in a way to put him in a negative play. Face for the jury as theyre thinking about this man, this attorney representing stormy daniels. Heres a bit of that backandforth related to one of the clients, the Keith Davidson represented around Charlie Sheen. So emil bove asked him, you know, who Charlie Sheen is, right . Keith davidson, i do. And youve represented some clients who you helped get paid by Charlie Sheen, right . Ive represented several clients who had claims against Charlie Sheen and who you extracted sums of money from Charlie Sheen on behalf of, correct . There was no extraction you took steps to cause mr. Xin to pay, correct we asserted that there was tortious activity committed and valid settlements that were executed. So some of this that emil bove is doing here in the courtroom before the jury, its subtle and it suggestive to the jurors, but it is something that he may try and argue later on that the defense team might try and argue later on whenever they have all of this evidence into the record, theres another really brief exchange, just so you can see how theres wordplay going on here between the Defense Council and Keith Davidson about what he was doing and what kind of a person he was bove asked him. I remember im asking what you remember. All right. Can Younswer Davidson in answer to what beauvais im not asking you to assume anything. Im just asking for truthful answers. Okay davidson, youre getting truthful answers, sir. Exchanges like that happens several times over the course of today that subtlety and suggestion coming across in the cross, that defense team had for Keith Davidson a lot in there. And certainly what you might expect if you have a lawyer on the Witness Stand no straight answer is ever lived. Prolines. Thank you for that. Up next for us, the judge is clearly losing his patients with donald trump is he decides whether trump violated a gag order. Once again plus the former president s the fence, his behavior and his attentiveness in court with a compliment to himself, this is Cnn Special Live Coverage Thanks that was a the whole myth has to be reimagined phoe, you didnt know whether you were next they were both tied up . Yeah. I was called it and they saw what turned out to be the biggest heist in history. It, went from gold medal winning icon to a pariah would really happen with jesse l. Martin sundays at nine on cnn. Youre introducing nets Plaque Psoriasis. He thinks is flaky red patches are all people see is the number one prescribed pill to treat Plaque Psoriasis oh tesla can help you get clear. Dont use a tesla if youre allergic to it. Serious allergic reactions can happen. Oh, tesla may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting some people take new tesla had depression, suicidal thoughts, or weight upper respiratory tract infection, and headache may occur live in the moment asked your doctor after about tesla in here you can expect defined Crystal Clear audio expansive, Display Space Endless Entertainment and more comfort for everyone but even with all that, we still left room for all the other predictability. Spontaneity and unexpected things. Youll find o