And theyre all coming . Those who are still with us, yes. Grandpa whats this . Your wings. Light em up gentlemen, its a beautiful. Day to fly. Preferred, better science, better results. I, Hanako Montgomery and tokyo and this is cnn just about 9 00 p. M. Here in new york. Fascinating day 14 of the trump hush money criminal trial. Now in the book Stormy Daniels ramped up two days on the stand. Manager thank to turn a portion of defense crossexamination aimed at undermining her credibility into some embarrassing moments for the former president at one point saying that if she were making up her story about sex with donald trump, quote, i would have written it to be a lot better today. Also Saw Testimony from a Trump Organization bookkeeper about how closely he monitors the checks he writes detailing the attack finishing he paid two amounts considerably smaller than 35,000 checks he wrote to Michael Cohen. The day ended with judge juan merchan and rejecting another trump motion for mistrial and denying his request to modify the gag order. He is under so we can talk about Stormy Daniels and capping it all off. Stormy daniels tweet this evening saying this about the former president , quote, real men respond to testimony by being sworn in, taking the stand in court oh, wait. Never mind. Back with the panel joining us conservative lawyer george conway, who was in court today what were your takeaways . I might takeaway. Was that the continued crossexamination of Stormy Daniels was a complete disaster and a fiasco for the defense. I mean, as a rabbit hole, they didnt need to go to it, just was just it just went on and on and didnt cheat. They didnt have anything. Honore. And you got to confine crosses to basically a few short lines of stuff thats good. They didnt do that. I think what happened was they had a day off and necklaces of very good lawyer by reputation. I can even tell just by the way, she conducted as she knows, how to crossexamine a witness and knows how to ask questions but she was shes per client is a Narcissistic Sociopath and who is obsessed with proving the lie, that he didnt have anything to do with Stormy Daniels. And so they went off on this whole tangent on, but basically it doesnt it done in a lot. The defenses position should be it doesnt really matter whether that happened or not, because even though it wears Extortion Money it was Extortion Money, it still could be a crime, but were trying to prove something that happened, didnt happen is just its just counterproductive and it was it just got to The Point Of Ridiculousness where shes asking a stormy about basically a map of south lake tahoe, nevada to figure out whether or not she was walking in or healed one block or two, where she took a cab. It was shuster garbage and it was embarrassing. And to the point where, you know, if you, control the whitney by keeping your across simple and short, you can control the witness, but longer you go, the more the witness can pop off at you. And this woman is way smarter than knockout necklaces, chunk client. And she got some really could i thought i saw jurors at some point trying to do what i was trying to do, which was suppressed laughter at some at some of the shots that stormy got into got into the record. It was just it was just a complete waste of time. The good news for the defense is thats not what this case is going to be about in the at the end of the day the prostate. Let me defense made the mistake. Also a putting this all into connecting what ive just stipulated that were not going to contest what happened yet in south lake tahoe, and were just going to focus the jury in on the faculty, whether or not there is proof that donald trump knew about the records that we claim were event that the Prosecution Claims were falsified. Now, lets leave apart the fact that he signed some of this stuff with a backup. Now next to it and you know, what it carefully read it. It was 35,000 to his lawyers, hadnt really done that much. Four lets leave that aside thats what this issue that if he gets off, thats how hes going to get off. By by leaving this issue open about what happened in that hotel room. They invited the prosecution to dump all this stuff in the record, then they fail to object to a lot at some of the stuff that should have they should have objected to the bit about whether or not he wore a condom let me the judge said that he did think that should have gone in, but there was no objection to think about the amount of money and what how closely he pays attention to that. It didnt get anywhere near as much attention. Is the Stormy Daniels crossexamination, but Madeleine Westerhout, who got on the stand there was the last witness today, and shell be back on the stand tomorrow morning. She was trumps gatekeeper inside the white house and it basically was the liaison who was his Executive Assistant at Trump Organization, trump tower. They trained her of how to basically do that out of the white house. And there was one moment that the prosecution clearly brought up where there was an email between her and rhona graff trumps assistant here in trump tower about buying a frame a frame from tiffanys next door because they didnt have any empty ones for a picture of trumps mother. They wanted to put and rhona graff responded in the email and said, okay, but the frames are about 650 with a 10 discount, can you check with them if thats how much he wants to spend . This is while donald trump is the president of the United States of america, and he was rhona, who knows him better than anyone. Essentially was still checking to see if that was too much money for him to spend on a frame and for her to expense it. And i think that is where were going to see this go tomorrow, that they are trying to get to the fact that he was a penny pinch or any paid attention to where every cent went and we paid this guy 35 thousand a month and he has a reputation around this town of Stuffing Law Firms like you could, you could, you can make a long list on ellies notepad here. The recording that Michael Cohen secretly taped of his client trump, does seem interested in the details of payments. I mean, hes talking about in cash, yet can we do we do it in catch shirts . Let me ask you this question. Is it seems to me that there is a lot of evidence that trump in general was very scrupulous about how he was spending his money. And in general, for all looked at documents very carefully before he signed them. But theres not any evidence specifically that he looked at these documents. Do you think thats enough for it let me there is evidence he signed those checks with the backup but thats not evidence that thats not are they separate georgie evidence that is. Its clear okay. And im looking at as objectively as i can as a form prosecutor and as the current criminal but instead, donald trump sign the checks. Ive said that thats not the crime theres kaitlan. You point about one the county told on the checks youre up, your point about the frame . Its clear that he watches his money, but thats not the crime. It is that secondly, leap of how does it then get written down back in new york city . Where is it listed . How is it listed . Is it listed as reimbursements to Michael Cohen or is it legal fetal Michael Cohen, there has been no proof whatsoever that donald trump had anything to do with how its listed . On the ledger in trump tower . Can ive tried to reframe this for a second now, ill pose a question to your george if the prosecution stands up tomorrow and says, your honor, at this point, we rest can they possibly when they would have to dismiss the case, its not necessarily. Am i think theres enough circumstantial evidence that they could infer it, but they need to put some more on right . So you know, so it would be i agree with that. I think if the prosecution rested tomorrow, it doesnt go to the jury. So they need something from Michael Cohen, right . Yeah. Theyre going to need what do you think they need from Michael Cohen basically is going to explain the missing link that he needs to the meeting in the oval office in 2018 where they basically discuss how to do this. And i think and i think theyre gonna do across on michael, that is great. Attempt to be brutal the way they attempted to brutalize Stormy Daniels today. And a lot of people have low expectations for that. But the fact that matter is given everything that they appointed two so far from the commencement of the hush of the catchandkill scheme to the Everything Everything like just fell off like just hold it up what michael has been is going to say has basically been pre corroborated. So its going to be that but it is going to be the key moment. I think thats exactly right. And that bridges the gap that i think were seeing here, which is there has to be that last link. And Michael Cohens going to say its that meeting in the oval office in 2017, were going to hear about actually set the foundation for that today because the woman who testified had an email, so showing that this meeting was happening doesnt tell us whats what was said, but the jury knows that meeting happened to Michael Cohens testimony about that im sorry. Go ahead and ask. This is going to be a dumb question, but the fact that these payments were split up over the course of a year to me, seems like one of the most fishy elements of this whole scheme. If he were just going to reimburse Michael Cohen, he could have just written a check that money was there. But the fact that they split it up, it seems to strongly suggest they were trying to make it seem like something that it was not. Ive retainer that was being paid over the course of a long period of time. Right. And the gross up like, well, yeah, i mean i mean, you know, god, regardless of the amount the means to me, i think the prosecution hasnt explained this or touched on this, but that seems strongly suggestive of a scheme to make it seem like something that it was not. And thats exactly the point its not enough for the prosecution to show common shop sign these checks. He knew they were intended to reimburse Michael Cohen for hush money payments. They have to show that this was part of an effort to falsify to falsely structure these labels and the pull down menu as lawyer fees, Attorney Fees in order to cover up the fact that they really like how does but how does Michael Cohen help . On that question . Well, look at the end of the day. Whats a Reasonable Doubt are real doubt has to be that there has to be some plausible Alternative Explanation for all these things that happened and at the end of the day, its going to be i think its gonna be hard for the jury to believe that donald trump didnt know that these payments were four george at the end of the day . Yeah. And experienced lawyer of you magnitude, you know what you would save if you are trying this case, you know what you would say. The jury Ladies And Gentlemen of the jury, one of the luckiest juries around because you got to meet mr. Reasonable doubt, you saw him walking. Hear you. So ill take the stand. If theres any human being on the planet earth yeah, it should be his pictures should be net to the definition Reasonable Doubt. Its Michael Cohen. And if you do the crossexamined mike, why hi, or being a fraud, i cant shut make the defendants credibility if no, as he takes the stand is not on trial because its not because hes been saying all sorts of stuff to show any line in lying well, cone for submitting fake cases to a judge when he answers Probation Lie to a federal guy, that he lied about that it has something to do with what hes saying on the credibility are going to troy his credibility not going to tell everybody is in there is a guy spent christmas and oldest ago, everyone, should know that interrupt this really intellectual debate that were having. But can i ask you a question about the Michael Cohen thing because we have heard every thing about his credibility. We will when he takes the stand, which we expect next week, Madeleine Westerhout is there to testify today and tomorrow about a meeting where theres an email. Shes asking for Michael Cohen descend Social Security numbers, date of birth, everything you need to get into the white house. Theres the date of when that meeting is. We actually have this sound by of Michael Cohen when hes testifying before the House Oversight committee in 2018 about that meeting at the white house. And essentially, what happened so picture this scene in february of 20 month into his presidency im visiting President Trump in the oval office for the first time. And its truly awe, inspiring. He showing me all around and pointing to different paintings. And he says to me something to the effect of dont worry michael, youre january and february reimbursement checks are coming. They were fedexed from new york and it takes a while for that to get through the white house system. As he promised, i received the first check for the reimbursement of 70,000 not long thereafter okay. So we know that the meeting setup, we have someone who is testifying about the fedex and how that worked, and youve Michael Cohen testifying that. So its not like its just his word alone. There is other kaitlan does that he got checks for michael whos allowed to be reimburse. You also prove that donald trump donald trump confirm that he was fully aware it was being really correctly the crime. Yeah. But thats being reimbursed again, the other side of tables doing the perfect Defense Lawyer thing, which is basically a chop up all bit by bit, who are making. I think thats entirely fair because yes, i think it is quite its going to be very clear to the jury that these this money was a reimbursement. It wasnt illegal fee but the corporate records being falsified, how do you tie trump to the corporate records being falsified . That i think is still problematic because he knew what thats what thats what was going on. That it was being done on his behalf, that hes signing these things that say that theyre legal reimburses. He knew and hes getting and its grossed up, but he couldnt he think he didnt figure out that. Wait a minute this was 130,000 and im writing checks for 35,000 a month i mean, hes a dumb guy, but hes not that as Michael Cohen publicly said, that trump knew that these, that it was being filed as legal expense. Not that im aware of. Michael cohen has publicly sayyed 1 million times that trump is as guilty as can be. And i think this is important when were talking about this meeting, right . But but he hasnt gotten to the debt level of legal specimen, but hes at a podcast is written ill call event you would think if that was right, something he was going to testify to, he would have mentioned and this is exactly the point were going to get into a meeting here. We know the meeting happened. Theres documentation of that, but what happened in what was said is going to entirely come down to Michael Cohens word. And its really not a question for the jury of whos a bigger liar, Michael Cohen or donald trump. Prosecutors have the burden and if the jury hears Michael Cohens account of what happened, including what he just said there and decides we dont trust this guy beyond a Reasonable Doubt. Theres no number on it, but a very high standard, then they have the right to say not guilty. I think its not a trump versus cohen. Its do we trust cohen . To that level of reasonable . I think arthur is making a good point about the dropdown menu, but i still have questions about whether thats really the standard. I mean, if if if there are kingpins who are convicted of crimes that involve things that they dont physically have to do themselves. I mean, do they have to do the dropdown menu themselves to be guilty . Im so i guess where do we go what is between doing the dropdown menu yourself and what the prosecutors would have known that theres a limited whether he knows its a dropdown menu, but theres a limited number of ways to code and expense. I mean, if hes been a penny pinch your monitored expenses and fedex packages, what do you have known . Oh, yeah. There are six things you can code it as legal legal issue. Lead prosecutor. Number one, the price you got to prove that, but one more thing, anderson, theres another piece of this. Its not just a bookkeeping. They then have to prove beyond and a Reasonable Doubt it was done to commit another crime. And we havent what evidence is there been so far articulating what crime that is allegedly when i was in quarternary heard theyre going to call a federal Election Law Expert or maybe a state Election Law Expert. So theres, theres the