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. started today, accustoming.com. i ve had to go montgomery and tokyo and this is cnn cnn breaking news welcome to cnn s breaking news coverage of the historic donald trump hush money trial. i m wolf blitzer in washington and boris sanchez is outside the courthouse in manhattan i m this de of the trial, the first witness his nearing the end of his testimony, david pecker is facing redirect by the prosecution after several hours of cross by trump s defense attorney. much of that cross detailed the former tabloid executives history of purchasing stories so that he could bury them boris and right now, wolff, the court is taking a break for lunch. the judge instructing the jury, as he always does, to not discuss the case outside of the courtroom de as the first w
when he was called up by the bronx bombers, he replaced a 19 year old mickey mantle, who was optioned for aaa and he became roommates with yogi berra. how s that for friday ticker. thanks to our panel. tnks to you for joining us. i m kasie hunt, cnn news central starts right now f is four friday and breaking this morning, damage control, donald trump s lawyers try to mitigate the dramatic, tawdry testimony from the first witness in the criminal hush money is it possible adult film star stormy daniels takes the stand today protests and golfing college campuses, college professors getting arrested and now one university is canceling their main graduation ceremony at tiktok fights back the wildly social media app does. it will not be sold out through a law that could lead to a nationwide ban. real that bad happened. i m sorry, sided with john berman and kate bolduan. this is cnn news central this morning. how much damage was done, how much can be undone? a critical moment in the
up witness david pecker who is at times combative, and jurors largely avoiding looking at trump, but according to those inside the room, giving pecker their rapt attention. for a day filled with details and inside baseball legalese, no small feat. we have a panel of experts standing by to explain it all. plus, nothing matters more than how the jury is interpreting the witness testimony we ve seen so far. how are attorneys on both sides analyzing what jurors are taking away from the questioning. we ll ask a jury consultant. and for the political stakes of this trial, the campaign. the former president announcing new campaign events when he s not in the courtroom while president biden just made a promise that could have a major impact on november s race. so a lot to get to. we begin with that redirect questioning of key witness david pecker, which began just a short time ago. prosecutors jumping straight into rebutting some key threats from the defense. one key, for example
i m period in question. i thought in many what we did a concession at all was michael dreeben essentially admitting the attorney for the special counsel s office, essentially admitting that these facts were so inextricably intertwined in a colloquy with justice barrett, that it would be very difficult to separate them out on remand. that s how i interpret for his statements at least. well, and to translate that for people watching, that means that basically, if it wasn t official act, they would not be able to use that potentially at trial. he was arguing they should be able to use it to paint a bigger picture. but trump has argued, total immunity. he has not said, well, some of these are private x this would mean the case could at least in part go forward and go to trial. we believe that without the official acts charged in the indictment, there is no case. we ve been very consistent in our position from the start, starting with the district court proceeding through
concession at all. was michael dreeben essentially admitting the attorney for the special counsel s office, essentially admitting that these facts were so strikingly intertwined in a colloquy with justice barrett that it would be very difficult to separate them out on remand. that s how i interpreted his statements, at least. well, and to translate that for people watching, that means that basically, if it wasn t official act, they would not be able to use that potentially at trial. he was arguing they should be able to use it to paint a bigger picture. but trump has argued, total immunity. he has not said, well, some of these are private x. this would mean the case could at least in part go forward and go to trial. we believe that without the official acts charged in the indictment, there is no case. we ve been very consistent in our position from the start, starting with the district court proceeding through the circuit. now at the the us supreme court, that what we re