45th president of the united states, as a convicted felon, and donald trump's lead attorney, todd blanche well, join me live. >> i'm kaitlin collins, and this is the source it's one of those where were you kind of moments in american history when the verdict came down on donald trump today. gil we'll t guilty, guilty reverberating 34 times over as the former president's that stone-faced and that new york courtroom about are how you feel about this case or about donald trump, the man. >> it's an extraordinary stain on the office of the presidency and on donald trump's already tarnished legacy he'll be back in that very same courtroom for sentencing in this case on july 11. >> that happens just days before he takes the stage for the republican national convention accepting his party's nomination for president but this time as a convicted felon, we saw donald trump earlier raising his fist and defiance it's to the crowd that had gathered outside trump tower like this evening. i lead source tonight is the lead attorney who represented donald trump in this case, todd blanche and todd, thank you for being here. what do you think the jury found donald trump guilty on all counts? >> i mean, i don't know. i mean, it's a good question. i think understanding why a jury reaches a verdict is something that every single trial lawyer in the country would love to be able to answer honestly. look, a lot goes into a jury verdict that doesn't even, include what happened at the trial. the decisions that are made before the trial, the decisions that the court makes, and that the parties decide about witnesses a call, what evidence to put in. so i think that at the end of the day it remains true that if the word of michael cohen was not accepted at all, then you could not have convicted president trump. and the jury convicted so at the end of the day, they they looked past what we thought were were fatal flaws and mr. cohen's story and his past and they reached a guilty verdict. >> right. but it wasn't just the word of michael cohen. i mean, there was other evidence in this case, the documents they wanted to rehear, david pecker's testimony. i mean, they took all of that into consideration. sure. i know a look. of course, the jury will take everything into consideration and they were very serious. look, this jury showed up on time every day. they were very focused on the evidence and on the on the testimony that came in, there was a lot. but look at the end of the day they it was still like case in our view as we've been saying, for a year that that relied on testimony of conversations and interactions that took place 8789 years ago. and certainly documents what we're part of the case, but the documents that the 34 counts were documents that that really had very little connection to president trump. but for the checks that the few checks city sign, look, we we i very much relieved that the jury the jury should have found president trump not guilty. i mean, very in my soul, i believe that and i believe it for a year. i mean, i left i left my job to do what i did the past six weeks and my conviction around what happened today and what i believe the facts show it remains the same. >> i know you you disagree with the outcome, obviously and do you accept that he did have his de and cord and it was a jury of his peers that made this decision will no. >> not at all. >> why not? no. i mean, look, i think and this is nothing that we haven't said repeatedly. we were we were indicted for conduct that happened in in 2015, 16, 17, in a jurisdiction that that it was very hard for us to get a fair trial. kayla, i mean, i know the district attorney has said repeatedly said it today. this is a bread and butter case. we do this all the time. >> that is not true. >> it just not true. it may be that they bring these types of charges regularly, business records charges, but you cannot find another case in the manhattan district attorney's in the history of that office, where they did what they did here, which is charged charge somebody for conduct that was seven, 8-years-old somebody's personal records, right? not not corporate records as personal records. so this is not i don't think i think it's naive to say that this is like any other case that we do what we did in this case is what we do all the time. no, maybe it's okay. i mean, they think it's okay. they did it. >> but i think the response to that, would? be well it's also not every day that someone running for president reimburses his attorney who paid off a woman to keep her silent. and when you when you say about getting a fair jury, this is where donald trump mean, you know, new york, well, this is where donald trump chose to have his businesses and spent decades of his life until just recently. i mean, that's why the case was here. i think some people would say, well, that's ridiculous that a jury couldn't put their beliefs have sayyed, you just talked about how hard they worked in this case. don't you think that they put their political beliefs are biases or stereotypes aside to make a fair decision here, i don't know what they did or didn't do, but listen, kaitlan, it matters, right? like when 100 we did it in groups of about 100, when we picked that jury, half the jury just walked out when invited to by the judge, if they couldn't be fair and impartial so imagine if you're if you're if you're standing before a group of your peers, right? that's what a jury system is supposed to be. so you're saying for a group of your peers and half of them walk out before a single question is asked just because they have opinion of you that is so strong that can't be fair and impartial. >> 12 to be fair did not well, they did not, of course, but but that's that's not really the point. >> the point isn't that 50 stayed? the point is that it's telling how many just walked out and then also the fact that president trump did business in new york. that's not the law. the law doesn't say, well tough luck if that's where you do business, then that's where you're going to be built his business here and he resided here and i guess if you think you know, if you talked about the testimony and when this happened, well, why didn't the cross-examination of these witnesses or what you put forward, your defense why didn't that work? why did it still lead to this outcome well, that's a great question. >> if you know the answer to that told me, i mean, look, i don't i think that at the end of the day, i do think it comes to something that we talk about a lot of times in our profession where there's a bias that you have that you can't get past. i mean, you say that this this is where he built his business. that's true. every single personal that jury new donald trump, either as president, as candidate, from the apprentice. and so i don't accept that this was a fair this was a fair place to try that what you're going what's your main argument? argument going to be? and your appeal? >> look, i think we have i think there were a lot that is certainly an argument. i think the timing of this trial and was really unfair to president trump. there's so much publicity around the witnesses and around the leading up to the trial that it our system of justice isn't supposed to be a system where every person that walks in the courtroom knows about the case. i mean, it sounds it sounds like it's one of those cases where you can't avoid it. i mean, no matter what jurisdiction he's trying to say trump the law doesn't say. but if you can't avoid it, tough luck, right? that's not what the law says. the losses that a person is entitled to a fair trial in front of a jury of their peers. and we just think that because of everything around the leadup this trial, it made it very difficult for the jury to to evaluate the evidence kind of independent of what they knew coming in. and we knew that and that's not something that we haven't we've been screaming from the rooftops that's what you said. >> a few of you arguments on the appeal. when do you plan to file your appeal? >> well, there's a look. >> this is one step in the process, right? >> so we have motion let's do a couple of weeks in front of judge more, shawn, which we're going to vigorously fight and restate a lot of what i'm saying to you tonight and other things that happened are in the trial that we think just made the trial unfair and including the testimony of ms daniels. if that is not successful, then as soon as we can appeal, we will in the process in new york because there's a sentencing and then and then and then we appeal from their district attorney bragg tonight, did not directly say whether or not they are going to seek jail time for donald trump. do you expect that he will i have no idea. >> look, there's there's a system in place that were you rely on precedent and somebody like president trump should never, never face a jail sentence based on this conduct. and it would just kind of confirm what we've been saying all along. and a lot of people say that we're wrong and that we're we're missing we're missing key pieces. but if, if, if other 77-year-old first-time offenders would never be sent to prison for this conduct. >> judge marsha, and we'll make that decision. >> that's right. do you do you think the judge was fair throughout this case i think that there were there were times when we very much disagreed with the decisions judgment shawn made. i think there were times when when when we certainly appreciated that he was making decisions, but guang both sides and make decisions based upon that. but at the end of the de there were key decisions made before the trial started in during the trial that i don't want to use a fair or unfair, but that we think we're not consistent with the law. >> but you can't say he was fair or not well, within your favorite, sometimes you wrote again to you, so yeah, but no, i think i think just saying whether someone's fair or unfair is not really the question. the question is whether decisions that he made before the trial in advance of the trial with the ominous motions with the motions in limine a. and then during the trial were they right on the law? it was he right. doing that and that's where think we have we have disagreements. we think there are a lot that we're not why did donald trump not ultimately take the stand here well, that's a very personal question to him and to me, honestly. and it's a very difficult question. of course, he wanted to testify and i don't say that because that's what he has said. he wanted to get a story out. i think the judge had made some decisions before the trial or the de of the trial started about what would be allowed to be asked of him by prosecutors if he took the stand and some of those questions were really complicated to answer because there's still appeals going on. and there's a lot there's a lot of decision points that go into whether somebody testifies ultimately, it's his decision and he listened to us and he relied on our council and he reached the decision that he that he thought was right, which i very much agreed with. >> so that means your council was for him to not take the stand. >> i'm not going to tell you what my counsel well, he said he relied on council and he went with that decision and he didn't take the stand and ultimately, it was his it was his decision. and i'd never say and i think colleagues and folks are your volunteer hopefully agree with me. i'd never say to somebody, don't take the stand, right? that's their decision and that's a decision that they have to make. >> but but i want them to have they'll want to know what will happen on the good and the bad if they do take the stand. so no regrets on him not taking the stand. >> look, the verdict came down a couple of hours ago. i don't know if i have any regrets about anything yet. i'm still i'm still thinking things through and i think so or so is he and so everybody else around him. but at this point, i don't think that we there was a conviction because he did not take the stand. >> when he was leaving one thing he brought up, the witnesses who were not called and he was saying that there could have been witnesses that would have helped make the case. >> we never saw keith schiller, allen weisselberg, some key figures here who got brought up a lot why didn't the defense call any of these witnesses? well, because we happen to live in america and we don't have the burden of proof. and so there's not that's not the point that should, that's a question that is a loaded question that should not be asked to a defense attorney or defendant. the question that we ask the jury and they ultimately obviously it got passed is why why the prosecution didn't call those witnesses, right? you as a defense for you don't go into a case saying i'm going to fill the holes of the prosecution. right. and keith schiller and some of the other witnesses that were not ultimately called in our view should have been called should have been called by the prosecution. and we ask the jury to take a hard look at that i don't know whether they did or not, but they convicted todd blanche. >> i have three more questions for you. if you'll stick around, we're going to take a quick commercial break and we'll be right back much more with donald trump's lead attorney in a moment. >> assignments are going off the tornado here you cannot out swim this you cannot outrun it really terrifying experience. >> it is a style nightmares you could hear it and feel it my eyes and my throat. we're burning i'm thinking i'm going to die and i thought that was it along with earth, with we have schreiber premiere sunday at nine on cnn are the facts choosy here is shopping for a used car, but she doesn't know that nearly half of them have been in an accident. >> and interesting, the car facts.com shows how accidents impact. so she doesn't have to overpay on pause shaft the all new kotb acts.com every weekday morning cnn's five things has what you need to get going with your day. and here are five reasons. to streaming on max it's the five essential stories of the morning in five minutes or less you can stream it anywhere, anytime get you up to speed and on with your day. >> cnn's five things with kate bolduan, streaming weekdays exclusively on madix mark writers. >> some people would rather crash that's slow down it was a golden age motorcycles and took my breath away i'd both his club i don't this is my family the club is changing what do you want me? >> the do like writers where your door only beaters june 21, we're trying to save the planet with nuggets because we need the planet and we also need nuggets impossible we're setting the meat problem with more meat. >> you will never smell better everywhere. like you will with looming. it's so easy to use just a pea sized amount like this, rubs in like a lotion, controls odor for three days on pitts feet privates, anywhere you have odor, but wish you didn't. now before you say isn't that what sopa water is? i'm here to tell you that your shower doesn't work as well as you think it does. and lumi is clinically proven to work better than a shower with soap, give lumia, try and see what happens because your body has never been so odor free as it will be with lumi. it's one less thing to worry about. everybody wants super straight, super white teeth. >> they want that hollywood white smile, news censored in clinical white provides two shades, whiter teeth and 24/7 sensitivity of production. i think it's a great product. it's going to help a lot of patients we really don't want people to think of feeding food like ours as spoiling their dogs. good real food is symbol that looks like food snowflake is what dogs are supposed to be eating no living being should ever eat processed food for every single deal of their life it's amazing to me how many people write in about their dogs changing for the better the farmers dog is just our way to help people take care of craig here pays too much for verizon wireless. so he sublet half his real estate office... [ bird squawks loudly ] to a pet shop. meg's moving company uses t-mobile. so she scaled down her fleet to save money. and don's paying so much for at&t, he's been waiting to update his equipment! there's a smarter way to save. comcast business mobile. you could save up to 70% on your wireless bill. so you don't have to compromise. powering smarter savings. powering possibilities. 369369. today this is cnn the world's news the presumptive republican nominee. >> now a convicted felon, guilty on all 34 counts today, and his unprecedented hush money trial here in new york his lead attorney todd blanche, back here with me. can we just talk about what it was like in the room today? because our reporters, you ever thought reporters included that no verdict was going to be reached. the judge himself seem to think that he went to go get the jury and then he came back with a verdict note and hand i mean, you in trump had been sitting there talking, laughing and then obviously italy realized a verdict was coming. you were obviously surprised yes. >> i'm very surprised, but that's what juries do you know, everybody that's been talking for the past two days about what they thought maybe a note met or what a jury was thinking, or how long they would deliberate you never know you never know. >> and i think there was as the day there have been no notes really all day and as 430 came, we were going to just go home and start again tomorrow and and the jury sent a note, said they reach a verdict, so it was surprising, but it wasn't surprising like oh my gosh, i'm shocked that we had been prepared but we're here for guilty verdict trump's him. >> do we telling people from what i heard, he thought it was going to be a hung jury we were prepared for a guilty verdict. >> i mean, i don't know what people he was present. >> trump was saying that too, but but of course, are in our view, we were we were fighting to win the case of course, but a hung jury would have been as close to a win as as we could have gotten, but we were prepared for a conviction. i think that was expected yeah i think a lot of people are curious because we hear from a lot of former trope attorneys what it's like to be a trump attorney. >> how has it been for the last seven weeks? >> listen, i hear former trump attorney is talk on tv all the time as well. i have found the last seven weeks to be in. i don't want to use cliches, but it's been everything that i would expect and want out of out of a client, out of someone who is really putting their life in your hands. it's been challenging, it's been rewarding. president trump this there's a persona that people have about him that is completely wrong. there's persona that people have that is right in some ways to it was the hardest in many people's lives. the hardest thing you do is go through a criminal trial and he was i was impressed, especially today. the way that he carried himself and handled himself. well, there were moments and i was in the court multiple times where you would see you and trump are often sitting next to each other or the other attorneys, emil bove and susan nicholas, but trump, what hit you on the arm? tap you on the arm, or judy, their object are clearly was writing your notes and saying, i mean, who ultimately was in charge of the defense strategy here, was it you or was it donald trump it was both of us. >> if there's a lawyer that comes in and says that they're in charge of their defense strategy. >> they're not doing a service that our client, every decision that we made, we made as a team and not just present trump on myself, but the whole team so again, every, every defendant, everybody who has her life on the line in history, will tap their lawyer every once while and say, hey, what about this? what about that? i've never we had we not only did we