Live Breaking News & Updates on Stand app

Stay informed with the latest breaking news from Stand app on our comprehensive webpage. Get up-to-the-minute updates on local events, politics, business, entertainment, and more. Our dedicated team of journalists delivers timely and reliable news, ensuring you're always in the know. Discover firsthand accounts, expert analysis, and exclusive interviews, all in one convenient destination. Don't miss a beat — visit our webpage for real-time breaking news in Stand app and stay connected to the pulse of your community

Trump on Trial New York v. Donald Trump

donald trump just walked back into the courtroom. what is the latest from inside the courthouse? >> reporter: literally at this minute right now, the people calling david pecker from alvin bragg's office, the first witness in this criminal trial is now taking the stand. david pecker, the former publisher of the national enquirer who is going to be a pivotal witness in this for the prosecution who established the meeting at trump tower in august of 2015. that is where the prosecution alleges the catch and kill scheme was first outlined and thought of. from that point on, in 2016, it led to not only the purchasing by ami of karen mcdougle's story, but also michael cohen being informed by the enquirer that stormy daniels in october of 2016, had her own story to

Donald-trump , David-pecker , People , Courtroom , Reporter , Attorney-general-s-office , Courthouse , Latest , Alvin-bragg , Stand , Trial , National-enquirer

Trump on Trial New York v. Donald Trump

their side so because of that, their strategy is going to rely on trying to muddy the waters and make this confusing for the jury to sort out. at least one juror says i don't understand why we're here and i expect you're going to continue to see that sort of work and theme advance by his defense team. >> now we're starting to hear names that may not be familiar to folks. back to vaughan who is outside the courthouse. the name dylan howard came up. tell us about him and why he's important. >> reporter: he's another individual we should expect to be a witness called to the stand in this trial. dylan howard was working as the editor in chief of the national enquirer as all this unfolded in 2015 and 2016. he, per the prosecution, was engaged in prosecutions between david pecker, michael cohen, as well as donald trump. particularly around the stormy daniels payment and arrangement in october of 2016, david

Jury , Juror , Defense-team , Theme , Strategy , Side , Waters , Work , Sort , Confusing , One , Reporter

Trump on Trial New York v. Donald Trump

and that and the other, but i guess he didn't spend his own money very often. a cheap guy when it came to spending money, but this is i guess to get to the point he would not have spent $130,000 on this. yet his name is on the checks. so how do they get past that? >> it's going to be interesting. they thought about these things or if they haven't, they are thinking about they will. i think it's one of the reasons why we had the sandoval era and got a number of rulings from the judge about what they can ask donald trump about. should he choose to testify. and a lot of the things are about corruption. a lot of the things are about bad business records. so if you get on the stand and attempt to advance this narrative that i would have never paid $130,000 for someone for hush money, you're jeopardizing your own livelihood or your own freedom because you you've opened the door to these other things about how you've

Point-of-view , Money , Guy , Name , Other , Spending-money , Checks , 130000 , 30000 , Things , One , Reasons

Trump on Trial New York v. Donald Trump

belief these decisions by judges. >> exactly. it shows a pattern of deceit, fraud, dishonesty, which is what you're allowed to cross-examine the witness and the defendant about if he should take the stand. >> and sexual misbehavior. >> he will not be allowed to be crossed on that. the judge thankfully was very fair. they cannot cross him about being found liable for sexual assault or being found liable for false buying business records. that would be considered too prejudicial. this shows what a good and fair judge juan merchan is -- >> that's such an important clarification. you don't want to overload and just say he's a bad person. therefore, he did this. you want to ask him about questions that go to his dishonesty, his lack of credibility. sexual assault, no. violating a court order when you're not supposed to talk about the judge's court attorney, yes. over valuing assets, yes. defaming twice, making false

David-pecker , Stand , Defendant , Judges , Fraud , Dishonesty , Decisions , Deceit , Merchan , Shows , Sexual-assault , Buying-business-records

Trump on Trial New York v. Donald Trump

today so the jurors will begin to hear the continuing theme that the prosecutors developed in their opening statements. >> catherine, we're not in that room, but we're getting good details from the folks that are. i think it's worth reestablishing and we talked about this throughout the day, paying hush money is not a crime. that's not what's at issue here. it's the underlying what they say are the underlying facts of this and how it was pursued. our folks say when david pecker walked into the room, donald trump craned his neck. it was almost as if, this is their own take on what they saw, he was trying to make eye contact with him. how much of this kind of stuff, and it's going to happen again and again and again. donald trump knows most of the people and in fact, was very close to some of the people who will be on the stand for the prosecution. how much, in your experience, do jurors pay attention to that and can it influence them? >> they pay attention to everything in the courtroom.

Jurors , Statements , Prosecutors , Catherine-christiansen , Room , Folks , Details , Theme , Hush-money , Facts , Crime , Issue

The Context

otherwords, charged, election interference. in other words, that he did it to influence _ other words, that he did it to influence the results of the 2016 election — influence the results of the 2016 election. 50 influence the results of the 2016 election. ., , , election. so the former president sa s it is election. so the former president says it is a _ election. so the former president says it is a book-keeping - election. so the former president says it is a book-keeping case, . election. so the former president j says it is a book-keeping case, in says it is a book—keeping case, in fact it is. says it is a book-keeping case, in fact it is. , , says it is a book-keeping case, in factitis. , , , fact it is. exactly, but i suspect that what _ fact it is. exactly, but i suspect that what the _ fact it is. exactly, but i suspect that what the prosecution - fact it is. exactly, but i suspect that what the prosecution has, | fact it is. exactly, but i suspect. that what the prosecution has, if the jury— that what the prosecution has, if the jury believes them, is witnesses that will— the jury believes them, is witnesses that will say that they heard or they _ that will say that they heard or they have _ that will say that they heard or they have got documentary evidence that proves that the former president said, for example, "you have _ president said, for example, "you have got— president said, for example, "you have got to — president said, for example, "you have got to pay this money, it is close _ have got to pay this money, it is close to — have got to pay this money, it is close to the _ have got to pay this money, it is close to the election and if you do not pay— close to the election and if you do not pay the — close to the election and if you do not pay the money she is going to out me" — not pay the money she is going to out me" "i — not pay the money she is going to out me." "i could lose the election over— out me." "i could lose the election over it" _ out me." "i could lose the election over it" they _ out me." "i could lose the election over it." they have not typed that ”p over it." they have not typed that up obviously because they are on their— up obviously because they are on their first — up obviously because they are on their first witness.— their first witness. they have put david packer _ their first witness. they have put david packer on _ their first witness. they have put david packer on these _ their first witness. they have put david packer on these stand - their first witness. they have put| david packer on these stand first. he is from the parent company that owns the national inquiry. he was instrumental to this catch and kill programme that the prosecution allege was in play. why him first? how good a witness is he?- allege was in play. why him first? how good a witness is he? well, we are auoin how good a witness is he? well, we are going to — how good a witness is he? well, we are going to see. — how good a witness is he? well, we

Election , President , It , Book-keeping-case , Prosecution , Fact , Election-interference , Results , Words , Book-keeping , Otherwords , Jury

Trump on Trial New York v. Donald Trump

trump takes the stand as he's claimed that he will. in another manhattan courtroom today, the question is whether the insurer that provided donald trump a $170 million bond has the financial strength to issue the guarantee. now if the judge rules against him, mr. trump will have ten days to come up with the cash. also for the first time today in the florida classified documents case, witness statemented that had been redacted have been made public. back in new york tomorrow, judge merchan will hold a hearing about trump's gag order. did he violate it and if so, what could be the consequences? and as if all that isn't enough, on thursday, the supreme court will hear oral arguments on his claims of presidential immunity even as he is back in a new york courtroom. to say this is a consequential week for him is an

Donald-trump , Courtroom , Stand , Question , Insurer , Strength , Manhattan , Bond , 170-million , 70-million , Mr , Merchan

Trump on Trial New York v. Donald Trump

so you always, should as a lawyer, be trained the don't do anything that's going to be out of the ordinary because the jurors will look at you. >> what would be out of the ordinary? >> you don't want to be like, you know, i always say as a lawyer, don't ever let them see you sweat. if a witness explodes on the stand, no big deal. you take it that way. you don't want the witness, the jurors to know that something went wrong. especially on cross. remember, now the defense has a long time to prepare their cross-examination. so he testifies today. they're going to spend a lot of time researching what he said tomorrow. i mean, they have off on wednesday. so the defense is going to have an extraordinary amount of time to prepare. >> do you think they will consider the fact that this is the national enquirer that they were paying people off? he's acknowledging that it was in his criminal. here he says it's on our screen,

Lawyer , Jurors , Anything , The-don-t , David-pecker , Stand , Way , Witness , Deal , Lot , Defense , Something

Trump on Trial New York v. Donald Trump

defendant none like anything we've ever seen. he is the former president of the united states of america. so when the jury sees him leaning over, all of a sudden, there's a little bit of distraction from what that witness might be saying. >> the jury's not in the room. >> in general. when the jury's, when they have a witness testify and donald trump leans over or does anything, makes a motion. now all of a sudden, their attention is diverted. when you have a witness and you have witnesses who you want the jury to pay attention to, he has that power to shift the energy in the courtroom even if it's for a second. i think that's also like really, really important. yes. to your point around who they put on the stand and when. there is a thought around we want to number one, set an impression and as catherine talked about earlier, set the stage for what this trial is about and get the jury engaged

Jury , Anything , Defendant , Bit , Of-a-sudden , None , Over , President-of-the-united-states , Distraction , Donald-trump , David-pecker , Room

Trump on Trial New York v. Donald Trump

would be $10,000. we're talking here about payments of $130,000 stretched out to kill a story. so they're establishing this was very unusual. >> not only are they establishing it's very unusual, andrea, part of the art, the skill of trial lawyers here including it is the way the prosecutors put out a very complicated case in 45 minutes told a story that captivates the jury. they know that they can continue, begin their opening witness, they can put mr. pecker on the stand and it will likely not allow the defense the opportunity to begin their cross-examination until thursday. so the jurors are going to live with what they heard from mr. pecker today, this afternoon. the court is going to be in recess. tomorrow, there are different hearings. wednesday, the courtroom is dark. they won't begin until thursday. it is smart. it is tactically astute to put mr. pecker on the stand with these remaining minutes of court

Story , Payments , 130000 , 0000 , 30000 , 10000 , Hush-money-case , Jury , Prosecutors , Way , Trial-lawyers , Part