ON HIS POLITICAL CAMPAIGN. AND IT COULD BE VERY PROBLEMATIC. >> THOSE WERE AVENATTI'S THOUGHTS FROM HIS PRISON PHONE CALL. WE HAVE COHEN LEGAL ADVISOR LANNY DAVIS, A VETERAN LAWYER AND SERVED AS SPECIAL COUNCIL SPOKESPERSON FOR THEN PRESIDENT CLINTON. HE'S PROVIDED LEGAL ANALYSIS I SHOULD SAY ON MANY PROGRAMS INCLUDING "THE BEAT." WELCOME, LANNY. >> THANK YOU, ARI. >> I SHOULD MENTION WE INVITED COHEN BACK FOR AN INTERVIEW. YOU KNOW THAT. YOU'RE HERE ON HIS BEHALF, WHICH IS NEWSWORTHY. I DO WANT TO PLAY A BRIEF PART OF THE AVENATTI STATEMENTS LAST NIGHT AND SOME OF THE ARE REBUTTALS WE ALSO AIRED IN THAT SAME PROGRAM AND GIVE YOU A CHANCE TO RESPOND. >> TO SAY THAT MICHAEL COHEN IS -- IS A PROBLEM WITNESS WOULD BE AN UNDERSTATEMENT. HE'S A SERIAL LIAR. HE'S SHOWN HIMSELF TO BE INCAPABLE OF TELLING THE GETTINY DANGEROUS. >> THAT'S SOME OF WHAT HAPPENED LAST NIGHT. YOU'LL HEAR FROM HIM AGAIN. THANK YOU. YOUR RESPONSE. >> FIRST OF ALL, IT'S A LITTLE BIT RICH THAT SOMEBODY WHO PLED GUILTY TO STEALING FROM CLIENTS INCLUDING A PARAPLEGIC COMES ON AND SPEAKS ABOUT MICHAEL COHEN'S CREDIBILITY WHO WITH STOOD DONALD TRUMP'S LAWYERS FOR TWO DAYS OF CROSS-EXAMINATION. AND THE JUDGE, DIRECT QUOTE, MICHAEL COHEN TOLD THE TRUTH. SO ANYTHING THAT MR. AVENATTI SAYS ABOUT MICHAEL COHEN IS FROM THE ABSENCE OF KNOWLEDGE. WHATEVER MOTIVES HE HAD, HE ADMITTED TO HAVING PERSONAL CONFLICT WITH MICHAEL. I WOULD SAY THAT THE CREDIBILITY OF MR. AVENATTI COMPARED TO MICHAEL COHEN WHO TESTIFIED BEFORE SEVEN CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES AND WITHSTOOD THAT CROSS-EXAMINATION AND ALSO TESTIFIED PLANE OTHER TIMES -- AND THIS CASE WHICH I KNOW SOMETHING ABOUT BECAUSE I WAS WITH HIM THROUGH THE COLLABORATION IS BACKED UP BY DOCUMENTS AND WITNESSES THAT VERIFY AND CONFIRM MICHAEL COHEN TOLD THE TRUTH. AND I BELIEVE THIS JURY WILL FIND THE SAME CREDIBILITY AS JUDGE ENGORON DID. >> YEAH, AND MR. COHEN WILL BE A STAR WITNESS, I THINK THAT'S FAIR, YES? >> YES. BUT NOT THE ONLY WITNESS. I CAN'T TELL YOU TOO MUCH -- >> I DIDN'T SAY ONLY, LANNY. >> BUT I AM SAYING TO EVERYONE AND YOU'RE AWARE OF THIS THAT THERE ARE MULTIPLE WITNESSES THAT DOCUMENT THAT DONALD TRUMP DIRECTED MICHAEL COHEN TO PAY FOR THIS MONEY TO DEPRIVE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE OF THE INFORMATION THAT MIGHT HAVE CHANGED THE ELECTION. >> AND THAT'S IMPORTANT, AND YOU'RE NEWSWORTHY BECAUSE YOU REPRESENT HIM AND HE COULD BE UP ON THE STAND IN A MATTER OF WEEKS. I WANT TO READ FROM THAT SENTENCING MEMORANDUM FROM NEW YORK vs. COHEN. QUOTE, COHEN DECEIVED THE AMERICAN PUBLIC THAT'S ON HIM BY HIDING ALLEGED FACTS HE BELIEVED WOULD HAVE HAD SUBSTANTIAL EFFECT ON THE ELECTION. >> CAN I COMMENT, INTERPRET YOU PLEASE? >> GO AHEAD. >> THAT'S THE SOUTHERN NEW YORK PROSECUTORS THAT FOUND DONALD TRUMP, QUOTE, DIRECTED COHEN TO MAKE THE PAYMENTS NOT FOR HIS BENEFIT. AND SECONDLY, THEY FOUND THAT THE CHARACTERIZATION OF THOSE PAYMENTS AS LEGAL EXPENSES WERE FALSE. >> YES. >> AND THAT'S THE FEDERAL -- >> AND THAT'S POWERFUL. THAT'S BAD FOR TRUMP. DOES THIS MEAN IN YOUR VIEW THAT THE SECOND CRIME HERE IS A FEDERAL ELECTION CRIME ALLEGEDLY BY DONALD TRUMP? >> WELL, THERE'S NO QUESTION THERE WAS A FEDERAL ELECTION CRIME. THEY CHARGED MICHAEL COHEN IN THE SAME CRIME THEY SAID THAT DONALD TRUMP DIRECT HIM TO DO. THEY DIDN'T CHARGE DONALD TRUMP. BUT THAT FEDERAL CRIME IS ALSO A NEW YORK STATE CRIME, WHICH WE WILL SEE WHEN THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY PRESENTS IT. >> SO THAT'S THE KEY SECOND CRIME. >> THE SECOND THERE ARE TWO CRIMES. ONE IS THE FALSE BOOKING, WHICH THEY KNEW IS NOT LEGAL EXPENSE. THERE WAS NEVER A LEGAL AGREEMENT. IT WAS COVER UP FOR THE MONEY THEY SPENT TO DEPRIVE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FOR THE INFORMATION THAT DONALD TRUMP HAD AN AFFAIR WITH AN ADULT FILM STAR. AND BY THE WAY, MR. AVENATTI ATTACKING MS. DANIELS LAST NIGHT ON YOUR SHOW IS ALSO A LITTLE RICH. THIS IS GUY THAT STOLE $300,000 AND THEN HE ATTACKS HER ON TELEVISION. I DON'T THINK THAT'S RIGHT. >> YOU GET TIME AS YOU KNOW MICHAEL TIME TO COME ON WHEN HE WANTS TO. >> MICHAEL IS ABOUT READY TO PREPARE FOR TESTIFY IN THIS HISTORIC CRIME. AND LET ME REMIND YOU THAT DONALD TRUMP CANNOT -- REMIND YOUR VIEWS, CANNOT PARDON HIMSELF IF THESE JURORS -- >> IT'S NEW YORK. >> IT'S NEW YORK. AND HE LOVES STATE LAW. >> SO YOU RESPOND TO AVENATTI, BUT YOU KNOW AS YOU PREPARE MR. COHEN THAT LIKE IT OR NOT THIS IS TRIAL, AND THERE WILL BE OTHER QUESTIONS AND POTENTIALLY ATTACKS ON HIS CREDIBILITY IN FRONT OF HIS JURY. AND THIS IS A NEW YORK JURY. AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU THINK, BUT I WOULD EXPECT THE DEFENSE COUNCIL TO TRY ANY WHICH WAY TO GET IN THE FACT HE USE TODAY BE A BIG TRUMP SUPPORTER TO SOME OF THESE PEOPLE. COURTESY OF YOUR REBUTTAL TAKE A LOOK AT THE HISTORY HERE ON THIS SOUND. >> I KNOW MR. TRUMP. I'VE STOOD BY HIM SHOULDER TO SHOULDER FOR THE PAST DECADE. >> DID THE PRESIDENT EVER PROVIDE INFLATED ASSETS TO AN INSURANCE COMPANY? >> YES. >> DO YOU THINK WE NEED TO REVIEW HIS FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND HIS TAX RETURNS IN ORDER TO COMPARE THEM? >> YES. I'M OBVIOUSLY VERY LOYAL AND VERY DEDICATED TO MR. TRUMP. I THINK HE'S GOING TO BE A GREAT PRESIDENT. >> TO YOUR KNOWLEDGE DID THE PRESIDENT OR HIS COMPANY EVER INFLATE ASSETS OR REVENUE? >> YES. >> AND WAS THAT DONE WITH THE PRESIDENT'S KNOWLEDGE OR DIRECTION? >> EVERYTHING WAS DONE WITH THE KNOWLEDGE AND AT THE DIRECTION OF MR. TRUMP. >> THE LATER TESTIMONY THERE DAMNING AGAINST TRUMP. BUT I MENTION IN THE INTRODUCTION WHAT A SEASONED LAWYER YOU ARE. THERE ARE PEOPLE WHO ONLY WANT TO COVER OR LOOK AT OR LISTEN TO ONE SIDE OF THE CASE. YOU NEVER UNDERSTAND A TRIAL WITHOUT BOTH SIDES. I THINK YOU MIGHT AGREE -- TELL ME IF YOU DO -- THAT THE OTHER SIDE OF THE DEFENSE WILL TRY TO IMPEACH MR. COHEN'S CREDIBILITY. AND IF YOU AGREE THAT'S POSSIBLE, I ASK YOU TONIGHT WHAT ARE THE RESPONSES. >> WELL, MOST IMPORTANTLY WE'VE SEEN MICHAEL CROSS EXAMINED BY THE SAME KIND OF QUESTIONS, AND THE JUDGE, THE ONLY ONE THAT HAS HAD ADJUDICATION IS A JUDGE FOUND MICHAEL TO BE TRUTHFUL. THE SAME KIND OF QUESTIONS AND ATTACKS WILL BE MADE IN THIS TRIAL. >> YOU THINK THAT WILL COME UP? >> I HAVE NO DOUBT NOT ONLY WAS MICHAEL TRUTHFUL, BUT HE OWNED THE LIE AND THE STEALING AND ALL THE OTHER THINGS THAT HE DID FOR DONALD TRUMP FOR TEN YEARS. THIS WAS NOT MONEY THAT HE TOOK. HE PAID THIS MONEY ON BEHALF OF AS THE FEDERAL PROSECUTORS WROTE IN A PUBLIC DOCUMENT, DIRECTED BY DONALD TRUMP. SO WHATEVER CROSS-EXAMINATION HE UNDERGOES, I HAVE TOTAL CONFIDENCE BASED ON DOCUMENTS AND OTHER WITNESSES TO BACK HIM UP THAT MR. TRUMP HAS A VERY TOUGH CASE TO GET EVEN ONE JUROR TO AGREE THAT HE'S NOT GUILTY. >> IT'S REALLY INTERESTING. DO YOU THINK, AND I'D ASK HIM IF HE WERE HERE, BUT YOU'RE HERE IN HIS PLACE. DO YOU THINK HE'S PREPARED PERSONALLY, FINANCIALLY, EMOTIONALLY FOR HOW MUCH THE TRUMP LAWYERS IF HE TAKES THE STAND WILL TRY TO BAIT HIM, TO UPSET HIM, TO MAKE HIM LOSE HIS COMPOSURE IN. >> YES. FOR ONE REASON. FIVE YEARS AGO WHEN HE CALLED ME AND WE TALKED ABOUT HELPING HIM PUTTING HIM INTO THE PUBLIC ARENA IN FRONT OF A CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEE UNDER OATH HE SAID I NEED TO TELL THE TRUTH FOR MY FAMILY, FOR MYSELF. AND SINCE THAT DAY HE HAS TOLD THE TRUTH IN FRONT OF CONGRESSIONAL COMMITTEES. MR. MUELLER PRAISED HIM TELLING THE TRUTH. AND I JUST SAID THAT THE JUDGE FOUND AFTER TWO DAYS OF CROSS-EXAMINATION I HAVE TOTAL CONFIDENCE THE REASON THAT HE'LL STAND UP IS HE'S ONLY GOING TO TELL THE TRUTH. AND WHEN YOU TELL THE TRUTH, THAT'S PRETTY POWERFUL. AND THE JURY WILL LOOK AT HIM AND DECIDE IS HE CREDIBLE. 12 PEOPLE DECIDE WHETHER HE'S CREDIBLE. >> I HAVE SOMETHING ELSE I WANT TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT. NOT THE WHY ARE WE HERE. THERE'S A CONVICTED CAMPAIGN CRIME. THERE IS A MOUNTAIN OF EVIDENCE AGAINST DONALD TRUMP PROVING THAT DONALD TRUMP MIGHT HAVE BEEN LESS THAN ACCURATE ON HIS FINANCES IS EASIER NOW THAN IT WAS YEARS AGO WITH THIS MOUNTAIN OF EVIDENCE. I THINK PEOPLE ARE FAMILIAR. SO NOT WHY ARE WE HERE, BUT WHY ARE WE HERE NOW? WHICH IS MORE A QUESTION FOR THE D.A. THAN FOR YOU. THE D.A. HAS BEEN ON THE SHOW, BUT HE'S BUSY RIGHT NOW. I WANT TO KNOW HOW YOU THINK THE D.A. WILL DEAL WITH THIS BECAUSE HERE'S THE TIME LINE. 2016 IS WHEN THIS THING OCCURRED. YOUR CLIENT, THE PERSON YOU'RE ADVISING, MR. COHEN, INDICTED -- PLEADS GUILTY BY 2018, RIGHT? WE DON'T GET THE REVIVAL OF THE CASE UNTIL 2022 AND THE INDICTMENT UNTIL 2023. AND NOW HERE WE ARE, 2024. APRIL JURY SELECTION COULD BE MAY STARTING THE TRIAL. I ASK YOU WHAT IS THE BEST REBUTTAL FOR THE D.A. WHEN THE LAWYERS SAY NOT WHY ARE WE HERE, BUT WHY ARE WE HERE NOW WHEN THEY TRY TO THROUGH QUESTIONS AND ARGUMENTS TO THIS NEW YORK JURY SAY IT'S A LITTLE LATE TO BE DEALING WITH SOMETHING FROM SEVEN YEARS AGO. >> FIRST OF ALL, I WISH IT HAD BEEN BROUGHT UP EARLIER. >> YOU DO? >> I DO. THE EARLIER D.A. MR. VANCE WAS READY TO BRING INDICTMENT BASED ON COMMERCIAL FRAUD. INSTEAD THE ATTORNEY GENERAL BROUGHT A CIVIL CASE FOR COMMERCIAL FRAUD. THIS D.A. DECIDED A MORE POWERFUL CASE WITH IMPLICATIONS FOR THE COUNTRY WAS THIS CASE. LET ME QUOTE THE FEDERAL PROSECUTORS WHO WORKED FOR DONALD TRUMP WHEN THEY WROTE THESE WORDS ON DECEMBER 7, 2018, IN A PUBLIC DOCUMENT. THEY SAID THIS CASE IS ABOUT PREVENTING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FROM KNOWING THE TRUTH RIGHT BEFORE AN ELECTION. HE WAITED UNTIL THREE DAYS BEFORE THE ELECTION. >> YEAH, VERY IMPORTANT. >> Reporter: TO TELL MICHAEL PAY OFF MS. DANIELS. >> YOU'RE A SMART LAWYER YO SO I KNOW YOU CAN HANDLE BEING PUSHED WITH ALL YOUR EXPERIENCE. WHAT DO YOU SAY IN THAT COURTROOM WHEN THOSE TRUMP LAWYERS SAY TO THE JURY IF THIS WAS SUCH A STRONG CASE AND A CLEAR CASE, AND MR. COHEN HAS BEEN READY AS I THINK HE HAS TO TELL THE TRUTH AS YOU SAID TONIGHT FOR ALL THIS TIME, WHY DID IT TAKE THIS LONG? IF IT'S SUCH A GREAT CASE, WHY DIDN'T THEY BRING IT EARLIER? HERE WE ARE BARRELLING TOWARDS AN ELECTION, HERE WE ARE SEVEN YEARS LATER. IS THERE A GOOD ANSWER FOR THAT. >> THERE'S A VERY GOOD ANSWER. HE WAS AN INCUMBENT PRESIDENT AND PROSECUTORS CALLED HIM INDIVIDUAL ONE, NOT DONALD TRUMP, DIRECTING MICHAEL COHEN TO PAY THE MONEY FOR HIS BENEFIT AND COVER UP AN AFFAIR. >> WE'RE 3 1/2 YEARS. >> WHEN HE RELUCTANTLY ALLOWED HIMSELF TO BE SUCCEEDED BY JOE BIDEN AFTER A VIOLENT INSURRECTION. NOW IT TOOK SOME TIME TO DECIDE DO WE GO WITH THE FINANCIAL FRAUD CASE OR BRING THIS CASE, WHICH IS PREVENTING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FROM CASTING THEIR VOTES. IT'S NOT A HUSH MONEY CASE ABOUT SEX. IT'S ABOUT PREVENTING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE FROM KNOWING DONALD TRUMP HAD AN AFFAIR ACCORDING TO MS. DANIELS, AND THAT HE DIDN'T WANT THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO KNOW ABOUT IT AFTER THE "ACCESS HOLLYWOOD" TAPE CAME OUT EARLIER IN OCTOBER. THOSE ARE THE FACTS. AND IT TOOK ABOUT A YEAR FOR THEM TO DECIDE WE'RE NOT GOING TO BRING THE FINANCIAL FRAUD CASE. WE'RE GOING TO BRING THIS CASE BECAUSE IT'S ABOUT FAIR ELECTIONS AND IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT MONEY. >> FINAL QUESTIONS YOU MENTIONED THE WITNESSES. MR. COHEN WILL BE A KEY WITNESS IF HE'S CALLED. WHAT OTHER WITNESSES DO YOU THINK WILL MOST CLEARLY CORROBORATE HIS TESTIMONY? >> WELL, I'M GOING TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION ACCORDING TO PUBLIC REPORTS BECAUSE I WAS IN THE ROOM WITH MICHAEL FOR ALMOST TWO YEARS WHILE THE PROSECUTORS WERE PREPARING. >> I KNOW. >> I CAN TELL YOU THERE IS ANOTHER MAJOR CRIME MICHAEL WAS FORCE R FORCED TO PLEAD GUILTY TO EVEN THOUGH HE REALLY HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT OTHER THAN PAPERING IT. AND THAT INVOLVED THE NATIONAL ENQUIRER AND SOMEONE NAMED DAVID PECKER. THIS IS THE ONLY INFORMATION I'M DESCRIBING. DAVID PECKER TESTIFIED IN FRONT OF THE GRAND JURY HE MET, AND THAT'S THE WORD FEDERAL PROSECUTORS USED IN THEIR MEMORANDUM.
