guys, we're going to win this thing. i promise you we're going to win it because we haven't done anything wrong. >> oh, eric. you're not paying attention. you have already lost, remember? in september, when the judge ruled that you and your brother and your daddy lied for years on your company's financial statements. this trial, it's really just about penalties. >> also tonight, president biden visits grieving families in lewiston, maine, as we learn more about missed warning signs before the gunman killed 18 people. i'm jason johnson in for joy reid. we begin tonight with another volatile day in the $250 million civil fraud trial against the trump crime family and their company. today, a new york judge ruled that a limited gag order on donald trump should also apply to his attorneys after he said they made inappropriate remarks about his principal law clerk. judge arthur engoron's order said the lawyers for the former president and his adult sons are, quote, prohibited from making any public statements in or out of court that refer to any confidential communications in any form between my staff and me. that is legalease for keep my name and my staff's name out your mouth. failure to abide by this directive should result in serious sanctions, engoron warned. the ruling came after eric trump returned for a second day of testimony in the civil fraud suit. eric acknowledged he was aware of the trump organization's statements of financial condition as far back as 2013, ten years ago. after repeatedly denying knowledge of them, after court adjourned he ripped state attorney letitia james to reporters, taking lines straight from his father's racist playbook. >> what new york state is doing to my father is truly awful. unbelievable company, some of the best assets in the world. they dragged us, and that's damage. they want our names in this thing because it sensationalizes the case. we have done absolutely nothing wrong. we have a better company than they could have ever imagined. >> letitia james' office has argued trump's children participated in a scheme to falsely inflate their company's assets to secure more favorable loans and insurance policies. remember, the judge has already found that donald trump and his two sons engaged in persistent fraud. this trial will determine what financial fines or other punishments trump will face. that's it. it's the case that hits closest to home, and not just because it involves trump's kids. it targets trump's entire image built over decades as a symbol of wealth and power. expect to see flashes of hot trumpian anger. joining me now is adam reese who was in the courtroom today. great to talk to you. i'm going to ask you this up front. this is the thing that gets me about some of these trials, certainly with eric jr. what is he attempting to do here? because it seems like he doesn't understand that he's already been found guilty. it seems like he's trying to relitigate something that's already been taken care of. >> you're right, jason. it really has been sort of a tale of two brothers. eric being one of them, don jr. the other. don jr., 45 years old, the elder brother. much more comfortable on the stand. amiable, cracking jokes with the judge. having a banter with the prosecutor. but sticking to his story, which is he relied on the attorneys and the accountants and his cpa, but as you mention, eric is an entirely different story. eric's testimony last two days, very fraught, very contentious. he doesn't remember a lot of things. he says, you know, i pour concrete. i am a developer. i'm a real estate guy. i am way, way above all of these intricate details of the finances. but he really got caught up in the details. and in the evidence. the documents, the emails, the signatures. his signature is on so many documents. and there were gotcha moments. he changed his story numerous times. first he didn't know about the statements of financial condition. then he said, well, maybe there were some, but i really didn't have anything to do with it. then at the end, he said you know what, yes, that does look familiar. but it really underestimates my father's wealth. he and his brother walked out of the courtroom, both of them thumbs up. but i must say, the judge is probably going to give them a thumbs down. >> adam reese, thank you so much for laying that out and starting us off tonight on "the reidout." let's bring in glenn kirschner and charles coleman jr. both are former federal prosecutors and msnbc legal analysts. glenn, i'll start with you. as much as i love this sort of kindle and roman thing they have going on when they go to trial here, it seems to me like i can't tell if this is a strategy or it's just eric trump doesn't know any better. do you think there is some sort of larger plan with the trump brothers where one is like, i'm going to play the jerk, and you're going to play the guy who is slightly more sophisticated? are they hoping that will change the penalties and fines they face, or are they just acting in their personalities? >> nobody will accuse these characters of being tactical geniuses, because what they should have done is plead the fifth and go home. listen, as you already pointed out, judge engoron has already ruled against trump and company on liability, and now the question is, how much will they have to disgorge, how much of the ill gotten gains they have courtesy of their fraud should they have to give back? but the other thing in the mix here is will they be prohibited, essentially, from doing business in new york in the future. so all i can figure is they think maybe they can talk their way out of being prohibited from continuing to work as part of the new york business world. i have a hard time believing judge engoron is going to fall for any of this nonsense when somebody like don jr. testifies that yes, i was the certifying official, yes, i signed my name on that document, certifying that it was accurate, but i had no idea if it was accurate or not because my accountants were really the bad guys. so were you crooked or were you just so incredibly grossly incompetent and you just didn't care? neither one of them makes for a particularly good new york businessman. >> charles, continuing with our sort of succession metaphor here, we have already talked about kendall and roman. now let's talk about shiv, ivanka. ivanka trump, the court just rejecting her desire to avoid testimony because she said she's too busy to testify during a school week and they basically said that's nonsense, you still have to come in even though she claimed he would be suffering undue harpship. one, under what circumstances would that argument have worked, and two, if you look at the three children in the trump organization, which is the one who is the most likely to cause the most damage? is it don, is it ivanka? which one of them is most likely to cause the most damage as far as possibly raising the amount of fines, fees, or penalties they could face? >> well, jason, to your first question, the notion of not being able to testify on the basis of a hardship exception is going to require a very high standard in terms of you meeting that bar. and ivanka trump basically saying hey, i have to get my kids from school for one day of testimony is not going to meet that. usually, you're talking about people who have extreme circumstances who are outside of the jurisdiction and for whom it would be a serious burden to get to court and to testify, and i might add, who are not essential witnesses. so all of those things are going to be factors that play into whether a judge makes the decision as to whether to let you off the hook from testifying along with the length of your testimony. for one day in a jurisdiction you already reside in for the reasons you have offered, you're not seriously medically ill, something you can't come to court, you're not immobile or in incapacitated. that would not reach the standard to allow a judge to excuse you. to your second question, i'm going to argue eric trump is probably going to do the most damage with respect to this case. don jr. has a very particular role because he was named as a trustee for the irrevocable trust once donald trump became president, but it's eric who had the most consistent presence. his name and presence looms largely over the organization in comparison to any of his kids. so that's the thing that i think don and eric and ivanka and donald trump need to be most concerned about, is eric and his testimony, which is why in part i believe he was so adversarials when he was on the stand testifying. >> glenn, talk about adversarial. the trump team has decided that they're going to just keep going after law clerks and staff members and everything like that. they have done this all along. it's not like that's new behavior from donald trump. not like that's new behavior from anybody associated with him, but i have to ask you, i'm not a lawyer, i don't play one on tv. i have seen plenty of legal shows though. what on earth could be the possible use of angering a judge by attacking their staff? do they think this is going to result in a delay? do they think they're going to anger this judge so much that he'll make a mistake and they can justify calling for a mistrial? what is the purpose of trump's team attacking his clerks? >> your guess is as good as mine, but i have a feeling they're using it as a distraction. they would rather people be talking about and us covering this feud that's going on between the trumps and trump's attorney and the judge and the judge's law clerk than talking about the rampant fraud that was going on, you know, in the trump organization and how much they are going to be made to pay. and the other thing, if i can circle back, i think ivanka is a real potential danger because, one, she's tried so desperately not to testify. that seems to be something of a red flag. but even more importantly, think back to the january 6th public hearings, when she testified, we saw the video of her behind closed doors testimony. she said in substance, i don't believe my father's claim of fraud undermining the election. i believe bill barr. boy, that was sort of ivanka introducing her father to the undercarriage of a bus. so it may very well be that she's so desperately trying to stay out of the courtroom because if she testifies truthfully, it's going to hurt dad and her brothers. >> she's going to leave in the limo holding hands with jared while her two brothers are fighting in the office. look, i see this trial as being part of our overall sort of analysis of how dangerous and how problematic it is that this family has been in a position of power, but i also think some of this trial is highlighting how unfill donald trump is. i want to play you sound from the jean carroll deposition with trump where the man seems not entirely clear about what's going on or who he's talking about. >> it's marla. >> you say marla is in this photo? >> it's marla, my wife. >> which woman are you pointing to? >> here. >> the person you pointed to is e. jean carroll. >> i'm not shocked that donald trump can't keep track of the names or even the images of women he has harassed and abused in his life, but charles, when somebody can't even testify as to who they have abused, i mean, is this something that is problematic for the lawyers? is this something they may try to weaponize later on and say hey, he's not even competent to stand trial? it's like trump was caught three or four different women ago he abused and he wasn't able to figure out who he was talking about. >> i don't think it's going to rise to the level of comp taenls, but if you're one of his attorneys you have to wrestle with the fact you have a client who has normalized talking out of both sides of his mouth and made it sort of a point that the american public almost comes to expect it. if you think about donald trump, and now you're seeing both eric and donald borrow these talking points, for the same guy who says, for example, i got the best people. i know the best words. i have been all the places and i know all the people, he has an uncanny ability to say i have never seen anything like this. for a guy who has seen and been everywhere, he loves to talk about with respect to the justice system, he's never seen anything like this, the political witch hunt, and you're starting to see his children borrow the same talking points on the courthouse steps. that's significant because as one of his attorneys it's very difficult to deal with a client who you don't know which clients you're going to get on a given day or at a different point on a given day. that's something that all of his attorneys in all of his cases have to contend with. >> been around the world and i i i can't even identify the people i have victimized. thank you so much, glenn and charles. up next, on "the reidout," president biden travels to lewiston, maine, in the wake of yet another mass shooting. amid concerns about how so many red flags could have been missed or ignored. "the reidout" continues right after this. after this this holiday with a ring video doorbell, see whose coming to town. happy holidays! [woman crying tears of joy] and with ring cameras capture all the holiday magic. [girl squeals with glee] with ring you're always home for the holidays. learn more at ring.com. when my doctor gave me breztri for my copd things changed for me. breztri gave me better breathing, symptom improvement, and reduced flare-ups. breztri won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. it is not for asthma. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. don't take breztri more than prescribed. breztri may increase your risk of thrush, pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling, problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain occur. ask your doctor about breztri. president biden and first lady jill biden spent yet another day comforting a community ripped apart by senseless and uniquely american gun violence. in lewiston, maine, the bidens paid their respect to victims, met with first responders and grieved with families and community members affected by the shootings. once again, the president tried to provide comfort to the people who are trying to pick up the piece of their lives. >> all the people of maine, jill and i have done too many of these. jill and i are here on behalf of the american people, to grieve with you and to make sure you know that you're not alone. 18 precious souls stolen. 13 wounded. all of them live lives of love and service and sacrifice. regardless of our politics, this is about protecting our freedom to go to a bowling alley, a restaurant, a school, a church, without being shot and killed. >> it was just over a week ago that robert card walked into two lewiston establishments and shattered countless lives. he was found two days later after he took his own life. the victims include bill young and his 14-year-old son aaron who went out to do some bowling. and four members of the deaf community who just wanted to play in the local cornhole competition. sadly, lewiston joins a long list of american communities hit hard by america's gun fetish. and roughly a year, president biden has had to travel to buffalo, new york, uvalde, texas, and monterey park, california. all communities that have suffered devastating losses at the hands of violent gun crime. there have been at least 37 mass killings in the united states so far this year. and we have got two months left. that has left at least 195 people dead. this is according to a database maintained by the associated press and usa today in partnership with northeastern university. while the president tried his best to help the community heal, the republican party absolutely refuses to do anything to address this uniquely american disease. in fact, they have promised to make access to guns easier and less regulated. people within the maine community affected by this mass killing are angry about what happened and how it came be. according to reports in may, the shooter's family reported him to the police because they were concerned about his mental health. and the 15uns in his possession. in july, the shooter spent two weeks in treatment while at a training facility at west point. in august, the u.s. army determined that the shoot should have his access to weapons and ammunition restricted. in september, a reservist contacted police to report his own concerns about card. saying that he was worried that card was going to shoot up the army reserve facility. and a month later, he did what everyone thought he was going to do, which is the problem. joining me now is the senior vice president for law and policy at every town for gun safety. thank you so much for joining me this evening. this, nick, i have talked about this before. i am a professor at morgan state university. there was a mass shooting at my school. i am intimately concerned about these kinds of issues, as are all americans who care about not only our own safety but the safety of others. i guess the first question i have for you is, is there any hope? we keep saying this, we say this, i could do a supercut of me talking about mass shootings in america, and every single time, we get thoughts and prayers. is there any likelihood of a change after this shooting? or are we just going to be having the same conversation in six weeks, six months, six years? >> well, you know, i think in the wake of tragedy, in the wake of another american community grieving, in the wake of another presidential visit to try to put some salve on the wound, it's hard to find hope. it's hard to think that things will be different this time. i will say that the progress we have made, though not the progress we deserve, has been really remarkable in the last ten years. the gun violence prevention movement is standing up against a gun lobby and their allies in congress and state legislatures to make the change that once seemed impossible and last year culminated in the most significant piece of federal legislation in 30 years. but ask anybody, it's not enough. we need more. we should expect more from the elected officials that are here to keep us safe. and we plan to demand it until they start to make the change. >> and nick, one of the things that strikes me is that even if there are red flags, even if someone like card is reported by multiple people, it's still a system where he's able to get access to the guns. isn't the issue not whether or not people can warn folks, not whether or not someone said hey, he's got mental health problems. it's the fact he had access to guns. is it more of an access issue than a policy issue? >> i think it very much is both. for one, when are the guns going to start making us safe? if guns made us safer, we would be the safest country in the world. instead, we have a homicide rate 25 times that of our peer nations. i really do think it's both. i think that we can look at the interventions and the failures along the way, and that's real. we can look at the policies and say, policies like red flag laws are designed exactly for this situation. to temporarily remove a firearm from somebody who poses a risk to themselves and others. maine doesn't have one of those. and they could, and they should. and they must take action. then there's the question of why does a man like this shooter get access to a weapon of war that can inflict dozens of deaths and injuries in a matter of minutes? and i think the answer to that question is, we need to reinstate the assault weapons ban. it worked for ten years in this country. it's time to bring it back. and then the last thing that we can do, the last name on my accountability list, is the gun manufacturers that continue to profit off of sel