Transcripts For MSNBCW Katy 20240703 : comparemela.com

Good to be with you. Im katy tur alongside my colleagues, Andrea Mitchell and chris jansing. Whats happening right now in Donald Trumps Hush Money Trial could determine how it all ends. A legal conference between judge merchan, prosecutors, and attorneys for donald trump to determine the charges the jury can consider. And there arent any fireworks to note inside the courtroom right now, no fireworks, but really important conversations, arguments with the conference thats highly sequential, theres gamesmanship at play on both sides. This is the final phase of the proceedings, right, before Closing Arguments begin next week. And jurors now have an extralong weekend. Actually, they have a full week to absorb this weeks testimony. They probably need it. Theyre not going to be back in court until a week from today, next tuesday, when Closing Arguments will start. Prosecutors rested their case against the former president earlier, after another lessexplosive round of testimony from Defense Attorney, Robert Costello. More on that in a moment. And the crossexamination, which many have called, masterful. Meaning, donald trump himself opted not to take the stand. Here is what he said this morning about resting the case. Well be resting pretty quickly, resting the case. I dont rest. I like to rest sometimes, but i dont need to rest. He will not be resting. Nbcs Yasmin Vassoughian is outside the courthouse, also with us is fbi General Counsel and former Senior Member of the mueller probe, Andrew Weismann, and former federal prosecutor paul butler. Andrew, you were in the courtroom today, and you talked about Susan Hoffingers cross. You said it was impressive. Andrew weismann, you watched it as well. Give us a description of what she did with bob costello, and why it was potentially so effective. Well, she would lets start with, she was helped by the conduct of the witness. That was a gift to her. Because give us a word. Yesterday, it seemed belligerent. What was it today . It was the word that the judge used, contemptuous. Speaking out in court, in reaction to the judges rulings. Hes a witness. He is not the judge. Saying, i strike im going strike that. As the judge said, thats what the judge does, not the witness. Reacting, saying, geez, rolling his eyes, staring down the judge. All of that is beyond the pale, let alone for a lawyer. This is i mean, who knows better. And today he seemed snippy and arrogant. Yes. He also it will be interesting to see what some of the female jurors, and even male jurors, would have thought to what he said after he was chastised by the judge you know, outside the presence of the jury, when everyone came back, he looks at Susan Hoffinger who asked a question that ive been told everyone could hear and says, speak into the microphone. I heard it and im in the back of the courtroom. And that was striking. And hes also damaged by the facts of the case, because they had all of these emails. This is a man who loved to write emails and he loved to use profanity in the emails. He spoke contemptly. He called his client, Michael Cohen, an ahole, thats the way he phrased it in this email. And he laid out the conspiracy, you know, is this guy nuts, you know, taking on the man the most important man on the planet. The most powerful man so if youre showing this to your class at georgetown, whats the lesson to be learned . Dont do this. In technical terms yeah, why was this witness called . Hes got information about Michael Cohen, not donald trump. Michael cohen is not on trial. The defense hoped that he would impeach the credibility of mr. Cohen. I think he ended up enhancing remember, Michael Cohen testified that he didnt want this guy to be his lawyer, because he didnt trust him. After this performance my costello before the jury, that judgment has been confirmed. Is that one of the problems and i guess maybe it goes away when you go into the jury room, but there is a sense often in the trial, and certainly in this trial, where it does seem like the person on the Witness Stand is the one who is on trial. Well, just thats the job, right, on cross . To your question and to katies question, the last witness the jury could find that his emails or trade donald trump as a mob boss. The kind of emails that i saw are exactly what you see in a mob case, where this is underlings that the jury could find, whos trying to find out what the witness has. Does he have information that could damage the boss and is he going to give it up . And whos he going to report that to . And parenthetically, i know theyve been instructed and they will or they will not obey. We think that they will, because of the way people take judge mar merchan seriously and jurors do in general. They have a whole week. But what do you know, Rudy Giuliani will be reported on in the press, and its not this case, but that he was ducking his subpoena, and he now has appeared on Election Interference case remotely, in arizona. So if its somebody and their family is read something that says, hey, look at this about Rudy Giuliani, and theyre making the connection, oh, that Rudy Giuliani who was trying to pressure Michael Cohen in the cause that im deliberating on, because its Rudy Giuliani is right there, you know, as the shadow figure, next to Robert Costello on the Witness Stand. Hes now part of this case. Yeah. Theyre not violating any rules. Even if you intend, in her scenario, even if you intend as a juror to follow the judges instructions, its hard today. 20 years ago, 30 years ago, not so hard. But now . Even with just popups on news headlines. You know, the one thing ill say having sat on a jury, and obviously been a lawyer in cases, is even if theres stuff that comes in through osmosis and you cant get rid of it, because youve seen something, i think jurors really take their obligations seriously. I cant say its 100 of the time. I think people rise to the occasion and, you know, when i was on a jury, we did not deliberate until we were told we could deliberate. We only talked about what happened in court. I mean, it was just it was what you wanted to be. So i do think that you could see that. All right, so, back inside the courtroom. Theyre talking about the enhanced misdemeanor, the felony, the intent here. Did donald trump intend to do something more than falsify documents. Did he intend to break a bigger law . A federal law . Theyre arguing a state law and the lawyers are going back and forth with this. Earlier, we were talking about intent that was argued in the courtroom, what this moment was like in 2016. This was the you know, the last days of the election. They were losing suburban women. The polls showed him not doing well. They needed to make sure that Something Else beyond the access Hollywood Tape did not come out. And so, coangelo, the prosecution, wants to say its very important for the court to instruct the jury on the defendant himself that he did not enter the accounting records. The instruction includes, and this is a critical concept, it has gone from case law to the four cases weve mentioned in the footnote. Theres no disagreement beyond the standard that causing false entries occurred, when falsification of those entries. He says, each of these cases cited by the government they dont support this. Coangelo says he wants to make two more points on this. Theyre arguing that the intent here is should be part of the Jury Instruction. That Donald Trumps mens rea, im using the term right, Andrew Weismann yes, you are. So happy for myself will explain why its going to be so crucial to get the intent instruction right for the prosecution. So, maybe, im going to give an example of sort of big picture, whats going on here. The jury has to decide the facts, but against what standard. They need to know, what do i need to find in order for the defendant to be guilty. And if it hasnt been proved Beyond A Reasonable Doubt, then the defendant is not guilty. Lets just take the whole, is it for melania, or is it for the campaign . The judge could say, heres the law. You have to find 100 of Donald Trumps intent, his mens rea has to be the cain. And he could instruct the jury that way. He could also say, you know what, only 1 has to as long as 1 is for the campaign, thats enough. Or he could say, you know what, you have to find that a significant purpose was for the campaign. Or, but for i mean, also, to standards in between 100 and 1. And that instruction to the jury is so important. If youre a jury, youre saying, tell me what would satisfy the case here. And this is going to be much clearer in the Jury Instructions than it currently is in the arguments. These are bunch of very welleducated lawyers who are arguing highly specific legal terms, theyre citing cases and following the document. If you dont have a law degree and you havent been doing this day in and day out, is difficult. You know what i really like. The judge says, im going to stick to the standard Jury Instructions. He is focused on what can be understandable to the jury. And i love it here, he says, i have tried to how do you pronounce this word, ive tried to say it a hundred times, ilya, merchan spells it and says, charity. Lets strike that. So then he goes on to the definition of intent. Hes trying boil it down. To make it clear to the jury. This is where the judge is needed desperately, right . So Jury Instructions are often where judges are reversed in the event that theres a conviction. Why is that . Because the judge has to explain very complicated legalese in a way that are nonlawyer can understand it. And so, intent is the word he will use rather than mens rea, and in this case, the government will have to have proven that donald trump intended that these false Business Records would aid his campaign. That doesnt have to be his only intent. If he was also thinking about melania, thats okay. But as long as part of the intent, one of the reasons was that he wanted to advance his campaign, then the jury will hopefully, according to the prosecution, find that. So every crime has an intent, and a causeuation, which katie mentioned earlier, is part of the act that the government has to prove. So donald trump has to either have made false Business Records or called caused false Business Records to be made. So one of the things theyre arguing about now is what does cause mean. What does that act mean . And new york case law says that you dont have to actually order it, as long as its a reasonable consequence of your actions that this other person will do the thing that counts as cause. In this case, its a reasonable conclusion that Allen Weisselberg would know that donald trump wanted him to make those notions on that document. They have to prove that. The jurors have to accept that. In all the other testimony, thats the way this organization worked. Donald trump was at the head of it, it was a family operation. Weisselberg had been there since his father, he was the cfo, he would write those things because he knew donald trump wanted. It another way to think about it, if youre spending 420,000 and grossed it up by paying twice the amount, it means that its not a reimbursement, its going to be recorded as income. And you would think its reasonably foreseeable if the whole scheme so to have it be declared as the disguise as income, that the books and records of your company will reflect that. Otherwise, the scheme isnt going to work. He was already in the top tax bracket. Dont go anywhere. Msnbcs special coverage of Donald Trumps Hush Money Trial continues and were continuing to watch whats happening he wasnt in the top tax bracket, by the way. They said he was. N the top t bracket, by the way. They said he was. bell ringing someone needs to customize and save hundreds with Liberty Mutual Inaudible Sounds Elevator Doors Opening wait, theres an elevator . Only pay for what you need. Liberty, liberty, liberty, liberty. We love being outside, but the sun makes our deck and patio too hot to enjoy. Now thanks to our new sunsetter retractable awning, we can select full sun or instant shade in just 60 seconds. Its 20 degrees cooler under the sunsetter and we get instant protection from harmful uv rays and sun glare. For pricing starting at less than 1,000, transform your Outdoor Living space into a shaded retreat your family will love when you call, well rush you a special 200 Discount Certificate with your free awning idea kit youll get your sunsetter for as little as 799. But, this is a limited time offer for over 20 years, sunsetter has been the bestselling retractable awning in america call now for this free awning idea kit packed with great Awning Solutions that will let you enjoy your deck or patio much more often. Plus, get this 200 Discount Certificate that will bring you your sunsetter for as little as 799. But this is a limited time offer. Call now sunsetters are backed with up to a 10year limited warranty more than 1 million families in america own and love their sunsetter. Now, you too can discover why life is better under a sunsetter. its like putting an extension on your home. And talk about options choose motorized or manual and for just a little extra, Add Led Lighting for evening enjoyment. There are so many incredible styles to choose from in our free awning idea kit. Get a custombuilt awning, without the custombuilt price call now to get the whole sunsetter story. Youll get this free awning idea kit. Plus, a 200 Discount Certificate and theres no obligation. With sunsetter, youll create the ultimate Outdoor Living space. Perfect for entertaining friends. Call now for your free awning idea kit, with local dealer info and 200 Discount Certificate. life is better under a sunsetter act now and save all right. Ive got an admission. I got something wrong right before we went to break. You were talking about Michael Cohen, not donald trump. Donald trump was not in the highest tax bracket, because often times he didnt pay any taxes. My bad. Lets bring in criminal Defense Attorney and msnbc legal analyst, danny cevallos. Danny, lets talk about what were reading in this document, whats going on in this conference. Do you see any wins here for the defense . I do see a couple. Theyre minor wins, from time to time. I mean, for example, i think pointing out and this may have gone in anyway with justice merchan, but pointing out the intent to defraud can be something other than it requires an intent to deprive someone of something. Its not just an intent to defraud out there in the ether. But even as im describing it, im reminding myself why my heart rate is rising listening to a discussion and read along with this Charge Conference. The Charge Conference for me is the most stressful part of the entire trial. And its quietly so, because people dont really know about charging conferences. They know about Opening Statements and Closing Arguments and crossexamination. But this is quietly where the case can be made or lost. And it moves quickly. And its really it ends up being more of a philosophical discussion. As were listening here, its an argument about different arcane legal definitions. And if it moves too quickly, youll decide on a Jury Instruction and think, oh, my god, did i just lose the case by not arguing that correctly. But never yet, its a part of the trial that people never even think about. It might be doubly important in a case like this, where youre dealing with relatively novel legal concepts. And boy, it is a really, really challenging part of the trial, especially because usually, its right before Closing Arguments, and youre thinking, boy, i would just love to be preparing my closing argument. But now youre locked in an hourslong debate over each and every word that goes in these Jury Instructions. Its hard for the lawyers to follow, let alone members of the public. Danny, question here. When we hear judge merchan say, im going to do, not going to do that, but this is not binding. He and his clerk will spend the next couple of days going over this and hell come out with his instructions and he can change his mind, can he not . He has the final say, but if he says, im going to adopt the challenge suggested by the bench or stick with the Jury I