Good morning, it is 11 00 a. M. Eastern, 8 00 a. M. Pacific. Im jose diazbalart. We are tracking an incredibly busy day on capitol hill. Just moments from now a Veteran Boeing Engineer will testify before a Senate Subcommittee that the 787 dreamliner could break apart in midair due to safety flaws. The president of Colombia University is defending her handling of antisemitic incidents on campus and accusations she failed to protect jewish students after october 7th. And in two hours, the senate will open the Impeachment Trial of Homeland Security secretary alejandro mayorkas, the first impeachment of a Cabinet Member in almost 150 years. But, we begin this morning with the very latest from former president Donald Trumps hush money trial, that is now taking shape after hundreds of new yorkers were summoned to court this week. Seven have now been sworn in to serve as jurors in the very first criminal trial facing the former president , centered around hush money payments made to stormy daniels. Prosecutors say trump falsified Business Records as part of an effort to bury a story about a Sexual Encounter Daniels alleges she had with trump. Trump had pleaded not guilty to all 34 counts, and denied the affair ever happened. There is no court today, Jury Selection resumes tomorrow morning to fill the 11 remaining seats. Joining us now, nbc News Senior National political reporter jonathan alan, msnbc Legal Correspondent lisa rubin, both have been inside the courthouse during the trial, catherine christian, former assistant District Attorney for the manhattan d. A. s office, she is also an msnbc legal analyst, and former republican congressman Carlos Curbelo from florida, an msnbc political analyst. So, lisa, what do we know about the seven jurors who have already been selected . Jose, theyre a Cross Section of new yorkers. We have got two attorneys on the jury, we got two residents of harlem, we have an oncology nurse, a salesperson, a teacher, and a software engineer. One of the things i find notable is that several of the jurors are young, appear to be in the early stages of their career, for example, one of them said that a year and a half ago, before they started the job that theyre in now, they were in college and so we can infer from that the person is in their 20s. The other thing that i find interesting about these folks is that none of them have small children at home. That may be in part because at the very beginning of Jury Selection, judge merchan said that anybody who was unable to serve either because they were unable to be fair and impartial on one hand, or because they had other responsibilities that rendered them unable to serve could leave with no questions asked. That may have resulted in a number of people with care giving responsibilities, including Young Mothers of young children, taking themselves out of that pool. So what were left with is a number of people on this jury who are either childless or have Adult Children and grandchildren. So, catherine, seven jurors selected in this period of time. Is that typical . Thats very fast. I call it remarkable. There are only maybe a handful of judges who can do it that quickly. Particularly for this type of case. When i say it is remarkable, because on a regular case with a no name defendant it doesnt happen that quickly. But clearly judge merchan is moving it fast, if you saw yesterday, it was he he was on a go. And he worked over time, typically court ends at 4 30, he went over an hour to get those seven jurors. And he told those seven jurors who are now sworn jurors to come back monday at 9 30, which means judge merchan intends to have a jury in place on monday, so there can be opening statements. And so, catherine, why do you think it has been a remarkably fast process, versus other more traditional, i guess, court cases . Two reasons, one, the judge, judges are controlled, judges are the ones that really can move the process along. Two, there were 96 people who were called, 50 automatically said as lisa said i cant serve, i cant be fair and impartial, it could be because they dont like trump, they love trump, or as lisa said they had care giving. What was left were clearly people who there were not a lot of issues, there were challenges for cause, granted. And the lawyers both sides used a number of their peremptory, but as i call them, they were normal people, who would want to serve, who will take this seriously, both sides hope. And, john, in a new piece, you describe the way both sides are grappling the reality that most people have an opinion one way or another about donald trump. What did you see from both sides and the judge . Yeah, i mean, what catherine said is so important. It really doesnt serve anyone either the prosecution or the defense or judge merchan for anything other than a perception of a fair trial for these jurors to all be able to separate whatever they may feel about donald trump from the question of whether the, you know, facts apply to the law suggest or Beyond A Reasonable Doubt prove that hes guilty. We have seen the judge also trying to make sure that this is an impartial jury, in particular, when objections were raised by trumps council yesterday after social media posts were surfaced by trumps team. There were questions about whether some of the judges based en what they posted on social media could be fair. We saw the judge agree with trumps lawyers in a couple of those cases that those jurors could not be seen as impartial because of what they had said about him in the past, and also in one case the judge said youre going too far here, because it was basically one of the Perspective Jurors husbands posting something. There has been a lot of care taken in this. I think by the end of the process, the jurors will have been advised repeatedly that they need to focus on the facts at hand and not anything else and if you have ever been on a jury before, thats a pretty solemn thing and i suspect most if not all of them will take it very seriously. And, lisa, the judge admonished trump for saying something in the direction of a jury yesterday, the judge said he will not have any juror intimidated. What could the judge do or consider that if trump steps out of line again . Jose, early in the trial judge merchan gave trump something called parker warnings. That basically included the warning that although donald trump has a right to be present during his trial, he can waive that right if he engages in misconduct during the course of the trial. So, one thing that he could lose, if he continues to behave in a way that the judge finds not consistent with the administration of justice is to take him out of the courtroom and have the trial continue. I dont think he will do that on a first or a second offense. But that is certainly available to him. The other thing that is available to him is to hold him in contempt of court. Again, we know that Criminal Contempt in New York City can include a punishment of up to 30 days in jail and some fines. I suspect that the sticks that judge merchan has available at his disposal include jail time and banning trump from the courtroom. Hes hoping, however, that just the threat of using either of those will keep donald trump primarily in line. Lisa, how would it actually physically be carried out if you want to get a defendant out of the courtroom . Do you just physically take him out . How does that work . Look, were talking about somebody who is not the former president of the United States, they are escorted out of the courtroom by Law Enforcement specific to the court. Where you got somebody on the other hand who is entitled to Secret Service protection, im not sure how that would work. There is no historical precedent for it. My guess is that he would enter some sort of order after a trial date, banning him from coming back if that were to occur. It depends on how flagrant the violation is. It is judge merchans hope that we dont have to get there, and that by admonishing the attorneys yesterday that we dont have to go down that road. No one wants to be in the position of presiding over a trial where a criminal defendant is absent. So, carlos, after his trial yesterday, trump went to a bodega where in 2022 a clerk fatally stabbed a man in selfdefense. D. A. Bragg initially charged him, that clerk, with murder, eventually dropped the charges. What is the former president s political message here . Well, jose, if we follow donald trump closely, he has used all of these legal controversies, all of these indictments and trials as part of his political campaign. We know that during the primary it really worked out for him because a lot of republican primary voters perceived him to be a victim, someone who is being persecuted by the left. That really consolidated his support. Now what hes trying to do, primary is over, hes looking at what are the voters, who are the voters he can speak to that he can steal from democrats, so, in this visit, what do you see . Minority voters, he goes to a town where a lot of minority people live, republicans think that donald trump can win more black and hispanic voters than he did last time, and also looking for sympathy because he believes, republicans theorize, that minority voters will be sympathetic to what donald trump is going through. That they will be able to relate to him because he is going through this difficult legal situation, so, everything trump does, legal defense, also combines with a political element to try to boost his chances this november. So, now that trump is going to have to be in court almost every day or every day, how could he use that in his Campaign Going forward . Well, to your point, earlier and to congressman curbelos point, we saw yesterday how he was using it to his advantage, not only does he go to a bodega and broader question of whether hes appealing to hispanic voters, minority voters by going to that bodega in the neighborhood, but particularly with the back story behind that. In the 2020 campaign, his campaign concluded that every time he talked about cracking down on crime, it was helpful to him, particularly with hispanic voters. So, were seeing him deliver that message there. Also delivering the message that d. A. Bragg has not prosecuted crimes, particularly serious violent crimes, and so were seeing that matched against what hes saying as an unfair, unjust targeting of him for political purposes. So, yesterday was a perfect microcosm of a lot of the arguments that hes making. In addition to that, well see him i think during this according to his aides, during this period when he has wednesdays free go out and do some campaign events, maybe locally, maybe on the east coast, and then on weekends were more likely to see some of the traditional trump rallies. Hes going to make the argument hes being prosecuted as a form of persecution and to stop his political ambition and those of the Republican Party and we have been hearing it for a long time, were going to continue to hear it more and hes got visual evidence he would like to show of him being in court to support that now. The d. A. Believes he has committed crimes for which he should be held accountable. And, lisa, meanwhile, Jury Selection resumes tomorrow morning. What can we expect . Jose, one of the things im really interested in and watching for is whether or not the defense has the opportunity today to do their research on the 96 jurors who will be part of tomorrow mornings pool. Assuming that they have from last night through all the way through today and tomorrow morning to do so, expect them to come armed with more social media profiles and other ammunition to try and excuse jurors for cause. Thats particularly true since of their ten peremptory challenges, they already used six. That means they have four remaining challenges to strike jurors for any reason whatsoever, and theyre going to have to use those judiciously. Their alternative is to try and convince judge merchan there are jurors who are incapable of being impartial, and they will rely on whatever evidence they can glean from the internet to do so, particularly because they have these 96 jurors perspective names. Thank you, all, so very much. Congressman curbelo, stick around. Still ahead, what the u. S. Is doing right now to prevent a fullout war from breaking out in the middle east. Here at home, were just hours away from a Senate Showdown as it takes up articles of impeachment against Homeland Security secretary alejandro mayorkas. And moments from now, a boeing whistleblower about to Tell Congress why he claims the 787 dreamliner could break apart midair. Were back in 60 seconds with what he exclusively told our very own tom costello. Youre watching jose diazbalart reports on msnbc. Youre watching jose diazbalart reports on msnbc. And year after year, you weathered the storm and just lived with the damage that was left behind. But even after all this time your Thyroid Eye Disease could still change. Restoration is still possible. Learn how you could give your eyes a fresh start at tedhelp. Com. My frequent heartburn had me taking antacid after antacid all day long but with prilosec otc just one pill a day blocks heartburn for a full 24 hours. For one and done heartburn relief, prilosec otc. One pill a day, 24 hours, zero heartburn. Heres to Getting Better with age. Heres to beating these two every thursday. Help fuel today with boost high protein, complete nutrition you need. Without the stuff you dont. So, heres to now. Boost. And we have breaking news, according to the faa website, Alaska Airlines asked for a nationwide ground stop. We are going to monitor this story for you and bring you any updates as we get them. Meanwhile, any moment now, a boeing whistleblower is set to testify before a Senate Committee about what he claims is the Aerospace Giants broken Safety Culture. That hearing is getting under way right now. But in an exclusive interview with nbc news, the whistleblower, who is a boeing Quality Engineer, delivered his first on camera interview detailing his allegations that the companys 787 dreamliner planes could fall apart midflight due to assembly flaws. Boeing disputes accusations the plane is unsafe. Joining us now, tom costello, who spoke with that whistleblower and jeff gazetti, Aviation Analyst and former faa and ntsb investigator. So, tom, what do we expect this witness to tell lawmakers today . Can i first give you a caveat on the news about Alaska Airlines. We believe thats related to a computer outage, nothing we believe related to the ongoing discussions with boeing on capitol hill. As you mentioned, there are three actual whistleblowers today testifying, right now on capitol hill, concerned about Quality Control lapses at boeing. We spoke with one of them yesterday here, he was on Nbc Nightly News and the today show. He alleges the Dreamliner Fuselage is joined, pieces of the fuselage are joined in the manufacturing process, he alleges that there is too much of a gap, too much of a gap between pieces of the fuselage, and as a result, he worries and warns that the plane could go under enormous stress and that could lead to Fatigue Failure and the plane could break apart. Take a listen to what he told me. The plane will fall apart at the joints, where the where were talking about. Once you fall apart, youre going to descend all the way to the ground. Reporter you think the plane could break apart in air . Absolutely. Okay, thats a very dramatic claim indeed. We would hasten to add the 787 dreamliner has flown millions of people safely for 13 years. Boeing is out with a statement, we need to read what they said to make sure you understand, boeing says this is absolutely inaccurate. It says extensive and rigorous testing of the fuselage and heavy maintenance checks of nearly 700 in service planes to date have found zero evidence of air frame fatigue. Or any cracking whatsoever. Nonetheless, because boeings reputation has been so damaged over the last five plus years, its own word, it has been doubted and has in fact been undermined by its own actions, now you got multiple whistleblowers on capitol hill. Others who have contacted the committee, concerned about Quality Control breakdowns at boeing. Jeff, how when you heard that, how serious do you think we should be taking that . We should be taking it very seriously, jose, but we should also take it in context of one particular whistleblower concern. And this particular one, boeing is stating that it is composites, all of their data indicates no Fatigue Findings in the entire fleet. So while this may be a well meaning, well intentioned whistleblower, perhaps a he just didnt receive the kind of explanation he needed to receive from boeing with regard to the robustness of the 787 structure. So, jeff, the whistleblower is a Quality Engineer. What kind of information would he have access to . Well, day after day he bo have access to measurements taken with holes and hes alleging gaps being produced, and he is alleging hes not seeing the data to indicate the ga