beach a few moments ago we saw the former president to part trump tower in manhattan, the motorcade making its way to supreme court and lower manhattan so we do expect trump to walk back through those doors as historic new york trial enters its final stage of

proceedings. we will see if he stops to speak to reporters as he makes his way back into the courtroom. usually is not the case, it's usually on his way out at this time of day but we will be watching for that hello and welcome everyone i am sandra smith the new york as we head into our number to. >> john: a lot ahead in the next 60 minutes on john roberts in washington this "america reports" perry when court resumes they will meet with the prosecution and defense on what should be included in the jury instructions before liberation is. it's a critical step of the trial as the instructions will be the last thing the jury hears before deliberating for a verdict. >> a threadbare inventive prosecution, but the judge can kind of put his finger on the skill or not in these instructions. it will be very interesting the instructions but of course it all goes back to jury selection too, who are these people and what of their biases? >> john: we have an all-star lineup of guests to take us through the latest development out-of-court. >> sandra: first kicking off covered with former assistant u.s. attorney andy mccarthy. he has been inside that

courtroom the overflow room i should say this morning andy, great happy with us. to give us your thoughts as we kick off a new hour where we expect to see the former president shortly. >> well what i would be concerned about, sender, is the judge already put his thumb on the scale and the last thing the jury had ringing in their ears before they left today which was a question put by half and drew the prosecutor who asked costello didn't to another lawyer represent costello or represent: when he pled guilty to two counts of campaign finance flood to influence and they got up and objected and they objected the objection so it's an admissible evidence they have no proof that trump had the campaign fraud laws on his mind at all and they

have to prove beyond reasonable doubt that he willfully wanted to violate them. they have offered to my mind no evidence of that and yet i think because of the way the prosecutors have used that evidence or abuse that evidence and the judge has allowed it to happen i think the jury thanks that has already been an established fact in the trial that there was a campaign finance fraud violation, people pled guilty to it, the prosecutors told the jury at the beginning of the case that cohen had not only planted guilty but going to jail over even though it was his fraud counts that drove his prison sentence. but i think the most important issue in the case that we keep asking where is the evidence, i think from the jury's standpoint they may think is artie been proved. >> if you are the defense in this case, and he and you are about to go into discussions with the judge and the prosecution about the parameters for the instructions to the

jury, what do you argue? do you argue to strike the testimony? what else to argue about? >> this will be strictly -- they're not going to strike testimony at this point. and the judge has left that in so many times that if they struck it on this one occasion, john, the jury can't unhear it, they are already gone and it's already threaded through the record. defined the defense lawyers from arguing very hard that they don't have evidence of trump either committing or intending to commit a campaign finance violation. i don't think -- it's a question of the evidence is weak, i don't think they've shown that trump even had the content finance laws on mind much less that he willfully violated them and i would be stronger on the idea that willfulness is the highest mental state element in the criminal law. you have to prove that somebody

new he had a legal obligation and intentionally flouted it. to my mind, again, i don't think there's any evidence in this case that the campaign laws even occurred to trump. >> sandra: andy, what are we watching for will we start to get readouts of inside that courtroom 10 minutes from now on the jury instructions will be listening for? >> well, the big thing, sandra, i don't mean to be dead dead horse but will we have complained about since the beginning of the indictment fails as an indictment because it never put that offense on notice of what the other crime is, the crime being concealed or committed. bragg has been cagey about that throughout. i think it's very peculiar that we don't have on the public record what each side has asked the judge to charge the jury. i've never seen a case with it being this close to the vest on something that should be like the most important thing in the trial, what the jury is going to be told about the law, and i

have to conclude here that frank knows he has no authority to enforce federal law. the judge knows his court has no authority to enforce federal law, that is exactly what they are trying to do and they are being cagey about it. >> john: so, andy, comparisons have been drawn over the course of this trial to the john edwards trial so many years ago. where he was accused of campaign finance violations for paying riel hunter sums of money that added up to about a million dollars. so the affair would be kept quiet and not hurt his chances of winning the presidency. but he was acquitted, so can we take that as an indication of what might happen in this case? >> it's even more messy than that, john. so with edwards, the federal election commission looked at it and they said there was no campaign expenditure. the justice department decided to roll the dice and bring the case anyways. the judge really didn't care

much for the case but he decided there was enough to send it to the jury and the jury acquitted him and the justice department having learned its lesson decided not to bring the case again not to try to retry it. so i think that's a good model of what you want to stay away from and also a reason they should've let brad smith testify to explain what a campaign expenditure is because the only advice the jury has gone on that so far is from michael cohen and david pecker. >> sandra: the doors are propped open now which means we may see the former president team reentering the courtroom shortly. have to wonder what's on his mind in this moment, andy. >> john: yeah. >> well, what i would be wondering about because this is a very peculiar thing too, sandra. to have a case where you are at the precipice of summations, the thing is totally wrapped and you say to the jury we will take a week off now and you send them home for seven days after wonder first of all they will be

marinated in the publicity about this case. >> john: andy -- >> if i am the defense lawyer that can't be good in new york. >> john: the former president has been working out and will be talking to the camera in the hallway right now looks like he has a whole page full of notes. >> there is no crime in fact i just got almost every review that has been done about the case so far as they say there is no crime. it should be dismissed before you even have a verdict, but let's say it's complicated but also with a conflicted for this judge is complicate it and conflicted. nobody is ever seen anything quite like it but we have a situation where we have no crime. and these next couple of hours are very important because the judge will try to manufacture

one where he goes from a misdemeanor which doesn't exist because of the statute of limitations, doesn't exist absolutely, and they tried bringing it to a felony but he can't do it because they have available to prove it and you see what's happened, remember i'm not allowed to say what i would like to really say because i'm gagging to. you be very impressed but i'm gagging so why would i take the chance? we want to defend our constitution so maybe one day i will take that chance. it's a very serious situation where if the republican nominee for president, the republican nominee, someone who won easily and quickly in record time its number one, gagged, and number two, before a democrat appointed judge and you are playing with fire like this it's very sad. but the good news is they have not proven the case, there is no crime. no your going to read all of these experts and you know to go

over that again but legal scholars, talented people, very smart people there is no crime. so maybe they will try to devise one right now to the judge will help them out because the judge has been very helpful to the other side. and that should never be and it should never be in our country. now also they are releasing a million barrels of oil from the northeast reserve making lower prices at the pump just before the election. because he is not letting anyone throw properly so he is destroying everything we have we were energy independent and now he has to go with all the strategic reserves to give oil and gasoline essentially for cars so they don't have to go up to $7, $8, $9 a barrel. and you would be paying more than $10 a barrel. you better hope he does not get elected and everybody else in

our country, so it's a big story, just came out, israel is releasing 1 million barrels of oil and the strategic reserves, he has been doing this to keep the prices down but the prices are now higher than they have been a long time. they are very high. so he's trying to stop that because my gasoline prices are not good for elections if you're on his side of it but nothing he has done has been good for elections. everything he has done has been very bad for our country. i don't know what you are seeing but the border record numbers of people from prisons, from jails, from mental institutions, terrorists, record numbers of people are pulling into our country. numbers like we have never seen before are pouring in. we have an incompetent president and we have to win. as i have said, november 5th, the most important day in history of our country,

thank you very much, everybody. >> john: and as usual the president not taking any questions but what was unusual as he usually does not speak when it comes back from the lunch break and the 2:00 hour, but because there was a prolonged recess president had a few things to get off his mind. a lot of it about the campaign and how his policies would differ from those of president biden, sandra. >> sandra: let's bring in mark eiglarsh, here in the new york studio, mark, great to have you here and to react directly out of the former president's words here, there is no crime, he began, this case should have never been brought and should be dismissed he called the judge conflicted and complicated he lamented the gag order that never should have happened to the leading g.o.p. candidate or any candidate, he said and went on to talk about the economy and the border. your thoughts? >> i will stay away from the economy and the board of that's not my subject matter but he makes some serious points and valid points when he says a crime was not proven.

so the state rested their case and i felt the defense did not need to put anyone else there was no reason for abbott and costello for the song and dance that was not necessary but after the state rested their case the question is as he eloquently stated where is the crime? and what specifically is the additional crime that he was concealing? and what are the jurors going to know about that? what is campaign interference if that is what they are alleging? aren't all politicians interfering with the campaign if they pay off somebody or give a speech? this all has to be laid out to the jurors. no trial by ambush at should not be that way. >> john: but what about this idea and he articulated which is that the last thing the jury heard was michael cohen acknowledging or, i don't know is how it went on in court, but it was susan hollinger planting in the jury the idea that michael cohen pled guilty to

campaign finance violations in connection with stormy daniels. i suppose as well the karen mcdougal nda. that plants in the jury's mind that even though brad smith from the ftc has said there was nothing wrong with that in terms of campaign finance violations that a crime was committed even though it actually wasn't. >> that frustrates me, it's happened in a number of trials where they have will have snitches come out and admit i was convicted of the same thing is mark eiglarsh's client, it makes me nuts. is not just unique to this trial, it happens all the time. its prosecutorial 101, they do it all the time. its up to defense lawyers to call the prosecution out for doing that. you know, making them pay the same way they should make them pay for calling stormy daniels to talk about the president and his boxers on a bed posing

waiting to have a extramarital affair. >> sandra: do you think we will get a hint of what's happening in that courtroom when that resumes a minute from now as far as jury instructions how will that go? >> there's a reason on no television drama have you ever seen jury instructions being shown. it's the most boring part of the trial. and usually i tell the clients okay, try to stay awake because it is so everybody knows exactly what the charges are going to be. and the language. that this is different. this is the most exciting part because for the first time we will learn specifically what is of the prosecution has to prove in order to find the former leader of the free world guilty of crimes? we don't know that yet. it shouldn't be that way i'm telling you. it's wrong. >> john: that the overarching question we don't know what the crime is. a half insure kind of leaned toward it with the jury suggesting the payment to stormy daniels was a campaign finance violation and

then the whole thing was concocted on top of it to cover it up, but signing an nda with somebody even if it is before the campaign is not criminal behavior. it's not criminal in any way, shape, or form. and many people think: pled guilty to something he never should've pled guilty to. >> right, i'm still troubled by what is the additional crime? in fact i will go one step further and ask the judge to order that the case simply go to the jury on a misdemeanor. not that somehow that has been proven, but even if you believe cohen that's the best to get. where is the additional crime? i would say that is not been proven until the jurors, no reasonable juror, can conclude that that occurred. >> sandra: markets great to have you here, thank you so much. >> my pleasure. >> green information as the former president has returned to the courtroom. john? >> john: thank you mark, appreciated, good to see was always we will take a quick break and be back on the other side with some of the political

ramifications for all of this with byron york, stay with us. h. - have a fun weekend. - ♪ unnecessary action hero! unnecessary. ♪ - was that necessary? - no. neither is a blown weekend. with paycom, employees do their own payroll so you can fix problems before they become problems. - hmm! get paycom and make the unnecessary, unnecessary. - see you down the line.

>> we have a situation where we have no crime and this next couple of hours is very important because the judge can try to manufacture one where it goes from my misdemeanor which does not exist because of the statute of limitations, doesn't exist absolutely and they tried bringing it into a felony but they can't do it because -- >> john: former president trump returning to the courtroom has his historic criminal trial enters final stages of the prosecution and the defense will no begin jury instructions before deliberations which are expected to begin next week let's bring into political correspondent from the "washington examiner" and fox news contributor byron

york. we should say at the top here that you spoke to and wrote an article about brad smith, the fec official, about what he would've told the jury had he had the opportunity to do it. one of the things he said at least on x was that we were going to go over the reporting schedules showing that even if they thought it was a campaign expenditure to be reported, this is the stormy daniels nda, and expenditure made on october 27th when the money went to daniels attorney would not under law be reported until december 8th a full 30 days after the election. smith basically told you i think, byron, there is no underlying crime here. >> he was addressing specifically the idea that somehow the trumpet and a cohen and everybody were covering this up so that the payment will not be known or reported to the fec before the election. and there was no requirement to do it before the election. i think the more important thing here is that we have known quite

a while that this case was going to come down to federal campaign finance laws. you can talk about hush money all you wanted to end this other stuff, but there had to be that other crime that makes the whole thing a felony. and the prosecutors were making pretty clear they had kind of a double bank shot theory there was this new york law that said it was illegal to promote a campaign "by unlawful means" and the unlawful means would be a violation of federal campaign finance law, so that's what it came down to in the end. >> sandra: byron, the former president did just speak kind of surprisingly as he is reentering the courtroom, he doesn't always do that midday before the trial is done for the day, but he did and he called the judge "comp located and conflicted" trey gowdy was inside of that courtroom and he described it this way using strikes owns. >> his strike zone is completely different when the prosecution

objects then when the defense objects. and, you know, i don't know him well enough, i'm not going to say he is a biased judge, i will say that judges should take really should be really careful to not even appear to have an interest in the outcome. look, i don't care if the strike zone is high or low, bill, you're a sports fan, give me the same strike zone and i didn't see the last or go days. >> sandra: i don't think we've seen an effort so far from what we have heard come out of that courtroom. a judge, byron, that is at least as trey said making it appear that he doesn't have any particular interest in the outcome. >> this judge president trump says is conflicted has i think ruled in favor of the prosecution a lot more then he has ruled in favor of the defense. one example is what we were just talking about. brad smith is the former fec

chairman, it's been weeks since the trump defense said hey, we may want to call the sky to testify, and the judge said "we can't talk about this, he can't talk about that, he can't about that. basically the stuff that john just mentioned to me about the reporting schedule, smith is very, very interesting on the topic of what for the purpose of influencing an election actually means in the law. he had a lot to talk about on that from experience as chairman of the federal election commission and the judge said he can't talk about that at all. it basically got to the point where the judge said you can call brad smith and he can talk about the history of the fec were how it works or i don't know maybe it's address and telephone number but you cannot talk about the law that we are dealing with here and the trump defense finally decided it was not worth it to call smith when the testimony would be sold limited. >> sandra: mark eiglarsh was

talking about the underlying crime and whether there is one and whether it's been articulated. you and i were joking in the break about liver and area of the deputy premier and the joseph stalin days of the soviet union who famously said "find me the man and i will find you the crime." is that the way it could potentially come down here because so many people are saying it's nothing more than a political show trial and you can invent whatever crime you want as long as you can get the jury to believe it. >> first of all we know trump is actually charged with felony falsifying of corporate records. but he is charged with doing that with the intent to commit another crime or to cover up and crying. now nobody has said to the jury what that other crime is, but if you read a lot of the filings, prosecutors have said that they intend to cite a few possibilities the other crime. one of them is that new york law

i just talked to you about unlawful means, the other is federal election campaign law, and the other was they were thinking about siding new york tax law whereby trump and cohen allegedly paid also so much. >> john: you think this could be a smorgasbord they could pick from one from column a one from column b? speak are not your expert but some experts have said maybe they would give him multiple choice if you think you committed extra crime 1, check here. if he committed another crime trickle, check here or may be other crime, check your. >> sandra: byron, thank you for setting that up for us. we are still waiting on something to come out of that courtroom. byron york, thank you. now as we do await any developments or updates katie and mark eiglarsh are here on our new york set our legal panel will begin to any developments when we return, stay tuned ♪

[cat meow] —is she? letting her imagination run wild even though she has allergies. yeah. with so many choices on booking.com there are so many tina feys i could be. so i hired body doubles. 30,000 followers tina in a boutique hotel. or 30,000 steps tina in a mountain cabin. ooh! booking.com booking.yeah

introducing kardiamobile. with kardiamobile, the fda-cleared smart device, you can take a medical-grade ekg in just 30 seconds from anywhere. every morning i check, make sure i'm in good shape. and it makes me feel pretty good about my heart condition. kardiamobile is proven to detect atrial fibrillation. and it's fda-cleared to detect normal heart rhythm, bradycardia and tachycardia. i mean, you might as well be in a doctor's office. get kardiamobile today for just $79 at kardia.com or amazon.

the all-new tempur-pedic adapt mattress was designed to help make aches and pains a thing of the past. because only tempur-material eases your pressure points in a way no other mattress can. for a limited time, save up to $500 on select tempur-pedic adjustable mattress sets.

because there is no crime so maybe they will try to devise one. the judge has been very helpful to the other side. that should never be in our country. >> sandra: okay. fellows former president donald trump a few moments ago when he was walking back in the courtroom he stopped to talk to cameras and said that the prosecution defense are laying out their requests for the jury instructions to the judge that's happening right now. our legal panel will dig in and tell us what they mean. mark eiglarsh is here criminal defense attorney thank you for being here. we are getting some new readouts from inside the courtroom and i will ask you to tell us what they mean. of course one just escaped me but it seems they are focusing on intent. okay? they are talking about the crime here is an election law

violation the crimes established by conspiracy and more broadly people think there is value in tailoring the unlawful means instructions more than their original proposal this is an exchange that happened the falsifying business records when there is intent when the object of crime is not needing to be committed what is your take? speak i am pounding will finesse the way they are. we know cohen did the things that cohen is claiming he did but cohen is playing the pronoun game instead of "eye" it's "weak" and "we" gets donald trump as his coconspirator. he gets his prosecutorial scooby snack overtime he says we and i was focused on willfulness it was done but it was not done with donald's knowledge with his understanding that this would be fraud and it would not be intentional which is required of the law. >> sa>> john: katie are you surprised at all this is the thin ice that alvin bragg is trying to put a former president

behind borrowers with? >> i am surprised michael cohen made some statements this case are not rely on him and that the people had significantly more evidence. not only did they not have any other evidence but they had failed to corroborate the statements that came out of michael cohen's mouth when he about witness of that many card ability issues if you don't have cooperation you can't rely on anything they are saying and the drake and disk on all of the. it's a embarrassment of a showing for sure. this is where the case has landed without calling an expert to say they legal was false. i think that's a mistake. >> sandra: what we have gotten previous to that update was proposing instructions that added twice, there are no other legal conspiracy so not enough for the establishment of civil violation but we have the 1986 richmond county case he says there is serious concern it must

be willful and it must have criminal object. >> when the foreseeable it is they have to pay if they are guilty they have to pay out but criminal. it's completely different. you must know that what you are doing is fraudulent. and the argument i am sure jurors will remind other jurors of his weight, he hired the sky, cohen to do it. he is in the weeds. donald trump doesn't go on the weeds to decide whether things should be labeled and how does that become a campaign interference offense? so that is why willfulness i would push for it as much as possible. spewing all right, we got a note from andy mccarthy in the overflow room there he says on the point of willfulness that is not much of a concession on matthew: angelo's part from the prosecution because the statute

says willful. questions are how is the judge going to define woefully and what is he going to tell them trump was willfully trying to do? andy's suspicion prosecutors will say he had to willfully try to influence the election which is what cohen claimed he did as it's not to willfully influence an election, bragg and mershon will create their own criminal offense under the guise of enforcing federal law. i mean, trump said earlier in this trial that they are building a frankenstein case here. taking some dead stuff from over here until we get together with a piece of dead stuff over here to get a brain from a guy named abby normal and firing 10,000 volts of electricity through it and somehow it's coming to life. >> i agree that the statute does require the falsification be within intent to conceal or commit another offense which is actually what willful means, but the word willfully does send a little bit different of a message then saying intentionally doing so so i

think it's a win for the defense in that respect but certainly the prosecution has a very uphill battle to prove any of this beyond a reasonable doubt. i still don't believe even on the misdemeanor charges that they have proven that these were false entries. if you don't get past that finding, the escalator has no meetings or effect whatsoever anyhow. >> i have a question, i have a question, does anybody here after watching the trial, and i will ask my partner here, does anyone know the difference between interference and influence? i don't. i've been practicing 32 years in spite of my youthful appearance, i don't know what it means. i don't know. these jurors need to be told precisely what it is those two lawyers who will take over the deliberations need to go through and say this is what the law is. this is what interference is, this is what influence is. influence, not guilty. interference? may be. >> sandra: and adding in the

object of a conspiracy with the conspirators agreeing to do has to be established as a statutory crime. if it is merely a key but the legislature has not criminalized by statute there is no criminal conspiracy. >> yes. inc. he is not a crime. icky is not a crime, right? >> john: i can't wait to hear the instructions to the jury. >> said no one ever. no one has ever said that ever. >> john: we will see how they dress the steer. all right we will get view from the inside what it's like to be in trump world during all of this bill brennan is his attorney during the second impeachment trial is on deck he will be up next, stay with us.

every day, veteran homeowners are calling newday to pay off credit card debt that's been piling up. many were shocked to learn they've been paying 22% on their credit card balances. and if payments were late, as much as 30%. that's over three times the interest rate on a newday 100 va home loan. pay off high rate credit cards and other debt with a lower rate newday home loan. save hundreds a month, thousands a year.

elmer>> hi, i'm elmer heinrich. my company sells immuno 150. if you haven't heard of it, you need to go to the website on the screen or call the toll-free number. we sell to thousands of consumers and our reorder rate is above 94%. now, many people ask us how we can sell a month's supply of immuno 150 for less than $60.00 when most of

our competition is $80 to $90 a month. it's simple! we don't pay celebrities to hawk immuno 150, and we don't pay testimonial people to say something good about the product. immuno 150 stands on its own with its 70 minerals and 80 other nutrients. it doesn't need any help. and it has more than color, taste, and smell. i am 90 years old and my wife is 81, both with no arthritis, no allergies, no aches or pains of any kind - nothing! all because of immuno 150. now, check the number of minerals in the product you take. don't be surprised if you don't find more than 12. order immuno 150 to see what 70 minerals can do for you. order now. you'll be glad you did.

>> remember i am gagged i am not allowed to say what i really want to say. you would be very impressed, but i am gagged. why would i take the chance if we do want to defend our constitution? i won't take the chance. >> john: both the defense in the prosecution in court to talk about the charges and the instructions that will be given the jury in the new york trump trial. let's bring in bill brennan former trump payroll corporation attorney and also represented in the second impeachment trial for the president. what you know the deliberations so far, bill, on the instructions to the jury what you make of it? >> they are at a charging conference right now, john, where the prosecution and the defense meet with judge merchan and pitches him the respective sides prosecution will say we want this or we don't want that defense type of thing. that there are model jury instructions that start things off. but in this case which is bizarre, it is an indictment in

a crime it is kafkaesque. they are asking what makes it a felony like when it be nice to know that when you are charged or defending on the case? i am flummoxed, it's crazy. >> regardless it has to con continue. in these instructions i guess we are just waiting. >> in some cases the jury and surgeons are perfunctory like who cares? first-degree murder this, third remodeler stomach murder back, this could rise or fall with thd wording of the instructions because because so much of this they are talking about if he made the payment why did he do it? was it to save his marriage? to influence an election, and

are they equal? does one have to outweigh the other? can they boast that might both be there or does one have to be there? it is some nuance verbiage they will have to agree on. >> john: of course costello was a very famous and contentious witness for the defense but the one they really wanted to call once brad smith, former chairman of the fec. because he would have talked about whether this nda did qualify as a campaign contribution or finance violation or whatever, and the likelihood was he was going to say no it wasn't and cohen should have never pled guilty because there was no underlying crime. here's what laura ingraham said about his testimony not being allowed in. >> limiting the opportunity of an fec expert testifying was i think extremely prejudicial to the trump defense because that is the predicate crime here. unless we will hear of a new crime that we haven't heard of yet. >> john: so merchan seems to

agree with the defense that they should include this in the instruction with the jury if the payment should have been made in the absence of a candidacy payment should not be treated as a contribution. it paying stormy daniels' nda like he was concerned about business brand or family than it is not a campaign contribution. and that, she says, is with brad smith would have explained and merchan seems to agree with the defense. >> john, that is huge because so many of these pro-prosecution and abundance have said well, it came right after the tmz tape, right before the election, other nda for less were paid. the liar doorman about the illegitimate child that didn't exist, the mcdougall money, so if the money would've been paid anyways and the judge is willing to instruct the jury that way, that moves the ball a lot

further towards the not guilty yard line. >> may be after having a huge strike zone for the prosecution and a very small one for the defense, merchan is opening up a little bit, we will see. >> thank you, john and sandra. >> sandra: thank you brett tolman will join us live next us to develop and continue out of the courtroom. but her daughter was happy to prove her wrong. you were made to dream about it for years. we were made to help you book it in minutes. ♪ every day, more dog people are deciding it's time for a fresh approach to pet food. developed with vets. made from real meat and veggies. portioned for your dog. and delivered right to your door. it's smarter, healthier pet food.

>> but the rejection is extremely let's say complicated and let's also say conflicted. its complicated complicated and inflicted. nobody has ever seen anything quite like it. >> so we just got some very big news from the jury instructions out of that courtroom moments ago. brett tolman is joining us now former federal prosecutor and former u.s. attorney for utah. thank you so much, brett, for joining us. we been listening there is now a dispute we are told about the legitimate press function the judge is offering to strike legitimate press function saying it is a broad concept, the defense agrees prosecution says this is confusing. of bovee says it's an incredibly broad concept the judge says better off staying away from any practical to facts of this case. some of these exchanges are for all of us very difficult to

follow without the full context but your reaction to what we have learned so far with the last 20 minutes or so? >> center, jury instruction's are important but i will tell you you win or lose your trial well before the jury instructions conference and the settlement on the law. you know, when i was a brand-new prosecutor my first dozen cases or so i scrutinized the jury instructions as though my life depended on it later i learned better. what you needed was an incredible presentation of evidence. or witnesses needed to be trusted, you also had to be able to deflect what the defense of theory might be, and if he did not accomplish that, you were going to lose no matter what the jury instructions said. >> john: let's come back to the instruction that judge merchan said he is reserving judgment on but would be inclined to included in the jury instructions and if that is the phrase which is what the defense wanted an "if the payment had been made in the absence of the

candidacy payment should not be retreated as a contribution" basically suggesting that even if it wasn't a candidate for president trump probably would've paid for stormy daniels in silence with nda. kerri kupec says here she notes it is interesting how much the prosecution wants the judge not to include that phrase. bill was on with us just a second ago and he says that is huge, what do you think? >> while, the prosecution does not want it because cohen has already given testimony that he did this and that this was something done outside of the election. so, case closed. with a couple of lawyers on the jury and they are looking at that and they see that payment would have been made regardless of the timing or the scope or whether the election was being

held or not, then, yes. legally your case is in tatters. but prior to that i would say even before the jury gets to that, you cannot articulate what the underlying crime is carried you cannot articulate what cohen or what evidence cohen was presenting that it's had a satisfied the heavy burden on the prosecution. stormy daniels is largely irrelevant and then you have costello who came in and it shot down the last semblance of life-support that michael cohen was on. >> sandra: we are waiting on an update now. obviously jonathan turley is in the courtroom, he says he is inside the courtroom for the hearing, they are arguing on the elements demanded by the indictment including predicate offense elements, this is just we are taking our viewers through anything they can possibly relate out of the courtroom, how long do you think this will take care, brett and

when will we know something for sure? >> yeah, i think these tend to be tedious and go as long as the judge has the patience to endure it. so i would imagine they are going to try to wrap up as much as they can. there may be additional issues that they will have to fight over a. remember, we are not going to see closing arguments for some time and in the jury we expect to get it later, so there is plenty of time for them to work out all of these details but it's very critical for the appeal. that's what most of this is all about. what does the jury get told by the judge the law is? and then they get the case. they will look at it and see all of this really has more to do with what happens on appeal. >> john: right, but the fact that you are looking at an appeal here, that would be probably months if not years down the road. and eric trump were convicted in

this, again it gives biden the opportunity to say he is a convicted felon in the first debate and call them that all the way through the election. so obviously what happens with the jury is very, very important. brett, thank you as always pure and we appreciate you being with us. >> thank you, brett. >> john: will be right back to close out after this. tired muscles and joints were keeping me from my family. now i can be myself again. blue-emu supports healthy muscles and joints. shop our expanded family of products at major online retailers.

>> john: there will rub it up for us to hear mccourt will be for a while and we are from the former president on the way out as he heads down to texas for some fundraising but he will be back later on this week. >> sandra: that is where we will that. was hoping i will get one more update here from the courtroom before the top of the hour among john, wait to be with you. great to be -- thank you for joining us, everybody, i'm congressman. >> john: will see you again tomorrow, seem bad time, seen by people. we'll start with martha right now. >> martha: thank you calgarians permit good afternoon,