don't share his opinion. it clearly was an unforced error and i'm pretty sure they won't bring out robert de niro again and they should all be bringing any other celebrity friends who are not representative of america. >> shannon: more information from maria, is out of the courtroom about notes number 2, it says there is a request to rehear the judge's instructions twomak keep in mind they were 55 pages long, we don't know what portion. the judge suggests bring the jury back in and say are they looking for testimony requested and asked of the needed instructions reread. we will continue to try to find out what we can about the jury, what these notes mean, what they are looking for and how the judge will handle each of these things, they are looking for testimony from pecker michael cohen and they want to look more about let karen mcdougall story. [ ♪♪ ] c1 thank you for that shannon,

still at that point now we're getting so many notes and so many little time but it's all happening at the same time. you've heard about of this new note making its way from the jury, requesting the judge's instructions. if i remember coke those instructions lasted the better part of 90 minutes. so i don't know whether that will be sort of replayed here. but they are also requesting some key testimony from michael cohen, david pecker. there is a lot going on here. welcome everybody, of neil cavuto. what a lot of people thought would be an uneventful newsday, turning into a sort of double whammy with these no requests and everything else, going rocket -- right back into the courtroom to get it all settled. how long it takes, anybody's case. let's go to nate, i'm sure he has a far better idea than i do. >> hello neil, so the judge just suggested bringing to the jury back into go over some of the concerns you mention it, you mentioned the jury has two note

so far, the most recent acumen nine minutes ago, the other over an hour ago. the most recent noted the jury want some clarification about of the jury instructions, the first node as you mentioned has to do with testimony from david packer and michael cohen, specifically relating to the 2015 trump tower meeting or prosecutors alleged in the conspiracy to unlawfully influence the 2016 election was born. in early before deliberations, we learn to jury instructions at the jury has a three separate options in regards to the underlying crime which is unlawfully influencing the 2016 election, but to meet the legal threshold of unlawful, in that law, here are the three options for the jurors be! the of dividers that trump falsified business records to conceal or commit eight federal election campaign act, the falsification of other business records, or a violation of tax laws. what's important is the juried a need to agree on which one of these trump is guilty of, only

one of those three options. now toback instructor the jury in order to find a trumpet guilty, prosecutors must have proved that trump falsified or caused the falsification of business records, and that he did with the intent to commit or conceal one of those three prior underlying crimes. over the jury finds trumpet violated federal election law, that means you agrees to base for me daniels through michael cohen because of his 2016 presidential campaign. akey instruction from judge juan merchan to the jury reads "if payment would have been made in absence of candidacy, i should not be treated as contribution". remember, testifying that trump worried a very much about his wife's reaction to the stoning me daniels story resurfacing, it testifying he requested the newspapers do not be delivered to their private residence. if jury finds that trump made a payment to protect his wife, it would not be a fica violation.

>> mr. trump: mother teresa cannot beat these charges be! these charges are rig, this whole thing is rigged. >> as owners following it minute by minute here the newest information, the judge is reading the notes back to the jury right now, we should be getting more information here shortly. a lot of people wondering what happens if donald trump is found guilty, new york caps the maximum sentence for those evil of funneling it for 20 years in prison but given the fact that donald trump is no conal history and nonviolent funds, legal analyst say present time is unlikely in this case -- criminal. >> niel: just to clarify, when you talk about with the judge, reading the notes back to the jury, those are his instructions, the initial instructions, by they took a believe originally close to 90 minutes, he's not going through the whole 90 minute thing again, is he? >> know, is not going through the entire jury instruction, he is reading the notes back to

them and one of those notes has to do with the clarification on a specific point of his jury instruction. he is doing do that and also reading the notes back for david pecker and michael cohen specifically regarding the 2015 trump tower meeting. i believed is doing that to make sure that all the same page so they can answer those questions and go over the testimony that the jury needs a bit of a reminder on. >> niel: thank you a very much, at the new york state supreme court, a lot going on back in the court here, back with us, former federal prosecutor, when a u.s. attorney, we got andy mccarthy, the former assistant u.s. attorney fox news computer, andy, the significance on this, the judge kind of rereading some of those instructions, you want to guess which ones comment. >> no, i don't have enough to

know which one. i would say it's not uncommon, lawyers, we have two lawyers on the jury but very often juries don't have lawyers on them. the notes are not always crystal clear about what exactly they're asking for or it could be what would be responsive to questions is answerable by multiple things and neither the instructions or the evidence. asking them to clarify basically what part of the instructions they want to hear and what other evidence they might want to h hear. >> niel: on that same issue, we are hearing from donavan turley, looks like he'll be excused for the day and addressed in the morning although this just started now i guess. again, keeping to that 4:30 o'clock deadline timeline, what you make of that? >> i think it might be a good sign there is a dispute among the jurors about what are the instructions said, the all took notes about of those, maybe is

some internal disagreement about the specific instructions of the judge, is hard to really read into all of these things, it's a loses games probably. from my perspective it may indicate some division between the jurors and as we know president trump only needs one and jury demand jury for jury, i don't know if that's the best outcome but better than a conviction. >> niel: so that was fast, at an over there is a delay, carried that the judges meeting with them from the time they requested to go back to the courtroom, it does not seem like a great links of time, would he make all of this? >> you know, emma little surprised or being dismissed, most jurors want to get a case behind them. what i think the -- this tells us is her in for much longer deliberation and they don't have the optimism they could reach the verdict this evening. they probably sent the signal, nine out of ten times when a

note comes out in the requesting a transcript, it's a difference of opinion on the recollection what it witness stated. not surprising, very typical, i think we will see more nodes and more interaction with the jury but i think it means we are in for much longer deliberation. >> niel: particularly interested in as i understand in what david pecker had to say, what michael cohen had to say, i don't know specifically what points in that leading to this meeting with donald trump or the trump tower. im curious what you make that this goes back solely the case of pecker to the first big witness, are they starting from the beginning, because damaging the time and in my head, who go by order who said what and when, this could be quite the delivery i -- deliberation. >> i think it's entirely possible that they started from

the beginning. it has been, for example,, pecker was the first witness in the case, ends been five or six weeks and they heard this -- his testimony. that make sense, of their working through it. on the other hand if you're looking for what it's worth, it means they are at least testing the argument of the prosecution that this is all about a conspiracy to influence 2016 election, because pecker's testimony is really not relevant to the 34 charge alleged misrepresentation of what the business records are. y'all relate to stormy daniels who pecker did not pay,'s if i was trying to eat something into it, i would say probably they are looking at the possibility that this conspiracy is it a visit in for jade to the jury on the prosecution actually is the central thing in the trial. spee with three if i'm on the defense team, would i be worried

about the pecker request, even more than the 3m you were not necessarily, you could be looking at the history of paying these nondisclosure agreements, if payments were to be made irrespective of a campaign for any other reason, that would lead to that there was no violation of an alleged campaign-finance all. again, hard to read what they are doing, maybe they're just having instructions about each of the witnesses, what the recollection was. but certainly all of this comes down to whether they can come to a unanimous decision at all, and it seems that there is early disagreement a might be less likely as time goes on to there. >> niel: i am just wondering about what happened from the west week of jury deliberation, i know into the case of the secretary he faced more than a dozen counts of miss purport parading funds, all of that,

that was supposed to last a long time. and believe the jury ended up going back to 1987 on the -- they deliberated for ten hours. night and day, i grant you but is that in keeping with what you think this could be, longer comment what you think? >> my longest jury deliberation lasted for about 55 days, at that time, i really felt like it was more a desperation i wanted to get back to their normal life -- five days -- than their ability to continue their stamina to continue. i think there is certainly an increase in is the importance of this case, into the minds of the jury they have a chairman or a person order for woman and i think they are going to plough this very difficult case in a methodical way until the have

neither the patients are stamina to finish. when that is, who knows. >> niel: i keep mentioning the donavan case, not because i coveted i was reported at the time but i thought it was interesting that everybody thought it would go a certain way, the former circuitry would be indicted on something because certainly there was a number of counts against him that made it look inevitable. everybody was surprised it did not happen that way, neither was it is expected that they would wrap up and come exonerate in all the players. maybe going back to them it has only to do with the clarity of the charges. the charges on fraud, the kind of stuff easily definable. here it is not. what you make of that comment -- teemac we might have lost him. let me go to that question with katie, it's at this motion of

what you know and what could be easily defined, on wandering over the judge may have complicated things to this jury by being so vague about allowing different issues to come up not as black-and-white as it was in the secretary donavan, years after the fact in that case. what you make of that? >> any sort of confusion to the benefit of the defense, of this confusion there might be reasonable doubt about whether something was or was not established. that being said i do think the jury could come to a clear analysis of this case if they go down the elements of each of these offenses and ask it of the evidence supported the finding of guilt only minimal element which is the falsification of the documents, aren't calling these payments legal expenses. if the answer is no, there's no evidence showing that is false, that is an audit guilty on all charges. there's always some jurors are want to go excruciatingly slow

in some cases from everything even though they may ultimately come around. that could be the case here as well. >> niel: they might be 12 angry men in that group there. but let me get your thoughts on that, when you see or you hear jury come back and requesting certain testimony, certain clarifications, a judge's instructions over again. people jump and try to read into that so much. myself included. but you guys of the experts, suffers to you, do you read any significance and to the details they are looking for today question mark. >> i think they're just getting started guide the study from the beginning, there's probably some discussion in some disagreement about what was said by the witnesses they have asked about. and then it is very standard for the jurors to ask about the law, look at it, refer to it, and them all of the law that was

read to them, so they can reference it, see you they can get full transcripts. but what you have is a jury i think at this point that as you indicated are dealing with a messy case, it is not find it, it's not a proven. it's the exact case that a directed verdict was intended for. where you don't have the defendant on noticeable with underlying crime is and he cannot instruct the jury on which crime of the or to assess unanimously. and instead it, you have this messy, messy case presented and it's been made worse by the law that is been instructed. this is an impossible situation for the jury's. i feel for them, it's a fatal flaw what the judge has allowed and has done in this case and i expect it will be reversed fairly quickly. >> niel: not to jokingly mentioned the case of the 12 angry men, the movie and the book, but what stood out was

that one juror who just was not convinced, a different case, a different topic that. is that the kind of thing that happens when you follow these things, one or two auto jurors who are not going along with the others or our parting company from the others are just scratching their heads saying no, i need to know more, i need to go back and study this more. and of that is the case, dozen that, canned the possibility of lengthening the deliberations. soon obvious everybody has their own personality and style when it comes to these things, but if it's at an impasse in their hopelessly deadlocked, they're going to have to indicate that to the judge. but before the indicated that of course there will be efforts to see if they can come do some sort of consensus twomak if there is a mistrial, i wonder if alvin bragg will retry this case because i think that could be done relatively quickly. >> niel: thank you very much.

the jury has been dismissed, you will obviously go through these instructions tomorrow morning and at that same courtroom and they will get to the bottom of some of these other requests, david packer, michael cohen's testimony, we don't know specifically what they are, but they are looking at something that certainly on the case of pecker who was the first key witness. give their working backwards from the beginning, play over to speed what is repeated, this could be a lengthy and deliberative process. maybe not. the donavan case in the eighties without that would drag on, but everybody thought he would turn out to spend the last -- the entire of his life in jail. and he was exonerated. holy so, no more sweating all night no kicking off the covers or blasting the air conditioning. because only the tempur-pedic breeze is made with our

one-of-a-kind cooling technology— that pulls heat away from your body. so, the mattress feels up to 10° cooler all night long. during the tempur-pedic memorial day sale, save up to $500 on select adjustable mattress sets, and experience deep, undisturbed rest. learn more at tempurpedic.com

our biggest challenge? uncertainty. hidden fees, surcharges... who knows what to expect! turn shipping to your advantage. keep it simple...with clear, upfront pricing. with usps ground advantage®. ♪ oh no. running low? with chewy, always keep their bowl full. save 35% on your first autoship order. get the food they love. delivered again and again. (♪) [thud]

>> niel: you probably learn something new everyday about this trial,, but something important, even though the home in manhattan is relatively nearby, from house to hang out of the court house all day as long as the jury is deliberating. i don't know why that is the case, maybe with the security it's just easier but it is a little novel, but i'm no expert cottages find it to be the case,

as his journey continues to deliver to some people say it could wrap up early, it could go on for days or next week. then we have the political impact of this, of course some will argue thanks to all over the notoriety, the, the pylon that's unbelievable trump is getting here that his poll numbers held up in his doctor doing better than the start of the trial, leading joe biden in all of the key battleground states, manchester, following all of this, the politics reporter. this is amazing how he has to stick around the courthouse. jessica anybody else to be fair. but this could go on for days, i do not know why that is the case, it is what it is that goes but we do know you sort of like a prisoner in that courthouse until it is resolved one way or the other. >> i don't know why that is either but one thing for sure is if donald trump was allowed to

leave the court house he would be free to campaign and meet with the voters and we have seen that he's been able to do that. he had one rally in the bronx, some fundraising to trips here and they are, for the most part, he is very much used this trial to campaign, that one hallway outside of the court room where you to television cameras and reporters, communicating with his base, interesting to see how he's become with an entourage. we saw barnett donald, lots of lawmakers that support donald trump. it's been away for him to campaign. that certainly works for his base of voters but i'm curious to see how that works with independent swing voters because it looking at a polls, those independent swing voters are not following this as closely. >> niel: good point, it

attracts a number of entourages, that bound interesting that biden folks put out robert de niro out there. he spoke his mind, day donald trump spoke about the schmuck spoke his mind about of this. >> donald trump has created this, should be telling him not to do this but he's just... he wants to so total chaos. >> mr. trump: of than they have a protester, a robert de niro, broken down full, standing up there. he got maggots. >> i haven't heard that phrase before. >> niel: we've left out of the stuff that our impressionable audience would hear from robert de niro but it was odd, getting

into entourages are going on each other. >> is one presidential candidate, on the presidential ticket, donald trump and the biden campaign and listing robert de niro. wasn't exactly on our bingo card, we knew that a robert de niro was in and add at least by the biden haters campaign. but it's just it was interesting to see that because the biden campaign getting the administration has been a very careful not to touch this trial. the rightfully so are focused on those kitchen table issues, the economy, healthcare, food prices, but there has to come a point where there is such an unprecedented trial, because it is the prison joe biden is running against at the have to address the. but it was surprising to see them address it for now by bringing it robert de niro out front in the courthouse. >> niel: they double down on those, we are told that president biden is preparing to a national address when we know

the ultimate verdict. good idea, a bad idea? you mentioned before they were ignoring those, now going for full throttle with this. >> i think he has to do this, it makes sense, he has not really addressed this, he's fine to speak with his supporters on the average american voters and the average of voters, the persuadable voters trying to decide between trauma and biden, they may be paying attention to this trial and of following the coverage, were there also paying attention to inflation, the economy, their kitchen table issues. so talking what all those issues more. like i said, this is his opponent, it's a former president, it's coming at a time when the nation is extremely divided, i think there is an opportunity for joe biden to strike a guess a court of unity in a way, it's extending an all

of branch to donald trump. but it is an opportunity for joe biden. >> niel: a wonder of the former president is exonerated, not convicted of anything that the president would. >> that's a good question. and i'm curious to see what is happening with biden speechwriters are now, i'm sure that tone could depend on the verdict. >> niel: would that be a statement of address if there is a case. a lot we don't know, to thank so much, good seeing you again. okay we mentioned the former president, he's still in the courthouse. has to wait it out, you don't know where he was in the courthouse, but again he could not go campaigning, not even go outside the building. the fire department, the bodega, whatever he has done, he cannot do. but he is about to leave that building and it is possible you could speak if he does, after

this. it's time to feed the dogs real food, not highly processed pellets. the farmer's dog is fresh food made with whole meat and veggies. it's not dry food. it's not wet food. it's just real food. it's an idea whose time has come.

>> niel: all right, looking outside the new york state supreme court what donald trump has been 9:30 am, the jury took the case at 11:30 am, five hours plus still looking to see the former president, after this.

[ ♪♪ ] >> niel: all right like clockwork, the judge said of the workday ends for the jury at 4:30 pm it will end, looks like that's exactly what happened, the jury wanted some testimony, mainly from michael cohen, all replayed, the legal definition is of that, shannon greene is with those now to help with all of that. and there is a note about of the judge regiven his instructions, i don't know all the instructions but again thank goodness, this at coverage been

excellent. the timeline for those has me wondering whether these latest note requests, there might be one or two several on the jury that will have questions, will be dividing more clarifications, more information. how what do you make of how this is going and what this might be signaling? >> it's always difficult to find a what it could mean because it could just be one juror fighting the other 11 jurors and say i remember it this way, i remember this is what happened. and another jurors saying that is not how i remember that testimony. it could be one are several who's a need to rehear that. asking for the david pecker testimony that was weeks ago. they've since heard from michael cohen, but maybe they want to compare and contrast, maybe the counseling that is a conflict

are one bolsters the other on that particular section. they do want to hear some jury instructions, 55 pages long, they took more than an hour for the judge to read to them. he is not a given them the written copy, they'd -- he must expect they will come back with questions. looks like he will do is add the attorneys agree on what portions will be read back, and then in the morning do that afresh for the jury as they come back to deliberations and also answer any questions they have a boat of the jury instructions. then send them back to the room for a second day of deliberations. >> neil: these instructions are 55 pages, when they open up some furniture that you assemble yourself in its 55 pages, i'm going to say that is not happening. what a way to make -- what do we make over the document does a lot of criticism that judge juan merchan has made this overly complicated, new wrinkles and now obligates the jury to consider things they weren't supposed to consider, or thought they would consider?

where are we on that? >> is our colleagues have done way more trials and i ever did as a young associate, except they think it is unusual. in their estimation, in a trial as i did, what a as a judge did give they'd instructions to the juries. that's the roadmap, when they get stuck the hash out and opened the jury instructions, here on pages 17 the judge said this is how you handle that a question that is how this wart is defined. but remember that judge juan merchan has been very adamant he is the only one to give any question and answered on the issue of the law. you told the attorneys repeatedly on the day of the closing arguments yesterday, that is not your territory that is my territory. so i not giving them the written instructions, he guarantees that any question they have or how to interpret something, with the law says, will go through him. it'll be filtered through him. he has to know that will happen and it will happen first thing

tomorrow morning on day two of the liberation. >> neil: what do you make of this, you know there's more than i, the judge directing all parties to remain in the building, including the former president and all the people around, the security, you name it. but would also include of the jury, i don't know where they are deliberating, how close it is to the courtroom itself but it took forever it seems for them to get from wherever they were deliberating to the courtroom, and that was in the same building i assume you mike what's the deal with that? >> it is all here in the same building but he have to get everybody on the same page, the judge comes back in and have to have some agreement, the party has to find out what the question is, and then have some agreement from those parties about which sections will be right back. is is a direct end of the cross about her that particular witness able to hear from again, is it a specific section or question they want to hear about. it takes a lot to get everybody on the same page, mother all very close. listen the elevators are slow,

it's an old building. we been on the sieve -- 15th floor, after taking the stairs many times, got my stepson because it's quicker to get the stairs then to use these elevators. >> neil: but when they clear the jury out of the room, they must be saying all right, you will push the button in the elevator, a couple of elevators, i was just amazed how long that tugged before they were even in the courtroom. >> shannon: and a half to make sure that no other extraneous people around would see this jury in transit, they will try to minimize that as well. a lot of us press folks are running around in there, there is a protocol to make sure the pots don't cross. >> neil: am i the leg sheet -- a quiet, shannon is in here. >> shannon: don't say what! >> neil: thank you, i learned a lot. the former leader of the free world has to wait out until -- in that building as the jury is deliberating.

no matter how long it takes, after this. beverage companies,... ...our bottles might still look the same... ...but they can be remade in a whole new way. thanks to you... we're getting bottles back... and we've developed a way to make new ones from 100% recycled plastic. new bottles - made using no new plastic. you'll be seeing more of these bottles in more places. and when we get more of them back... ...we can use less new plastic. see how our bottles are made to be remade. i'm your overly competitive brother. and i'm ready for a rematch. game on. i've been practicing. what the cello? you want me to lower the hoop? foul! what? you going to tell on me again? foul yah? foul bro! here take a free shot go ahead knock yourself out. your about to get served. seriously? get allstate, save money, and be better protected from mayhem, like me.

love you mom! wait till your father gets home. isolated...depressed... and embarrassed. that's how it felt to live with bladder and bowel incontinence. but that changed when my urologist told me about axonics therapy. a long-lasting solution that has really changed my life. this is not another drug, and it works. visit findrealrelief.com to arrange an appointment with an expert physician to determine if axonics therapy is right for you. results and experiences may vary. stop suffering in silence.

>> neil: you know, when we originally went to the new york supreme state court, we said it will be only a few days, nothing to worry about. not like you will live there for six or seven weeks and get a condo near there. so he's there, and he's still there, where day one of jury deliberations, i don't know how much longer there going on but nate is there were always happy he is. this is dragging on, now people say they are interpreting someone for these early juror requests as a sign it could drag on longer, what do you think? >> it will definitely drag on until at least tomorrow, the jury deliberated for four and half hours today, they will come back tomorrow, there's an indication they will possibly stay until maybe 6:00 tomorrow

night, the jury will have to decide on that but we have been talking about these two notes that came from the jury, and the judge whether those notes to the jury to confirm that they were accurate which they work, was happening right now is that of the courtroom, lawyers on both sides are huddled around and sort of discussing it appears what they're going to share with the jury tomorrow the jury instructions question was the most recent note, the jury could decide to have judge juan merchan read them of the entire instructions again, there was only that he asked me earlier. they don't actually have to decide right now, the entire instruction sheet is 55 pages long. it could be one part of the jury instruction, it could be more extensive. regarding the trump tower meeting in 2015, that is the clarification on the actual testimony that the jury wants to learn more about. of note there, david pecker of the former american media ceo

testified trump never expressed any concern about his family was negative stories coming out. which is the opposite of what a former trump aid how hicks testified, she said one of the daniel story resurfaced that trump was very much concerned about his wife and that he asked her to ensure newspapers were not delivered to their home. now the jury must reach a unanimous decision to either convict are acquit former president trump, the jury cannot discuss a possible sentence or punishment for donald trump during their deliberations, they can only considered the facts and evidence presented at trial, a lot of people wondering what is going to come after a decision, by because donald trump does not have a criminal history and sought a violent violent event that megaphones, legal experts say jail time is unlikely. >> neil: thank you, following all of that from the new york state supreme court. the dow jones tumbled today, i know your first thought would be cut exerted have anything to do with what is going on, at the

courthouse? know it or not. but we know what was behind it. after this. and it's designed to help you feel cool. so, no more sweating all night no kicking off the covers or blasting the air conditioning. because only the tempur-pedic breeze is made with our one-of-a-kind cooling technology— that pulls heat away from your body. so, the mattress feels up to 10° cooler all night long. during the tempur-pedic memorial day sale, save up to $500 on select adjustable mattress sets, and experience deep, undisturbed rest. learn more at tempurpedic.com

[ ♪♪ ] >> neil: still wind to hear from the former president et cetera the courthouse in new york, then you see on the right

side of your screen, the dow, those are not collected only mentioned that because there were some who are trying to connect them. not that we know of. the market expert extraordinary, it known you for decades, don't know how he does that but help me with why the dow was tumbling today? somewhere saying oh, they do not look legally good for donald trump because he could get convicted, i don't believe that has anything to do with it but fill me in. >> i would say the movement in the market really this week and clearly most of last week as well, the dow jones down a couple percentage points has a lot more to do with the fact that the treasury has to sell a lot of the bonds and bills and they had three major auctions this week, two yesterday and one today and the uptick from that was not great, you could call it mediocre. what is -- what that does is the price is only u.s. treasuries go higher and investors don't like when joe threes go through

significant resistance levels, so 4.6 percent is where we close today on the ten year and we have seen this happen before, the five and how percent solid last october would we had a draw down with 5 percent. think it is the creeping higher treasury he was kinda sort of hustles in a much -- for investors. we saw a couple household name companies had a rough report of this morning, then again this afternoon. >> neil: you know one of the things that is interesting to, you mentioned, this notion, market has been under by some things but has climbed a bit. let me just positive, throwing it out of there with his convictions for donald trump, in other words he has some trouble here. would there be a market impact, i don't see it at all, and mean he has climbed this with indictments, 90 plus right now

and he's doing fine. markets were standing just fine, what do you think? >> i think markets, looking at this as a more of a side story, i think what they do look at is economic growth and earnings, they look at the polls, but it's early for that. that would have more of an effect in an election year, certainly house the economy feeling, how's the second-quarter tracking and in general how is the season. those are much more fundamental to what investors are looking at ray no, as much as we make a politics especially in a presidential election year, the markets are much more concerned about of those fundamentals and who might be and the white house at the end of this year into next. i think it is more focused on how is the economy doing, the last 26 months, first quarter earning, and dewey continued to see economic growth anything that's being driving things h

here. >> neil: as unite discussed, mostly it's not really red or blue contrary to popular belief, it's all about of the green. if the environment is good for making money, they are happy. >> such a good point, it's been true historically, you track every election for the last 50 years the market does not really care, that major changes, it's it to three just so you know, we have these fancy graphics and music going along with us trump court case, we will stick with the graphics and the music. great to see my friend friend, is thank you very much. we are trying to get a good sense of what to look forward to tomorrow, jury will be busy back in the courtroom i guess, after this. tylenol 8 hour arthritis pain has two layers of relief. the first is fast, the second is long-lasting. we give you your day back, so you can give it everything. tylenol. number one doctor recommended for arthritis pain.

>> we just had a brief donald trump sighting heading back into the courtroom. he didn't talk to reporters. just a fist bump. meeting back with his lawyers. it's all wrapped up. andy mccarthy, katie cher cherkasky. spell out what we are looking at tomorrow morning. the jury is back in that courtroom. >> the jury will be back, and the judge is going to be able to answer the question after he discusses the appropriate response with the council, ultimately making the choice about being responsive to the question. in terms of the questions we're getting from the jury, they may

very well be looking for some corroboration, michael cohen. they cannot rely upon anything michael cohen says. >> they cannot read it themselves. what is the rules on that? >> they generally bring them in and read it to them they eat -- so that is read to the jury. as we think about timing to bear in mind, this episode shows the jury is not in complete control of the pace of deliberations, because i think the reason this got hung up this afternoon and they got sent home early. it's not that they didn't want to work. it's that the lawyers couldn't agree on what testimony in the record was responsive to their note. no idea how many times that

could happen in the next day or two. >> d>> somebody told me that it6 pages -- that they gave to the jury. that reminds me of how much ikea assembly cap. i don't know if i would be interested in all 56 pages. they honestly wanted certain things isolated. can you explain that process? >> in many cases, the judge will give the jury a written copy of their instructions. these specific question will need to be delineated in terms of what would be responsive. they obviously need to have a certain question. you can't just be ""i don't understand the instructions," it has to be more pointed. would imagine that would lead to one particular subsection or certain sections of the higher reading. >> a cop both of your appearances throughout the day. got first word of this note in

that request. didn't look good. didn't look good for the def defense. >> i think there's two ways of interpreting this. one is that they could just be going back to the beginning because this was the first witness. that would just suggest diligence. if it is substantive, what they are doing, you would think, is buying into the prosecution's theory that this case is about a conspiracy to influence the 2016 election. they have no relevance to the 34 counts of the indictment which are about falsification of business records pertaining to the stormy daniels payment that they were uninvolved in. >> obviously they will get some of this clarified tomorrow, but it's possible that there will be more requests, weather comes from one or two members. this could signal that it's not

just a one off. >> when you hear from the jury, people get anxious maybe that there is a verdict. we just cannot predict what will be the next move of these jurors. they understand the gravity of the decision they are making. it could be one of them for all we know that's causing all these disruptions and requests, but for sure they are entitled to get clarity on the issues they seem to be struggling with. >> you know henry fonda was that one juror in ""12 angry men"." [laughter] that's the extent of my legal knowledge. i will spare you the henry fonda impression which i think i do quite well but i'm not going to burden you with that. andy, katie, thank you both very much. whether it's henry fonda or someone else, the jurors -- another chance to get back in the courtroom and get some questions answered and maybe some clarity. here comes "the five." ♪ ♪ >> dana: i'manpe