on that note, i wish you all a very good night. from all our colleagues across the networks of nbc news, thank you for staying up late with me. me. thank you for joining us for a special edition of the rachel maddow show which is my interview with stormie daniels.

when she agreed to the interview, it was, in large part, because that trial was over. the republican presumptive nominee for president, former president trump's criminal trial in new york centered on the payment that was made to miss daniels to try to stop her from speaking publicly about her experience with mr. trump. miss daniels testified in the trial. mr. trump was convicted by the jury on all 34 counts with which he was charged. after the conviction, after the trial was over, that is when miss daniels agreed to sit down with me for her first american interview after the conclusion of the trial. but now, it seems, the trial may be no longer concluded. no longer over. today, judge merchan agreed to delay the sentencing in the case and he's facing up to four years in prison.

the sentencing will be delayed so that judge merchan can consider a new motion from trump's defense lawyers. the new motion is because of the astonishing u.s. supreme court ruling yesterday that went further than any legal observer expected in granting trump immunity from prosecution for anything he did while in office the could be loosely be construed as an official act. one of the most radical elements of the supreme court's decision, so radical, justice amy coney barrett wouldn't sign on to this part of the. one of the most radical parts of it is the ruling not only establishes the trump can't be prosecuted for so-called official acts, it means even if his alleged crimes were committed on his own time is a private matter, prosecutors ringing charges against him for those crimes cannot use any evidence in court that relates to any arguably official actions. so, in the new york criminal

case related to this payment to stormie daniels, trump's lawyer's going to try to claim essentially that some of the crucial evidence that was used to convict him should retroactively be deemed inadmissible on the basis of the fact that he was doing president stuff when he did those things that showed up as evidence in this case. now, with this new supreme court ruling, anything that is a president thing cannot be cited as evidence even if cited as evidence to support proving a totally unrelated crime he did as a private citizen. so, long story short, instead of sentencing donald trump next week which was when it was initially scheduled, judge merchan will instead considered the motion from trump's defense lawyers to throw out the guilty verdict. he will consider trump's

lawyer's argument about that and arguments against it from the prosecutors, and on september 6, he will rule on that motion to throughout the guilty verdict. if he does not threat the verdict, trump's sentencing will go ahead on september 18. rather than next week it will be september 18. that was all just decided today. one of the things it means in practical terms is that the republican party presidential nominee donald trump is going to be sentenced to prison in this case, that sentence will be handed down seven weeks before the election instead of 17 weeks before the election which is when it was going to happen. they say most americans don't start paying attention until after labor day but now if he's going to get a prison sentence, it will be well after labor day instead of months before labor day which had been the original schedule. since the debate between trump and president biden, democrats

have been newly and acutely focused on questions about president biden's age. the question of whether he should stay as the party's nominee or should he and vice president harris have her take over the top of the ticket and pick a new running mate for her. it's an animated conversation on the democratic side, presumably they realize they need to move forward quickly whatever they are going to do. on the republican side, since the debate, donald trump is moving backwards. he is moving backwards to this criminal trial at which he was convicted. >> how many billions of dollars to you o in civil penalties for molesting a woman for doing a whole range of things, having sex with a porn star on the night while your wife was pregnant? what are you talking about? you have the morals of an alley

cat. >> i didn't have sex with a porn star. >> not only has donald trump's defense team asking, effectively, to reopen this case and push any possible sentencing of trump 10 weeks closer to the election than it otherwise would be, he is also, as of this debate, i mean, he's still trying to tell america that stormy daniels is lying. that they did not have sex. he does not -- for lack of a better term, he does not need to litigate that point but he keeps trying to, even now. even at that debate. the reason stormy daniels testified in detail under oath that is criminal trial about her interaction with him is because he built his legal defense in large part on his contention that the sexual encounters between them did not happen. he didn't have to do it that way. but he did.

it is not necessarily the strongest legal approach to a defense as evidenced by the fact he was convicted unanimously on all counts, but that's what he did. that insistence by him that she is lying, that insistence that the sex never happened, it has had practical consequences for all of us.'s claim that this never happened, his insistence that be made in court by his lawyers on his behalf, it meant the jury in his criminal case was asked to assess, okay, which of these accounts is credible? his claimant never happened or her testimony that it certainly did happen. it cannot be both so the jury was invited to assess in open court which one of these accounts is right. that is the legal fact of it. the human factor all of us is we the public got all these details of these sexual encounters between them. not because any of us were

desperate to know but because it was a crucial question at his criminal trial. is she recounting this event in a way the jury finds credible? that was the test. her credibility. the detail she had to remember became very legally relevant. you know, high ick factor, definitely. high importance too and the first felony conviction of a u.s. president in american history. so, there is this bizarre legal approach which he has continued since the trial even at the presidential debate the denial that the encounter happen. there are the legal consequences of that for him. there are the things we can't ever forget consequences for us as the american public because of the details we have to learn as a consequence of that being his legal strategy. there is also stormy daniels. herself, a real-life person. the human factor of all of this for her is that donald trump,

former president of the united states, really did try, really did decide he would try to stave off these 34 felony convictions by attacking her as a liar. he did not have to do that in order to defend himself against these charges. it wasn't even a good legal strategy. that is what he did, and his attacks on her in those terms have led to years of ever- increasing threats against her. we will talk about that including what it has meant for this one life she has on earth and for her family's life and safety. we will talk about what it means for citizens whose countrymen ski that is -- history has been shaped by this one woman insisting that she should tell what she knows. regardless of the threats, regardless of the targeting and the consequences. with that, here is stormy daniels.

>> thank you so much for doing this. >> thank you for having me. >> you do not have to do this and i was surprised you agreed to do it but i have been looking forward to talking to you. i guess i mostly want to know how the last few weeks have been . it's been a many year saga for you but it's qualitative from time to time and the conviction has been a few weeks. >> yeah, it's been a lot. it has been intense and part of that comes from my mistake of in my mind thinking that this would be an wending. this would be the light at the end of the tunnel. it was what i was working toward, like a movie when the judge hits the gavel and the credits roll and it would be tied up in a bow and would be done. that's not how real-life works. my friends were celebrating and sending me messages, not just friends but everybody.

everybody who were happy with the verdict came down and it was over but i knew for me it was just getting started. for every person that was excited and thrilled and congratulating me, there was somebody else who was very upset . it just poured gasoline on some of that stuff i have been going through the entire time. and, it's common knowledge now that a lot of people were doxed. i know cohen were doxed and jurors were doxed. i know it strictly related because it was happening while i was still on the stand. >> was a consequence for having your address out there? >> my mailbox was destroyed. my animals have been injured. my daughter cannot go outside. there is press out there. i'm afraid to go outside.

i'm afraid to go out and mow my lawn. i can't go anywhere and i am afraid of being followed. death threats are so much more graphic in detail and brazen. people do not care. it is scary. leading up to the trial was hard enough. lighting up here repeatedly and sitting in the rooms and reliving all these terrifying moments, the only thing that kept me going was thinking there was an end in sight, and there is not. >> is there any sense of -- i mean, vindication? trump being convicted. it's not a case you prop up prosecutors brought. you were brought as a witnessed to testify. you were subpoenaed. or case. that said, the way the case was presented to the jury, the prosecutor described to the

jury in closing arguments, stormy daniels is the motive saying how crucial your testimony was. your testimony was not only riveting but integral to the case. does the verdict sort of feel like a vindication, at least in the sense the story is straight and the jury agreed he was wrong when he called you a liar? >> yes but no. i mean, i don't understand -- life is not fair. i am getting constantly attacked. it was called the stormy daniels hush money trial and that's not what was. it was falsification of business records. i was one thing but i was the most exciting part. i was the one that took the stand. i was the one whose testimony made an impact. there were so many others i could've called. they didn't call karen mcdougal. when he was found guilty, for that brief moment, it was worth

me testifying because at first i was not going to and i had to shut down my life. i was by choice sequestered. i didn't work. i did not tweet and if you know me that's a big deal. i didn't want anything to be misconstrued or entered into evidence and create more work for the prosecution or get the case thrown out or not allow me to testify. did i want to testify? no. do you know how scary that is. if i had known beforehand how nasty susan was going to be to me, i might not of. if i didn't testify then it would look like they didn't want me to and i was not to be trusted. that there was a reason they did not want me to testify. i knew i had to and it was important, and as soon as he was found guilty, i knew i had done the right thing in one aspect. the other side of that is, like you said, i did not bring these charges. i was subpoenaed. so much of the hate mail i get

is drop the charges. i'm like, i did not sue him. i am getting nothing. it caused me so much to testify. i was not paid. i am a registered republican. sorry. >> when you say you paid to,. , you paid your own expenses? >> of course. i wasn't compensated or written a check or anything. i got nothing. this has cost me so much money. i was not paid by anybody. my testimony that i was subpoenaed, everybody considers me to attend this great duty and be a hero, which i am not. i just told the truth. i was a human being and didn't do anything heroic. i didn't go in a burning building. i said the truth. i have never changed my story despite what other people said. look at interviews online from

2019, 2020, 21, my story has not changed. it's the only one that has been consistent. >> let me ask you about the. what you are saying was very much with the prosecutor said in closing argument. i want to ask you about the way the prosecution for lack of a better word, used you, the way you fit in their case because i want to hear whether you agree with that. he said, the defense has gone to great lengths to discredit stormy daniels on her account of sexually involvement with mr. trump. they shamed her and tried to suggest her story has changed and it has not at least not in any way significant. there were parts of her testimony that we cringe worthy but the whole episode in the suite, that was uncomfortable. some of the details about what it looked like, the contents of his toiletry bag in the topics of conversation those of the details i submit that kind of ring true. the details you would expect someone to remember. if she didn't testify about those, it would give the defense more ammunition in

their efforts to call her a liar and argue she was never in that hotel room. in the opening and closing, mr. blanche told you daniel's testimony doesn't matter. it's a bridge too far because it is true we do not have to prove that sex took place. is not an element of the crimes charged with the defendant know what happened in that hotel room and to the extent you credit stormy daniels testimony that only reinforces his incentive to buy her silence. the defense knows that because of her testimony was so relevant, what did they work so hard to discredit her? i am saying it's messy and it makes some people uncomfortable to hear and it probably makes some of you meaning the jury, and comfortable to hear. that's the point. that is the display the defendant did not want the american voter to see and in the simplest terms, stormy daniels is the motive. that is why your testimony was not just an amazing display but also american history the way it fits into this.

do you agree with the way they characterized you in this case? >> the prosecution? >> the way he is saying your testimony function and why it was relevant to the crime. >> absolutely. why would i make it up. yeah. i am comfortable with it. for those out there who are like, the letters say whatever she wanted, and i was -- i did nothing but answer the questions. i didn't present an essay for spoken word theater. i answered questions and if you don't want to hear the answer, don't has the questions. for those who said it was uncomfortable to hear? i loved it. you had to do was hear my very pg rated version on the stand. i had to relive it. i had to say it in court in front of these people knowing it would be public record and my daughter will read this and everybody will read this. preparing for the case, i had to go back and think about the details and make sure i had

everything absolutely accurate. it is important because it proves that i was telling the truth. maybe it's too far for the conversation but for those people who like to drag me about talking about what is genitals look like, don't you think i wish there was something else i could prove? i wish he had a birthmark that looked like the state of texas on a shoulder. it's the only thing that proves i -- that he did take his clothes off and frenemy. you know if he had not, that i was lying, he would've whipped his junk out a long time ago and proved it was a liar. it's the only thing i have. he knows i'm telling the truth which is why he wanted to shut me up. >> as soon as you were done testifying about what happened in the hotel suite, his defense lawyers moved for mistrial and they said what you testified and the detail with which you testified about it is going to be prejudicial to the jury and was not related to the crimes of a charge. the jury hearing that would

make them have so much improper prejudice toward trump that the trial had to be thrown out. the judge said no to the mistrial and the judge said, listen, you should not upset at the outset in your opening statement that the sexual encounters never happen. that set the case up so the jury has to assess the credibility of stormy versus -- >> they put me on the spot. >> they did that. the detail of the testimony will be the basis of trump's appeal. he will appeal to have not called a mistrial and that's the way he tries to get out of this conviction. can we go over your -- would you be willing to go through the testimony? there are no cameras in the courtroom. nobody has seen it. >> i printed out that section of the transcript. do you mind doing this? >> when we come back, stormy daniels gives her testimony here and explains what she meant by

it. there were no cameras for this testimony at trial that we have cameras here now. we will have that next. i should also mention that when ms. daniels told me while she was on the stand, she was doxed and details about her home was exposed, she was right. late in the afternoon of the first day she testify, the new york post tabloid did publish an article showing pictures of her home in florida separately. i should tell you we have confirmed that in court that day, her first day, trumps defense counsel did seek to enter into evidence a document with her full home address listed on it unredacted. ms. daniels alerted the judge which is reflected in the transcript. the transcript said, exhibit is shown on the witnesses and the party screens. trump defense lawyer, for this and evidence. executor, objection. the court, sustained. then the witness, stormy daniels, says whispering to the

court this has my address. trump defense lawyer. let me ask you, you only partially fill this form out, right? prosecutor, objection. the judge, sustained. trump defense lawyer, can i approach? the witness whispering to the judge, that's got my address. whereupon the following proceedings were held at sidebar meaning no one in the court could hear this happening but we have the transcript of it now. at the sidebar, the judge says to the lawyers, she meaning stormy, she turned to me and looked very fearful and she said that's got my address. you asked to approach and she said that's got my address. she is very much afraid of this form meaning afraid of this form being shown with her unredacted address on it. that form was not admitted into evidence. it was not shown to the jury that was shown a what they call the screen for the witnesses and the parties which means it was displayed on a screen,

visible to stormy daniels herself and visible to lawyers on both sides invisible to the defendant. i am telling you this because i want you to know we checked. she is telling the truth about what happened to her on the stand. more to come.

i'm andrea, founder of a boutique handbag brand - andi - and this is why i switched to shopify. it's the challenges that we don't expect, like a site going down or the checkout wouldn't work. what's nice about shopify is

when i'm with my family, when i'm taking time off, knowing that i have a site up and running and our business is moving forward because we have a platform that we can rely on. that is gold to us. start your free trial at shopify today.

can we go over that -- would you be willing to go through the testimony? there's no cameras in the court. nobody has seen it. i printed out that section of the transcript. is this weird? >> i have done a lot weirder. >> i walked into that one. >> i have to put my glasses on. >> stormy daniels testimony in the criminal trial former president trump was as consequential to the case as it was showstopping for everybody who heard about it. we will recount that testimony

now. i am interrupting and not jumping in straight away because i need to warn you the some of the conversation is about to be graphic in the next couple of segments, the conversation will not be appropriate for all audiences. if you are squeamish or watching with kids or if you don't want to hear descriptions of unwanted sexual contact, this is your cue to join us in a few minutes. with that said, here we go. stormy daniels with their own testimony in me awkwardly playing the part of susan hollinger, the prosecutor who question ms. daniels on direct examination. >> this is on direct examination because at the end is when they ask for mistrial. i will be the prosecutor in you be you. >> you are good. >> what happened when you left the bathroom? >> when it came out of the bathroom i expected to exit, go around the bed and back to

where we had been sitting and talking and hopefully say time to go. been here long enough. that was when i realized how long i had been there when i open the bathroom door to come out mr. trump had come in the bedroom and was on the bed. basically between myself and the exit. >> what was he wearing? >> boxer shorts and a t-shirt. >> what was your reaction? >> at first i was startled. i wasn't expecting someone to be there, especially debt and that's when i have moments where i felt -- that's when i had that moment i felt the room spin in slow motion. i felt the blood leave my hands and feet and almost like if you stand up too fast and everything kind of spins, that happened too. then i thought, oh, god, what did i misread to get here? the intention was pretty clear. somebody strip to their underwear and posing on the bed like waiting for you. >> i am going to stop for a second.

when you say the blood left her hands and feet like you stand up too fast and everything spins, you mean you were shocked? you were surprised he had come into the bedroom and taken off his clothes? >> honestly, even if he had his clothes on i still would've been startled. when i realized, you know, he was minus a lot of clothing -- what's happening? >> what happened when you came out of the bathroom, did he stay on the bed? >> he was on the bed like this and i did oppose and i won't because i am not wearing pants. i made a joke sometimes he was doing his best burt reynolds. >> he extended himself like to show you the length of his body? >> yes. >> was a choking? >> i wish. >> was there a bearskin drug? what happened after that? >> when i went to step around,

i laughed nervously and try to make a joke of it. step around and leave. even though i was moving like i was in a fun house, i felt like i was in slow motion and i thought, i put myself in this bad situation like what did i do? how did i miss read everything? he stood up between me and the door, not threatening, he didn't come at me or put his hands on me or nothing like that. i said, i have to go. i got to go. he said, i thought we were getting somewhere. we were talking and i thought you were serious about what you want to. if you want to get out of that trailer park basically, i was offended because i never lived in a trailer park. >> at this point there are objections and sidebar with the judge. you volunteer here. he was not physically coercing me. >> no. >> are you trying to establish that you did not want to do with

but he wasn't making you do it? >> i didn't want to say it was rape for physical violence or force. also, i could have taken him. >> you said, put myself in this bad situation. what is the badness of the situation? >> i had an x who had these pearls of wisdom. the press will always use the picture of you looking the worst and not the one looking the best. put yourself in a bad situation, bad things happen. he used to say that all the time. don't get in a car with friends who have been drinking. you put yourself in a bad situation. i put myself in a bad situation, but how did i misread it? a friend is wasted in falling down drunk and you get in the

car, you know they are drunk. i thought what q did i miss to told me that when i came out of the bathroom that he was there? >> after the sidebar, the prosecutor said proposed standing up at this time? >> yes. >> what happened next briefly? >> i think i blacked out. here is something i want to say. i think they have a typo here. i didn't say blacked out. they have run with it. if you look at my older interviews where i have the same thing, locked it out. >> blocked it out. you said i think i blocked it out? >> blacked out means i fainted and i never lost consciousness. >> you're next line is i was not drugged. >> people have taken the san run with it. you woke up on the bed? i blocked it out. look at old interviews. i know i have an accent.

i think i blocked it out. i was not drugged and never insinuated i was on drugs. i was not drunk and never said anything of that sort. i just don't remember. >> again, there are objections they happened between the lawyers and the judge. what they are discussing is whether you are implying that you had been drugged. it seems to me what you are trying to say is there are parts of the sexual encounters that i don't remember even now. >> i have to tell you, i did write about this in my book. going over and over with the prosecutors and they were nice people. they tried to be gentle with me. they were asking me the questions over and over because i wanted to make sure they were doing their job correctly and they were probably trying to protect me from how awful the defense although no one could've prepared me for how awful that woman was to me and shamed me or try to. they asked me like horrific,

specific questions like did his tone dart in and out of your mouth. i don't know if you can use this. when he was touching her breast, did he flick a roll or pinch your ? what did his skin feel like? can you describe it? things that would prove when he said he didn't use a condom. what did you do with the . that made me remember things i didn't remember until then. i remember being in the car and having to wipe it off my leg. this is the graphic stuff that's not in the testimony that could've been. as i remembered more of that, it makes me -- it narrows the window of what i remember and do not remember. there is a tiny part i don't. if what i blocked out and they start to remember is so terrible, what am i still not remembering?

>> why do you think you blocked some of it out? >> i mean, i just said. >> protecting you from the memory? >> yeah. i thought there was something wrong with me or i didn't say this because i thought people would say i was lying. you would remember if that happened to you. that was then and as i have gotten older and met people who have gone through similar things or talk to therapist, they say that's a defense mechanism. it's more common for you not to remember these pieces then for you to remember it. it made me feel a little better in a messed up way or a little more normal. but i am not a liar. >> stormy daniels is my guest this evening. we have reached out to the trump campaign to ask for

comment and they have not responded but we will have more in just a moment. >> this is one of the things i had not thought much of.

dealdash.com, online auctions since 2009. this playstation 5 sold for only 50 cents. this ipad pro sold for less than $34. and this nintendo switch, sold for less than $20. go to dealdash.com and see how much you can save.

we are back with more of my interview with stormy daniels. for this section i will reiterate what i said earlier which is this portion of the discussion may not be appropriate for all ages or anyone who does not want to hear relatively broad discussion about unwanted

sexual contact. it's not prurient these details are directly relevant to establishing in front of the jury the relative credibility of ms. daniels in contrast to the credibility of trump's denial. if you do not want to know these details, these are your fair warning. let's go. >> this testimony, obviously, the way the defense reacted was to say it so prejudicial to trump and is not related to the crimes. the jury hasn't needed to hear this. we have to throw it out. the judge allowed it because you having this detailed recollection allows the jury to assess your credibility about whether this happen one trump said it did not happen. for all of us in the world watching you testify, those in the court and everybody who read the transcript, a whole new thing emerged we did not know before which was this kind of feels like he was offering

you a part in the apprentice and you did not into sleep with him and you were pressured into it. it was not that it was rape but it was manipulative. >> it was definitely manipulative and i thought by saying it's not me too and i still have not said that it was. i have still not said it was me too. i never said it was rape because it would open me to that strippers cannot be rape. adult film actresses cannot be raped which is just a step above she deserved it. you have seen so many men in their underwear, you cannot be shocked to see them. you are not expecting it. yeah. >> i am reluctant to do this but if you want to keep going? question. can you briefly describe at some point, did you end up on

the bed having sex? >> yes. >> can you describe where? >> the next thing i know i was on the bed. the opposite side of the bed from where we were standing which is sidebar. how did i get there? there is still missing time. >> you came out of the bathroom . >> you would think i was here but i ended up on the side of the bed by the wall with the window. >> away from the bathroom and you don't know how. >> no. every day i wake up and think is tonight, i don't remember but when i go tonight will i remember these pieces? how terrible is it or maybe it's not? i don't know. somehow on the opposite side of the bed. from where we had been standing. i had my clothes and shoes off and i believe my brawl was still on and we were in missionary position. >> there was some objections

and discussion with the judge. without describing the position, do you remember how you got your clothes off? >> no. >> do you remember how your clothes got up. is at a memory that has not come back? you don't remember, is that correct? >> correct. >> did you have sex with him on the bed? >> yes. >> did you feel something unusual that you have a memory of? i left this objection so you could see it. at this point, trump's lawyer objects and it is sustained and the prosecutor moves on and does not follow up on that but her question was do you have a recollection of feeling something unusual that you have a memory of. do you know what she was asking about? >> about his skin. >> what do you mean? >> this is one of the things that i hadn't thought much of. as they were questioning me, i was in my mid-20s. >> 27. >> i was an adult film actress

which means of people i were performing with were adult actors. young men close to my age who made money off their bodies. i had never touched skin before that felt like that. the word i think i used was creep her creepy. it was so shocking to me that i remember that moment the way it felt. anyway, i think that's what she was asking because i don't think she would've asked directly about his i don't know because there was an objection. >> the prosecutor resumes. what if anything do you remember other than affect you at sex on the bed? >> i was staring at the ceiling. i don't know how i got there. i was trying to think of anything other than what was happening. >> she does explicitly asked

did you touch his skin? >> she was circling back and there were objections. the next thing she asked on the record and the transcript is was he wearing a condom? >> no. >> was a concerning? >> yes. >> did you say anything? >> no. >> why not? >> because i did not say anything at all. >> in the conversation you had with trump ahead of the sexual encounters, you had told him that you worked for wicked entertainment because they were the condo mandatory company. >> my entire career. the only scene you will see that there's not a condom is something that was shot for my personal dish piracy now, for my personal website or whatever. every single movie i ever made for wicked pictures, even if i

was performing on screen with my real life partner, my husband, we even had to use a condom. >> and so the application i draw reading the two parts and doing those things about you is him not wearing a condom was of concern to you and you not saying anything about it is upsetting to you. >> absolutely. if i had gone there with the intention of having sex being an escort are being paid for sex, would've brought my own condom because i am allergic to latex. every scene i've ever done on film or in my personal life if i needed to use a condom, i have to provide my own because i have to use polyurethane. i have never relied on the guy i was on a date with to bring their own condom because he usually bring latex and that makes me feel like i am on fire. >> him not using one and you not saying anything at this point is emblematic at least in your telling of the fact that

you did not neither intent expect for this to be sexually. >> i would've come prepared so i would've been safe. i would not have felt like my genitals were on fire. >> prosecutor continues. do you recall how it ended, the sex? >> yes. >> was a brief? >> yes. >> do you remember getting dressed? >> yes. >> tell us what you recall? >> sitting on the end of the bed noticing it was dark aside now, and it was really hard to get my shoes on. my hands were shaking so hard. i had on tiny little -- they were strep a gold heels with tiny buckles my hands were shaking so hard i was having a hard time getting dressed and he said, let's get to gather again honeybunch. we were great together. i just wanted to leave. >> did you say no at any time? >> no. >> why not?

>> because i didn't say anything at all. >> my conversation with stormy daniels continues right after this. ipad pro sold for less than $34. and this nintendo switch, sold for less than $20. go to dealdash.com and see how much you can save.

what is cirkul? cirkul is what you hope for when life tosses lemons your way. cirkul is your frosted treat with a sweet kick of confidence. cirkul is the effortless energy that gets you in the zone. cirkul, available at walmart and drinkcirkul.com.

dealdash.com, online auctions since 2009. this playstation 5 sold for only 50 cents. this ipad pro sold for less than $34. and this nintendo switch, sold for less than $20. go to dealdash.com and see how much you can save. what is cirkul? cirkul is the fuel you need to take flight. cirkul is the energy that gets you to the next level. cirkul is what you hope for when life tosses lemons your way. cirkul, available at walmart and drinkcirkul.com.

your bruening one of my stand-up jokes. >> we got more to come up my interview with stormy daniels including some of the funny parts. i mentioned earlier we checked her assertions about her unredacted address being listed in court documents will she was on the stand testifying in trump's criminal trial.

it was shown to the lawyers for both sides as well as to the defendant, prosecutors objected to it being admitted into evidence and shown more widely. ms. daniels was correct that a conservative tabloid newspaper, the new york post, published an article that included the name of the town where she lives and photos of her home while she was in the middle of her testimony on the afternoon between the first and second days in which she was on the stand. i want to tell you she mentioned another instance of something similar. >> the dhl driver posted my address online because somebody sent something to my house. they still have not taken it down. i can't believe dhl is allowing it. so those who might use dhl, don't do that because they don't care their employees put your address on the internet. >> we looked into this and she is right again. we were able to confirm a career for dhl who has

contracted to deliver a package to her home posted a photo of the handheld electronic device the carriers use showing her name in the town where the delivery was made. we asked dhl for comment and they did confirm it had happened. they told us dhl can express confirms a career blood by service provider posted a customer's name and partial address on social media after completing a delivery in june. this regrettable violation does not represent our operating standards. we require all service providers handling data to maintain confidentiality. photo showing the partial address has been removed and the courier is no longer assigned to dhl shipments. the photo was removed, but only because and only once we asked about it in order to fact check this interview. is a hallmark of this time in republican politics that anybody who has stood up in any

capacity that is put them at odds with donald trump, anyone, soon finds themselves targeted and threatened by the trump movement. the harassment and the threats follow like clockwork when he singles out his targets for disparagement at israelis and interviews and online. for some of the people who get targeted like members of congress or judges or fbi officials or members of the military, all of whom he singled out for attack, for people who are members of robust institutions like that, the threats and the targeting that come from opposing donald trump, those threats and targeting is terrorizing and scary but maybe less so because folks in those jobs can get help. members of the january 6 committee got additional security from congress. u.s. marshals had to step up security around judges. we have had members of the military move to different u.s. military housing for their own safety for protection from the

kinds of forces that the trump movement unleashes. for individual flesh and blood humans who are not part of some big robust institution, just people, private citizens who nevertheless got cross lies with trump and his movement, where is there help? there is no security detail to call for? is no sergeant looking after their safety. no one on the other side of any panic button. that is true for the jurors in these cases and it's true for the election workers who they have been threatening. it's true for our guest tonight . that should mean something to all of us because part of rejecting violence and intimidation as part of our political system is protecting the individual people who are being subject to it, and that's not happening yet in our country which is a problem. more of my interview with stormy daniels is ahead. ahead.

the moment i met him i knew he was my soulmate. "soulmates." soulmate! [giggles] why do you need me? [laughs sarcastically] but then we switched to t-mobile 5g home internet. and now his attention is spent elsewhere. but i'm thinking of her the whole time. that's so much worse. why is that thing in bed with you? this is where it gets the best signal from the cell tower! i've tried everywhere else in the house! there's always a new excuse. well if we got xfinity you wouldn't have to mess around with the connection. therapy's tough, huh? -mmm. it's like a lot about me. [laughs] a home router should never be a home wrecker. oo this is a good book title.

thank you for being here for this special edition of the rachel maddow show tonight. the republican nominee for president was expected to be sentenced next week. it's now been delayed until september, but that is expected when now he'll be sentenced for his conviction on 34 felony counts. those crimes pertain to his effort to prevent my guest this evening from speaking publicly about a sexual encounter she says she had with him shortly after the start of his current marriage. as you know he was convicted of using his business, of creating false business records to try to disguise a $130,000 payment to my guest tonight so she would not speak publicly before the election about her alleged sexual encounter with him. in this part of my interview with stormy daniels we're going to go through a little bit more of her testimony from the trial but also her elaboration on that testimony explaining what she meant. the criminal charges that were brought in this case were brought because of the means by

which trump, the candidate, tried to cover up and keep secret and disguise the fact that he had paid this woman to keep quiet about this story. her elaboration here is important because what was it about this story that was so worth paying to keep quiet, that was worth with the gymnastic, even baroque efforts he went through to try to cover up that the payments were made? here's stormy daniels. did you notice afterwards a dvd on the side table? >> yes, it was a dvd i'd given him earlier from the gift bag from the show that was on the nightstand that i signed. >> can i stop here for a second. this is a really stupid question, i'm sorry. why does an adult film company sponsor a hole at a golf tournament? is it funny because of the word hole? >> that's one of my stand up jokes. >> here's me toadal prude unable

sitting here hearing them say they sponsored a hole. >> now that you ruined my comedy act i can say it's basically like they brought myself and other stars they brought their own holes to the holes so it's like bringing sand to the beach. thank you. >> here all week. try the veal. so you had given him a dvd because wicked had brought you and other people from the company to this golf tournament. were there lots of other adult film companies at this tournament in. >> no, no, we were the only adult film company but we were in the gift room and sponsoring a hole. they had brought different dvds of the actresses and that one in particular was a movie called three wishes that i wrote, directed, and starred in and he

specifically wanted something i had directed, which is why in my stupidity he thought maybe he really is serious about having me on, you know, "the apprentice." >> because when you met him at the hole on the golf course you sort of immediately started talking about the fact you don't just stars in films, you've also directed. >> right. the owner of the company was introducing everybody that was, you know, there, this is my contract girl such and such, this is my contract girl such and such, this is my publicist, this is contract star and director stormy daniels. and he was like you're a star but also direct. >> and that's when you have a conversation with him about directing and about your role in the business. >> yes, yes. >> and is what you're saying about that when you say, oh, stupid me -- by that you do think that meant his expression

in you as a business director. >> and it was legit and why it wasn't a red flag to have a meeting. and oh, you went to a married guy's hotel room what were you expect something first of all, there's two parts to that. one, nobody knew melania was back then. i didn't know he was married. i know he was famously divorced from his wife because everyone saw that scandal. did anyone in 2006 know melania trump. >> they were married the oprevious year. >> but it wasn't a thing. i didn't know until he told me. second thing when they think of hotel rooms 99% of people have stepped foot in when you walk in and it's a bed and dresser and it's a room. this is a room bigger than my apartment. it had a dining room, living room, two bedrooms.

if you had told me it was a hotel room and i didn't know it was a hotel room, i wouldn't know. it was lying an apartment. someone doesn't think twice about going to a conference suite with a table. i've also gone to a hundred other meetings in rooms exactly like that, but nothing bad happened. >> prosecutor says -- this is almost the end -- when you were leaving and went to leave what, if anything, did you do or say? >> he said we have to get together again soon. he went to kiss me good-bye and i left as far as i could. you know, that was it. >> did he say anything to you about talking again? >> yes. he said we should get together again. we were fantastic together. i want to get you on the show and that was it. he didn't give me anything. he didn't offer to pay me anything or his cellphone

number, nothing like that. >> did he ask you to keep his cellphone confidential? >> no. >> you said it was dark out when you left? >> yes. >> and do you recall how you got back to your hotel? >> it was a cab. >> after that night did you tell anyone else about what happened? >> yes. >> just give us a sense of the people that you told and what you told them. >> i told very few people we had sex because i felt ashamed that i didn't stop it, that i didn't say no. a lot of people would just assume and make jokes out of it. i didn't think it was funny. i didn't want to hear or assume that was a paid prostitute, i didn't want it to get back to anybody that i was dating. >> this is a situation where you thought there might be a legit business reason to talk to this man who's more than twice your age who you had no intention of sleeping with. he turned it into a sexual

encounter, you did not want it, and you did not feel good about it, and you were embarrassed about it when it was over. >> yeah. >> having to recount this in detail in order to rebut his characterization of you as a liar, even though you've told this story in a lot of different venues and you've told this under oath, this is the testimony from the trial, it seems this is still not an easy thing to talk about. >> no. because i have to do it over and over and over and over. and i think about how hard this must be for a rape victim, like somebody who was physically like -- at least they just get to say it once hopefully in court to a prosecutor and don't get to read about it every day. i just feel so terrible for those people. now i understand why a lot of people never come forward. when woo ewe come back stormy daniels talks about why it is this fight, this

confrontation with trump means she is now not making a living and why an action by trump's lawyers right now has she believes put her in imminent risk of losing her home and of possibly having an arrest warrant issued for her. that's next. g an arrest warrant issued for her that's next. >> you could be the biggest trump supporter, a woman voting for trump and ask that woman did you ever vote for trump, do you love trump, yeah. how do grow feel about him having your young daughter's legal name, address and identifying information? legal n identifying information?

what is cirkul? cirkul is what you hope for when life tosses lemons your way. cirkul is your frosted treat with a sweet kick of confidence. cirkul is the effortless energy that gets you in the zone. cirkul, available at walmart and drinkcirkul.com. it's hard to run a business on your own. make it easier on yourself. with shopify, you can have your inventory, payments, and customers in sync across all the places you sell. start your journey with to duckduckgo on all your devie duckduckgo comes with a built-n engine like google, but it's pi and doesn't spy on your searchs and duckduckgo lets you browse like chrome, but it blocks cooi and creepy ads that follow youa from google and other companie. and there's no catch. it's fre. we make money from ads, but they don't follow you aroud join the millions of people taking back their privacy by downloading duckduckgo on all your devices today.

z's baking the house special. join the millions of people arisa's styling a new look. and steve's filling his biggest order ever. with the first ever comcast business five-year price lock guarantee, these business owners get five years of value on gig speed internet and advanced security. all from the company with 99.9% network reliability. so now they can focus on doing what they do best for the next five years. that's a lot of bread. you got this. the comcast business five-year price lock guarantee. switch today for a limited time. when you say you paid to come up here, you paid yourope expenses to testify? >> yes, of course, multiple times. i wasn't like compensated or written a check or anything like that. i got nothing, and this has cost me so much money. i wasn't paid by anybody. >> we're back to my interview with stormy daniels. i want to let you know that mrs. daniels was not paid for this

interview. we do not do that under any circumstances. we also came to learn over the course of preparing for this interview and reporting out the circumstances in which we were going to be discussing these matters with her -- we came to learn she is in fairly dire financial circumstances because of her confrontation with trump as evidenced by the fact that she recently asked a friend, a man named dwayne crawford, to open an emergency gofundme campaign to try to pay the attorneys fees she has incurred, and as she tries to hold onto her house. for that part of it i'm going to let ms. daniels here explain. so the case that in which you just testified was a criminal case brought by prosecutors. you were subpoenaed to be just as a witness. the reason you owe trump money is a separate matter. your former lawyer, michael avenatti, now in prison for defrauding you and other clients, brought a defamation

suit by trump by you and that case was thrown out and trump was awarded attorneys fees. and that totals -- to make a long story short it totals about $6,040 you need to pay trump. >> for all those people out there saying you lost a defamation case because they found you to be a liar or not truthful never looked at the case. e. jean carroll was called the exact same things by donald trump, and not only did they accept her case and let her take the stand and let her have her day in court, they've given her millions. meanwhile my attorneys fees have wracked up to over half a million dollars. >> do you have any means of paying that? >> no. nor do i think i should. it's not fair. >> in terms of what happens next, judge merchan lifted the

gag order, so he's still prohibited from attacking court staff and prosecutors and their families, but he's now free to attack jurors and witnesses, which means you. >> right. >> when the gag order was in place did you benefit from that at all? are you worried about it being lifted? >> no. i mean he's going to say what he's going to say anyway. i'm not afraid what he could say about me or what he could call me. i'm telling the truth. i'm the only one who has continued to tell the truth. i can prove everything i've ever said, so i'm not concerned about those things he might say. i'm concerned of him saying something that will make his followers come after me more. >> has that changed over time the character, the kind of language? how has it changed over time? >> the biggest thing is they're not hiding. they used to all be bots. now they're using their real

stuff. there's facebook threads of people in my own community planning to do things to my house and my family. i sent some messages over -- when barrett was on another show, and they couldn't even air everything they said, the graphic details about how they were going to rape everybody in my family including my young daughter before they killed them, very graphic things talking about a child. and most importantly, like, trump is trying to make -- i believe trying to make an example out of me of anybody who dare stand up to him. and was served again yesterday -- sorry, the day before yesterday, and they're trying to take my partner's house. it has nothing to do with me. technically he's got a mortgage, the bank owns it. i don't own that house. i play rent every month because i split bills with him, but i don't own it. my name is not on the title. i didn't put any money on the

house. they're trying to take his house. they're demanding personal information about my 13-year-old daughter. i refuse to fill out that form. >> identifying information about her. >> yes. where she lives, her legal name, date of birth. like why do you need that about a child? so i didn't fill out that part of the form, they left it blank. and they rejected it and sent it back and are demanding i be held in contempt with sanctions and that i have to pay this money. i have to pay $600,000 plus sanctions and contempt of court, which comes with a warrant possibly -- >> an arrest warrant. >> because i -- the things i said which they found him guilty of i also have to pay, and i'm protecting my child. and you could be the biggest trump supporter, a woman voting for trump. ask that woman have you ever voted for trump, do you love trump, yeah. how do you feel about him having your young daughter's legal name, address, and identifying

information? >> yeah. >> no woman out there i can imagine would give that information up. they got my address, look how quickly that happened. you think i'm going to give up the other address, because sometimes she's with me obviously and sometimes she's with her father. why would i do that. >> there's two impalss now in terms of that money and the resolution of that defamation case and you paying the legal fees. one is you don't have the money to pay, but two is they want you as part of that to give over that identifying information about your daughter. >> even if i had the money, even if i had billions, it's not fair. why do i have to pay it? and i'm so happy for e. jean carroll, but like literally the same three sentences like liar, whack job, con job, whatever, she gets over 80 million, and it costs me over $600,000, it's going to cost my partner it's house. it's going to cost my daughter her privacy for the rest of her

life? it's not fair. >> i feel like, stormy, the trump movement has destroyed or tried to destroy a lot of people for posing a threat to donald trump or a challenge to him. and there are as you've been describing millions of americans if not tens of millions of americans who have a rooting interest in all these various efforts to confront him and expose his behavior and hold him accountable for crimes or treachery or whatever. but the rooting interests doesn't help you, right? more than half the country is rooting for him being held accountable, the people who are actually in the middle of these confrontations are being terrorized and menaced and ruined. and overall, this system -- i'm sorry to put this to you, but i feel like the system is unsustainable unless the real live human people who are willing to stand up and be counted and speak the truth against him are themselves

protected. >> you can be me. >> yes. >> we could all be me. like anybody out there. they're trying to seize property of people that i care about, that's not even mine to scare me. they're trying to ruin my daughter's life before she even has a chance to live it, and they're trying to financially ruin me and take money because i told the truth. and i shouldn't have to do that. and i've never asked for help before. i've been fighting this by myself. even the people closest to me, my best friends, my partners, everyone else can take a break. you know, my best friend duane has been my tour manager, my assistant, he's lived td the most with me, but even he gets to take breaks. he gets to get on a plane and go home and take his kids and his family to disneyland and not think about it. i am the only person that every single day for the last six years this has bled into my life. some days worse than others,

some days i'm picking pellets out of my horse's body and getting served papers and sobbing because i miss my daughter and she's not safe and she's with me sometimes. and some days it's just things i read on the internet. but every single day -- you live this and you tell the story, even you, rachel, there's been times you get to check out at least for a minute. i've never had a day like that in six years. >> your work life has been severely curtailed by this, changed. you've still got some stuff doing. you've been doing comedy events. >> i just came back to that last week. the same thing, the owner of the club got death threats. >> really? >> i'm from new orleans and she didn't care, but how many places out there are afraid to book me? >> how are you going to make. money to leave? >> i'm not. literally between legal fees and not being able to work --

especially because i wasn't working during -- remember the trial got pushed, so i'd taken off a bunch of time before and it got extended, so there were some months i didn't do anything. i stop doing my podcast because they were freaking out about everything i said. i didn't to create more work for the prosecution basically or i didn't want to be taken off the witness list for all the reasons i told you earlier. there's so many things, people being just afraid to hire me. like i do have some really great people. i host a tv show and i've started to go back and do some standup comedy and things like that, but i've lost a lot more than i've made, mostly my peace, mostly my daughter's privacy and time, time i'll never get back with her. >> given that, are you worried about trump potentially being elected to a second term?

>> shouldn't we all be worried about that? >> are you worried about it particularly for you? >> yes. >> why? >> because i think that he will make -- try to make even more than example out of me, you know? and also because people -- his followers will probably be even more bold thinking if they do something, he'll pardon them. >> in terms of his own criminal liability he's due to be sentenced very soon. you said shortly after the verdict that you thought he should be sentenced to jail and community service, working for the lass fortunate or, quote, being the volunteer punching bag at a women's shelter. do you still feel that way? >> no, i mean money is no object to him. for somebody else taking a bunch of money could definitely teach him a lesson. in his case his supporters are going to throw it at him. and we're talking about a man

who got convicted of 34 -- and in one night how much was it? like $130 million was given to him when he was found guilty? fighting him is not going to do any good. i think, you know, taking away his control slash, which is freedom by a jail sentence if that's what fits it because he's so used to being in control. it's not about lock him up and take him away. i think it's about control would be more helpful in this case, i think. and making him do some community service especially with those people he looks down upon so much. >> on the issue that was just mentioned there of a potential arrest warrant for ms. daniels and the contempt of court review that's being sought by trump's lawyers, we have confirmed that there is an august 7th court hearing on these matters. as you heard from her a few

moments ago, ms. daniels says she is not able to pay the $600,000 she has been ordered to pay. she's concerned about providing documents in the case that require her to reveal personal information about her daughter. her lawyers have asked for a confidentiality agreement before she hands over that information. trump's lawyer told the judge that ms. daniels should have to hand over the information now and then afterwards she can ask the court for a confidentiality agreement. the court actually sided with trump and his lawyers on that. on her gofundme page tonight ms. daniels just posted this. quote, disinformation is not only a violation of a child's privacy but has the potential of very real and immediate danger. in response to her own doxing and fearing for her daughter's safety, stormy declined to provide those details unless a confidentiality agreement was granted. no mother should be force today choose between protecting her innocent child and contempt. we have reached out to the counsel that's representing mr.

trump in this matter. we've reached out to him for comment. we have not heard back. we will let you know what we do hear if we do hear from him. but we'll be back with the conclusion of my exclusive interview with stormy daniels right after this. >> but you're worried you would have -- >> gone stormy. have -- >> gone stormy

what is cirkul? cirkul is the fuel you need to take flight. cirkul is the energy that gets you to the next level. cirkul is what you hope for when life tosses lemons your way. cirkul, available at walmart and drinkcirkul.com.

so in the middle of your testimony put with you not in the room because there was a recess, the judge calls the

lawyers up. and judge merchan says to todd blanche, trump's defense lawyer, i understand your client is upset at this point, but he is cursing audibly and he is shaking his head visually and that's contemptuous. it has the potential to intimidate the witness, which is you, and the jury can see that. mr. blanche, i can see that. i will talk to him. the judge, you need to speak to him. i will not tolerate that. mr. blanche, i will talk to him. the judge, one time i noticed when ms. daniels was testifying about rolling up the magazine and presumably smacking your client and after that point he shook his head and looked down, and later i think he was looking at you, mr. blanche. later when we were talking about the "the apprentice" i think he uttered a vulgarity. please talk to him at the break. did you see that, did you notice

it in the courtroom? >> i tried not to look at him because i just wanted to stay on point. not because i was afraid. one is i was -- and i probably shouldn't admit this. i also have -- if i had noticed -- if i had seen or heard him saying like she's lying, i don't know if i could have controlled myself. >> what would you have done? >> who knows. i don't know if i just -- i shouldn't have had to be there. no person shouldn't have had to be there. and to have him in open court when we're trying to follow the rules and be respectful he's still disrespecting me and still calling me a liar. i might have snapped and said something back, and that's what he wanted. >> so you wouldn't have been intimidated. >> oh, no. >> but you're worried you would have -- >> gone stormy. because i am not the same naive young girl that was in that

room. >> what could the justice system and what could the people of this country have done better for you? what could have been done differently to give you more support see that this would not have caused the kind of ruination in your life it has caused am. >> i should have been allowed to present my case like e. jean carroll was, the defamation case because i would not be facing a $600,000 judgment right now because i would have won. i absolutely would have won. i don't want millions. i don't need that. i need to not owe him and be able to have peace and be able to work. now they have doxed me because of this situation, i need a safe place for my family and my animals. and i don't know if i will ever have that because it just keeps happening. >> what you have experienced is something that is absolutely individual to you, but it is also part of a pattern of people

who confront trump or tell the truth about trump that hurt him because they don't reflect on him well. people get destroyed, and there's something wrong with us as a country for not being able to protect you when you've done nothing wrong. i cannot apologize to you on behalf of the country. that's my job, but i want you and your family's life to be better than it is, and i want you to have more protection than you have, and i hope you can get it. >> thank you. and i am prepared. this is my hill to die on, and i will potentially lose everything and maybe be arrested because i'm not giving up my daughter's personal information. and if that means i am in contempt of court, i have done everything. i have shown up to court, i've told the truth, i've honored the subpoena. i've done everything they've asked me to do, and they have not protected me. and this is my one thing, this is my line in the sand. this is my little girl. >> good luck. >> thank you.

>> thanks, stormy. >> they have not protected me. and this is the one thing, this is my line in the sand, this is my little girl. >> you know, this interview surprised me in so many ways, but where i landed on with this in these conversations with ms. daniels is at this very simple place, which is that no one is super human, right? our real life villians are not super human. we sometimes make them out be, they're not. they're human beings with every frailty and decency that every human being is born with. but our real life heroes aren't super heroes either. and stormy daniels certainly she is a symbol, she is a brand name, she's a indelible and consequential proper noun in american history, right? she's someone who will always be part of this crucible, this sort

of trial by fire of the american principle that every american is subject to the rule of law. she is also a mom, right? she's also just a woman, and she has had six years of death threats and doxing. and she is facing losing her house and is facing potential arrests on contempt charges for not -- after all of that, for not handing over personal identifying information about her 13-year-old daughter. we checked that assertion from ms. daniels as well. looking at the court documents related to this case she is facing contempt of court -- the possible ruling that she's in contempt of court, which comes with a possible arrest warrant, and she is facing it because she is not filling out a document that is demanding that she hand over identifying information about her daughter including where her daughter can be found.

her daughter is 13. she says she won't do it, and so what will happen to her? who's protecting her? she's not part of any institution that has any sort of institutional defense. she's just a citizen. and no one is super human, but you should not need to be super human in this country to tell the truth about a powerful person. i've got more ahead. stay with us. rful person i've got more ahead. stay with us llywood white smile. new sensodyne clinical white provides 2 shades whiter teeth and 24/7 sensitivity protection. i think it's a great product. it's going to help a lot of patients.

what is cirkul? cirkul is what you hope for when life tosses lemons your way. cirkul is your frosted treat with a sweet kick of confidence. cirkul is the effortless energy that gets you in the zone. cirkul, available at walmart and drinkcirkul.com.

what is cirkul? cirkul is the fuel you need to take flight. cirkul is the energy that gets you to the next level. cirkul is what you hope for when life tosses lemons your way. cirkul, available at walmart and drinkcirkul.com.

it's hard to run a business on your own. make it easier on yourself. with shopify, you have everything you need to sell online and in person. you can have your inventory, payments, and customers in sync across all the places you sell. it doesn't have to be lonely at the top. join the millions to finding success on their own terms. start your journey with a free trial today.

what i'm saying is that her story is messingy, made some people uncomfortable to hear, probably made some of you, meaning the jury, uncomfortable to hear, but that's the point. that's the display the defendant didn't want the american voter to see. in simplest terms stormy daniels is the motive. that is why your testimony was not just an amazing display but also american history the way it fits into this. do you agree with the way they characterized you in this case? >> the prosecution? >> the way he's saying your testimony functioned and the way it was relevant to this crime? >> yes, absolutely. >> stormy daniels is the motive why the crimes were committed. as the prosecution said, her story is in many instances uncomfortable to hear. she describes it as uncomfortable to recount, but it is now indelibly etched into our

american history. it is central to the first ever criminal conviction of an american president. its details were recounted in court and they themselves are a somewhat searing insight into the personal behavior of an american president, but also she's an indelible part of american history here because the targeting of her as a result of her testimony, her confrontation of him, the targeting of her because she is viewed by president trump as one of her enemies because of this testimony. the story of what's happened to her because she has told the truth in this case, because she has testified in this case is a harrowing story of the kind of menace, the kind of physical menace that the trump movement uses against their perceived enemies. and that is one thing when it is directed at people who are in

relatively safe positions of power with resources and with structures around them that can protect them from the worst. it's something else when it's just an atomized human out there in the world trying to cope alone. and the targeting of the people who are hurt by and menaced the most by the trump movement is something we have not yet figured out ohow to defend against as a country, and it is not going to get better on its own. joining us now is michael beschloss, nbc news presidential historian. mr. beschloss, michael, it is really nice of you to be with us here tonight. thank you so much for making the time. >> thank you. >> let me ask your reaction to this interview. this is the first u.s. interview she's done after the trial. we thought the trial was done. maybe it isn't now, but as a historian looking at this what you think of it. >> well, she's a brave woman, and i don't want to tie her immediately to early american

history, but i almost can't help but do it because the founders and the early americans, we fought for independence from england so we'd have a system unlike england. no one could ever stand up to the king. you couldn't criticize the king without destroying your life. the whole idea of america was that this would be a society where we would benefit from everyone's criticism. so the founder said the humblest person could stand up to the president of the united states or criticize him, say that he'd done things wrong. he might not like it, but that person would not have their lives destroyed, and that's what's happened to stormy daniels, and obviously something has fallen short, and it may be even worse now given the ruling of the supreme court yesterday that's going to make the power imbalance between american presidents and our most modest citizens, that power imbalance is now probably tripled in the

last two days. >> i've been thinking a lot about that ruling in light of this interview. it seems to me and you've studied these things in much more in-depth than i do, but i've always felt the sort of genius of the basic idea of the united states and our constitutional republic is that we recognize the rights of man, the naturally given rights of man. and we have setup a government that is to protect our rights, to protect our rights from each other and particularly from a ruler, from a government that would infringe on our rights. and this supreme court ruling is about taking away our protections, taking away our rights to protect ourselves against a ruler who has just had his rights expanded so that he can do stuff to us with

impunity, and we can no longer defend ourselves against it. and i think of it in terms of the congress, and i think of it in terms of the judiciary and all the institutions of our civic life, but when i think about it as individual atomized humans, flesh and blood, it feels like a complete inversion of the overall idea of american right and the american ideal. >> yes, it's the supreme court is taking us backwards in that respect. you and i have talked a lot about watergate, and one good result of the watergate scandal and nixon's departure and the reform laws that were passed by congress later on, the idea was that we would never again have a situation that applied to too many presidents between 1930 and 1974 where they abuse the irs, they abuse the fbi. they use the power of government

to go after columnists that criticized them or people who got in their way. they would have, you know, bank executives in the hometown of the person who had done this go after the person and take their mortgage away. it's what stormy daniels was reminding me of when she was telling about how much she has gone through. the point is that we should have a judicial system, a supreme court that protects the weak, not the strong. instead, in the last 48 hours the supreme court through its non-wisdom in my view, has decided to give even power to the strongest in the society, the president of the united states, and also other strong people around that person. that's not the way it's supposed to be. it's not progress. >> yeah. and it is something we need to compensate for as a country. if the courts are not going to do it, then we have to find other ways as a civic entity to

protect the people among us who are in the most -- >> because our government will trample on our liberties and do corrupt things, and no one will be able to stand up to it. >> yeah. michael beschloss, nbc news presidential historian, thank you for this perspective. thank you for being here tonight. it's a pleasure to have you here, michael. >> thank you. me too, rachel. thank you. >> after the supreme court's ruling on that immunity case this week, trump and his counsel did move quickly to try to get his 34 felony convictions in new york thrown out. trump was set to be sentenced for those convictions next week, but today the judge in the new york case announced he'll delay sentencing until september. and i want to show you the letter judge merchan wrote to the attorneys in this case announcing it. he said, quote, the matter is adjourned to september 18, 2024, at 10:00 a.m. for the imposition of sentence, quote, if such is still necessary. when he says, if such is still

necessary what he means is if the supreme court's decision doesn't effectively wipeout that jury's unanimous guilty verdict against trump on 34 felony counts, it's an open question. joining us now is catherine christian, former assistant district attorney in the manhattan d.a.'s office. ms. christian, thank you so much for being here. appreciate your time. >> glad to be here. >> let me first ask you this interview with stormy daniels tonight we set this in motion when we believe it's over. now cleary it's not. with the sentencing delay and the judge throwing out the motion given what happened at the supreme court, i have to ask you is there anything about this interview, about ms. daniels talking publicly about her testimony, which could still have any bearing on the trial or and the way it resolves? >> no, i don't think so. so the proceedings aren't over

because of the sentencing but the her trial is over because her testimony and she's a free agent. she added additional detail but nothing really that will harm the case. >> if judge merchan does entertain -- he is going to entertain this motion from the defense to set aside the verdict, would the new york district attorney's office then have the option of re-trying the case and using a different selection of evidence to try to prove the same criminal charges but without reference to official acts by trump? >> well, assuming that judge merchan grants the moegds to set aside the verdict, which he probably shouldn't because i don't believe these are official acts the tweets, the testimony. but assuming he did then the case would have to be re-tried, and then the d.a.'s office would

obviously exclude those tweets, those, the hope hicks testimony if the judge were to decide those official acts, which i don't think he will. but if he did, they would have to re-try it without that. the reality is if you exclude that testimony, there is a mounten of evidence that points to guilt, so you wouldn't need that evidence. and that would be the argument, quite frankly, the d.a. is going to make in their response to this motion to set aside the verdict, that there was nothing prejudicial if they were deemed official acts, if you took them out, there's still a mountain of evidence. >> so the way that would work and forgive my ignorance on this, not a lawyer. but if some of the evidence was determined or was argued some of that evidence was relevant to his official acts as president, you couldn't extraicate that evidence and leave the jury's

verdict intact. you would need to re-present all the evidence minus those things to a new jury and get a new verdict. you'd have to go through from day one again. >> i don't think so. i think judge merchan if he were to determine these were official acts -- and i'll say again i don't think they're official acts. but if he were to determine that, he could also determine, you know what, there was such a mountain of evidence, even if you took these acts out, the jury would have still found -- find guilt. often cases are reversed on appeal because prejudicial evidence was in that was so prejudicial it denied the defendant the right to a fair trial. the court of appeals in new york reversed harvey weinstein's conviction on this. >> harmless error. we all have to learn -- the trump era in american politics we all have to learn to be

mini lawyers. we all have to learn all the jargon, all the language. we have to learn how all these things work. you shouldn't have to learn this much criminal law to follow politics, but that's where we are. catherine christian, former attorney in the planeten d.a.'s office, i appreciate you being here tonight to put these pieces together. we'll be right back. stay with us. es together we'll be right back. stay with us

all right, that's going to do it for me tonight for the special edition of the rachel maddow show. appreciate you having me here on a night i'm not usually here. i was really glad to have you with us. i would say that the input from my constituents has been 10-1 in favor of replacing president biden