trump firmly said he pleads not guilty the prosecutors handed over the indictment they said it was unsealed at 1:30 in describing the indictment, they said that mr. trump tried to conceal a conspiracy and undermine the 2016 election, to identify and suppress negative information. this was covert and illegal payments at mr. trump's direction, directed to michael cohen, and the purpose was to suppress this affair and this negative information he paid cohen, and in doing so, he falsified those business re records. he falsified it as cash, was concealing the -- the -- another crime, a more serious crime. the prosecutor went on to say that mr. trump has made recent threatening emails and speeches,

both directed at new york city, and courts here in new york, and justice system, and the district attorney's office. he said that these are irresponsible social media posts, threatened death and destruction, and even world war iii. he said that these public statements to the district attorney, which included a photo of him swinging a baseball bat towards the district attorney's h head, was very concerning. they're concerned about this and what effect it will have on potential jurors and witnesses but they said this will not dissuade the office, and they're seeking a protective order regarding discovery materials. they're very concerned that some of the attorneys some of this may be leaked or that president trump himself would use some of that discovery in a way that would compromise a potential trial. they began discussing conditions of release

they talked about how defense attorney joe tacopina had communications with stormy daniels and that could present a conflict in response, todd blanch, representing mr. trump, said that the people just spoke for ten minutes. they haven't seen discovery. they talk about michael cohen, and michael cohen had been standing on the steps of this courthouse, revealing all kinds of material that would be relevant in a trial. mr. trump has -- mr. trump has -- sorry, i'm just being moved here they say that mr. trump has responded forcefully and clearly. he's very upset. he's frustrated. and he believes that this is an injustice. in hearing that's going on right now, the judge said that he's taking the rhetoric and the language he's using and he's very concerned about it. blanch said, well, this is free

speech he talked about the investigator mark pomeranz -- i'm going to have to toss it back to you, lester >> all right, adam,just to be clear. sorry. just to be clear, these charges would be felonies then, because he's citing the campaign violation perhaps, finance violation. >> i believe they're misdemeanors 34 counts of falsifying in the first degree i would defer to laura >> yeah, actually -- >> falsifying in the first-degree, that's a felony. >> that means we can define that -- >> we just got an awful lot of information from adam reiss who was inside that courtroom, and we are just hearing that these

34 counts, including falsifying business reports are felonies. we got a lot of other information that we heard from adam reiss from via the district attorney he tries to undermine the 2016 election, that he tried to suppress the affair, and in p paying michael cohen, he falsified business records but also interesting that he talked about the threatening speeches and social media, which he calls irresponsible -- death and destruction and world war iii. what is your takeaway, ari melber, from what we just heard from adam reiss in that courtroom? >> thanks to our colleague adam who was phoned in from wherever he could get to. what's striking is this is not the narrowest possible fact pattern. we need to see the unsealed indictment, but to answer your question, breaking news, what we heard from adam, i would call it

me medium it includes campaign conspiracy. again, according to mr. reiss, it includes the business records, the theory of the case that this was falsified, it was mistreated as cash, that that was a knowing lie. interestingly, mr. cohen made tapes where donald trump makes a reference to cash, so they may feel they may have contemporaneous material beyond the checks raises the question, what election, what charge? i'm not going to speculate on the statute, but in an hour we may have it, and i have fine lawyers sitting beside us who may do that. lastly before we hand it off to the panel, i'll mention the threats in the court on the d.a. it's a question many raised. anyone else dong this thug activity i use that word quite specifically and thuggishly bringing in the d.a.'s wife and thuggishly posting a picture a weapon

above and beyond everything else donald trump has said and his promises for pardons for violence insurrectionists, you would expect there to have been that raised immediately. i think it is striking and notable it was i'd love to look at that full transcript we'd love to look at full information buck those are highlights. >> andrea i want to go to you, but at some point we'll hear from alvin bragg, so he'll be asked questions in bringing this indictment go ahead, andrea. >> i want to elaborate on something mentioned by adam reiss, which is in that colloquy between the prosecutor, the assistant d.a., the judge, and the defense, there was also the issue of the -- of course as ari was just saying, this issue of the threats, threatening social media posts. when the defense lawyer says that was because donald trump was -- mr. trump was frustrated

and responding forcibly, the judge said he was concerned. and i think it's really interesting that adam said that he was asking that the prosecution is asking for a protective orderon discovery let's listen to more from adam reiss. >> and that this was aiding and concealing the concession of another crime. and again, as i said, they went on to say they were very concerned. he wasn't afraid to bring up the threatening emails, posts, and statements that president trump has been making, both against the city, the court, the justice system, including the d.a.'s office they're very concerned not only for their own safety, but for the influence of a potential witness or a juror the social media posts that threatened death and destruction and world war iii, the public statements he's been making, the

picture of him swinging a baseball bat towards d.a. bragg's head, they're very concerned about these and the potential effect on jurors and witnesses. but again, he said this won't dissuade the office. they're seeking the protective order. we'll have to see what the judge decides on that as well as conditions of release. they want him to be warned about his statements and as i mentioned earlier, they're concerned that tacotacoa his attorney joe tacopina has communications with stormy daniels and he'll likely not be able to cross examine her if she becomes a witness. that's certainly a conflict of interest. >> adam, i'm wonder field goal you can clarify if the judge has a response to what you're talking about, the fact that some of the threats have been brought up not just against the prosecutor's office but the judge himself. i also want to check -- i think i heard you say todd blanch

spoke for donald trump so donald trump did not say the words not guilty, is that correct? >> donald trump said not guilty, very firmly, but todd blanch was speaking on behalf of the defense. in terms of the judge, he said we're taking the rhetoric and language donald trump is using very seriously. >> danny >> adam reiss, our nbc news producer who is inside that courtroom. and we were sharing resources within nbc news, so forgive us for that he did say again that donald trump was the one to plead not guilty inside that courtroom i do want to go back, andrew weissman, to this question of what the prosecutors are looking for, some sort of relief not necessarily a gag order, but that they made a point to mention that donald trump has been threatening prosecutors, threatening the judge, posted that photo of him with a

baseball bat next to alvin bragg's face, worried and concerned about what it will do to a potential jury. and this is a conversation that we have had in the past. if you are somebody that is picked to be on a jury for a trial including donald trump, would you feel safe being on that jury? and say, yeah, the government might sequester you, might hide your identity, whatever, but can you feel confident that donald trump or his team might not talk about your identity or release details about your identity or do something that might in some way threaten your own life so how does the judge handle that given the history of this particular defendant >> katie, let's just take a step back for a moment and just understand the nature of the question, which is you're asking about threats to a jury if you are trying to former president

of the united states because you're concerned about the conduct by the former president or his allies. i mean, it is a breathtaking conversation to have when you step back for a moment this issue that you raised is one judge louis kaplan, the federal judge over the e. jean carroll case that's going to happen in less than a month in new york had to deal with when he said he was going take steps to protect that jury, and that's in a civil case. but the same thing is going to happen in this criminal case and any future criminal cases. these are steps that are routinely taken in organized crime cases, where you have those types of defendants. so, the courts are capable and able to protect jurors, and jurors riseto the occasion in

those very difficult circumstances, but it is a breathtaking concept that this is something that you have to worry about. i should say that now that we're hearing about these being felony accounts, it does suggest, as i mentioned, an enormous sort of face in the part of the district attorney, and the other is we're getting some information that the theory of the case for why these are felonies goes beyond campaign finance and includes tax charges. and i think the relevance a that is that it leads to it being on a stronger footing there's a lot of people who have issues about whether a federal crime can be the so-called bump up to get something from a misdemeanor to a felony, and there's concern about if it's campaign finance at the state level, whether that's a preempted crime, meaning that it's not really allowed because this is really about a federal election but if there are tax charges --

state tax charges, that seems like the d.a. is trying to really make sure that they have a number of different grounds so that if there's a motion to dismiss, there's really no way all of this -- the case may get narrowed, but it's not going to all go away. >> if i could just pick up on that i'm going to do something i don't normally do. i'm going to tentatively disagree with my friend ari. you said on the options small, medium, or large set of charges here -- i think that this is large. base on everything we're hearing about, viewed against the range of things we have been hearing about for the last two weeks -- so, if everything here is a felony, there's nothing charged as a misdemeanor, if it's not just about stormy daniels but also another woman, presumably karen mcdougal, and if the enhancement is not just campaign finance violation, but tax, that's pretty much going to 11

set of options that the district attorney had available to him. i'm not aware of much else in the discussion up to this point of a charge or a theory that bragg could have brought that we're not hearing is actually in this. >> so, what is your question for alvin bragg if you are at that press conference, which you think he's going to have >> he would never answer it, but i want to know, what changed >> hmm. >> you know, this was something that you had put the brakes on earlier. everyone thought this was dead except for one guy who's with us, andrew weissman who wrote a piece saying this thing isn't dead, might be on a pause, but it could come back one person who thought this was still going on bragg obviously did think something was going on something changed. and that's what i want to know there's two ways of reading that one is, well, it's him being political. that's the trump story that, he

basically killed this investigation and them to make his name or something like, that revived it the other is, he was doing his job as a cautious prosecutor he had memos from mark pomeranz and others which weren't credible but future prosecutors, new prosecutors came online, including someone from the u.s. justice department, matthew colanguage low, and they looked at it and said, there's something very serious here, and there's a viable legal theory to get us here. >> i welcome neal's thoughts we're going to do this throughout the day and get indictments. i was at an initial medium he's at a large. andrew weissman always goes supersized ask enron or the mafia or any of his defendants we're going to watch for how many tentacles are there to neal's point, whether tax and conspiracies come in, that may be more difficult for trump and his lawyers to deal with.

>> andrea? >> joyce vance, let's talk about your take -- small, medium, or large? if you've got tax cases involved here, conspiracy and tax, and you know, fraudulent business filings, you're going pretty large. >> i think it is going big and to the point that was being made before people knew what was in the indictment, there were a lot of complaints, many of them motivated by politics, saying that this was an insignificant indictment, that it was just about some records keeping violations i'm sure this becomes more clear when we see the unsealed indictment, but knowing that there is a significant number of felony charges, that it's more expansive than stormy daniels, that begins to give aus a pictue of the work that was done here i have the same question as neal has. i'm interested to know what changes. but having been a prosecutor 25

years, having been involved in many extensive grand jury investigations, i can tell you sometimes when witnesses get in front of the grand jury and begin answering questions, new facts, unexpected facts can come to light or you can begin to see existing facts through a different filter and you begin to appreciate that when defendants begin to engage in conduct together, there are multiple crimes. the conduct that they're engaging in can amount to more than just one crime, and so from what we're hearing early on about this indictment, it sounds like something that will withstand scrutiny. >> i wonder if i could jump in on joyce's point this is andrew one of the things our newest anchor jen psaki, her interview on sunday of the prior d.a., the d.a. who stepped down and ended his term in december of 2021 just before alvin bragg took

over in january of 2022, her interview gave some evidence as to help understand joyce's excellent point, which is in her interview she was asking about that, and cyrus vance confirmed that when he left office, that the cases that he was doing, that they were investigating, the financial case into donald trump, this hush money case, were not ready, that they were still investigating. so you really get the sense that when d.a. bragg took over and said, you know what? he toll me the investigation, that year-plus period is one where they continued digging, as a good prosecutor would to make sure you've look at all witnesses and all possible documents. >> and a quick question to adam reiss who's now on the phone with us, our nbc producer. was there an outcome to the request for protective order to the judge?

>> there was not while i was there, but i can brief you on what was said from both sides inside the courtroom if you like when i left there was no decision on the request by the prosecutors. >> yeah, go ahead, adam, tell us what happened. >> chris conroy, acting as prosecutor, talked about the 34 counts said this was in order to conceal a conspiracy and undermine the 2016 election, that this was an effort to identify and suppress negative information. these were covert and illegal payments made at the direction and to the benefit of donald j. trump. the purpose was to suppress the affair, the alleged affair with stormy daniels he paid cohen by using false business records, falsified cash and concealed the concession of

another crime. the prosecutor chris conroy went on, he talked about their concern about threats, the threats that president trump has made to the city of new york, to the -- in new york, to the justice system, and even to the d.a.'s office. they're very concerned about the irresponsible social media posts, that he threatened death and destruction and even used the term world war iii these threats were directed, the public statements were directed at the district attorney here. he mentioned the photograph of former president trump using a baseball bat towards the district attorney. they're very concerned they would like some kind of order given by the judge to force president trump to stop these. concerned about the effect it could have on potential jurors or witnesses but he did say they're seeking that protective order, and that also includes discovery

materials. they want conditions of his release. they want to judge to make warnings they talked about defense attorney joe tacopina and his weighs years ago with stormy daniels and how that could pose a conflict of sinterest as we move towards a trial he wouldn't be able to cross examine her. whether or not he can stay on the defense team is another thing. todd blanch stood up and spoke and said, the people just talked for ten minutes. we haven't seen discovery. he talk about michael cohen speaking on the steps of the courthouse every time he meets with prosecutor he is announces all the charges. he said that donald trump has responded forcefully, yes, he has, but he's upset, frustrated. he believes this is an injustice. the judge responded by saying we're taking this rhetoric be the language that former

president trump is using seriously. blanch responded, there is free speech the investigator who worked on the first case, called the so-called zombie case, wrote a book, and he speaks publicly cohen continued to be on every news show. and mr. trump is running for election and we just received a copy of the indictment minutes ago, and he said this is really an injustice >> adam, it's katie tur. thank you so much for all the color inside the courtroom i really do feel like you brought me in there. in terms of the indictment, i know the defense says it has it. any word on how the press is going get it it was unsealed at 1:30. are they handing it out? is there a viewing copy that will be photographed >> i don't know, katie it's not clear right now i do know as soon as the hearing is over, which should be moments

away, there will be an email from the district attorney's office detailing the charges it won't have the firmness of an indictment we'll just have to see how they plan on doing that there's quethe question of whet or not it was being kept sealed or not we don't have an answer. we should expect to see more details of the charges once that press release from the district attorney comes out immediately following the hearing. and then right after, that expected around 3:30 -- it's almost 3:30 now, so that will be pushed back, d.a. bragg will be having a press conference here. >> do you know if he'll be taking questions from reporters? >> we do not know that we were discussing that before the hearing started. he gave a statement after the guilty verdict in the trump court -- trump criminal court trial. he gave a statement. didn't take any questions. we feel in this situation he's

almost obliged to take questions. >> donald trump went into that room you so the picture on the right of him between his lawyers at 2:28 p.m. 55 minutes since he went in there. we thought it was going to be brief. we're waiting on the left of your screen to see him coming out. andrew weissman, i'm going to ask you, but first, let me ask adam reiss, do we know what's going on inside that courtroom >> i can explain part of the delay. just whatever we got into president trump's specific case of indictment, a media attorney stood up and spoke for about ten minutes and talked about the monumental significant to the public that this case has, and his concern about some of the orders that came out from the judge yesterday. he understands that there are competing interests, that president trump has a right to a

thorough defense, but he says we should work on a media plan going forward to avoid cost. the indictment should be made public he asked thatall media, anything, all discovery be made public promptly. and he also said he wants to make sure people can see president trump's facial expressions going forward. so we asked, could we put some reporters in the jury box? that's not uncommon. often times if there's extra room they will allow reporters to sit in the jury box this will allow them to see president trump's facial expressions. talked about laptops the judge in his order last night said you can bring phones, laptops, types of electronics into the room, but you can't use them that wasn't typical for this judge, but this judge said this was unusual, a novel case. there's high security here and so for today we're going to

keep it like that -- >> i'm going to interrupt you. we just briefly saw, adam, donald trump leaving the courtroom. so 3:25, almost a full hour, about 57 minutes inside that courtroom. donald trump who stood up, and according to you, adam, said very clearly -- very firmly i believe was your phrase, not guilty. >> he said -- >> go ahead. >> he said it seated he didn't stand up. >> okay. so he was asked how he pleads, and seated he said, firmly, not guilty adam, thank you so much. andrew, sorry. andrew -- adam, thank you. andrew -- too many "a"s here i wanted to ask you -- ari -- this is all "a"s now i'm very confused. you obviously were reacting when you heard what adam had to say

what are your thoughts >> we like to follow the facts and evidence as we get it. 57 minutes is a very, very lengthy booking hearing. we're watching some of the process here we'll keep our cameras as we look at the outside of the -- exterior of that court area. >> looks like boris epstein. >> he was one of his lawyers and campaign representatives was there. this was a very long hearing andrew weissman can speak on this as well the point there is i've briefly done a few arraignments and booking in that very room. i will tell folks. and there we see the former president walking out after his booking arraignment and arrest our shot is slightly obscured, but we just -- yep, you can see there donald trump walking out

at about 3:27 p.m. new york time, completing his arraignment after pleading not guilty in his own voice in this case we're still waiting on getting the full indictment. >> and saving whatever he has to say for tonight when he has that full speech at mar-a-lago. >> just for context, our lawyers mentioned this, you'll see usually in that room -- i have been in it, bookings where a whole line of people will go through. it looks like a very fast process. you'll see people go through sometimes three, six, nine, ten minutes. this was an hour on one individual, and that may be okay, because there were extra issues appear individual who according to the proceeding was called out for inappropriate and perhaps potentially unlawful conduct towards the justice system, the d.a., and the judge. i want to get andrew in on all of that. what we know now -- we're seeing them depart. this was a longer proceeding had more issues, and definitely

started with a bang. we'll get into the indictment, but the very fact, chris, that they were raising the defendant's conduct and potential limitations that might need to be placed on him and he's the former president of the united states, that's executive order native-american that is an extraordinary aspect of this, even above and beyond the unprecedented nature of the booking, the arraignment of a former president andrew, you and i were side barring about this i'd love for to you share with news members what you're thinking. >> i really think you're right, that this is an unusual aspect of this. we have the former president of the united states for the first time under arrest, having gone through an arraignment the arraignment time period is striking, and so i'm going to be very curious about what happened during what is essentially those 57 minutes and i'm curious to see what did

the judge do with respect to the protective order, potential gag order. did he sort of lay out just some guidelines for when he said he took this seriously, did he go further than that? that you could imagine took some time there also could be security issues you could imagine the judge watching to impress on the defense team the kinds of things that the judge saw, not just only for himself, but really looking at the d.a.'s office i do think that the fact that the d.a. raised it, this is by all accounts what i'm seeing is the d.a. being completely fearless in terms of handling this case the way he would anyone else who did this you saw that in connection with the two letters that the d.a. sent to the house, where jim jordan and others had wanted to interfere in the investigation wrote two very strong letters saying essentially, back off

strong but much more legal terms. these are 34 felonies that also is the d.a. being fearless, and then raising in court what they would raise with any other defendant who was writing about the d.a., the d.a.'s wife. and we're getting reports child, and about the judge or the judge's child. that kind of threat is the kind of thing you would expect the d.a. to raise, and it suggests a real fearlessness on part of the manhattan district attorney's office. >> when donald trump mentioned somebody's name in a negative way, that person is usually followed or can often be volled by vitriol from donald trump's supporters some of that vitriol bordering on or -- threats of physical harmle you're watching donald trump motorcade going back up the fdr north.

we'll see if he's going to make a pit stop or take it to what was formally known as the triborough bridge, la gathered ya, his lane, and back down to mar-a-lago likely that is the case. he is scheduled to speak to his supporters the country, you could say, at 8:10 eastern tonight it's what they're calling a primetime address. unclear how it will be broadcast since he is no longer the president of the united states alvin bragg will be holding his own news conference at 3:45, which is just about 14 minutes from now, where he'll be laying out all the charges or indictment we have yet to see the unsealed indictment and all of the evidence that the d.a. has collected. we're going garrett haake in just a moment. he's in an elevator trying to get out of the courtroom, but he's going to be with us in just

a second to tell us how that hearing ended. it was 57 minutes, longer than anyone expected it to be our partier reporting it did not end with a gag order the prosecution was looking for some sort of relief. we'll likely hear from garrett how firm the judge was with donald trump about what he can and cannot say and whether there was a formal warning for him to stay within the bounds and not threaten prosecutor osar the district attorney. say what you want, go out and campaign, say that you're innocent, but don't threaten any of the people involved in this case and it likely did not help donald trump or his team that there was an image that they tweeted out of donald trump and a baseball bat next to alvin bragg's face remember, bragg has gotten multiple death threats according to the sources in new york, including one in particular we reported on the air last week, saying alvin bragg, i'm going to

kill you, a letter mailed to the d.a.'s office. garrett haake now joins us he has made it out of the elevator, out of the courtroom garrett, what happened >> well, katie, about 58 minute z donald trump was in the courtroom. we heard him in his own voice plead not guilty and answer yes or no to several questions from the judge about his various rights, including rights related to his counsel, joe tacopina, who the prosecutor suggested may have a conflict in this case because he had previously spoke ton attorneys for stormy daniels. prosecutors did present the team and court with cop ways of specific posts he made on truth social network suggesting that kind of comments could lead them in the future to ask for more restrictions in fact, they did ask for a protective order regarding discovery. the detail of that are going to be worked out, but mr. trump and his attorneys would not be able

to comment publicly for any purpose other than his defense on element of discovery handed over for prosecution the judge made it clear there was not an ask for a gag order, nor would he provide one if one were requested based on what we know now, that would be an overly restrictive measure, especially given the first amendment -- candidate for president. he did say if they were presented to him again in the future he'd have to look at it more seriously very much an issue he instructed the defense attorneys to argue essentially witnesses for the prosecution, namely michael cohen, have been speaking still publicly about this case for so long and defending donald trump has assist having been frustrated by this process the judgment very calmly kind of admonished the defense and said that frustration is not an

excuse for rhetoric that escalates beyond a certain point and instructed both parties, trump's defense team and the former president and the prosecutors, to caution their witnesses, caution the defendant against escalating rhetoric any further. so that's where we are right now. certainly nothing like a gag order. discussions ongoing about what the restrictions would be around that discovery the prosecution team had requested that mr. trump could only review evidence for discovery in his own attorney's office he wouldn't be able to take it with him, make copies, wont be able to tweet it or hand it over to the media the defense says that's something they want to try to do it would be impractical, they want to do it at mar-a-lago. >> we've gotten the indictment, and we're printing it right now. it will be distributed to our teams and we're going to go through it together. garrett, it's 16 pages can you tell us what trump was

like, his demeanor in that courtroom? >> very focused. he walked very slowly and deliberately down the center hallway in the courtroom when he came in. i have to just back up and say the security in the courtroom was unlike anything i had ever seen basically, the two seats closest to the aisle on either side were blocked off and reserved no one could sit in them, and at the end of every aisle was awe armed court police officer facing us to make sure all the reporters remained seated. once trump came down that center aisle, making contact with some focus along the way, two more officers stood directly behind him, making it almost impossible to see him for the duration of the hearing, but we did see him watching his lawyers quite closely. sometimes his arms crossed, sometimes his hands folded directly in front of him sort of somberly watching the proceeding on his way out, trying to keep

his eye straight in front of him, ow communicationly looking around, making eye contact with some of the reporters. forgive me for being out of breath had to run around the back of the courthouse to get here interestingly, trump was represented by the three lawyers we have been discussing for some time now as part of his defense team boris epshteyn was also there with him, although didn't speak, didn't introduce himself no trump family members, no trump aides. no one else sort of visibly in the former president's side of the court. just he and his attorney who entered late, later than expected, ten minutes after the 2:15 time we thought we'd see them, and proceedings immediately began. all the unique security concerns were part of it. became a bit of an issue towards the end of the hearing where you had one of the lawyers for mr. trump -- forgive me, coming back around -- todd blanch,

arguing that the next hearing, scheduled for december 4th, mark your calendars given the measures necessary to get this here to make it happen, perhaps his presence wouldn't be necessary. no, said the judge, i like my defendants in court, basically unless something totally unexpected, his expectation would be donald trump should be there, the next in-person hearing on motions on december 4th. they also discussed the possibility of a trial date in january of 2024. i don't have to tell anybody only this panel, that's when the presidential primary calendar is expected to get started next year the collision between trump's legal challenges, the trump campaign, in stark relief in that courtroom today. >> thank you so much for that garrett haake who just came out of the courtroom and gave us more information but again, we have just received a hard copy of that indictment against donald trump it reads at the top, in the supreme court of the state of new york, county of new york,

the people of the state of new york against donald j. trump, defendant. just to see that in writing. one of the things we see as we two through the counts, every one of them seems to mention defraud and conceal. ari, i couldn't help but notice how quickly you were going through the pages. what jumped out to you >> andrew and i have been going through this we have it could we show this for a second. i'd love to just show everyone what we have been waiting for. this is the indictment we now have it everything we have been talking about has been reporting on the court process. andrew and i were discussing the length of that and the hints from that. we now have the actual indictment and it does paint a broader picture of donald trump's attempts, according to the d.a. these are the charges, they're not proven yet to basically defraud and lie in a business legal sense about what he was up to. reading hear the statement from the district attorney for example, here's something that's interesting. talks about a $30,000 payment to

a former trump tower doorman who claimed to have a story about, quote, a child donald trump had out of wedlock, end quote. allegation but this is regarding the underlying incidents that relate to the false business records. so under the aw, the issue is, according to the state of new york, the people of new york here, represented by the d.a., whether that constitutes a crime. in this case, a falsifying record but i would say that is a different type of incidence and allegation than ms. daniels. this is in one instance -- again, the allegation, a company that's a separate corporation, not the trump organization, american media inc. paid money to a former trump tower doorman who claimed to have a child out of wedlock not proven. >> i need to interrupt you trump's lawyer speaking outside the courthouse. >> you don't expect to this happen to somebody who was the

president of the united states, and on the one hand -- on the one hand, there's not really any surprises. i know there was a lot of talk over the past several weeks and the past several days about what's going to be in this indictment and what's going to be there that we don't know. there must be something besides who we have been talking about for the past four, pfive years there wasn't there's nothing. the indictment itself is boilerplate. it doesn't allege any federal crime, any state crime that's been violated. it doesn't allege what the false statement is and it's really isappointing it's sad and we're going the fight it >> can you tell us what mr. trump's reaction was >> were you surprised by anything in the indictment >> no. >> how about you, joe? >> surprised there were no facts in there normally in an indictment you have facts they said this was a false business entry to aid and abet another crime, we don't know

what the other crime was [ inaudible question ] >> when you say, what i say what's his reaction was, what do you expect his reaction was? his reaction would be the same as if it happened to anybody he's frustrated, upset but i tell you what, he's motivated, and it's not going to stop him, and not going to slow him down it's exactly what he expected, and so to that extent, there's no surprise. but he's also -- he's also -- he's also upset and frustrated and disappointed and mad that this happened. >> what about the warnings against rhetoric >> well, there was not a warning. what do you mean >> from the judge, talking about -- >> the judge did not warn. the district attorney made a statement addressing what they perceived to be -- i'm not sure what the words they used -- inappropriate rhetoric of some sort obviously we responded, and the judge just took it in.

the judge didn't warn. he asked the parties to consider what he was saying >> guys, he did not admonish the president. >> he asked the president not use language that would -- >> he did not ask the president not use language he asked everybody involved. by the way that includes -- that includes the witnesses the witnesses for the people who are talking just as much -- >> it also includes the former president swinging a baseball hat at the head of the d.a. >> i don't know where you got that >> that was a tweet put out by the former president. >> first of all, that picture is not him swinging a baseball bat. if you want to distort the facts go right ahead he wasn't swinging a baseball bat at anyone's head that was a picture of him showing off an american made bat. someone else put the d.a.'s

photo. >> cannot use any language that ion cites -- >> we're going to talk about in insufficiency of the case. everyone's not above the law, no one's below it either. if this man's name was not donald trump there's no scenario we would be here today based on these charges. >> [ inaudible question >> when? >> yeah. >> 8:00. >> you should tune in and you'll hear it. >> -- january. did you think that was real estate snick. >> no. >> can you guys talk about -- there's a lot of speculation about the unity among defense attorneys. >> look at us. >> is that why you chose to do this >> to come out together? we chose to come out together so we could speak with one voice. but there's no disunity here that's gossip and nonsense we have been working together and will be working together. >> this to me quite frankly is

the best team i've ever worked with i'm honored to be working with these guys it's a family, a team, and we'll achieve the next figure. >> what's your next move >> i'm going to go home and have some food. >> what about the change in venue? >> i didn't mean to be flippant with you. >> the judge set a motion schedule of -- the judge set a motion schedule that requires motion files in four months, so that's when we'll be filing motions. >> this whole notion of how it's novel -- >> it's not a notion it's a fact. it's never been charged before. >> talk about that. >> this district attorney, the office exist for decades and decades and you can find one if you like you'll never see a charge like this ever. >> you understand this -- simple as this -- a state prosecutor is prosecuting a federal election law violation that doesn't exist according to federal election law officials. simple as that you can sum it all up like that.

>> will there be anything else in your motions -- >> we haven't come close to deciding. >> can someone address that now? >> worried the defendants could post discovery on social media can you commit he won't do that? >> that won't happen more than us committing he's committing. >> what about -- social media? >> we're not having any discussion about what we told him. >> change of venue. >> it's premature. >> so why is they talking about that why is he trying to move it to a place like staten island >> we're here to litigate a case we're not pr consultants donald trump made one hell of a brand and became president of the united states with his social media posts and everything else, his messages. we are thhere to talk about the case and litigate. we can't address what he posts. >> as attorneys did you tell him

to stop posting rhetoric >> literally we can't tell you what we discussed with the client. >> are you concerned talking about the judge, judge's wife, talk about the family? >> i don't think the judge was concern about it. >> yeah, but any other defendant -- >> any other defendant would not be here today. >> he is not going after the judge. he is not going after the judge. he commented he thought there were some issues that he thought may cause a conflict that's not going after the judge. that's not threatening the judge. he's not going after the judge he said with the d.a. he's angry because the d.a. brought a case that's unjustified i'm not going to comment on it you may disagree with the way he spoke but -- >> can you talk about the process? was he fingerprinted >> i'm not going talk about it thank you for your attention >> what was his message to the reporters gathered here? >> all right, donald trump's lawyers right there trying to say that donald trump has not

been going after the judge, hasn't been going after or threatening anybodyinvolved, that the baseball bat picture that was tweeted out by donald trump was just trump showing off an american-made baseball bat. here's one of his last posts on truth social this case should be moved to nearby staten island could be a fair and safe place for the trial. the judge and his family are well known trump haters. he was a well known disaster on a previous trump related case. wouldn't recuse, gave horrible jury instructions. impossible to deal with during the witch-hunt trial his daughter worked for kamala and now the biden/harris campaign kangaroo court. also in term of the evidence lawyers say was not presented, i want the read from the statement of facts from d.a. alvin bragg who by the way will be holding a press conference in a moment and we'll go there as soon as it

begins from august 2015 to december 2016, the defendant orchestrated a scheme with others to influence the 2016 presidential election by identifying and purchasing negative information about him to suppress his publication and benefit the defendant's electoral prospects. in order to execute the scheme, the participants violated election laws and made and caused false entries in the business records of entities in new york the participants also took steps that mischaracterized for tax purposes the true nature of the payments made in firsturtheranc this team. they laid out the $130,000 payment to an adult film actress to present her from publicizing a sexual publicizing a contact with the defendant, and michael cohen, through a series of monthly checks, was rye um bursed by don't j. trump revocable trust, a trust created

under the laws of new york, which held the trump organization entities and assets after the defendant was elected as president, then from the defendant's bank account there's pages missed about a $30,000 pavement to a doorman, which we had not heard before, also suppress ago second woman's account, that is karen mcdougal. i'm going to bring joyce vance to tack about this remember, these payments happened at the end of the campaign, when the "access hollywood" tape was out, when he was going after -- it came out he had called a contestant chubby, when he had issues with women and the campaign was worried that women would not support him. that's the time that these payments were made what do you make of what the lawyers tried to argue there >> well, the court of public pin won't do them a lot of good.

ultimately it's a manhattan jury that will decision on these allegations. what we're seeing is a bit confusing, because there's two documents that have come out of the manhattan d.a.'s office. one is the indictment, containing 34 charges of falsified being records. and it explains what you're alosing to, this notion it was about the election, that it was about the campaign, that donald trump was faltering, and as the statement of facts explains, he embarked upon a scheme it's conspiracy language, although we don't see a conspiracy count in the indictment itself, saying that he embarked upon this scheme we know the context, no matter what his lawyers try to argue, is that this was all about

controlling damage in a campaign environment. in other words, this indictment really is trump's origin story as a candidate trying to manipulate elections, trying to keep damaging information from coming to light. i think in many ways, the allegation being made by trump's lawyers is there were no surprises in here, nothing new to look at, is really belied by what we read in this statement of facts, which talks much more broadly than stormy daniels. it talks about another woman it talks about an additional effort to capture stories that could have been damaging to the former president as the election approached, and overall, it is a very compelling case made in this statement of facts as to why this indictment is important. it's not something you can shrug off at a accomplice cal effort to damage a former and future

candidate. it's the sort of core allegations that any prosecutor would bring in a situation where you see evidence of fraud not only being used internally on internal records, but being used with the goal of committing other crimes here. lots of violations that are apparent one of the most compelling them in the indictment, repetition, the counts all the mirror each other. it's not one accidental incident it's time after time after time, most counts being charged on different days >> daniel horowitz, as we wait to hear from alvin bragg what is going on inside the

office >> in terms of scheduling, i think we heard there's got to be worked out a schedule regarding discovery. clearly this became an issue and was probably one of the reasons why the arraignment, which is ordinarily 10 or 15 minutes took so long. there's a lot of discovery clearly the prosecutor is very concerned about the disclosure of grand jury testimony, witnesses statements, and all sorts of information that they're concerned that the president, now defendant trump, will use inappropriately, particularly because of the threats that he's made publicly about the district attorney's office, the case, as well as the district attorney himself, and the district attorney's wife so what i'm hearing is that there's got to be a schedule worked out among the defendant's legal team and the prosecutors for discovery, and then in four months, the defense will have an opportunity to file whatever

motions they're going to file -- change the venue, try to get to another court, and ultimately to dismiss the indictment the prosecution will then have four months to reply to those motions, and that takes you pretty much toward the end of the year you need some time for the judge to make a ruling that's the reason why you've got a december 4th date for the next appearance, where defendant donald trump will appear and a judge will render a ruling on whether motions that trump decided to file. >> they're now in queens, new york, headed to laguardia, where he'll get on the plane and head badge to mar-a-lago. he's going to make an address from there at 8:00 p.m

he never made any comments today, never addressed cameras there were discussions within the trump team about whether he should dump at one point even talking, according to "new york times" reporting how he should make a bigger show of it, reveling in the idea of wanting a perp walk. joyce, i want to talk about the tax issue here donald trump's lawyers are saying these a novel case, that the d.a. is relying on a state crime over a federal crime, to make it -- the addition of tax charges here still make it novel? or does it strengthen this case in a different way >> well, it's not nearly as novel as they would like to make it out to be this is as many of the former d.a.s in this office have told

us, this is a bread-and-butter charge for this office while it could have been novel, certainly ways that the charges were presented, this is pretty much driving straight up the mainstream here, to charge it in this way, to include charges that are clear violations of new york law something that prosecutors will do, when some charges are very clear and others may require litigation down the road because there's not legal clarity, will make sure there's sufficient grounding, to make sure that any convictions can be affirmed on al peal. it's clear in this indictment there's some bread-and-butter charges that use crimes to accelerate the misdemeanor into a felony that will withstand scrutiny >> and so, in our final minutes

here, katy tur, let's recap the information. the extraordinary amount of information that you talked about, but also a donald trump who, according to his lawyers, is sad and disappointed and frustrated and upset and mad i'm sure he will express some of that tonight when he has his say. as you pointed out, unusually for him, quiet, having nothing to say, either leave trump tower earlier today, going into the courthouse, or leaving that courthouse and going directly to queens, but the bottom line here is that in a courtroom today, on behalf of the state, they charged mr. trump falsified business records, as part of an illegal conspiracy to aid his campaign, and katy, undermine the election. >> what we just saw a moment ago, we changed the d.a.'s press conference, we're seeing in that

image, donald trump as a criminal defendant, a former president. for the first time in our history is a criminal defendant indicted we should note, this could be the first of potentially many other indictments. two special counsel investigations, an investigation by the d.a. in georgia, all currently pending. what happens with them we're going to have to wait to find out who knows how long, potentially very soon, though. that wraps up our special coverage of donald trump's arraignment. thank you for joining us for the last four hours. "deadline: white house" starts right now. \s it's all happening, the gang is all here with you on a history-making