we are joined by district attorney joyce vance and jason johnson. both analysts for us, joyce, i went through some of what we got this opening week. it fair to say if you are on the jury, the da is up in the lead. i was careful to say it doesn't mean we know the outcome. what do they have to worry about? >> it is a great question. if you are the prosecution and you are not up after your first witness, you are in big trouble. right? but, the prosecution really did start off i think with an unexpected bang. no one knew what to expect out of david pecker. we knew he had been cooperating with prosecutors and brought trump into the election fraud conspiracy necessary to turn the misdemeanor into a felony. he today up well on testimony. they did not seem to come after him with a lot. they questioned some of the key pieces of evidence. but he was thoroughly rehabilitated on cross- examination. >> i don't want to be unkind to the defendant. and he is legally presumed innocent. but his family is not there. the your can notice that. the guy is a liar but we ar

joyce vance is back with us now. times" chief white house correspondent peter baker. co-author of "the divider: trump in the white house." joyce, what's the latest from the courtroom? >> well, the process is back underway. jurors are in the box and they're being questioned reading from their questionnaires. so this is the process that we would expect to see taking place. i think the fact that the judge is delaying the much treasured lunch break in this courthouse means he's serious about getting this process back on track. >> and peter, "the new york times" today has a story detailing the type of juror that the trump team wants, including just to quote from "the new york times" today, younger black men and white working class men, particularly public employees like police officers, firefighters, sanitation workers, those who have had bad experiences with the legal system. knowing what we know about the five selected so far, they don't fit these demographics. >> no, they don't. i mean, a couple of attorneys, i think s

attorney joyce vance and she's with us to explain it all.hem an insurance policy for himself. if you have some of the justices saying, contrary to what a lot of expectations are, that there's some presidential immunity, that you still should not do it in this case. explain. how does that sit with the supreme court argument? >> you are right when you say it's complicated. the full court press in this brief is the argument that there's no absolute immunity, no immunity for a former president for participating in criminal conduct. smith is clearly concerned that the court might see shades of gray. he makes the argument that even if there is some immunity, there is no immunity in this situation for a president who tried to interfere with the transfer of power, obstruct official proceedings and interfere with americans' right to vote. he urges the court to speed the case on its way back to trial. >> joyce, in terms of another case that is going before the court next tuesday, which could invalidate hundreds of january 6 prosecutions, these prosecu

attorney joyce vance and professor jason johnson, both analysts for us. e, i went through some of what we got out of this opening week. i think if you are on the jury, it feels like the d.a. is up. they are in the lead. what do you think they achieve in this first week and what do they have to worry about? >> sure. if you are the prosecution and you are not up after your first witness, you're in big trouble, right? but the prosecution really did start off i think with an unexpected bang. no one knew what to expect out of david pecker. we learned he had been cooperating with prosecutors and he brought trump straight into the conspiracy, the election fraud conspiracy which is necessary to turn the misdemeanor into a felony. he stood up pretty well during testimony and on cross- examination. they did not seem to come after him with a lot. they tried to pick away at his credibility, question some of the key pieces of evidence but he was thoroughly rehabilitated on redirect. the prosecution has to be feeling good. >> jason, the defendant is legally presumed inn

joining me now is joyce vance, former u.s. attorney in alabama, and received legal analyst and the cohost of the sisters, podcast and hugo lowell, political investigations reporter at "the guardian." my friends, thanks for being here. it is a two block free-for-all. i'm going to start with you, joyce. let's talk in detail. i think this is important for our viewers to understand. if this case gets reminded back to the judge, which a lot of us believe it's probably going to be the happy medium between the conservatives on the supreme court and the liberal judges, let's talk about what that remand analysis will look like. what would judge chutkan do to be able to determine what was an official act, that has immunity, and a private act that does not ? >> that is the ruling that is expected, that instead of saying donald trump has absolute immunity, his position, or very little immunity, the government's position, the expectation after argument is that the court will say some immunity for official actions, that maybe not a whole lo

joyce vance is back with us.ome questions we've never seen before. >> you know, some of these questions are very specific to this trial but really, anyone who has been involved in jury service will find these questions to be very familiar. the whole point of this process is to determine whether jurors will be able to set aside any knowledge that they have gained outside of the courtroom, any prejudices or beliefs or affiliations they may have, and try the case simply on the evidence that the here in court and the law that the judge explains to them. that is the fair jury we say defendants are entitled to, and that is the judges goal when he lets the lawyers and perhaps he himself will participate to question potential jurors. >> one of the lawyers options when they hear these answers, they can challenge for cause, and then some, they can just have removed from the pool without giving any reason at all. is that right? >> right. it becomes accounting game for the lawyers. you get a certain number of challenges, per

i former united states attorney in alabama and msnbc columnist, joyce vance.c. what we can do to stop his.

we are joined by joyce vance and jason johnson, both analysts for us. e, i went through some of what we got out of this opening week. i think it's fair to say if you're on the jury the da was up in the lead. it doesn't mean you know the outcome. what have they achieved and what do they have to worry about? >> sure. it's a great question. if you are the prosecution and you're not up after your first witness, you're in big trouble, right? >> right. >> but the prosecution really did start off i think with an unexpected bang. no one knew what to expect out of david pecker. we learned he had been cooperating with prosecutors and he brought trump into the essential conspiracy, the election fraud conspiracy, which is necessary to turn the misdemeanor that's charged here into a felony. important testimony, he stood up pretty well on testimony, on cross examination. >> cross. >> they did not seem to come after him with a lot. they tried to pick away at his credibility, question some of the key pieces of evidence he came, but he was thoroughly rehabilitated on cro

nbc's vaughn hillyard is joining us outside the courthouse, and back with us carol lam and joyce vanceng pretty quickly here. >> reporter: yeah, good morning, ana. look, we've got a starting lineup. mow it's a matter of filling in the bench at this point. there are 118 potential jurors currently inside of that courtroom, all who could be one of those last five alternates. the idea that judge merchan would like to fill all of those slots by today's end, and currently they have asked the 42-question questionnaire to ten individuals, two have been dismissed, so we've got eight that will go through a more intense questioning process as they look to fill those other slots here. this is a moment for the defense team in which there's a reckoning that come monday we could be talking about opening statements and potentially the fist witnesses being called here. we were talking at one point about the jury selection process taking two weeks, so suddenly this weekend becomes all the more crucial for donald trump's legal team as they prep for for what could be a consequential first days out of the

attorney joyce vance. and former manhattan assistant district attorney catherine christian.e stage. a lot of sidebars in the past hour. fill in the gaps. what line of questioning do you think the state is objecting to? >> reporter: right. over the course of the last hours, the defense team for donald trump is not explicitly saying to the jury, don't trust michael cohen, he lacks credibility. but they have brought up multiple instances with david pecker in their cross-examination that would lead the jury to question michael cohen and the extent he make exaggerate or take statements out of context. pecker's testimony was that michael cohen asked him to send paparazzi to a meeting he was going to have with mark cuban to essentially make donald trump jealous. a second example was in 2018, when the federal election commission sent a letter to david pecker about the alleged financial scheme, an arrangement they had pertaining to karen mcdougal and other efforts to suppress stories ahead of the 2016 election. david pecker testified just a moment ago when he called michael cohen abo

attorney and msnbc legal analyst joyce vance. joyce, we're always grateful when you can join us. hear from the co-defendants, the attorneys today? do you think their arguments have any merit? >> well, it's really remarkable that these motions have been set for oral argument in front of the judge, jonathan. this is not the typical use of motions in linine, meant to argue legal arguments. these are essentially about matters of fact, whether or not the government can prove these two defendants had knowledge of what they were doing. that's the sort of issue that is normally left up for a jury to determine at trial. it'll be interesting, in front of this judge, whose rules have not always been straight up the middle in the view of legal experts, it'll be interesting to see how she handles these motions. >> seems like another move to stall that trial. unclear when that one will begin, but we do know that trump's hush money trial, barring something completely unforeseen, will start monday. the historic prosecution of a former president and, right now, the republican nominee for presiden

attorney and msnbc legal analyst joyce vance. will we be looking for, or what will you be looking for today in the testimony? what connections is the prosecution trying to make? >> right. so the prosecution is at the point in this case where they're setting the stage for michael cohen's testimony, still to come, building credibility for cohen, who is going to be a very difficult witness, by establishing the events he will testify to. that they occurred. that the banker can confirm the nature of payments. along those lines. also, the government now has to begin proving the essentials of its case. the core of this indictment are the false business records, the 11 invoices, the 12 entries in ledgers, and the 11 checks and check stubs that form the core of the false financial entries that the government has to convince the jury beyond a reasonable doubt were made as part of a scheme to commit other crimes. so pretty soon, we'll see them go through the technical process of putting each of those items into evidence and in front of the j

joyce vance is back with us.n your case, and also how this is another person in the elector plot that is now facing a potential trial and a potential convention. your thoughts? >> you might as well mark that tape you played as a government exhibit 1. that is an -- he is talking about the fake elector scheme he is now charged and in arizona. when that is added onto some of the other evidence that we have heard about that is publicly known, we do not know what prosecutors might have that we are unaware of. emails are trying to convince officials in arizona they should come on board for this plan, to put in a fake slate of electors to try to tie up the certification of the electoral college vote, that makes arizona's casebook very solid. really interesting that boris epshteyn was in court with president donald in new york. not quite sure what we can make of that. he was not there for jury selection and was not there for opening statements. he did show up the day after he was indicted in arizona. maybe it was planned

attorney and msnbc legal analyst, joyce vance. dge cannon has rejected trump's bid to dismiss this case based on the presidential records act. does that put this defense to bed? >> the problem with the ruling is that it doesn't, ana. the ruling is good insofar as it goes. she says she's not dismissing the prosecution for now. the problem is she leaves open the possibility that this issue could be resurfaced at trial, and of course for prosecutors, once the trial begins, the jury is sworn in, double jeopardy attaches, and what that means is the government can't try the case a second time under double jeopardy, so if the judge were to dismiss down the road based on the presidential records act, the case would be over. donald trump would be acquitted. prosecutors will have to find a way of preventing that from happening. it may come in the form of a motion to recuse. it could be another type of motion in advance of trial. that's very likely the conversation happening in the special counsel's office this morning. >> so dave, you say th

joining me is joyce vance, former u.s. he university of alabama law school, and msnbc legal analyst. and former congressman denver riggleman, who served as a senior adviser to the january 6th select committee. joyce, assess the strength of jack smith's filing for us. >> so jack smith's filing i think is technically very strong. he's covered all the bases. his main argument is, look, trump's not entitled to immunity. but then he tells the court if you find that perhaps there's some small area where presidents do get immunity, it's not this case. this is a case about trying to steal an election. you don't need to go any further looking at where there might be exceptions because this case is not it. >> denver, you were on the investigative team looking at what happened on january 6th. what official acts did you find in that investigation that trump was engaged in on january 6th? >> that's what was so tough about it, great to be here, by the way. there was also one or two layers between the white house and what was going on on

attorney and msnbc legal analyst joyce vance is with willie and me. and the big news this morning comes two days after former president trump again took credit for ending roe v. wade and said states should decide their own abortion laws. remember this. >> many people have asked me what my position is on abortion and abortion rights. especially since i was proudly the person responsible for the ending of something that all legal scholars both sides wanted and in fact demanded be ended. roe v. wade. my view is now that we have abortion where everyone wanted it from a legal standpoint, states will determine by vote or legislation or perhaps both, and whatever they decide must be the law of the land. in this case the law of the state. >> arizona giving the nation the latest stark example of the consequences of leaving the issue up to individual states. the arizona supreme court ruled a 160-year-old near total abortion ban still on the books in the state is enforceable. the decision which could shutter abortion clinics across arizona adds the state to the

joining me now is joyce vance. irst for your reaction, joyce. >> well, i think it's not surprising that we've seen this indictment. what's surprising in some regards is some of the expansion here, the inclusion of boris epstein. and kenneth chesebro may be finally cooperating but is not indicted but discussed in the indictment. this suggests that prosecutors in arizona have amassed the evidence that they need to go a step further. it is horrible news for donald trump the middle of his criminal trial in manhattan. >> indeed. >> he is an unindicted coconspirator in this case. >> very quickly. there was a lot of criticism of fani willis rico case. this is an even more sprawling case, as you said, with even more people we hadn't heard before, christina bobb, boris epstein. to me it's a vindication in my mind, at least, of what she did in georgia. >> well, i think it suggests that fani willis was the immaculate career prosecutor we know her to be. tim will tell you this, too. when you're a prosecutor, there's no arbitrar

joyce vance is now with me, and has a lot of experience arguing appeals court cases and also a former prosecutor. joyce, what is your takeaway from this argument where they were all over the lot and when they even talked about remanding it to the district court, this could be a very long delay. >> it could be a long delay. this was a messy argument. no one really colored straight inside of the lines of any one argument, and so while there is clarity on a few issues, for instance, the fact that a president doesn't have immunity for purely personal acts, no one seemed to agree on what purely personal acts might look like. and that's the problem here. the court has to make decisions not just applying to president trump but also decisions that will apply to future presidents. so there was a lot of concern about the future impact of the rules that they would create here. andrea, i think you're correct to say that that means we're looking at delay as the court perhaps requires the lower courts to make additional factual rulings, perhaps even legal rulings before a trial could go forward. >>

also joining us, joyce vance, former united states attorney.ed states attorney she was the head of the u.s. attorney's appellate division, and was in charge of all matters before the 11th circuit court of appeals. both are msnbc legal analysts, good evening. joyce, let me start with you. i read a lot of legal terminology, but there's this talk of jeopardy, and there is this discussion by jack smith to say, please make whatever decision you're going to make now, because if you don't do it now, we have a problem. what did he mean? >> here's the problem that happens with aileen cannon's refusal to issue a ruling on trumps motion to dismiss under the presidential records act. the reason jack smith says he's entitled to a decision now is that if she rules against him, he can appeal that in advance. he can go to the 11th circuit and ask them to second-guess. and the reality is that virtually every legal expert who is not in the trump campus looked at this issue says the presidential records act has nothing to do with whether or not someone is illegal

joyce vance is a former u.s. attorney, law professor at the university of alabama, and an msnbc legal analyst. jim messina was white house deputy chief of staff under president obama and ran his 2012 campaign. good to have all of you here. garrett, break down this potential witness list for us. >> chris, the bold-faced names won't be surprising. start with michael cohen at the very top of this list, the person who allegedly orchestrated all of these hush money payments and the two women who he orchestrated them for, stormy daniels and karen mcdougal. you've got a couple of executives from american media, the company in the middle of this buying their stories and the folks that i'm more interested in a little bit down the line, some of these former trump campaign and trump white house staffers like hope hicks and madeleine westerhout who will be able to describe what was going on in the trump campaign and the trump white house around this story that might buttress the case. the defense witness of course is donald

attorney joyce vance. joyce, i walked through all of this, some of what we heard today and some of the problems. your thoughts. >> well, i thought you were dead on the money, ari, because so many people expected going into this argument to hear if not agreement among the justices then at least agreement that what happened on january 6th was something remarkable in our country, that was separate and apart from other acts that we might talk about in hypotheticals and we really didn't get that today. justice sotomayor today tried to float a distinction for what sorts of acts might be unconscionable and she made the distinction when mr. sauer was talking about other acts that could possibly be implicated, possible wrongs by barack obama or by president biden where he suggested that down at the border crossings could be prosecuteable. justice sotomayor said the difference is what donald trump did is for personal gain. >> yeah. >> what the other presidents did was to lead the country. unfortunately that distincti

joyce vance is with us now, as well as paul butler.today from david pecker about both karen mcdougal and stormy daniels in these, you know, nondisclosure agreements that of course the allegation is were all arranged through the "enquirer" or through michael cohen to keep everything out of the public, according to pecker, as a matter of the campaign. >> this is exactly what the prosecution was count ongoing when they put pecker up as their first witness, right. prosecutors and paul will back me up on this, we know two things that juries remember, the first thing that they hear and the last thing that they hear. so this first witness, while they're still fresh is very important. not only is david pecker talking about the seedy side of the deals, he's also bringing donald trump directly into the mix throughout much of his testimony. >> and there was an objection at one point, but that was overruled, so this is all being presented to the jury, paul. >> yeah, that's right. so, again, a riveting witness. this has got to be the most interesti

and former attorney and nbc legal analyst joyce vance. day at the supreme court as justices heard oral arguments yesterday regarding donald trump's claim he is immune from prosecution for actions he took while in office. just around the corner from the united states capitol where the former president is accused of inciting an insurrection, the court's conservative justices seemed open to the arguments being laid out by his legal team. yesterday's proceedings came after the d.c. appeals court ruled trump does not have absolute immunity. a decision with which the conservative justices appeared to take issue. >> the court of appeals below, whose decision we're reviewing, said, quote, "a former president can be prosecuted for his official acts because the fact of the prosecution means that the former president has allegedly acted in defiance of the laws." that, i think, is the clearest statement of the court's holding, which is why it concerns me. as i read it, it says simply, "a former president can be prosecuted because he is being prosecut

. >> joyce vance, duncan levin, thank you for getting us started tonight. >>> coming up house republicans putting on a united front, but don't be fooled. evidencedo the chaos caucus persists. >>> but first reading the tea leaves in supreme court arguments today in a case that has the potential to upend the january 6th rioters and donald trump himself. more on that after this break. dd trump himself. more on that after this break. >>> today a supreme court heard oral arguments on a case that could determine the future of many january 6th defendants and even donald trump himself. at issue is a law prohibiting the obstruction of an official proceeding, a statute the justice department has used to prosecute a quarter of the january 6th rioters that have been charged in trying to stop the electoral votes. this ruling brought by special counsel jack smith in his federal election case. lawyers argued the statute was not meant to apply to circumstances like the january 6th insurrection. and the government argued the january 6th attack is exactly what the proceeding look leak. there was one exchan

attorney joyce vance, who spent 25 years as a federal prosecutor. joyce, heavy legal day, you are going first. judge cannon, heard trumps speech to dismiss the case three weeks ago, she finally filed a ruling today after jack smith's filing insisted she do something or he was going to go to a higher court. what's your take on this? >> this ruling has some good, some bad, and some ugly. it's good insofar as it goes, she reached the only result she really could reach, here, denying trumps motion to dismiss, at least for now. but, the bad is that it's not a final ruling. as we saw her do previously with trumps motion to dismiss on vagueness grounds, she leaves the possibility open that she could have a different ruling during trial. as we've been discussing, that's dangerous for the prosecution. if they get a ruling from her now before trial and they don't like it, they can appeal it. if she doesn't rule until after the jury has been sworn in and double jeopardy has been attached, they can't take an appeal. the case is essentially over if she rules agai

let's go right to joyce vance.we'll hear from other women who had what they will say were sexual experiences with donald trump, triggering for him, embarrassing for him given his personal situation, a political opportunity for trump for sure. i would like to ask you, joyce, what is he facing legally today in this trial? >> today we start with jury selection. not always the most interesting part of the trial, but you can see trump's demeanor as he approached the courtroom today. he looks a little bit shrunken in on himself. the reality of a trial often doesn't hit the defendant until they get to the courtroom and have to look at the people who will sit in judgment of him. today around 500 citizens in manhattan will be summoned. the judge will hold a selection procedure. we don't know exactly how long that will last. it could be a matter of days, or it could drag on for longer. the judge's goal is not to find jurors who don't know anything about this case, but jurors who are willing to set aside any preexisting belie

attorney joyce vance, who spent 25 years as a federal prosecutor. hugo, since you were in the room, what stuck out to you? >> we should clarify and say that we were separate in the room, but that we were still there. it was very clear to me that trump will have a hard time sitting there and playing by the rules on a criminal trial, without having outbursts. today he was falling asleep, but without having outburst and saying things that could hurt him down the line, as he has in his previous cases, >> i got to talk about the jurors. kristi, you and joyce have interviewed hundreds if not thousands of jurors, what you make of the process so far? i kept thinking, all these people in manhattan called for jury duty today, so many had to be thinking, holy cow, and my about to get on the trump trial? >> one thing that was interesting was what was going on outside. the jurors were all outside for quite some time, waiting to get into the building, and as they are doing that, right across the street from them is a pro trump rally essentially, people waving the

joyce vance, duncan levin, thank you for your time. >>> still ahead tonight, pro- life.rizona wants to, want-to be senator, kari lake, republicans cannot seem to figure out what they want. more on that next. children are the greatest joy and our best hope for a better future. friends, they are the future. but did you know that millions of kids right here in our own backyard are facing hunger every day without healthy food? it's harder to grow, to thrive, to feel their best. the impact when children don't have enough to eat is tremendous because when you're hungry and your basic needs aren't being met, you cannot learn. that's why i'm here now, asking you to join me in helping end child hunger in america. this is a problem we know how to solve, and we can do it better by supporting no kid hungry for just $0.63 a day, only $19 a month. you can help provide healthy meals like a good breakfast in class to power kids through their days. breakfast in the classroom contributes to kids being more focused, which leads to higher grades. test scores, and simply just their well-bein

. >>> joining me is joyce vance and rashad robinson. thank you both for being here.to go to you first, rashad. the day that donald trump's jury selection began in his trial, election interference trial, he floated this memo that named george soros all soros-funded d.a.s. talk about this trebd in attacking people calling them soros-funded and also naming color of change. >> look, it's no surprise that the rich and powerful, who now sometimes every once in a while are held accountable are going to then go attack the very people who are doing the work to hold them accountable. you know, we have worked for years to make the criminal justice system more fair to be able to level the field and to be able to bring safety and justice to all people, to all communities. and as part of that effort, we have gone out and we have raised money in that effort to engage in elections. but joy, i want to demystify what we used that money for. we used that money to expand the number of people who vote in this elections. district attorney elections are famously low turn-out elections. in

." >> with peter baker, mike joseph stern, and joyce vance with us. let's start with the fact that the day began before david pecker got back on the stand with the manhattan d.a.s office saying that there are four alleged violations, brand-new ones, of the expanded gag order that judge merchan is setting a hearing on for next thursday. we don't have a ruling from the first motion for contempt, so what's the delay from judge merchan? we have four new violations now. >> we do. we have ongoing violations and the issue that the judge faces is either this gag order has teeth and he will enforce it, or it does not in which case, donald trump can do anything he wants to do with regard to this jury, witnesses, or the court families, for that matter. this has to come to a head, the delay likely give the judge a little extra room to gather additional evidence, but this gives him very limited options. he can either impose a penalty of $1000 for each violation, or he can impose up to 30 days of custody. there is no room to maneuver between those options. he will

joining me now, duncan levin and joyce vance. former u.s. rney in the northern district of alabama. thank you both for being here. joyce, what are the implications of losing the confidence of the judge in like 48 hours? >> so yeah. i mean it is never a good thing. right, alex? i think we are all trying to find different ways to express the fact this is the worst development for donald trump's lawyers this early in the trial. and their client has forced it upon them, if donald trump were a normal defendant, his lawyers would have taken him out of the courtroom, sat him down, and had a meeting with him where they would have said to him we cannot defend you if you continue to do this. they may well have had that conversation because trump's posts on truth social tonight have involved attacks on the judge. attacks on alvin bragg, the district attorney. but he seems to have stopped talking at least for the moment about witnesses. but frankly, it is too late. the judge i think is slow to anger. this is a very good judge. a judge who has good contro

attorney joyce vance and michael steele is here, former chairman of the republican national committee and former lieutenant governor of maryland. you know him as the cohost of the weekend right here on ms. joyce, what is your reaction to this potential list of prosecution witnesses? who stuck out to you? >> well, what sticks out to me is the whole package because one of the big questions here is whether prosecutors will ask the jury to rely on the testimony of michael cohen, who is someone who is known not to tell the truth. he has pled guilty to charges related to that, but i think we now can see that is unlikely to be the case, that there are other witnesses here who will be use to corroborate cohen's testimony at every step of the way, perhaps documents that he can introduce, so it is this total package of witnesses that i think helps us start to understand what the prosecution's case will look like. >> reminder, michael. for those who say listen, it was a guy, he had an affair. he was trying to protect his family, his reputation, his wife, this is about paying someone off to suppr

we're talking about msnbc legal analyst joyce vance and andrew weissman who investigated trump for supposedll kristol, watergate figure john dean, george conway, an msnbc fixture and mary mccord not to mention cnn legal analyst jeffrey toobin, ellie williams and the founder, normanizen. this looks awful because it's exactly what trump and conservatives have been saying, that the media are part of an organized resistance dedicated to getting him. >>> there were the usual jokes and jabs at last night's white house correspondents' dinner, some of them thanks to s, nl's col run jost aimed rather mildly at president biden. >> i have to admit, it's not easy following president biden. it's not always easy following what he's saying. howard: as for biden and his joke-writing team, or donald trump was a prime target. >> donald has had a few tough days lately. you might call it stormy weather. [laughter] what the hell? [laughter] trump's so desperate, he started reading those bibles he's selling. if. howard: and, of course, there were shots at the media. >> to all my friends in the press, and fox new

joyce vance mentioned one she used to use. what bumper stickers do you have on your car? tell us what that might reveal. >> one thing that's notable is that for a lot of the viewers who have served on civil and criminal juries, this is going to seem unduly intrusive. this is an unusually careful process and searching process in terms of these questions. hence, your question about what bumper stickers. where do you get your news? what papers do you read? what podcasts do you listen to? what do you stream? obviously, more direct questions like, are you affiliated with some group that's aligned with law enforcement or aligned with only keepers or proud boys or maga events? those are all trying to get at for cause challenges but to give information to strike people who have such strongly held views that they are not going to be confident that they can put those aside and just base their verdict on the facts in the courtroom and the laws given to them by judge merchan. what the prosecutor is worried about is someone trying to sneak on the jury who is going to be a holdout and

joining us now is joyce vance, former u.s. attorney, mia wylie, former civil attorney in new york, and hugo, covering washington and all things donald trump. joyce, i want to start with you. we've talked often about trying cases. when you have your case in chief, that primacy is how you do this. you start and end strong when it comes to the presentation of your witnesses. was it smart for the prosecution to start with david pecker thus far? >> well, it was smart, katie, and i am reminded that it was you who first said that you thought david pecker would be a great kickoff witness. i think that's the case, right? this is someone who doesn't have the baggage of a michael cohen, and who tells the origin story. he has now walked us through the election interference conspiracy. this is now patch and kill to elect trump. that's the case that the prosecution will put on. they've done a great job of giving the jury sort of the basics, the land marks and the road map that they'll move ahead on for mr. pecker's testimony. >> you know, mi

i former united states attorney in alabama and msnbc columnist, joyce vance. straightahead, double jump has reached new levels of other predicate that rhetoric. what we can do to stop his. >>> good morning. it is saturday, april 6. in nine days, donald trump's first criminal trial and the first involving a former president will begin in manhattan. despite becoming the republican party presumptive nominee, 2024 has not been off to a great start for the twice impeached indicted ex-president. already penalized hundreds of millions of dollars in a pair of civil cases and soon faces the possibility of being convicted and going to jail. as his legal situation grows more worrisome, trump has escalated his rhetoric. he is abusing his platform to publicly intimidate those involved in his cases and we are already seeing the consequences of it. late last month, tyler vogel, a 26-year-old from lancaster, new york was arrested for allegedly sending threatening text messages to two people connected to a high-profile civil case. this week we found out that the targets of the

that's something joyce vance suggested prosecutors actually raise as an example, as a hypothetical in today's other oral arguments to bring it home. i want to be clear about this. this case is not about the merits at all. this is an effort about donald trump to throw sand in the gears of the underlying to keep it from even getting started or completed before the november election. that's what's happening. >> sometimes when referees do review a call, they continue to upold the wrong call. is there any doubt in your mind that the supreme court will not reject this? >> ultimately no. what they could do is refer the matter back down to a lower court for further fact finding, but in -- that is a win for donald trump, right? because it gives it -- >> it elongigates the time. >> it eelongates the time. no one is above democracy and certainly not american presidents. >> we'll shift to the trial that is happening right now. judge merchan so far held off on any ruling about his gag order. >> right. >> as we saw a former trump lawyer suggest plainly states he violated the gag order. if trump's o

and joyce vance, who spent 35 years as a federal prosecutor. thanks all of you for joining me this evening. it was a huge legal date, so i want to start in d.c. at scotus. the three of us were all in the courtroom today for arguments, so let's start first with your main takeaways. josh, i'm going to start with you. >> well, i thought it had to be a dispiriting day for special counsel jack smith. he saw one after another of the members of the conservative majority on the court basically signal discomfort with his position, and some degree of alignment with trump's claim that there should be at least some type of immunity or protection for a former president from criminal charges. i have a vivid memory of sitting there and having each of those justices i'm thinking of, just as matt cavanaugh, chief justice john roberts, and justice neil gorsuch, for example, go through one by one and it pretty clear that they were not going to come out in this case the way jack smith wants them to come out. and at that point it is a numbers game that i don't thin

joyce vance is a former u.s. attorney, law professor at the university of alabama and msnbc legal analyst. and msnbc legal correspondent lisa rubin joins me now on set. anybody who read this, the judge didn't mince words, even just rejecting trump's legal team's argument, i think he pretty much made mince meat of it, saying it is obvious to anyone who listens to trump's remarks that they pose a threat. so, i wonder what you make of not just the judge's order, but the way he framed it. >> first of all, to your point, he's not mincing words. i've never seen or rarely have i seen a judge do so much in so few pages. this is only a five-page order, but the words chosen are careful and precise and when i read it, i went, whoa, last night. but, the other thing that i think is important to see here is that judge merchan is drawing a connection between the attacks on his daughter and, for example, attacks on d.a. bragg's family, and what that signals to anybody else who could find themselves a participant in that proceedi

. >> joyce vance and peter baker, thank you both so much. and peter's book again is "the divider: trump in the white house." that does it for this edition of "andrea mitchell reports." follow the show on social media@mitchelreports. "chris jansing reports" starts right now. ♪♪ >>> good day, i'm chris jansing live at msnbc headquarters in new york city. one step forward, two steps back. just when we thought donald trump's hush money trial was moving ahead of schedule, two of the seven people picked to serve as jurors have been excused. juror two complaining she was essentially outed by the media. juror four let go after seemingly lying to the judge. so now we're down to five. where does this go from here? plus, the family feud unfolding today with very high stakes, influencing the outcome of the presidential election. what 15 members of the kennedy clan are now saying about rfk junior's white house bid and why they're endorsing president biden instead of their own flesh and blood. >> and the nasty split between speaker mike johnson and house

joining us now, joyce vance. he does seem to be running out of patience.he 11th circuit. he will not wait for her long stretches of delay in between rulings and then requests for briefings from these two sides, which doesn't seem normal, according to most lawyers. how say you? >> i would agree with that. this is a stacked series of bad rulings by the judge. the reason that jack smith's hand has been forced at this point is that she's now indicated that she won't rule on trump's motion to dismiss the entire case based on a really bad claim. the problem jack smith faces is if she doesn't rule under a jury has been impanelled and trial is underway, he cannot appeal the decision because of the legal doctrine of double jeopardy. once trial is underway, the government doesn't get a second bite of the apple. if the judge dismisses, that's the end of the case. smith has to convince her to rule or he will take an appeal. he suggests at that and says that it's the correct approach for him to take, essentially going to the 11th circuit and asking them to order her to

something really big on the other side, all the witnesses, et cetera as you were just detailing the >> joyce vancend harry litman, thank you very much for starting up our discussions. >>> more breaking news. donald trump managed to post the one or $75 million bond in his new york civil fraud judgment against him for the $464 million judgment that he is appealing. then alexander is a senior editor at forbes. , how do donald trump do it? who gave him the money can >> reporter: he did with the help of a group called night specialty insurance company. this is a group that falls under the umbrella of companies owned by don hankey, who is a billionaire based out of california. don hankey is an interesting guy, who is not number focused and made his fortune in offering auto loans. this is a guy who is comfortable with looking at people who have marked up credit histories and saying, they have got the collateral, we can afford to do this and we will make money on it. apparently that is what happened in this case. >> going for, donald trump has the money to cover the bond so that his assets will be protect

with us, peter baker, msnbc political analyst, joyce vance, former u.s. attorney, professor at the university of alabama school of law, and msnbc legal analyst, jeremy fallon, former assistant district attorney in the trial division of the manhattan d.a.'s office and a criminal defense attorney. all right, vaughn, explain what we learned so far from davidson on the stand. >> reporter: keith davidson, a crucial witness who frankly we did not know what he was prepared to publicly testify to. he is somebody that has not been public over the last eight years, somebody who has not given interviews to detail his story. he was working in the form of sort of agent attorney figure for karen mcdougal and stormy daniels in 2016, negotiating the sales of their stories to the "national enquirer," ami and michael cohen. and is at the heart of this, in what the actual scheme looked like when it came to the actual execution. he testified, beginning in june of 2016, when he says he went to dillon howard, who is the editor in chief of the "national enquirer" with, quote, i

. >> joyce vance, it's great to have you here in person. thank you so much. thanks to all of our teams covering the court case. it is very complicated and of course our teams, our producers in new york and here in washington and around the world actually on all of the foreign policy we've been covering. that does it for this edition of "andrea mitchell reports." follow the show on social media @mitchellreports. go to msnbc.com/andrea. "chris jansing reports" starts right now. >>> good day, i'm chris jansing live at msnbc headquarters in new york city. trying to catch the witness in a mistake. you'd never know it was the end of a long week at donald trump's hush money trial. the defense lawyer described as sharp, combative, trying to trip up witness david pecker who is at times combative, and jurors largely avoiding looking at trump, but according to those inside the room, giving pecker their rapt attention. for a day filled with details and inside baseball legalese, no small feat. we have a panel of experts standing by to explain it all. >>> plus, nothing mat

i'm joyce vance. i'm okay. how

i'm joyce vance. i'm okay. how that. i'm a professor the university of alabama law school and i hg

i'm joyce vance. i'm okay. how that. i'm a professor the university of alabama law school and i hang out with barb mcquade a whole she's the show she's why we're tonight i have got some reminders that i have to read to you are you guys the obedient type? will you follow directions? oh, rebels. all right. i love my group already. i'm told to remind you that tonight's is being recorded. so we kindly ask that you silence your cell phones for the duration of the program. and most importantly, if you have questions for barb, please fill them out on the questions cards that were on your seats or if you're joining us through the youtube chat, they will bring the questions up to me so i can ask them periodically. um, it really is a pleasure to get to introduce to you. she's terrified about what's going to come out of my mouth. yeah i think. i think she's said enough you. so look barb and i serve together united states attorneys during the administration, i was in birmingham. we love the applause for boss barb was in detroit. and