a slow network is no network for business. that's why more choose comcast business. and now, we're introducing ultimate speed for business —our fastest plans yet. we're up to 12 times faster than verizon, at&t, and t-mobile. and existing customers could even get up to triple the speeds... at no additional cost. it's ultimate speed for ultimate business. don't miss out on our fastest speed plans yet! switch to comcast business and get started for $49.99 a month. plus, ask how to get up to an $800 prepaid card. call today!

welcome to our new special. new york versus donald trump. we will be bringing you this brand-new breakdown of the third week of the historic and first ever criminal trial of a former president and a current candidate as well. this was a tough week for the defendant. it was gripping, dramatic testimony from the woman at the center of the hush money plot. there were also testimony on key days of testimony from witnesses who were in trump's orbit who could speak about what she said and corroborate some of the financials for the jury. we have more on that as well tonight, but prosecutors have been laying out the pieces of this scheme to influence the 2016 election and as we recount why it was such a tough week for trump, we know recording to the public remarks here, we're working off the public evidence, we know we're near the end of this thing. we have now two witnesses left

according to d.a.'s team. the star witness, michael cohen, trump's former lawyer and fixer will begin monday. one other witness they'll be ready to rest as soon as the coming week. cohen, of course, is central to the d.a.'s case and he has testified under oath before that trump was in on everything. >> you knew about everything. everything had to go through mr. trump and be approved by mr. trump. >> that's what cohen sounded like last time. that is similarly legally binding testimony that it's under oath. a lot of punishment if you're lying to congress. we expect to see a similar line on monday. they'll rest their case by the end of the week. now, it could change. there's not some other esh with the judge, but they expect to have this thing done by thursday. there are of course steps after

that, the defense gets to respond and jury gets to deliberate, that kind of stuff. but whether or not they can make the case, they are saying by thursday they believe they will have legally set out all the evidence, every element, of the two crimes they say donald trump committed. this week started with a bang. trump's team clashed with the judge over him getting caught blatantly violating the gag order. that meant as this barrels forward, the judge had to tell him, the defendant through the lawyer, that he could face a jail sanction if this continues. future violations could be punishable by incarceration. prosecutors are making good on what they said they would do. follow the money, show the receipts. that's important as we've mentioned and i'm going to get into this with our experts tonight as part of this special. that the witnesses matter because they bring everything to life. they don't do much without receipts. the d.a. does have some damning ones. the checks you see, the signature from the defendant,

the other paperwork that shows how this was not just some random one off but was a whole plot run through the trump organization and through donald trump's personal bank account. they have the checks that trump wrote to cohen. the jury saw those for the first time this week. prosecutors then called actress stormy daniels to the stand where she testified and told the jury why she understood trump wanted her silent at that time. >> stormy daniels became a household name for shaking the corridors of power. >> daniels of course is at the center of this entire case. >> everybody wants to hear what daniels will say. >> stormy daniels getting the most attention. >> riveting, bombshell, sometimes icky testimony. >> you wanted money. >> it bordered on susan necklace i think shaming a sex worker. >> motivation to really shame this woman and it's not working. >> she was not going to let her

story being mischaracterized. >> daniels testified over two days. her testimony was quite detailed. at times, graphic. as an observation there, that could sound like a characterization or within. that was something the judge had to at times patrol. so at a legal level, some of the details went beyond what the judge felt was necessary for the evidence to support the d.a.'s case. remember, this is not like an interview where you can jump around on different topics. the questions and topics are regulated by the judge. now, within what she did say, she testified that trump didn't appear concerned when they had their initial encounter about it going public. that bolsters the d.a.'s case, part of the campaign crime and not just some generalized hush money. daniels faced aggressive questioning from trump's attorney who as we've reported across the week, tried to use stigmas or discredit her because

of her job. she accused daniels of exporting trump. daniels replied false. kind of an allegation in the form of a question. also raises the idea that daniels made the whole thing up. that is to say she had some interaction with trump that made him so concerned he was willing to pay for her silence. daniels also said sharing her story has negatively impacted her and there's a lot of corroboration of that. when she wrapped, it paved the way for other witnesses and some aren't as exciting but go again to what i said had to prove. not just that it was a cover up, but an intentional financial cover up that trump knew about basically at the time. so there was a bookkeeper from his company that said trump talked to weisselberg daily. that testimony backed up by another staff assistant on

thursday that they remembered a couple of times where there was a question about a check and trump would pick up the phone and call weisselberg. she became emotional and cried on the stand and said she met with the defense earlier in the week to prepare as she was a prosecution witness but that gives you some signal of her perspective. that's okay, by the way. the witnesses may have a mixed perspective. their main obligation is supposed to be telling the truth. the jury assesses that. friday, the judge even floated the idea of having the convicted trump money man, weisselberg, testify himself. now that would be a big deal. remember when i mentioned unexpected things could add time. if you added a witness and had to arrange him getting out of rikers jail, that might take extra time. he's in rikers in new york after pleading guilty to perjury for testimony he gave in a different trump case.

in a different fraud case. and that is the second time that weisselberg has gone in to jail for things he did that were basically related to and arguably or allegedly at the behest of his boss, donald trump. politico reports that at times, trump lawyers have looked visibly concerned at the suggestion that weisselberg come in. they seem to think he's loyal but better off not heard from. now, we are also seeing the way that day by day, this process can yield different information so that staffer that i mentioned, when she testified friday, she said trump would sign checks sometimes without even reviewing them. that goes to a clash among and across both witnesses in the d.a. and defense arguments. because again, the jury's job here is not to root for one side and not to only take the first thing they hear as gospel. indeed, they will get instructions before they go in

to deliberate that you have to take it all. not just the most recent argument, be that which lawyer got to finish or which witness went last. so together, they have to unspool all these claims. the busy out of the loop claim is a fair defense. one he's allowed to lodge. but they have to look at all the defense, the signatures, the books, the bragging about how involved he is to decide whether or not that, plus a tape of him talking about these payments, whether it checks out. if we were using a general standard like two sources in journalism, they'd have trump. but it is a higher standard and deliberately so. it's not just two sources or what you think is most likely or reasonably what happened. it is a very high standard on purpose for all defendants it's supposed to be beyond a reasonable doubt that he did it, covered it up and with a campaign crime content. a higher bar. that's what we're going to be watching this next week as the d.a. brings many cohen then

rests its case. the trial is barrelling forward. trump's efforts to delay this in this courtroom have been failed. now, our special's going to continue with two very special guest that is we think will help us really wrap up what has been a bruising week for donald trump. we're back together in just 90 seconds. trump. we're back together in just 90 seconds. and it changed everything. (♪♪) hey dave, don't knock it 'til you smell it. new gain relax flings.

liberty mutual customized my car insurance and i saved hundreds. that's great. i know, i've bee telling everyone. baby: liberty. oh! baby: liberty. how many people did you tell? only pay for what you need. jingle: ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ baby: ♪ liberty. ♪ this isn't what i want to be known for. as a matter of fact, i hid for quite a while and it's

overwhelming and intimidating and down right scary a lot of times. >> stormy daniels when she was speaking about this back in 2018. now, this week for the first time, people have heard from her under oath in this legally binding proceeding. joined by joyce vance and law professor, melissa. professor murray, when you look at this week, we are always looking for inflection points but it felt like it barrelled forward. in some ways for all the excitement about cohen next week, if you were writing a story where the d.a. began to really, it came like it was more from this week. the receipts and daniels this week before you get to cohen saying yes, what they said is

true. >> it's an interesting rhythm the prosecution established this week. you're right, there's a lot of forward momentum but there's some mundane moment where is witnesses had to corroborate the chain of custody for certain forms of evidence. again, punctuated by some really explosive testimony. i think people really are going to look back at the set of questions that stormy daniels answered from the prosecution and susan necheles. the documents are the stars. the witnesses were all there to basically elaborate and give context and color for those documents and to give the jurors a story.

trials are story telling and the prosecution using this evidence decided to tell a broad story and use these witnesses to make that story come to life. >> joyce? >> anyone who's served on a jury understands that judges admonish jurors at the start of a trial that they must not deliberate until all of the evidence is, until they're all in the room together. and we're treating the case very differently. we're assessing each witness as they testify on every piece of evidence that comes in. sometimes that leads us to overfocus on one bit of the evidence. or one facet of the case without seeing the bigger picture that the jury will have when they begin to deliberate. so you know, i find melissa's assessment to be entirely appropriate when she talks about the trajectory of the case. the prosecution has had i think one overarching goal in mind

throughout their entire presentation of the evidence. their goal is to buttress michael cohen's credibility before he ever takes the witness stand because the tough part of this case is proving that donald trump knew, approved, participated, wanted to use the false business records to conceal or aid in the commission of other crimes. and at every step of the way, they've masterfully executed that goal. whether it's the way daniels held up beautifully on cross-examination. she comes across not just as a porn star, the way she's been caricatured in the media. she comes across as a mom, a real person with real interests and with an important life story and someone who the jury may not approve of, but who they can listen to and believe. but at the same time, melissa nails it. it's the documents. the documents don't lie. they're in evidence now. they have weisselberg's writing on them.

he may not testify but it doesn't matter because the documents are there. >> yeah. you're both talking about the documents and how the trump defense or the doubt they want to instill really runs into that brick wall. that's why the d.a.'s been having momentum. joe tacopena was the lawyer before he left, your defense, oh, this was money for the lawyer, retainer. if your defense is no fraud. problem is, the money didn't stay with the lawyer. it passed through the lawyer, went to stormy daniels. so it's not money for the lawyer. it was money for her. then to add insult to injury from a legal perspective, you have the cfo they're talking about taking out of rikers to testify. writes down his plot on paper. let's lie. let's commit tax fraud. here's that exchange. >> is stormy daniels a lawyer?

>> i don't think so. >> so she's not a lawyer. and these payments were made and they were according to federal filings, classified on the trump side as legal services. that was false, wasn't it? >> payments were made to lawyer. not to stormy daniels. >> joyce? >> well, that's slicing pretty thinly there. but ultimately, it doesn't work. and in addition to the trump books where these payments to cohen are coded as legal fees and multiple witnesses have now said they were reimbursement payments to daniels, we know that in this california litigation where stormy daniels, she says she didn't approve it, but her lawyer sued trump for defamation. she loses that case. she's ordered to pay trump's legal fees and as part of the filings in that case, trump actually concedes that the

$130,000 is reimbursement for the payment to stormy daniels. the prosecution can put that into evidence. they may well be what happens with their last witness. we don't know who that will be yet. but that is compelling evidence along with the trump tweet that there was discussion about this afternoon where he talks about well, my lawyer was handling a private agreement. it adds up to knowledge and it's contrary to this defense that trump didn't know and these were just legal payments to cohen who somehow went off as a free agent and decided to spend trump's money for him in maybe the slim hope he would be reimbursed down the road. that doesn't make sense. >> right. and if that story doesn't make sense, that takes us to next week, professor, where there may be questions and issues for cohen on cross, but to believe the trump defense, you'd have to believe that after everything cohen's been through, including

prison, he's now sticking to a new made up story. perjuring himself again and taking on new liability and somehow pulled other people into it. it's a, you know, i hesitate to make a musical reference, professor. just kidding. but it's a bit like near the end of the drake kendrick lamar battle where he said, oh, some of the things kendrick lamar said about him he had secretly previously planted. negative information about himself so kendrick lamar would say it so he could say gotcha, it's false and i trick you into attacking me. it's so convoluted that people question whether it's true. so i put all of that to you as well as for evidence the other issue with cohen is that the judge was moved and hasn't had to say this to many other witnesses. he was moved to say i would direct the people, the d.a., to communicate to mr. cohen, the

judge is asking him to refrain from making any more statements in the case. that's certainly not great. your thoughts on any of the above. >> certainly a minor deviation for mr. cohen. i know you'll know what i mean by that given your knowledge of the drake kendrick lamar beef. but i think one of the prosecutions this week was they got out a lot of dirt on michael cohen before he even came into the room. so honestly, the bar has been held for cohen. if he even performs reasonably well, strings some sentences together that are articulate and stands up on cross-examination, it will be a success. again, the strategy here was to minimize michael cohen by making the documents actually do the work of corroborating his story and i think they did a lot of work this week.

lining up those documents, providing context for those documents and also prebutting all of the claims this the defense will make about michael cohen and his credibility going forward. so, again, i think when you watch michael cohen next week, we might actually be very surprised that he stands up and that is perhaps because the prosecution has done so much work this week really airing out all of his dirty linen. >> yeah, you both sort of have given us and anyone listening more insight in why this is going down the way it is. why some of the negatives are coming out as we gear up for what is likely the final four days, sorry, three, monday, tuesday, thursday. the final three days of testimony on the prosecution side. because they have that wednesday off per usual. i will tell both of you on behalf of msnbc, please stay near your phone, camera set ups. stay hydrated. we'll be calling you a lot next week. thank you, guys.

>> thanks, ari. >> appreciate it. we have a lot more coming up including how those oval office meetings could be haunting trump. you'll be hearing testimony about that next week. when we do these specials, we like to also broaden out. we've had some interesting people join us. i'm thrilled to tell you that an acclaimed, long serving journalist who knows new york inside and out, curt anderson, is our special guest later in the hour. but first, michael steel. stay with us. ur but first, micha selteel stay with us when you have chronic kidney disease, there are places you'd like to be.