good day, i'm chris jansing live at msnbc headquarters in new york city. it may be donald trump's hush money trial, but all day long it's been the michael cohen show, with testimony pointing to cohen over and over at the heart of schemes to protect his boss. but the lawyer for stormy daniels and karen mcdougal testifying today that, in fact, he believed trump was behind the payoffs. the defense trying to argue he doesn't know what he's talking

about so where does it all go from here? plus, did trump cross the line, judge juan merchan may once again punish the former president for violating his gag order, what the prosecution is asking for as they try to get trump to stop. on the surface, it may seem that trump's trial and the escalating violence and chaos on college campuses have nothing to do with each other, but one of trump's former aides says it may, in fact, be part of a perfect political storm that is helping trump, boosting his election odds even as he sits quietly in court. but we start right here in new york city where a lunch break just began after a pretty wild morning at trump's trial. it's the former president accused of a crime, but today's proceedings have been focused squarely on his former fixer, michael cohen, his credibility, his likability and the lengths he went to to protect his boss as election day 2016 approached. cohen hasn't even taken the stand, but his name has already come up more than a thousand

times at this trial so far. i want to bring in nbc's yasmin vossoughian who's outside the courthouse, paul butler is a former federal prosecutor, georgetown law professor and an msnbc legal analyst. jim messina served as white house deputy chief of staff under president obama and led his 2012 re-election campaign, and danny cevallos joins me here in studio. he's a criminal defense attorney and an msnbc legal analyst. there is so much to get to, danny. it's been keith davidson on the stand, right? but the focus keeps coming back again and again and again to michael cohen a thousand times. he's been name checked in this trial. a lot of what we heard hasn't been flattering, but is that actually part of the state's strategy here? >> here's the thing, cooperating witnesses or people like michael cohen who is cooperating witness-esque, they always have problems. in the grand scheme of things, witnesses like michael cohen and

keith davidson aren't all that bad in the spectrum of cooperating witnesses. these are often people who are hardened criminals who may be brought into court in shackles and prison gear. you don't have that with michael cohen or keith davidson, but the people know that these are problematic witnesses because they seem seedy. michael cohen seems impulsive, rude, and possibly even somebody who makes bad decisions all on his own. the people know this, so they're getting out in front of it. they're doing the right thing, what you should always do with cooperators, what i'm sure paul butler did many times is you get in front of the problem. you bring it out in your direct examination that these people are problematic. the people know that davidson's going to say these bad things about cohen. they know because they're asking the questions about cohen, and it's good for the people to get this out in the open instead of letting the defense expose it and the people look like they've been hiding this the whole time. >> all right, paul, the defense has spent the last hour or so trying to discredit keith davidson. of course the lawyer for the two women at the heart of this, and

they want to show that he cannot tie the stormy daniels payoff back to donald trump directly. do you think that they have been successful in undermining that testimony? >> somewhat. so the cross examination so far has emphasized that it's donald trump who's on trial, and keith davidson never had any personal contact with donald trump. one of the first questions davidson was asked during cross is whether he had ever seen donald trump in person before this trial, and davidson said this was the first time. so he's testified that he believes michael cohen was acting on behalf of trump, but the defense is going to suggest that there's reasonable doubt. >> yasmin, tell me what you can, then, about how both sides are tried to use davidson's testimony to make their case. >> reporter: it was, chris, i have to say a really fascinating morning to say the least. when we talk about the direct

from the prosecution with davidson, they talked about really the time line. they talked about the pseudonyms that were used, right? the loyalty from michael cohen, his fervent kind of commitment to making sure this deal went through, his loyalty to donald trump in communications with davidson and making sure the payoff went through, but then also his difficulties in communicating with davidson and dylan howard having to act as an intermediary or a mediator because michael cohen was becoming so difficult to communicate with and davidson felt as if he was not being truthful with him about why it was they were trying to delay the payment. we know allegations have been made that it was donald trump, in fact, who wanted to delay the payments until after the election depending on whether or not he won or lost that election. it was interesting to see that entire time line, chris, laid out, and then when we went into

cross examination, it was all about chipping away at the credibility of davidson as an attorney, right? his list of clientele, his roster of clients that he has served going after, for instance, lindsay lohan when she was in rehab. they wanted to chip away really at the credibility, and they did that for quite some time. bove really went at davidson for quite some time. there was a risk, i think, for the jury in seeing that, okay, we know what you're trying to get at. let's get back to the matter at hand, and when bove eventually circled back to what they were dealing with, they talked about, for instance, the retainer that davidson took from karen mcdougal and that the initial agreement between karen mcdougal and bove was for, i believe, a 25% retainer, that retainer that increased to 35% making bove -- making davidson, excuse me, seem as if he were out more for money than anything else. it was a real interesting morning, i would say, and i

think the big moment for the prosecution was when davidson had emailed howard on the night of 2016 and said what have we done and howard emails back, my god. and this was the night in which we learn that donald trump had become the next president of the united states in 2016. a real moment, chris, inside that courtroom for the prosecution in understanding what had led up to that moment, just two weeks, by the way, prior, the emails beginning two weeks prior on october 26th as laid out, chris, by the prosecution. >> does that moment, danny, that yasmin just pointed out say unequivocally to jurors, at least in the minds of these two guys, they knew who was behind this and it was donald trump. they knew who they were trying to protect, and it was donald trump. >> yes, but the people know that david dennison is not giving

them trump's involvement. they must have more evidence of trump's involvement. that's the one thing that's glaringly absent. it seems to me the people's plan here is to first establish the element of their case that is the transaction from michael cohen to stormy daniels and then presumably they're going to shore up the trump involvement part later. that will obviously come from michael cohen. it may come from other places, maybe hope hicks. we don't know yet. but they are trying to lock in -- and i think they've put a lot of evidence in. it's almost indisputable at this point that michael cohen paid stormy daniels this money. but david dennison and even david pecker to some degree is never going to give the people absolutely donald trump's involvement, and they know that. what they're getting from david dennison is irrefutable proof at this point in my view that there was a transaction from michael cohen, a payment of money to stormy daniels and that he brokered the entire seedy affair, and it is a seedy affair. it's not necessarily bad for the prosecution. they want them to see every

element of it. david dennison gives us -- it gives lawyers like me an introduction into an area of law practice i never knew existed, which is the underbelly of celebrity payoffs for silence. something i never knew existed. >> all right. so paul, it was really interesting to follow, even on our document, we're not in court any of us. but the prosecution also brought up stormy daniels' denial that she had a relationship with trump. she signed a document, we think maybe, to that end, something trump himself posted about right before the trial started. so what did we learn, put this in perspective for us and why the prosecution even brought it up? >> so trump has suggested that stormy daniels just like michael cohen is a liar. she'll say anything because she doesn't like donald trump, and so at one point, she engged in

this kind of lawyerly answer about her relationship with donald trump. the truth seems to be that they had a one-night stand in terms of sex, and after that they had something like a business friendship i guess you could call it, and so when she says very specifically that she didn't have an extended romantic relationship with him that the defense will suggest that's just a sleazy lawyer being sleazy once more, being very lawyerly but not really trying to come up with the truth. so again, they're just trying to suggest that this guy is an extortionist. they've also presented or asked questions to elicit that he threatens high profile people like donald trump. he threatens them by threatening to expose their secrets unless they pay him off. so the defense wants the jury to think that the hush money payments were not about helping trump win the election, which is

the prosecution's claim. the defense wants the jury to think this was an old fashioned shakedown scheme committed by a sleazy lawyer who the prosecutors are presenting as a star witness. >> jim, let's talk about the politics of this deal between cohen and davidson to hide stormy daniels' story was signed on october 27th. that's less than two weeks before election day, and honestly, people were already voting. so if that story came out at that moment, is it reasonable to think it could have changed enough minds that it swings the election? >> oh, absolutely, chris, because remember what's happening around that. you have the access hollywood tape. you have kind of all of this happening as voters are making up their mind in the final part of the election. we know as political professionals that up to 10% of americans make their minds up in the final week or so, and so if you're the trump campaign or you're michael cohen, you just cannot allow this to get out there, and that's why they did this. it is absolutely clear from a

campaign perspective, you just could not have this coming out right in the middle of an election in the final days when voters are actually, to your point, voting every single day so people like michael cohen are hired to make this go away, and that's clearly what happened. >> let me make an argument on the other side that this is no longer the '60s or the '70s, that this is not a case where a presidential candidate goes on a boat named monkey business with a woman who is not his wife and finds himself in trouble as a candidate. you're convinced that it would have made a difference? >> how close the election was, we're talking about thousands of votes in a few key states. it goes into the entire narrative that the clinton campaign at the time was trying to move that donald trump was shady and had all these problems and was a shyster, and this would feed that narrative, especially, chris, around the access hollywood. i mean, this would have been a

two-part series here to show what this guy is and who he is to these women voters who ended up going away from clinton to trump in the final days of that election after the comey letter. >> a one-two punch. yasmin vossoughian, thank you. paul, jim, and danny, you're all going to stay with me. in 60 seconds, judge merchan is now weighing if trump violated his gag order again and what the consequences should be if he did. plus, our reporting team is just getting to the cameras outside the courthouse to give us color about what happened inside, so don't go away. t happd inside, so don't go away ( ♪♪ ) i thought water would help with these dry spots. that's lawn disease. but scotts healthy plus will cure it! lawn disease? been going around. so like other people have it and it's not... pick up a bag of the new scotts turf builder healthy plus lawn food today. feed your lawn. feed it. ♪ (upbeat music) ♪ ( ♪♪ ) with the push of a button, constant contact's ai tools help you know what to say, even when you don't.

hi! constant contact. helping the small stand tall. right now our reporting team from inside the courthouse where donald trump has been just got to our cameras outside the courthouse. let me bring in msnbc legal correspondent lisa rubin, and msnbc contributor and "new york times" investigative reporter sue craig.

they've been in the court overflow room all morning, which is where members of the press can listen to what's going on because of limited space inside the courtroom. usually when i go to you, lisa, right when you come out at the lunch break i ask you, you know, what your big headline is, which i think implies like what was the most important thing legally? but so much of what i read today got my attention, and i imagine got the attention of the jury. so i'm kind of asking you a two-part question. is there one thing legally and another you think may have clicked something for the jury? >> i think legally the one thing that i think is important to understand is that keith davidson is no angel, but notwithstanding that, when his client went forward and denied her relationship with donald trump, he and she were careful about the language that they used. they didn't see it as

inconsistent with the nondisclosure agreement that she signed or with the existence of what actually had transpired between her and donald trump, and i was speaking of stormy daniels now. stormy daniels wanted the world to know she had been paid no hush money, that she had no romantic relationship with donald trump, and as keith davidson testified today, he viewed that as perfectly consistent with the settlement agreement that he negotiated and that stormy daniels executed. why? because as he i'm sure will be infamous now said nobody ever thought there was a romantic relationship between stormy daniels and donald trump. rather it was a sexual encounter. and so keith davidson is a very careful witness. he parses his words. that having been said during the last hour, emil bove who is donald trump's lawyer really tried to dirty him up, and we are swimming in muck right now, chris, with respect to the world in which keith davidson lived.

if david pecker was the creme de la creme of gossip, we are no longer in first class. we are living in a world where as somebody just said to me during the break, i didn't even know there was such a thing as a sex tape broker. well, guess what, there is, and his name is keith davidson, and we are all learning that today. >> okay, so sue, i want to get to you in a second, but i also want to like take people behind the scenes that you often -- other lawyers that are in there put in notes for us of your observations. this is my favorite observation of the day just because it harkens back to one of my favorite sketches ever in the history of "saturday night live." you describe the vibe between bove and davidson as quineses macho. what was going on between those two guys? >> i'm from los angeles originally, i've watched my share of telenovelas. there is definitely a like i'm

going to out lawyer you vibe between the two of them. at one point bove said you're a lawyer, i'm lawyer, i'm not playing legal games with you, and davidson shot back, well, if you're not playing legal games, then maybe you should stop using the word extract because bove was trying to make the point that keith davidson is a guy with a history of extracting settlements, if not extorting people outright. that was the line of questioning to which josh steinglass for the prosecution repeatedly objected. i think the overall tenor has come across to the jury. keith davidson who by his own admission has represented over 1,500 clients in his career was really representing people who are peddling stories that largely dealt with sexual transactions or relationships with famous people but not necessarily a-list celebrities. people like terry baa leia who we know as hulk hogan or charlie sheen and the like. at one point, for example, had a client who was accused of having

transactions with tmz to sell information about lindsay lohan being in rehab. keith davidson is fighting for his professional reputation. he's still in practice in los angeles county and really wants people to believe he is a credible lawyer with a litigation practice. if you had read his direct testimony, when asked what he did for a living, he said he was a civil litigator whose practice was in media cases and he had represented some clients swaul assault claims. emil bove is trying to say what you do is basically engage in settlement agreements for the cheap and tawdry stories that people try to sell. >> i think people in hollywood know who he is. >> oh, yeah. >> he's traveling in some pretty crazy circles, and that's what donald trump's lawyers are trying to get across today. i have to admit, when i was sitting there i couldn't help but think of the -- sorry, new

york city behind us. i couldn't help but think of the saying that hell is empty today because the devils are all here. he's dealing with people trying to sell sex tapes and they kept trying to put this thing that he was extorting money as lisa said. he actually came back and he said it's not extortion. it's money for consideration for a civil settlement. he just kept coming back to that. these are deals he puts together. it's consideration and it's not extortion. i have to also say, chris, the one thing i kept thinking is what is the jury making of all of this and what does this actually have to do with the case. when you step back, what it is, it's a falsification of business records case, and they're trying to muddy up this witness, but in the end, what keith davidson is

right now is he is building a story just like david pecker was. keith davidson, there will be others, to the falsification of business records at the trump organization, and they all have a piece of that. so at the end of the day, i'm not sure how much all of the salacious stuff that we were hearing in the last hour is going to matter all that much, but you know, i think successfully the government did get in that there wasn't two agreements that were put together, keith davidson put them together. there was a lot of interaction between michael cohen and keith davidson up and through 2018 we're hearing. he was very involved. stormy daniels and people remember, she came out and i'll put in quotations, denied a relationship with donald trump. she put out statements, that's what lisa was talking about. there was the denial non-denial where it was very carefully worded. it's sort of like when donald trump says to us when he pays

taxes when we ask him if he pays income tax, he's actually talking about property tax. it was that sort of distinction with a difference but trying to thread a needle or trying to say something -- >> truthful but still misleading. >> chris, can i zoom out for a second? because i want to give our viewers a picture sort of where we are in the case. sue noted this is at base a falsification of business records case, but in order to make it a felony, as i have said to you and others many times, the d.a. has to show that those business records were falsified with the intent to commit or conceal another crime. that crime, as the d.a. has now revealed, is largely going to be a conspiracy pursuant to new york election law 17-152. makes it a crime to engage in a conspiracy to promote or prevent the election of a particular person through unlawful means and where at least one act toward the establishment of that goal is met. we are still in conspiracy land,

and so because of those two things, you can look at this case as being divided into two halves. there's the part about the falsification of business records, where we are is still in the establishment and execution of that conspiracy. that's where keith davidson fits in. remember, he never worked for the trump organization. in fact, he was forced to concede today, before today he had never been in the same room with donald trump. he's never communicated with donald trump. in fact, were i emil bove, that would have been the bulk of my cross examination was establishing you don't know what authorization michael cohen did or did not have. for all you know, michael cohen could have been freelancing. you told us that michael cohen's self-identity was very reliant on his position in the trump organization. wasn't it important for michael cohen to impress the boss. michael cohen could have been doing this just to make an impression on donald trump

without donald trump's involvement or knowledge. that would have been a very effective cross, particularly given that these folks, they don't dispute that there was a nondisclosure agreement. they're very happy to admit that there was. and in fact, they want davidson to help them establish that ndas are standard operating procedure. >> that was his first question. >> just as they did with david pecker. taking a wider lens out, we are still focused on the conspiracy. there will come a point in time where the d.a.'s attention shifts to the back half and really the more important part of the case although the duller part of the case. how did donald trump and others around him then get together to cover this up through false business records that the trump organization and beyond. right now we're still all about the election and making sure donald trump won in 2016 in part through the cooperation and help of people like keith davidson who infamously said to dylan howard, what have we done, in that december -- i'm sorry, november 9th, 2016, text.

>> that's really extremely well stated, where we are in terms of the legal part of the case. let me ask you, sue, about the atmospherics. we often start with donald trump. there were several reports in our document that, again, he seemed to have his eyes closed. i mean, i think it's a normal human thing, wondering what must be going through his mind when they're talking about a statement written by stormy daniels whom he says he never had any kind of relationship with, signing this document, her name coming up. karen mcdougal's name coming up. how was donald trump today? >> i think a few things when i think about the morning and his reactions. he was more alert during the gag order part, and at one point when there was a tweet from michael cohen that was showed to the court, he actually gestured to it as if maybe he wanted to say something. for the most part, his eyes have been closed. he's listening. you can see his eyes will be closed.

he'll make a comment to his lawyer immediately. he could be -- he's listening, and i also think -- you know, when i think about whey we care about donald trump and what he's doing, i think it's important because the jury is going to be watching him. they're going to see he has his eyes closed. but the other thing is there's severe consequences to him if he acts out in court. it could be that he's trying to keep a very straight face at this point. it's one thing to get fined a thousand dollars because you're making a post on your social media platform. it's another thing to act out in front of the jury and risk incarceration. >> and while bove is trying to go after davidson, i'm curious about how you think he came across as a witness, and there's one particular point, maybe not so legally significant, but one that got all of our attention where he's describing after the election he's in a big box store, and he describes it decorated like alice in

wonderland, and you felt very small in it, and there were these huge rabbits, and his phone rings and on the other end is michael cohen, and he said something to the effect of can you -- delete -- believe i'm not going to washington and everything i've done for that guy, i can't believe i'm not going to washington. i saved that guy's -- delete -- so many times you don't even want to know. it was a kind of a real moment, but overall, how would you describe davidson as a witness? >> i'm going to take that in two parts because i think -- start on direct examination and then on cross, that moment was incredible. it was on direct, and he actually talked about how michael cohen thought he might become potentially the attorney general or the chief of staff. i thought he was an effective witness on government direct.

but once we came to the cross examination, i think it quickly fell apart i think would be too strong, but he became seemingly kind of almost embarrassed and sort of very contrite about the sort of world that he was dealing in. you know, the questions were very narrow on direct about michael cohen, about his clients and all of a sudden we're talking about all these other people, hulk hogan, lindsay lohan, all these deals he might have extorted, and he felt -- i immediately when that started to happen thought back to david pecker's testimony. david pecker just seemed to have no remorse. he told his story. he was an effective witness. he was smooth, and i think we saw, you know, keith davidson sort of almost -- i felt his embarrassment about the world that he travels in. how did you feel about it? >> i felt -- first of all, i agreed with you. keith davidson is very much embarrassed and also has a livelihood to still earn. is a person who according to emil bove may have fallen afoul

of california ethics guidelines in the past with respect to his career as a lawyer. he is definitely motivated not only by his own embarrassment but to keep his career going just as a legal matter. i want to say one thing about that testimony about cohen which was not only extraordinarily colorful and sort of reemphasized how surf reel it was -- surreal it was, for keith davidson to be doing his christmas shopping with a despondent michael cohen on the other side of the phone, he later confessed cohen was so depressed he feared that cohen might actually take his life. you're wondering why is that important? that's salacious. it's very important. the defense is trying to paint a picture of michael cohen as a guy with a vendetta, a guy with an axe to grind. and according to them, that axe starts with the fact that cohen never got to go to washington. he was pissed off at having been abandoned by donald trump, and as a result of that has manufactured lie upon lie upon

lie about donald trump. so that story about the conversation in the big box store, that's one that both sides had an interest in coming out. i think partially for the prosecution because they wanted to show that cohen was a person who at all times was motivated to do right by the boss. he wanted to make donald trump proud and he wanted to ingratiate himself to donald trump, and he was doing this for donald trump. that's important to the prosecution. but conversely, the defense may also use that conversation to illustrate cohen has always been upset with donald trump dating back to late 2016, and he has not let up since, and everything he's going to tell you about these transactions with respect to our client, all of that is a lie. largely grounded in his feeling that he was taken for granted and not given the job that he thought he should have had when our client was elected president. >> and chris, the other thing

that's sort of perplexing and sometimes when we were on direct about why the government was introducing certain things that didn't seem to work in their favor. i think they're just trying to lay the groundwork so they can at least control the narrative on some of the stuff that happened with stormy daniels and that she was denying the affair. why would the government want to introduce that? i think they wanted to get it out to the jury in a way they could control it. >> and that was only this morning. thank you so much, lisa and sue, much appreciated. the other thing that they touched on even before all that happened, judge juan merchan once again facing an important decision, did donald trump further violate the gag order against him in the hush money case. there was a hearing this morning, and the prosecution used striking language saying trump is creating a, quote, air of menace and that his statements are corrosive to this proceeding and to the fair administration of justice. so they used four more alleged

violations all in trump's own words to make that point. paul butler, jim messina, danny cevallos back with us. so, paul, trump's lawyer todd blanch says he's running for president and has the right to speak. how does that compar to the judge's ruling in this case? >> that's not going to work. the judge knows that $9,000, that is $1,000 per violation will not deter donald trump. he's a recidivist violator of gag orders. he probably thinks of it as a campaign expense. it's worth it because politically trump has to discredit the process that could make him a convicted felon and even send him to prison, and trump can do that because he's got the biggest megaphone of any criminal defendant in history. i think the judge is in a

difficult position. he knows that jailing trump is probably the only thing that will work to shut him up. the judge also has to be concerned about equal justice under the law. any other defendant who committed contempt of court nine times would be sitting in rikers island right now. >> danny, blanche also raised a fearless issue saying his client should have a right to respond to comments made whether it's by cohen, whether it's been stormy daniels. even president biden's joke, he said, which was about stormy weather when he was at the white house correspondents dinner on saturday and he brought even more examples of what he said were other people going after donald trump. does his argument have any weight potentially? >> i'm going to call that a mid range argument in all the arguments we heard today. the loser argument is the idea that donald trump was talking about the jury to begin with in any way, shape, or form. that i think he's going to lose on. i think judge merchan is going to find him in violation. you're not supposed to talk

about the jury at all. then on the other end, saying david pecker is nice. i think the judge is going to give trump a pass on that one. it's just too nothing. you can imagine context in which let's say john gotti's on trial and he says, hey, those witnesses better be nice. that would be a different statement than just saying david pecker is nice. i think trump prevails on that one. the mid-range, as a campaigner being able to respond to statements by people like michael cohen, i think it's bolstered by the fact that michael cohen won't stop talking. i have no doubt the people, the prosecution is equally as frustrated with michael cohen out there making statements and bolstering trump's argument that he should be able to respond to them. so in other words, this argument might have less of a chance if michael cohen wasn't so active out there making statements and bolstering the argument that trump should be able to respond

to them as someone campaigning for the highest political office in the land. >> you know, jim, joe biden's name was invoked for the first time by the defense in this hearing over the stormy weather comment. but, i mean, joe biden has been amping up his attacks, right? they've gotten a little sharper. do you think it's smart for him to go after trump for the trial, get in first of all what's happening in court, but also just maybe how it reads to voters. could some of these digs, i don't know, make him look small? >> i don't think so. i mean, the comment the other night was a joke at a dinner, and i think the joke's fine. i think going forward, though, here's the problem for the trump campaign. they need every single vote they got in 2016 and 2020 and they need more because they're going to lose some of those votes and millions more americans can now vote in this election. and so every day voters are reminded of the one thing that we know from polls they don't like, and that is the circus

around donald trump and how he treats people, and so that's why this court case is so difficult for trump and the biden campaign is going to largely skip it and just let trump sort of sink in his own mire here when voters are starting to be reminded why they didn't like this guy in the first place. >> jim messina and paul butler, thank you both very much. danny, you're going to stay with me. next, could trump's time inside the courtroom be saving him on the campaign trail? you're watching "chris jansing reports" only on msnbc. reports" only on msnbc nothing dims my light like a migraine. with nurtec odt, i found relief. the only migraine medication that helps treat and prevent, all in one. to those with migraine, i see you. for the acute treatment of migraine with or without aura and the preventive treatment of episodic migraine in adults. don't take if allergic to nurtec odt. allergic reactions can occur, even days after using. most common side effects were nausea, indigestion, and stomach pain. it's time we all shine. talk to a healthcare provider about nurtec odt from pfizer.

feeling claritin clear is like... ♪♪ [cat meow] —is she? letting her imagination run wild even though she has allergies. yeah. when you put in the effort, but it starts to frizz... you skipped a step. tresemmé silk serum. use before styling for three days of weightlessly smooth hair that frizz can't beat. new tresemmé keratin smooth collection. i have moderate to severe crohn's disease. now, there's skyrizi. ♪ things are looking up, i've got symptom relief. ♪ ♪ control of my crohn's means everything to me. ♪ ♪ control is everything to me. ♪ feel significant symptom relief at 4 weeks with skyrizi, including less abdominal pain and fewer bowel movements. skyrizi is the first il-23 inhibitor that can deliver remission and visibly improve damage of the intestinal lining. and the majority of people experienced

long-lasting remission at one year. serious allergic reactions and an increased risk of infections or a lower ability to fight them may occur. tell your doctor if you have an infection or symptoms, had a vaccine or plan to. liver problems may occur in crohn's disease. ♪ now's the time to ask your gastroenterologist how you can take control of your crohn's with skyrizi. ♪ ♪ control is everything to me. ♪ ♪ learn how abbvie could help you save. hi, i'm greg. i live in bloomington, illinois. i'm not an actor. i'm just a regular person. some people say, "why should i take prevagen? i don't have a problem with my memory." memory loss is, is not something that occurs overnight. i started noticing subtle lapses in memory. i want people to know that prevagen has worked for me. it's helped my memory. it's helped my cognitive qualities. give it a try. i want it to help you just like it has helped me. prevagen. at stores everywhere without a prescription. from chavez and huerta

to striking janitors in the 90s to today's fast-food workers. californians have led the way. now, $20/hour is here. thanks to governor newsom and leaders in sacramento, we can lift workers out of poverty. stop the race to the bottom in the fast-food industry. and build a california for all of us. thank you governor and our california lawmakers for fighting for what matters.

it's a beautiful... and our california lawmakers ...day to fly. wooooo!

there's a kind of confluence today of three major trump stories, donald trump's trial, the controversial interview he gave to "time" magazine and the chaos on college campuses across the country. stay with me, it's a contrast in images. on one side you have a calm, if sometimes sleepy donald trump in court. today once again seeing with his eyes shut during witness testimony. on the other, violence, unrest, police activity, scenes that draw attention away from both the trial and the interview where he said he would let red states monitor women's pregnancies and would be willing to build migrant detention camps. alyssa fara griffin argues in a new opinion piece that his court hearings may be helping him by keeping him contained and unable to feed his worst instincts

which will only provide voters with reminders of why they rejected him four years. still within the margin of error suggesting that perhaps the trial may not be hurting him politically. jonathan allen, nbc news senior national political reporter joins us along with geoff bennett, co-anchor of pbs news hour and an msnbc political contributor. i wonder, john, what you make of alyssa farah griffin's argument that the trial could be helping trump saving him from his worst instincts? >> it certainly keeps him out of the news for several hours a day whenever he's in the trial. obviously as we see what that "time" magazine interview, he's certainly capable of generates headlines with talk of extreme policies or policies that certainly are extreme by the current standards, so whether you're talking about monitoring women's pregnancies, allowing states to do that, whether you're talking about migrant detention camps, these are significant policy changes he's

able to get out there even if he's at trial. i think alyssa farah is right, there's a limitation on that by the fact that he is in trial. we're going to hear obviously with some of these violation, contempt issues with him violating a gag order, he may be a little more -- as time goes on. the other thing i think is so fascinating is watching him during these protests and watching joe biden during these protests. it was just four years ago obviously a very different issue, but the summer of protests following the george floyd killing in minnesota. you had trump in office dealing with protests. now you have biden in office dealing with protests, and what we heard from joe biden today in some ways echoed donald trump. what we heard from joe biden repeatedly was the word law and the word order, or in some cases he said disorder in a very short span of time, which sounds not too difficult from donald trump's law and order. and i think that indicates that joe biden is worried that, you know, basically the persuadable middle in swing states will look at these college campus protests

and what's going on there and blame the president in office if there is not a restoration of order. >> there is no doubt trump has been trying to spin the campus unrest to his advantage. just yesterday at a wisconsin rally, here it is. >> when you see that video of raging lunatics and hamas sympathizers at columbia and other colleges, no, but when you look at it, i say where did these people come from? and you follow that up by saying where is joe biden? well, joe biden did come forward and talk about it today, but it is logical, i think, for people to be watching, following the campus unrest. it is a big story, but the images are also quite compelling. how much danger is there for joe biden and how much of an opening for donald trump? >> yeah, well, we've seen president biden, chris, really try to calibrate his approach

between denouning anti-semitism, denouncing violence on campus but also defending the students' right to protest. that's precisely what he said in his comments earlier today. campaign aides don't see a big risk to the president's political standing, at least not yet. and that's because they say these students who are actively demonstrating across campuses across the country, that they really represent a subsection of a subsection of the electorate, and if president biden has any issues with younger voters right now, the humanitarian catastrophe in gaza and the u.s. approach to it, that's not the chief concern. what remains the chief concern among younger voters is economic issues, the high cost of living, all of that, and we're also not seeing these demonstrators protest against president biden himself directly. the next big test, of course, will be for president biden when he is in atlanta speaking at my alma mater, morehouse college for that commencement in a couple of weeks' time, but returning to this other issue about the trump trial and the

political risks that that presents for donald trump, i have a slightly different view than alyssa farah and even my friend john allen. in part because in electoral politics time and money are finite resources. and this trial, chris, is consuming both of them coing at a time when the trump campaign is trying to stand up a national infrastructure for the general election and as president biden is seeing his poll numbers improve in some places. just on the money looking at the s.e.c. filings for march, there is a super pact tied to the trump campaign that supports it that spent $3.7 million in trump legal fees. $3.7 million is the same amount of money the trump campaign spent on donald trump running for president over that same period of time -- >> can i interrupt you for just a second, geoff? >> sure, yeah. >> so the question that i keep getting asked is -- and so i'll ask you given your argument -- how do you explain that the polls still show them basically in a dead heat, right? within the margin of error if

what you're saying is that donald trump is at a big disadvantage in time and money. >> i think it presents a risk. if this election comes down to the 8 to 10% of independents who were left in this country to have all of these tawdry details come out day after day after day, that presents a huge risk to donald trump's standing with independent women, women who live in the suburbs. and so that's the risk. and so there's the risk with the time, with the money he has to be in court four days out of the week with the court going dark on wednesday, we saw him yesterday in michigan and wisconsin. this approach of trying to talk to reporters on his way in and out of the court, that over time could have diminishing returns. one of the ways we know that, yesterday he tried to fit in two rallies in two swing states. it really has more to do with the risk, even if it's not showing up just yet in the polls. >> john allen, geoff bennett, thank you both. coming up, we're going to talk with a former trump white house deputy press secretary. that's coming up in our next hour. but first we have more on

president biden condemning violence that erupted during pro-palestinian protests on college campuses nationwide. hundreds arrested at ucla. we'll head to that campus for the latest next. >> this isn't a moment for politics. it's a moment for clarity. so let me be clear, peaceful protests in america, violent protest is not protected. peaceful protest is. ♪ i'll be there... ♪ ♪ you don't... ♪ ♪ you don't have to worry... ♪ power e*trade's easy to-use tools make complex trading less complicated. custom scans help you find new trading opportunities, while an earnings tool helps you plan your trades and stay on top of the market. e*trade from morgan stanley businesses go further with 5g solutions. that's why they choose t-mobile for business.

pga of america and t-mobile are partnering on 5g-powered analytics to help improve player performance. t-mobile's network helps aaa stay connected nationwide... to get their members back on the road. and las vegas grand prix chose t-mobile to help fuel operations for one of the world's largest racing events. now is the time to see what america's largest 5g network can do for your business.

breaking news, just moments ago, president biden landing in charlotte, north carolina. right now he is meeting with the grieving families of four fallen law enforcement officers who were killed in a fatal shoot out on monday. that emotional visit will take place behind closed doors to protect the privacy of those families. it is an added stop in north carolina. the president will later be going to an event on jobs and

infrastructure. this morning, president biden addressed the growing unrest at dozens of encampments on college campuses across the country. some have been raided by police. biden said peaceful protests are protected in america. violent protests are not. >> dissent is essential to democracy, it must never lead to disorder or denying the rights of students to finish their semester and college education. it's basically a matter of fairness. it's a matter of what's right. the right to protest, but not the right to cause chaos. >> his remarks come after law enforcement in riot gear cleared an encampment at ucla very early this morning, following two days of upheaval and attacks from counter protesters. police say hundreds of people were arrested. right now, crews are clearing the site, they're putting anything left over in a dumpster. nbc's dana griffin is on the ground at ucla. what are you seeing right now on

campus? >> reporter: we are in the media staging area. earlier they were allowing crews to go inside. but they have now put up additional barriers, and this is what is unfolding at this moment. we are seeing crews using these front loaders, dumping several bags of garbage and tents inside these huge garbage bins. we're going to keep walking down, to show you a little bit on campus. we're going to see there are several crews in light blue shirts. they are dismantling tents at this moment. they are putting them in large piles so that those heavy equipment machines can come and collect them and then dump them. this has been going on for the last hour or so and it's been a very very quick process as everything is getting cleaned up. we know that classes today have been moved online. we're not seeing many people on campus besides media, law enforcement and the crews behind us cleaning up this encampment after the highway patrol came in, dismantled what had been an

encampment that's been here for at least a week. you can see some additional items here, some tents, some bags of trash looking over this barrier. you can see the hard hats that some of the protesters were wearing as they were fortifying their defense in case police came in heavy handed. they wanted to protect themselves. we saw many in gas masks. and you can just see as the eye can see just outside the famed royce hall here, just a sea of people who are now cleaning up the mess that has been left behind. we know there have been several arrests, and we are still trying to narrow down exactly how many of these were students, faculty or maybe outsiders who joined this cause. but there's been a lot of frustration from the protesters who say that they initially clashed with counter pro israel protesters and there were concerns that police had not come in to stop the fighting. we saw that heavy show of force here last night. we know that one officer was

injured. for the most part, no one else really hurt in this, but now it's just the race to clean this up and what is to come for the campus here at ucla remains to be seen. chris. >> dana griffin, thank you. we've got more on donald trump's trial coverage coming up at the top of our next hour. more "chris jansing reports" right after this. more "chris jansing reports" right after this nothing dims my light like a migraine. with nurtec odt, i found relief. the only migraine medication that helps treat and prevent, all in one. to those with migraine, i see you. for the acute treatment of migraine with or without aura and the preventive treatment of episodic migraine in adults. don't take if allergic to nurtec odt. allergic reactions can occur, even days after using. most common side effects were nausea, indigestion, and stomach pain. it's time we all shine. talk to a healthcare provider about nurtec odt from pfizer. when my doctor gave me breztri for my copd things changed for me.

breztri gave me better breathing, symptom improvement, and reduced flare-ups. breztri won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. it is not for asthma. tell your doctor if you have a heart condition or high blood pressure before taking it. don't take breztri more than prescribed. breztri may increase your risk of thrush, pneumonia, and osteoporosis. call your doctor if worsened breathing, chest pain, mouth or tongue swelling, problems urinating, vision changes, or eye pain occur. ask your doctor about breztri. i'm jonathan lawson, here to tell you about life insurance vision changes, or eye pain occur. through the colonial penn program. if you're age 50 to 85 and looking to buy life insurance on a fixed budget, remember the three p's. what are the three p's? the three p's of life insurance on a fixed budget are price, price, and price. a price you can afford, a price that can't increase, and a price that fits your budget. i'm 54. what's my price? you can get coverage for $9.95 a month. i'm 65 and take medications.

what's my price? also $9.95 a month. i just turned 80. what's my price? $9.95 a month for you too. if you're age 50 to 85, call now about the #1 most popular whole life insurance plan available through the colonial penn program. options start at $9.95 a month. no medical exam, no health questions. your acceptance is guaranteed. and this plan has a guaranteed lifetime rate-lock, so your rate can never go up for any reason. so call now for free information, and you'll also get this free beneficiary planner. and it's yours free just for calling, so call now for free information. your shipping manager left to “find themself.” leaving you lost.

you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. indeed instant match instantly delivers quality candidates matching your job description. visit indeed.com/hire

♪♪ welcome back to our second hour of "chris jansing reports." after a morning of testimony both legally significant and salacious, we're just about 15 minutes away from the jury's scheduled return from a break in donald trump's hush money trial. and the former president is already back in the building and speaking. here's what he told us just moments ago. >> getting ready to spend another day in the courthouse, which is bogus trial that every leading authority on law says should never have been brought, that alvin bragg didn't want to bring until the election happened, and then he brought it. you know that this case could have been brought eight years ago, could have been brought eight years ago. instead, they wait and wait and wait. they know it's not a good case, and now it turns out to be, they've lost every -- they have no case. they have no case.