nnected on the day of your move with the xfinity app. can i sleep over at your new place? can katie sleep over tonight? sure, honey! this generation is so dramatic! move with xfinity.

good day. i'm chris jansing live at msnbc headquarters in new york city. he's just another guy, the words of a dismissed juror describing the former president, someone she once viewed as larger than life. we're closely watching jury selection unfold in his criminal hush money trial. some progress on day two, narrowing the pool of possible jurors to at least an initial batch of 18, though who knows how many will make it to the next round. we'll have the latest from the courtroom in just a minute. plus, the former president's time is no longer his own. trump complaining this morning that he should be in florida or north carolina campaigning instead of stuck in a courtroom. how he's coping with this new reality. and finding trump supporters in new york city these days is no easy feat. just two in ten backed him in 2020. in manhattan, where the trial is being held, it was closer to one in ten. our own steve kornacki dives

deep into the jury pool coming up. but we start with that new phase in donald trump's new york city trial, just getting under way again as we speak. about 90 minutes ago, 18 per spective jurors made it through the questionnaire without being dismissed or excused. they're not on the jury yet. having survived the 42 written questions and then answered more questions from lawyers on both sides, the judge just asked them to step outside. it is possible they could deal with striking jurors now. so the question is, will any of them survive? trump himself is said to be watching potential jurors at times, at other times leaning back and closing his eyes. and he smiled when one of them said they read his book, the art of the deal. our reporters described trump as being more alert and in better spirits than he was yesterday. that didn't stop him from slamming judge merchan again as

he arrived at the courthouse and once again offering a defense to the hush money allegations against him. >> mark it down as a legal expense, i didn't know. mark it down as a legal expense. that's what it was. legal expense. it is called legal expenses. that's what you're supposed to call it. nobody has ever seen anything like it. >> and as the judge works to put together a jury, the american people are already weighing in. there is a new associated press poll that says just 35% believe trump's actions were illegal, another 31% say they were just unethical. that said, if he is convicted, fully half of americans say it would render him unfit to serve as president. i want to bring in nbc's vaughn hillyard, outside the courthouse. also with me, barbara mcquaid, former u.s. attorney, university of michigan law professor and

msnbc legal analyst. so, vaughn, what is the latest there? >> reporter: right now they're going through the process, they finished the voir dire process which allowed the d.a.'s office to ask for about 30 questions -- 30 minutes, questions, specific questions of the 18 individuals who could potentially be jurors. that was followed by donald trump's attorney following up with his own set of questions. todd blanche was keen on asking the individuals their beliefs about donald trump. and multiple individuals, you know, for example, one juror saying that he felt he didn't need to share exactly what his opinion of donald trump was because he felt like he could compartmentalize his opinions about the former president and be able to be a fair arbiter in determining whether donald trump is guilty or innocent. there was another juror, though, who commented he didn't have

much of an opinion about donald trump truthfully, but the courtroom, the team inside, broke out into laughter when this individual said about trump, quote, he walks into a room and sets people off. so many people are set off one way or the other, i find that interesting, calling donald trump fascinating. and there was another juror who said donald trump stirs the pot, quote, you can't judge him because he speaks his mind, i know what's right, and what's wrong. so, it is based off of those types of answers that it is now up to the defense team and the prosecution to huddle with their respective sides and determine who they would seek to strike from this process. at that point in time, we have a better understanding if any of the 18 individuals will actually be seated jurors. and at that point, next round of individuals will enter the courtroom into the jury pool and begin to go through the 42 questionnaire process that played out yesterday afternoon and again this morning and then the voir dire process repeats itself again. so, we are getting closer here in this early afternoon to

potentially finding out if some of these jurors over the course of last 24 hours answered extensive questions from both sides could potentially be one of those either 12 jurors who is seated or one of those six alternates to play out over the course of the six to eight week trial. >> all right, barbara, i want to ask you about what is going on right now. the jury just went back in to be told they're going into a lunch break. before that happened, both sides were going to have to decide now on who to strike or who to keep and this says, this is again from our folks who are on scene, barbara, stein glass, hoffinger and the entire prosecution team is in a huddle. what happens, what are the conversations like and what is the process of deciding who to strike and who to keep? >> prosecutors are looking for people they believe are going to be able to render a guilty verdict. there is some rules of thumb there, you want people who are generally educated, people who

work in jobs that require them to follow rules and pull things together. and when i was choosing a jury, i tended to look less at individual jurors, and more at the jury as a group because i was interested in people who could work together to solve problems. because the prosecution is the burden of proving the case beyond a reasonable doubt and so i didn't want strong opinion leaders who might be polarizing to the other side. i wanted people who would listen, with an open mind, and be able to follow the rules, follow the instructions from the court, and work together to reach a consensus. >> all right, let me play a little bit more of vaughn's interview with a juror, which vaughn was great, and i want to get your reaction on the other side. take a listen. >> it was such an interesting experience because -- i had never seen him in person before. and you see someone blown up so larger than life on the media,

for so many years, to see them in person is very jarring. and you get the sense that it is, like, oh, this is just another guy. i guess when you're on any jury, it is -- you have elements of that person's future in your hands. so whether it was trump or whether it was some stranger off the street in manhattan, who i had never heard of before, if you commit to sitting on the jury, you can change that person's life forever. >> i thought that was such an informative answer and i want to know what you think, barbara, she hit on two things we talk a lot about here, that is the impact of having a famous person as a defendant. and the second part of it is how seriously jurors take the charge, the oath that they take. what do you make of her answer, even though she was not chosen?

>> yeah, i think it is very insightful. so, this idea of being star struck, i think that is true for most jurors the first time they see somebody. they're going to be spending every day with donald trump, in very close proximity, for many -- so you get to know a person and you see them. so i think that that sort of reduces that star power over time because you see that they're an ordinary person, they have a drink of water, they have to tie their shoe, all kinds of things that are very ordinary. i think some of that star power diminishes over time. the other point she made is about the solemnity of holding a person's future in your hands. i think it is what motivates jurors to take their jobs very seriously. you get -- you're outside of court, people are tough talk is cheap, you get in the courtroom and the judge instructs you, there you are, you see the guards and you see the seal of the courts, all of these symbols of institutions, and you realize that you, the jurors, hold this

incredible power and i think it is what causes jurors to take their jobs very seriously, to follow the law, and to do their best to try to figure out the right result in the case. >> vaughn, do we know why she was struck? >> reporter: scheduling. she works in cybersecurity, and when asked about her schedule ahead and whether she would be able to accommodate the trial, she said she works in cybersecurity and that there were concerns about the obligations of her job with the time that it would take over the course of six to eight weeks to be on this jury. and, you know, this is what is unique about this case, is that really any reason is a good enough reason in the judge's eye to be dismissed, even without reason, and she said as much as she would have liked to have par taken in the jury, the amount of commitment it would take for her was something that she was just not able to and ready to do at this point in time. >> so, barbara, i want to read part of what you tweeted about the jury pool. you said if you're a prosecutor, you're looking for jurors with an open mind who can work well

in teams. if you're on the defense, you're looking for a strong-willed contrarian. my question is, and the reason i asked vaughn that question is because she seemed like such a smart person who understood the gravity of what she had to do. how do you figure that out? >> well, it is a little bit of guesswork. in this case, it is actually better than most because of that 42-question questionnaire. but you are making a lot of assumptions based on the answers that the jurors give. and in response to your follow-up questions. and so, some of it is just the way they answer the questions. sometimes people come across as having strong opinions, they might say things that are a little bit off beat. they're willing to take a strong stand, they're willing to make bold assertions about a defendant. some of the things you reported on earlier today would give me a little bit of nervousness about donald trump commanding a room and those kinds of things. that's not a normal thing for people to say. i might be a little worried

that's the kind of contrarian i might not want to have on the jury. somebody who might be too strong willed or somebody who might be polarizing. if you're looking for that person, you might be looking for their job, the idea that they are someone who is sort of a disestablishment character based on the work history or the media they follow or some of the answers that they give. so it is not just what they say, but how they say it. >> all right. nbc's yasmin vossoughian is outside the courthouse as well. yasmin, give us a sense of what is going on inside. i know you've been closely following what people have been writing from inside. what do we know about donald trump's demeanor and any sense of the vibe inside the courthouse on day two? >> reporter: i think when people showed up today, what we're hearing from inside is that it felt like kind of the first day of school jitters. i think a lot of potential jurors that were showing up today kind of knew the gravity and understood what was going

to -- it was going to take to sit on this jury and were quite nervous to start this second day and understanding what it would take away from their lives, but also the potential of what it could mean for the rest of the country. when it comes to the former president of the united states and his demeanor, chris, inside this courtroom, lisa rubin described him as kind of leaning to the left, arms crossed, and eyes closed on and off all throughout the morning. you have to imagine, i mean, this is a pretty long and drawn out period, right? court began pretty on time this morning at 9:30. we're now four hours into the day, they're just taking lunch break now. the former president really hasn't engaged a lot throughout the day, despite the fact that he converses with his attorneys here and there. every time there is a side bar, in court, with the judge, when it comes to this q&a process, he's left alone at the table. when it came to the end of the

voir dire process, they went to the separate corners to discuss who should be struck, the former president went to his corner, with his attorneys to discuss that. there was something i wanted to read out for you, chris, because there was a moment in which the former president kind of peered at one of the jurors and the juror said this, i just feel like anyone until you're proven guilty, why should i judge? he stirs the pot, he stirs the pot. he speaks his mind, you can't judge him because he speaks his mind. at this point, the former president briefly glanced at her and then glanced back down. it seems like he's less involved in this process so far, maybe i should say less animated so far than we remember from the process that played out during the judge kaplan trial and the defamation case for e. jean carroll. >> yasmin vossoughian, vaughn hillyard and thank you, barbara, we'll check back with you in a bit. in 60 seconds, a former attorney for former president

trump joins us. what he thinks about trump getting a fair trial. the defense strategy and what has been called a bromance with his lawyer. that's next. d a bromance with his lawyer that's next. with e*trade from morgan stanley, we're ready for whatever gets served up. dude, you gotta work on your trash talk. i'd rather work on saving for retirement. or college, since you like to get schooled. that's a pretty good burn, right? auntie, you can't put that right in the dishwasher. watch me. with cascade platinum plus i have upped my dish game. i just scrape... load... and i'm done. in that dishwasher? in that dishwasher. only platinum plus is packed with more dawn to remove up to 100% of grease and food residue. get the highest standard of clean, even in your machine. clean enough for ya? yeah. scrape, load, done. cascade platinum plus. dare to dish differently. >> tech: at safelite, we'll take care of fixing your windshield. but did you know we can take care of your insurance claim? cascade platinum plus. that means less stress for you. >> woman: thanks. >> tech: my pleasure.

have a good one. >> woman: you too. >> tech: schedule today at safelite.com. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ just like any jury, there are a lot of reasons why people say they can't serve. today, one person was worried about leaving their dog home during long trial days. dismissed. another had a work schedule conflict. dismissed. but some of the jurors spoke directly to their ability to be fair. one juror saying, quote, i believe no one's above the law. i'm not 100% sure that i can be fair. another said, quote, i'm not sure that i can say beyond a reasonable doubt. i can try and i think i can, but i'm not sure i can be fair to him. both were dismissed. i want to bring in former attorney for donald trump tim

parlatore. good to see you again. so the prosecution addressed the court today saying, quote, no one is suggesting you can't be fair because you heard from donald trump. we need jurors who can set aside strong feelings and focus on evidence. it is not a referendum on the trump presidency, we don't care. this case is about whether this man broke the law. do you think donald trump can get a fair trial? >> i certainly think he can get a fair trial. new york juries and i tried several cases in new york, you know, they can be fair. and, you know, to believe the campaign, you know, polling and try to equate the two and say that because he lost the election there, therefore he will, you know, lose a trial, i think it doesn't give enough credit to new york jurors. >> i'm sure your experiences and my much more limited experience inside trials is that sometimes the days are long. sometimes it is hard to pay

attention. but, if you're a defendant, and you're a famous defendant, as donald trump is, people tend to pay maybe a little more attention, he's been for the last couple of days appearing to close his eyes, some reporters have suggested he seems to be nodding off. does that surprise you? and do you think it is a problem for him? >> you know, this is a very long and tedious process. and so certainly it is something i have seen defendants do, you know, before, during the jury selection process. so i don't think it really is going to affect that much. i think the big important piece is for him to be paying attention, you know, during the trial, and, you know, to, you know, basically not be doing anything that will, you know, unduly prejudice the jury against him. >> you know, we are at the stage of the trial because none of the

arguments have really been made yet, except by donald trump outside of the courtroom. largely. where people are kind of looking for clues, one of the clues they thought they got yesterday and then again today was the relationship that seems to have developed between donald trump and his lead lawyers. he and todd blanche were seeing laughing and talking, often conferring, where as susan nichols, who is a very experienced defense lawyer, a little more off to the side, should we read something into that and could that be important? >> you know, i have a lot of respect for susan. she's been around for a long time, she's a very good lawyer. i know that, you know, todd is certainly somebody that has been closer to him through the campaign and things like that. and so, i can understand why you would have a stronger relationship with the lead attorney in situations like that. but i think susan is a

professional, and the fact she's still there is a good thing for him. >> do you think -- >> i certainly understand. that's -- it is kind of standard you do develop that stronger relationship with the lead attorney. >> he says he wants to testify. should he? and what's the first thing if you were still his lawyer, if you were his lawyer in this case, that you would say to him about that? >> well, first of all, the decision whether a defendant should testify should not be made until after the government has rested their case. you have to wait and see what all the evidence is and then make a strategic decision at that time as to whether you need to testify or whether that's going to potentially be something that just creates an enforced error. if that happens, the conversation i would have with my client is going to be very hard and very direct, and we're going to play it out and i'm going to be the prosecutor, i'm going to beat him up myself and see, you know, see if he still wants to do it after that

session. >> yeah, he has said several times in public, and pretty forcefully, that he will testify, he has made it clear, he has nothing to hide, he says he wants to answer questions. you know the pitfalls of that, you know that there is a good reason that unless you're in trouble, after the prosecution presents its case, and then arguably still in trouble after the defense that you don't have a defendant testify. but do you think he could be talked out of it if it is something he wants to do? >> ultimately, constitutionally it is a decision that only he can make. and so -- >> we know this, but you know him -- >> yeah. can he be talked out of it? i believe that if he respects his attorney's opinion, he will follow it. >> i think that's a very diplomatic answer. tim parlatore, always good to have you on the program. thank you so much, appreciate it. and coming up, a new israeli

air strike in lebanon, the target the idf says was struck and what the world now waiting to see how and when israel will respond to iran's attacks, what u.s. officials expect. we'll head to tel aviv after this. officials expect. we'll head to tel aviv after this that's why my go to is nurtec odt. it's the only migraine medication that can treat and prevent my attacks all in one. don't take if allergic to nurtec. allergic reactions can occur even days after using. most common side effects were nausea, indigestion and stomach pain. now i'm in control. with nurtec odt i can treat a migraine attack and prevent one. talk to your doctor about nurtec today. (vo) if you have graves' disease, your eye symptoms could mean something more. that gritty feeling can't be brushed away. even a little blurry vision can distort things. and something serious may be behind those itchy eyes. up to 50% of people with graves' could develop a different condition called thyroid eye disease, which should be treated by a different doctor.

see an expert. find a t-e-d eye specialist at isitted.com [music playing] tiffany: my daughter is mila. she is 19 months old. she is a little ray of sunshine. one of the happiest babies you'll probably ever meet. [giggles] children with down syndrome typically have a higher risk for developing acute myeloid leukemia, or just leukemia in general. and here we are. marlo thomas: st. jude children's research hospital works day after day to find cures and save the lives of children with cancer and other life-threatening diseases. tiffany: she was referred to st. jude at 11 months. they knew what to do as soon as they got her diagnosis. they already had her treatment plan drawn out. and they were like, this is what we're going to do. this is how long it's going to take. this is how long in between. this place is like a family to us now. like, i can't say enough how grateful we are to be here.

medical bills are always a big thing to everybody because everybody knows that anything medical is going to be expensive. we have received no bills since being at st. jude. we have paid for nothing. marlo thomas: thanks to generous donors like you, families never receive a bill from st. jude for treatment, travel, housing, or food so they can focus on helping their child live. for just $19 a month, you'll help us continue the lifesaving research and treatment that these kids need now and in the future. join with your credit or debit card right now, and we'll send you this st. jude t-shirt that you can proudly wear to show your support. tiffany: anybody and everybody that contributes anything to this place, no matter if it's a big business or just the grandmother that donates once a month, they are changing people's lives.

and that's a big deal. [music playing] my name is oluseyi and some of my favorite moments throughout my life are watching sports with my dad. now, i work at comcast as part of the team that created our ai highlights technology, which uses ai to detect the major plays in a sports game. giving millions of fans, like my dad and me, new ways of catching up on their favorite sport.

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. israeli defense forces just announced they killed a hezbollah commander in air strikes in lebanon. that commander, according to the idf, was involved in missile launches from lebanon and had

organized a number of terror attacks against israel. it is unclear whether that air strike is part of an imminent israeli response to iran's weekend attacks. but u.s. officials say they expect the response to be limited in scope and most likely involve strikes against iranian military forces and backed proxies outside iran. nbc's raf sanchez is live in tel aviv. i know you got to see part of an iranian ballistic missile today. walk us through what you saw and heard from israeli officials about this response. >> reporter: so, chris, this was part of one of the 110 or so ballistic missiles that israel says iran fired on saturday. the vast majority of them were intercepted outside of israeli air space, according to the idf. but a number of them did get through what you are looking at there is the fuel tank from one of those ballistic missiles. it is about 36 feet long, with the warhead attached, the missile would be longer still.

israeli military says it -- if that warhead weighs up to a thousand pounds, that it has the potential for just colossal damage. now, one -- several of those cruise -- those ballistic missiles did get through and they struck at an air base in southern israel, that's where a lot of israel's f-35 fleet is based, the israeli military says the damage there was limited. that is what iran fired at israel. the question now, what will israel fire back in response? i had a chance earlier to speak to the chief spokesman of the idf and i asked him whether israel would necessarily respond with missiles or whether there was a possibility we would see some other kind of covert strike like a cyberattack. take a listen. >> does it have to be a military strike? could it be cyberweapons? >> we will respond in our time,

and that way, the way we chose to do. >> reporter: now, you saw there the israeli military giving nothing away, when it comes to their response. but u.s. officials are telling nbc news they believe israel's response will be deliberately limited, so as not to cause a full scale war. and they are saying the strike might not necessarily be in iran itself, that it could be in syria, it could be elsewhere in the middle east, where there are iranian assets, where there are iranian targets, but this is something the biden administration and the region is watching very, very closely. >> and understandably so. raf sanchez, thank you. let's go back to new york now, where donald trump's trial is in a lunch break, but jury selection is set to resume in just about 45 minutes. msnbc legal correspondent lisa rubin and msnbc contributor sue craig just left the courthouse. so, they got our first insights from what it was like to be

inside today. okay, lisa, we heard from the beginning, right, that jury selection could take a week or two. somehow it feels like it ismove ing very slowly. is that a misperception? >> i wish that we had what is about to come next before the lunch break because i think that will give us a much better sense of how quickly things are going to go. after the lunch break, we're going to come back and each side is going to have an opportunity to strike jurors from among the first 12. there are 18 people seated in the jury box right now. they can exercise both peremptory challenge and for cause. each side has ten peremptory, it can be for whatever reason and doesn't get stated. the challenge for cause is someone you don't believe can be fair and impartial, given their answers to some of the further questions that both sides got to

ask to them today in increments of half an hour each. both joshua steinglass and todd blanche got half an hour with the 18 jurors. i think once we see what happens after the lunch break, how many people they strike, and what their -- what the threshold is among the trump folks and in particular for striking jurors, we'll have a better sense of how many days this is going to take. we have 18 people in the jury box. they could get a jury out of that. somehow i doubt that's where we're going to be left. my hope there will be between three and five people left over after this initial round of strikes. >> i don't know, three to five may be optimistic. i'm not there. give us a thumb nail of the pool today, some of the things you heard that were interesting and where you think we are right now. >> sure. and remember we came in yesterday and there was, you know, 96 and half of them just

declared they didn't feel for whatever reason they could serve. maybe they couldn't be impartial. we were left with about 50 and more came in today, not a lot, but significant number, i would say three or four, and said they decided overnight they slept on it, that they couldn't be impartial. so, that's one of the things that is slowing this down is we have to go through questions with the jurors. there are 42 questions, and sometimes they take -- i've been timing it about five to seven minutes each to go through the questions. sometimes we get right to the end and then we discover that they don't feel they can be impartial. but as for the jurors, there is a pattern emerging. they're drawing from manhattan. we got a lot of people that live on the upper west side, some from the upper east side, a few from the lower east side. they seem for the most part to read "the new york times." they like dogs. mixed bag on who's listening to podcasts. there is a few. not a lot.

and we also have got nobody so far who said they attended a trump rally. but one interesting moment came when one of the jurors, they're asked have you read these -- a number of books, one of them is michael cohen's, he's written two books, there are a few others and asked if they read any of donald trump's books. one juror, this morning, said, in fact, he had read three of them. he remembered the name of art of the deal, he mangled the other two, climbing to the top, or at the top or something, and he mangled that and i have to say one of the few reactions we got from donald trump today is when this fellow said he read some of his books, it seemed to please the former president. he's been in court and either paying attention or seems a little bit drowsy, but resting his eyes may be a better way to put it. yesterday it seemed like he had fully fallen asleep at one point. >> maybe he's contemplating his defense. >> one detail? >> yeah, please. >> one thing that i find

noticeable and obviously this is an occupational hazard for me is there are four lawyers among the 18 perspective jurors who are in the box. all of them are male. one of them is an assistant district attorney in bronx county. another is a former law clerk to the former chief judge of new york's highest court, the court of appeals. one is a regional counsel for the social security administration, so they all -- and one is a corporate lawyer at a law firm that i won't mention to protect him. but what i will say is all four of these people sort of came in with a legal education, and yet all of them are saying that true to that legal education, they understand that the former president is innocent until proven guilty, that the burden rests with the people, meaning the district attorney's office, to prove their case. and while all of them had said at some point or another, they have some disagreements with former president trump, they have some agreements with him, they have views of him, all of them said those views shouldn't matter with respect to judging

this case as jurors. >> that's interesting to me, sue, because one of the questions was, we all know what the political makeup is of new york city, how could he get a fair jury, he says he cannot get a fair trial here. on the other hand, you have a lot of people saying who frankly might want to see donald trump be convicted, say, i can't be fair. and so maybe that's an indication, sue, that this is how not only the system is supposed to work, but it mostly does work. >> i have to tell you about one great exchange, a reminder that some new yorkers are -- they like to spar verbally. one of the jurors was being questioned by todd blanche, who was giving -- getting back at the same time, but this fellow was asked, what do you think of donald trump and instead of answering which most of them did, they say they have an opinion or they don't agree with some of his policies, this

perspective juror just said it does not matter. he was just refusing to answer the question. he said, look, i may think one thing about him, but i need to judge the evidence and i'm not going to bring it into the courtroom. and the two of them went back and forth, it was an incredible exchange. and the end, he admitted he would was a registered democrat and would go no further and todd blanche walked away from him and went to another juror. >> are they expected to answer those kinds of questions? >> look, it is not a part of the jury questionnaire as you know, and todd blanche and his team pushed for questions to be added that weren't ultimately added that would go to what they say is an underlying bias toward their client. so, it is not customary to see this, but then again this is not a customary defendant. i will say to todd's benefit, he pressed on that question. what was your opinion of former

president trump walking in here. he was agreeable, he was congenial and yet he was persistent and didn't walk away from it. by not walking away, he did get some admissions, such as from that guy who kept saying i can compartmentalize, it is not relevant and gave up that he's a democrat. there was another woman who if you took her at her first word would tell you, i'm not political, i'm not into the news, when pressed she said he speaks his mind, he stirs the pot, some people may not like him for that, i would rather have someone who speaks their mind than someone who doesn't. indicating perhaps an openness to former president trump and his case here that you wouldn't have gotten from her had todd blanche simply walked away and taken her first comments at their face value. >> it is interesting. there was a fantastic interview that vaughn did with a juror that was excused, she was excused because she has a job that will not allow her to take whatever it is going to be, six weeks or whatever, sue, but, you

know, you see someone, she suggests, who is larger than life. there probably is that moment for a lot of jurors, she had never seen him in person before, where, oh, that's donald trump and very quickly she seemed to come around to but if i was on this jury, i would have a big job to do, and it is, like, he became humanized just like that when she started to think about the reason that she was there, and i wonder if you could talk a little bit more about jurors' reactions to donald trump. >> well, there have been -- yesterday, i heard that some of them were -- when he came into the room and they first saw him, when they came into the room, they were peering around at him. but for the most part, we haven't felt -- we can't see the jurors, so we just don't know, you know if they're looking at him. we got a pool report about that. one interesting thing is there is some people in the -- we're in an overflow room, watching it

on closed-circuit. a few people brought binoculars in so they can train their eyes on the former president to get his reactions. there is a high level of interest in everything he's doing, his interactions with his lawyers, with the jury, is he awake, is he resting his eyes, all of it seems to be of interest to people that are in the overflow room and i'm sure in the main courtroom. >> i love the binoculars detail. that is pulling back the curtain to the most interesting degree. lisa and sue, thank you, i'm sure you would like to have a few minutes to grab a little lunch yourself. it is going to be a long afternoon, we appreciate you being with us. well, could donald trump's behavior in the courtroom change how the jury and voters perceive him? what we're hearing from inside trump world. that's next on "chris jansing reports" only on msnbc. world. that's next on "chris jansing reports" only on msnbc

lactaid is 100% real milk, just without the lactose. delicious too. just ask my old friend, kevin. nothing like enjoying a cold one while watching the game. who's winning? we are, my friend. we are. i'm jonathan lawson, here to tell you about life insurance we are, my friend. 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. ♪ that colonoscopy for getting screened ♪ ♪ is why i'm delaying ♪ ♪ i heard i had a choice ♪ ♪ i know the name, that's what i'm saying ♪ -cologuard®? -cologuard. cologuard! -screen for colon cancer. -at home, like you want. -you the man! -actually, he's a box.

cologuard is a one-of-a-kind way to screen for colon cancer that's effective and non-invasive. it's for people 45+ at average risk, not high risk. false positive and negative results may occur. ask your provider for cologuard. ♪ i did it my way ♪

today, a different narrative of donald trump is unfolding and it is the one he has dreaded. not the gold tinged billionaire businessman, not the president of the united states, not the tv celebrity, but citizen trump, defendant trump, a man who so convincingly turned lies into an accepted narrative, now forced to face truth in a court of law. and he doesn't like it. >> i'm now going to sit down for many hours -- i'm now going to sit down -- the voters have to

understand. look at the polls. this is a sham trial. and the judge should recuse himself. >> now, the belligerence he likes to project is muffled as he has to sit behind the defense table, frustrated that judger where merchan, not he is in control. after all the waiting and all the speculation surrounding donald trump on trial, it is about to get real. nbc's garrett haake is back with us, sam stein is politico's deputy managing editor for politics and msnbc contributor, and barbara mcquaid is former u.s. attorney and msnbc legal analyst. you know, sam, donald trump is

used to being the boss of his company. being able to do, to say whatever he wants. that is not the case in court, which is, of course, the judge's domain. how could that unfamiliar role, do you think, play with him? >> well, first of all, i don't think anyone is comfortable sitting in a criminal proceeding. i'll give that to him. but i think your point is extremely valid, which is for 40, 50 years no one has talked back to donald trump. he's run his own company, it is a family business, but it was his. he was a television personality, where the show was literally about him telling people they were fired or hired. he ran for president, to define expectations, in those capacities you don't really ever get told to sit quietly at a table or risk being sanctioned. you don't get told that you are -- your freedom son the line and it is not in your hands, but in the hands of others. this is deeply unfamiliar territory to him, and i have to

imagine, i can't get into his psyche, but i have to imagine it is a bit of a hit to the ego and psychologically disorienting. he is not in control of his future. he's handed that to his lawyers and he has a jury that will have to decide his fate and that's just not a position he's been in for his entire life, let alone 40, 50 years. >> we already know, garrett, there has been concern in trump world and among a number of republicans about what this trial could mean for november, for them as well as for donald trump. but, have you heard any worries about how his behavior in and out of court could change perceptions of him? >> look there is an element of that, chris. the campaign and donald trump in particular have tried very hard going back for more than a year now to cast this trial in a very specific light, the idea it is joe biden versus donald trump, regardless of what the legal facts may be here. but how he conducts himself in this courtroom, even away from

the cameras, could infringe upon the narrative they're trying to set up. we know this because we already have seen it happen once in a much less high profile case, in which he was going back and forth, repeatedly with the judge, in the e. jean carroll case in such a way he was admonished and told he could be removed from the room. that was a case that didn't have a quarter of the attention that a case like this does, when the eyes of the entire country are watching at least to some degree what is going on inside this courtroom and what is going on outside of it. we don't know what the prolonged exposure coming and going from court in a way that could diminish anyone might play. so i think that's very much on the minds of the trump campaign and we know this in part because they spent much of the last two weeks preparing him for trial. they gave almost no details about what that preparation looks like. but just the fact that he was not actively campaigning all that much and much more heavily focused on what is going to be going on inside the courtroom

suggests to me they're well aware of the stakes. >> tell me if i'm right about this, barbara, or i watched too many police procedurals. a lawyer before a defendant goes into court, will talk to them about how the jury might judge them based on the way they look, based on their demeanor, based on even maybe their body language. how much of that is true, and how big of a concern can that be for donald trump because we know when he was in his civil case, there were moments when he was less than, let's say, diplomatic. >> absolutely. not only do they talk about how they should appear in court, they even talk about how they should appear going in and out of court. you often see a client and their lawyer walking into court, trying to look confident, smiling, not looking fearful, i think they want to project confidence that they will prevail in this case. in the courtroom, i think it is

important to counsel a client that you should assume that the jury is watching you at all times. i've talked to juries after they have served and rendered verdicts, and it is amazing all the details they pick up on. we noticed you got a haircut halfway through the trial. or we noticed that you used a different water bottle, starting with week three than you were using weeks one through two. they notice everything. there is a lot of downtime, tedium and they're watching. so body language can be very important. i think that a client needs to look like they're respecting the process, that they're confident, perhaps that they're involved in their defense, and i think that if i were advising donald trump in this instance, i would be sharing with him those views, reminding him to be on his best behavior at all times. >> sam, your colleagues write about the lack of a strong pro trump showing outside of the courthouse. in the past, trump has always been able to count on his supporters turning out en masse from his signature rallies to the riot at the capitol. but on monday, at a pivotal

moment for the maga movement, in trump's campaign, the faithful were uncharacteristically quiet. one part of it can be new york is very democratic. but could we be seeing signs of a wider exhaustion with trumpian chaos, maybe, sam? >> i was going to say, new york is not exactly the bastion of maga movement here. but i will say, there are signs of general fatigue around all this stuff. i mean, if you look, it is not an apples to apples, but if you look at the grassroots online fund-raising numbers for instance, they are down significantly on both sides, but also more so on the republican side of primarily donald trump, had issued these calls of being persecuted and prosecuted. being a witch hunt. him standing up for you, not them. all these tactics. i think a lot of people, obviously the die hard and the

faithful, continue to believe it. they continue to rally to his call. but i think it's exhausted a fair number of people, too. when you see the fund raising numbers. the fact they can't gin up protests at the courthouse. >> it just occurred to me, barbara, i think you and your sisters in law podcast should write a police procedural. i would watch that. i'll take 5%. thank you all so much for that. so jury selection in the hush money trial so far is confirming what many new yorkers know about this city to be true. the people here are quite diverse. they are colorful. at times, they're funny. among the first round of 18 potential jurors, our team of journalists, includes an upper west side man who told the courtroom i feel that nobody is is above the law. whether it be a former president

or a president, sitting president, or a janitor. and then there's the upper east side man who admitted his girlfriend works in finance but said quote, i honestly don't know what she does. steve kornacki is at the big board with a deep dive into voter preferences and the demographics that make up this jury pool which is here in manhattan. okay, steve, what insights do you have? >> let's look at the demographics of manhattan. manhattan is one of the five boroughs. they aren't all the same. this is overall in new york city, how the 2020 election went in new york city. joe biden getting just over 76% of the vote. donald trump at 22.7%. now let's take you through the five boroughs. i think you'll see that here. let's start at what's the outlier here politically and demographically.

this is staten island. the one red part of new york city. it's the smallest by far. not a lot of population density relative to the other boroughs. more suburban in nature. here you can see donald trump actually carried staten island over joe biden in 2020. again, by far, the smallest of the boroughs. then you work your way here to queens county. the borough of queens. this is where you get into the much better areas. brooklyn, biden was 77%. the bronx biden with 83%. and then that brings you to the one remaining borough and that is where this trial is. where the jurors are from. it is manhattan. 87% nearly for biden in 2020. so within a very big blue city among the five boroughs, manhattan is the deepest blue of those five boroughs. nearly 87% of the votes going for biden over trump in 2020. why is manhattan that much bluer than the rest of new york city

demographics i think help explain that. take a look. a demographic profile here of manhattan. if you compare these numbers to the numbers of new york city as a whole, a couple of things start to emerge. 45% white. new york city as a whole is 31% white. also, white with a college degree. 40% of manhattanites fit that profile. city wide in new york, it's 21%. median household income is nearly 100 grand in manhattan. city wide, it's more like 76,000. so layer those demographic categories on top of each other. it is whiter. has a deeper concentration of white voters with college degrees and it is wealthier. those are all characteristics politically that have become core democratic groups. this is a national story. we talk about it all the time. white voters with college degrees. suburbs with higher incomes. those are groups that long-term there's been a trend towards democrats and it's really

exploded since donald trump came on the scene in 2016. and so that's what makes manhattan again, we're talking about a big blue city overall. we're talking about four of the five boroughs being very blue but that's what makes manhattan the bluest. a group that's been political gold for democrats nationally is represented here more than it's represented in the other boroughs. >> i had no idea about these differences. fascinating stuff as always. thank you so much. in our next hour, house republicans expected to send articles of impeachment against secretary mayorkas to the senate but believe it or not, that might not be the biggest fight speaker johnson has on his hands today. stay close. more chris jansing reports right after this. jansing reports rigt after this something more. that gritty feeling can't be brushed away. even a little blurry vision can distort things. and something serious may be behind those itchy eyes.

up to 50% of people with graves' could develop a different condition called thyroid eye disease, which should be treated by a different doctor. see an expert. find a t-e-d eye specialist at isitted.com ethan! how's my favorite client? great! i started using schwab investing themes, so now i can easily invest in trends... like wearable tech. trends? all that research. sounds exhausting! nope. schwab's technology does the work. so if i spot an opportunity, in robotics or pets, i can buy those stocks ina few clicks. can't be that easy. it is with schwab! schwaaab! schwab investing themes. 40 customizable themes. up to 25 stocks in justa few clicks.

a test or approve a medication. we didn't have to worry about any of those things thanks to the donations. and our family is forever grateful because it's completely changed our lives. i'm jonathan lawson, here to tell you about life insurance 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.

it is good to be back with you on this second hour. at this hour, diving into donald trump's jury pool. the pointed questions and answers that led to more dismissals today with not one juror seated yet. the trial versus the trail. trump fuming about his schedule, calling it a scam. his heated remarks at president biden heads out for a campaign blitz. the message he's bringing to pennsylvania today. and a critical january 6th case in front of th