Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Event/Special

Now: Trump Jury Deliberating; Now: Trump Speaking As Jury Deliberates. Aired 11:30a-12p ET

Aired May 29, 2024 - 11:30   ET



JAKE TAPPER, CNN ANCHOR: Let me ask you a question, Karen and Jamie. I'm not going to count you, David, because it's a grand jury.


TAPPER: What do you do when you -- so, you get into the room, what happens? You sit down and you pull everybody, like what happened?

KAREN FRIEDMAN AGNIFILO, CNN LEGAL ANALYST: So, I was surprised that I was picked for a jury. It was actually a civil case. I was working at the Manhattan DA's office at the time. And they picked me for a civil jury. And everyone, including myself, thought I was going to be the leader of the jury room because I'm a lawyer.


AGNIFILO: And I'm a trial lawyer. And we've got back there. And it turned out just by evolution, I was not -- I was by far not the leader because I had a strong opinion. There was another -- there was a group of us who felt a certain way. And therefore, I didn't have much to say because there was no question in my mind.

There was a whole other group that had a different point of view. And there was a gentleman who I'll never forget, he was a bartender, and he was the guy who sort of was like, well, what about this and what about that, and he just evolved as the leader of the jury room and brought us all around myself included to a particular place. Again, it was civil, so it wasn't -- it was not about a criminal conviction. It was about liability.

The thing that fascinated me the most about it was all the things as trial lawyers, you think matter didn't matter. It wasn't about the show. It wasn't about the performance. It wasn't about the expression on your face to make sure that oh, I look incompetent in front of the jury.

It was none of that. It was none of the things even the spin. Juries are like -- they're BS detectors, right? They can tell when you're spinning. What we tried to do and what every single person in that room tried to do was to get to the bottom of what the truth is.

OK, I could tell she was trying to influence me by doing this. And I can tell he was -- that was a little too showy for me. But what I saw was the fact that Melania Trump wasn't there standing -- sitting by her husband.

You know, they see those things. And they see the things that nobody is saying that nobody's pointing out.

TAPPER: To be clear, you're being hypothetical there --

AGNIFILO: Of course.

TAPPER: That your case did not evolve.

AGNIFILO: Of course.

TAPPER: Melania Trump -- I just talk to people. People misunderstand things.


TAPPER: Just a couple of updates. The jurors have left the courtroom, you see on the left side of your screen there. That is how long the jury has been deliberating, three minutes. And yes, we're going to have that up until there's a verdict. Thank you very much. I hope you like it.

Judge Merchan has also asked -- or thanked rather the alternate jurors. Remember, there were 12 jurors, seven men, five women, and then there are also six alternates that shockingly, they have not had to dip into and grab because the 12 original jurors are still there. But as we discussed already, those six alternates have not been excused.

The judge thanked them for their diligence. He said we're not going to excuse you just yet. Please remain with us because there might be a need for you at some point during deliberations.

Judge Merchan is now clarifying the instruction he gave earlier. The panel will have free access to the evidence laptop, so they won't have to ask for a piece of evidence every time they want to look at something. Yes, Karen.

AGNIFILO: So, that is something -- when the judge called the parties up to the bench, that is something they would have had to have gotten them to agree on because the evidence does not normally go back to the jury. They usually have to ask for it. They'll send a note. I would like this piece of evidence. And then the lawyers go crazy trying to read the tea leaves and figure out why do they want that.

TAPPER: So, we're not going to have -- we're not going to have that. They have it all on the laptop --

AGNIFILO: Correct.

TAPPER: And they're just going to say, hey, can you give me Stormy Daniels testimony on day two?

AGNIFILO: No, that's not evidence -- that's not what they're talking about. TAPPER: That's not evidence?

AGNIFILO: Well, it's evidence but that's not what they're talking about.

TAPPER: They're talking about?

AGNIFILO: They're talking about the physical evidence. They're talking about documents that were --

TAPPER: A check. Right? They --

AGNIFILO: Correct. Any --

TAPPER: Let's go check with the endorsed check. OK.

AGNIFILO: Any item that was introduced in -- that was introduced and received into evidence as people's exhibit number one or people's exhibit number 23. Defense Exhibit A. Defense Exhibit B.



LAURA COATES, CNN ANCHOR & CHIEF LEGAL ANALYST: They can't rewind someone's testimony and play that back.


AGNIFILO: They can't --

COATES: If they're -- recollection, of course. (INAUDIBLE)

AGNIFILO: They can't do that on that laptop.


AGNIFILO: If they want testimony, which is also considered evidence if they want testimony --

TAPPER: Then, they're going to have to request that.

AGNIFILO: They have to request readback and --

TAPPER: Read back. They can't actually get the paper.

AGNIFILO: No. So, they asked, and then --



TAPPER: It's why.

AGNIFILO: And then -- TAPPER: It doesn't make any sense.

AGNIFILO: And then the way -- interestingly, they can ask for portions of testimony. And then the lawyers -- so they -- you can have a note that says I want the part of Stormy Daniels' testimony that describes having sex with --

TAPPER: X, Y, or Z. Yes.

AGNIFILO: With Donald Trump.


AGNIFILO: And -- but they don't specify direct or cross for example. The lawyers will then have a discussion with the judge. Do we just give them direct? Do we give them direct and cross? Do we give them both? That sort of -- those are negotiations --

TAPPER: Who does the reading back?

AGNIFILO: The court reporters. So then -- so then the court reporter -- it takes time. The court reporter then will take 15, 20, sometimes an hour to go through the testimony on their machine and find the portions that are responsive to the note.


All the parties have to agree, then they call the jury back in, and then the court reporter reads it in painstaking real-time to the jury. So read back and notes --


AGNIFILO: And things can take out --

TAPPER: Yes, that sounds like a great procedure in the year 1836. Right now, jurors, four and six are being instructed by a paralegal at a DA's office on how to use the laptop. Todd Blanche, the defense attorney, and Susan Hoffinger from the prosecution are standing close and looking on. Kaitlan Collins, back to you.

KAITLAN COLLINS, CNN ANCHOR: And now the jury, of course, will be inside that room, says they've been deliberating for seven minutes. We'll give it a little wiggle room given they're still learning how to use the laptop. And Paula and John, the two jurors who volunteered to be the custodians of the laptop, I should note, we know one is a security engineer, juror number four. Juror number six is a software engineer. So, that at least they pick two good members of the team to be in charge of what is going to be important as they are in that room all together, looking through this laptop.

It -- you know, as Steinglass, the prosecutor was making his closing argument yesterday, he kept saying you can go back and look at this. You can go back and look at this check. This exhibit. He said it so many times that it seemed to be -- you know, reminding them, hey, you can look at this when you're inside this room tomorrow. PAULA REID, CNN CHIEF LEGAL AFFAIRS CORRESPONDENT: Because they believe that this case can be one on the physical evidence. Now, we have the graphic of the jury up right now. But to remind people -- you know, we've all been in the courtroom. We've seen this jury.

But to remind people what a cross-section of humanity you have here, I remember the first time I saw the jury in there. I thought wow, if you took the first 18 people because of the 12 jurors and the six alternates, just getting off the subway car anywhere in Manhattan did probably look like this group. Took a butterfly net just on the street one day, these are the first 18 people you might come across. Definitely, a representative sample of the diversity of Manhattan. And this is going to be fascinating to see what they do with the facts and the evidence they've been presented.

JOHN BERMAN, CNN ANCHOR: Although on our screen, they all look remarkably alike, right? (INAUDIBLE) No, I didn't know when the prosecution made its case. They kept on referring you can go back and look at this evidence. And I think it was twofold.

Number one, they were trying to explain to the jury, we have physical evidence. It's not just Michael Cohen, there is this stuff to look at. And I also do think that they think it advantages then if they're going back to look at a check that has Donald Trump's signature on it.

COLLINS: Yes. And the two jurors have left the courtroom after learning how to use the evidence laptop. They probably did. Hopefully, it's up-to-date technology. Not much technology inside that courthouse, I should note is.

And Judge Merchan has confirmed with Trump's attorney Todd Blanche, that his client consented to the jury receiving this laptop with the evidence. Blanche confirms. He and Susan Hoffinger from the prosecution team were standing there, as these two jurors were making sure they knew how to use this laptop because it's a critical moment now that they were going into this room.

REID: Yes.

COLLINS: They all have to stay in there as they're deliberating until at least 4:30 today, we know, as they are going to begin going through everything the judge just went over with them.

REID: Yes. And I'm sure Todd Blanche and Necheles were looking at that laptop with an eye to any potential appeal if there is a conviction. That has been their strategy since the beginning.

Rack up any possible objection, and any possible problems, so if there is a conviction, that they can appeal and try to overturn it. And the strategy that has been described to me is for death by a thousand cuts. So, I'm sure they were watching very carefully to see if there was anything that they could bring up about that laptop.

COLLINS: Well, and an important note that we just -- that we just passed by, the judge said, I'm going to be in the robing room for a little while just in case we get a quick note from the jury asking for a question or further read back up some testimony, then I'll probably go upstairs. I do direct all of you to please be here. You cannot leave the building.

That's what we were reporting earlier. Trump and his team, they won't stay in the courtroom necessarily. They have another room where their attorneys have been working out of. But Trump himself has to remain inside this courthouse behind us as long as the jury is there deliberating.

BERMAN: I suppose we could get a Truth Social update from Donald Trump while he is waiting. I'm not sure I would do that necessarily politically or legally, where I am. But it is possible that they do that. And I do think he will feel helpless as he is trapped inside a room at this somewhat dingy courthouse for maybe the rest of the day, maybe tomorrow, maybe beyond that. Who knows?

COLLINS: Yes, and we're watching if you can see there in the bottom right corner of your screen, the former president is about to walk out of that room. There's Emil Bove, one of his attorneys that is often flanking him. As you can see, they're taking a quick turn. Donald Trump Jr., a few others, Susan Necheles.

As you saw just walking out there, that's Karoline Leavitt, I believe from the campaign. Natalie Hart, Steven Cheung, Trump's campaign spokesperson. Steve Witkoff, a donor, and you can see other members of the Trump legal team and posse that are leaving inside that courtroom.

Is there going to go into a room -- it's not clear which room, Paula, they're going to go into. There's two. One that Trump would go into that was quite small. Someone described it to me as 20 by 15 feet that they would go into for those brief breaks. But they do have a larger room where the other attorneys were kind of huddling and working out of while they were in those -- the lunch breaks or the bigger breaks as they have been inside this courthouse.


REID: There's nothing grand or fancy about this courthouse. That's for sure. Far less impressive than other federal courthouses where he's had cases and had to wait for a time during those initial hearings. But he rolls deep. Not only does he have Secret Service protection, but he has his legal team, his adjacent legal advisors, a little of his family --

COLLINS: This isn't -- you can see, that's Todd Blanche right there --

REID: Yes.

COLLINS: In the middle, I believe. He just turned his head. Alina Habba. You can see. I think Trump is off to the right, which is interesting. They're kind of just standing outside the courtroom door right here. It's not clear whether they're deliberating to come over -- obviously, you can see where the camera position is inside that hallway. That's where Trump often comes and speaks. It's not clear if they're deliberating whether he should come speak to the cameras. I mean, that would be -- REID: Yes --

COLLINS: That would be all.

REID: Based on Todd Blanche's sort of motions, just speculation right now, I'm going to guess that that is the conversation. He's trying to ease some of the tension with humor. I know that's a strategy he's used with his client.

But I'm guessing given their proximity to the camera, and the fact that it is Todd appearing to talk to his client, this is I think, probably most likely a conversation about whether he wants to address cameras. Because as we reported earlier, he did not do that going in, which is highly unusual.

COLLINS: Well, and if someone's watching and wondering, why didn't they just talk about this inside the courtroom? Obviously, the courtroom is full of rows of press and a few members of the public. Also, typically the DA's team is still in there. They often have waited until after Trump's team has left. Before Trump exits the room. They're still standing there right outside the courtroom door.

BERMAN: There he is.

REID: There he is.

COLLINS: There's Donald Trump. And it does look like he is in fact coming to address the cameras, which I should note we will be listening. He didn't speak last night or this morning going into the courtroom. But now, he is prepared as the jury is in a room deliberating, coming to speak to the cameras.


DONALD TRUMP, FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: I would say, listening to the charges from the judge who's as you know, very conflicted and corroded. Because of the confliction, very, very corrupt. Mother Teresa could not beat these charges.

These charges are rigged. The whole thing is rigged. The whole country is a mess between the borders and fake elections, and you have a trial like this, where the judge is so conflicted, he can't breathe. He's got to do his job. And it's that for me that I can tell you.

It's a disgrace. And I mean that Mother Teresa could not beat these charges, but we'll see. We'll see how we do. It's a very disgraceful situation. Every single legal scholar and expert said this is no case, it shouldn't be brought, and it certainly could have been brought seven years ago, not in the middle of a presidential election.

It was all done by Joe Biden. This judge contributed to Joe Biden. And far worse than that -- but I'm not allowed to talk about it because I have a gag order. Far worse than that, by a thousand times worse than that. The worst I've ever heard. But I can't talk about it.

It'll be talked about, but I'm not allowed to talk about it. But it'll be talked about in the history books. What's happening here is the weaponization of the level that nobody's seen before ever. That shouldn't be allowed to happen.

So, I'll stay around here. This is five weeks and five weeks of really essentially not campaigning, although I took a big lead in the polls over the last few weeks, I think. Something's going on because I think the people of this country see that this is a rigged deal.

It's a weaponized deal for the Democrats to hit their political opponent. For Joe Biden, the worst -- the worst president in the history of the United States. He's destroying our country. He's letting millions of people from jails, from prisons, from insane asylums, from mental institutions, drug dealers, pour in.

Venezuela, if you look at their crime statistics, they've gone down 72 percent in crime because they're releasing all the criminals into our country because of this horrible president that we had. And then they have a protest of Robert De Niro yesterday as a fool of reason. Broken down fool standing out there and he got -- he got MAGAed -- he got MAGAed yesterday. He got a big dose of it.

But I just want to say it's a very unfair trial. That should have never happened. If it was going to happen, it should have happened seven years ago, as you know, Bragg didn't want to bring it. The southern district didn't bring it. The F.E.C. didn't bring it.

This judge didn't even let us use the number one election attorney. He's making the rules. He doesn't know anything about elections.

He doesn't know anything about voting and vote counts. He doesn't know anything about this stuff. That's not his profession.

We had the leading election expert in the country, Brad Smith, ready to testify. He wouldn't let him do it. They wouldn't let another gentleman who represented, and you know very well, he -- you saw it.

It was the worst I think I've ever seen anyone treated on the stand, Bob Costello. He wouldn't let him talk about all of -- the hundreds of e-mails that he was sent by a gentleman -- another gentleman who I can't mention because I'm gagged. Every time I speak to you -- you ask me simple questions I'm not allowed to give you the answer because I'm gagged by this judge.


But we have a very, very serious problem here. I mean, our country's going bad. And remember -- and let me just leave you with this. This is all because of Joe Biden and his -- and I don't even think it's him. I don't think he's smart enough to think about it.

But it's the people that surround him in the office. They're smart. They're fascist, they're communist, but they're smart, and they're ruining our country. But we're going to in this election.

November 5 is going to be the most important day in the history of our country. We're going to take back our country from these fascists and these thugs that are destroying us with inflation. And with everything they do, how stupid they are allowing 15, 16, 17 million people into our country, totally unvetted, totally unchecked.

We're going to bring back to our nation. November 5. Remember the most important day in the history of our country. In the meantime, this trial is rigged. Thank you.


COLLINS: Those are the comments of the former president. His first comments since the jury began deliberating in his criminal hush money trial. Not seeming to believe there's going to be a positive outcome as he claimed that Mother Teresa could not be the charges that are facing him there.

You see, he is surrounded by his entourage. He also made several false claims while he was there. We'll get to those with our fact check -- fact-checker, Daniel Dale in a moment.

And, Paula Reid, though, just to hear Trump, you know as he was -- as he chose not to speak last night, he chose not to speak this morning coming into the room, and then you saw that remarkable moment that we have not seen so far in this case. Typically, it's quite clear when Trump is leaving the courtroom that he's going to speak to cameras. He carries his comments in hand that he's going to read to the cameras.

He came up and decided to criticize the case, criticize the instructions that the jury just heard, and claim falsely that this is being done at the behest of President Biden, which it's not. But what is important there is not even just the words themselves, it's that he clearly does not believe there's a positive outcome for him waiting at the other end of these jury deliberations.

REID: Yes, that's exactly right. And it's interesting both sides of this case framing it as election interference. Prosecutors have continued to try to rebrand it from the hush money case to a 2016 election interference case. And the Trump team doing the same thing, arguing that these have only been brought in an election year.

This is his argument in the court of public opinion. It includes falsehoods, trying to link this prosecution to President Biden which again, that is just not true. But this is how he's trying to frame it and definitely does not appear optimistic about his odds here. And as I've been told repeatedly, they believe the best likely outcome for them -- for most people, the best outcome would be an acquittal. For them, the most likely outcome is a deadlocked jury.

COLLINS: And we also have Daniel Dale here with us, as I mentioned. Daniel Dale, I don't know -- you've fact-checked all of these before, I believe. I don't think any of these will be new to you. I know you and I've been on together several times to fact-check the claim about people emptying their insane asylums in countries and sending them to the United States, which I know there's no basis for. Also, his claims wrongly that President Biden is the one driving this one. Of course, he was indicted by a jury of his peers here and it is the Manhattan district attorney, Alvin Bragg who brought this case. DANIEL DALE, CNN REPORTER: Yes, you barely need me anymore. You got these fat checks down. Everything you said is correct. He also referred to fake elections in this country of a vaguer than usual reference to his false claims -- his lies that the 2020 election was rigged. We have entirely legitimate elections in this country, including the 2020 election, he lost.

He also used this figure. He said 15, 16, or 17 million people being let in over the border under Joe Biden. Those are wildly exaggerated figures. We are under 10 million so-called encounters, that includes many millions who were sent back under Title 42 after they were encountered. So, not all of them were let in.

And I think a point of clarification, he says something true. He said that Judge Merchan had donated to President Biden -- to Joe Biden's campaign. That is true, but I think it's important to note that the amount of the donation was $15. So, just a point of fact there.

COLLINS: Well -- and that's why whenever he claimed -- he said the judge is so conflicted that he "can't breathe." I mean, that has been something that Trump has long claimed during this trial. I should note as someone who's been in that jury room or in that courthouse -- that courtroom watching this, the judge often strives at great lengths to be fair to both sides here, both the prosecution and the defense.

DALE: Yes.

COLLINS: And also, this has gone through a process where he was asked if he was too conflicted to preside over this and he was told no.

DALE: Yes. And, Kaitlan, I -- there's one more thing I should mention. He said that we -- that the Trump side, his defense had a leading election expert, and the judge has refused to allow him to testify. That is not what happened.

What happened was the judge as is common, limited the scope of the possible testimony that this expert could have offered. And then Trump's defense said OK, we're just not going to call him at all. So, they could have called him to talk about various matters, maybe it would have helped them. The judge did not completely reject this possible witness. And Trump's team instead made its own call not to have him up there on the stand.


COLLINS: Yes, that's an important one. It was the defense who decided not to call Bradley Smith to the witness stand. Daniel Dale, thank you for that. And, John Berman, obviously, you know, though, what Trump is doing here and what his -- you know, talent has been ever since he's been in the political sphere is preparing his supporters and you know, the broader public outside of what is going to be likely the outcome here, at least in his eyes of how he's viewing this.

BERMAN: Look, we'll see. I do think it is notable that as a jury is now 18 minutes in or 22 minutes in, but when he was speaking, it was like, what, 15 or 16 minutes of deliberation, Donald Trump was outside not far from where they were saying this is a rigged trial. The jury actually deliberating when Donald Trump was claiming that it was rigged. I do think that's notable.

And, Kaitlan, you were wondering what that group of people was talking about with all the lawyers. Todd Blanche, Susan Necheles, Donald Trump Jr., and Donald Trump. Well, I think they were talking about Mother Teresa because as Donald Trump, the former president was out speaking in the microphone, Donald Trump Jr. at the very same exact moment, maybe even seconds before was tweeting out the comments about Mother Teresa. So, perhaps they had agreed on which figure -- what saintly figure they would refer to who could not get a fair trial on their minds here in New York.

COLLINS: Yes, I think Mother Teresa would like to probably be left out of this. But someone I'd like to bring it to this is trial attorney and jury consultant, Renato Stabile. Renato, don't worry, I'm not going to ask you about Mother Teresa.


COLLINS: But as we are seeing this count-up clock, which is different what CNN -- normally, we have a countdown clock on CNN. As we're watching this to see as this jury is deliberating, we're waiting for a note to the judge or any indication of where they are as they're just getting underway in these deliberations. I wonder as you look at these jurors -- these 12 jurors, you can see their descriptions, what they do, their life experiences. Which jurors do you think are going to be the most critical that you'll be watching as all of this is going on?

STABILE: Right. Well, right away, you know, I think as David Marcus mentioned on the last segment, juror number one is now the foreperson. That's different from federal court where the foreperson is elected by the jurors. So, you know, that person naturally will be now a leader, whether they want to be or not in the jury room. Obviously, we're going to be looking at the two attorneys.

But something else I want to bring up. There are three jurors that are parents. And you have to think about -- you know, there were some very lewd testimony about Donald Trump in this trial.

And I know the defense wants to say it's not about Stormy Daniels. It's not about, you know, whatever relationships he might have had. But you know, if they're parents of daughters -- I mean, putting aside how you feel about him, if you're a parent of a daughter, that testimony and that evidence, I think really impacted you and might have hit you emotionally.

I wouldn't be thinking about the three jurors who are parents. I think it's four, seven, and eight, who have children. And if they're, you know, parents of daughters, or especially young daughters, they might have taken that evidence very, very poorly.

COLLINS: So, how did -- how did the two attorneys see this? Because I think another thing that's important to note here is we've got juror number seven, who is a civil litigator, obviously, who is handling this. Juror number three is a corporate attorney. As they're inside that room, you know, and when they were being selected for this jury, they both made clear, at least jury number seven did from what I read that you know, they're not well-versed in criminal law. This is not, you know, their world that they operate it on a daily basis. But does that -- how does the other jury -- the rest of the jury see that as they're either looking to them for guidance or, you know, taking maybe more weight for their views of this, given they both are attorneys?

STABILE: Yes, I think the two attorneys are going to tell the other jurors that they're really not qualified to opine on criminal law. I mean, it's sort of like having a brain surgeon do heart surgery. You don't want to have that.

People just assume that if you're a doctor, like you know everything about the body, the same thing with lawyers. But I think they're going to acknowledge very quickly to the other jurors that they have no particular expertise that applies to this particular case. They might be able to try to offer something about you know, applying the standard of beyond a reasonable doubt or things like that, but I don't think, legally speaking, they're going to have much to offer even though I do believe you got the jurors in the room were going to defer to them.

COLLINS: What about -- as they're looking at the charges, and we just heard what the judge was saying to them about how they should interpret the law, what the charges here are. And you know, they're looking at checks that has Donald Trump's signature on it. They're looking at ledgers, though that does not -- that he did not physically himself put in there.

That was never the expectation. Is there a chance that this jury can see that maybe they'll give greater weight to the checks given they have Donald Trump's signature on it, than they will the ledgers? How does that work for what they could ultimately decide here on the verdict?


STABILE: Yes. I know, we've been talking about, you know, guilty, not guilty or a hung jury. Another real possibility here is a mixed verdict. And that would be where they convict Donald Trump on the counts that relate to the checks that have his physical signature because there's no dispute that he knew he was signing those checks. I mean, maybe you could say, well, I'm not sure that he knew about the ledger entries.

But a mixed verdict -- you know, in the juror's minds, they might think, well, we're giving the defense something, we're giving the prosecution something, but the mixed verdict is an absolute disaster for the defense because then Donald Trump is a convicted felon, even if he's convicted of just one count. You know, sometimes defense attorneys take that on -- head-on and they tell the jury, look, this is an all-or-nothing case. You shouldn't return a mixed verdict. You either believe it or you don't. I'm not sure that Todd Blanche did that, but I'd be very, very concerned about a mixed verdict here.

COLLINS: Renato Stabile, thank you for that. We'll wait to see what that verdict ultimately is. And, Paula Reid, just -- I mean, just looking at this, that we're 27 minutes into the jury deliberating. It is remarkable when you step back, as you were trying to guess what the jury will decide, we have no clue what they're going to ultimately decide. No -- even experts who've been in many cases have said that as well.

It is remarkable that right now we are in jury deliberations for Donald Trump. I mean, the two of us covered Trump in the White House. And I don't think you know, is the story was breaking in 2018 as we were learning more about Trump's involvement in this to know that it would ever come to this. This is remarkable in and of itself.

REID: Yes, and a paperwork crime of all things. One thing Trump does really well is he doesn't leave a trail. He doesn't e-mail. He does not put things in writing, even when he gives verbal instructions. They're usually sort of indirect.

He's very careful not to leave, again, a paperwork trail of any potential criminal activity. So, the fact that here he's charged with 34 counts of falsifying business records, I think that is shocking. I think that Alvin Bragg is probably shocked that this is the first criminal prosecution of Trump that is actually going to trial because of course, there are three other criminal cases.

And it was widely expected that the January 6 federal case brought by the Special Counsel Jack Smith, that would go first. But in large part, because the Supreme Court did not act faster, we don't know if that will go at all. And it definitely won't go before the election.

COLLINS: Yes, we could still be a month away from even knowing --

REID: Yes.

COLLINS: Whether or not that's even close to potentially happening. And so, it is remarkable in this moment -- I mean, to see Alvin Bragg was not in the courtroom today based on our reporting, but he was there all day yesterday until the very late hours watching as his prosecutor Josh Steinglass was -- you know, part of this team that he's assembled here was delivering that lengthy summation, which you know, obviously is part of what's on the jury's mind as they're inside that room right now.

BERMAN: A lot of pressure on Alvin Bragg, a lot of pressure on the attorneys, also a lot of pressure on Donald Trump. And I think it was evident in that statement he gave, at least at the beginning. And you've watched him very closely for years, both of you have, he was not full of energy. He was not full of this defiant energy rage. It was a little bit -- I don't want to say meek, but he looked tired, worn down, just frustrated in that moment.

And one last comment as we're 29 minutes into deliberations here. We say we don't know what's going to happen. We don't even know how it's going to happen. We don't know how a jury will necessarily approach deliberations. They each go about it in their own different ways.

Maybe by now, it's very possible they've already taken an initial poll about how all of them feel in which case they'll know if they have days to try to convince one or two or three holdouts or whether they're close to be able to come out and announce the verdict to the general public. Or they may not have taken a poll. Or they may be going through each and every count meticulously.

COLLINS: And Renato was just talking about the foreperson here who is not someone who's elected kind of by the juries in other -- in federal cases. But here, it's just the first peer who's selected. And he's -- when they file and he is the first one, he's sitting closest to the gallery where the district attorney's team is in those front two rows. Alvin Bragg was in the second row yesterday. And then it's a bunch of reporters and members of the public.

He works in sales. He has some college education. We know that. He'll be the one who actually -- it doesn't have to be his note or his question, but he has to put some kind of marking on it. Not his name.

REID: Yes.

COLLINS: But then passes to Judge Merchan if they seek clarification while they're deliberating.

REID: Yes. Look, this is a historic position. And he didn't choose this. He wasn't chosen. He just happened to be juror number one.

But he's going to be the one guiding the jury in a lot of ways and also reporting back to the courtroom if they have a question. And ultimately when they come to this historic decision, whatever this verdict is, mixed verdict, acquittal, conviction, he is going to be the one shepherding that. So, it's an extraordinary responsibility that has been thrust onto this Manhattanite.

COLLINS: Yes. Jake, remarkable. We are now 30 minutes in. No clue how long this could all go.

TAPPER: Could be minutes. Could be hours. Could be days could be weeks. Could be months. Could be years.

We can be here for years. All right. Kaitlan Collins, thanks so much. I don't think we're going to be here for years.

But I'm -- because I am a juror -- jury virgin and I've never experienced a jury, I'm interested in finding out what it is like. Karen told us what her experience was like. Jamie, you have also served on a jury. When you go into that room, is there -- does the foreperson take a -- take a survey, is there an initial vote? How did you guys do it?