e #1 prescribed pill to treat plaque psoriasis. ned? otezla can help you get clearer skin, and reduce itching and flaking. with no routine blood tests required. doctors have been prescribing otezla for over a decade. otezla is also approved to treat psoriatic arthritis. don't use otezla if you're allergic to it. serious allergic reactions can happen. otezla may cause severe diarrhea, nausea, or vomiting. some people taking otezla had depression, suicidal thoughts, or weight loss. upper respiratory tract infection and headache may occur. audience: ohhh... with clearer skin, movie night is a groovy night. (♪) live in the moment. ask your doctor about otezla. >> john: any moment now they will talk to stormy daniels a key witness in president trump's

storied criminal trial. are cameras just captured trump going back into the courtroom, he waved at reporters but in th, did not stop to say anything. i am john roberts in washington. >> gillian: think of having me, john i'm gillian turner in for sandra smith that a-determiner. this is "america reports." stormy daniels took the stand at 10:30 this morning starting by describing her upbringing, family life and early career than what she got into the details of the sexual encounter she says she had with trump now about 18 years ago. >> john: expert analysis to cover everything we have heard so far and to react to the new testimony as it happens. >> gillian: first we go to nate foy live outside new york state supreme court with the latest details on the trial. hey. >> hey, jillian, former president donald trump posted on truth social callings is "an agent case" saying it should never been brought.

this is as court is about to resume with stormy daniels on the stand. her first couple of hours on the witness stand she testified that she met former president donald trump in 2,006 and an affair with him just before breaking for lunch she was starting to speak about the process of selling that story to michael cohen for $130,000 while trump ran for president. daniell's claim that she met him in lake tahoe shortly after she was invited to the penthouse and allegedly had an affair. she says she met him at trump tower and kept in contact because she wanted to be on "the apprentice" tv show and thought he could help her career. every blog post about their religion affair in 2011, daniels claims a man approached her in a parking lot and told her to stop telling the story about trump supporter stop telling the story about trump and daniels said telling the story to call hands was the best-case scenario

because then husband or no one should be saved. during cross-examination the legal team could question daniels about revia statements she made also denying these affair. trump's on erica's there today. he posted on ask "to be clear that they don't give a you know what about the merits of the case. the prosecutors are at their table and behind the courthouse pews giddy by the salacious show. this is the intent, not the merits nor the fact this entire case is a massive extortion player" so court is getting back underway right now. you can expect to learn more about daniels selling her story to michael cohen. we will send it back to you, jillian. >> gillian: nate foy outside the courthouse in manhattan thank you. >> john: let's bring in andy mccarthy former assistant u.s. attorney and fox news contributor. as court got back underway, todd blanche immediately moved for a mistrial. the judge mershon claimed

stormy daniels' testimony, saying the prosecution which has no case has gone too far. mistrial. "are there grounds for a mistrial? >> yes a lot of this is salacious with no apparent purpose connecting it up to anything relevant to the trial. i actually think the trump team, they are not going to succeed in this, the judge is not going to grant them a mistrial, but they can use some of what judge has done to bolster their motion. i regard this is unbelievable. the trump lawyers vigorously objected not just to testimony, but in particular to graphic descriptions of the salacious details of the sexual encounter. merchan overruled and let them elicit graphic details and sent the jury out of the room

apparently to lecture the prosecutors for eliciting the testimony that the judge said they could elicit. it's remarkable. >> gillian: that content, you know, may be salacious. it is salacious. but don't the jurors need to hear from stormy daniels to decide whether they believe her story? to decide whether they believe she actually had this encounter with the former president? or do you think that too is irrelevant? >> the truth of her story is not relevant, jillian, one way or the other. the case is about it's hard to remember this because of the way the case has been tried. but the charge here is that in 2017 trump falsified business records of a reimbursement to michael cohen. the fact that the reimbursement was for a nondisclosure old then my deal and that he was prompted

to pay the deal because of the allegation by stormy daniels was true or false makes no difference to how they booked these payments in 2017 which is what the case is supposed to be about. >> gillian: so if i understand you i've been trying to get this answer out of a couple of our legal analysts this morning. if i'm following you correctly, andy, it seems the jurors do not need to make up their minds one way or the other about whether they believe stormy daniels and the former president ever had some kind of affair in order to determine his guilt or innocence, right? that's what you are saying? >> jillian i think the reason it is hard to get an answer to that question is there is with the law should require and there is the dynamic of the way the case is played out. if we are talking about the charges in the indictment is entirely correct that it does not matter whether the jury believed this happen or not because it is really not relevant to why the records were

falsified and whether they were falsified. however, once the judge lets the testimony and, it's a live issue in the case. i think it could affect trump's decision whether to testify or not. if you could narrowly testify about the charges that would be one thing, but now the jury is going to expect him to testify about stormy daniels allegations and description about they are encounter. it's entirely possible that if he testified about it and they did not believe him, they might convict him even though her testimony is not relevant to the charges. >> john: is that all part of the prosecution strategy then? to put trump in that box you just described? it is also to paint him as a less than savory individual? i don't know the history of criminal proceedings, but it would seem to me if you are a jeweler and you think the person you are deciding on is not a

good person you may be inclined to convict. >> that is absolutely right, john. it is a piece of everything else. it is more sensational to anything else happening in the tribal let's again remember the charges in the case are falsification of business records in 2017 which is usually a misdemeanor in new york. it's about the theft of the 2016 election by suppressing politically damaging information in violation of federal campaign finance laws which he has no authority to enforce. full trial has been inflating what the charges are actually about which are pretty trivial in the scheme of things. >> do you think it was a mistake with the judge in the courtroom at all or do you think it would be a better job of limiting her question and limiting the testimony she was able to provide?

>> jillian, whether it is a mistake depends on what your objective is. if we want to indulge the fiction of what judge merchan is here with due process and integrity then yes, it was a mistake to allow this testimony. but if the objective is to get trump convicted so that joe biden can spend the months prior to the election calling him a convicted felon and not terribly worried that down the road it gets reversed by the court of appeals than it is not a mistake at all it's the plan. >> john: in terms of the appeal, we don't know if you will be convicted. if he is obviously there will be eight appeal. in a coat of my totally different case in terms of what has happened but may be similar from this point the harvey weinstein case, it court of appeals overturn his conviction because the prosecution brought in witnesses who were not directly related to the case. is stormy daniels is not directly related to the falsification of business

records that they potentially could have irreversible point on that? >> that is one of many points they have but the thing about harvey weinstein is if i'm remembering right his trial was about three years before his conviction out reversed. of trump gets comfort from the court of appeals in 2026 i don't think it will be cold comfort. be one you are probably right about that. andy, thank you. good have you with us. >> gillian: thank you for answering my question we appreciated. court is now back in session and the trial against former president trump, the defense is calling for a mistrial over stormy daniels' testimony, how will the judge rule? we will break that down coming up next with two criminal defense attorneys, stick with us. limu, someone needs to customize and save hundreds on car insurance with liberty mutual. let's fly! (inaudible sounds) chief!

doug. (inaudible sounds) ooooo ah. (elevator doors opening) (inaudible sounds) i thought you were right behind me. only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty, liberty, liberty, ♪ ♪ liberty. ♪

okay everyone, our mission is to provide complete, balanced nutrition for strength and energy. yay - woo hoo! ensure, with 27 vitamins and minerals, nutrients for immune health. and ensure complete with 30 grams of protein. (♪)

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

>> gillian: welcome back former president trump is back in court as his criminal trial in new york continues they are moving for a mistrial arguing the testimony we have heard so far from stormy daniels is prejudicial and designed to inflame the jury. let's bring in mark eiglarsh. mark, welcome. the former president himself said this morning that we filed a -- we filed a legal claim as a legal claim in the paperwork, that is the end of the story what if you make of that com comment? >> i don't know, i really don't. i'm not exact but sure what he meant by that. i think he is doing everything he can to make sure everyone understands this is a meritless claim that should have been brought against him. there are certainly not proof beyond a reasonable doubt he committed fraud. >> john: let's talk about the motion for a mistrial in i just

got some notes from grace taggart in the courtroom for us. the defense calls for a mistrial saying it is absolutely prejudicial testimony by unelected incident is way different than the story she was published on my paneling in 2016. blanche says the prosecution is trying to inflame the journey stomach jury about stuff that does not matter, and elicited second advance by trump also talking about a safety and consent issue. blanche is saying we sat here and objected as best as we could but she was able to say what she said. how can we come back from this in a way that is fair for president trump? the jury, some of the stuff was stricken from the record but the jury still heard it and how can you on the hear it? the prosecution says wait a second here, the defense was fully briefed on stormy's testimony and the options and this testimony is probative to

trump's intent. mark, this is something i brought up the next hour. is the prosecution trying to prove that the story was so tawdry and so salacious that as a presidential candidate donald trump would go to any lengths to stop this from getting out? >> absolutely. that is clearly the stated reason but the obvious reason is anything you can do to trash and a particular specifically donald trump, they are going to do it. the more they could get into his bad character and the judge will allow them to do it, they will do it. we learn from the harvey weinstein case you better be careful. there are consequences when you somehow go after details that are bad character, don't necessarily prove the underlying issues in the case. you risk a reversal. so what the defense is doing by moving for a mistrial is preserving the record on appeal. you must move for a mistrial so that when the court analyzes a

potential conviction assuming there is one, they will say the defense did everything they could to try to get the judge to fix this and of the did not. >> john: as mccarthy pointed out i think astutely moments ago you might have grounds for a reversal on appeal, but that appeal likely would not come for a while. if he gets convicted joe biden gets to hammer him all the way till november. >> no question. >> john: the judge said no mistrial perry would not expect it. >> we knew that. >> gillian: right before the commercial break where hearing that so let's bring mercedes because she is a criminal defense attorney. mercedes, what do you make about stormy daniels' testimony today? do you think she should have brought in as a witness? do you think she should have been allowed to answer the prosecution's line of questioning that became very salacious lead detail-oriented? >> such a key question and

really a lot of defense attorneys like myself and mark who have great respect we kind of expected. we expect evidence to come and that is going to be tawdry that is going to be effective in terms of trying to do everything you possibly can to blemish the defendant on this who is being persecuted. that is something we are entombed to do and certainly time and time again by prosecutors that will do it, but you have to be very careful when you do something like this where you start to bring in so many details. of course the prosecution will say they are is specification for a. because the of said clearly that had been no intimate experience between miss stormy daniels and former president trump. it never happened. he has denied it publicly, he has denied it -- goal he has obviously not taken a stand, who knows if he will? you know going into this trial that he has denied vehemently that anything took place intimately between himself and a

stormy daniels. the prosecution will say well, when you have a witness that is so detail-oriented about that physical intimacy that took place, you have to give credit to their credibility. that is how they will try to argue if, in fact, it becomes a pivotal issue for allowing this evidence to come in, if former trip president trump is convicted, you will see the prosecution say it is routine for the prosecution to bring up this type of testimony especially when you have a defendant that is vehemently denying any intimate relationship took place between himself and stormy daniels. >> john: on that point kerri kupec is in the overflow room we got a note from her, judge merchan about the testimony judge said i agree it would have been better if some of these things has been left unsaid to. he says a mistrial is not warranted, he is doing everything he can to control the witness including objecting himself once, but he is the guy who let this in in the first

place exmac >> yes and no. he let some of it in but clearly as the defense feared, she stepped over the line. the lesson is you cannot trust pornstars. to probably put in some level of detail that some of the things she said went beyond his ruling. and added information that should not have been there which will help the defense's argument on a mistrial. however, however, the judge is saying it is not so bad that it causes significant to heirloom and thus we need to grant a motion for a mistrial. >> gillian: so, mercedes come the last court note, the last phrase we got here was judge merchan pointed out at one point the court interjected because defense was not objecting.

i mean, have you ever heard of that? >> that is pretty routine. >> oh. >> if judges feel that is going awry they will say there is some background noise i could not hear fully but yes. there are many times where the judge will step in especially when they start to see there is a very likely little chance that evidence will get in that is inappropriate and can tip the scales in either direction. you know, if there is an appeal may be this is inadmissible evidence that has come in and no curative instruction can come in and be told to the jewelers to cure the issues that have arisen during the course of the trial. a lot of things that the judge can do. in the very end. he will make instructions with the jury. you can look at that testimony and think about that testimony and deliberate over that testimony once i have struck it

it it is no longer part of the case. >> but that instruction -- >> wonders out. >> john: go, mark. >> that i laugh at it as a trial lawyer. it's like okay, everyone, you see that tiger? on unicorn with the nazi helmet juggling balls? i want you to ignore that. you can't exmac when they hear these busy details that a pornstar brings out it's hard t. >> john: true but also, i don't know if this will play to trump's favor or not there are attorneys on that jury and when it comes to deliberations might those attorneys say look, by the letter of the judge's instructions we cannot consider any of this. while it may be difficult to on here something you have heard, it you really have to be different domain and diligent in

leaving it out of your consideration. is that possible? >> absolutely very listen there are a lot of professionals plus the lawyers who should know the law is i think it will come down to jury instructions by the way. what specifically does the prosecutor have to prove to prevail in this case? this is the case that has never been brought, you don't have standard jury instructions. you have on each side is going to submit to the judge and what the judge chooses to tell the jury. that is going to be interesting. >> that is something i have not understood all along, mark. why do we not have jury instructions? in this case? >> if this was a murder case, a rape case, robbery case there are standard instructions but i have never heard of a case like this so there are no standard instructions. it will be tailor-made by the

defense and the prosecution submitting what they want the judge to lead and what specific words the jury has to be able to find the prosecution prove this case beyond this good discussion of a reasonable doubt is what this hinges upon. >> john: as we anticipate cross-examination, mercedes, where did the prosecution case the direct with stormy daniels leave donald trump at 2:24 in the afternoon on tuesday the 7t? >> if there are any jewelers that would say oh, i think donald trump did not have any sort of intimate exchange with stormy daniels, all those details made a question in their mind to think to themselves the defense is all about this ever happening and yet these are really tawdry, specific, nauseating details about this physical encounter that they had. i have a tendency to think it may actually have taken place.

and the defenses lying. one of the worst things you can do to lose the trust of the jury. if there is a juror sitting there saying it is so specific you can't know all those things unless it actually happened it can tip the scales in terms of dipping it towards the prosecution. we have to see it i am sure is a very ruthless cross-examination and it has to be with some of what came in she allegedly testified she was afraid of donald trump. that defense attorney has to jump in and really try to dismantle stormy daniels and say this is someone who has enriched herself by making these accusations against donald trump. look what she has been able to do. look at the book, look at the podcast look at the lady a look at the tv. look how her life has changed dramatically. she is not making porn movies, i mean i don't know she has, but

now she has this great wealth because she made these and has to come out very aggressive to make this mileage because so far it looks like stormy daniels there is a 1 in her column. >> john: we will see where this goes for the rest of the afternoon mercedes, mark, think of being with us as always. judge to be 21 denying the motion for a mistrial on trump's team over star witness stormy daniels what will this mean for the cross-examination for the defense, we are speaking to a an attorney that represented trump in the past. jim trusty is up next on all of this, stay with us. ss damage, but he was busy working from home... ...so he scheduled with safelite in just a few clicks. we came to his house... then we got to work. we replaced his windshield... ...and installed new wipers to protect his new glass. >> customer: looks great. thank you. >> tech: my pleasure. >> vo: we come to you for free. schedule now for free mobile service

at safelite.com. ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪

( ♪ ) my back got injured very bad. i was off work for about a year. i heard about relief factor from my wife. i took it every day, three times a day, for three weeks. look at her and i said, "the pain is gone." and she said, i'm glad it helped. i said, "no, you don't understand. it's gone." you, too, can feel better every day with relief factor, a daily supplement that fights pain naturally. call or go online now for our 3-week quickstart, just $19.95.

be one continual coverage on the criminal trial, just getting back underway after judge merchan denied the motion for a mistrial for a testimony. let's bring in jim trusty, a former attorney for

president trump and former doj prosecutor. jim, clearly, donald trump's team is worried about what happened in court this morning, really worried asking for a mistrial on prejudicial terror testimony and a lot of what stormy daniels said was unfortunate. he said i agree it will be better if some of this had been left unsaid, but saying that he said i don't believe we are at a point where a mistrial is warranted. you know, there is this idea of it you can strike things from the jury about a juror on here what they heard. >> but you have to start with objecting as it is happening. i think that is what is implicit in a judge's comments. i would have sustained a bunch of these objections. what has happened is the entire day seems to be devoted to salacious details of the life of stormy daniels. and her thoughts about

president trump and the apprentice show. all of this stuff is absolute garbage and proving some sort of felony bookkeeping event took place in her nda so i think the message there was be a little more aggressive on the objections. may be the does not want to look too defensive in front of the jury or overly antagonistic toward this woman, but at some point you cannot fast forward to a mistrial you have to start with objecting as it is coming out. >> gillian: i was going to ask you what is going on with the defense. why are they not objecting more? but you kind of pretty much answered that. i mean, did they jump the gun with the mistrial? to think that that is why the judge struck that down? >> i mean, a mistrial has to be essentially a manifest necessity. meaning there is no chance of salvaging this case. things have gone too horribly wrong in this instance inadmissible information.

something is coming out and it is not particularly relevant or material it's a little prejudicial of president trump but it's mostly just garbage. salacious details to continue to paint this picture that president trump and everyone around him are bad people so they must be guilty of a crime. that's really the substitute for actual evidence, but it is a tough spot. look when you are sitting there in front of the jury you don't want to look like this when this is hurting you because ultimately she doesn't whether there is a relationship or not none of it really matters. i am sympathetic you don't want to look like you are objecting over and over again to these vivid details coming out, if you ever want to go for a mistrial you will not get there if you haven't objected first. status with the judge was telling him. may be if it rains in a little bit on the direct still going forward i would not rise to the due date if i'm the defense counsel. make a few points of her unreliability but don't turn it into anything other than the

michael cohen show which is where you want to fight this fight. >> john: apparently the judge is considering limiting instruction submitted to him and we will not have an answer on that until thursday. in the meantime stormy daniels back on stand but apparently the prosecution went out there and instructed her to limit her answers just sick to the matter at hand and not go into all of the level of detail she was spouting before but let me get you to put your defense had on here and ask if you were about to do the cross, what would you do with her? >> well, you have the basic tawdtawdryness and ndas are extortionate in nature. a doorman threatened to expose a lie about an illegitimate trust at the ehrhardt event nda is generally simply impressive behavior. sometimes to victim who doesn't

want to have to go through it's more oftentimes extortion. this comes pretty extortionist so you can explore the fact that she is breaking the rules that she is a celebrity hound trying to get on tv, but also recognize beating her up does not change the ultimate verdict. get in and get out would be the verdict for the defense. underscore that she is not a particularly reliable witness but remember she is not the one delivering the conviction if they are ever going to get there. don't get bogged down in the battle where you may start losing the sympathy war. >> gillian: jim, come to judge have done a better job of setting these rules of the road and hammering out some of this stuff before today? or it just is what it is? >> sorry, sandra, i don't know if the defense telegraph there will be a lot of things with this witness sometimes you get when you overplay it and the

pulmonary motions by the end of that day to say look, judge, we are not looking to have a day in the life of stormy for the next six hours and you can get some sympathy. the judge has telegraphed of having some concerns about the level of detail but until defense stops it, the prosecution will keep doing it consistent with working with the case which is tawdryness equals criminality. >> john: resuming the direct in payments from terms of their off the salacious details and now onto the financial side of things, but a lot of people would think the damage has artie been done to the former president. we will see where it goes from here. jim, thank you, appreciate your time. >> good to see you guys. >> john: thank you, see you again soon. >> gillian: new york versus trump continues with stormy daniels on the stand out her testimony so far has had trump's defense team calling for a mistrial which the judge has

not gone along with. so our prosecutors getting what they hope for? jonathan turley fox news contributor will join us next with his thoughts. d we designedp make aches and pains a thing of the past. because our most advanced, infinitely adaptable tempur material eases your pressure points, inch by inch and molecule by molecule. in a way no other mattress can. all night. every night. during the tempur-pedic memorial day sale, save up to $500 on select adjustable mattress sets, and experience deep, undisturbed rest. learn more at tempurpedic.com

speed to welcome back where live on the new york versus trump trial as it is unfolding in the courtroom stormy daniels on the stand so let's bring in jonathan turley fox news contributor to talk about his take on every thing that is having today. jonathan, the big ticket item is that stormy is there at all providing aviary detailed testimony of what she alleged happened to go. >> absolutely correct. the statement judge that he is

surprised there isn't a higher number of objections on the defense is baffling. did objected to putting her on the sand. they didn't stomach then objected to the scope of the questioning and now the judge sounds like claude rains saying i am shocked, shocked there is a pornstar in my courtroom. what did you expect? and the problem was with the judge has done here is this is an entirely unnecessary when his. is uncontested there is an nda. whether what happened in their relationship, if there was one, is immaterial to how those payments were denoted by the trump campaign. so the court had the opportunity repeatedly to say we are not going to take this courtroom through details of this relationship. if you want to establish a relationship occurred, do so.

establish the dates. but likely those facts could've been been stipulated. the prosecutors wanted to get salacious details out. this is a form of punishment. they are trying to use a witness for punitive purposes and in my view, political purposes, and this is what happens. it happened because the judge lost control of his courtroom. >> john: there seems to be no argument, jonathan, that this was only to make trump look like a bad guy. they are talking about finances now after laying out this whole country, salacious history of stormy daniels with donald trump, what susan hoff under said in a sidebar goes to content so they try to paint trump is a guy who had been married to lonnie and for a year when this allegedly happened. do you hear the salacious details of these come out in court and susan the prosecution would say one trump heard stormy daniels was going to tell

the story publicly he probably said oh, my god, we have to do over the weekend to stop this from coming out. so i mean they have painted this tale for the jury, as people have pointed out, you can strike whatever you want from the record, but once a jury here is that it is awfully tough to hear it. >> like the old far side cartoon where the judge is saying jury will ignore what was just said and the jury had shocked faces. you know, you really can't have this cat walk backwards. the judge knows that, the prosecutors know that, but what the prosecutors are arguing here is completely ridiculous. i mean, he also paid money to kill a story of a doorman that was completely untrue. is the jury have to know the details of that story? the point is that various stories were killed because they did not want to get them out. the question is what was the intent in how they noted these payments as a legal expense?

an entirely different problem when it comes to materiality and the judge seems to have one of her on the stands because the judge could easily have said "i don't get it" or he could have said "you are going to have the fastest witness in history. rules and bid adieu to stormy daniels quote. >> gillian: once judge merchan decided to allow her into the portland as a witness, could he have done more to put guardrails in place? >> he certainly could. because he came back later and said you know, when i'm concerned about how far this is going it was on the titanic side i am concerned about navigation when people are heading for the lifeboats. i mean, it's a little bit late when the judge is concerned.

status was clearly going to happen. this is why the defense team objected. this is why the prosecutors had to argue that they need a broader scope. the prosecutors literally stood up and said, i assure you, judge, we are not going to get into i mean, if that's the standard they left for the prosecutors because it appears to be so. now are saying gosh i wish you would objected that. >> john: we are saying to andrew mccarthy about this there may be grounds for appeal here and it is similar in the cases are completely different but it's similar to the harvey weinstein case that a lot of witnesses will lead in but they were character witnesses who impugn harvey weinstein's character but the judge says this was prejudicial. you have to kick it out and by the way i'm overturning the case. so trump may be able to overturn the font he may get convicted in

the meantime. terry joe biden gets to bash him all the way until november for being a convicted felon and overturning years from now. >> i think i may be reversible error on a number of fronts. it will be hard to correct that. the judge can correct it in his instructions but at this point will be very hard to do it. for example the judges allow this jury to hear over and over again that there were election violations at the base of this case suggesting that trump committed election violations. there is no evidence of that. there is no evidence of a crime. q1 [coughs] all right thank you for your learned opinion is always. good have you back as well. thanks. will be back with more with matt whitaker right after this, stay with us as port continues in new york city. mendous tool to help you achieve financial security.

here are the benefits. stock market growth, protection against market losses, compound interest and no annual fees. sound too good to be true? if you have at least $100,000 to invest, get your investor's guide and see if it's right for you. mom genes. she passed them down to you. but who passed them to her? ancestrydna can show her who and where her genes came from. best of all, it's on sale for mother's day. get it now, before she has to remind you. you didn't live this strong, this long to get put on the shelf like a porcelain doll. if you have postmenopausal osteoporosis and are at high risk for fracture, you can build new bone with evenity®. ask your doctor if you can do more than just slowing down bone loss with evenity®. want stronger bones?

then build new bone; evenity® can help in just 12 months. evenity® is proven to reduce spine fracture risk by 73%. evenity® can increase risk of heart attack, stroke, or death from a cardiovascular problem. do not take evenity® if you have low blood calcium, or are allergic to it. serious allergic reactions and low blood calcium have occurred. tell your doctor about jaw bone problems, as they have been reported with evenity®. or about pain in your hip, groin, or thigh, as unusual thigh bone fractures have occurred. don't let a break put you on a shelf. talk to your doctor about building new bone with evenity®! we're talking about practicing-- practicing good financial strategy. ...by cashbackin. what'd you think i was talking about? -not a game. -not a game. -talking about cashbackin. -cashbackin. cashback like a pro with chase freedom unlimited. how do you cash back?

with absorbine pro, pain won't hold you back from your passions. it's the only solution with two max-strength anesthetics to deliver the strongest numbing pain relief available. so, do your thing like a pro, pain-free.

absorbine pro. >> john: all right stormy daniels is back on the stand again. the direct examination is continued with susan hoff into who you see in the upper right-hand side of your screen. let's bring back matt whitaker attorney general for some thoughts here. i was going to a couple of things because michael menotti

is waiting for m waiting on this and i wonder if he is hoping foa pardon if trump becomes president again but he brings points on stormy daniels that may come and cross. >> he has posted on x which is amazing in and of itself he is making a suggestion that stormy daniels has been hiding her income so not to pay this judgment set out on has against her for almost $600,000. and it is interesting. it will be whether or not the defense uses it in cross-examination to impeach her and suggest she is not an honest person and maybe has the purpose of my personal animus toward donald trump. >> john: which suggest he she is willing to make up anything to get to him. >> gillian: according to a convicted criminal. that's the problem. >> john: whose instant, innocent in all of this? >> gillian: is a objected. >> donald trump a one. >> gillian: what i'm trying to get my mind around his judge

merchan a couple of sickly dinged, the defense for not objecting wond during the cerem. want to hear something it's very difficult to discount and end pretend you never heard. speak of the prosecutors are trying to tell story and playing a political order to make points that mike chief political points and the fence is afraid to continue objecting objecting because it annoys so much annoys the jury's have to choose what to object to to make sure it's impactful but there is a gatekeeping. i think professor turley is absolutely right the objected to

the witness they want to limit the scope and the judge seem to let stormy daniels testify about everything in some very salacious items and to me that's on the judge not the defense they've artie objected they can object but again we are trying to convince the jury that you want them to rule 40. it's very -- we mentioned in the break it is certainly more art than science. >> john: there is the issue here is the testimony probative you think in no shape or term it is. >> methylation out of bin laden because it was more than probative. more to the elements of these alleged documents or even the election charged to see what it's looked like based on everything we know right now i don't know how she couldn't have

been a more limited witness. then she was allowed to testify on. >> john: apparently the judge is considering a limiting instruction but won't have anything to say until thursday. thank you. we'll be or a backup of this, us. -ugh. -here, i'll take that. woo hoo! ensure max protein, 30 grams protein, 1 gram sugar, 25 vitamins and minerals. and a new fiber blend with a prebiotic. (♪) (vo) if you have graves' disease... ...and blurry vision, you need clear answers. people with graves' could also get thyroid eye disease, or t-e-d, which may need a different doctor. find a t-e-d eye specialist at isitted.com.

♪ i'm gonna hold you forever... ♪ ♪ i'll be there... ♪ ♪ you don't... ♪ ♪ you don't have to worry... ♪ 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.

using the finest materials, like indulgent memory foam, and ultra-conforming inner-springs, for a beautiful mattress, and indescribable comfort. save up to $800 on select adjustable mattress sets at stearnsandfoster.com

>> back to the trailer to hear about that than -- it looked like it was canceled and it was resurrected, document the financial aspect of things but again the salacious details have been later there. >> sandra: seemed to dominate today speed jury heard also now all we've been talking about be -- >> sandra: yesterday we had forensic accounting as someone -- today we had porn star testimony. a bit -- >> john: in one of these days convicted felon testimony. when michael gordon expand. >> sandra: i'm julian turner. "the story" with martha maccallum start right no