says is in the moment, the day of the closing arguments, there was a lot of, this is long, this is technical, this went on too long. the jury was getting antsy, and there was a lot of questions like did that backfire, but the jury instructions seem to have said that they heard steinglass and it works. molly i saw a poll that said 67% of people are not affected by the outcome of this case , that leads me to believe that these people had already made their mind up. for people who don t like trump, or believe that this is a guy who has abated accountability for a long time, what is the level of satisfaction for them and what do they do about it? i think what biden said was
today s top stories. michelle goldberg, msnbc political analyst, and opinion columnist for the new york times , and matthew dowd, senior msnbc political contributor, and former chief strategist for the bush 2004 campaign. michelle, i know you went to the courthouse for part of michael cohen s testimony, and for closing arguments. so let s start with trump felony convictions. early polling suggests the majority of voters approve of the verdict. but many of trump s most ardent supporters are outraged and the former president seeming to encourage the anger. what could that mean for the country, as we draw closer to the election? obviously it is extremely frightening because we have already seen reports of trump supporters trying to dogs jurors, inundating members
prosecution. do you agree with me that this is a legitimate appellant issue for trump? he can put it in the way that i put it. i don t know for what i was convicted there are two appellate issues here. the first one is what you said look, a basic fundamental principle of our criminal law process, of our constitution is a defendant is entitled to notice in advance of trial with specificity what he s being charged as for what he s being tried for that s why we have indictments. now the indictment in this case does not specify what the underlying quote-unquote unlawful means are. and in fact, i found this to be shocking. frankly, the judge did not make the prosecutors commit to any of those unlawful means until we were just it s about into closing arguments. so that s gonna be appeal issue number one. i was never put on specific notice of what i was being tried for appeal argument number two is going to be this one of the bases for conviction here. one of the unlawful means is a violati
convention. rebecca rose woodland, sol wisenberg, the former independent deputy counsel, fox news contributor. sol, interesting couple of piece i ve been reading on the prospect of appealing something like this. in new york appellate courts though i understand rarely do they overturn a jury decision without evidence of serious error. so the obvious question to ask you, are there enough serious errors here to make an appeal and make an appeals court go the other way? well, i think there are very, very serious errors here, neil. to begin with, the fact that trump s lawyers really weren t given the actual theory, the actual facts about what other crimes. remember, they had to prove that he falsified business records with the intent to cover up or commit other crimes, and they weren t informed of that, the trump defense team, until right before closing arguments.
in two sworn statements seen by the jury and a tweet but these were reimbursements. he said that even after there were those two smoking gun documents, wasting so much time and so much credibility with the jury, with that it was a pivot point of both his opening statements and his closing arguments. and the fact that that was a pivot point of his defense i think may explain the speed with which the jury rejected reasonable doubt. you know, andrew, i have never, as i think about it, i cannot think of an instance in hearing a criminal defense lawyer, after losing the case, after getting hit with a guilty verdict, go into an interview and say they were witnesses that should ve been heard in that courtroom, but they should ve been called by the other side. i have never heard a lawyer in