12 00 p. M. Pacific time at the commonwealth club. That is tonights last word. The 11th hour with Stephanie Ruhle begins right now. Tonight, Michael Cohen gets called out. What the judge in Donald Trumps trial is saying about a star witness out of his testimony next week. A new report from the State Department criticizing the war in gaza as israel prepares to invade rough al appeared and trump famously does not like spending money. But what happens when his Campaign Starts cutting corners . Why republicans are sounding the alarm. As the 11th hour gets underway this friday night. Good evening. I am katie phang in for Stephanie Ruhle. We are 15 days into the trump hush money trial. With Stormy Daniels done Testifying Comedy 15 was mostly about records. But things will get heated again next week. Prosecutors revealing that their star witness will take The Stand On Monday and face off against his former boss. My colleague has more. Reporter tonight, nbc news learned from multiple sources that prosecutors will call their star witness on monday. He called himself Donald Trumps excerpt here now a vocal trump critic. Cohen unleashing on his old boss in his book and on social media. Spotted online this week wearing a tshirt depicting mr. Trump behind bars. The judge today Directing Prosecutors to inform cohen that the judge is asking him to refrain from making any statements about the case or mr. Trump. But is not placing a gag order on cohen. Mr. Trump remains under one, barring him from attacking witnesses and the jury. It is a disgrace. There is no case, there is no crime. No crime. They failed to show a crime. Reporter cohen is a critical Witness For The Prosecution as a jury has now read his text messages, heard his voice , and seen evidence that he paid a Stormy Daniels 130,000, just days before the 2016 election so she could not derail the campaign. The defense said her story of sexual relations with mr. Trump was false, a shakedown for money, brokered by cohen, making his testimony and credibility on the stand essential. Mr. Trump has pled not guilty to the charges of illegally disguising his rivers and trucks to cohen, his former attorney, as Legal Expenses to cover his tracks. The faceoff between the gop nominee and cohen is likely to be one of the most dramatic of the trial. Cohen comes with baggage, including previous convictions for campaignfinance violations and lying under oath. Meanwhile today, the jury is hearing more from who set aside the oval office and confirmed mr. Trump met with cohen at the white house in 2017. Prosecutors say they devised their reimbursement game there. But she testified the former president signed checks without reviewing them first, contrary to what mr. Said mr. Trump said in his book and other witnesses that at trial. With that, lets bring in our leadoff panel, catherine christian. She is an nbc news legal analyst and criminal defense Attorney Daniel ceballos and hayes brown, writer and editor for msnbc. Com. Thanks to all of you for getting us started this hour. Catherine, i will start with you. Lets start with the fact that today did not include necessarily, quote unquote, murky names or hollywood testimony. But as we know as former prosecutors and trial lawyers, it is the details that matter. We got that through records. We have custodians of records that were coming from at t and verizon, and there was sometime that was taken in front of the jury to get these records and enter them into evidence. You think the jury will be able to appreciate the nuances about having these records and once they go into the jury room and they are able to see the evidence . They will understand it monday when Michael Cohen testifies and testifies about phone calls that he made, phone calls that he received, text messages. So they will understand why that boring stuff was really, really important. And it is. It is the most important part of this case, the records. The 11 checks, the invoices, ledger entries. Those are the 34 counts of falsifying Business Records that donald trump is charged with. So as you said, the details are important. Star, that is very interesting, but that is not what this case is about. Reporter hayes, to kathryns point, there was what i felt like was the highlight of the day. The summary that was entered into evidence. That summary, i thought, for those that had been critical about the detour, perhaps, as you would call it, that was taken with Stormy Daniels yesterday, the summary that was allowed to be entered into evidence that the jury will have in its possession linked the 34 individual Felony Counts to the specific invoices, General Ledger entries, and checks that were signed by donald trump, that were issued by the trump organization, in terms of, excuse me, the Donald Trump Revocable trust account in the Donald Trump Personal account. Do you think that the distilling of the information made sense for the prosecution to do at this time, coming on the heels as big as something as Stormy Danielss testimony . Absolutely. It was important for the over arcing narrative. To establish with Stormy Daniels why these payments existed in the first place, and then use this evidence to lay out the groundwork. Here is the connection, here are the connection points between the scandalous testimony you just heard and all of this a boring but necessary stuff, to show what exactly this crime was. He showed the clip at the beginning of the hour of trump claiming there was no crime, there is no crime. This is the crime. Of him falsifying his Business Records to cover up these payments. And i feel like the fact that it was necessary for him to cover his track is something that the jury understands. They understand the idea of having to, like, hide evidence of a crime. This is the prosecution laying out, here is how all of this fits together. This is really important that it was done at this stage before i go cohen testifies to really wrap it all up. Reporter danny, i need you to put your Criminal Defense Attorney had on. I know it is not exactly what you do. I want to put you in this particular spot in terms of the question. Last night , former federal prosecutor that writes for politico, he and i got into a bit of a back and forth about his estimation that he does not think that the prosecution has even crossed the finish line yet when it comes to being able to prove the felonies in this case. He said this is all great and stellar, but the fact that trump was trying to hide all of this in order to make sure it did not damage his campaign, that is not what this case is about. Do you agree . That the prosecution has not actually met the elements of the felonies that have been charged . I think, and i think catherine and i are in agreement on this one. When it comes to the underlying misdemeanor, the notion that there were records that were falsified, had they shown the transaction, have they should only records, and had they shown Donald Trumps knowledge and awareness . That last element, they do not have it quite yet, they certainly have Circumstantial Evidence of it. Michael cohen will give the direct evidence of that presumably. He will come in and say donald trump ordered me to do this, or some version of that. But the part that aggravates it to a felony, you could say that in a sense, the government hasnt even told us what crime they are using as that Predicate Crime to bump it up to a felony. It might be election law, it might be tax violations. But either way, the argument that trump is trying to make it through crossexamination is that there were other reasons why he concealed this alleged crime. And if the jury believes that, or if the jury is just confused. Taking a step back, this is not like a robbery case, something that jurors can their minds around. This is not only a confusing legal theory, it is a novel legal theory. Arguably, it hasnt ever been applied before. Certainly falsification of Business Records, but this application to bump it up to a felony. Anytime you are in novelty lands, that might be a hard sell to a jury. Catherine, i want to say on this. I think the management of peoples expectations is always important. Especially as lawyers, management of Client Expectations is key. We have a responsibility when we do these shows and talk about these issues to make sure that people understand the real machinations of what happens in a room. There were motions to dismiss that were filed by donald trump. They were denied. But at that stage of the motion to dismiss, the Legal Standard was easier for the prosecution. Now, when the prosecution rests its case, which we anticipate could be at the end of next week, i think the defense will move for him judgment of acquittal. The idea that the prosecution has not proven, you know, a prima facie case of each elements of the crime. Talk about why that is going to be a different legal analysis that judge rochon will have to do once the defense files motion for judgment of acquittal. Its been a grand jury, when the judge reviews in new york and other states, the grand jury is sufficient if the people have shown that there was reasonable cause that a felony was committed, period. It is not proof beyond a reasonable doubt. Trial standard is very different. Now i cannot remember the last time, at least in manhattan, where a judge after the conclusion of the case granted the motion. But it is a very different standard. And i agree that some of our new york lawyers were saying, which crime is it that they are saying that donald trump intended to commit or concealed . I have not explicitly presented that evidence to the jury yet. And there are only two more witnesses. Reporter one of the witnesses we will not be hearing from is allen weisselberg. He is doing time it rikers for 4 perjury for the second time. An issue that was Resented Today Outside Of Court was whether or not his Severance Agreement was going to be admissible. The Severance Agreement said that he gets paid out three different payments, but he is not allowed to disparage the trump organization, its directors, et cetera. More importantly, he Cannot Disparage donald trump here there was a backandforth with the prosecution about whether or not it would even make sense to subpoena him from rikers to have them come over and testify considering the agreement. The fact that weisselberg, who seems, not seems, excuse me. He is a critical part of the case. The fact that he is not testifying, do you think the introduction of this Severance Agreement would help close that loop for the prosecution . I think so. What they are intending to show is that the reason he cannot be here is because we cannot really trust what he has to say. And the idea that he is, i believe the daily beast framed it as him being another hush money payment recipient, that he is basically getting this payout in exchange for staying silent about what he knows about the crimes under discussion. I inc. That the fact that neither the prosecution or defense as the Peanut Weisselberg is definitely interesting. The fact that march on even floated the idea of it in other side really seemed to have really put that into motion at all. I think that the defense is right, that there are a lot of reasons why he cannot be there, including, yes, he is serving in rikers. He is also serving in rikers because he will be pled guilty to perjury. So, considering the fact that Michael Cohen has also credibility issues for lying under oath to congress, i can see where the prosecution would hesitate to put someone else on the stand who might have more credibility issues and instead lean on this Severance Document instead. Reporter you know, you and i have had to deal with putting flipped defendants on. Lets look at that lens. I think Michael Cohen is tantamount to a flipped co defendant. He will be subpoenaed to show up. But the point is that he knows what happened in that room. Right . In those rooms. He was part of the conspiracy. He is saying this is what donald trump agreed to do with dana packer and me, with Allen Weisselbergs knowledge. How do you, if you are Michael Cohens lawyer, how do you counsel him going into his testimony on monday knowing that the judges actually said as well to the prosecution, tell mr. Cohen and the other witnesses to please not talk about this case outside in public . Here is the advice i would give him. It is the same advice i would have given Stormy Daniels. Just answer the question that is asked. And while on the outside of the courtroom, a lot of folks thought Stormy Daniels zinged the attorneys with her never answering a question yes or no. But instead, fighting back on every single leading question. While that played well too many outside of the courtroom, when a witness does that, when a witness is combative with every single question on the cross, they do not help anyone. They do not help themselves or the side they are trying to help. If anything, they may help decide they are trying to fight peer to some degree, that couldve happened with Stormy Daniels. Jurors do not always like someone who fights back on every question. If Stormy Daniels did that, i expect Michael Cohen will do a lot more. I think his attorneys will probably tell him, i know you think this is your time in the sun, just listen to the question, answer the question asked. Yes or no. It is what it is. Have credibility problems, the prosecution presumably has built up the rest of their case. It is not all on your back, just go in there and answer the questions asked. Reporter you know, to dannys point, Stormy Daniels tweeted last night after she testified, quote, real men respond to testimony by being sworn in and taking the stand in court. Oh, wait, nevermind. Putting aside whether or not you support the fact that Stormy Daniels tweeted about, i mean, we do have to fast forward this analysis a little bit. Because the prosecution rests its case next week. All eyes turned to the defense. And we know constitutionally that the defense has no obligation to do anything. It does not have the burden of proof. But you and i note also that it is hard to ignore all of the allegations that have been made that are so personal in nature that it actually does almost look to donald trump to have to take the stand to explain away a lot of the things that he has been accused of. It just will not happen. I cannot imagine it. And if it were to happen, he would be convicted. You know . Defendants also are often their worst enemies. Sometimes you listen to the peoples case, they rest, and you are, like, well, they did not really prove this, so we will not do anything or say anything and hope that the jury does the right thing. So he is going to speak publicly. He cannot trash witnesses or jurors, but what he does outside the courtroom, that is his way of testifying. Yes, but this last question will go to you, right . Because you actively practicing criminal defense, youve got clients, rights, that are probably chomping at the bit, like donald trump, to take the stand. The problem you had was this. Donald trump from day one has publicly come in the court of public opinion, told the world that he is going to testify. It is not, i will think about it. It is not if it is on a thursday, maybe i will do it. It is i will testify, i have nothing to hide, i will tell the truth. We have also seen, danny, that trumps lawyers have not done a fantastic job of saying no to him has there have been representations made during the course of even this trial that make you scratch your head as a lawyer. It does donald trump take the stand . Let me take out my list of promises that donald trump has made that no one even takes seriously anymore. No one will remember that he said i was going to testify. I do not know why we are still Charlie Brown kicking this football. Of course he will stand aside and say, hey, i will testify. And then when he does not, no one will do anything. Yes, in the last few weeks, i have taken the underdog at that maybe he will because im the only one saying it and i will be a legend if he does. And if he doesnt, everyone will forget i said it. Trust me. So i really do not believe he will end up testifying. Heres why. Psychologically, you will get all kinds of whitecollar criminal defendants in cases like this that say i am taking the stand and telling the story. As the case goes on, they get a reality check, and they realize that if they get up there, they will be subjected to the crucible of cross examinations. The rules are slanted against the witness and in favor of the attorney. And really, nothing good can come of it. But the only reason i still hold out for that underdog bet is that he is, he has an unconstitutional constitutional right to do it and what lurks in the mind of donald trump. Baby will have rick scott take the stand for him and testify as his surrogate. Thank you to all of you for getting us started this ev