outside the courthouse but, yesterday, the biden campaign held the surprise event there. >> i don't understand that. >> we will tell you who was there and dig into that campaign strategy. also ahead, the latest from gaza where israeli forces are moving into the city of rafah. it comes days after an israeli air strike ignited a deadly fire at a camp for displaced palestinians. let's dive in to our top story. after 21 days of heated testimony, the defense and the prosecution delivered closing arguments yesterday in donald trump's criminal hush money trial. nbc news laura jarrett has a recap. >> the first trial of an american president soon in the hands of seven men and five women. prosecutors closing their case arguing former president trump orchestrated a criminal conspiracy to influence the 2016 election to pull the wool over voter's eyes, they say, by ordering the payoff of stormy daniels and covering it all up. they tried to establish a pattern of mr. trump damaging stories that could derail his 2016 campaign pointing to a key conversation secretly recorded by mr. trump's then attorney michael cohen, the star prosecution witness where mr. trump discussed the alleged payoff of a different woman and stein glass calling it jaw dropping. we didn't pick him up at the witness store, the defendant chose michael cohen, he said. telling jurors you don't need michael cohen to connect these dots. but as the ultimate insiders, he can do just that. the defense has also tried to discredit cohen as motivated to lie and desperate to put mr. trump behind bars and pointing to coy hen's own podcast. but steinglass took that head on arguing cohen is understandably angry because mr. trump dropped him like a hot potato after the feds came calling in 2018 and urging jurors to see this case not about michael cohen, it's about donald trump. in his closing arguments, trump attorney todd blanch tore into the prosecution's case and blasting cohen as the human embodiy of reasonable doubt and branding him the greatest liar of all time and the mvp of liars saying he lied to congress, judges, prosecutors, bankers, his family. adding he came in here and raised his right hand and lied to each of you repeatedly and pointing to one of the trial's most dramatic moments when cohen was confronted with phone records suggesting he never spoke to mr. trump about daniels in a 2016 phone call lasting just 96 seconds but, instead, called mr. trump's bodyguard. blanche arguing, quote. he struck at the 34 felony counts that mr. trump faces to allegedly falsifying his business records arguing none of the voices, vouchers, or checks were falls saying the legal retainer language on the records wasn't criminal or sinister, but merely generated by accounting software at the trump organization and there was nothing wrong with it. he said trump is innocent. there is no crime, period. >> this is a trial that should not happen. it's a very sad thing. this is a dark day in america. >> nbc laura jarrett is reporting for us there. here is the time line for today's proceedings. the judge will give the jury instructions at 10:00 eastern time and expected to last an hour. after that, the jury deliberation begins. the judge said the jury will deliberate until about 4:30 this afternoon. schedules for thursday and friday will depend on the jury's progress. let's bring in our guests this morning. good morning to you all. lisa, you were at your post again yesterday down at the courthouse. so the case from donald trump's defense team is michael cohen, the star witness as he he believes he is, is a liar, the greatest liar of all time as todd blanche put it to which the prosecution said he is and why donald trump counted on him to do his dirty deeds. how did it play out in court yesterday? >> i think one of the things that is missing from that sort of juxtaposition there is how much other evidence the prosecution has that has absolutely nothing to do with michael cohen. if you listened to todd blanche yesterday, michael cohen is the central character in this drama. you listen to josh steinglass he is nothing more a narrator and a tour guide through this mountain of evidence. i thought it played pretty well that he acknowledged what michael cohen is and was, because he was saying, again, you played this clip from laura. we picked this guy up at the witness store. we didn't choose this guy. the defendant chose this guy and chose him for what makes him untrust worthy. i thought a good number for josh steinglass who had a number of good moments yesterday. >> the day didn't end until 8:00 last night, three hours from donald trump's defense team and almost five hours from the prosecution. at the end of the day, what did it add up to for you? >> it added up to eight hours at the ends of the day. >> massive. very good. >> i was told there would be math on this test and i was prepared. look. i think that is too much but part of that is from my own experience. if i had begged for 30 minutes to close a case like this, i would have gotten 20. i don't know what the right amount is. i know that prosecutors and defense attorneys, you know, want to say everything they can because if they leave something unsaid, they will believe that was the thing that made the difference in their case. so i get it. i think it's too much. i think there is a lot of diminishing marginal return. >> lisa, walk us through what seemed like an important moment in the courtroom yesterday where trump's attorney todd blanche was admonished by the judge and blanche said to the jury you might be putting this guy in prison and sending him to jail p the judge said, whoa, that is not necessarily going to happen so walk us through that this. >> they asked for instruction from the jurors that they are not to take that in to consideration. the reason it was so serious, first of all, blanche worked in the southern district of new york almost ten years. chuck and i know and i was never a prosecutor, you don't mention anything in summations having to do with sentencing. that is the province of the judge. the jury has absolutely nothing to do with the sentence. so by raising the specter of prison was a big no-no, particularly given who the defendant is here, because what blanche was trying to do is think about who you might be sending to prison. this is the former president of the united states. almost trying to elevate the burden improperly. the instruction was you're not to think about this. sentencing is totally for me to deal with. and there is not necessarily a sentence of imprisonment that would go along with a conviction. we were on air and he said if you're the prosecution that is the best possible position to be in because he has lifted that extra burden that todd blanche wanted to place on the jury by telling them you can convict this guy and he might never do a day in prison, don't trouble yourself about it. >> chuck, i understand from my preeminent source in this trial, mika brzezinski, that there are two lawyers on the jury. when i start hearing about michael cohen is a liar and michael cohen is this and that and everybody is focusing on michael cohen, just as a lawyer, and i know lisa and you are also lawyers, what are you thinking about? when you get back there, you're looking at the documents. again, it seems to me if you've got two lawyers that are going to be back there, they are going to be saying, okay, it doesn't matter whether you like that guy or not, it's in the documents. we have got the evidence here. whether that evidence acquits donald trump or whether it convicts him. i wonder if that is your thought as well. >> i agree with that, joe. look. if i have a good case, good evidence, good documents, good witnesses, all are welcome to the jury. lawyers, zoologists, i don't care. also, you can't look at any one person and describe that they would be or would not be a good jury based on their occupation. but i think you're right. i think lawyers take a particularly rigorous approach to analyzing evidence and following instructions. again, if i have a good case, that is exactly what i want. >> so let's look ahead to today, guys. lisa, the jury instructions 10:00 this morning and expected to last about an hour and then it's in the hands of the jury, this case. why are the jury instructions so important to what happens next? >> because the jury instructions inform how the jurors understand what are sort of complicated charges here. remember, the charge here isn't about hush money, itself. it's about the falsification of business records and 34 of them in particular. but what makes this a felony is the accusations that these business records were falsified essentially in service of concealing another crime. and so in that, the jury instructions are going to be critical. what does it mean to have the intent to defraud? to the extent the prosecution the underlying crime as a conspiracy to promote donald trump's election through unlawful means. what are those unlawful means? the judge's final jury instructions allow for the jurors to have not a meeting of the minds but their own opinion on what those unlawful means are and they are sort of a grab bag of what they can be. and so the jury instructions here are absolutely critical, in particular, look for an instruction on what it means to falsify business records with an emphasis on the word "cause." because donald trump has been accused of falsifying the records himself or causing them to be falsified and josh steinglass emphasized yesterday this cause aspect of it. it doesn't matter that trump may never have seen the entries. if he set this whole thing in to motion, he caused alan weisselberg to struck them to make the business records in a certain way, that will be enough, so long ago the jury instructions make clear to the jury that is what they can mean to falsify. >> interesting. lisa, i have a question for you but, first, i want to read from chuck's new opinion piece in "u.s. news and world report." it's entitled even if he is guilty, trump could be acquitted. justice would still be served. you write in part, this, chuck. to me as a former federal prosecutor, the evidence is compelling that trump directed a plot to conceal the tryst from voters during the 2016 presidential shp. no matter how you feel about his innocence or guilt that is okay. our justice system is imperfect. anything endeavor that includes human beings is imperfect. we ask jurors to list and deliberate and ask them to serve as the conscientious of our community and we empower them to determine whether a defendant is guilty as charged and we must live with that decision whether we agree or disagree with it. >> chuck, let's just take this one layer deeper. sort of an ininception thing here. even if he is convicted, a lot of legal minds out there think he has a pretty good appeal on legal grounds. forget the facts. but on legal grounds on whether this case should have been brought in the first place or not. so, again, the wheels of justice grind slowly, but they grind fine. again, it's not a slam dunk. this is not a basketball game. it's a process that, over time, as you said, works, regardless of the outcome. >> i believe that is right. i tried dozens of cases, joe, as a federal prosecutor. number one, i couldn't predict what the jury would in any of them, although in the overwhelming majority of those cases, the jury convicted. but when they don't convict -- and it was painful, because i still, to this day, believe in the cases that i brought in which the jury acquitted. and that is painful because i feel as if there was a injustice, but that is not really accurate. when the jury decides, it decides. everybody in the system knows that is final. putting aside the appeal you just discussed, joe. and that is okay. we live with it. that is our system. we ought to be proud of it. it's flawed and it's still the best system in the world. justice is a self-defining concept whether acquitted or convicted, the jury has spoken and we must accept that. all citizens must accept that. >> yep. it's that acceptance is really important. i couldn't agree with you more, chuck. lisa, another factor of this, everyone is, of course, talking about this is whatever the jury decides and waiting to see what this jury will come up with. one thing you've also been studying in court is the judge. it's impossible not to. it's such an important player in all of this. and what his experience has been throughout all of this. just studying him, how do you think he is going to be -- you've already made it clear that his instructions, you expect them to be specifically clear, especially around certain subjects. but if they can't decide, how long can you keep them in there and would he? >> it's a difficult question to know but i think what he will do is encourage them to continue to deliberate. if they indicate they are having trouble, encourage them to deliberate until they are absolutely positive that no more movement can be -- can happen. this is a judge who has earned the respect of observers in the courtroom for his demeanor. he has the quintessential judicial temperament and that should pay real dividends with the jury, in particular. all juries love the judges that are in charge of them. that is sort of just a bug in a feature of our judicial system because the judges are the ones who care and feed for them. but my expectation is that this particular jury really has affection for judge merchan who is looking for their well-being throughout the and temper through the trying of times. if he says to them i am going to encourage you to go back to the jury room and continue to deliberate, i think they will take that seriously, unless there is absolutely no possibility that they can reach a verdict. now, of course, there are 34 counts here so one possibility is that they convict on certain counts and hang on others. and that may be a situation where he is more than willing to let them come back hung on certain counts. in particular, because donald trump signed nine of the checks, one possibility here is that you see a mixed verdict where the jury comes back and say we are holding him accountable for the accounts having to do with the checks he personally signed. on some of the others, we are having trouble reaching agreement, your honor. >> chuck, back to your experience as a prosecutor what it is like now to made your case and your closing arguments and it's in the hands of the jury to try to look in their faces and read their reactions over all of these weeks. what is it like to sit and wait as a prosecutor who feels he has made his kiss to see what the jury will decide? >> absolutely flipping miserable. i hated it. because there is nothing you can do at that point, willie. it's out of your hands entirely. so what i mostly did was pace the halls and wander into the courtroom and back out and tried to each lunch but couldn't. tried to turn my attention to the next case but couldn't. it's funny. i had jurors come back quickly i thought a complex place and take a long time and i've had jurors take a long time where i thought it was a simple case. to answer your question? miserable. >> a follow-up on that. is it possible to predict any particular jury -- from your experience a case like this, how long it took, the number of counts involved. give us an approximation how long the jury deliberations might take. >> my only sense of that, jonathan, 34 counts and lots of documents and they will work through it methodically. there is a bit of folklore attached to verdict friday. jurors often will reach the verdict at the end of a week so they don't have to come back next week. but that is not a rule. that is not a law. that is just something that i've observed on occasion. again, i didn't know when my own jurors would come back so it would be hard for me to tell you when this one will come back. >> former u.s. attorney chuck rosenberg and msnbc legal correspondent lisa ruben, thank you both for coming on this morning. we will see you soon. still ahead on "morning joe," the latest from the middle east following that deadly air strike on a tent camp in gaza housing displaced palestinians. why the white house says israeli's actions in rafah, so far, have not crossed president biden's red line. richard haass joins us next with his expert analysis. we are back in 90 seconds. we are back in 90 seconds. ♪ lim♪ and doug. (bell ringing) 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. ♪ with so many choices on booking.com there are so many tina feys i could be. so i hired body doubles. mountain climbing tina at a cabin. or tree climbing tina at a beach resort. nice! booking.com booking.yeah. it appears the munitions used in israeli's deadly strike on rafah were made in the united states. that is according to "the new york times" which spoke to weapons experts and reviewed visual evidence. while the attack received international condemnation, israeli is still pushing forward with its offensive in the southern gaza city. nbc news international correspondent raf sanchez hat latest. >> palestinian families fleeing rafah any way they can as nbc news crew found israelis pushing in the heart of the city for the first time and the white house says it hasn't seen evidence of israeli crossing president biden's red line. >> we still don't want to see the israelis smashing into rafah with large units and haven't seen and not to this point. >> reporter: outside the city 21 people killed in an israeli strike on tents along the coast, according to the health ministry in hamas-run gaza. the idf denying they attacked a safe zone. it comes just two days after an israeli air strike ignited this firestorm at a different camp and killing dozens of civilians. facing international criticism the idf saying it used small bombs to target two hamas commanders but that a secondary explosion started the enormous fire. >> our munition alone could not have ignited a fire of this size. >> reporter: the idf says hidden hamas weapons might have caused the blast but offered no firm evidence. an israeli official said earlier a gas tank could have sparked the blames. nbc news has learned the military has been forced to halt aid delivers in gaza by three after officials say bad weather damaged their temporary pier. here is part of the causeway floating away from the beach and a setback after military boats washed up on the coast of israeli and gaza over the weekend, while the u.s. service member remains in critical condition after an accident on the pier last week. >> nbc raf sanchez was reporting us from israeli. joining us is richard haass, author of the weekly news letter home and away. great to have you at the table with us, richard. welcome. let's talk about the red line. amiral saying what we saw yesterday out of that refugee camp that were killed after a bomb in horrific pictures making their way around the world and that did not cross the red line. what is the red line? what is the red line mean, so everyone watching is clear? >> the red line was essentially not to go in in a very heavy way using large ordnance and not the way israeli had previously gone into gaza using large weapons from a distance, sure, to cause lots of civilian casualties. how will i call it is in the red line was set fairly high and it was how israeli was going to do this. >> how much pressure is this president feeling right now? obviously, some tough questions in the briefing room yesterday to admiral kirby about what happened in that camp. what is the relationship right now with prime minister netanyahu, as we see these