late. see you at the end of tomorrow. and welcome to the beat. i'm ari melber and today, for the first time ever, defendant donald trump's fate in this criminal trial is now in the hands of a jury of his peers. presiding judge giving the standard and detailed instructions to the 12 jurors in a case that is anything but standard. we know that. and tonight, we can report several brand new developments from the jury's first day of the deliberations which lasted over four hours. we have now gleaned new clues about what they are discussing. what they are considering. what exact evidence and testimony they are focused on today and presumably leading into tomorrow when they hear more of it. we can even tell you the kind of instructions that they want to make sure they are reviewing and so our breakdown on that new information is top story and broadcast tonight. and here is how today's process played out. the nation rivetted. and on a collective verdict watch. >> the historic criminal trial of a former president moves from the courtroom to the jury room. >> we have reached the beginning of the end. >> the day the jury gets the case. >> jury instructions will be delivered by judge merchan to these 12 jurors. >> things just got serious it feels like. >> it does. actually. >> the gravity of the moment cannot be overstated. >> there are four requests from the jury. >> this is interesting. let's get into it. we now have the first clues about what they are discussing. >> the one thing i do think is good for potentially for the state here, is asking to have michael cohen's testimony read back. >> so this is all happening. late into the day. the judge read aloud the formal jury instructions. and then, took over an hour to do that. telling the jurors they are tasked to make an important decision about another member of the community. this defendant being like any other and they operate now as judges of the facts deciding the guilt or innocence. the not guilty possibility. this jury has been in court for 22 days. it has heard 16 days of testimony under strict rules to avoid discussing any of this with other jurors and other people. and remember, even if you are a little skeptical and wondering how this all goes down, the jurors are strictly overseen by the court. the judges there, along with officers and secret service and frankly more armed officers and bailiffs than usual. it is the kind of environment that makes most people compliant. these people have already been screened. they are also observed by the press and other court attendees. i say that to mention there has been no indication that those rules have been breached. the rules saying these jurors must think and take in the evidence but not discuss this with anyone until now. the information we have indicates the jury's first conversations with each other about evidence began today. when they sat down together. that began what they think is their first ever discussion of donald trump's guilt or innocence. his conduct, his personal life. his campaign life. it began when deliberations commenced at 11:37 a.m. new york time. trump was seen grimacing. he repeated his claim that the case is rigged. and then? then what? everyone just waited. and waited. and that's the system. and that could have gone on a lot longer than this. we could have been waiting for daying and not heard a peep. it is only those 12 citizens and what thigh choose to do so people waiting outside the court on them. lawyers waited inside the court. people around the nation wondering when a verdict may come. people with signs, demonstrations on both sides of this thing. that verdict watch will continue when the jury reconvenes tomorrow morning but late in the day, as i mentioned, as nicole mentioned, as we showed in the package of late news clips. late in the day, we got the first look into what the jurors are thinking about. they had four questions and we know some of what they are pondering and it is all about the prosecutor's theory of this case against trump. the juries requested testimony about the call with david pecker. simple and important. they want to review what this man you see here, this long time trump ally and powerful media guy david pecker said under oath about that call. that goes to corroborating whether there was an illegal campaign plot. and he is an eyewitness. and i'll tell you before i go further, we know what pecker testified. remember, the jury has a lot of sway and influence here. but they don't have access to all the information we do under all the rules i mentioned so they had to ask to get the testimony back. they are not supposed to go home and google it. they don't go out and talk to the people there. but we know what he said. mr. pecker testified under oath that he and trump were discussing how trump spoke to cohen. and, they discussed how karen mcdougal was a nice girl. why does that matter? it goes to how the tabloid secretly helped trump silence mcdougal. and about acquiring her story. through a thing called buying life rights. that's the second question and also about david pecker and the da argued all of that was bad for trump because of evidence showing that tabloid paid mcdougal. the argument. and this is not proven. the jury is asking these questions to look it. but the argument was that pecker did that for trump. he didn't do it for himself or the tabloid. this is about whether he conspired to commit a campaign crime. and, prosecutors had everyday that pecker thought and trump said that trump would pay him back for that money. basically, this was a trump thing for mcdougal and he needed someone else to engineer it and that plan was ditched when own lawyer said it could be illegal. pecker testified he decided warned about a potential illegal and criminal act to not take trump's money there. so that is two other requests that show what the jury is thinking about. let me break down what it means. the jury is at least starting where the prosecutors did. with pecker as the first witness. and with the tabloid plot as the lens to understand the later secret schemes, the payments and what the da calls the campaign crimes. and the other two requests go down that same road. the third request goes into the infamous meeting for the catch and kill plot. we are not trying to make this any more varied or have different character. the first three questions were about pecker. and they want to know. and review, what pecker testified about that trump tower meeting. to hatch the catch and kill plot. we ask about the da's case. do they believe it? are they ready to convict? i will be very clear. we do not know if all the jurors or most of the jurors or some of the jurors except the da's case that those pecker plots became a campaign crime. we don't know if they would be asking about this because some hold outs are arguing for defendant trump saying yeah i remember but it wasn't a formal plot. now the other folks might be saying look at what he said. but we know pecker gave that damning testimony. he left little debate that the tabloid would run positive stories on trump and negative stories for his opponents. i'm bringing back that testimony. that's the type of stuff the juries will hear tomorrow when they read it back. so trump's own ally who doesn't have the same credibility problems that michael cohen might. gave that testimony. and that brings us to today's fourth and final jury question. they also want to review michael cohen's testimony about that very same trump tower meeting. we know that cohen confirmed the meeting and this testimony would appear to line up with pecker and the other corroboration. and he said pecker would keep an eye out for anything negative about trump. he would be able to help us. know in advance what was coming out and try to stop it from coming out. that last part is crucial. that is where the da say it is criminal activity began to form. and remember. most members of the media don't go around burying stories for politicianslet alone buying them or talking about being reimbursed for them. that is not a left right thing. that is just in general. tabloids can support or criticize candidates like any other press. some tabloids run misleading or false stories. that doesn't always become a crime. you don't go to jail for defamation. but, the da says when the tabloids started acting as the secret arm of the trump campaign spending money that should have been donations but were instead hidden illegally from the government and the public, that is where prosecutors say trump committed a crime. that's why they say trump wanted the daniels payment secret. to hide the campaign crimes he knew were ongoing. so this jury ends its first day of deliberations. catch and kill to help trump. now, that is not a pure win for the da. but it is not bad either. for prosecutors. there have been five weeks. 80 hours of testimony. we count all this stuff. so they have options. if they were only asking about michael cohen's correct or for testimony that went to complaints that trump's lawyers made or cross examines they thought showed problems with the witnesses. that would be a different start. and this is new. it is kind of exciting and interesting. the very first time we are learning what the jury is thinking about. they have come together and in their group process, they are topically following the start of the path the da laid out. follow the money and the tabloids and the cover-up. and the tabloid meeting led to the very actions that formed the conspiracy. we are here now. we are not here to prejudge what the jury does. if you believe in the rule of law, we are following it precisely to see what outcome we get from the jury of the defendant's peers. but we are learning for the first time that at least on day one, they are back to the beginning of the da's case and whether this cover-up became a crime. david kelly is our special guest on all of this in 90 seconds. this in 90 seconds. anthony: this making you uncomfortable? good. when you've got type 2 diabetes like me, you have up to 4 times greater risk of stroke, heart attack or worse death. even when meeting your a1c goal. discomfort can help you act. i'm not trying to scare you. i'm empowering you... to get real with your health care provider. talk to them about lowering your risk of stroke, heart attack or death. at st. jude, the mission is just something that everyone can truly get behind. look at our little st. jude pin there on the fridge! we're just regular people donating. yeah. and i think it's cool to be able to make a difference in someone's lives in a way that is meaningful. ♪ ♪ welcome to the roots of our legacy. where excellence, comfort, and electricity... are forever in bloom. welcome to beyond. the mercedes-maybach eqs suv. this was an effort to do a favor for donald trump in the last few months of the presidential race. >> unfortunately, yes. >> was the national enquirer acting as the arm of donald trump and michael cohen. and if so, is there something wrong with that? >> we strongly suspect they were. >> karen mcdougal and her lawyer discussing what has all come out. we are now joined as we get the new jury questions by former u.s. attorney david kelly. the district that also handled michael cohen's prosecution for leadership. full disclosure, my former boss, you have prosecuted a lot of cases. this is a big case. what do you think when you hear these jury questions? >> i think it is always kind of a fun jury game if you are not one of the lures lawyers involved. this could be one juror. it could be a bunch of jurors. my guess at this early stage, a bunch of jurors are zeros in right on the prosecution's case. because if they believe pecker, you know, we talked earlier at the earlier stage of this trial. if they believe this story, pecker laid out. that's the heart of this conspiracy. going back, hearing the testimony. if i'm a prosecutor i'm feeling good. and bringing cohen into it. and kind of comparing it instead of leaving cohen to the end. i think they are moving along at a pretty good pace here. >> you think they are moving at a good pace. and you are seeing as you said, careful, caution, some of them. some of them got the point that david pecker who likes trump, who stuck his neck out for trump. who has done things for him, still back then called his lawyer said and so he is going to reimburse me for all this campaign plotting stuff we are doing. his lawyer said do not do that. as i mentioned, there have been many days of evidence. zeroing in on that shows that someone on the jury understands that is bad for trump. >> well yeah, because they get the story. and the felony here comes down to the campaign plot. and i think that this shows that somebody or some people or all of them or most of them, get it. >> trump tower meeting is not itself a crime. >> no. >> they met and talk about this stuff. >> it is part of the conspiracy. >> but if you stopped on that day and no other action occurred it would be fine. burying stories is not something that most media do on a regular basis. sometimes we learn something and don't run it out of fairness. but, you don't just take orders from some billionaire and say we are going to help you hide that. the pecker and cohen testimony at the trump tower meeting, what is that likely to be for the jury's benefit? they want both. >> they go to pecker and they get the whole story. there is corroboration out there. some of which is cohen. if they can believe pecker and cohen's testimony interoctoberred. they will go a lot with cohen. they will not reject him out of hand. i think. but you know. it's tea leaves. >> it is four tea leaves, not one. then they asked they might want the jury instructions again. do you want the whole hour or part of it? do you read anything to them wanting that this early? steams people want that later. >> true, you never know when you will get the jury instruction request from the jury. up front it is probably a good sign they are moving through this quickly. and it will be interesting to see if they will ask for a portion of it. it could be nothing. >> that's fair. we look at the jury's makeup. we protect their identities but they were asked about how they get news. this is who they are. their professions. when you look at how they got their news, okay, many of them are varied. some people kind of said google which basically means you don't check the news that often. that's fine. no offense taken david. but some of them say like juror 2, oh, he goes to trump's truth social. okay. juror 1 clicks around. he does msnbc, full disclosure. take it or leave it. fox news, new york times. looking at this, and then thinking about these questions, can you imagine the back and forth? can you imagine maybe the truth social or the fox person saying yeah. i don't know. i don't know. a lot of people talk like this. it is not that they have a fact to rebut you with. they just say i don't know. i don't know. and the other jurors are supposed to be respectful. generally, we believe everyone is on their best behavior. >> i spend a lot of times watching jurors step into the juror box and seeing if they have the daily news or the new york times or the post. and trying to read something into that. at the end of the day, i trust that a juror is going to really listen to the evidence and put their own biases aside. and decide it on the facts of the case. and i think all the jurors together really help each other do that. you know. and focus and talk about. >> up to a point. if they are deep oan, if they are only into. i meant, now i'm really going off topic. i met someone at a cocktail party once. they didn't know my job so this was really random and said oh what are your hobbies? i like music. normal chatter. he said i'm really into conspiracy theories. i said oh, like which ones? they said the classics. moon landing faked. jfk. but they were serious. the jury instructions require a certain level of literacy that some people refuse to use. >> that is what it is designed to root out. that should have come to the surface through the questions they asked. so if you have a conspiracy theorist in there, you might be talking about a hung jury. >> some of them have been weeded out. you are willing to stick around. we have a lot going. so david stays with us with the big questions coming out. they got the memo. but where are they going? we have a veteran of this very office next. this very office next. [ indistinct chatter ] oh no. what if we don't get down in time to get a birthday gift for zoe? don't panic. with etsy we can find the perfect gift, and send her a preview right away. i love this. thanks guys. ooh, that's a relief. it sure is great to know when something's coming. [ surprised scream ] don't panic. gift easy with etsy. i'm going to jail in part because of my decision to help mr. trump hide that payment from the american people. before they voted a few days later. >> hide the payment. catch and kill. this is ultimately where the case may rise and fall. and that is why it is so interesting as you join us now and we are all on verdict watch together that we are learning what the jury is asking about. that was the trump tower plot. and michael cohen discussing what the payment ultimately made separately to stormy daniels. jurors today requested information specifically on the trump tower meeting and on david pecker, the tabloid chief's conversation with donald trump. prosecution has argued this was the meeting that started it all because they came up with their catch and kill scheme. pecker ran the enquirer. prosecutors have questioned cohen about that meeting on the stand. this is the type of stuff that might be read back out to the your tomorrow. you don't have to wait until tomorrow. what did pecker say he could do for trump's candidacy? cohen recounted he could keep an eye out for anything negative. he would be able to help. know in advance that was coming out and try to stop it from coming out. as i was discussing with david kelly, how much does that match? pecker recounted, quote, i said that anything i hear in the marketplace, if i hear anything, i would notify michael cohen. i will keep reading because this is what the your is likely to be given. pecker continuing. i would notify michael cohen and have them killed or somebody would have to purchase them. and then listen to this. the da's team follows up. purchase the negative stories about mr. trump so they would not get published you mean? and pecker confirms that they would not get published. yes. i would run or public positive stories about trump. and i would publish negative stories about his opponents. i said i would be your eyes and ears. if you are thinking i get the point, you need to get the point beyond a reasonable doubt if they are going to win. all of this stuff is supposed to be dead to rights and we know in the da's closing arguments which will not be reread tomorrow but are relevant, prosecutor steinglass said the prism through which you should examine things. trying to become more powerful by controlling the flow of information that could reach the voters. the question is not one of rhetoric or ideology, it is, is that true and proven beyond a reasonable doubt that they did that at a criminal level? as i told you, if the whole plan was just to say nice things about a candidate, we wouldn't be here. violateing the federal code, all so he could cheat. that's the allegation. we have a special guest joining us. she is in demand from the very office bringing this case. katherine christian. welcome back. >> so, when i was a prosecutor. i was very superstitious. so when notes came out that were good for me, i was cautiously optimistic so i think this prosecution team is cautiously optimistic because these notes the questions are dead onto right where josh steinglass wanted them to b