Meet the Press NOW — January 26

If it's Friday. As former President Trump gets closer to becoming the Republican presidential nominee, a bipartisan deal on border security and aid to Ukraine gets farther away. Plus, former President Trump storms out of New York City courtroom today as jury deliberations are now underway in what could be the first of multiple trials he'll face as he campaigns for president. And the United nations highest court orders Israel to take action to prevent acts of genocide in Gaza.

But stop short of calling for a ceasefire as President Biden speaks to one of the key players in the hostage negotiations. Welcome to be the Press now. I'm Kristen Welper in Washington, where it is 284 days until election Day. The top Republicans on Capitol Hill appear to have fully entered campaign mode.

Bipartisan Senate talks on boarder dealers plan to continue over the weekend. But after former President Trump reiterated his position that, quote, a border deal now would be another gift to the radical left, Democrats housekeeper Mike Johnson is telling colleagues in a letter today, quote, if rumors about the contents of the draft proposal are true, it would have been dead on arrival in the House anyway. Folks, this is an election year. And instead of pushing for a compromise, some of Mr.

Trump's allies on the Hill want to preserve the border as an issue for the 2024 election. Here's Missouri Republican Senator Josh Hawley saying Congress should back down. Senator, is this deal dead? Effectively, I hope so.

It should be. If it's not dead yet, it should be dead. And there is absolutely no reason to agree. Policies that will just further enable Joe Biden.

Well, after privately appearing to soften his support of a border deal, Senate minority leader Mitch McConnell says publicly he remains committed to getting a deal done. And the idea of abandoning border talks isn't sitting right with some Republicans. The idea that someone running for president would say, please hurt the country so I can blame my opponent and help my politics is a shocking development. I think the border is a very important issue for Donald Trump.

And the fact that he would communicate to Republican senators and Congress people that he doesn't want us to solve the border problem because he wants to blame Biden for it is really appalling. Well, what Speaker Johnson will support when it comes to the border is the House's impeachment. Korean to DHS Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. Johnson's letter said the House will move forward with impeachment proceedings over Mayorkas handling of the border next week, which may be politically advantageous.

But paraphrasing Johnson's own words would be dead on arrival in the Senate. NBC's Ryan Nobles is on Capitol Hill 4 as NBC's Vaughn Hilliard is following the Trump campaign. Ryan, I have to start with you. What a week it has been in terms of these border talks.

Has the hope for a deal gotten worse over the course of this week? Where do things stand? You know, it's like watching a graph of a patient on life support, Kristen. It goes up and down depending on the day.

And if you had this conversation with me on Wednesday afternoon, I would say they were close to dead. It was revived somewhat yesterday, and now we're in a bit of a lull, waiting to see the actual text of the legislation come out. And you know, what Mitch McConnell did by kind of forcing the hand of the MAGA Republicans in his ranks is it kind of brought the other Republicans who are supportive of a border package. And let's not forget about Ukraine either.

Woodwork. It became a gig that made that group kind of forceful and vocal, a group of supporters of this effort and trying to kind of lean in and put pressure on that group that may be more inclined to support Donald Trump. So this could go either way. You know, I think a lot of this will shake itself out once we do see that legislative tax, which we expect at the beginning of next week.

So this bill's not dead yet, Kristen, but there are a number of things that could still potentially kill it here in the next few days. Right. Let's talk about these extraordinary comments that minority leader Mitch McConnell made behind closed doors. I was on Capitol Hill yesterday as folks there were just starting to process what had been said.

Effectively, what he said is, we don't want to undermine Trump's chances for reelection with a border deal. Now, publicly, as I just noted, he's walking that back. But what is the reaction today, Ryan? What's the ongoing fallout from that?

Yeah, I think we have to kind of put his comments into context. Essentially, what he was telling this group of senators is you got to make a decision here. You're either worried about the campaign or you're worried about fixing the border problem. If you're worried about the campaign, that's your decision.

If that's where you want to go as a conference, and let's pull out and just abandon this whole idea. But if you're serious, I'm about actually solving the problem, then let's work on solving the problem. And there are members of his conference who feel that way, like Senator Thompson, North Carolina. Look at what he said about these negotiations.

It is immoral for me to think you look the other way because you think this is the lynchpin for President Trump to win? President Trump is on a path to win anyway. Let's make sure after he wins, he's got the tools that he asked for back in 2017. And so you know the way that a lot of these Republicans are hawkish on this deal, their argument here is we're never going to get an opportunity to pass a package like this ever again even if Donald Trump wins.

Because they're never going to get 60 votes in the Senate because there are not 10 Democrats that would support a package like this. Even if Republicans take the Senate, even if Donald Trump is the president and even if Republicans control the House, this is their opportunity right now. And if they're serious about doing anything to fix the problem at the border, now's the time that they have to act. Well, let me bring you into this conversation or what has the reaction been within Trump world?

And talk about the extent to which Donald Trump is reaching out to lawmakers on Capitol Hill and making it very clear that he doesn't want a deal. Right. It was Speaker Dunstan was actually at the forefront of initially telling the Congress that Donald Trump was opposed to the measure as long as Fox News personality Laura Ingraham. This for Donald Trump has been a more careful approach, if you may say, rather than a stream of social media posts or interviews in which he has declared that this measure should not go through.

I made some calls yesterday afternoon to Trump campaign officials asking for some clarity on exactly what Donald Trump opposed as part of this border security measure. And shortly after I reached out to them, the campaign actually put out forward the statement, a two paragraph statement which Donald Trump wrote in part. A border deal now would be another gift to the radical left Democrats. They need it politically but don't care about our border.

What is currently being worked on in Senate will be meaningless in terms of border security and closure. That was a statement from Donald Trump last night which reflects what Speaker Johnson suggested his position here is in the past for Donald Trump. You look at the results out of New Hampshire just earlier this week and among those who said that Republican voters said that immigration are top issue, Kristen, 80% of them voted for Donald Trump compared to 20% for Nikki Haley. Donald Trump all the acknowledging that this is a key political issue for him to run on not only in the Republican primary but in general election.

It sure is. And we saw that in 2016. Ryan, there's no doubt that the border is an energizing issue. Ryan, big picture.

Before I go back to Vaughn on some More politics. If lawmakers cannot get a deal on the border, what happens to aid to Ukraine, what happens to aid to Israel? Is that effectively dead at this point? We should remind folks, President Zelensky was on Capitol Hill saying that without the United States continued support, he would not be able to win the war against Russia.

Kristen, you raised such an important part of this discussion because the issues with the border are going to continue to be the issues with the border. Lawmakers on capital have been fighting over this for decades. And if this border package doesn't change, the status quo will exist as it currently exists. That's not necessarily good, but it's something we can come to expect.

The situation with Ukraine is far more dire and far more urgent. The administration has repeatedly told members of Congress that if aid doesn't come quickly to the front lines in Ukraine, Russia has a chance of winning the war, possibly even toppling the capital city of Kiev. And there is no path to funding for Ukraine at this point without a package that is tied to a border deal. So there is a plan B right now, Kristin.

Now perhaps if it falls apart, they go back to the drawing board. But Republicans in the House are insistent that they don't want to vote Ukraine aid all by itself. So this is the vehicle that has to get that done. If it doesn't, it's really hard to predict what comes next.

And again, we cannot overstate this. The politics of 2024 are looming so large over all of these conversations on Capitol Hill. Let me go back to you on that point because former President Trump, of course, setting his sights on Nevada and South Carolina. And it comes as the RNC had this draft proposal essentially declaring that he had won the nomination.

Trump came out and said, let's pull that back. I want to do this the quote, unquote old fashioned way. What's the state of play now? You have Nikki Haley, who has been defiant.

She's pushing forward in South Carolina, her own state, Right. And she's going on the attack very aggressively against Donald Trump this morning in an interview calling him unhinged. This is all playing out with Kristen, head of next week's RNC winter meeting in Las Vegas where the resolution that was proposed, David Bossi and how Donald Trump and also an RNC committee man was set to go forward. But last night the RNC making it clear that the in fact that the resolution would not be going forward.

And so for Donald Trump, he actually in social media posts had suggested that he wanted to win the old school way. He did not want this resolution to come forward for a vote. If you'll recall, eight years ago, Kristen, of course, you were there when Donald Trump was questioning whether the RNC was actively working against him to rig the nomination process and hand a victory to Ted Cruz or somebody else, even expressing concern about the coup that was potentially unfolding with the releasing of the delegates. So it's notable that Donald Trump eight years later told some of the folks that were essentially all but trying to effectively end this primary and dedicate party resources to Donald Trump's campaign to back off that he wants to win fair and square in South Carolina is the place where he intends to do it.

On Nikki Haley, some surface. All right. Well, big battle brewing in South Carolina. We're talking to Nikhil exclusively on Meet the Press on Sunday.

Ryan and Vaughn, thank you so much for your great reporting on this Friday. I really appreciate it. Joining me now is Jeff Mason, White House correspondent for Reuters Simone Sanders Townsend, former senior advisor to Vice President Harrison, co host of the weekend on msnbc, and Matt Gorman, Republican strategist and former advisor on the Tim Scott presidential campaign. Thanks to all of you for being here on this Friday.

First, let's talk about what's happening on the Hill. It's all intertwined with what's happening on the campaign trail. But Jeff, break down the state of play. The fact that it seemed like these border talks were actually heading in the right direction, at least in terms of getting to the Senate.

And then those Comments by Mitch McConnell In a closed door meeting, a big snack even though he tried to walk them back. Huge snack. And Mitch McConnell has been supportive of Ukraine aid the entire time. I mean, President Biden has long said I can work with Mitch McConnell, even though they certainly disagree on a lot of president being a huge one.

But that was and the former president is what has influenced this. And the fact that Mitch McConnell, who I think we can probably all table agree is not always been a big fan of the former president, the fact that he's making that calculation and shifting his own position on that is a blow to whales. It is. And he's also the summer said just talking about the political rally.

McLemore, I want to read you something in the Wall Street Journal. This is what the editorial board wrote today, quote, giving up on a border security bill would be a self inflicted GOP wound. President Biden would claim with the cause with cause that Republicans want border chaos as an election issue rather than solving the problem. Voter anger may over time move from surprise to the GOP and the public will have A point.

Senegal is the only word that fits Republicans heading a border deal whose details aren't even known. How do you think Republicans are responding to that type of reasoning today? Look, I think two things can be true at once. It didn't matter really candidly what the White House and Senate come up because the House still has to pass with a three Senate three seat majority.

Wasn't it true today? It was a month ago. I think that they kind of seem to have forgotten that. But the other part of this I kind of push back on Wall Street Journal here is Biden can do stuff on his own.

There's executive wars a plenty you can go through with remain in Mexico and the like. Heck he can go to border shake up the team. There are things he can do he doesn't need a lot he has to wait for actually get this thing at least in a better position. So both of those things I think can be true right now.

Simon, what about that? I mean should President Biden with Democrats, moderate Democrats at least hungry for a border deal, take an executive action on the border and do you think he should try to push this border deal through if he has any leverage over Republicans at this point despite the internal fighting that we're seeing? I mean I definitely think the president and the vice president of the White House should continue to be aggressive in demanding Congress literally do their job and pass because this is about funding. Like I think it's all boils down to funding.

There are many things that president can do from the White House's perspective and I don't argue they're doing a number of those. But when you ask folks in we had the mayor of Mesa, Arizona on the weekend, just last weekend who is the co chair of the mayor's task force us on immigration. And they will tell you they're overrun with people. They just they need infrastructure and to build up infrastructure and custom border patrol agents and people to adjudicate you need money, Congress has to allocate the funds.

And so I saw interviewed by Vice President Harris recently. She said we want to fix it, they want to run on it. And I think that's what this is boiling down to right now. Democrats are finally on offense on the board.

We're not allowed to lie but that's where it is. Let's do a little rewind and play something that Mitch McConnell said just a few days ago and get everyone's reaction on the other side. I don't think we'd get 60 votes for any border plan if we had a fully Republican government. So this is a unique opportunity where divided government has given an opportunity to get an outcome.

Matt, what do you make of this? I mean there's McConnell saying this is a unique opportunity. You're right. The House probably wouldn't have gone forward three days ago, but still, I mean it's moment they would have gone there in December.

I love the Senate, I'm a House guy. We're always a Senate, little brother. There's another dynamic here. It's not just the White House and the Senate.

You know, I think right over Christmas when folks in the otilis and cinema and the White House were talking, the House already left, you know, they already gone for the holiday. So again, where it's a three vote margin, you're not gonna get that three. Doesn't matter how many, how many votes get in the Senate. It's just too fraught in issue.

Let's talk about what's happening on the campaign trail. All eyes are on South Carolina, of course, and it comes, Jeff, as we're seeing these interesting moves by the rnc. One, before polls closed the night of New Hampshire primary, you had the RNC chairman Ron McDonald come out, effectively say sign for the party to unify. And then there was that draf proposal that was leaked to essentially declare Trump the winner.

And even Trump said wait, let's just do this the old fashioned way. What do you. He's obviously also calling for the Kaylee to get out. So what do you make of this moment though?

Well, a couple of things. One, I think he decided against supporting that after backlash because it was backlash. You know, he's telling Nikki Haley she should drop out and criticizing everything from her appearance of her policies from the stage because she hasn't dropped out, because she hasn't fallen in line like he would like to see the rest of the party do. Haley on the other hand, sees some potential, I guess going into her home state and going into Super Tuesday, but the polls aren't really backing that up.

I think the big question for her is to somebody stay with her. And Trump tried to influence that by saying anybody who gives money to Nikki Haley will not be part of the MAGNA movement. So it's, you know, he's not pulling any punches even if he's saying I want to win the election. Yeah, that's a really important point, Madden.

Jeff lays out the pressure campaign, if you will, that Trump has embarked on him trying to pressure to get out of the race. This is uphill. You obviously work for Tim Scott. He's now endorsed former President Trump.

She's defiant, though, and she has sharpened her lines of attack against him. And she's saying, hey, folks, we don't vote in South Carolina for a few weeks, so give me some time. She needs to take that time and think of a couple things, see if she can raise the money. And I don't see the polls close.

Right. If this is a week between the two, okay, momentum will kind of carry you. But if, you know, she is down, say a week and a half from now, 20 points in her home state, that's a large task to say. But also too, you don't need a pressure campaign.

Trump's winning. Just keep winning. There's no reason to squeeze people out. Just let the process take its course.

So on, how are Democrats viewing all of this? I guess the question is, does a prolonged primary help President Biden? Because he put out this notable statement on the night of the Hampshire primary saying, this is over. I'm going after Trump.

I declare him the nominee. Basically, when can I do a nomin? Trump should have took the page out of Joe Biden's campaign, but also sucked to his script when declared that it was over on New Hampshire primary night. Look, I think if this were a normal Republican presidential primary and there was actual competition that had been had, it would benefit Democrats to sit back and watch while the Republicans, you know, fight it out and bruised nominee eventually emerges.

This is not a normal presidential competition. Governor Haley, Governor Haley has yet sharpened her attack. But even the day the New Hampshire primary, she was asked on another network, does she get down on top three president? And she said yes.

She. What she's doing now, she should have done seven months ago and gone directly to the heart of the issue. She has not yet done that. And so when you're unwilling to compete, I mean, I go all the way back to the Democratic primary back in 2020, to be very clear, the current vice president of the United States of America stolen a base stage in Miami.

I was there and said some very choice words about the current president of the United States of Americ. The senators, like Cory Booker, had very choice words about the President of the United States of America. Why? Because they want to be president themselves.

Okay. So if you want to be, if you want to be a nominee, you need to compete. And Governor Haley has an administration to compete, which is why I don't care how many weeks she has. I don't see the numbers.

And the question is, is it too little, too late? Yeah, I'll ask her on Sunday not to repitch the show. Thank you very much. And Matt Gorman will be there with me on Sunday as well.

I look forward to it. Jeff, it's Simone and Matt. Thank you. And coming out, we're live outside of the New York courthouse when the jury is deliberating in the defamation damages trial against former President Trump.

Plus, the Biden campaign hits the airways in Nevada with anti Maga ads ahead of an unusual and somewhat confusing Republican primary there. We'll explain everything though, coming back to the break. You're WATCHING me. THE PRESS now.

Do stay with us. Welcome back. We're following a number of legal stories surrounding Donald Trump. At any moment now, an appeals court could rule on whether the former president has immunity in his federal election interference case.

A panel from the D.C. circuit heard that appeal more than two weeks ago. Now, we could also get a decision from the judge in Trump's New York civil fraud trial. The judge who will have final say in that case has said he intends to issue his decision by the end of the month.

And those developments come as we wait, a verdict from the jury in a defamation trial brought by writer E. Jean Carroll. Closing arguments took place today with some of the most heated moments of that trial unfolding this morning. The former president briefly stormed out of the courtroom as Carol's attorney was telling jurors Trump doesn't think the rules apply to him.

Join me now is Yasmin Vesuvian from lower Manhattan. Yasmin, thank you for being here. So things got heated today in the middle of closing arguments. Break it all down, what happened here?

Yeah, they certainly did. I'm watching the clock, by the way, Kristen, while you and I are talking, because it's about six minutes to 4:30. And we know court usually wraps at 4:30. And the judge, judge chaplain said essentially telling the jury the court raps at 4:30 he wanted a decision and or a note before that to say they need extended time and they were close to a decision.

We have not seen any notes from inside the court that they have brought a note in. And so the assumption is maybe they are not close to a decision. We could this could be kind of kicked till Monday. But again, that could change.

It's not yet 4:30. So a decision could come this afternoon. The jury has been in deliberation for a couple hours now. As you mentioned, it was quite fiery, to say the least of the court today.

The former president, United States walking it out of the court of 10 minutes into closing arguments from aging Carols attorneys. It was a moment in which Robbie Kaplan essentially framed the Rules saying the judgment was made, he was found liable of sexual assault. And yet in the moment that he was found liable, he broke the law, he broke the rules. And he's been continuing to do that since then, even throughout this trial, that he thinks the law does not apply to him.

At that very moment, the former president stood up and he walked out of the court. There was another moment as well, Chris, not necessarily notable, but but also not necessarily surprising because there's a lot of back and forth between Judge Kaplan, no relation, by the way, to teaching Carroll's attorneys, and Elaine Hobbit, farm president's attorney as well. They have had a pretty contentious back and forth relationship throughout this entire thing. There was a moment in which the former president, excuse me, the judge, said to Lena Hamba, you can land yourself in jail.

And it was over admission of some various evidence in which she was contested. And so it was quite fiery to say to these. Let's talk quickly, Christian, if we can, about what the jury here is considering the closing arguments that we heard from both sides. Egyptian Carroll essentially saying car was translationally saying eating.

Carroll was a victim here. Right. There was a point in which they painted a picture of Egg sitting in her midtown apartment. And the attorney said, imagine you are her and you open up your computer and you see these threats and you see these tweets and you fear for your life and you fear for your security and you close your shutters and you lock your doors and you stay inside because the President of the United States, you feel as if is threatening your life.

Right. But Elia Habba came back and closing arguments and said, well, that's not his fault that his supporters went after her. He was just putting out what he saw as the truth. That is a very short summation of some of the closing arguments that we hear.

But that's part of what here, Kristen. The jury is considering again eating her, asking for $10 million plus in compensatory damages along with who knows how much more imperative damages that can come at any moment now and if not, then extended till Monday. We are now at 4:27, so only three minutes left, but it does speak to the timing and the timeline, and it's incredibly helpful to have that context and fantastic reporting. Yasmin Vesuvian, thank you so much.

Really appreciate it. We will come back to you with any developments in that case, of course. But coming up next, verse counting down to Nevada's dual presidential contest. What do we mean?

Well, we'll explain why the state is having two primaries and one caucus, but Donald Trump and Healey won't appear on the same ballot in either election. We'll break it all down. You're watching the press now. Next week it's Nevada.

Next week it's Nevada. It's not South Carolina. We love South Carolina. But next week it's Nevada.

And I'm pleased to announce we just won Nevada 100 because all of them, they looked at it and they took polls and I was polling at 95 to 4 or 5% and they decided not to play in Nevada. So we just won Nevada. Welcome back. That was Donald Trump Tuesday night claiming victory in a contest that hasn't happened yet.

It was one of several false claims he made that night. But in this case, Mr. Trump is going to win in Nevada. Although the contest isn't next week, a new state law requires the Nevada Republican Party to hold a primary.

So that will happen on February 6th. That's a week from Tuesday. But the results won't matter. Here's why.

The party is also holding a caucus two days later on February 8th. And that's when delegates will be awarded. If you're confused, don't worry because join me now to break this down, the CEO of the Nevada Independent and NBC News political analyst John Ralston. John, it's so great to see you as always.

Great seeing you too, Kristen. So why is there so much confusion about these two nominating contests? Why are there two nominating contests happening in Nevada? Break this down.

What do people need to know? Weren't you confused just introducing the cycle? Yeah, everyone is confused about this, including some Republican voters here, as you mentioned. And they passed the law in 2021 changing us from a caucus to our primary state.

But they left open the possibility that the parties themselves could decide how to allocate their delegates. Now, the state Republican Party last year decided to split off from the state and do their own caucus and apportion delegates. That. Now why would they do that?

Well, like many state parties, but especially the Nevada Republican Party, it's controlled by Trump supporters and they didn't want to leave anything to chance. Their same day registration, their mail ballots mailed to everybody in the primary. Maybe Trump wouldn't get as big a percentage if they didn't pull it over to the state party caucus. Much smaller universe, as you know.

Kristen would participate in the caucus than a primary. And so now they've caused all this confusion and the conspiracy theories. The Democrats are keeping Trump off the primary ballot. The Republicans are keeping Trump off the primary ballot.

Well, we appreciate you so much Joining us, John Raulston. Thank you. We are getting some breaking news out of New York. We're gonna go back to work in just a moment.

Do we have Yasmin or should I go back to John Ralston? Guys, we do have Yasmin. Yasmin. It sounds like we have a verdict in the EG Herald defamation trial.

What do you know here? Yeah, it shows. Never been on me, right. Because I predicted wrong just about six minutes or so ago when you and I were last talking.

But it looks like we have a verdict just against the mark. Up against the mark at 4:30. I'm saying they have a verdict. And deliberating just under three hours.

It seems like the court is gathering once again to read the verdict. I want to review, Chris, and kind of what we're gonna be hearing. The verdict form that was given to the jurors and the instructions prior to when they went into deliberation. Did Ms.

Carol prove by preponderance of the evidence that she suffered more than nominal damage as a result of Mr. Trump's publication of the June 21st June 22nd statement? That was, of course, the things that he published after the revelation of her sexual assault claims made in a cut excerpt from her book. Book.

If yes, insert that dollar amount. In making the 2024 statements, Mr. Trump acting maliciously out of hatry ill will or spite, vindictively or out of wanted reckless or willful, disregarding Ms. Carol's rights, yes or no.

In making the statements, Mr. Trump Acting maliciously out of hatred, ill will or spite, vindictively or wanting reckless or willful disregard of this car. If you answered yes, either question two or three, how much of any should Mr. Trump paying his Carol impunitive damages?

So again, we are waiting the verdict here, Kristen, and there's a lot at stake here, right? Because you had the former president of the United States in the court for the first time with Eugene Carroll in two and a half decades. He did not testify in the last trial. He had wanted to, but then he decided not to in the last minute because his turns advised him not to in the very last minute.

He has said on the record that he regrets not testifying them. He testified said in this trial for three minutes yesterday, three whole men, 216 yesterday afternoon was off the standby. 2:19. It was very short.

There were a lot of parameters around his testimony and even in those parameters he was able to get in that he felt as if he did not do this despite the fact he's held he's been held liable for sexual assault already in the previous trial. You also kind of have to think about the optics of this thing, right? Kristen, you have obviously been covering this for so long. President running for election back in 2016, running for reelection in 2020, running for reelection.

Now he is a front runner to be the Republican candidate for President of the United States. And he sat in a courtroom yesterday trying to defend himself against sexual assault claims that were he was on liable for with each other peril. And he sat just two rows behind her and delivered the testimony for just three minutes. And yet after this, he will go on and get back on that campaign trail running for to be the next president of the United States.

And you think about the monetary damages here business as well, right? Asking for 10 million plus dollars in the pedestrian damages and then punitive damages. That number could be however much the jury decides. And then by the way, just down the street, as you were talking earlier, Judge and Goron will delivering his decision in the next week or two when it comes to Trump civil fraud trial right there asking for $370 million.

The board president had a massive payout in the next couple of weeks or so, depending on what this jury behind me decides. Yasmin, you and I were on air together yesterday, and you walked through some of the key moments in this trial, not just when Trump took the stand, but some of the key data points that will be under consideration, including when he looked at a picture of Eugene Carroll. Right. Talk to me about what some of those key moments have been that have stood out, that have made headlines throughout the course of this case and why they're significant.

I know I'm listening to you, but I'm just looking at my phone. If this word it comes in so just another one planting down. I'm listening, but looking as well. So I think, you know, the case that was laid out by Agent Carroll's attorneys came front and center yesterday.

And I think part of that was the deposition, the moments the deposition before president offered in the previous trial. And they plead from that deposition, not only the front president talking about his net worth and the value of his properties, because they wanted to show the jury that this is a man who has a lot of money. Right. At one point, Eugene Carol's attorney, Robbie Kaplan, pointed out that this is a man who could play a million dollars every day, as he has said, for the next decade, and still have money in his bank.

Right. They wanted to tell the jury that this is a man who has a lot of money. So ask yourself when you go into delivery, Right? How much is going to make him stop?

How much damages is going to make him stop? And then they went on to take Agent Carol as a victim here. Right? That she was victimized, that she was under threat, that she lost her job as a result of the threats that she was facing and the revelation of this sexual assault that she made against the former President of the United States and that it was his fault, that she was a target because of him.

She did not put herself in this position. And this is a man as Robbie Cap, as I mentioned earlier, who does not care about the rules. This is what she said. And this is a picture that they are painting for this jury when it comes to the president's attorney.

Right. They have repeatedly said that, in fact, Agent Carol was dining out on this moment. She has gained a tremendous amount of celebrity. This is then talking, not me.

She has gained a tremendous amount of celebrity from the allegations that were made. Okay, we're getting a verdict in. Let me just click my phone and read it off to you, please. So, 7.3 million.

I'm not seeing a pivot. I'm just talking to my producer. So. So, all right, let me read this off to you.

Did Ms. Carol prove by preponderance of the evidence that she suffered more than nominal damages as a result of Mr. Trump's publication of the June 21 and June 22 statements? If yes, insert the dollar amount, $7.3 million.

If yes, you're worth the reputation repair program only if nobody bank and blank another $11 million there. What else we got, Andrew? So I was talking to you. I'm looking at my phone here.

So so far we're getting $7.3 million in, along with $11 million as well. What was being asked to put it into context, wow. Here I got one more in for you. For in making the statement on June 22, Mr.

Trump, acting maliciously out of Patriot, will respite vindictively or wanting reckless or willful disregard of Ms. Carol's rights. If you enter yes to either question two or three, how much? $65 million.

So the total that the former President of the United States running for re election, the front runner, will have to pay, Agent Carroll, is $83.3 million. That is compensatory and punitive damages. Kristen, $83.3 million. She was asking for 10 to $12 million in compensatory damages.

They did not give a dollar amount impunitive damages, as they often don't. The jury came back on its own. Separately, to make up the jury, seven men, two women, many of which were vague about where they got their resources from and who they vote for. With $83.3 million the former president has paid in.

Carol, let me say one more thing. He can appeal this, as we well know. So the money is not going directly to Eugene Carroll. He has a timeline in which he must, in fact, appeal this.

He has to seek an appeal bond in order to make that appeal. If he is not able to secure an appeal bond, the appeal cannot go through. So she could see this money within the next 60 days, possibly or so, or it could take up to a year or more, depending on which direction the appeal goes. But either way, we have a verdict in this case that we've been following the last couple of weeks, $83.3 million for which the former president will have to pay E.

Jean Carroll here for definition. It's a staggering amount of money, Yasmin. And obviously these legal trials have been a part of president's campaign strategy. We'll take a brief pause.

This is an NBC News Special Report. Here's Lester Holt. And good day from New York. We're coming on the air with breaking news.

A jury has just reached a verdict, a ruling in the federal defamation trial against former President Donald Trump that was brought by the writer E. Jean Carroll, former president ordered to pay $83.3 million of damages for the case. It comes months after Mr. Trump was already found liable for sexually abusing and defaming Carroll, who Trump mocked while he was president after she made a sexual assault claim against him.

It also comes after Trump stormed out of the courtroom during closing arguments earlier today after Carroll's attorney told the that he's a liar and thinks, quote, the rules don't apply to him. For more on this, NBC News legal analyst Danny Savalas. Break it down for us. I said that the larger sum is 83.3 million.

How does that split up? Yeah, split up. 7.3 million compensatory damages other than the reputation repair program. Remember, the plaintiff called in an expert to say this is what it would cost if we started a campaign to repair Gene Carroll's reputation.

So they separated that out. The compensatory was basically pain and suffering. That was 7.3 million. And then you go to the reputation repair program, 11 million.

That was right around what the plaintiff and the expert testified to, upwards of about 12 million. And Carroll had been asking for at least 10 million. At least 10 million. But it was right there in the range.

Now we get the Punitives and punitives, Lester, are really difficult to calculate. You really never know what a jury is going to do. As a good rule of thumb, anything in the three to four to five times multiples is probably going to get upheld on appeal. It's when you get into the 100 times the compensatory damages, the punitive damages might get overturned or reduced when they go up on appeal.

This is right within the range, and it is within the range of what the plaintiffs were looking for. In terms of compensatory damages, the punitives appear to be roughly, and I'm not good at math, but about four times the compensatory damages. That's right in the range that I think an appellate court would uphold. But make no mistake about it, the Trump team will appeal this as they often do any adverse rules.

And what do you make of the fact that this deliberation was just a matter of hours? Well, there's a couple of factors there. Number one, it is Friday and the jury was going to deliberate until 4:30. The other factor is that this trial is going to be unlike any other Trump trials, criminal or civil, because the issues were so narrow, almost to a pinhole.

It was really just about damages, specifically compensatory damages to Jean Carroll and punitive damages, which are designed to punish Donald Trump. Donald Trump could not testify about many of the things he wanted to, which was he wanted to say that she was a liar or that she made all this up. None of that was coming in. And that was why you had a rocket fast case here that started and ended really in just over a week in whole.

So this is something that is a bit of an anomaly in Trump legal land. The case moved very quickly. The jury just got the case to deliberate a couple hours ago. Ultimately, they didn't have a lot of numbers to play with.

They had an expert who testified as to the dollar amount it would take repair reputation. But the challenge with defamation and punitives, they're both really difficult to quantify, not like a normal personal injury case where you can talk about years of physical therapy or lost wages, here you really just had pain and suffering and a number. They had to arrive at four punitives. And while it may seem that they plucked it out of the air, they had to get in there and agree and be unanimous on that number.

So we never know what negotiations. But they had the very difficult task of selling on a number in a very intangible world of compensatory damages and defamation. And then punitive. Daniel Ask you to stand by for moments.

I bring in senior legal correspondent Laura Jarrett joining us on the phone. Laura, the ruling unanimous, as we point out. Can you walk us through how this case differs from the other E. Jean Carroll cases?

Lester, It's a unanimous verdict. It's also a massive one that is meant to Send a message. $65 million in punitive damages in particular is really, I think, sending quite a strong message from this federal jury in Manhattan. And remember, as you said, this is now the second time around for Eugene Carroll.

She had already won back and made $5 million and we've now bumped it up to $83 million, which I think shows you what happens when the former president continues to make statements about her having made this entire thing up. Remember how all this started was on the White House lawn when he said back, I don't know this woman. I have no idea who she is. She's accused other men.

It's a totally false accusation. It's from that what happened on the White House lawn last year. Eugene Carroll said she then was subject to a barrage of threats from Trump supporters who thought that she was a liar. And they essentially ruined her life after that point.

And that's what all of this money and compensation she says she's owed. It all stems from what happened on the White House lawn and the statement that he's continued to make and you heard, including argument today, her lawyers pressing the point, what will it take to make him stop? That's something we heard repeatedly throughout this series trial and something we heard including arguments here today, as Danny mentioned. This, of course, will go up on appeal just as the first verdict day.

He's already tied that case up. An appeal that you can have a few cents of that $5 million, although he has been forced to put the money in escrow. So I would expect to be with the dis civil verdict, also go along appeal. If the former president were to repeat these claims again, as he has apparently done at some point along the way, is he potentially a new lawsuit, a new trial?

She could try that. But at this point, Lester, she's now gotten $83 million in one verdict and 5 million in another. She could keep going. She could amend her lawsuit.

We saw her amend her claims after he went on a tirade against her after the first verdict. We all remember he went on CNN and repeated the same claims again. And she brought that back up in court and the judge took notice of it. And so she certainly could hear.

It's unclear whether any of the behavior that we've seen Lester would actually thought. All right. And dad, we talk about appeal all the time. Appeal, what appeal?

Evidence that came in. Most likely they will appeal. How the judge they feel limited their ability to bring in testimony about Donald Trump's intent, maybe his spite on some of the other factors that go no punitive damages claim. There was a lot of debating in court over what evidence should come in and not come in.

Look for all of those to be points on appeal by the Trump team. All right, Danny Savalas, thanks. We continue to absorb this news. The number again, 83 point million that this jury is ruling that Donald Trump is liable for.

That concludes this NBC News Special Report. We'll have much more ahead on our streaming network, NBC News now and of course online@NBC news.com and tonight we have full coverage. And I see you back here. For NBC Nightly News, I'm Lester Holt in New York.

NBC News, thank you for watching. And our coverage of this ruling continues here on NBC News. Now, former President Trump ordered to pay $83.3 million in that civil defamation case with Eugene Carroll. I want to go to Jeremy Salon, he's a former Manhattan prosecutor, to get his perspective on this massive sum of money.

This is clearly aimed at sending a message to the former president. Jeremy, what do you make make of what the jury decided here? It's a devastating message. It's a direct message.

It's a full throated message to the former president that this nonsense has to stop. If it doesn't stop, he has to understand the consequences of his actions are very, very real. And what we've learned over the history of Donald Trump is what matters most to him. Dollars matters most to him.

His image matters most to him. This tarnishes both and as we were just discussing, we would expect an appeal in this case. Talk about what you will be watching for next, how you expect this to unfold. Well, it's a slow, it's a slow process.

This is not like the case itself. The trial case was very, very quick. This is a much different process. It goes up to a higher level court.

What might he challenge? What might he say was wrong? Well, I was muzzled. I was not allowed to share what I wanted to share to that jury.

I was prevented from telling my story, from defending myself. The inst. If you recall, there was an issue about what the judge was going to talk the jury about, sex abuse and with the digit and whether that was too inflammatory. There's a lot of questions about that.

So I think these are some of the issues that Donald Trump was challenged. We should have no misgivings. He's not just turning over this money. But that's not strictly for Donald Trump that we would expect from any person in his position, though.

That's a lot of money. It sure is a lot of money. Yasmin Vesopi, let me go back to you. You have been outside of this Manhattan courthouse.

Talk about the reaction and really the broader political implications here, because what we have seen for former President Trump is that these legal cases continue to embolden him, quite frankly. But this is personal because this is a ruling handed down in Manhattan, Manhattan. And it, it has to do with a massive sum of money. This is personal.

His money is personal. Right. That is how he defines himself. His businesses are how he defines himself.

So this is certainly personal down the street, the Trump's. Well, certainly personal judgment as well. And when you think about Christian kind of the political implications of all this, I think a lot of folks thought we were gonna get a massive number here because of what Agent Carroll was asking, also because of the degree to which they could offer those damages. Said if he paid a million dollars for the next 10 years, he would still have money in his bank.

He split this out, we're looking at for the next seven years. So for president, it seems like he's still gonna have money in the bank, even with what he's going to have to pay aging care if he loses that appeal. When you talk again about those political implications, I mean, this is yet another. The four President has yet another campaign stop, Kristen.

As he has seen all his other trials and people continuous. I mean, we saw the polls numbers, we watched the poll numbers. The second those indictments hit, his poll numbers went up. Right?

His support, his support at the polls has gone up with those indictments. And you wonder with something as personal as this, if that will continue to happen. I don't think it's delivered for the former president the way that he expected it to. Him taking this in yesterday, I thought he thought there was gonna be more fireworks than there actually were.

I think he expected to be on the set a little bit longer than he was going to get. He thought he had some more free money. Despite the fact that Chap said you would have no freedom and you had a lot of restrictions to what you're going say to say, but nonetheless is going to continue to use the courtroom. That's his campaign stop.

Because every single one of these, every single one of these trials. Let me jump in. You probably can't see us behind you. Eugene Carroll leaving.

Oh, yes. With her attorney. Her attorney swinging her arm around Eugene Carroll. Broad smiles across the board in this, the wake of this civil defamation trial and now this massive punishment that has been handed down.

The former President ordered to pay $83.3 million. Undoubtedly, from Ms. Carol's perspective, justifying her speaking out, her taking a step against the former President, it looks like she's not going to talk, Yasmin. It looks like she is getting right into a vehicle.

We'll have to see if that holds. Talk a little bit, if you will. Yeah. About Eugene Carroll and what we heard and what we saw from her throughout this case.

Yeah. I mean, let's remember, by the way, this is the second judgment, right. So she's already owed $5 million by the former President of United States, which is putting aspirate because he's killing that decision on top of the 83 million that she has now won in this judgment as well. So we're looking at an 88 million dollar payout.

You think about what Agent Carol has been through, Right. She had, as her lawyer put it, one of the most popular Ask Eugene columns in Elle magazine in which she doled out advice as an opinion columnist for a very long time. She was well known in New York social circles, and yet she revealed the sexual assault by the former President of the United States. United States.

And then she had to sit in front of him as he tried to defend himself and listen to that testimony. This has been for her person a long time coming, right. Since 2019, since the revelations first came out, since she wrote that book, since that excerpt came out in the cut in that article. You think about, we're talking a lot about money here, but the emotional toll, sexual assault.

And she had to sit in that corner with him. And you think about the power that he has in this country, right. That he has retained in this country, the fact that he's running for reelection and what she was up against. Right.

And what she faced now walking out of that form, as you just saw, arm in arm with her attorney, saying that Robbie didn't exactly rejoicing, present the case the way in which he did. And so I think it's a real. She's seeing it as a real win for her. But also the emotional toil, I'm sure, I'm sure going into that, she doesn't forget the emotional toil she's been through the last couple years in facing off against what she sees and what many people see as one of the most powerful men in the world.

The former President of the United States. Yeah, Yasmin. It's such an important point and such important context. As we continue to stay with these images, I want to go back to Jeremy Salon.

Jeremy, talk about what Yasmin was just reflecting on, which is, as Yasmin described this, this David and Goliath fight that unfolded in this Manhattan courthouse. And now this judgment, this order to pay $83.3 million. How extraordinary is it that you would have such a powerful figure, quite literally in real time, in testimony, lashing out, out in the way that has been reported to have occurred in this courthouse? It's extremely consequential.

You know, I hope that the former president can learn a lesson from this. But more so than him, the American people have to believe in the justice system. Not necessarily. Well, certainly the criminal justice system.

That's not what we're dealing with here, that people who do things that are wrong, they can go before a jury of their peers, they can rant and they can rave and they can do what they want. But when push comes to shove, the evidence will be reviewed here. It's preponderance of the evidence, not proof beyond a reasonable doubt that we have to get at these criminal trials, but that a jury of your peers will listen and there's consequences. I mean, you've really hobbled a man with a reason that's overstated, because this is something that he will get over.

He will still push forward with the presidential ambitions in his career. But this certainly brings him down to size and shows that the little person can stand up for him or herself. And there's accountability. No matter what you say, no matter how you behave, there was law and order and there's consequences.

And that's what we have here. I think it's very remarkable. That number is staggering. We are hearing from the former president on Truth Social.

Let me read parts of what he has said. I'm not going to read the parts that are factually incorrect, but he calls this absolutely ridiculous. He says, I fully disagree with both verdicts and will be appealing. He says our legal system is out of control and being used as a political weapon.

Of course, there's no evidence to support that. He says they have taken away all First Amendment rights. This is not America. Danny Savalas, I believe we have you as well.

We only have about 10 seconds, but your reaction to this, not a surprise. It was the plaintiff's case the entire way. And this was going to be a pretty long period of damages award. Once they introduced evidence.

Donald Trump in another case saying, I'm a billionaire. My brand is huge. It was almost a foregone conclusion. All right, Danny, Jeremy and Yasmine, thank you so much.

And if it's Sunday, it's Meet the Press on your local NBC news station. I'll have exclusive interviews with presidential candidate Nikki Haley and conversman Alexandria Casio Cortez. You don't want to miss it. NBC News now cover continues with Tom Costello in for Hallie Jackson right now.

I'm Craig. Mel. Cheers. Cheers.

Cheers. I've always been a glass half full kind of guy, and now I'm talking to people who look at the world that way, too. It's really fascinating. Folks who share their defining moments, their triumphs, challenges, their stories are fun and quite candid.

So I hope you'll join me each week. Who knows, you might just come along with your own glass apple. Search Glass Apple with Craig Delphin From Today on YouTube and wherever you get your podcasts.