hi, everyone, i'm zinhle essamuah, kate snow is off today and "nbc news daily" starts right now. ♪♪ today, friday, february 16th, 2024, breaking news,

awaiting a decision at any moment a judge is set to hand down a ruling in donald trump's civil fraud trial. it's just one of two consequential cases for the former president. we're tracking all the developments in both courtrooms. death in prison, russian officials say vladimir putin's most ardent critic died in a prison colony, what the russians are saying ability alexei navalny's final moments. don't believe your eyes, woolly mammoths stampeding through snow. the video looks real, but it's not. the noke technology that made it. >> heart to heart, love languages have been called key to happy relationships but what are they and how do you find out yours? our expert is here to translate. >> thanks for being with us, we're going to begin with breaking news, we are waiting for the decision in the new york civil fraud trial against former president donald trump and his family business, the young's decision will cap a months long trial in new york city, nbc news

special report will be as soon as we get the verdict. a trump organization lying about property values and total net worth to get better loans and other financial benefits. rehema ellis is outside trump tower in manhattan, and tom winter is with me now. rehema, what are we hearing from the attorney general and the trump team? >> reporter: we are hearing that there's nothing yet from the attorney general but we understand that the judge's decision on this case is being released. we are literally just getting information about that right now, zinhle, and -- according to the what i am hearing, it is a substantial amount of money they be close to what some people may have been expecting to come out, i think we're hearing $186 million decision against trump and his real estate empire.

there's a number of other things that have to be decided about this in terms of where that money would come from, how mr. trump and his real estate empire would have to pay that fine, we have already heard from his attorney, alina -- who has said they're expecting a decision from the judge and they're planning to appeal. we are just getting this, i don't have all of the details just yet, but the decision from the judge is being read, it's released and we are reading through it right now. zinhle? >> yes, and we'll bring more information in the nbc news special this is an nbc news special report. here is lester holt. >> good day, everyone. we're coming on the air with breaking news about former president donald trump. a judge in new york just ordered him to pay about $187 million in

penalties, after he was found liable for fraudulent business practices. at issue in the trial, the fate of mr. trump's business empire and fortune, and whether he and other defendants, including the trump organization and his eldest sons eric and don jr., inflated the value of his properties to get better loan terms. trump has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing in the case and his legal team has said it would appeal the decision. senior legal correspondent laura jarrett is with me. there's more than the dollar amount he's facing. >> still, the dollar amount is staggering, $187 million as a civil fine, a penalty for having inflated his assets to try to get banks and lenders to give him better loans, to give him better deals on all of the property, his famous real estate holdings, including trump tower, mar-a-lago, the judge already determined were falsely and

fraudulently inflated and the crux of the trial was to determine the bottom line number, along with a couple of other straggler remaining terms, such as falsifying business records and insurance fraud. the top line number, $187 million, falling short of what the attorney general in new york had asked for, $370 million is what she asked for. she also wanted a lifetime ban preventing mr. trump from being business in the state of new york and the judge decide to go put on a ban for a period of three years so he could not get loans, and a period of two years for his sons. >> we're getting word the number may be up to $364 million, which would put it very close to what the state had asked. >> yes, we're still working our way through the decision. our team is obviously compiling the numbers. but $370 is what the state had asked for and the judge was completely within his discretion

to decide what number. this was a bench trial, it was completely up to the judge to decide what the penalty should be. >> let's bring in our colleague, danny cevallos. what is standing out to you? >> in addition to the $364 million, there are bans. we already know that allen weisselberg might be on the hook. he had been the subject of some alleged fraudulent conduct. so you have overwhelming evidence found by the judge that weisselberg cannot be trusted with controlling the finances of any business. they were permanently banned from serving in the financial control function of any new york corporation, similar bans on donald trump, allen weisselberg for a period of three years and that's serving as an officer or director of any new york corporation or any other legal

entity, which really leaves in limbo what is to be done with the trump entities. because not only are these business organizations, they also have substantial assets. the question now arises, who steps in or what steps in to control those companies and control those assets? but a very significant finding, $364 million is pretty close to the asking dollar amount of the plaintiff in this case, the plaintiff, of course, being the state of new york, through new york's new york. >> laura, what happens in the intervening period? he obviously will appeal this decision. >> yeah. >> this ruling, is it stayed? >> he's already signalled he's going to do that. remember because the judge already had the bulk of the decision already determined pretrial on the fraud, mr. trump had already appealed that. the judge tried to cancel his business certificate so he couldn't operate in the state of new york. that was part of a decision that was on hold and appealed. this will, again, wind up in the courts appealed for many years

to come, perhaps f it goes that road. at the same time, now that there's a judgment, typically you do have to put up a portion of the judgment in order to appeal at all or try to get a bond, something we haven't seen him able to procure in other civil judgments. >> what is the mechanism for the state to collect this or any other money? >> they're going to have to go through additional litigation and they'll be able to secure some of this money. there's an independent monitor in place, given all of the sort of financial wranglings and deeds he's been accused of. there was an independent monitor, a judge who was overseeing this so he couldn't sell assets or try to do anything behind the scenes. that will continue to be in place as the state tries to enforce the judgment. >> former president trump has been clear in many of his legal issues that he's being singled out, treated unfairly. when you compare this judgment today to others, how does it stack up? does it seem within the realm or out of the realm? >> in a sense, this is a

different case because it's purely civil, as opposed to the other cases we've been following, four of which are criminal cases. one of which in new york state, in new york city has a criminal trial date just around the corner in march. but this civil case hits trump in a different place. it does not seek to constrain his liberty as a criminal case would. it instead seeks to hit him in the pocketbook, to ban him from conducting business, which now justice engoron has concluded will happen, and also banning other officers and agents of the trump organizations, including his sons. i'm reading right now as we speak that they also are going to be banned to some degree. but this is a very significant judgment, and of course on appeal -- i know we've already touched on this, this appeal will go up to the appellate division and i believe they get an automatic appeal as the new york court of appeals, the

highest court in the land. so don't look for any immediate consequences in terms of someone having to write a check. after all, donald trump may not have the liquid to even write a check, because if you go back, one of the original reasons for bringing this case was supposedly a loan that he had taken out and secured in order to pay on the trump university case, which is going back several years, i believe to 2016. so this is a situation where trump may not have the liquid to may it, but they may have to if they're able to secure a stay, first to the appellate division and then surely to new york's highest state court. >> correct me if i'm wrong, he's also facing judgment and a potential payout in the e. jean carroll case. >> absolutely, yes. and procedurally what happens is a little different because that's in federal court. and in federal court the process for getting that stay pending appeal is a little different. but procedurally they're going to be seeking the same things, just in separate courts,

separate sovereigns. e. jean carroll being in federal court, and then of course this case being a judgment by a new york state supreme court, which somewhat confusingly, new york supreme court is the lowest, and the trial court is the highest in the state of new york. >> i want to bring in a former manhattan assistant district attorney and analyst. let me get your take on the level of penalties. >> first, i, of course, read all 92 pages, the judge did not give the ag james everything she requested. so she requested a permanent ban. it's a three-year ban. a permanent ban as being an officer or director of any corporation in new york state. the judge has said three years. she requested $370 million, i haven't added it up, but apparently it's $364 million. also, what happens to the businesses? there's already been an independent monitor who has been assigned, and i'm reading the

same independent monitor, former judge barbara jones, will continue to be the monitor. so she will decide what will happen to the businesses, and if they're going to be dissolved, how that will occur. as danny said, this is going to be appealed. so it's not over yet for mr. trump, but this is a big loss for him because he's been found liable. >> in practical terms when you're banned from doing business at an entity, three years or four years or beyond, what's the practicalities? they take the keys away, you can't turn on a computer? >> you can't conduct a business and anything you want to do with that business, judge jones, you're going to have to go through here. you're going to have to ask the court and ag's office. the independent monitor basically will control what will happen to these entities because of the order of this judge. >> let me turn to "meet the press" moderator, kristen welker. at the end of all the sentences, politics, and it's certainly something that the former president has called out loudly

during his legal journeys. how will this be viewed going forward? >> lester, on the one hand, this does hit former president trump really at his core, as a businessman. that's part of his identity. on the other hand, what we have seen throughout this primary race is these legal battles that he is facing have only emboldened him. he's used courtroom appearances to galvanize his base. i anticipate this will be no different. he's referred to all of these cases as witch hunts. you can expect to hear the same type of reaction despite the fact that obviously there's no evidence of that. the question becomes, lester, if he wins the primary, how will these legal battles impact him in a general election? how will they impact moderate voters, independent voters, suburban voters? it could be a different picture if he makes it to the general election. right now politically it's emboldened him. >> thanks, kristen. laura, let me bring you back in this.

you've been going over the paperwork. we started with one number and then moved to another. it's not like there's one big number. >> partly because there's different defendants. it's not just the former president, it's his company, his long-time cfo, his sons. the top line number is $364, a little over $364 million. that's the penalty. you can see the breakdown for defendant donald trump, a little over $168 million. you can also see the breakdown for his sons, all of it laid out there. but, again, there are several different defendants with different liabilities, different culpability here. the bottom line number, $364 million. i also think it's worth pointing out the main defense offered by the former president, lester, was that the banks were always repaid, there was no harm. this was a victimless crime. on that score the judge takes this face on. he says timely and total repayment of loans does not reduce the harm that false

statements inflict on the marketplace. in other words, the marketplace needs to have honesty. there was still a warm and the ill-gotten gains from being able to take advantage of the false statements and inflated assets, that's what he's having to pay for. even if deutsche bank didn't complain, that's what the penalty is for. >> danny, how long typically would an appeal process take in a case like this? >> we can give you the ordinary appeal process for mere motorles who appeal to the appellate decision and up to the supreme court. as with all things trump, timelines seem to get compressed when it comes to appeals. again, at the same time, this is not a case that's dependent on an upcoming election like trump's immunity claim, which may need to be resolved in advance of, or in trump's view after an election. this is a case that doesn't really need to be fast tracked when it comes to appeals.

we're reading this as we go, but it may be the case that in terms of the business organizations, the cancellation of those business licenses, and i was just talking about this, may not be going forward. instead, it's going to be referred to the independent monitor, retired judge barbara jones. so the business licenses may not be subject to the death penalty, at least in the way that was contemplated or sought, in a sense, by the attorney general in this case. >> you used the term death penalty. i've heard it a lot with relation to this. was this judgment in effect a death penalty if it's upheld? >> it's a death penalty in a sense for people like allen weisselberg and other individuals who are banned permanently from doing any kind of business. you can imagine a situation where someone attempts to do business in a sly way, maybe through another person, in some other way. that's the kind of thing that the independent monitor, barbara jones and others are going to be keeping their eyes on. it's not something you're going

to be able to play games with. in terms of the business licenses, those appear to be -- and i'm reading from this, the cancellation appears to be no longer necessary. so it remains to be seen. the restructuring shall be subject to individual review by the court appointed independent director of compliance in consultation with retired judge jones. so to be continued on that issue. >> nbc's vaughn hillyard has been covering the former president. he joins me now outside his mar-a-lago home. is there any word coming from the former president's camp? >> reporter: right. donald trump is here at mar-a-lago right now, lester, as this decision from judge engoron comes down and one of his attorneys in the case, alina habba, not only spoke on donald trump's behalf inside of the courtroom but frequently came out to the courthouse steps following the three-month trial to address reporters. she just issued a statement here in the last two minutes in which

she says, in part, quote, given the grave stakes, we trust that the appellate division will overturn this egregious verdict and end this relentless persecution against my client. now, alina habba said just in the last two hours that she and the legal team for donald trump attend to appeal this within the next 30 days. of course, this was an investigation from letitia james, new york attorney general, that began almost four years ago, march of 2019. you'll recall this last november at the beginning of this trial, that donald trump himself testified for more than three and a half hours, lester, at one point the judge overseeing this case told the former president that his quasi tan general answers led him to make negative inferences from his answers. donald trump was calling this a scam prosecution, and upon donald trump leaving the stand that day, i asked his attorney, alina habba, whether she would

intend to direct her client to have better control of his answers inside of that courtroom for fear of an outcome like this from the judge, and she told me she would not represent a client and ever direct him or her what not to say. for donald trump, he has made it clear every time he's had the opportunity to speak inside of the courtroom, that he will speak exactly what is on his mind, and ultimately here with the judge's decision, this will have far-reaching implications if it holds through this appeals process, not only on him and the corporations' future, but also that of his children, and of course at a time in which he is trying to hold on and win this republican nomination. this is going to present an opportunity for not only his republican opponent, nikki haley, but also democrat joe biden, to hone in on the judge's findings that he and his company over the years have repeatedly engaged in financial fraud. >> vaughn hillyard in palm beach, thank you. let's bring in "meet the press" moderator kristen welker one more time. do you expect this will be a big

fundraising opportunity for mr. trump? >> absolutely. he has fundraised off of each of these key moments that have unfolded inside the courtroom, so this moment will be no different. you just heard the statement from his attorney, alina habba. i anticipate we will hear something similar from the former president on truth social. vaughn hits at a really important point, what are we going to hear from his rivals? nikki haley has been out on the campaign trail trying to make the case that these legal challenges are nothing more than a weight around his neck, around the neck of all republicans trying to win back the white house. so far that has not resonated with primary voters. according to the latest polling, 61% of voters do have concerns about mr. trump's multiple felony charges, this is of course a civil case that we are talking about. but as danny was talking about earlier, his first criminal case will go to court, that hush money case next month.

so how will that play out? we'll have to see. >> kristen, thank you. let's go back to danny cevallos. you've been going through this and noting some of the pointed and sharp language the judge delivered in making this ruling. >> as this case wore on, after the first few days and the fireworks with donald trump in court, this case went on, the trial was 44 days long. during that time, the trump team did call some expert witnesses, for example, to testify that the statements of financial condition were prepared according to general accounting principles and they were, therefore, not that big a deal. so there was a possibility throughout this trial that justice engoron could have been persuaded, and of course he kept his own counsel and we don't know until this ruling came out. but this puts to bed any idea that justice engoron was persuaded toward the defense view of the case throughout this trial. it's pretty clear that justice engoron has some pretty harsh words, quoting the english poet

alexander pope, saying to err is human, to forgive is divine. he says that's not the situation, the defendant's complete lack of remorse borders on pathological, and he closes with more quotes saying the defendants are incapable of admitting the error of their ways. instead they adopt a, quote, see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil posture that the evidence belies. there were those of us wondering had he kept an open mind, was he being persuaded by the expert witnesses called by the defense, i think the answer is pretty much a resounding no. i think he is consistent with the same tone he had in his original summary judgment opinion, which very much lambasted the defense, probably in harsher tones. this new opinion, same general tones, disbelief of the defendant's position. >> let me turn back to laura in that same vein with some of the

things you've been highlighting with your pen. what stands out? >> one of the things, there's a long discussion about michael cohen, the former president's former lawyer, former fixer. he was sort of described by the former president as a linchpin to this case, and given the fact that he has been an admitted perjurer, he wanted him to be the heart of the state's case. the judge takes this on in an interesting way, saying that certainly donald trump essentially acted through a mob voice in directing michael cohen indirectly as opposed to directly to falsely reverse engineer the financials, to make them look better so the banks would lend them money. it's interesting, he credits michael cohen's testimony, saying even though he admits that he did purger himself in the past, that doesn't mean that you can never tell the truth. the judge saying michael cohen told the truth. why is that important? because next month donald trump is going to trial here in new

york city in a completely different case where michael cohen is going to figure very prominently. >> that will be in front of a jury. the credibility test may be different. >> it will. it's interesting to see for this case, for this judge, he was able to find cohen credible, even though he went through a lengthy cross-examination and a very tough one at that. >> katherine christian is standing by. >> to follow up, michael cohen is the main witness on the manhattan d.a. office case going to trial at the end of march. to have this judge basically say just because he's a convicted of perjury, that doesn't mean he's not telling the truth. they are going to have to make the same arguments to the jury, why the jury will have to believe michael cohen and should believe michael cohen. >> danny, will the appeal be on the judgment here, the dollar

amount and the remedy, or will it be on the actual finding of liability? >> it will likely be on everything, a global appeal on all issues, and really if you want to go through a bulletpoint list, it would probably be in the earlier decision on summary judgment where justice engoron addressed a number of the defense issues they had raised and rejected almost all of them, if not all of them. so in a case like this, it won't just be the legal issues or the conclusions that we read in this opinion, but it might be something that we're not even yet aware of, which might be evidence that came in that shouldn't have come in, although that's always an uphill battle on appeal. so there are any number of issues that the defense may raise, and of course they will attack everything from the findings to the final judgment, the dollar amount. the findings of liability, even going back to summary judgment. everything they can possibly raise, they will raise on

appeal. >> back to catherine's point, what do you think the prosecution in the upcoming hush money case will be able to glean from this ruling? >> quite a bit, to the extent they don't already know it. obviously any criminal case, the prosecution isn't going to reveal what they already know or show all of their cards in advance of trial. but to the extent there's a finding about michael cohen, i think the manhattan d.a.'s office will find that interesting because the case against trump is almost completely financial and relates very closely to some of the issues that are raised here, the internal business activities of trump entities. and that includes people like michael cohen, who is a character in the new york a.g. case against trump, but a central figure in the manhattan d.a.'s criminal case against trump based on the hush money payments made to an adult film star. the office has been watching this for plenty of time and

there's plenty to use f. they didn't already know it, they would have had access to the same discovery tools as the attorney general. but they are reading this with great interest right now as they look forward to a march trial date in this, which may be one of the first trump criminal cases to actually get to a jury trial. >> laura, you've been digging through. there's a lot here. this could get ugly and messy. >> it could. and i think for folks at home that might be wondering, if the banks didn't complain and the banks were not the ones that brought the suit, instead it was the new york attorney general's office bringing this on behalf of the people, on behalf of the state, where does all of this money go? so the answer to that is it will go back to the state. the banks will not see a dime of this money. it's not as if deutsche bank is going to be made whole by this nearly $300 million penalty. this will go in a state fund and be tied up in appeal for a long time. so folks at home understand, this is not money that is going back into the coffers of

deutsche bank. >> let's go to rehema ellis, standing outside trump tower in midtown manhattan. you're here to remind us this case goes beyond donald trump. it's the organization, and it's his family. >> reporter: it really is. and since donald trump was president and most recently his sons, donald and eric, his two adult sons have been running the business, and the judge's decision makes a mark against them as well. both donald and eric have been fined $4 million each and been banned for two years from doing business in the trump enterprise. that strikes at the heart of what the trump enterprise is all about. this building i'm standing in front of, this is the iconic image of trump tower, of the trump enterprise. this building is the heart of what he is all about. this hits at his brand and at his children, who have been running it, if you will. if they are banned from doing the business and if ivanka

trump, who has essentially stepped away from the enterprise business-wise and politically, the question becomes one of who will take over the running of the trump business. that's a question they've got to be asking and other people are asking, too. as much as they've been forbidden because there is a monitor watching everything from selling off assets and moving assets around in order to not have to respond to any penalties that people thought were coming. so a big question now, what does this family do in the interim, if donald trump himself is banned and if his adult sons are banned from doing business in trump enterprise, what happens to trump enterprise at that moment? >> rahema, we'll ask you to stand by. let me bring back kristen welker. you talked about donald trump using his legal woes to his political advantage. we haven't seen the same thing necessarily from the biden camp.

>> that's right. and what's notable is that president biden has walked a really fine line when it comes to talking about former president trump's legal challenges. reporters certainly have tried to get a number of reactions from him to all of these various developments. what he's been focused on, for example, trump's recent comments about nato suggesting he would support russia invading a nato country. his stance on abortion amid new reporting that trump is mulling throwing his support potentially behind a 16-week ban that was first reported by "the new york times," now confirmed by nbc news. so strategically speaking, president biden is trying to stay out of the legal fray, particularly coming off of his own special counsel investigation, where he was obviously cleared of mishandling classified documents. now, notably, when you talk about the money when it comes to this, the fundraising, think about this, trump raised more

than $2 million within a day of when his mug shot was released, and continuing with that thread, more than $27 million in trump campaign fundraising went to legal costs in the last six months of 2023. so when you think about how this could impact trump politically, could there start to be a backlash from this? it's hard to see his core supporters ever leaving him, but, again, how could this play if he does make it to the general election? that's where it gets more complicated on the campaign trail, lester. >> let me bring back nbc news legal analyst danny cevallos. the judge in his ruling really reflects on the history of the trump organization, along with what was initially before him. >> yes, and because the standard -- because the judge in a sense was finding repeated and persistent fra ase had even as far back as the summary judgment decision, there is a

recitation of the fact that this is not the first time this has happened. in other words, in formulating a punishment it was relevant to the judge that this kind of thing had been going on for some time. for example, he goes into the history of corporate malfeasance and discusses that in august of 2013 the office of the attorney general, and i referenced this earlier, had sued donald trump, donald trump organization and other entities in connection with the trump university, i guess you would say, university that wasn't a university. so that goes back as far as 2013. then in 2018, the attorney general sues donald trump, trump jr., eric trump for persistent violations of law based on the donald trump foundation. and then just recently, may of 2022, trump organization enters into a settlement agreement with the a.g. for the district of columbia, arising out of allegations that the inaugural committee paid excessive fees to the old post office there. and then you go back to 222,

august, allen weisselberg, pleaded guilty to 15 criminal counts of tax fraud. so very relevant to the judge here, this has been going on for some time, at least over a decade, a little over a decade is the earliest date, the 2012 date. so that was very relevant to justice engoron in arriving at a dollar amount and the appropriate punishment. so this is a situation, much as it is in criminal sentencing, a criminal history is relevant in formulating a sentence, for justice engoron here, the history of bad behavior was relevant in arriving at a final punishment for these defendants in this civil case. >> catherine, let me turn back to you. donald trump, if i get this right, has really downplayed his day-to-day involvement in the trump organization. but the judge seemed to call out his credibility on that. >> yes, as you recall, he

testified, donald trump -- actually, he testified twice. he testified about that issue, but the judge specifically states that mr. trump frequently interjected long, irrelevant speeches on issues far beyond the scope of the trial, his refusal to answer questions directly, severely compromised his credibility. so that's basically the judge saying donald trump was not credible. so he did not really credit his testimony, and that was put in the decision as the basis for the verdict. it was very important just to keep a record for when it goes to the appellate division, which will probably take five months to a year and then on to the court of appeals. they will look at this decision and read the transcript and say even donald trump was incredible with his testimony -- wasn't credible with his testimony. >> and some of the ramifications are severe. getting loans, for example. >> it wasn't just the bottom line number but the reputational

harm that i think the trump organization and business empire will now be felt is a part of this order. the judge says he is banning donald trump and the trump organization and affiliates from applying for loans from any financial institution in new york for a period of three years. now, the state, the attorney general had wanted a lifetime ban on his ability to do business in the state of new york, because of what she alleged was sort of the course of conduct that had gone on. but what the judge is doing is saying you can't get a loan for three years. even if he's not banning you for life from operating in the state of new york, if you don't have the ability to get a loan, that might effectively prevent you from your ability to conduct business. now, of course, his real estate entire is not limited to the state of new york. this only concerns what's happening within the state's boundaries. it doesn't affect what's going on in florida or new jersey. but still it's a meaningful sanction. >> let me go back to kristen

welker. we were talking about fundraising off of this, and we've got some news on that. >> lo and behold, we just got our first fundraising email that has been sent out from the trump team. it starts accusing this decision, this judge of basically being behind a witch hunt, just as we were discussing, despite the fact there's no evidence to support that. and he frames this entire thing as election interference in this fundraising email. again, i just reiterate the point i just made, that he raised millions of dollars after his mug shot was released. this is a strategy that has been working for him in this republican primary. we are a week away from the south carolina primary, for example. he has at least solidified support around him heading into south carolina. he's leading nikki haley by some 30 point. it doesn't mean she can't turn this around. it sure is uphill for her and hard to see how she would stop him, despite the fact that she makes the case that he should be disqualified because of this

baggage. so far, hasn't had an impact. >> let's find out what the day-to-day impact will be. let me go back to danny cevallos. what's the practical impact as donald trump goes about his day today, what has changed in his immediate existence? >> arguably, very little, because they will almost certainly seek an immediate stay while they appeal this to the first department, the intermediate appellate court in new york state. and so during the pendency of that appeal, it may be that none of these will go into effect, including that no one will write a check. it's not just donald trump, allen weisselberg, some of the other individuals have been assessed with penalties themselves. allen weisselberg was hit for a $1 million penalty. we're still reading through this. i don't know if justice engoron showed his work as to how he arrived at that number by each human defendant as opposed to each corporate defendant. in the very near future very

little is likely to change except for the continued monitoring by retired judge barbara jones in terms of compliance. because one of the main central themes of the a.g. here is that this is an ongoing problem and this came up several times in the course of trial. it's not something that happened in the distant past. this is something that keeps happening and needs to stop happening in the near future. so it will be very interesting to see how the trump organization -- or the organizations formally known as the organizations here, to the extent they are canceled, how they move forward and how they are monitored in terms of ongoing behavior. because this organization is a gigantic ship that you don't bring to a halt on a dime. it's an ongoing concern, it is a business that is active as we speak. this is going to require quite a bit of monitoring in the near future. >> all right, you see the headline at the bottom of the screen there, donald trump ordered to pay $355 million in

the civil case. kristen welker, some final thoughts? >> lester, again, this is a gut punch to former president trump. there is no doubt about that. they are going to appeal this decision. it still hits him where it hurts, in his pocketbook. he has created his political career around himself as a businessman. so there's no doubt that this hurts broadly speaking, but, again, in the primary it's hard to see it really having a dent. we will have to see if he does go on to win the nomination, and we'll have to see if some republicans, some donors start to get frustrated by paying his legal bills. again, he'll be in court next month for his first criminal case, lester. >> kristen welker, thank you. laura, your final thoughts? >> kristen makes a great point, this is happening in the backdrop of an avalanche of other legal woes, a criminal trial slated to start next month

in new york, also a case in washington, d.c., a case in florida, a case in georgia. multiple jurisdictions, multiple overlapping issues. this one is about his business empire, the whole thing that propelled him to fame and the white house. this really hits home. and the judge talking about his behavior and his lack of remorse, bordering almost on pathological, to use the judge's words, and why it was always baffling why the former president attacked the judge who was going to be the one making this very decision. this is not a jury of his peers. this was a judge he attacked again and again. we saw him in the hallway day after day almost using his hallway stops as campaign stops. this is now sort of setting the stage for what could come later on. obviously this is a civil case, not a criminal case. this is what one judge has done and we're now going to see what a jury will do. >> laura jarrett, thank you very much. that concludes this nbc news special report. we'll return some of you now to

"nbc news daily." we'll have more coverage ahead in our streaming network, nbc news now, and online at nbcnews.com. i'll see you tonight with more on "nbc nightly news." i'm lester holt in new york. good dr holt in new yo, goodrk d

. you've been watching an nbc news special report, and we're

back on "nbc news daily" to continue with the breaking coverage, regarding the decision, and for the new york civil fraud trial against former president donald trump, and his family business, the former president has been ordered to pay more than $354 million in fieps and he's been banned from doing business in new york state for three years, his sons donald trump jr. and eric trump fined as well and also banned for two years, joining me now to break down this breaking news, nbc news correspondent rehema ellis outside of trump tower in manhattan, and tom winter here in studio with me, and former prosecutor david henderson, thank you for being here, tom, starting with you, this decision was just released. there are not a lot of numbers being thrown around, can you just break down for us what it means for trump, his company, and his family? >> well, not often that i break out the excel spread sheet. i've got it here in front of me so we can go through it and be specific, 354, 867,158 # to the

entities he controls himself. that's what's on the line for donald j. trump, it's a little over $9 million, all told, the trump orbit, talking about folks that have worked for him for many, many years, in some cases decades and the former president himself, 363,894,816 dollars, and also other penalties they're facing here, so allen weisselberg, the company's controller are enjoying a lifetime ban from serving until the financial control function of any new york corporation or similar business. in other words, they cannot take that financial responsibility at any company, period, for the rest of their lives. donald trump, allen weisselberg, and jeffrey mcconnie cannot serve as a director of any new york corporation or other legal entity in new york for a period of three years, that may also speak to other interests of the former president that are not tied up in this, maybe a charity, maybe other things that he possibly controls so that's a

big deal, the court also says that trump and the trump organization, and its affiliates cannot apply for loans from any financial institution chartered by or registered, the new york state department of financial services for a period of three years, i am having a hard time thinking of any banking institution whatsoever that does not fit that criteria. so, it is possible that he could go to zinhle and tom, silly example, i understand, and get a personal loan from us, or loan to him, because we're not chartered and private investors can invest in these things all the time. but he can't, for instance, go to bank of america, jp morgan, chase, et cetera and get a loan from them for a period of three years. why does this matter? it's a big number but trump says i'm worth billions of dollars, i'm a successful real estate person, it's a huge part of his entire entity, when you look at it in totality, we're including a lot of assets that are not

necessarily liquid. and so we're talking about commercial real estate assets in the city of new york, about as bad a marketplace as anybody can remember as the pandemic shifted people out of the office, more work from home, there's a lot of problems pushing through deals in commercial real estate, he might have to sell those assets, but it at a depressed price, that brings down his net worth further. looking through it, the president's personal financial statements, i've been looking at them while we're listening to lester and laura in the whole gang, he's got a lot of liquid cash or liquid investments, things he could sell off, but between this, the e. jean carroll suit. >> right. >> looking at everything he's facing, even if all of his legal bills are paid out of political contributions and donations, the former president has some serious cash responsibilities whenever the appeals portion of this is over, and obviously with respect to the e. jean carroll case, and his attorneys already signaling today they're going to appeal this, he doesn't have to pay this bill tomorrow, but he

does potentially have to -- >> it's on the docket. >> pay it down the line. when you look at this, when the rales of this hits home, even if trump hasn't been doing business with banks for a long time, he's been using private investment groups we've reported you look at this and you say this is somebody who's got tough financial decisions ahead as he's the front run -- >> of 2024, gop nomination and this is really hitting him as a businessman, specifically. rehema, i want to bring you in, outside one of those businesses, trump towers, what's the reaction. we're hearing from the trump team right now. >> from the trump team, let me read you some of what his attorney alina habba mentioned, she said she calls the verdict a manifest injustice, plain and simple, saying it's a culmination of a multi-year politically fueled witch hunt that was designed to take down donald trump. this is language we have heard from donald trump himself, over and over again, who said given the grave stakes, we trust that the appellate division will

overturn this egregious verdict, and in this relentless persecution against donald trump, and let me make it perfectly clear, she says, this is not about trump, this decision stands, it will serve as a signal to every single american that new york is no longer open for business, this, in some ways is somewhat of the campaign message that donald trump has issued every single time that he comes out of a court proceeding, that it is not about him, but he stands in the way of illegal justice, and illegal prosecutions being filed against the rest of us, if you will, what i want to mention to you is that letitia james, is it state attorney who filed these charges against trump, and the trump enterprise, is expected to make a statement about all of this, coming up maybe in less than two hours from now, and we will hear from what he has to say, you know she was looking for a judgment of something like $370 million against the trump organization, this judgment, in

total, of something about 364 million, comes close to that, and also, we want to mention something that we heard from the judge about all of this, he said that the documents prove over and over again that there was fraud in this case, he said the defendants did not commit murder or arson, they didn't rob a bank at gunpoint, but donald trump is not bernie madoff accused of stealing multibillions of dollars to investors. defendants are incable of admitting the error of their cays, they adopt a see no efl, hear no evil, speak no evil posture that the evidence belies. the judge when he found them liable in this case, he said that the way that trump was doing business it was like in a fantasy world, not the real world, and the real world has come crashing in on this business that identifies who donald trump is all together, and that is that he was a

powerful businessman, that he rose to fame, that claim -- his claim to fame was that he was a powerful businessman. this tower behind me, the trump tower, is the only entity here that he owns outright, worth about $156 million, it's got about $100 million in debt against it. but this is the core of who he is, and that people said that this is the businessman who has done successful, he could do that for the country as well. now, this judge's case, strikes right at the core of that, and it will become a question of what they do, as tom was mentioning, there is no longer the ability for his sons, his adult sons running the business, they will be banned from doing business here for two years, d.o.t. will be -- donald trump will be banned for three years, the interesting thing in all of this letitia james was seeking a lifetime ban against donald trump from doing business. this stops way short of that, and banning him for three years,

but it is a blow, zinhle, against the trump enterprise and the trump business. they were not hoping for, they were hoping for something a lot less than this, they say they're going to appeal within 30 days. zinhle? >> those appeals likely at this point. david, let's bring you in, you're a former prosecutor, what do you make of today's decision? we heard rehemasay it, this was pretty close to the asking price of letitia james but she didn't get everybody she asked for, right? >> she did not. but typically, and here's a secret. lawyers never expect to get everything we ask for. in my world, she basically got everything she wanted because it is so incredibly close, what i think you have to do in addition to everything else we've discussed so far is consider where this fits in to all of the trump trials that are going on, and it is part of an ongoing theme when they go to court, they lose, and they lose huge, which is what this reflects, normally, as a former prosecutor, whenever you have a finding of having committed

fraud, that is huge when you still have litigation ongoing. since this will be on appeal, it's not as though you can just use this as evidence to cross-examine him, but if at one of his trials he says something like, no one's ever accused me of saying something wrong before, doing something wrong like this before, an evidence of some of these findings can be brought in for cross-examination, now given how much he's got without having heard him it's hard to know exactly what that is going to entail when it actually goes to trial but here's also a bigger issue, zinhle, at some point this isn't simply what it says about former president trump, it's also what it says about us, the statement that you just heard that his lawyer released, clarifying this as a witch hunt, really puts in perspective the hypocrisy of what is currently going on down in georgia with fani willis, she's being accused of saying one false thing, he's about to go to trial for 34 false things in addition to this current finding, and thus far it hasn't slowed his momentum.

>> you mentioned that statement from trump's spokeswoman, and we also had reaction from donald trump jr. on "x" formerly known as twitter, he wrote we've reached the point where your political beliefs combine with what your case is heard, the determinants of the outcome, not the facts of the case, it's truly sad what's happened to our country, and i hope others see it before it's too late to correct course. tom, to you, what's the impact on the trump children? but also you talked about trump as a businessman. he has established himself specifically in new york, so what might this ruling mean for trump, his businesses as large? >> to be clear because he's running as a presidential candidate he has to file a statement of his own personal financial condition with the fec, it's not completely detailed, you have wide ranges you can say, so, yes, he has cash and assets that are a part from his business and we talked earlier about what that might all mean as far as his future, there are lines in this ruling that might stick out to folks, the judge quoting alexander

pope, an english poet saying to err is human, to forgive is divine, he says defendants are of a different mind. after four years of investigation and litigation, the only error in parentheses, is acknowledging the tripling of the size of their penthouse, he attacks and uses a number of of examples of things that have come up as a result of the investigation. >> rehema, back to you and trump tower, hearing this reaction now and expecting an appeal, right, at this point? >> reporter: absolutely. they were prepared for this. the judge had already found them liable of civil fraud in this case, this was all about what kind of penalties this judge would decide he would level against them. they knew it was coming. their attorneys have stayed they would move forward with it in 30 days. this is just piling up in terms of what they have to do, they have an appeal that's going forward in the e. jean carroll

case where they were defined, that came back with more than $83.3 million in fines, and that civil case as well, so, yes, an appeal is coming. zinhle? >> okay. rehema, thank you so much, david, i want to go back to you. this is a big number that trump, his company, his family owes, but what's the process like for actually collecting it? you, of course, mentioned e. jean carroll earlier, right, new york is not the only institution that trump owes money to. >> that's true. and any trial lawyer worth their salt will tell you there's a world of difference between getting a verdict and a check in your hand. i like to refer back to movie references because people know them. this is the seen in erin brockovich when the lawyer says let's do binding arbitration, at least you'll get your money. this goes through appeals, appellate courts take away big findings, they reduce them, but that's when the jury makes the finding, not when a judge makes the finding, because a judge

made this finding, and i guarantee you with all of the antics that happening during the this trial, judge engoron was making sure he was solid. it may take a couple years but this one is likely to stand. >> tom, ending with you, we have moments left, big picture, what are your takeaways, what should people understand? >> the former president is a big figure in the new york real estate world but it's changed a lot since he inherited it and it grew. i think long term this is really the beginning of the end for his businesses because they're going fb very challenged in new york city, going forward, that is something that will be part of the former president's lasting legacy, and that's something he'll have to contend with,ton on top of all the other legal headaches, the rest of them criminal by the way. >> important, tom winter, thanks for your analysis. thank you all for watching "nbc news daily," i'm zinhle

essamuah, and of course you can essamuah, and of course you can kultomiris is for adults withee generalized myasthenia gravis who are anti-acetylcholine receptor antibody positive. it is lasting control over your gmg symptoms. and, ultomiris is the only long-acting gmg treatment with 8 weeks of freedom between infusions. ultomiris can lower your immune system's ability to fight infections, increasing your chance of serious, life-threatening meningococcal and other types of infections. if not vaccinated, you must receive meningococcal vaccines at least 2 weeks before starting ultomiris and if ultomiris is urgent, you should also receive 2 weeks of antibiotics with your vaccines. before starting ultomiris, tell your doctor about all of your medical conditions and medications. ultomiris can cause reactions such as back pain, tiredness, dizziness, limb discomfort, or bad taste. ultomiris is here.

ask your doctor about managing your generalized myasthenia gravis with ultomiris. [♪♪] generalized myasthenia gravis did you know, there's a way to cut your dishwashing time by 50%? try dawn powerwash dish spray. it removes 99% of grease and grime in half the time. dawn powerwash has 3 cleaning boosters not found in traditional dish soaps that remove food and grease 5 times faster. and, because it cleans so well you can replace multiple cleaning products for counters, stoves, and even laundry stains. try dawn powerwash dish spray. brand power, helping you buy better.

i'm craig melvin. and this is dateline daytime on nbc. omach, i just knew something's not right here. i just felt something bad had happened. he must have been so, so scared. craig melvin: they were so happy at first. michelle hopkins: kevin just fell in love with her. morgan was very, very charming.