criminal trial related to the alleged hush money payment scheme, with payments to scoremy daniels around the 2016 election. we're looking at a trial start date of potentially april 15th. judge merchant is currently hearing from not only donald trump's defense team but also the district attorney alvin bragg's prosecutors as to when this trial may begin. the defense team is suggesting that this trial should be delayed, potentially months. of course, we could very well get a decision from judge merchant as early as this afternoon on the trial start date. this is a busy day here in new york city for donald trump. jose. >> it is indeed. vaughn hillyard in new york city, thank you very much. that wraps up the hour for me. i'm jose diaz-balart. thank you for the privilege of your time. andrea mitchell picks up with more news right now. right now on "andrea mitchell reports," donald trump in manhattan this hour on the hot seat, in court today awaiting a trial date from the

judge overseeing his criminal hush money case. as a new york appeals court delivers the former president some much-needed relief on his civil fraud penalty. giving him ten days to post a greatly reduced bond figure of $175 million, not half a billion dollars. also this hour, the u.s instead of vetoing a hostage/cease-fire resolution in the u.n., they allow it to pass, as netanyahu canceled his advisors' planned visit to the u.s. this week. and vladimir putin false claim, blaming ukraine for the horrific terror attack outside of moscow, killing at least 137 people. ♪♪ good day, everyone. i'm andrea mitchell in washington. former president donald trump in new york city in the courtroom

this hour in the criminal hush money case, just as an appeals court threw him a lifeline on the half a billion dollar bond he was supposed to pay today. moments ago, the new york appeals court slashing the amount trump needed to pay in his civil financial fraud case from $464 million with interest piling up daily to now $175 million. the court gave him an extra ten days to make the bond payment. moments ago, attorney general letitia james responding in a statement saying, quote, "donald trump is still facing accountability for his staggering fraud. the court has already found that he engaged in years of fraud to falsely inflate his net worth and unjustly enrich himself, his family, and his organization. the $464 million judgment, plus interest, against donald trump and the other defendants still stands." and in the criminal hush money case, a judge could decide today when that trial will begin. first, another delay in the start of that hush money trial this morning in the courtroom in

lower manhattan as the trump legal team pushing for another delay. arguing that they accessed thousands of pages of documents and they've been put in a disadvantage. da bragg saying a fraction of the evidence revealed in the case is related to the evidence at all. judge marchant tried to pin down trump's attorney about how long they'd need to review the relevant documents. that's taken place this morning. this could result in the mid-april trial be delayed yet again. vaughn hillyard on all of this, bringing us up to date. first, on the bond reduction, letitia james says the amount still stands. does that mean she's going to appeal, or does she mean it still stands against him? see if you can clarify before we talk to our lawyers, vaughn. >> reporter: right. this is a significant bond still that donald trump is going to to post within ten days. of course, we here in new york city, we're waiting for the

appellate court to make a determination of whether they would either lower the bond or whether they would effectively stay it and delay donald trump having to post it until the actual new york appeals court hears his attorneys' appeal. we are looking at potentially, from some initial court filings, that appeal being heard as soon as this fall. still several months here from now. but donald trump struggled to come up with any insurance company that was able to put forward a bond of more than $450 million on his behalf. now, just in a statement a few moments ago, donald trump did explicitly say -- i want to read it for you -- quote, "we will abide by the decision of the appellate decision and post a bond, equivalent securities, or cash." for donald trump, he is guaranteeing there he will within the next ten days be able to put up a bond or cover this in cash. this has been at the heart of the question, andrea. we, the public, do not know how much liquid cash donald trump

actually has at his disposal. despite suggesting he had $500 million in a social media post last week, clearly, his attorneys said it'd be an impractical impossibility to put up that size of a bond. there was a reporter that was in the courthouse here as donald trump entered the courtroom on an unrelated hearing that asked whether he'd be turning to a foreign entity to put up the cash. donald trump turned and walked into the courthouse, not responding to it. financially, donald trump could secure $175 million cash guaranteed potentially, he could cobble together a few moments to put together a few minute dollars. there is a risk for anybody who does that, andrea. you're talking about donald trump. still, if, in fact, the appeals court were to affirm judge engoron's initial decision, he would be on the brink of having to put forward that full more than $450 million in damages. for the most, he's just got to

come up over the next ten days with the $175 million. by year's end, we could still very well have to pay up the nearly half a billion dollars and could face the other consequences that judge engoron initially found just last month in his initial decision. >> vaughn, thank you so much for that. stay with us if you don't mind. i'm going to bring in our national political correspondent, mara lieson, and harry litman and joyce vance. joyce, first to you. the bond reduction today, how does the court justify that? and why did letitia james say donald trump still owes nearly a billion dollars? >> right. so here's the problem. when we think about these sorts of appeals bonds, the numbers are sky high and we don't always stop to account for what they're supposed to do. this bond is donald trump's promise that he'll be able to pay the judgment is he loses on appeal. in essence, the people of new york say, you have a right to take an appeal.

you can do that. but we are entitled to collect our judgment. this is trump's way of saying, no, all's good. i believe i might win my appeal, but i'm willing to pay this money to show i'm willing to comply with the rule of law. that's the problem here. donald trump is not willing to comply with the rule of law. in my judgment, it was a mistake for the court to reduce this amount of money because even if he pays $175 million in cash into the court fund, it won't secure the entire judgment if he loses on appeal. that's the whole point of what this bond is intended to do. >> harry, our colleague, lisa rubin, has also pointed out in the appeals court ruling, he's not permitted to borrow from a new york registered bank to pay that amount. that was part of what letitia james had put into this and he had, donald trump and his lawyers, had opposed that. but that still is one thing that he can't do. i assume he can now try to

collateralize against real estate or something else to get that money. $175 million is lot more doable than half a billion dollars with interest piling up daily. >> it is a lot more doable, and it is consistent with the way this court acts. they're considered a pro-business court. the bond, i mean, joyce is absolutely right, it is to secure payment, but it's not to break the defendant financially. so it is a calculation of whether he'll be able to pay if he eventually loses. lisa is right about remains in place. also, the monitor, the very strict, including the enhanced monitor provisions that were put in last week with judge barbara jones, trump had tried to get those removed. they said no. so the immediate drama of his ability to pay, i think, he will one way or another be able to pay in ten days. of course, now trump will try to

have someone other than him pay, which is his normal, preferred practice. we still have to watch for that, depending on who it is. there's also this -- his ipo for the truth social company that he hopes will also somehow get him out of hot water. but he will now, i think, be able to make it, but possibly with the help of another entity. that's something for us to be worried about when it happens. >> worried about, just to follow up, because of the national security implications, if it is some foreign agent? >> or a domestic agent who now thinks trump owes him a very big favor. look, nobody will be buying truth social because of its inherent value as a company. it would be because trump might become president. that's where the value lies. of course, that's a two-edge sword for us as a nation. >> and mara, how has the former

president been using all his new york cases to his advantage politically. >> he uses it to his advantage because the courtroom is now a rally site, in effect. he can campaign from anywhere. he campaigns in front of a courthouse just as well. you can see how much interest there is in this story today. wherever trump is, he can campaign from. he can pursue the idea he is being victimized and persecuted and, you know, he's unfairly prosecute. he can still campaign. this is not going to hurt him, i don't think, in terms of his ability as a candidate. one thing this does today, it takes pressure off the rnc. the rnc set up a kind of financial pressure so that money raised first goes to a superpac that can pay his legal bills, then it comes to the rnc. they have a little less money to raise for donald trump's legal bills. >> let me go back to vaughn hillyard quickly. we're hearing from the courtroom that judge merchant is ruling from the bench.

i believe that the da, al bin alvin bragg, was not responsible for the delay in documents. what else is he saying? he'll rule from the bench on the timing of the trial? >> right. already, he has delayed ahead of today's hearing, delayed the trial through april 15th. after the first about hour and a half of this morning's hearing, he was repeatedly asking todd blanche, donald trump's attorney, as to how many of these 200,000 of pages of any documents related to key witness, michael cohen, did they actually need to go through. the prosecution, from alvin bragg's attorney, said 300 pages were actually relevant to this pending case against donald trump. but when repeatedly asked by the judge, donald trump's attorney suggested it could be potentially tens of thousands of pages. clearly, it irked and frustrated judge merchant, suggesting this

was simply a delay tactic in order to put off this case even further. even last night, you saw that todd blanche, the attorney for donald trump, suggested he had a new phone conversation with the u.s. attorney's office about pages of evidence related to stormy daniels, which, again, was a big question mark from the judges to why did this take you so long, so many months to attempt to not only acquire these documents but also prevent them? now, you saw donald trump, andrea, head back inside the courtroom here. this was a moment here where judge merchant has the ability to rule from the bench here about what that trial date will actually be, april 15th is the date it could be as early as of right now here. we are waiting to see in the next minutes even, potentially if he rules from the bench. >> as you speak, i'm just told from the control room that it is going to be april 15th for jury selection. so they can start that, you know -- obviously, that starts before the actual trial.

april 15th for jury selection. just to let you know. i do not believe -- >> clearly dismissing donald trump's efforts. >> joyce vance or harry, one of you jump in. joyce, if you don't mind jumping in, does april 15th for jury selection mean that donald trump doesn't have to be in the court for jury selection, not until the trial actually opens? or does he have to be there for jury selection, as well? >> it would be unusual if a defendant wasn't present during jury selection. because one of the tasks that his lawyers have early on as they select a jury is to, in essence, introduce their client to potential jurors to begin to paint a picture of him as someone who should not be convicted. his absence at that stage in the proceedings would be so unusual, it might suggest to the jury a failure to take the proceedings seriously, something that no criminal defense lawyer wants

jurors to believe about his client. so trump's situation is unusual. he'll certainly be campaigning, but he's all but tied up the nomination here. unless he wants to face an enhanced risk of confinement at the conclusion of this trial, because conviction here, most likely, means conviction on felony charges and a custodial sentence, i suspect we'll see trump in trial from the get-go. >> harry, he would not be disadvantaged, actually, to be in court, because as mara liasson was just pointing out, he's picking up strength politically with every one of these legal proceedings, and he can also campaign given his access to transportation within a broad area of the east coast every afternoon and evening, let's say, after the court adjourns, harry. >> that's right. but it's also now a serious dual track for him because the trial itself is really beginning. as joyce says, i mean, it's part

of the trial and probably required, but it'd be a disaster from the legal standpoint. he now has not just the american people but a -- but 12 men and women, good and true, to really, really, really worry about persuading. one more quick point. his lawyer had a really bad time today in front of judge merchant. not just for the reasons pointed out but also he had made these allegations. this is part of the playbook, that the d.a. acted inappropriately. merchan said, you have nothing here. he was beat up pretty badly in front of trump with the hearing and the setting of the date. >> vaughn, we're following a google doc, who is transparent with our viewers and listeners, as to how we're learning what's going on inside the courtroom. can't have audio or video, but our people in an adjacent room

are being able to get this out to us. what are you seeing has now happened? >> adam and gary, our great producers, are trying to detail this in real time to us, andrea. this was the determination from the judge. when we were talking about him repeatedly pressing donald trump's attorney, todd blanche, as to why the trial should be significantly delayed, as it pertains to these new documents, these are documents that were requested by trump's defense team from the u.s. attorney's office related to michael cohen. they did not request these documents until january. of course, they have been gathering evidence here for months. you heard keen questioning from judge merchan as to what took them so long. of course, they just obtained these records one week ago. what judge merchan here, and his decision to begin the jury selection on april 15th and not push off this trial any further was the determination that the

delay, you could say, in having these records turned over to the defense team was not because of any wrongdoing from district attorney alvin bragg's office. essentially placing the onus on donald trump's defense team for waiting too long to actually obtain the records they felt would be pertinent to the discovery and materials and evidence that they would be presenting as part of their case. and the defense team for donald trump did not do their part today to justify that this was prejudicial to donald trump or the defendant in any way on the part of the district attorney, alvin bragg, or his prosecutor's office. we should note here, in the last minute, the court has now adjourned here. andrea, wrapping up this hearing. now we know jury selection will begin april 15th, this would lead us to believe that, in fact, this alleged scheme to cover up the hush money payments to stormy daniels by donald

trump will be his first criminal trial, set to begin just about one month from now here in manhattan. donald trump, we expect him to head -- >> i can see him now. >> -- down the road to his skyscraper. we're seeing him walk out. he'll make remarks. >> yeah, vaughn, let's listen. >> now, they're fighting over days because they want to do it during the election. this is election interference, all it is. it is election interference. it's a disgrace. obviously, we appeal it. but this is a pure case of voter intimidation and election interference. it shouldn't be allowed to happen. this case had been brought by the d.a. but they -- >> the former president is repeating what he has said often, that this is a case of election interference, which is arguably not the fact. mara liasson, you jump in here, as well. they're talking about the way that he has been successfully

spinning a lot of this. >> spinning and blaming. there's tactics and strategy. the tactic is delay as long as possible, hopefully past the election. the strategy is to destroy american's faith in the justice system. whatever result of these trials, donald trump can dismiss them or say that they're phony just like he tried to do with the election. that's why you hear him saying election interference, voter intimidation. he is casting this as if the justice system itself is on trial, not him. >> joyce vance and harry, joyce, first to you, please also jump in here and talk about the legal implications of this. clarify what i said, not being a lawyer, that this is not a case -- this is not, rather, a prosecution based on election interference. >> right. so trump is correct when he says that this is a case of election interference, just not in the way that he means it. because this case, which trump

has tried to suggest is unimportant or about business practices, is actually about the desperate, last gasp of his campaign ahead of the 2016 election. the "access hollywood" tape has been released. women are abandoning the trump candidacy in droves. they're extremely concerned about the release of information that the republican nominee had an affair with a porn star while his wife was home with their infant son. that's the reason that they went ahead and paid off stormy daniels, gave her hush money payments. in order to conceal them, they characterized them as pages to trump's then lawyer, michael cohen. when you understand the full context of this case, it's very clear it is about an effort to pull the wool over the eyes of voters, to ensure they didn't have access to important information about a candidate while they voted. that's the narrative that we'll

hear the district attorney's office share with this jury. while the events are years removed, the evidence is very clear. they won't be able to play the "access hollywood" tape at trial, according to judge juan merchan's ruling. they'll be able to talk about the tape and talk about the "access hollywood" tape where trump talks about grabbing women by parts of their bodies and sexualizes women in ways that are simply unacceptable for someone who will lead the country. that will all be fair game when this case goes to trial. >> he's also said, while we were talking just now, that this is a case of clear election interference and voter intimidation, that this decision today is something he will appeal. and he said that this is a case that could have been brought 3 1/2 years ago, and they're now fighting over days. this is election interference. of course, a lot of the delay in bringing the case, at least under, you know, prosecutor bragg, not the previous

investigation, had to do with the delays caused by all of the defense motions, harry litman. he's been a big part of these delays. >> no doubt about it. it is election interference for the reason that joyce nails completely. what he's saying is it is interfering with this election, but that's not a legal basis for appeal. the only basis for appealing would be the basis for the ruling, which is, he needs more time for this relatively small sheath of papepapers, to use it his defense. i see next to no possibility that we should all be prepared for jury selection starting april 15th. >> vaughn, checking in with you again, i believe the former president or his attorneys said he'd be paying this bond in cash. >> right. donald trump said that he will either in the form of cash or

securities, be able to post the $175 million bond. of course, today in new york city, i think, shows just how many focus points donald trump and his team have at this point. i mean, we're talking the fact we're just over seven months away until the presidential election. now, the presumptive republican nominee for president of the united states will, in fact, go on criminal trial just 20 days here from now. his defense team tried to push this case off to the best of their abilities. they effectively have been able to in the federal election interference case, in the georgia election interference case, as well as the classified documents case. but donald trump, beginning on april 15th, has a criminal trial on his hands. when you're looking at the reality around this hush money payment case here, andrea, it's the fact that donald trump can say that this is election interference. let's be very clear, over the course of the last eight years, donald trump has answered very few questions as it pertains to the actual specifics of the

crimes that are alleged against him. one year ago before he was indicted with the 34 felony counts for falsifying business records around the alleged payments to stormy daniels, i specifically asked him when he did become familiar with what michael cohen was paying daniels for. despite asking him three different times, he never answered my specific question, which hits at the heart of donald trump's criminal trial set to begin here 20 days from now. it's whether he falsified financial records through michael cohen in order to help him become president of the united states in 2016. if that had not, in fact, happened, could we be having a very difficult conversation here in the year of 2024 politically? would donald trump be the republican nominee for president of the united states? would he have had the type of scrutiny on the trump organization that would have led to this $175 million appeal bond having to be put forward in the next ten days?

these are all of the questions that are coming forward to us here today on march 25th, 2024, andrea, largely because of donald trump's political and financial state in what has become the, not only american political discourse, but also around the idea that he is a real estate tycoon. somebody who, you know, at such a significant stake here in what new york city and the skyline, as he says it, has become. >> also just want to point out, joyce vance, that there's a little immunity hearing in front of the supreme court on april 25th. there's a lot piling up here. but a lot also, joyce, that's delayed. we don't know when florida is going to start. we don't know when jack smith going to start because of the impunity before the supreme court. jack smith's case can't start until the court rules, and they could stretch that out until

june. >> harry and i were discussing this just last night. trump's strategy is delay and deny. really, he's been very effective at getting these cases delayed. it's become something of a joke, that trump's preferred trial date in all of these cases is never. he does not want to go to trial because the evidence against him is very strong for different reasons in each of these criminal cases. but as you say, andrea, the supreme court hearing that is set for april 22nd is something of an all-encompassing hearing. because trump has tried this gambit of arguing that as a former president, he is immune from essentially any allegations of criminal conduct that were committed while he was in office, at least if they can be characterized as official acts. and as i think we all understand at this point, that argument, too, is simply a delay tactic. it's a real nonstarter.

because if presidents can do anything, the full panel of options would be open to joe biden. he could interfere with the results of an election with immunity, refusing to turn over the reins of power if he lost. we all know that trump loses this argument in april. the real question is how long will it take the supreme court to get there? then will we be in a position where, for instance, judge tanya chutkan in the district of columbia might be able to try the flagship case that federal prosecutors have brought, the election interference case against trump. >> vaughn hillyard, let's talk about the campaign. so how will this -- let's say that this starts with jury selection april 15th and donald trump is sitting there in the courtroom, stuck there for however long this trial lasts. how is that going to affect his campaigning outside of the benefit that he seems to be getting politically anytime he's in a courtroom, by playing the

victim card? what's on the calendar april, may? i think you're coming up on the pennsylvania primary in may. what else is there? or the end of april. >> right. i think there is a two-part answer to this, andrea. number one, what is donald trump going to say he is precluded from partaing in, versus what is the reality for donald trump actually? this trial going to last monday through thursday, potentially up to six weeks. donald trump did not have to appear in the courtroom over the course of the last week at all, yet he held no political events. of course, he has the month of april, you know, at least the next three weeks that are open, but there are no political actual campaign rallies or events on the docket. donald trump is campaign cash crunched, as well. not just a personal financial crunch but also a campaign one. donald trump, in terms of the amount of campaign cash that is currently in the bank, joe biden

has double what he has. they have struggled to effectively raise funds. those rallies he puts on, those are expensive events here. he's going to need to put in some time for hosting fundraisers. he has, by and large, focused on having fundraisers at mar-a-lago. typically, like we've seen with joe biden the course of the last week -- and in texas, for example, he had three separate private fundraisers. typically, you see nominees travel the country for purposes of financing for their campaign. donald trump is still going to have friday, saturday, sundays available to him. donald trump had no campaign events here this weekend. again, he was free but chose not to. the last time we saw him was a week ago in ohio when he campaigned for bernie marino. for donald trump, i think this comes down to a lot of where does he end up putting his priorities? if he becomes the president of the united states, that would effectively keep him from, if he were to be found guilty on any

of these felony counts here in new york, from likely having to go to jail. for him, i think the political stakes are the highest stakes of all because so much is going to be riding on his business and personal future, going to be riding on his political fate just seven months from now in this november general election. >> vaughn, we're going to bring in our political analyst. republican national chairman, co-host of "the weekend," michael steele. and former obama white house press secretary robert gibbs. michael, when the hush money case starts, donald trump is going to be in court. as we've been discussing with vaughn, it'll be four days a week. he said he'd campaign at night. or being forced off the trail and significantly lowering his bond in the fraud, and add to all this this is election interference and a witch hunt, does that play out? he'll still be able to do fundraising at mar-a-lago on weekends. those expenive rallies are not in his benefit because he's better off doing the fundraising.

>> yeah, you know, the reality of it is, all the noise coming out of donald trump's mouth is just that. donald trump is not ill-served or abused or otherwise hindered by this process. he's pretty much got everything he's wanted. again, that was proven with the reduction of his bond from $450 million to $175 million. for what reason? no one else in the country would have that luck or be ill-served, if you will, in his thinking that way. donald trump can do two things. i think mara put her finger on exactly what this is and has been from the very beginning. two things. tactics and strategy. the tactics being delay. the strategy being to create enough distrust of this process that the american people, whatever decision comes down against donald trump, will take

it as, oh, there goes the system. it's corrupt. it's broken. he can raise this money. he will raise this money, which is why he's set up the rnc the way he has. he'll show up on the 15th like he's supposed to and wine and moan. we'll pretend like, oh, my god, it is news. but the process of accountability begins on the 15th of april. we should focus on that aspect of this and not the drama that he wants us to be entertained by because of his woes and how difficult this is for him. i personally don't give a damn how difficult this is for donald trump. everything that's coming his way is by his own creation. it's about time we stop acting like it is our problem instead of his. >> robert gibbs, you know, democrats, the white house and campaign people are making much of the fact that they have a big, a very large campaign war

chest advantage over donald trump. are they placing too much importance on that? it is great to have from their perspective, but hillary clinton had more money than donald trump in 2016. didn't help her win the election. there's, you know, a whole lot campaigning that has to be done in battleground states, in particular, where donald trump, in polls, at least, has an advantage over joe biden. >> yeah, it's a great question. look, i don't think the campaign cash advantage determines the winner in these elections, as you point out, but i do think you have a real structural advantage, the biden campaign, as it relates to its ability to run an effective campaign. vaughn pointed this out. i mean, it is a half a million dollar tally for donald trump to have a rally right now. the reason he's not having rallies right now is as much about cost as it is about anything else.

the only scheduling challenge donald trump going to have in the next few weeks is to his golf schedule, not his campaign schedule. he's certainly going to be free to campaign as much as he'd like to on weekends, on evenings, and far more than he's campaigned in the last ten days. look, i don't think the cash advantage is necessarily the be all, end all, but it is going to make a big difference, certainly in the short to medium term as to who prosecutes this over the airwaves. >> speaking ofairwaves, another advantage of him in court is that's what we're talking about today. we'll get to the -- i hope we're going to get to the developments over in israel and the u.n. and the team that's not coming here because of a u.n. vote today, the u.s./u.n. vote to abstain and lets the resolution pass. also other breaking news.

but the fact is, there is so much attention, justifiably, placed on these court cases, and the delays are important to the electoral calendar and his fortunes or misfortunes, all to january 6th and other obvious violations, like what happened at mar-a-lago with the classified documents, at least on the face of everything we know. those are important issues, but that's what we're talking about now. we're not talking about a lot of things that are coming out of the white house, including, you know, the anniversary of obamacare and a lot of the focus that was today and tomorrow going to be on that, from their perspective. >> i can't agree with you more. it is one of the more frustrating aspects of all of this. my wife put it to me, i think, the best. she said, you know, we have been

talking about this one man every day since 2015. name a day of the week, name an hour of the day in which this man's name has not come up on our airwaves, in our conversations, in entanglements with others, just greetings of people. at some point, the conversation is, oh, do you believe donald trump? we are so consumed by all of what he is doing, which is exactly how he wants it. the billions of dollars that is spent to cover this one man on our national broadcasts is unprecedented, no doubt. but i think more importantly, to your very important point, we're not talking about anything else. we're not talking about the things that are also what matters to american people, about health care and education, what president biden is trying to get accomplished in israel. i bet you people don't even know that the u.s. abstained today on

the u.n. council vote on the cease-fire. they have no idea because we are locked in on donald trump's drama. and we need to break ourselves of that. >> yeah, we're going to get to that momentarily. we are going to get to that in a minute because you know we're -- >> i know you know. >> what i do for a living is cover israel and all of those things. michael, that's absolutely correct. you're right about that. vaughn, are you still there? we want to bring you into this conversation, as well. oh, excuse me, vaughn is running off to cover the other -- there is going to be, momentarily, i'll let the viewers know, we're expecting that something may well be happening at 40 wall street coming up with donald trump speaking. before that, we'll get to israel. lisa rubin is joining us now. let's button this conversation up with lisa rubin. your thoughts on the appeals court ruling and how it'll

impact donald trump legally? >> andrea, if we're talking about the appeals court ruling on trump's bond, i think it is really interesting in two ways. first, the fact that this five-judge panel lowered the bond to $175 million is a signal that this same panel may consider the substance of the appeal and lower the judgment in judge engoron's order following the trial. if they weren't considering lowering the judgment, in all likelihood, they wouldn't lower the bond. if other thing that is interesting here, with respect to this bond amount, they are not saying that donald trump still has the ability to borrow from new york financial institutions. there is a provision of judge engoron's order after the trial that said trump and his co-defendants could not borrow money from financial institutions that are registered or chartered in new york state. that provision was temporarily on hold to allow trump to find a

bond. that's something that his legal team had insisted in its papers to the appellate division of new york state he needed. that's no longer on hold. in terms of where he comes up with this $175 million, that may no longer be attainable from a number of the other 30-something insurers that trump's side said they consulted in trying to obtain a bond. >> if you'll all stand by, we know there is more developments to come momentarily on this. we're going to take a quick break. next up, drama at the u.n. as israel tries to pressure the u.s. over a vote for cease-fire in gaza. that's next. you're watching "andrea mitchell reports" on msnbc. on msnbc. een? [both] because i said cologuard®! -hey there! -where did he come from? -yup, with me you can screen at home. just talk to your provider. [both] we'll screen with cologuard

and do it my way. cologuard is a one-of-a-kind way to screen for colon cancer that's effective and non-invasive. it's for people 45+ at average risk, not high risk. false positive and negative results may occur. ask your provider for me, cologuard. [♪♪] did you know, many moisturizers only hydrate your skin? for advanced science that visibly repairs signs of aging... try olay regenerist micro-sculpting cream. it delivers 10 benefits in every jar for younger-looking skin, visibly firming, lifting, and smoothing wrinkles. olay regenerist penetrates the skin's surface, to boost regeneration at the surface cellular level for continuous improvement. to visibly repair signs of aging, try olay regenerist. this has been medifacts for olay. (fisher investments) it's easy to think that all money managers are pretty much the same, try olay regenerist. but at fisher investments we're clearly different. (other money manager) different how? you sell high commission investment products, right? (fisher investments) nope. fisher avoids them. (other money manager) well, you must earn commissions on trades. (fisher investments) never at fisher investments. (other money manager) ok, then you probably sneak in

some hidden and layered fees. (fisher investments) no. we structure our fees so we do better when clients do better. that might be why most of our clients come from other money managers. at fisher investments, we're clearly different. norman, bad news... i never graduated from med school. what? but the good news is... xfinity mobile just got even better! now, you can automatically connect to wifi speeds up to a gig on the go. plus, buy one unlimited line and get one free for a year. i gotta get this deal... that's like $20 a month per unlimited line...

i don't want to miss that. that's amazing doc. mobile savings are calling. visit xfinitymobile.com to learn more. doc? we'll get to other big news but will go back to donald trump if he is making news when he appears, as expected, at number

40 wall street, coming up. meanwhile, today at the u.n., a lot of news. the security council passing a resolution for a cease fire and hostage release resolution in gaza without condemning hamas for the october 7th massacre. the u.s. deciding to abstain, according to the white house, letting the resolution pass instead of vetoing it. israel's prime minister, netanyahu, says he is now cancelling a visit to the u.s. by his top adviser, ron dermer, and his national security adviser, for meetings that were supposed to happen on tuesday and wednesday. there was a demand for an immediate cease-fire for the end of ramadan, ending in two weeks. raf sanchez is in tel-aviv. there is already a delegation here at the pentagon. there was going to be a bigger and higher-level meeting on wednesday at the white house

involving the former long-time ambassador here from israel and the closest adviser, of course, to netanyahu. that is being canceled. raf? >> reporter: that's right, andrea. this is prime minister benjamin netanyahu's way of signaling his fury that the u.s. allowed this security council resolution to pass. the prime minister in a statement put out a little while ago accusing the u.s. of abandoning its position at the u.n. security council, saying he's calling off that visit by one of his closest advisors and israel's national security adviser. a visit that president biden specifically requested from him in their phone call at the beginning of last week. their first phone call in more than a month. israel is also indicating it is not planning to cease-fire. the israeli foreign minister in just the last couple of minutes saying the state of israel will

not stop the fire. we will destroy hamas and continue to fight until the last of the hostages return home. now, andrea, this is sort of subtle u.n. security council politics. you are very familiar with it. just for the benefit of our viewers, the u.s. put up a resolution on friday, calling for an immediate cease-fire linked to the release of the hostages. today, this resolution put up calling for an immediate cease-fire and the immediate release of the hostages but not linking the two of them. that is why netanyahu is saying that the u.s. has abandoned its position. the u.s. ambassador at the united nations trying to say earlier that the spirit of the resolution is the same. but it does not include that crucial linkage. now, hamas is welcoming this resolution, saying that it is prepared to release hostages as long as israel releases

prisoners. but the israelis at this point are saying that they will not cease-fire as a result of this resolution. and it is not clear where that puts israel in terms of international law. the american ambassador at the united nations referring to this resolution as being non-binding and it's not clear what she meant by that. u.n. resolutions are binding. it may be she was referring to the fact that this is a kind of resolution that cannot be enforced militarily. but the u.n.'s highest body is now ordering israel to cease-fire. that is a resolution that the u.s. allowed to pass and the israeli government is saying that they will not abide by it at this point, andrea. >> raf, i was on a conference call on the record with john kirby speaking for the white house, of course, and he said that the reason why they vetoed it -- excuse me, why they didn't

veto it, they abstained, which let it pass, is because it did not condemn october 7th, the massacre. that's what they have been demanding. he is saying that this is not a change in u.s. policy because there were a lot of u.n. resolutions, as you well know, leading up to this. three at least that i can think of that the u.s. vetoed on behalf of israel because it did not specifically condemn hamas for october 7th. they're saying that this is not a change of position. certainly in the context of the visit that was anticipated by ron dermer, this top adviser, and the key negotiations or discussions that had reached a pretty angry pitch between the white house and netanyahu over rafah and whether they were going to go ahead with an invasion to get the four battalions of hamas out of rafah that the u.s. opposed, this was a key moment to de-escalate. the other key thing that's happened is the weekend talks

where there are reports that israel has agreed to a proposal that's on the table for the hostage releases for some 700 or 800 palestinians to be released, including some terrorists, some known killers, convicted killers, in exchange for the 40 hostages. it would seem, if there is no cease-fire, there's no way to get the hostages safely out. this determination to continue hostilities not only stops the aid from getting in, more aid from getting in, but would prevent the hostage releases from going forward or being accepted. >> reporter: right. it becomes a little bit of a chicken and egg situation. the israelis say if there is a deal on the hostages, there will be a cease-fire. hamas is saying, if there is a cease-fire, the hostages will be released. what order you implement those is key. as you said, there was supposed

to be this delegation by senior israeli officials heading to the white house with a very specific purpose. they were there to hear out american concerns about a potential israeli invasion of the city of rafah in southern gaza, where some $1.5 million palestinian civilians are sheltering. the white house has made very clear at this point it opposes any large-scale israeli offensive into rafah. it has said that it believes it'll be a disaster, that there is nowhere safe for those civilians to go. the point of that meeting was for the israelis to hear the american concerns but also to hear what was supposed to be a set of american proposals of alternatives to a full-scale invasion. now, we don't have the exact details of what the white house was proposing, but it is likely to be along the lines of targeted raids. that meeting no longer going to happen. as you say, this is a real, real point of tension, public tension

between israel and the united states right now.sanchez, thank all of that. when we come back, trump's trials up next. a deeper dive on what the former president now faces in the upcoming trial with jury selection set to begin next month. you're watching "andrea mitchell reports." this is msnbc. you know that feeling of having to re-wash dishes that didn't get clean? i don't. cascade platinum plus has me doing dishes...differently. scrub, soak? nope. i just scrape, load... and i'm done.

platinum plus is cascade's best clean ever. with double the dawn and double the scrubbers, it removes the toughest grease and food residue for an irresistible clean and shine. rewash? not in my house. upgrade to cascade platinum plus. dare to dish differently.

we're expecting former president trump to speak soon at 40 wall street. we see him arriving. following his appearance earlier in that new york city courtroom this morning where jury selection was scheduled, is scheduled to begin april 15th. mr. trump's legal strategy is to delay, delay and delay as long as possible. we're seeing that in full display in manhattan today. back with us now, howard lippman and joyce vance. i want to bring in msnbc contributor jonathan alter who is also in the courtroom today.

jonathan, talk to us about what you two saw in the courtroom today, the dynamic between the lawyers, the prosecutor and the judge, judge merchan. >> well, first of all, this was an historic day, even though it was just a pretrial hearing. the judge decided for the first time in american history a president of the united states will face a criminal trial starting april 15th. so that shouldn't be minimized here. that's a pretty dramatic development. the expression on donald trump's face was consistent with that very bad news for him. i happened to be seated in the courtroom on the aisle, so he walked within a couple of feet from me as he was walking in and out of court. particularly when we went to break and he knew that the judge was going to rule against him,

he had a very grim expression on his face. you can tell that this was sinking in for him, his delaying tactics had run their course and he was going to have to face trial. the other really bad thing that's happened to him in this case is that the judge has basically rejected the motions of the defense and granted the motions of the district attorney. so on almost every single issue, the judge, after careful deliberation -- he's a very careful by-the-book judge, juan merchan, he has made conviction more significant in this case. >> trump was also seen whispering to his attorneys and he appeared angry. how in control is he of his own

defense? >> that's a really good question. they aren't getting him the results he wanted. sometimes they get some results, like he got the bond amount reduced, but this is the big deal. he doesn't want to stand trial in a criminal case, and this trial is going ahead. that's not what he wants. he wanted his team to protect himself against that. he gets rid of a lot of people he doesn't think are doing a good job for him. i think he's frustrated. i think this is a huge, huge burden on him, even though it seems like it hasn't hurt him politically yet. he's still tied with biden or a little above in the battleground state polls. this is a big deal. he wanted this case to go away or be delayed and it's not going to be. >> mara, we shouldn't understate the significance that jonathan alter was just pointing out. this is a former president going on trial. >> this is a cal case. >> we've seen this happen in other countries. we've seen it happen in israel

with former prime ministers. >> this is an abject lesson, of course, to netanyahu who is being accused of stretching things out, stretching a war out to stop from faces a court case. this is a trial that could very well go against him. >> it could. it could. what question don't know yet is how voters will react. what we have are a lot of hypothetical poll questions. if donald trump is convicted, would you be more willing or less willing to vote for him. in the meantime, donald trump is going to do his best to destroy americans' faith in the justice system so whatever comes out he can say is meaningless. >> any case that is decided adversely against him would be appealed. any judgment would not take place or be put into effect before the election actually takes place. harry, let me turn to you. in terms of the hush money case,

it's about alleged election interference by the trump campaign in 2016. there were campaign violations as well, financial violations. a less ser charge, you tell me. a lot has happened since then. how can the passage of time impact potential jurors. when jury selection starts on april 15th, there are so many cases, so much legal noise around donald trump. will perspective jurors have focused on this? maybe that's a good thing. how do they get a jury that has no opinion at all and has not paid attention at all to the legal travails of donald trump? >> hopefully they don't. that's not the jury they want. the jury they want is one that says it can be fair, 12 persons. i really want to -- this is one of the key takeaways from today. he's had no trouble going into court and vilifying the judge,

vilifying the attorneys. he can't do that in front of a jury now. to the extent that conflicts with his political goals, he's got to sit in that chair and make as nice as donald trump can because those 12 people hold his fate in their hands. the jury selection challenge, they'll be able to do it. they'll have -- they can choose from all kinds of hundreds of potential jurors. you just want 12 people to say i can set aside whatever views i have about the evidence. so the less -- the fewer pre conceptions they have, the better. one other takeaway from today, judge merchan was really tough on and questioned the tactics and credibility of trump's main lawyer, todd blanche. that ogers very poorly for him. >> harry, when you say he can't do this in front of the jury, can he come outside the

courthouse, as he has in previous cases, and blast the prosecutors, blast the judge, even the court clerk in one case, as you know. can he blast them outside and not subject himself to a potential gag order because this jury is not going to be sequestered. anything he says is going to be all over the headlines in new york city. >> it's a great point. and the short answer is no, judging from merchan. if he does anything that could prejudice the jury, he will quickly find merchan saying you better zipper it, and for that very reason. that's another way in which he could be deemly hamstrung. that, of course, is something that has proven irresistible to him. not only could he find himself the subject of a gag order, but find himself subject of potential contempt for violating the gag order. it's a whole new ball game once

12 persons are in that box. >> joyce, can you quickly -- i mean in seconds -- summarize your thoughts today? >> well, i think harry is right about the dilemma trump faces. this is a judge who has shown that he's very capable. his rulings have been fair and even handed. he's focused on ensuring that any conviction can be sustained on appeal. i think we'll continue to see him rule in this even-handed manner which means he won't tolerate trump's high jinks. >> you are a pro legally and in television. thanks to all who were on today. that's it for today. "chris jansing reports" starts right now. good day. i'm chris jansing live in new york city headquarters in new york city.