Trump trial updates: Appeals court denies defense's bid for judge's recusal

Judge Merchan heard arguments over how former Trump lawyer Michael Cohen's 2018 guilty plea on charges related to the Stormy Daniels payment should be described to the jury -- whether Cohen "participated" in crimes or was "convicted" of crimes.

The judge said echoed a defense concern that Cohen's convictions could be used to infer that Trump, by proxy, should also be found guilty.

"It seems like to me right now we are really playing with fire and getting close to that," Merchan said.

In general, Merchan reminded the parties, "Where there are standard pattern jury instructions, I don't deviate"

The defense is arguing a candidate's expenses arising from controversies are not necessarily campaign expenses.

Merchan suggests the language should be as follows: "If the payment would have been made, even in the absence of the candidacy, the payment should not be treated as a contribution."

Prosecutors have argued the payment to Stormy Daniels should have been labeled a campaign expenditure because it was meant to protect Trump's electoral prospects in 2016

Merchan reserves his decision on the issue but suggests he would include both proposed sentences from the parties.

Defense attorney Emil Bove argued that Judge Merchan should tell the jury it must find Trump acted willfully in order to convict.

The district attorney's office argued the jury must find Trump acted unlawfully, not necessarily criminally.

Judge Merchan said he would reserve his decision about whether to include "willful" in the jury charge

Trump was alert and attentive at the start of this afternoon's session, whispering to his attorney Todd Blanche. Now his eyes are closed.

Judge Merchan, ticking through each of the proposed edits to the jury instructions, appears to be focused on making sure the instructions are clear and understandable for the jury.

"We want to make it as easy as possible for the jury," he said.

Judge Merchan declined to add a sentence to the jury charge that there was no limit on Trump's personal contributions to his political campaign in 2015 and 2016.

Defense attorney Emil Bove argued that the line would have told the jury that Trump “could have paid this out of his personal expenses without issue.”

But prosecutors argued that the line was “extraneous” because Trump made the Stormy Daniels payment reimbursement from the Trump Organization, not out of his personal funds.

“It has nothing to do with the case,” Colangelo said.