Defense attorney Todd Blanche shifted his argument to the prosecution's burden to prove criminal intent, "Like a conscious objective. A purpose to defraud. There is no evidence of that ladies and gentlemen," Blanche said. "Where's the intent to defraud on the part of President Trump?"

"President Trump is not guilty. But I expect you're going to hear from Judge Merchan that there's something else that has to be proven beyond a reasonable doubt ... the government has to prove to you that President Trump caused these entries ... with an intent to defraud."

"There is no evidence of that," Blanche said. "Were's the intent to defraud on the part of President Trump?"

Displaying Michael Cohen's 1099 form, Blanche said, "If there was some deep-rooted intent to defraud, why do you think it was reported to the IRS as what it was? (Payments) to Michael Cohen, as Trump's personal attorney?"

"The Trump Organization disclosed these payments to the IRS," Blanche said.

Defense attorney Todd Blanche told jurors not to believe that Trump participated in a tax crime by "grossing up" Cohen's reimbursement to account for taxes.

Prosecutors have suggested Trump acted to advance another crime -- potentially the alleged tax crime -- when he falsified business records.

"I expect the government is going to tell you there might have been some tax scheme," Blanche said. "You saw no evidence of the tax treatment from anybody."

Referring to the bank statement where then-Trump Organization CFO Allen Weisselberg and Michael Cohen took handwritten notes about the repayment arrangement, Cohen said the document was "full of lies."

"So what proof do you have? What actual evidence do you have that this gross-up was anything to do with taxes? … There's none," he said.

Returning to the testimony of former Trump attorney Michael Cohen, defense attorney Todd Blanche asked jurors, "How is the government going to ask you to convict President Trump based on the words of Michael Cohen?"

Blanche insisted to jurors that if the payments were all for repaying Cohen, that would mean Michael Cohen was working for free in 2017 -- something he said he never would have done.

"You saw him on the stand for three days -- do you believe that for a second?," Blanche asked. "That after getting stiffed on his bonus in 2016 … do you think that Michael Cohen thought, 'I'mgoing to work for free?'"

"Is that the man that testified, or was that a lie?" Blanche asked. "That is absurd!" he nearly shouted.

Defense attorney Todd Blanche reminded the jury that Trump was president at the time Cohen's invoices were being paid, suggesting that he was too busy to actually look at the checks he was signing.

"President Trump was very busy. He was running the country," Blanche said.

Blanche noted the testimony of then-Trump aide Madeleine Westerhout who testified that Trump "sometimes" looked at what he was signing.

"You can't convict President Trump because 'sometimes,' without being specific at all ... President Trump looked at invoices ... that is a stretch," Blanch said. "And that is reasonable doubt."

"The leap that the government wants you to take that he looks at the checks, looked at the invoices ... is absurd," Blanche said.

As Judge Merchan reread the jury instructions, the jury again hears what exactly is reasonable doubt in the eyes of the law.

"A reasonable doubt is an honest doubt of the defendant's guilt for which a reason exists based upon the nature and quality of the evidence. It is an actual doubt, not an imaginary doubt. It is a doubt that a reasonable person, acting in a matter of this importance, would be likely to entertain because of the evidence that was presented or because of the lack of convincing evidence," Merchan said.

The jury also heard again how to judge the credibility of a witness.

"You must decide whether a witness told the truth and was accurate, or instead, testified falsely or was mistaken," Merchan said.
Trump's team had hammered the credibility of Michael Cohen, saying he had an "ax to grind" -- and who they will rehear testimony from again later this morning.

"You may consider whether a witness had, or did not have, a motive to lie," Merchan instructed them. "If a witness had a motive to lie, you may consider whether and to what extent, if any, that motive affected the truthfulness of that witness's testimony."