Defense attorney Todd Blanche tried to downplay prosecutors' theory of the case and emphasized that Cohen was Trump's attorney in 2017 and that the $35,000 paid each month over that year was Trump paying him for his services.

"Take a step back. Nobody disputes that Mr. Cohen was President Trump's lawyer in 2017," Blanche said. "So what makes more sense, that president was paying his personal attorney in 2017 the $35,000 per an agreement he made with his personal attorney?... Or the version that Mr Cohen said?"

Blanche then mimicked Cohen's testimony, as Michael Cohen:

"No, I was not paid, I was going to work for free ... I'll just work for free and make a lot of money as a consultant," Blanche said, mimicking Cohen.

"For the first time in President Trump's life, he decided to pay me back triple," Blanche continued, mimicking Cohen. "He doubled up the $130,000, he gave me $50,000 for some online poll -- by the way, I stole from him a little bit on that -- and I decided I wanted a bigger bonus. That's what really happened, ladies and gentlemen.

"There's a reason why in life usually the simplest answer is the right one -- and that's certainly the case here," Blanche said.

Defense attorney Todd Blanche attacked Michael Cohen's testimony that he did not work under a retainer agreement for Trump, as referenced in the invoices.

"There was a retainer agreement, and that's how retainer agreements work," Blanche said, referring to Cohen's testimony. "Anything criminal about that?"

"That's not evidence of some secret agreement that Mr. Cohen had with President Trump. He broadcasted this to the world," Blanche continued. "This was not a secret. Michael Cohen was President Trump's personal attorney -- period."

Pulling up a transcript in which Cohen testified there was never expected to be a retainer agreement, Blanche said, That was a lie," stretching out each word.

"A lie is a lie, and this is a significant lie," he said.

As Blanche argued about the practice of "verbal retainer agreements," prosecutor Joshua Steinglass objected twice. Judge Merchan overruled both.

Defense attorney Todd Blanche tells jurors they will have to find two things to convict: "First, that the documents contained false entries, and second, that President Trump acted with an intent to defraud."

Blanche argued that Michael Cohen did legal work for Trump in 2017, making his invoices for legal services -- which he submitted for reimbursement of the Stormy Daniels payment -- legitimate requests for payment.

"Cohen was rendering services to President Trump in 2017 as his personal attorney," Blanche argued, highlighting parts of Cohen's testimony about his role and work for Trump.

Cohen testified that he served as Trump's personal attorney for free, but Blanche is attempting to suggest that the invoices at the center of the case were Cohen's way of getting payment in 2017.

"Cohen lied to you. Cohen lied to you on direct examination," Blanche said.

"It's a paper case," defense attorney Todd Blanche says. "This case is not about an encounter with Stormy Daniels 18 years ago. An encounter that President Trump has unequivocally and repeatedly denied ever occurred. It's not even about a settlement in 2016," Blanche said.

"The bookings were accurate. And there was absolutely no intent to defraud," he said. "And beyond that, there was no conspiracy to influence the 2016 election."

Starting a PowerPoint showing the evidence, Blanche quickly seeks to made the case a referendum on the credibility of Michael Cohen, telling jurors he lied on the witness stand.

"You cannot convict President Trump of any crime beyond a reasonable doubt on the words of Michael Cohen," Blanche said.

"He told you a number of things on that witness stand that were lies, pure and simple," Blanche continued.

"The words that Michael Cohen said to you on that stand -- they matter. He took an oath, he swore to tell the truth, and he told you a number of things on that witness stand that were lies, pure and simple," 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."