Prosecutor Josh Steinglass argued that Michael Cohen kept Trump in the loop because he sought Trump's credit.

"If Cohen accomplished something for Mr. Trump, he wanted Mr. Trump to know immediately," Steinglass said.

Steinglass highlighted testimony from former Trump aide Hope Hicks to highlight Cohen's credit-seeking nature.

"I didn't know Michael to be an especially charitable person, um, or selfless person. He's the kind of person who seeks credit," Hicks testified.

"Why would the defendant be kept in the dark about the Daniels' NDA?" Steinglass asked the jury, referring to the nondisclosure agreement. "It defies common sense."

More than four hours into his summation, Prosecutor Josh Steinglass returned to the timelines of the Karen McDougal and Stormy Daniels payoffs.

Steinglass argued that Cohen attempted to delay the Stormy Daniels payment until after the 2016 election at the direction of Trump.

"You think Cohen would have the audacity to take that chance without the defendant saying so?" Steinglass said. "Cohen did that -- that strategy of delay -- because that's what the defendant told him to."

"There is just no way -- no way -- that Cohen wouldn't have told Mr. Trump about Daniels during that phone call. Why wouldn't he have?" Steingless said.

"Is this timing just all a coincidence, every single one of these things? Mr. Trump was being kept abreast of every development."

"Michael Cohen is not some rogue actor here," Steinglass said. "He is acting at the direction of the defendant."

After the parties returned to the courtroom following the final break, Judge Merchan told prosecutor Josh Steinglass he needs to wrap up his summation by 8 p.m.

"You've been going for four hours now, and the jury has been clear they need to go by 8 o'clock," the judge said.

"Thanks for sticking with me," Steinglass told the jury before diving back into his closing argument.

After Michael Cohen implicated Trump in the hush money scheme in August 2018, Trump was "furious," prosecutor Josh Steinglass told the jury.

"His fixer had done the unthinkable, and Trump immediately went on the attack -- an attack that continues to this day," he said.

Steinglass showed a tweet Trump posted the following day: "If anyone is looking for a good lawyer, I would strongly suggest that you don't retain the services of Michael Cohen!"

"This is the day after he pled guilty," Steinglass said.

Steinglass argued that Trump's tweets after Cohen pleaded guilty in 2018 were warning messages to other potential witnesses who could cooperate against him.

"These tweets were not only designed to punish Cohen," Steinglass said. "Cooperate or you will face the wrath of Donald Trump," was the message they conveyed.

Steinglass described a "vexatious and punitive lawsuit" Trump filed against Michael Cohen and a defamation suit against Stormy Daniels as evidence of his punitive means against people who epoks out against him.

After a series of sustained objections regarding Trump's tweets and their alleged impact on Cohen's safety, Judge Merchan smiled and told the jury, "This might be a good time to take our last recess of the day."

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."