CNN's John Miller joins us now.

John, what's the purpose of today's interview?

What did the probation officer likely ask the 45th president?

So the purpose of today's interview is for them to prepare a PSR or a pre-sentence report for the judge.

This is basically where the probation department, which could in today's meeting have included the commissioner, a couple of senior members, maybe a social worker, but it's where the probation department meets with someone who's going to come for sentencing and they ask questions about family background, financial status, living situation, a lot of basic questions which coming from Donald Trump would have not the usual answers they get from their common defendant.

But what they do is they write up their report and they submit it to the judge basically saying, is this person a good candidate for what they call community corrections, which means being supervised on the outside rather than in jail or in prison.

Will Trump's interview or was Trump's interview likely different from the average probation client do you think?

Well, yes.

Our understanding is that the interview was scheduled for around 3.30 this afternoon.

It can usually take an hour or two, so that interview may still be going on as we speak.

But the average client, they're looking to ask about family history.

His family history isn't the average family history, education, criminal background.

So he doesn't have a criminal background except he will have to explain to them that he has three open felony cases pending in other jurisdictions, two special counsel, one in Georgia, what's his employment history, he's always worked for his dad or himself, substance abuse issues, medical conditions, financial status, I'm a billionaire, where do you live, in a big tower with my name and gold letters on it, in a triplex penthouse.

So it'll be unusual.

That said, this is the Manhattan DA's office, it's the New York City Department of Probation.

This will not be the first white-collar defendant they've brought in who's a millionaire, but it is unusual because it will be the first person they've ever brought in who was a former president of the United States and running to get that job again.

Right.

He worked for his dad, he worked for himself, and he worked for the American people for four years also, John Miller.

That's right.

Thanks so much, appreciate it.

Let's bring back CNN's Eli Honig.

How does this pre-sentencing report weigh into the judge's sentencing decision?

So ordinarily, PSR's pre-sentencing reports can be influential.

Judges want to know a bit more about the person, but in this case, what's not known about Donald Trump, and I doubt Judge Mershawn is going to be much persuaded by this, I mean, this is a decision that he and he alone will make and he has to live with.

He knows that this will be his mark in the historical record books.

I don't think he's going to give all that much credence to whatever probation recommends.

I think it's going to be on him.

When it comes to sentencing, what do you think the defense is going to recommend?

What do you think the prosecution is going to recommend?

So the defense is certainly going to ask for a non-custodial sentence.

They're going to ask for some combination of probation or a fine or maybe community service.

A healthy majority of people convicted of this exact crime do get non-incarceratory sentences in New York, somewhere between 70 and 90 percent.

I also think the prosecution is going to ask for imprisonment, and I think, first of all, because there are aggravating factors here that make this worse in the prosecution's opinion, your typical falsification of records.

He broke the gag order 10 times.

Breaking the gag order, his open contempt for the judge in the process, the fact that the conduct impacted an election.

I also think it's hard for the DA, as just a practical and political matter, to bring this case, get the convictions, and then say, we're fine with probation.

So I expect guessing, but I expect Alvin Bragg to ask for some sort of prison sentence.

You know, it's possible that we didn't discuss this enough because the amount was so minuscule, $35 for 15 designated to the Trump campaign, against the Trump campaign, for the Biden campaign.

But it is inherently unusual and very frowned upon for a judge to have given political donations and then not to have recused himself.

Again, the amount was small, but still, is that not grounds for an appeal in and of itself?

The judge, Mershawn, gave $35 to whatever was Act Blue or whatever, and $15 of that went to the Biden campaign, which is very much against the defendant.

Judge Mershawn did get himself what we would technically call a CYA memo.

He went to the ethics board and gave them the facts, and they said, you can stay on.

But in my view, he absolutely should have recused himself.

He should have removed himself.

I mean, it's minuscule amount, but judges are not supposed to give any amount.

He violated the rules by giving $2, forget about $35, and I would just pose the converse.

What if the judge had donated a tiny amount, $35, to Trump 2020?

And then was the judge.

Exactly.

Right.

Would people be fine with that?

I think people would be going nuts about that.

But is it grounds for...

I don't know that it quite rises to the level of reversal, because he got this opinion from the ethics board saying, you're okay to stay on if you want.

Not you have to stay on, but you can stay on.

But keep in mind, there's 40-something other judges in that courthouse who never donated, and it would have been safer.

Why would the...

I mean, what was the ethics board thinking?

I mean, it seems like, why are they giving him this allowance to give money?

The ethics board's opinion is mishmash.

It is a two-or-so-page opinion that's very conclusory.

They basically say, well, it was a small enough amount, and it was more than two years ago, to which I would say, who cares?

Why does that matter?