it is now every day you are addressing something no one has seen before. the great joy and great sorrow of watching the news or re reporting it. >> there is more of this tomorrow, anderson, and also more tonight, so, we'll turn things over to dana bash and erin burnett. ♪ good evening, everyone. i'm erin burnett. >> and i'm dana bash. our breaking news tonight, the federal indictment of donald trump. the first time in american history that a former president has faced federal charges. donald trump has been indicted in the classified document investigation and charged with seven counts. at least one will be a

conspiracy charge, according to a source. trump's team does not expect charges to be unsealed tonight. another source said, but in a video, he takes aim at the justice department. >> it's called election interference. they're trying to destroy a reputation so they can win an election. that's just as bad as doing any of the other things that have been done over the last number of years. >> well, there he is, lashing out, the former president says he's been summoned to appear at the federal courthouse in miami on tuesday afternoon. and in a statement, he says it's a dark day in america, something everyone should be able to agree with, regardless of how you see this, but then he goes on to insist that he's innocent. >> i'm an innocent man. i did nothing wrong. >> i want to bring in evan perez, our senior justice correspondent, to begin our coverage here, and evan, you know, the trump team saying they haven't yet seen the full indictment. there's a lot we still don't know, but a lot minute by minute that you're learning.

>> that's right, erin. we know just in the last hour, certainly from the trump attorneys, that they have received this summons, which shows essentially a basic charge sheet. seven charges, according to them. we're told, according to them, that one of them has to do with the 793, which is the espionage act. one of those is 1512, an obstruction of justice charge. there's a witness tampering charge, according to the list they provided. conspiracy, again. those are among the charges that we're aware of, according to the trump attorneys. and the idea at this point right now, erin, is that late this evening, the former president's legal team was notified that there had been an indictment in miami, and he is set to appear on tuesday, 3:00 p.m., at the federal court for his first appearance with a federal magistrate. we know that frankly this was something being held very tightly by jack smith, the

special counsel and his team. law enforcement officials who are going to be in charge of trying to secure the president, secure that courthouse and secure the judges, were caught offguard by this. t they were not notified until after the former president had gone public with this information on truth social. and we can talk a little bit more about that, i mean, it cease something that, you know, i am a little surprised that the justice department is allowing the former president to set the narrative of exactly what the special counsel has done. >> yeah. >> at the end of this investigation, it's almost like they didn't learn anything from last august when the former president was the first to tell publicly that his house had been raided at mar-a-lago, and then, for the next few days, spin out lies about exactly what had happened. including allowing for threats against the fbi agents that carried out the search. >> and to that point, evan, right, they're coming out, he broke this before the justice department, they're talking about the summons.

when do we all get to see the actual indictment, the charge, how does this happen from here? obviously, he's appearing, as you said, on tuesday at 3:00 p.m., but when, if, how do we all see the actual indictment? >> well, someone has to go to a judge and ask the judge to unseal that indictment. again, we don't know exactly when this grand juror when the grand jury returned that indictment, we saw a lot of activity inside that courthouse today, trying to figure out what was happening, we saw there was activity in the grand jury room, but we don't know if that grand jury returned that indictment today. >> so, what we know is that beginning tomorrow morning, certainly, someone, perhaps the justice department, will go and ask the judge to unseal the indictment. jim trustee told kaitlan collins last hour they hope they can see it before tuesday. that's the truth. until the justice department or

until a judge unseals it, we don't know what the special counsel is alleging against the former president. we don't know the seriousness of these charges until then. >> and that's unbelievable, right? as you said, just because something fills empty air. something fills it and maybe it's better to let the facts and the truth of that fill it than speculation. all right, evan, thank you so much. i mean, dana, it is incredible to think, here we are, we know so much, and yet, we still know so little. and we don't know when this information is all going to come out. >> no, absolutely. and the fact that, as we heard from one of donald trump's attorneys, even they haven't seen the indictment yet, they have just gotten word about it. i want to -- the notion of donald trump and what his team is hearing, i want to go to cnn's kristen holmes. you have done some reporting, you are still doing reporting as we speak, what are you hearing from inside trump world? about how he's doing, and what they are hearing? >> well, right now, it's starting to wind down.

there was a lot of excitement and concern over the last several hours as this began to unfold and as you noted, look, this is still sealed. no one that i've spoken to in trump's political world has actually seen this indictment. they have just heard from attorneys what this looks like. this is something that they were not taken by surprise when it happened, but yet, it is still shocking nonetheless, given the fact that the former president, unprecedented move, has been indicted by the department of justice. and as we've been reporting most of today, donald trump himself was starting to tell people that he believed he was going to be in indicted. i talked to a number of senior advisers who said, yes, we think this is going to happen. his team was preparing for this moment. they have had a call with the lawyers, but just as jim said, they don't have all of the information yet, and sources are telling me that they aren't expecting this to be unsealed tonight or possibly even

tomorrow morning. they are still trying to piece together what exactly trump's reaction is going to look like. yes, he put out this video, but what does this look like in a larger sense? when does he go down to florida? he has two campaign events on saturday. he's going to north carolina and to georgia. i am told by officials none of that is going to change. so, the question is, how exactly does he address this? is he going to bring this up? is he going to give remarks on tuesday after he goes down to miami? is he going down to my iami in person? i want to note, our colleagues are talking to trump advisers who say they are jacked up, they are ready for this -- and i do believe that there is a faction of trump's world that does feel that way, they feel energized, they feel like this is going to give them the same boost in the polls that they saw from the manhattan indictment, the same boost in fund-raising -- but i will note, there are a number of

people around him who are very serious and very professional this cycle. and they do not feel that way. the people that i have talked to who say they're not sure that this is an ultimate positive, that the entire way they believe that donald trump can win the election is by broadening his base, and getting an indictment in this federal investigation is not a way to broaden his base. so, something to keep in mind that, well, yes, this could, in fact, energy his base, could bring in fund-raising dollars, boost up his poll numbers, there are still people who support donald trump who don't think that this is a positive when it comes to an actual 2024 election. >> yeah, we used the word ultimate. it is the age old question about the short-term versus the long-term in politics, the primary versus the general election. and they are very, very different, but clearly, he feels, you know, he needs to win the primary first and that's who he's playing to. >> first and foremost, primary. >> absolutely. kristen, thank you so much. on that note, i want to bring in

manu raju. manu, many of the president's allies are rallying against this indictment, rallying on his behalf, including the speaker of the house. tell me what you're hearing? >> yes, rushing to his defense, similar to what happened in the new york case. even after -- before they had seen any details of the indictment in the new york case, before they've seen any of the details in this federal indictment, saying that the justice department is wrong, calling it a witch hunt, calling it a sham investigation and vowing to use the power of the house gop majority, in their words, to hold the administration accountable. that's what speaker mccarthy just said in a tweet moments ago, going after this indictment, calling it a dark day in american history. he says that republicans stand with president trump against what mccarthy says is a, quote, grave injustice. he goes on to say house republicans will hold this brazen weaponization of power accountable. now, it's not entirely clear what he means by that.

some folks in the far right of his conference want him to go as far as calling for defunding or dismantling the justice department. that's not rhetoric mccarthy has embraced. but they have done other things to go after investigations. including, they have already gone after the new york prosecutor in that case, trying to call him to come and testify on capitol hill, to try to suggest that that was a politically motivated investigation. expect the same to happen here. it's unclear exactly what, at this point, but dana, there is a serious divide within the ranks of the republican party. we have not heard anything from senate republican leader mitch mcconnell, or his number two, john thune. mcconnell is publicly neutral in this campaign, but he wants to move past the trump era. as does john thune, who supports senator tim scott. yet to weigh in on this issue. showing the persistent divide within the party over donald trump, and also, dana, most members are gone that -- really nobody left here in the capitol tonight.

they are not here until next week. the people speaking out are the vocal ones. a lot of them are quiet, waiting to see the details to weigh in if they weigh in at all. >> manu, thank you so much for that. we can hear the echoes in the halls there. and erin, what we just read, it is from the house speaker, i think, to me, the most striking part of it is, it is unconscionable for a president to indict the leading candidate opposing him. that just frames it exactly the way that republicans will be doing it, not that this is something that is happening to a former president, but to somebody who wants to be president again. making it a political -- alleging that it's political. >> absolutely. and saying the president is doing it as opposed to a special counsel, right, who was given those powers, of course. thank you, dana. let's get reaction from ty cobb, former trump white house lawyer. i know we've talked a lot during this. you heard manu and dana talking

there. i know your contacts told you that this was probably ready, it could happen today or tomorrow, here we are. you were right. as -- what stands out to you most here? and i guess i'd like to start with, if possible, the seemingly, sudden switch from washington toll south florida. do you have a theory on that? >> yes, i do. i think there's some, you know, there have been complaints made by the defense counsel about some procedural issues that they view as misconduct, which the justice department apparently does not believe rises to misconduct. there's been a lot of exchange of legal theories, there have been logistical discussions. think it's likely that in the course of that back and forth that justice department as it firmed up the evidence and consi

considered where the charges should actually be brought, reconsidered some of the venue issues -- i think they -- i think they have venue in d.c., but i can understand that there are arguments that might delay the venue decision that forces it to go through a hearing and an appeal and that by bringing it in florida, they sort of bulletproofed themselves from that, because obviously that's where the bulk of the activity in terms of the unlawful possession and obstruction occurred. >> does it speed it up? it sounds like you are getting rid of some of the delay. does it speed it up enough, that this could get it before the election by doing it in south florida. >> that's an excellent question. i know that's on everybody's mind. i think, you know, as we've talked over the course of the

last year, this is -- this is right up against the line at which it is conceivable that it could get to trial before the election. i think had they waited until september or later, that would have been very difficult, but i think by a, bringing it in florida, b, limiting it to seven counts, which i think is, you know, very prosecutorial, very professional, very intelligent approach, unlike, you know, bringing 34 charges or however many were brought in new york. but having seven counts tied together, blending in the unlawful possession and use of the classified documents, along with the obstruction efforts that were made to prevent the archives and the justice department from receiving those

documents, i think that's a smart approach. i think that also speeds things up. i think from the description that jim gave, and i appreciate his passion on that, but from the description of what he gave, it sounds like a pretty -- pretty lucid approach to -- to the indictment. we still don't know exactly what's in it. we hear a lot about, you know, public interest and, you know, the poor president not having a copy, but the reality is, he's not entitled to a copy. nobody's entitled to a copy until arraignment. i think they'd like to work out a circumstance where they could maybe make an agreement with the president and his counsel to share the indictment with him ahead of time on the condition that the president's team wouldn't leak it, but we'll see how that develops over the weekend. >> all right, well, ty, thank you very much.

i appreciate that. and let's go straight out to our panel here in new york. ryan goodman, former flag prosecutor, elliott williams, scott jennings, and the former democratic congressman mon dare jones. let's just start here on the legal side. the point, interesting, ryan, that ty is saying, by doing it the way they did it, by evaluating even though he felt that they would ultimately prevail in washington, evaluating the push-back, it will be faster to do this in south florida that speed seemed to be part of it. that it is possible, possible, that this could get through the system prior to the election. >> i think that's right. and before this point, if you were to have asked me, what is trump's strongest legal argument, i would have said venue. from they brought it in d.c. that would be the place that he could make an argument and a challenge that they brought it in the wrong jurisdiction, which could end up in the entire case being thrown out. >> the risk of it being thrown out, if you win, you just burned a lot of time. >> exactly. exactly. so, that now -- now they've

taken that off the table. it's in florida, strongest legal argument that that is exactly where it should be brought. there's no venue challenge that's going to come up of bringing it in florida. >> and obviously, we know, obviously we haven't seen it, we know from jim and from cnn reporting, you've got espionage, witness tamper, and conspiracy, among what's referenced in the summons that they got. but you know, interesting, as ty says, seven charges seems to be very specific, very buttoned up, very tight. though, when i hear, witness tampering, espionage, conspiracy, all in there, with presumably obstruction, that's a lot in a few counts. >> it's a lot in the few counts. i want to be careful and clear here. when we sees s espionage act, not the cloak and dagger trench coats and sort of spying, but it's the mishandling and retention of information that could harm the defense interests of the united states. that's probably what was charged

here and not sort of specific spying. now, conspiracy is something quite concerning, because that's an indication, in order to be charged with that, or convicted with it, you formed an agreement with another person to commit to break the law and took and act in furtherance of breaking the law there. so, there's probably one other person, at least who came to some agreement with the former president or acted at the direction of the president to break the law. >> i don't want to just play 20 questions, but we don't know the answer to begin with, but that could be anybody from person moving the boxes to mark meadows, what immunity he had, we don't know who that quote unquote conspirator is and what deal was reached. but it could be anybody in that gamut. >> it could be. jim said something very interesting in his interview with kaitlan collins, she basically said, what about the fact that, do you know of anybody else who is being indicted, and he said, we're not aware of it, and i have a theory. she says, what is your theory? he maps out this argument that does seem to point the finger at

the porter, the body man moving the boxes in and out, who said he moved the boxes in and out at trump's direction. and he said, basically, he's trying to make this argument that the doj engaged in misbehavior that could have changed the equation in that other case, that is the walt case, and he's suggesting that's why walt is not being charged tonight, and that might be the other conspirator. so, that could be at least one of them. because it's two or more. and it could mean what he's saying there, not being charged means he is cooperating. >> and one more thing. another charge that's being talked about is false statements. it's not -- and that would be a false statement made to law enforcement or a government official, right? it's not clear that the former president spoke to any law enforcement, but he might have directed somebody and tried to influence the words they provided to somebody else, which can get you charged with false statement. >> all these possibilities in here. as i said, seven charges.

you could go, okay, that sounds like a lot, and a limb, ttle, b you already hear their arguments, you already see their arguments against it, desantis saying -- >> well, the word of the night for the republican party is weaponization. and you are broadly seeing the republican party leadership rally around and circle the wagons around donald trump. house speaker kevin mccarthy, ron desantis, other presidential candidates, lots of members of congress, i think there's going to be a tremendous amount of pressure in the u.s. house, and you're already seeing vague promises. we are going to hold the department of justice accountable. what does that look like? you know, does that look like funding -- >> code for defund. >> impeaching the attorney general? and i think trump is going to want to encourage that, but this word, weaponization, this is a key argument that trump is making and will continue to make, that your government is being weaponized against you if you are a republican. >> so, what fills the air space between now and when we actually see this indictment, which could be several days? i mean, this is what you're

going to get, but this is it? >> yeah, look, i think you'll continue to see allegations of weaponization of the department of justice by my former republican colleagues in the house. the irony, of course, is that nothing could be further from the truth. i mean, this is a department of justice that clearly isn't politically astute enough to even issue a statement to get its own position out there in terms of what it did today with the indictment. it is ironic, though probably not surprising, that we will see, i think, house republicans move forward with continued talk of defunding the fbi and defunding the apartment of justice, despite having spent years running campaigns against democrats falsely accusing them of wanting to defund law enforcement. >> the irony there. all right, dana, it is amazing to think that it could be, and maybe somehow it comes out tomorrow, right, or maybe we're still sitting here having the same conversations around the edges of conspiracy, or espionage, in a few days.

>> it very well could be, if we don't end up seeing this until tuesday. i want to go, erin, to mar-a-lago, that is where cnn's randi kaye is, and randi, there's a small crowd of trump supporters gathering there. what are you seeing? >> dana, they've been gathering here for the last couple hours or so since news of the indictment broke. we're on the bridge which overlooks mar-a-lago, known as southern boulevard, and this is where the protesters come, whether donald trump is here or not, as we know, he's in new jersey tonight. but there has been a small group of supporters, you can see here behind me, that have been gathering here tonight. very, very peaceful. there's police in the area, as well, making sure that it remains peaceful. i spoke to some of them earlier, and they were basically saying that they think that this indictment is only going to make the former president stronger, going to make his campaign stronger, they believe it's a witch hunt, as we know, that's a word the former president likes to use. they called it political garbage, and they truly believe that this is not going to impact his campaign or a possible win

in the election at all. now, also, i should note, there were plenty of people driving by honking their horns, yelling out their windows, saying "lock him up." not everybody here is a supporter. but this is ground seooer zero. this is where the 15 becomeses of documents were removed. 300 documents marked as classified removed from here. but when you speak to supporters about the former president, they don't want to hear anything about it. one said they believe it was all planted. dana, back to you. >> randi kaye, thank you. we have much more to come on our breaking news. the first time in u.s. history a former president has faced federal charges. donald trump indicted in the special counsel's classified documents investigation. documents investigation. stay with us. i don't have it. i don't have it. - keep going. - we should've used behr. yeah. today let's paint. right now, get a america's most trusted paint brand atat a new low price starting at $28.98. behr. only at the home depot.

the first time you connected your godaddy website and your store was also the first time you realized... well, we can do anything. cheesecake cookies? the chookie! manage all your sas from one place with a partner th always puts you first. (we did it) start today at godaddy.com meet gold bond healing. a powerhouse lotion that moisturizes, heals, and smooths dry skin. with 7 moisturizers and 3 vitamins, you can pay more but you can't get more. gold bond. champion your skin.

you go by lots of titles. veteran, dad, hair stylist. so adding a student title might feel daunting. national university is here to support all your titles. national university. supporting the whole you. ahhh! icy hot pro starts working instantly. with two max-strength pain relievers, so you can rise from pain like a pro. icy hot pro.

♪ neither snowcapped mountains, nor puddles of water, nor unexpected detours with a 20 foot drainage pipe, can stop the ruggedly capable telluride x-pro from getting you to your dinner reservation on time. okay! ♪ kia. movement that inspires - representative! - sorry, i didn't get that. - oh buddy! you need a hug. you also need consumer cellular. get the exact same coverage as the nation's leading carriers and 100% us based customer support. starting at $20. consumer cellular.

breaking news tonight. former president donald trump has been indicted in the social counsel's classified documents probe. he is set to appear in miami on tuesday afternoon at 3:00 p.m. we're in miami tonight. and kara, what are you learning and, obviously, between now -- it may be until then, we have to wait until then, to actually have this not under seal. >> yeah, erin, it's the big

question, will prosecutors ask the judge to unseal this indictment between now and tuesday. and if they don't, then on tuesday, when he's appearing in court, that might be the first time that we learn what the specific charges are, and in the case of a loft oft of these indictments, it will go through in some kind of narrative tomorrow what the prosecutors allege the former president had done to violate the law. a lot more we would lean once the document is unsealed. on tudesday, as we wait for tha, this will be just like any other arraignment. the former president will come in, he will self-surrender to the fbi. they will process him and then he will appear before a judge here and be asked to enter a plea in this case. now, the big question also here is, what will that look like here? you know, will this be in the ceremonial courtroom, will it be in the judge's -- the judge who is randomly assigned to this case, will that be a trump appointee, will it be someone

appointed by a democrat, we don't know how that's going to play out. but then he will make his appearance. as we saw in new york just a few months ago when he made thiat appearance in the state court, that was a big security undertaking. a lot of precautions they took. but they tried to get him through the actual process, turning himself in and then actually going into the courtroom and going through that proc procedure, they tried to do that as quickly as possible, given just the security risk he faces being out there, and issues it causes to the city, because of the lockdowns and the security parameters they take. so, you know, that will be the next steps here. so, the next thing will be on tuesday, and then he will come in and enter a plea to these charges, and then, you know, usually in those -- this an arraignment, you do get some additional discussion about what kind of discovery they have, so time sometimes you can learn about the evidence they collected, how much of it is -- how much

they've turned over, so, all these other little details that sometimes come out that we'll be looking for on tuesday. erin? >> all right, kara, thank you so much. and dana, it's amazing. kara is talking about that, to think about the former president, you know, again, having to turn himself in, he just had to do that in new york. now here we are, unprecedented take two. there was being found guilty, right, in the defamation case with e. jean carroll. it's pretty stunning. >> it is, and, of course, that was on the state level. this is on a federal level, which is a whole different ball of wax, as they say. and on that, i want to bring in john miller to talk about the secret service, meeting with staff this morning, beginning security planning for the former president's indictment. so, before we talk about security, i should also say, you are cnn's intelligence analyst and cnn chief law enforcement analyst. on the charges first, john, what is your takeaway from the

little, really, that we know so far? >> well, we know it's a seven-count indictment, we are told there's a conspiracy count there, that is particularly important, because a conspiracy count means that the person charged in the case conspired with another. that could suggest, as was discussed a minute ago, that someone else could be charged, or it could suggest that someone else is going to testify that they conspired with the former president to obstruct justice by moving, hiding, or otherwise shifting these documents around to avoid discovery. you know, the most likely charge we're looking at here is title 18, u.s. code section 1924, because it speaks to the actual mechanics and component pieces of the investigation. it's about any unauthorized person who knowingly removes with intent to retain at an unauthorized location, those are three points of the investigation, classified documents about the united

states defense. and we've seen other cases involving government officials with the same charges, notably the airman up in massachusetts, another air force suspect in florida. this seems to be the go-to charge for the moving parts of this case, dana. >> and this is thes peonage act? >> this is under the espionage act. so, you have, you know, a secret service detail that only found out tonight that they are to -- to basically produce their protectee in the southern district of florida at a hearing at 3:00 on tuesday. to face these charges. this was held very closely. >> and what does that tell you about how law enforcement, secret service and outside law enforcement agencies, are going to handle this on tuesday? >> well, the eadvantage is, it' not -- as we were just talking about a minute ago, it's not unprecedented. it's a drill they've been through in a state court.

this will mirror that. you're going to have the former president brought to a federal court, he's going to go through what we would call an arraignment, in the federal court, it is a presentment. he's going to be released on his own recognizance in that he's going to be judged not a flight risk, but at that proceeding is the place where most likely they will unseal these charges, and we will get the first look on what is the breadth and the story behind them. >> john miller, thank you so much. and here with me now in washington, cnn chief legal analyst, laura coates, legal analyst kerry cordero, abby phillip, and andrew mccabe. thank you all for staying up late on this -- another history-making night. laura, i want to start with you. as you are sitting here sort of consuming all of this, i want to know what's going through your

mind, given your legal background. >> well, let's take a step back on the extraordinary nature of the fact that we have a former president being charged, but i'm not going to get hung up on the fact that it's a former president. what i'm focused on is the conduct, that somebody previously had the authority to retain classified documents as a person who had that legal authority. and doubled down and retained them, according to what we presume to be the willful retention of that. there will be a lot of focus going forward, well, what does this say about our country, other democrats have held their former leaders to account. but what does it say about america to have this moment? well, what would it say about our country if we allowed laws to go unchecked? if we had a notion that people were above the law, if they were no longer the head chief officer in the country? so, i'm focusing in that realm, but i'm going back to this moment that was also extraordinary. a former president's attorney was allowed to testify at the grand jury. was allowed to give evidence on

conduct. i have an eye towards that, when i'm looking to figure out what evidence jack smith had, what is the evidentiary basis -- >> it's so unusual for people, who don't know. >> it's so unusual. >> for a -- to allow for attorney/client privilege to be breached. >> to be pierced in this way. we want forthright, candid conversations. we certainly want them with our attorneys. so, if an attorney is allowed to speak about the nature of conversations and the substance, because the federal court has said, wait, there's an exception here, it's called crime fraud. i'm not going to let you shield yourself because you're an attorney to say, you can't tell me anything. that was the moment i think this became a kind of foregone conclusion. >> i just want to pick up on one thing you said, laura, at the beginning, which is that you want to look at this as a person -- >> a person. >> an american citizen, but not necessarily a former president.

we know that's not necessarily how they look at it, and andrew mccabe, you are the only person that has experience, not necessarily with the former president, but with a very high profile figure, and that is a presidential candidate. he -- there has to be a different lens through which you look at a case like this, because he is a former president, and a candidate again. >> you know, not in the way that laura was just speaking. not when it comes to examining the conduct. that lens should be the same for former president trump or anyone else who engaged in this, you know, it would be impossible for anyone but a former president have the authority he had to classify and declassify documents, to lose that authority, and then to continue to retain the documents. so, the fact pattern here is pretty specific. but nevertheless, when you are investigating this alleged activity, you have to look at it through that lens of, what did this person do and how does that conduct stack up against the law? certainly, now when we're talking about a presentment,

arraignment on tuesday, there are security concerns, how do you transport this person, how do you handle them, there are all places where it's perfectly reasonable to think about this soon to be defendant as a former president, and the unique considerations that come along with transporting and securing him. but when it comes to presenting that evidence to a grand jury, having a group of your fellow citizens sit in judgment as to whether or not there is probable cause to hold you accountable for a crime, you should be seen the same as any other citizen in that context. >> i don't mean to suggest he's going to be held to a different standard when it comes to the law and the facts and the evidence, but when it comes to approach and being really buttoned up. >> hey, there's no question. any high profile case that you know is going to receive this level of scrutiny, you want to beperfect. you want to have every detail taken care of. we also know that being perfect

in a large, wide-ranging, broad investigation is impossible. and over the course of this litigation, i'm sure we'll see arguments about things that the department of justice allegedly should have done better or have been more careful about. that happens in every single case. at the end of the day, the question is, do the prosecutors convince a jury of americans that there is -- beyond a reasonable doubt, that president trump committed these offenses? that's at the end of the day the only standard that matters. >> and it's not the first time we will be asking that question of this particular former president. i mean, that's what also makes this unprecedented and historic in probably all the bad ways. this is a current candidate, former president, who now faces several indictments, and many more, potentially, to come. it's a pattern of conduct, some of which is alleged, others, you know, in the case of the e. jean

carroll case, has been found by a jury to -- for him to be liable for that. but it's a pattern of conduct here that has put him in this position so many times. that's incredibly unusual. and that's actually what really undercuts the argument from a lot of his allies that this is all just a grand conspiracy. you know, donald trump was president once. if he wanted to bring charges against any number of his political allies, if it were so easy, he could have done it, if their conduct created the environment to make that possible. i just think it's so difficult to get to this point, where on so many different issues, trump is facing real investigations, real charges, real criminal liability, and that is not going to be washed away by tweets or by political spin. the voters will ultimately decide. but we just have to take a step back and look at the fact that, on documents, on sexual abuse and defamation, on the hush

money case, where georgia is coming up soon, january 6th is also coming up, there is a range and a scope here that is truly unprecedented. >> you know, what i keep thinking about all evening, dana, is that this did not have to happen this way. this case, the fact that we are at this point as a country, the fact that the former president is now facing these charges, is 100% a self-inflicted wound by him and by his team around him. there are other cases that we can look to in the national security space and mishandling of classified information, including the more recent cases of former vice president pence, where individuals make mistakes, they mishandle information, then they work with the government to fix it. and in some cases, it can mean that there's never a case that's actually brought, a criminal case that's ever brought, like the pence example, where it was

just an accident, he handled it, he reported it, they returned it, done. or there's been other cases, including a former senior high ranking national security official, where they made a mistake, they admitted it, they plead down to what is the lesser charge of, which john miller was describing earlier, section 1924 of the criminal code, unauthorized removal and retention of classified information, which is different than the set of stay ctutes und thes peonage act, and the case gets handled. a former cia director plead guilty toe a misdemeanor, faced probation, and paid a fine. so, there was a whole range of potential ways that this could have been handled. and that this could have been resolved, and i just continue to think about the fact that it didn't have to get to be this way. >> and it wasn't resolved that way, because trump, as he's said multiple times, he still to this day does not believe that the documents belong to the

government and that he had to give them back. i mean, his refusal to even contemplate that is what has brought us to this point. >> well, you know, i almost think -- i wonder if he really does not believe that, or if there is an emboldened sense that suggests, i don't have to. i have three questions for this former president. why did you take the documents? why did you keep the documents? and why do you refuse to return the documents, even though it is clear that there has not been declassification, that you have the where with all, knowledge about this. it is notinadvertent. we have to see the full reporting on this issue, but let's not forget about merrick garland, the attorney general of the united states. jack smith is the special counsel. he has authority to make prosecutorial decisions and declint nations, but under this statute, he will have to go to merrick guard land, the attorney general, with this information. garland has the opportunity to agree with the decision or decide against it, at which point, speaker mccarthy and

congress would have to be informed about the decision. so, this is not -- any talking point that suggests that there is somehow, i think the word, the imperial army of the roman empire, as if jack smith is simply that sport -- now, he's a special counsel who has certain regulations. i would really doubt, though, don't you all, that merrick garland would look at this case and say, you know what, jack smith, i will not follow your suggests, based on all that you have seen. that's going to be the next talking point to suggest that he's just a rubber stamp. >> all right, stand by, we're going to have to take a quick break, buzz we're going to be back with much more on our breaking news. former president donald trump indicted on seven counts in the classified documents investigation. what happened next? more ahead.

>> are you going to say that you didn't know there was a 911 call with kids inside the classroom? >> i all right told -- >> you are going to tell us that you didn't know there were kids inside the classroom. tell us right now -- >> there's no response. >> did you know that there were kids inside that classroom? >> there's no response. but stephanie got inspire, an implanted device that worksnside the body. there's no reason to keep struggling. inspire. learn more a view important safety information at inspiresleep.com. ♪ when you have chronic kidney disease... there are places you'd like to be. like here. and here. not so much here. if you have chronic kidney disease, farxiga can help you keep living life. ♪ farxiga ♪ and farxiga reduces the risk of kidney failure, which can lead to dialysis. farxiga can cause serious side effects including dehydration, urinary tract or genital yeast infections in women and men,

and low blood sugar. ketoacidosis is a serious side effect that may lead to death. a rare life-threatening bacterial infection in the skin of the perineum could occur. stop taking farxiga and call your doctor right away if you have symptoms of this bacterial infection, an allergic reaction, or ketoacidosis. farxiga can help you keep living life. ask your doctor for farxiga for chronic kidney disease. if you can't afford your medication, astrazeneca may be able to help. ♪ farxiga ♪ meet gold bond healing. a powerhouse lotion that moisturizes, heals, and smooths dry skin. with 7 moisturizers and 3 vitamins, you can pay more but you can't get more. gold bond. champion your skin. (vo) when someone is diagnosed with cancer, they need support. subaru and our retailers are there to help... by providing blankets for comfort and warmth and encouraging messages of hope to help support nearly three hundred thousand patients facing cancer nationwide.

we call it “the subaru love promise.” and we're proud to be the largest automotive donor to the leukemia and lymphoma society. subaru. more than a car company.

more on our breaking news tonight. former president donald trump has been indicted in the special counsel's classified documents investigation. i want to bring in a man who knows maybe just about more than anybody about a president facing stunning legal trouble, nixon white house counsel john dean.

thank you so much for joining me tonight. i kept thinking, as i knew i was going to talk to you, about the sort of famous line, it's not the crime, it's the coverup. obviously, this is just an allegation here, but it's sort of the same idea of, we were talking before the break, about mike pence and others having classified documents, returning them, in the case of mike pence, just week before last, him being cleared, and donald trump is facing a very different set of challenges and an indictment. >> very true, dana. this is a perfect example of somebody who just kept digging a hole deeper and deeper. it was really kind of surprising, but it points back to what might have been the original intent, which is to take these documents, to keep them and use them for his own whatever purpose, which we may or may not ever learn.

so, i think there is a difference in this wasn't pure cov cov coverup, initially, wanted the documents. >> let's talk about the way the doj has handled this so far. and the question of informing donald trump and his attorneys and keeping the indictment under seal until tuesday. what's your view on the way that they're doing it, given how high profile this is, given how very political it is, since he's donald trump and he's also a candidate for president? >> yes, my initial reaction was that the department seemed to have blown it, because why didn't they put out an announcement of some kind, rather than let trump run with what was in the indictment? then we learned when jim was on cnn that the indictment really has not been handed down at this point, that they've been --

they've received a summons, they've got to come to court next week on tuesday, and that's when they'll unseal the indictment. at least for court purposes and it will be official at that point. now, i don't know if -- i think what might be happening, dana, given what happened with the search warrant, and the way trump handled that, they may be very reluctant to let him have a head start on this. so he cannot reframe and recast issues that are very clear in a talking indictment, which i suspect will be the case. so, i think the department has handled it well, and while i tweeted earlier, i was surprised, i'm not anymore. >> oh, that's really interesting. let's talk about the -- one of the charges -- from cnn reporting, and that is the conspiracy charge. what do they have to prove to get a conviction on just that one charge? one of seven, i believe? >> they have to prove that

there was an agreement to commit a crime, to commit action that was criminal, and that there was some step taken towards actually conducting and committing that crime. it's a very low standard. the department of justice, federal prosecutors, love conspiracy counts. because a lot of admission of evidence might otherwise not come in -- if it comes in, they are very tough for defendants to not get caught up when they are charged with this. and justices are very careful in who they name. actually, richard nixon was named as an unindicted coconspirator, so that all his tapes could come in against his former aides. >> john dean, thank you so much. appreciate it. really interesting that you changed your view, giving more information. imagine erin, that that does happen. it's important to actually

underscore because you've been talking all night about the fact that this is just a vacuum that is being filled by the former president. and you have somebody like john dean, who says something initially, and says, wow, the doj is not handling that right, and gets more information from donald trump's lawyer, that they don't actually have the indictment. they just have a notice. and he's not -- the doj. >> right. the facts are coming in so much. it is interesting, dana -- we had our panel here, thinking, gosh, could you be in a situation where you have the front runner for the nomination, possibly the nominee, under indictment? four different indictments at the same time? it is incredible, just his take a step back here, because you get in the moment of this, one, and then we are covering, it right? and then you think, gosh, what could we be possibly be walking into? it is incredible, as we are sitting here together, watching history unfold here again on

this night. -- much more historic indictment of donald trump, and the special counsel's documents classified documents investigation. was also the first time your profits left you speechless. at the counter or on the go, save 20% with the lowest transaction fees and keep more of what you make. start saving today at godaddy.com with gold bond... you can age on your own terms. retinol overnight means... the smoothing benefits of retinol. are now for your whole body. plus, fast-working crepe corrector diminishes wrinkled skin in just two days.

gold bond. champion your skin. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ get 2.9% apr for 36 months plus $1,500 purchase allowance on a 2023 xt5 and xt6 when you finance through cadillac financial. my name is tonya, i am 42. as mother of nine kids, i think i waited this long to get botox® cosmetic because i take like no time for myself. my kids are sports kids. we're always running from one activity to another. i'm still tonya, and i got botox® cosmetic, and this is like the first thing i've done for me in a really, really long time. my life is still crazy, it's just as full as it was before. just with less lines. botox® cosmetic is fda approved

to temporarily make frown lines, crow's feet, and forehead lines look better. the effects of botox® cosmetic may spread hours to weeks after injection causing serious symptoms. alert your doctor right away, as difficulty swallowing, speaking, breathing, eye problems, or muscle weakness may be a sign of a life-threatening condition. do not receive botox® cosmetic if you have a skin infection. side effects may include allergic reactions, injection site pain, headache, eyebrow, eyelid drooping, and eyelid swelling. tell your doctor about your medical history. muscle or nerve conditions, and medications including botulinum toxins. as these may increase the risk of serious side effects. see for yourself at botoxcosmetic.com ahhh! icy hot pro starts working instantly. with two max-strength pain relievers, so you can rise from pain like a pro. icy hot pro.

the insurance company enwasn't fair.ity y ca i didn't know what my case was worth, so i called the barnes firm. llll theararnes rmrm now the best result possible. ♪ call one eight hundred, eight million ♪

>> our breaking news tonight -- former president donald trump indicted on seven counts in the special counsel's classified documents investigation. my panel is back with me. let's start here on the legal side of things. ryan goodman -- so, as we are getting more information, we are starting to kind of come through here. it seems that we are going to get some of the real parameters of this pretty quickly. that we are not going to be, necessarily, waiting until he walks into that courthouse on tuesday morning -- tuesday afternoon, i'm sorry. >> that's right. so, as the evening progresses, we are getting more and more of the charges, and there's seven. it's finite. it does seem like the headline and charges the espionage act. and the words being used are

retention. so, it just means he's being charged for keeping the documents that would pertain to u.s. national security and national defense information from the government. >> right. >> but what hasn't been said is the word dissemination, which, in some sense, is good news for the president -- president trump -- dissemination meaning he somehow got it into the hands of third parties. >> right. right. and i guess we don't know, elliott. that would be significant. because obviously one of the big pieces of information that he got in the last week was the -- where he's talking about millies -- the potential plan for an invasion of iran. >> right. >> and he's shaking around a piece of paper that may or may not have -- wish i could tell you all of it because it's classified. that, theoretically, could have been dissemination, if it had been -- but at least from what we understand now that may not be among the -- >> that would have been a separate federal defense, if it

would have been -- very serious federal offense with very serious penalties here. so -- >> it does not seem that that is on the table. >> it does not seem that that is on the table. -- >> -- you've got conspiracy, espionage, all those things. if you do not have dissemination, from a political perspective, i think your view is, that this makes it even harder to break through the political rhetoric rhetoric that we are seeing. >> yeah, i was thinking earlier, that if he had something, showing he had given it to someone earlier and -- >> for national or -- >> yeah. but then if they don't have that, you can see tonight the circling of the wagons around him, that's what you can do. republicans are doing this without having seen anything. they haven't seen -- they've seen none of the documents. so, that would probably embolden them to continue to do that. and remember the reaction after the raid, and people were saying, this is like the beginning of a civil war. this is -- the lines are drawing, there is no going back now.

that happened when the rate happened that -- this is going to be a continuation of that from the same people who started that back then. and, i mean -- it is mind-blowing to think about. this guy is going to be on trial for his life. these things carry actual jail time possibilities. and this trial -- got a georgia thing hanging out there, the new york thing, january 6th -- at what point does he start to wonder, running for president, isn't my best defense? or is my worst nightmare when it comes to keep myself out of jail? he's an elderly guy. you don't want to go to jail at that age, or at any age, really. >> -- raises questions about what he would do in this situation. because it is very likely that he is going to be facing -- he is facing multiple indictments. facing two -- it could be three, it could be for. >> yeah. it's a pandora's box with this guy. and i think the fulton county d.a. has given enough of an indication to the courts that there is an indictment