tonight, we're learning new details about the u.s. soldier is believed to be in north korean custody. the army says he is private travis king, cavalry scout who enlisted in january 2021. david secretary austin says he will fully and without authorization crossed the demilitarized zone, on a tour of what is known as the joint security area between north korea and south korea. sources tell cnn, he spent 50 days in its detention facility in south korea, before this. he was facing disciplinary action for assault. he was about to be separated from the army, he'd even been escorted to the airport to fly back to the u.s.. but he never board that plane. we'll tell you more as we learned, in that case, thank you so much for joining us tonight. cnn prime time with laura coates starts right now. >> kaitlan, thank you. good evening, everyone.

i'm laura coates. tonight, we are once again in uncharted territory in american history it appears that a former u.s. president is facing his no third indictment in a matter of days. donald trump reveals he is now a target in the special counsel investigation of efforts to overturn the election. here's the plan for tonight. we're going to methodically analyze exactly what we do know just focusing on the facts and figuring out what this might go next we've got an amazing team of reporters of experts, including the former council from one of trump's impeachments. we'll talk with a former trump white house legal adviser and get her reaction to all of this. we also have michael fanone the retired officer who was attacked on january 6th. what's happened to his insight after a target letter has been sent. and jake tapper, will join me on how trump's 2024 rivals are reacting, including an exclusive interview with florida's governor, ron desantis.

first, an avalanche of headlines it's coming in fast and furious. here is what we know, at least at this hour. trump received a letter on sunday, he's already been plotting a strategy with allies who are on the hill. prosecutors have now interviewed officials in all seven battleground states. michigan has now charged the fake electors who signed certificates falsely claiming that trump won. and in trump's second indictment over classified documents, the judge in that case saying, a trial is not likely to happen this year. trump is responding, for the first time, on camera tonight. >> i got a letter on sunday night, think of it. i don't think they've ever sent a letter on sunday night. they're in a rush, they wanted to interference. interference with the election. election interference. never been done like this in the history of our country, it's a disgrace. what's happening to our country,

whether it's the borders of the elections or kinds of things like this, where the doj has become a weapon. for the democrats, an absolute weapon. it seems that every time my polls, were leading by a lot. we're leading by a lot in a place called iowa. a lot. [crowd chanting] [applause] not only the republicans were leading against biden, by a tremendous amount. they haven't seen anything like it. they feel, i guess, they want to try and demean in diminish and fight people. they don't frighten us. we're gonna make america great again. >> let's start off with the fact that trump is a target, we know now. his own words in the january 6th investigation. joining me now to discuss, cnn legal analyst, norm eisen. you recall that he was the house judiciary special counsel in trump's first impeachment trial. norm, let's start at the beginning. a very good place to start. we're hearing a lot about target letters. what does it mean to be definitional-y a target? >> it has a technical

definition. the practical meaning is, donald trump is very shortly going to face charges as a defendant. if you look at the definition here, the elements are, is a person who the prosecutor or the grand jury has substantial evidence, a lot of evidence, that they have committed a crime. in the pot has come up to such a high boil that there are punitive defendant in the case. what >> does that term mean to people? >> it means they are extremely likely to be charged. they are currently considered as charges being imminent. so, it's a default, hey, you're gonna get charged now. very rarely, laura, i practice defense law, as you know, for 30 years. before i was impeachment counsel, the lawyer will come in and talk to government out of it. knowing, as we do here, the mountain of evidence against

donald trump, the seriousness, he said it first time in american history a former president gets a target, in the first time in american history. he's gonna get charged. that's what the target means. >> allegations, substantial evidence, probable cause before grandeur. standby, we have more to talk about on this very important issue. i want to head down to florida though, get the reaction from the trump world tonight. that's where paula reid is. paula, what are you hearing? >> laura, i was in court for about two hours during this first hearing before judge aileen cannon, it's pretty clear from what i saw today, this case is unlikely to go to trial in december. which is when prosecutor said, they would be ready to take this case before a jury. the judge seemed sympathetic to arguments from defense attorneys, that was just too soon. she called that timeline, quote, compressed. as the cases like this just take more time, especially because this involves classified information. she did not seem interested in litigating anything about how trump's candidacy for the white house would impact timing here.

instead, she is focused on getting answers from a defense attorneys about how long it will take, them to get through discovery, and at least get to the point where they might be able to discuss a possible trial date, either next year, or even later. laura? >> we'll have to see, paula, thank you so much. i want to break down with this target letter is all about. in the window that he has to respond. joining me now is brandon van grack, a national security lawyer. first of all, we have not seen the actual target letter, he's alluded to it, he's reference to it as well. this is a sample target letter of the kind that you would receive, if you were to be a defendant or a punitive defendant in an action. let's take it in bite size pieces. first, not everyone gets them. but if they have, it might look like this. walk us through the first part. telling you about what your rights will be, what you're supposed to do as a grand jury witness? >> that's right, there is one distinction i think between this simple target letter and probably what the former president got, which is what

this is saying, is explaining how the grand jury process is going to happen. but it's the implicit here is that the individual who's receiving this letter has been compelled to testify in the grand jury. i think more likely than not, with the former president got was an invitation. in fact, this sample letter comes from the department of justice's own website, that gives a sample letter, so, sometimes they're compelled, and it says this is what you're gonna do. what probably former president got, probably didn't include that specific language. >> in the language, one section of it, a notion of we advise the grand jury connected to an investigation, likely a federal crimes. of course, you cannot destroy or alter evidence if you are compelled. >> that's right. i think if we can bring that language back up, that's probably the most interesting part of the letter that the former president got. >> let's bring that up. >> used to start at the, and it actually not a footnote. what it is is an invitation for the prosecutors to include the potential charges that the former president may be accused of violating.

so, i think this line likely was in the letter. i think there's been some reporting recently, this afternoon, indicating with those potential violations were. >> let's walk through with those could possibly be. but the notion that could have some advanced notice. the third party think about these bite size pieces, of course, telling you a little bit about what might be the law and order moment of what you can say or what you will say. may be used against you, the notion of right to refuse to answer a question, that might surprise people. >> that's exactly right. the point of the target letter may be taking a step back, it's a fairness point. again, in the department of justice's own internal guidelines, it, quote, encourages prosecutors to send this letter to individuals who are about to be indicted and maybe indicted. what it saying is, again, this is i think language like this would when you hear from the former president, an invitation to testify. you do have right. you're not compelled to testify, that's exactly what this letter shows. >> finally, one last point of it. when you don't have the right to, although we know about the right to counsel, that attorney camp in the room with you in

the grand jury. >> that's correct. the >> grandeur is gonna ask you questions, you can go a step outside the grand jury room and confer. why is that significant? >> well, i think it's the reason why most individuals who receive a target letter do not in fact testifying for the grand jury. >> more than saps a corny blanket might have implications. standby please, branded, there's also another huge development today. 16 people across michigan have now been charged, and now face multiple felony counts in a 2020 fake electors scheme. we've got cnn's jessica schneider in the city of lansing, with much more on this. jessica, what can you tell us? >> laura, these are 16 republicans who allegedly tried to storm in the state capital behind me on december 14th, 2020. armed with fake certificates, falsely claiming that donald trump was the winner here in michigan, despite joe biden actually winning by 154,000 votes. at the time, those 16 were rebuffed by police. now they're facing eight counts, multiple felonies.

what could amount to decades in prison. it includes election law forgery, these are prominent republicans, current and former officials. school board member, a mayor, and now they're all facing these charges. might be others in arizona in georgia. >> might be more to come. jessica, thank. you speaking of charges, more broadly, i want to know what some of the possible ones that trump might actually face if, and of course if, he is indicted. norm eisen is back with us right now. norm, we've talked about is a great deal. what other potential charges that he might be facing? and others could actually face. i want to walk through them a little bit. you broke it down into four categories. and one of them is the obstruction of an official proceeding. talking about certification. >> this is the culmination of the events that started after the 2020 election, and ended on january 6th. different ways that prosecutors, in that target letter that

we've talked about, may choose to charge this. different statutes. the essence of the matter is, laura, donald trump's alleged, now apparently going to be charged, for a scheme to stop the certification of the electors of the rightful president, joe biden. in favor of preserving his own tenure in the white house. the official proceeding is the january 6th meeting of congress. there's a tremendous amount of evidence that donald trump took steps to interfere with that. >> we've heard from the congressional investigation on this issue. some things have happened in broad, light opener. then you've got this notion of the conspiracy. the conspiracy, the meeting of the mines, to defraud the united states government and the officials of the people. what is this a reference to? >> this was the heart of a model prosecution memo that i

wrote with them. all-star, bipartisan cast of former prosecutors. >> what does that, mean a model? memo >> in the department of justice, in order to charge donald trump, in order to generate the target letter brad to be a prosecution memo, what they call a criminal law, a cross memo, explaining, here's the charges, here's the facts, here's the evidence, here is the law. here's who did what. okay? in the core of this analysis, i think, is 18 usc, three 71. a conspiracy to defraud the united states. you can charge it in various ways, laura, the essence is simple. that's what jacques wright has to do. now he's getting ready to go to trial against donald trump. keep it simple, stupid. you have these phony electoral certificates. those people were not the duly appointed electors of the winning presidential candidate. he used those phony electors to

pressure mike pence, and then to disrupt congress. simple scheme that is defrauding the united states out of the person who really was the rightful president. >> of course, what i think about conspiracy, as we all do, we talk about a meeting of the mines, likely more than unlikely that he'd be the only person who might be charged in something like that. but then you've got this next part, i want you to dress that point as well. the possibility of an incitement, assisting or giving aid to an insurrection. this is a very serious allegation. >> it's one of the most serious allegations in american criminal law. it's also one of the rarest. prosecutors are probably thinking, and we cautioned in our model prosecution memo, prosecutors may not go there. they might look for other legal vehicles, how do you deal with an insurrection? you can say, for example, that there was a conspiracy to interfere with mike pence performing his constitutional duties. or to interfere on congress

deciding on the rightful person. at the end of the, day it all comes down to that violence of january 6th. i think prosecutors are signaling, with this target letter, they're going to hold donald trump accountable, or attempt to, before a jury of his peers. >> we shall see. that controversy were keeps coming up. norm, please stay with, me a lot more to talk about. up next, one of trump's former legal advisers in the white house is going to join me live to react. plus, republicans on the hill are calling the letter, their words not mine, bs. trump is strategizing with them. michael fanone joints to a rule this looming indictment, cnn special live coverage. gentle. it cleans better, and doesn't leave behind irritating residues. and it's gentle on her skin tide free & gentle is epa safer choice certified. it's got to be tide every day, more dog people, and more vets are deciding it's time for a fresh approach to pet food. they're quitting t kibble. and kicking the cans.

and feeding theidogs dog food that actually well, food. developed with vets. made from real meat and veggies. portioned for your dog. and delivered right to your door. it's smarter, healthier pet food. get 50% off your first box at thefarmersdog.com/realfood 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 sometimes jonah wrestles with falling asleep... ...so he takes zzzquil. the world's #1 sleep aid brand for a better night sleep. so now, he wakes up feeling like himself. the reigning family room middle-weight champion. better days start with zzzquil nights. ♪ ♪ we're reinventing our network... ...with smarter, more efficient routes... ...so you can deliver more value to your customers. fast. reliable. perfectly orchestrated.

the united states postal service. welcome to my digestive system. when your gut and vaginal bacteria are off balance. you may feel it. but just one align women's probiotic daily helps soothe digestive upsets. and support vaginal health. ♪ (upbeat music) ♪ ( ♪ ) constant contact's advanced automation lets you send the right message at the right time, every time. ( ♪ ) constant contact. helping the small stand tall.

♪ limu emu & doug ♪ what do we always say, son? liberty mutual customizes your car insurance... so you only pay for what you need. that's my boy. now you get out there, and you make us proud, huh? ♪ bye, uncle limu. ♪ stay off the freeways! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ the day you get your clearchoice dental implants makes every day... a "let's dig in" day... mm. ...a "chow down" day... a "take a big bite" day... a "perfectly delicious" day... - mm. [ chuckles ] - ...a "love my new teeth" day. because your clearchoice day is the day everything is back on the menu.

a clearchoice day changes every day. schedule a free consultation. welcome back to our special coverage, it's been a dramatic development in the federal investigation into january 6th. former president revealing himself, that he is a target of the criminal probe. i wanna bring in former trump white house associate counsel, main millman. source to the vice president restoring integrity and trust in elections. she's from the white house in 2019 through january 2021. may, welcome, i'm glad you're here. i'm eager to hear your insight tonight. you spoke about this issue, and we're talking about the potential charges. we do not know what will ultimately come, or even if they will be an indictment or when, but you have said that there should not be charges in any event. tell me why.

>> yeah, so, i expect that the charges will relate to the fake electors scheme. not storming the capitol. i don't think the charges should be brought, this is nothing to do with protecting trump. if people commit crimes that should be open to be charged. i don't think the charges are appropriate here for a couple of reasons. the first, it's not illegal to be crazy. so, jack smith is going to have to prove that trump knew that he lost the election. i just think that that's debatable, and debatable is not enough for doj to bring the weight of the federal government down on someone. yes, the fake electors scheme was farfetched. it's not illegal to believe in a farfetched legal scheme. and try to convince your vice that it's correct. obviously, unsuccessfully. >> i would hear that next point. but on that very important point you raised, the idea of crazy, are you suggesting that somehow he did authentically believe, obviously jack smith has to prove some kind of

intent to a jury, has to have at least some reference to it. demonstrated he's aware of the intent based crimes. do you think that there is evidence to suggest that maybe trump truly believed that he, in fact, did they win the election, and his pursuit was lawful? >> yeah, i mean, it's going to be tough. you have to get into donald trump's mind, something that neither you nor i could possibly do, and i've spent a lot of time with the former president. i think it's no different than most americans, where if you tell yourself something for a long enough, it really ends up being true to you. if you think the ref stole the game, it actually ends up being true, if you think you didn't send that ark-la-tex that night, and ends up being true. you can hear something in all of his advisers after the campaign said, he really did win the election. at the time, there were some basis for that. there were real lawsuits going on in pennsylvania.

eventually, that basis faded, some of the fraud allegations were brought through the court system. so, it no longer became true. but if you bought into something so fully, you do believe it. he says that he won everywhere he goes. still, currently, even though it's not helpful at all to his reelection campaign. >> that is true. then you have testimony from the likes of, for example, alyssa farah griffin spoke about his conversation with mark meadows at one point. i believe cassidy hutchinson a lead into something similar. referencing, and their statements before the january 6th congressional committee, which is a separate beast in this entire equation, to suggest that he did in fact believe or knew that he did not win. but to your point about it fading, that timeline, that chronology is very interesting to so many people. because, of course, one of the big issues here is whether they can prove that he thought so. also, how he may had conspired

or convinced others of what he was saying. i wonder, you are a part of the white house, you are there through 2021. it did you have a conversation with the former president about his belief that he won, or did not win, the election? >> so, i didn't. fortunately, that was pat philbin and pat cipollone, well known to the grand jury at this point. but yeah, certainly of tuck -- from cassidy hutchinson, there's no reason to discount that. the doj usually needs more. it's not on this hand, on the other hand, trying to figure it out, i don't know. usually, and you worked at the department of justice, you know this. the department of justice, in order to seem like a fire broke, they bring cases that are certain. that you can win. that you've got that evidence. my fear is that when you bring

a case that really seems like you just have to get into the presidents head, and it could go either way, you just not sure, you end up losing so many americans. this was my second point. this isn't gonna prevent another january 6th, if anything, it's gonna make it worse. because people feel as though the department of justice is one-sided. it's politicized. and when people lose that faith in their institutions, i think it actually is very dangerous to our republic. it makes you need to take over the government. if the wrong side gets the department of justice, they will use it against. you it creates a very high stakes, very bad situation. >> it also creates, as you're seeming to intimate, a self fulfilling prophecy on that very notion. it's interesting, of course, perception, as you know, can very well become king. how is trump unlike the average defendant. i know he's a former president,

in terms of trying to prove intent, the prosecutors all the time have to use contextual clues and circumstantial evidence if they don't have direct evidence to try to understand the mens rhea, the mind of a particular defendant. what makes this so different? the fact that politics obviously has been a big part of the conversation around this particular allegation? >> well, you know, i don't think he's different than the standard defendant in the sense that, of course, you can never actually be in anyone's mind. i would just say, you need the exact same level of intent. i struggle to see that you have that here. somebody who's been remarkably consistent, at least in the public view, that he thinks that he has won the election. and has really structured his life around it. yeah, i personally think, you know, here at this age. you should retire. he thinks, he feels it is so,

this is something that is owed to him. because he feels as though he has won this before. i really don't think you'd see, i mean, this type of behavior if he actually thought that he had lost the last election. you're absolutely right, there isn't it shouldn't be too systems of justice. which i think is part of the problem, so many republicans, 56% of republicans, no longer trust the doj or the fbi to be fair. that is, i think, catastrophic for our country. >> a stunning turn of events, especially it trickles down the electorate's perception as well. a conversation will continue, may, thank you for joining. we don't know all the answers of what the indictment or if it's happening with the charges. but the conversation is happening all across america is about whether it should, what should it be, and what the impact. thank you for joining us. >> thanks, laura. >> next, news out of the first hearing. trump's second indictment is

one over classified documents. why the judge is signaling that she won't actually hold a trial this year. stay with us. (swords clashing) -had enough? -no... arthritis. here. aspercreme arthritis. full prescription-strength? reduces inflammation?

thank the gods. don't thank them too soon. kick pain in the aspercreme. the world never stops moving... growing. evolving. it demands energy that evolves with it. meeting this challenge will take more than one solution. and more than a little time. it's the work that makes progress... possible. work that drives us, inspires us... to deliver the energy we need today - while forging new paths to the future - in ways that are affordable, reliable and ever-cleaner. that's... energy in progress. eva's about to learn her fear of missing out leads to overeating. i totally eat stuff to not miss out. and that's just a bit of psychology eva learned from noom weight. sign up now at noom.com

all, right now to donald trump's other legal troubles. trump's lawyers and special counsel jack smith's team appearing in federal court today on the mar-a-lago classified documents case. have appointed judge aileen cannon pushing back on prosecutors proposed mid december trial day. she's calling the proposed timeline, compressed. and says that cases like this, they take more time. she has yet to actually set a

trial date, if she plans to promptly issue an order on the matter. norm eisen and brandon van grack are back with me right now. normal, start with you. there is a big divide, there's the august 8th, she wanted to stay initially. the december day by the prosecutor. and then there's trump you said, after the election. was that ever realistic, after the election? >> no. >> good, one word answer. >> that doesn't mean he won't get it. this is a judge, judge cannon, who's already made a pattern of pretty far out decisions, favoring donald trump in the litigation over the search warrant at mar-a-lago. she was struck down twice by a very conservative 11th circuit appellate panel, because she's so favored him. so, who knows what she's gonna do. he shouldn't get it. >> why shouldn't he get it? >> i think it goes to the december peace. we just talked about, the end

date. the department of justice, one of the points you just pointed out, that judge cannon got into, this is a compressed timeline. most cases involving classified take information takes more than six months or to put together. >> it is true. >> what is untrue, is most of those cases, the department of justice within the first month, have all of the information ready to provide to defense council. that's where they are right now. they have provided almost all the unclassified information. they have said sitting in the courthouse is just about all the classified information. they just need to sign a protective order. it's different in the sense that normally, the department of justice isn't in such a position that they can actually go forward in such timeframe. >> they should be able to get this case to trial within a year. if you look at other complicated cases that have operated on a rocket docket, the paul manafort case, that go to trial in less than a year. in the eastern district of virginia, where i sometimes practice, they have a very rapid trial calendar. this case should be able to go, and it's of the utmost national

interest. that it does go. we know, are we gonna choose a president who is convicted of mishandling classified information? that's the whole job of a president. i >> agree, out just amend it. it does need to happen in the year. it can happen in six or nine months. if the department of justice is saying, right now, we have all the information we can provide. it shouldn't take 6 to 9 months to deal with this. >> they're providing information, what about the defense who saying, i've gotta go through everything. you may tell me everything, i've got rights to exculpatory information. i want to see the voluminous client documents. i wanna go through the footage you've given us. what about their argument? >> two pieces of that. one, the department of justice has provided them with a guide. saying yes, it's voluminous. here's what we're gonna focus on. the second piece is, that's not the way scheduling works. the defense doesn't get to review all the information and then you pick a trial date. what it is, you pick a reasonable period of time. and somebody -- those dates move. you don't put not date on the calendar.

>> that's why, she already has two strikes against her on the 11th circuit. >> the 11th circuit has a rule, if you show a pattern of partiality toward a defendant, there's no exact number, it's kind of a three strikes you're out rule. >> are we there now? without having a scheduling order? >> let's see what she says. she says an order is coming, how reasonable or unreasonable is it, there's no need to defer this case. you're right even a full year within a year it should be done six months, nine months as she pushes it to you. you can expect 11 surgeons gonna take a hard look. nothing is happening in the next year, gentlemen it's all gets an election year, don't worry there's no real timeline. more on this in a moment thank you norm eisen and removing black appreciate. joining me next, everyone, michael fanone along with donald trump's former deputy press secretary, and former fbi official, peter strzok. they'll all react to this new january 6th target letter. also, what does it say that folks like rudy giuliani haven't yet received the same letters.

we'll break that down. rmy reserve. my retirement funds allow me to enjoy what i love to do. as long as you can make an impact, why stop? ♪ (upbeat music) ♪ ( ♪ ) constant contact's advanced automation lets you send the right message at the right time, every time. ( ♪ ) constant contact. every time. helping the small stand tall. hi, i'm ben, and i've lost 60 pounds on golo.

i currently suffer from nerve damage which kept me bedridden for six months. i was very overweight and depressed. i was skeptical when i first ordered golo, but the condition i was in, i was willing to take the chance, and the chance turned out to be my lotto ticket. golo gave me back my life, and that's why i'm here. (announcer) change your life at golo.com. that's golo.com. sometimes jonah wrestles with falling asleep... ...so he takes zzzquil. the world's #1 sleep aid brand for a better night sleep. ( sfx: ding, ding, ding.) so now, he wakes up feeling like himself. ( sfx: crowd cheering ) the reigning family room middle-weight champion. ( ♪ ) get the rest to be your best with zzzquil. it's non-habit forming and powered by the makers of nyquil. better days start with zzzquil nights. and try zzzquil purezzzs melatonin gummies. 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 sales from one place with a partner that always puts you first. (we did it) start today at godaddy.com like ours is spoiling their dogs. good, real food is simple. it looks like food, it smells like food, it's what dogs are supposed to be eating. no living being should ever eat processed food for every single meal of their life. it's amazing to me how many people write in about their dogs changing for the better. the farmer's dog is just our way to help people take care of them. ♪

well, once again, their political shockwaves moving through capitol hill. donald trump revealing today, he is the target of a federal investigation into january 6th. the secret where his allies stand on this news, of course. >> that's my reaction. >> president trump will open the whole polls, it's actually surprising president biden for reelection. what do they do now? weaponize government. >> every time they indict him, his numbers go up. >> donald trump's the leader of our party. . if donald trump is gonna beat joe biden. in 2024. for a second time. >> why are they doing everything they can to prevent him for being on the ballot in 2024? i'll tell you why, because donald trump will win in 2024. and the left just are scared to

plus. >> sarah matthews former white house deputy southpaw, terry's -- justice department department the wall street journal. peter strzok, former fbi deputy assistant director, cnn law enforcement analyst and former d.c. police officer, michael fanone. i'm glad to have all of you here. there's a lot to take in. first of all, we're talking about the target letters. you've been a cop, obviously. is this an oddity that you have a target letter in general? >> i went back and went through my rolodex of criminal cases, i've probably participated maybe 100 and hundred and 50 federal court cases. i can only think of one time in which a target letter was issued. and that was an individual who held an elective office. >> what does that say? is that because of the nature of the position that you dot the, eyes the cross the t's, you have a professional courtesy of kinds? >> i think so. i think that's what it has, what's happening here.

the doj is extending every courtesy to donald trump. i don't think it really matters. who cares? can the doj issue a target letter, yes. they can. they have to? no, they don't. today she won in this circumstance? yes. that's it. other than that, i think it's just gives us fodder to talk about, in our 24 hour news cycle, which we need to -- >> here's why i disagree. here's where i think it matters. the idea of not only the crossing the tees, dotting the eyes, the notion that they are on notice. of course, if you're a notice of a potential crime, you might change your behavior in some way, or you might be somebody who is now feeding evidence in some other way. you have been investigator, when you're talking about a target letter in particular, and having this out there, should this matter? or is it the hubbub allude that he was talking about. >> i think it does matter, in some context, when you have sophisticated white collar criminals. when you public corruption

cases. when you have investigations where the person knows that the investigation is ongoing. you give them some sort of notice, they're not gonna run and destroy evidence, presumably, that's already all been gathered. at this point, again, do i think this is going to result in trump showing up before the grand jury testifying? absolutely not. i can envision him doing. it i can't envision any of his attorneys doing it. i do think it is, again, for the sort of case, for a high profile sort of white collar, public corruption type defendant, it is something consistent with practice. all it does, it takes away one potential tool for trump, his attorneys, and his defenders to try and use against doj. saying hey, look, you can give us a target letter. you're targeting him politically. it deflates that sort of attack before they can even use it. >> they do know right, anyways, wright city? republicans have been speaking about this tonight, they don't see it as a courtesy. they don't think the idea of a target letter somehow magnanimous by the doj. they think it's weaponization, 101.

>> right, to your point, we have seen trump being treated differently than other criminal defendants in the separate mar-a-lago investigation, we saw prosecutors they don't even request detention for him. they didn't seek to take his passport. they didn't put any restriction on his release. that's different. that's because jack smith and attorney general garland are very cognizant that no matter what they do it's going to be subject to attack by the right. that's exactly what we're seeing. we saw the fbi director on the hill last week, >> it's all all one long. >> that's right. it was about six or seven hours of just attacks from republicans about politically -charged investigations, and specifically, how they're treating president trump. >> on that point, is there something that's a winning campaign message or platform? the weaponization of the government has become as

readily used and heard as many other things like health care. right now, it's a conversation point all the time. is this something they ought to be focusing on? >> when you look at the past, republicans were critical of things like the russia investigation. which they thought was all a hoax, and all of that. so, they saw it as a two tiered system of justice, where trump was being targeted. if you look at this case in particular, this is very different. we're talking about donald trump potentially defying his oath of office. because he wanted to overturn a free and fair election. all because he wanted to stay in power, and couldn't except the fact that he lost to joe biden. you can be critical of things like the alvin bragg case in new york, or things like the russia investigation. but i think things like this case and the classified documents case, it's hard to say that this is a weaponization of government. also, they're gonna point to the fact, oh, he's a political candidate.

that's why joe biden's doj is going after him. the thing is, i think that donald trump jumped in the 2024 race because he wanted to use the fact that he was a candidate as a political shield. obviously, his allies are going to use that as a defense as well. i think that we need to wait and see what the facts of this potential indictment are. i think it will be strong. >> i'll put the form of the substance over it, the target letter is one thing. her comment, about her eloquent comment about the motivation in the race. but what about the perspective charges that we're talking about. the idea of conspiracy. the idea of trying to defraud. the notion of false electors. we're about 400 or so days away from the next presidential election. have there been enough lessons learned in order to avoid? this year's marking. have there been? >> are there lessons learned enough on the part of donald trump did not engage in behavior like this? absolutely not. we're in the same place we were

prior to the charges surrounding mar-a-lago. a lot of posturing on the political front, when it was apparent that charges were coming. nobody had read the indictment, i think where the same spot where the clip you played, we have a lot of the folks on the right defending trump. but when this indictment comes, and i really believe it is coming, and we get a chance to see the data in there. the detail, the actual facts that are alleged, that's going to be a very similar response in terms of people reading that. and seeing overwhelming detail, much like they did with mar-a-lago. it's one thing to posture politically now. when you have alleged facts in front of, you and i really don't think the doj is gonna bring a borderline case. when you get that set of overwhelming facts, it's gonna become much more difficult and costly, politically, to continue to defend trump. >> just a jump on that point, your question was, how they're been lessons learned with regards to the political rhetoric surrounding these types of events and whether or not that ultimately i'm assuming we are talking about is leading to violence. have we learned these lessons. i think donald trump has

learned his lessons. he does understand that this rhetoric results in violence. and that's his intention. the intention is to say these things in these very ambiguous, roundabout ways, or you can kind of say, well, just political speech and whatnot. he knows that these are, i, mean to use the phrase dog whistle is an understatement. he signaling to his supporters to go out, commit acts of violence, on his behalf, try to suppress his detractors. and prevent people from coming out and saying that what donald trump did was wrong. >> what you're -- tell you about the success of that longevity of that kind of support? >> i think it's unwavering, what we've seen is that trump has been able to build a lot of support around his two indictments. the fund raising emails came

out almost immediately, after put on truth social that he was received that letter. >> raised millions. >> he's raised millions. that's one of the most unusual circumstances about this extorting political moment that we're in. our views of these cases are so polarized, i don't know that there's anything that can sway people who wear that strongly set in their views about the justice system. in some sense, it's not just trump that's gonna be on trial here. also a test of the justice system, and, you know, for some people that's going to mean can the justice department really hold the most powerful people to account. and for the people, it's going to be well, is this an agency that's become irreparably damaged by partisanship. so, you, know it's just really hard to -- very serious test of the justice system. >> quick last word? >> i think that politically, this obviously is going to benefit him in the short term. long term, i can't see how this is gonna help him win over anyone that he either hasn't

already won over, or lost since the 2020 election. i think that independents are going to be outraged by this. it's radioactive for them. we saw the 2022 midterms, candidates who were talking about stolen election lies and pushing all of those fraud claims lost. so, if donald trump is still out there talking about this, and this is gonna dominate the news cycle because of the looming indictment and then when it does potentially drop, that's all that him and the other candidates are going to be talking about. i think that americans want to be talking about the other issues that actually matter to them. >> everyone, thank. you standby, i'm glad you're here. up next, jake tapper. he'll join dana's exclusive interview with one such candidate hoping to get that rnc nomination. florida governor ron desantis. plus, a surprising development in one of america's most notorious cold cases. a search warrant involving the murder of tupac shakur.

julian's about to learn that free food is a personal eating trigger. no, it isn't. (sigh) yes, it is. and at's just a bit of psychology julian learned fr noom weight. sign up now at noom.com. i've been telling everyone. the secret to great teeth... ...is having healthy gums. crest advanced gum restore detoxifies below the gum line and restores by helping heal gums in as little as 7 days. crest.

florida's republican governor ron desantis campaigning in south carolina today, even as headlines about his biggest primary rival are dominating the news cycle. cnn's own jake tapper sat down in an exclusive interview with governor desantis and he asked the governor about the news that trump is the target of the special counsel's investigation into efforts to overturn the 2020 election. >> so, i do have to ask about the breaking news today.

>> your chief competitor the front runner right now, donald trump, says he was informed that he is the target of special counsel jack smith's investigation into efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election. mr. trump has until thursday to report to the grand jury. if jack smith has evidence of criminality, should donald trump be held accountable? >> here's the problem. this country is going down the road of polite's criminalizing political differences. i think that's wrong. alvin bragg stretched the statute in manhattan. to be able to try to target donald trump most people, even people on the left, acknowledge that if that wasn't trump, that case would not have likely been brought against a normal civilian. so we have a situation, where the problem just, as the fbi, have been weaponized. against people they don't. like the number one example of that happen to be against donald trump with the russia collusion. that was not a legitimate investigation, that was being done to try to drive trump out

of office. so, what i've said, as president, my job is to restore a single standard of justice, to end weaponization of these agencies, we're gonna avenue fbi director on day one. we're gonna have a big changes at the department of justice. americans across the political spectrum need to have confidence that what is going on is based on the rule of law. that based on my political trigger. in the second thing i would say, this country needs to have a debate about the country's future. we need to focus on president biden's failures, all be able to articulate a positive mission for the future. i don't think it serves as good of a presidential election focused on what happened four years ago in january. so, i want to focus on looking forward, i don't want to look back, i do not want to see him. i hope he doesn't get charged, i don't think it'll be good for the country. at the same time, i've been focused on looking forward. that's what we're gonna do. >> jake tapper joins me now.

jake, the phrase that sticks out in my head, the idea of politicizing -- criminalizing political differences. that's not what foundationally the indictment that we've seen so far been about. what did you make of that answer we just heard. does it give primary voters a reason to choose him over trump, and all the legal woes? >> so, i then even followed up with a question, if jack smith, the special counsel, finds evidence that trump broke a law, you don't think it should be charged? i noted that jack smith, who he was painting as a partisan actor, jack smith has previously been part of the prosecution of democrats like john edwards and new jersey senator bob menendez. he stuck with this, it's basically just a republican talking point now, that they view the entire justice department as politicized. look, they look at some of the failures of the fbi, that have been acknowledged. when it comes to the russia investigation, against donald trump.

and reforms that christopher wray made, even though you heard him say he was gonna fire christopher wray. you look at the charges or the lack of serious charges against hunter biden. this is a very popular view among republican voters. and i guess that that is where they feel all these republican presidential candidates with the three exceptions will hurt chris christie and ages hutchinson. you likely have to be. -- their voters are now skeptical of all charges of donald trump. apparently, cannot be convinced, even if there is evidence, even individuals like former -- bill barr, mark esper, saying that they think these are serious charges. >> i, mean fair criticism, is always fair. as you point out, the idea of talking, point to suggest that somehow overarching, lee it's simply bad for the country to prosecute somebody who's accused of a crime. it's really one that's distinct in the political realm over anything else.

i can't help but think about the fact that desantis is legging quite for behind donald trump in recent polls. you actually asked him, point blank, about the troubles that are facing his campaign. let's listen. >> so, this issue gets into the state of the race. some of your supporters are disappointed that your campaign has yet to catch fire the way they would want. in terms of polling. one republican pollster, one who sympathetic to you, i was asking her about your campaign. she said she thought the issue was you bumped up to the beginning because voters, republican voters, saw you as a more electable conservative like trump. trump without the baggage. but then they say, as you go further and further to the right and some of these divisive social issues, that can alienate moderate, suburban moms, et cetera. republican voters see you as less and less electable. what do you say to that analysis? >> i don't think it's true. the proof is in the pudding. i took a state that had been a one-point state, and we won it by 20 percentage points, 1.5 million votes. our bread and butter where

people like suburban moms. we're leading a big movement for parents rights, that the parents be involved in education. school choice, get the indoctrination out of schools. of course, there's bread and butter issues that matter to. inflation, more economic opportunity, florida's economy is ranked number one of all 50 states. we've retired to make that happen. crime, you see crime in all these different communities. that's now even going into suburbs and some areas. i think there's a lot of things, i don't think that's the reason. i think the reason, is i was getting a lot of media tension at the time. coming off the victory. i had to do my job as governor, with my legislative session, and we had a great legislative session. we did a lot of great things. actually, things that appeal to huge majorities of the population. so, i think that analysis is wrong. but i had to do that. so, i was basically taking fire, really, nonstop, since then. a lot of people view me as a threat. i think a left views me as a threat. they think will beat biden. and actually delivered all the stuff. and then of course, people have their allegiances within the

republican side. i have gone after me. the reality is, this is a state by state process. i'm not running a campaign to try to juice whatever we are in the national polls. whatever he did in the cnn compared, whatever, it's fine. obviously doing better than everybody else. >> state-by-state, obviously. >> state by state. >> it is state by state. of course, any governor running would of course going to the wrong track record, pointed on state. there is the simple fact, landing your question, of the idea of, look, he's done this in florida. but there's 49 other states. what did you make of that answer? >> well, look, he does have a track record in florida. 2.2. he was elected with 60% of the vote. and did quite well with some traditionally democratic and democratic-leaning groups. there's no question about that. the question is, how can he compete against donald trump in south carolina, where i am, and in iowa, into a lesser extent, in new hampshire. that doesn't seem to where he

spending as much time and focus. he needs to do well in iowa. anybody who hopes to defeat donald trump needs to. hope that he will not win iowa. it's true it's a state-by-state contest. and that brought desantis is in second place. in iowa, according to polls. there isn't a lot of great pulling out of there right now. he's in second place. hovering in the twenties, i would say, donald trump is in the 40s. and while the theory of the case for desantis supporters and the desantis campaign, is trump support is soft. and they just have to present a reasonable alternative, one of the problems, as i enumerated with the governor's, one of the reasons one of the big selling point for him was people thought was he was more electable than trump. so, republicans who want to win the white house thought he was more electable. as he's taken more and more conservative positions, on abortion, on the trans community, on the lake, some of that support has peeled away.

it was based on electability, and these republicans, whether they're moderate or conservative, now view him as somewhat less electable. that's what both -- and another pollster. i don't know where this goes from here. but he really needs to do well in iowa, he needs to come in first, or very, very strong second. and he obviously needs to do well here in south carolina. look, it's really. it's early, the first contest is not until january 15th in iowa. there's a lot of ground to be made up. and we'll see if he can deliver. >> he does compared to the others in the race, looking for that rnc nomination. he is besting them, of course, compared to donald trump. he is not another, event in iowa, he's got the support so far. although she's not endorsed him. the governor seems to be very favorable towards the governor of florida. jake tapper, great interview, we've all been looking forward to hearing what the governor had to say. thank you for bringing it to us today. >> thanks, laura, good to see you. >> before we go tonight,

there's a sudden development in the cold case of tupac shakur's unsolved murder. las vegas police are not giving away any details, but they have confirmed that a search warrant was executed in a located in henderson, in about. to park was shot to death while sitting in a car in 1996, after leaving an event on the vegas strip. cnn reported at the time, authorities believed that he was intentionally targeted. thanks for joining me tonight, i'm glad you're here. laura coates, cnn's tonight with ellison camerota starts right now. hey, alison. >> hey, laura. thanks so much. good evening, everyone. i'm alison camerota. welcome to cnn tonight. a lot of headlines. in the criminal code -- into donald trump's efforts to overturn the 2020 election. now that trump has been informed that he is a target of jack smith's investigation, what happens next? and what we have learned about those 16 fake electors in michigan. we're gonna bring you tomorrow's