♪ ♪ >> kayleigh: it appears the department of justice has met its student dominic deadline for the former raid on president trump's estate. the judge ordering it to be made public by noon today. we are waiting on the court to unseal the documents that apparently justified the mar-a-lago search. we expect them to be heavily redacted. hello, everyone, this is "outnumbered" and i'm kayleigh mcenany on this

friday and with me is jackie deangelis, doctrine janette nesheiwat, and tomi lahren, and joe concha. sensitive details about witnesses and the scope and direction of the investigation from the affidavit but it may offer some new details on the events leading up to the search we will keep you updated on the breaking news. in the meantime, president biden president biden drawing severe criticism today. he kicked off his midterm push in maryland yesterday back from vacation. it was a build as a unity rally. interesting name because he decided to attack. >> i respect conservative republicans. i don't respect these maga republicans. the maga republicans don't just threaten economic security but they are a threat to our very democracy. they refused to accept the will of the people here in maga

republicans don't have the clue about republican spirits because they have made their choice to go backwards full of anger, violence, kate, and division but we have chosen a different path: forward! >> kayleigh: so that is the great uniter. he indeed has chosen a very different path from janua january 20, 2020. joe concha, was and how he sounded them. >> history, faith, reason, show the way, the way of unity. we can see each other not as adversaries but as neighbors. we can treat each other with dignity and respect. we can join forces, stop the shouting and lower the temperature. for without unity, there is no peace. only it on and fury. >> kayleigh: we are very united right now. >> joe: i'm feeling it aren't you? >> kayleigh: i am.

>> joe: he has had moments before. during the voting rights push, saying if you don't support this federalizing voting rights, what we want, then you are bill connor, jefferson davis. and we saw in florida yesterday charlie crist, against the strategy appears to be "let's insult people that we may need to vote for us if we want to stay in power." he talked about the battlefield of love? isn't that a duet with taylor smith and richard marx? [laughter] right? he ran on unifying the country and appears to have zero interest in doing that based on his own party. >> kayleigh: right, he does this unity rally and tomi a private fund-raiser with democrats and is a wee leaks out. here were his comments, what we see the death nail of extreme philosophy and the entire philosophy that underpins it. i will say something. it is like semi fascism.

so he is calling half of the country now fascist. >> tomi: this is his basket of deplorables moment and we saw how that worked out for hillary clinton. this is what they need to do. this is actually a strategy. i don't think this is them saying anything in their heart of hearts which i'm sure he probably does. this is a strategy. he knows his administration has been lackluster. he knows no one is excited to go vote for democrats or joe biden because quite frankly who has excitement for that? nobody really does. where the excitement and democrat party lies is with the radicals so radical leftists. he has to use the terms like ultra maga but that will work against him because those ultrae fbi raid and pretty excited about donald trump 2024 and pretty excited to vote in november and show the country you can call us whatever you want, ultra magas, rednecks, republicans, it doesn't matter because we will vote and show you what it feels like when the ultra magas come back and we come back and force.

>> kayleigh: speaking of an ultra maga, an expressive shot every time you hear ultra maga comic you will be bouncing off of the walls. >> let me tell you about this ultra maga a agenda and it is extreme as most magas aura. i never expect that ultra maga republicans who seem to control the republican party now to have an able to control the republican party. i never anticipated that. as much as the republican party. >> kayleigh: jen psaki said he came up with that himself. jackie, a six month project. coming up with that term. >> jackie: it is really insulting. to say the agenda is extreme, ultra maga, maga voters those are half of the voters. if anybody recalled the election was not a slide but these are voters that he may need on a site if he wants to win again

and win work tried to put another candidate up there. it is amazing. the man has spent $4 tri $4 trillion, $4 trillion of taxpayer dollars and ultra maga money is included in there, by the way. he's trying to insult people in a very sandbox approach. if i don't like you, i will throw sand in your face. people are insulted by it and it makes them angry and to get out and vote. to the previous comment, a lot of those maga voters are women, too, people that don't like joe biden and can't stand for crime in this country or reckless spending. you want to talk about extremism, republicans might say we want less government, list spending, leave us alone and let capitalism function properly. their green claimant agenda is extreme. you want to talk about extremism, they are shoving it down our throats. when he stands up there for the hypocrisy in these statements is absolutely unbelievable. >> dr. nesheiwat: doesn't it sound and they can, ultra maga

and wouldn't you have that in a barbecue? it sound so force. the language you have to use is the language you would use at happy hour. there is not one person in anywhere saying what do you think about the ultra maga poets and what are they doing right now? it is not natural. >> kayleigh: it is really bad political marketing. dr., i want to play for you comments and she had words and apparently she wants people to believe. >> fighting to bring government back to the people and not in the hands of dictators. [applause] and we are here to say that the arrow of trump and lee zeldin, and marc molinaro, jump on a bus and head down to florida. you don't represent our values. you are not new yorkers. >> kayleigh: wow! >> these are not the words of a leader. i'm stunned, shocked and insulted as a new yorker. only this rhetoric horrible for

republicans, but also independents like myself and two americans. you can't speak like this i have news for you, guess what 350,000 new yorkers leapt to florida. that is why they call it the sunshine state. it is because of high crime rates and uncontrolled crime in new york with the highest combined taxes in the entire nation, city and local taxes. it is just ridiculously high. and then we look, always at the epicenter of disease here in new york whether monkeypox, ebola, the flu. it is always here because of the poor leadership. so we need to focus on what is going on at the foundation and the new york office as governor versus kicking us out. we are hardworking new yorkers. we pay our taxes and help keep things going in yet, you want to get rid of us. that is not right. >> tomi: can you imagine if republican governor said that to constituents, leap, get out of the state! people would be up in arms and outraged.

but she's allowed to say because she has kathy hochul on the blue side of things. >> kayleigh: it is true. tomi, when you look at charlie crist insulting floridians and needs his vote and the worst statement on several metrics but it would be so easy if you were a democrat just to be a uniter. the president if he would have followed his words on inauguration day, he would be underwater because of his policies. he might be a few points higher if he combed the waters a little bit. >> tomi: he's pretty calm, he's comatose. but i wonder gavin newsom is begging floridians to come to california so i wonder what he thinks about all of the people saying go to florida but again this is a big target on the back of ron desantis because they are terrified of desantis 2024 so they have to dog on florida one way or another. that's not going to work. >> kayleigh: you are exactly right. we are still awaiting that court unleashing of the unsealing of the affidavit of the mar-a-lago search and other documents potentially as well.

the website is crashing. our team is on it, and we will bring you the details as we get bring you the details as we get them. ♪ ♪ ur home insurance, here's a pool party. look what i brought! liberty mutual! they customize your home insurance... so you only pay for what you need! ♪young people having a good time with insurance.♪ ♪young people.♪ ♪good times.♪ ♪insurance!♪ only pay for what you need. ♪liberty liberty. liberty. liberty.♪

with best western rewards you get rewarded when you stay on the road and on the go. find your rewards so you can reconnect, disconnect, hold on tight and let go! stay two nights and get a free night. book now at bestwestern.com.

♪ ♪ >> we are still awaiting to see the redacted mar-a-lago raid after the judge unsealed the affidavit and other documents. the website is crashing. david spunt is live at the justice department with the latest, hi, david. >> i met, jackie, not a good time for the website to go down but high profile so we are clicking away waiting for us to come up here and what we do have released is a memorandum that was just unsealed right here. this is not the affidavit we are waiting for in the big document we are waiting for, however, this gives the government's case

why they should believe there should be multiple reductions in that affidavit. in this document talking about redacting the affidavit and has its own reductions here. this is why the government believes information should not be out there in the public sphere because of compromised investigation. i want to read the memorandum of the witnesses identities are exposed and subjected to harms including retaliation, intimidation, or harassment and threats to their physical safety as the court has already noted "these concerns are not hypothetical in this case." and you can also read the government argues revealing this information. we are not sure what information they were talking about could adversely impact the government's pursuit of relevant evidence. so, i don't want to go too much into this because this is an explanation why the government wanted to seal and we know why the government wants to have

this affidavit sealed. we don't want a road map for the investigation to be out there but the big item we are waiting for is that affidavit. this website not playing ball right now but we will check and update as soon as we get it, jackie. >> jackie: david spunt, i will open it up for discussion because everybody is waiting to see what exactly, what information is revealed or how much is redacted up your there is already speculation that people will be trying to see through the black lines, haley, and make excuses for what is redacted and start reading into this and many different ways and we won't know until we have the actual document. >> kayleigh: to that impact several black lines to this affidavit as david pointed out and this is 1 of 3 documents submitted. the only one so far we can see because of the website crashing. the memorandum of law as you noted going through the government's arguments. there are some reductions just from the government's argumentst reductions in the actual affidavit, but what this boils

down to they want to protect the integrity and secrecy of ongoing investigation and five points where they feel the investigation will be compromised. witness information is one there are a bunch of reductions and the road map among three other concerns. we know that the judge, judge bruce reinhart found this compelling because big news to us all and it's in the interest of the public and any form of redactions and not for the investigation. but here we have the government's arguments which sounds like hook, line, sinker and we will see in a few moments with the affidavit says. >> jackie: it is interesting because we've had this conversation a number of times how far does the government over this. how far away are they from doing that? if they do move forward with charges, what is in the affidavit becomes public and fair game, joe. everybody will see who the witnesses are and what they had to say and what the

justification was here. so i'm wondering if you think they are further away from those charges were completing this investigation and that is why they are being so protective of it. >> dr. nesheiwat: if investigation into russian collusion is a preview, that went on for years. we could get a close-up here of jeanette's dress today. this is what the redacted document is going to look like. we will not a learn anything out of this. and you will see it in the once in a while but we if you listen to scholars. >> tommy, releasing the document and all redacted if that is the case. we don't have it yet but that is a speculation. but what does that do for people's confidence in the country where we are already losing confidence in the doj, the fbi? giving the document with no one can read or glean information doesn't help that much? >> tomi: we have to be careful

because we don't know. maybe we will be surprised. maybe it will be sensitive information and i think we are hopeful for that, even though we don't expect it. i think the public interest in the story is the story. people want to know. people want to know what happened and why this happened, who is responsible and who knew everything and when did they know it. but the american people have such investigation fatigue also so, so joe, i hope this doesn't go on for years because we have bigger fish to fry in this country. this is a big issue but on another investigation. >> joe: that is why it will go on for such a long time. if you talk to folks on the right, they will say this will distract from inflation, asked prices, crime, border education so forth. >> tomi: they have done this for years and years. >> kayleigh: it's popping with one line with the black dress theory if we can call it that. at the very end of this 14 pages, jackie, two sentences for the reasons stated and the court should maintain under

seal, protects the government has marked for reduction of the government refers to the court to determine whether the redactions is so extensive the release of the remainder of the f a definite with a price closure. in substantiating every scholar has said for jonathan turley. >> jackie: will have more on this and we are waiting for official document of course and will bring it to you as soon as we can. coming up backlash at facebook as the fbi calling for mark zuckerberg to testify after his bombshell admission. he said that he suppressed hunter biden's laptop stories before the 2020 election after agents warned facebook of russian propaganda. we are talking about that next. ♪ ♪

you see, son, with a little elbow grease, you can do just about anything. thanks, dad. that's right, robert. and it's never too early to learn you could save with america's number one motorcycle insurer. that's right, jamie. but it's not just about savings. it's about the friends we make along the way. you said it, flo. and don't forget to floss before you brush.

your gums will thank you. -that's right, dr. gary. -jamie? sorry, i had another thought so i got back in line. what was it? [ sighs ] i can't remember.

if your moderate to severe crohn's disease or ulcerative colitis symptoms are stopping you in your tracks... choose stelara® from the start... and move toward relief after the first dose... with injections every two months. stelara® may increase your risk of infections,

some serious, and cancer. before treatment, get tested for tb. tell your doctor if you have an infection, flu-like symptoms, sores, new skin growths, have had cancer, or if you need a vaccine. pres, a rare, potentially fatal brain condition, may be possible. some serious allergic reactions and lung inflammation can occur. feel unstoppable. ask your doctor how lasting remission can start with stelara®. janssen can help you explore cost support options. i brought in ensure max protein with 30 grams of protein. those who tried me felt more energy in just two weeks. uhh... here, i'll take that! yay!!! ensure max protein, with 30 grams of protein, 1 gram of sugar enter powered by protein challenge for a chance to win big! ♪ ♪ >> kayleigh: facebook and the fbi facing intense backlash after mark zuckerberg admitted he suppressed stories about hunter biden's laptop for the 2020 presidential election.

we all kind of figured that. facebook ceo telling joe rogan that the social media site deliberately used an algorithm so the story would appear further down on people's newsfeeds after, get this, they got a warning from the fbi. speak with the fbi basically came to us and some folks on our team, hey, just so you know, you should be on high over it. they thought there was a lot of russian propaganda in the 2016 election. we have noticed that basically there is about to be some kind of dump that is similar to that appearance will be vigilant." i think it was 5-7 days were basically being determined whether it was false. the distribution on facebook was decreased, but people were still allowed to share it. so you could still share it, you could still consume it. >> kayleigh: jackie questions for social media bit questions

for the fbi going around social media companies telling them to suppress a story. >> jackie: why is the fbi calling mark zuckerberg? he has a ceo of the company and has nothing to do with this. i can't understand it. it is mind-boggling. and eda released a statement on this, "this is not a new revelation and both testified about this." the average american might listen to joe rogan, but they are not listening to's testimony and reading transcripts and whatnot. so this really was a revelation to many people to understand this was happening. also amazing, he throws twitter under the bus. twitter completely censored this. i just have an algorithm pushing it lower on the totem pole. it really makes you think about pre-covid when congress was thinking about really starting to investigate how should we regulate these companies? what is their role in business and society and politics, and sure they have this much power? and covid essentially overshadow that and still lower on the list. this is a question that needs to

be addressed and generally i'm not for big government, but these big social media companies so big, so powerful and so much control, mark zuckerberg knows very well he is influencing the election either way. if he suppresses that story or pushes it down lower, it is censorship and certain amount of people can't see it, can't read it, it can't talk about or have an exchange in it would be in joe biden's favor. if he brings the story and brings hunter biden news out, yes that could impact the election as well, but maybe it shouldn't be his decision to make. >> kayleigh: that is right. you look at the fbi, doctor, so suppressing the hunter biden story but as he points, they effectively laundered information about 2016 russian dossier which turned out to be a hoax. kind of a different standard. >> what we see is this russian interference, guys when relief is domestic interference by the fbi. they blocked a major story, which tilted the national scales towards the democrats appear that could definitely influence

the election. so they are hiding this information. they are hiding this disinformation when in reality it turns out to be true. what else are they hiding? they also withheld covid information, information on the origins of covid and information on vaccine safety and information on whose oversight of the fbi? so, who is keeping them in check and allowing them to proceed with what they are doing which is totally at the realm of the scope of their practice. >> kayleigh: hopefully republican congress. but this comes the same day we learn from ron johnson's from wisconsin that he has a whistle-blower that says the fbi with slow walk the hunter biden investigation. there is this letter from john grassley and want to learn about this briefing of the senate where the fbi briefed about the hunter biden story. they say gave it air and breath in the media. and totally unnecessary. it reminded me of that defensive briefing the fbi gave trump in

the wake of his election remember with james comey and others with the dossier be reduced in the same fashion this briefing about a fake dossier and it turns out used in the media. they went crazy with it. >> joe: want you brief the president on it, that gave license for cnn, go ahead with this because it's in the public interest. but suppress information is a direct violation of the first amendment. and speaking of the first amendment, i love the fact joe rogan has a podcast like you do, tomi, it is long form and conversational income go 120, 30, 60 minutes that mark zuckerberg became so relaxed it was like describing a vacation in disney. >> kayleigh: i hate to interrupt your billets but we have a fox news alert. we are getting our first look at the redacted version of the affidavit connected to the fbi raid at mar-a-lago earlier this month. david spunt is live at the justice department with more. >> this affidavit released is 38

pages long and not nearly as reductive as some thought it may be. there are 38 pages, as i say. it talks about the introduction and agent background. i'm going through and you can see right here that this explains -- and i have not had a chance to look at this because the site was crashing at this came down. we can see a little bit about why -- and i don't want to read probable cause section right here. this is the reasoning the judge signed off on the search warrant. right here is the probable cause section and it says february 9th, 2022, the special agent in charge of the inspector general's national archives that were referred to doj and specifically talks about some of the communications between the trump team down at mar-a-lago and the national archives up here in washington, d.c. remember, it was in january 2022 earlier this year that the trump team in florida returned some 15

boxes of material back to the national archives after a request. so, i will go through this document. i will make some notes. i will come back when i have a little bit more, but i don't want to show where everybody that are pages and big chunks of redacted as we expected. department department of justice did not want to release this document, but ultimately complied with a court order to do so. after about 40 minutes of a site crashing, the website crushing because of the demand, here we are. >> kayleigh: let's bring martha maccallum, anchor of "the story." >> hi, haley, we are waiting for the complete document as david . 14 of the pages early on which is sort of the background foundation for the department of justice in terms of what the united states interest is in keeping some of this under wraps to protect witnesses, to protect law enforcement, to protect the ongoing investigation. but the area that david was just

looking at, which is probable cause section of this is what is going to be the greatest interest. as he said, if not completely redacted, the entire thing, and it goes into a little bit at the back and forth between the national archives agency and the trump team at mar-a-lago. so, that is where we are going to learn, hopefully, we will be able to fill in some of the piece is about why they felt it was so necessary to do a raid and early morning dawn hours of august 8th. what we need to substantiate is that there was no other way to get these documents back. they had tried everything that they could appear that they were concerned that it wasn't being shared to the extent that they needed it in order to have a deeper understanding. i know we have anti-mccarthy with us and all sort of going through this as quickly as we can. so let me toss it back to you guys. >> kayleigh: andy mccarthy.

going through this now, 38 pages. it looks like there are some significant redactions but pro-form is not expected to. is this what you expected to see questioning >> kelly, it pretty much is pure there are things you knew they would be able to deal. and i did a column yesterday that have a timeline of everything that we know from the time president trump went back to mar-a-lago up until the time of the raid. there is a lot of information already public. for example, earlier, i want to say a week ago we learned a few days ago about this letter from the national archives. you know, which laid out a lot of the back and forth between the trump and the national archives. so there is a lot of information that was already available. for that reason, there is stuff they can say that wouldn't be

letting any cats out of the bag because that is already out there. they are obviously going to confirm because the media reported. but there is a document out there like national archives. that is already public. so, there are things they can reveal without doing the things they are worried about because as we have all said, giving a road map to the investigation and identifying witnesses and the likeness. that is the thing most people are most furious about. the other thing people are curious about, why this and why now? why do a search warrant and why at this point? i'm not sure we will get much insight into that. >> kayleigh: martha, over to you. >> thank you very much going through the talk top of the document and what is in here. it talks about the government conducting a criminal investigation concerning the improper removal and storage of classified information and unauthorized basis as well as

the unlawful concealment or removal of government records. it says the investigation began as a result from nara as we knew and goes through as he said, a removal of 15 boxes but go back because they felt that there was still information that was being kept in certain spaces that they wanted to get at and thoughts the raid. so, we are just kind of getting a look at this. as i said, it is 38 pages. the top section is unredacted as you get to section 3, you see some areas reductive. and that sort of lands in the probable cause section, switch is not surprising. it says, "further after a blacked out section, for their cause to believe documents contain classified nei or presidential records subject to record contention currently remain at the premises, which is the phrase they are using to

represent mar-a-lago." do we have on the line mackay's? david spunt back at the doj digging through all of this. david, what are you learning questioning >> we have a portion which is interesting because some of this as reductive as expected. that is not overly surprising. but this gives an idea right here and cbs miami according to a article cbs miami, spotted at mar-a-lago published monday january 18, 2021, at least two trucks at the premises january 18, 2021 a few days before then president trump left office. that is not abnormal, but then you have chunks like this redacted appearance so there may be information here related to that part of the moving truck. this is the kind of picture we are getting. we are not getting all of the details here as a affidavit has because of the sensitive nature of the affidavit. there is another part i want to read that is significant. it says, as i previously

indicated to you" and this is the person who sworn to the affidavit mar-a-lago does not have a secure location as such it appears that the time classified document were removed from the secured facilities at the white house and moved to mar-a-lago on or around january 20, 2021. they have not been handled in an appropriate manner or stored in an appropriate location. we asked if at mar-a-lago the document stored to be secure and all the boxes removed from the white house to mar-a-lago along with any items to be observed in that room until further notice. martha, the interesting thing about this is we have heard a back and forth for months that the department of justice and federal prosecutors and the fbi knew that these documents were in a room at mar-a-lago. the actual search did not happen or raid or whatever you want to call it until august. negotiators from the department

of justice were down at mar-a-lago meeting with president trump's team, former president trump's team in june. the former president actually popped into that meeting, and they were aware that some of these documents were in this room in a storage room in the basement of mar-a-lago. that is clearly what this talks about right here, martha. >> thank you, the department of justice, anti-mccarthy is with us as well as we continue to go through the documents, andy. what do you hear in here? there was reporting, i would point out, this did not come out of nowhere. right around the time of the inauguration, there was reporting that the trump team had taken some of the material from the white house down to mar-a-lago. so, this has been in the bloodstream for a long time before this raid. we are still learning the back and forth about what transpired between the two sides that led to this really dramatic action on mar-a-lago estate.

>> that is right, martha. that detail is in the archives letter that was publicized over the last few days. so at least taking the timeline up to may 10th, which is when that letter from the archivist was executed. we had a pretty good idea up until then what the slate of events was. and then, may know a lot of information about what happened after that because on may 11, the day after the letter issued a grand jury subpoena. we know there was at least one other grand jury subpoena after that for surveillance camera footage. now, i think the interesting thing and one of the things i would like to know but i have no expectation. we will find out today, it seems to be what triggered the search has to have been, they signed a ladder, the trump team does on june 3rd that says, "we have returned all of the documents marked "classified."

and obviously they thought they needed to go in to get documents unclassified on august when they got the warrant and on august 11th. they had evidence because they would not have gotten a warrant. they would have had to show probable cause that these documents were still at mar-a-lago, and they were highly classified appearance was something happen, obviously comic from the time that they issued the warrant for the surveillance footage on june 22nd. something happen between june 22nd and august 11th that told them they needed to move. and i don't know that we will find that out today. i doubt it. >> auntie, one of the things that transpired and you mapped out this timeline and a great way on your timepiece is that they had a subpoena for the surveillance video of the area where it was kept, right reshma can you shed a little bit more light on what perhaps that might have informed the reason to go in. they were talking about the fact they didn't feel it was secure

based on the comings and goings they were seeking, right? >> here, martha, you have to rely on media reporting, which i hate to do except simply notorious this time that the justice department people in the justice department linked to some of our favorite news sources, right? so what "the new york times" has reported about that is when agents reviewed the surveillance footage, they saw people breezing in and out of the area that was supposed to be secure. they solve boxes being moved around, and they saw documents being removed from the boxes, which was alarming to them. now, the problem is, we got that from a "new york times" story. we don't have an official government document that says this. in the document we are talking about, the redacted affidavit may, infect, say it but i don't think we will see that part of it. >> martha: that is one of the big problems here, and e. we were told that this has

to, you know, look like this and yet, you have these drips and drops coming out that we are seeing show up in "the washington post" and "new york times." it feels a little bit unfair. if it all is so clandestine and under wraps and so much of part of the significant investigation we can't learn anything, why do we keep saying, see some of these things trickle out? >> martha, there is nothing in my experience particularly as a prosecutor, there was nothing more infuriating to the court. there is nothing more infuriating to the prosecutor who is actually trying to run an investigation then the fact that there are some people -- there is too much diffusion of information. there is too many people out there who think they are important by leak into the press. the press, of course, indulges that. what is end up happening and that think a cherry picked version of reality. they put out things that may not be true at all.

they may be half-truths and make sense if you knew the whole picture, but not the way they do it. they basi don't explain what thy want you to know when the media account. as a prosecutor, you are in a position to go to court to say, it will kill our investigation if you disclose this. and the judge will look at the prosecutor and say, "why don't you tell that to whoever is leaking the main justice or the fbi or the news? "it is an eternal problem. and for 20 years come i haven't heard of a good solution to it. >> martha: all right, thank you very much, andy, standby david spunt continues to go through this document. also looking through this probable cause section where you noted this movement of a couple of trucks january 18th. what else are you learning, david? there is intrapersonal a interesting part with the 15 boxes taken from mar-a-lago that breaks down a little bit about what may have been in those boxes and the actual details bow

they were labeled the classification of drinking. so i want to read this may 16 to may 18, 2022, just a few months ago fbi with a preliminary review of the 15 boxes provided to the national archives that was earlier in the year when the trump team turned over to the national archives. identify documents with classification markings and 14 of those 15 boxes. preliminary triage of the documents with classification markings revealed the following approximate numbers. 184 unique documents bearing classification markings, including 67 documents marked as confidential, 92 documents marked as secret, 25 documents marked as top-secret. further the fbi agents observe markings with the following compartments, disseminations, controls acf, fisa. we talk about pfizer for years at fox news specifically before and surveillance court in the

carter page story. based on training and experience, again defiant with the person who swears to the affidavit who is not named. that is typical for safety reasons. so based on my training and experience, i know documents classified at these levels typically contain some of these classified information. several of the documents also contained what appears to be the former president of the united states handwritten notes. >> martha: that is a very interesting section. david. one of the things that keep striking me here, and i talked to jared kushner yesterday is, is this about because you just read off a lot of numbers that in most of the boxes and the majority of the boxes press have according to this affidavit which is their case in this argument. here is why we have to go in. we are not hearing the other side but this is what is about the judge. is this about the fact there was a large number, large number of

classified documents or is it about an urgent need to get their hands on a specific pieces of pieces of information that they were very concerned could leak out to get to the outside world? and that raises the next question about why the judge gave them two weeks to do this. by the search itself went on for hours and hours. we don't know whether this is an investigation into a breach of information that falls into that andy i national defense or whether it is truly just what the archives unhappy that you shouldn't have this information and all of it needs to come back right away. any thoughts on that? >> it is something we want to find out but this affidavit does not provide specifically that information. the judge knows because the judge has seen this affidavit without everything. the prosecution, meaning the government, has seen everything without >> kayleigh: peer of the trump team has not including the former president is likely l

are pure they have not been privy to see that information but you raise a good point that you wonder and are there questions about 50 documents, and i'm giving a number here. 50 documents marked confidential which is lower on the classification system versus three documents that have the highest classification level. that is the question about why judge reinhardt gave that two week window for agents to go in. >> martha: absolutely, david, keep coming back to us. i know you are going through this. we appreciate that. let me bring andy mccarthy back in. that is one of the central things, you know? what is in these documents at such a level that they rated the former president's home, former president who may very well be running for president again. is there anything we can glean from this that tells you whether or not there was a specific urgent document or issue that

needed to be pinned down and pinned down quickly or whether this is just about getting it all back where they needed it? >> the archive of this letter said it talks about not only the highly classified top secret sensitive compartmentalized information, but they also point out the number of the documents were special access program, which is like the top super-duper super stuff. and the archive has stressed that, but in particular, the justice department stressed that. with a pointed out here, and this is why i keep going back to whether do they really want to prosecute trump, or do they want their stuff back? what they say is, and this is true, when a top-secret classified document has potentially fallen into the wrong hands, they have to do a thorough going damage assessment to figure out, do we have informants at risk? are there high-level classified programs that have been

compromised such as for example, if the russians learned we have super-duper program, they can start feeding this information, which could hurt the government in various national security light. so, they are very hot to do this damage assessment because of these top-secret documents. and they've wanted the fbi to be able to examine the things that they had recovered in these 15 boxes. they were obviously concerned there was more information of that nature. i have never been convinced that they necessarily want to prosecute the president or former president on a document retention basis. and i thought it was very interesting yesterday when the judge talked about the arguments that the government had made that one of the things the government stressed was potential prejudice to uncharged persons. now, may be the government saying that because they always say that, but maybe they are saying it because they really haven't gotten to the point

where they are convinced that they want to charge trump, but they just want their stuff back. >> martha: andy, before i let you go, if that were the case, right, is the raid itself meredith? >> well, martha, what i think they would say in response to that is, "look, we went with them a number of times and could not have stressed more how important it was that we get this information back. we tried to get the fbi to be able to do this damage assessment and president trump continually tried to block the fbi, which is what they will say." we tried to issue grand jury subpoena and we went down and met with him and they represented to us that we had everything back that was at least marked classified. then obviously, we had reason to believe that they still maintain things that were marked classified purity and we were finally at a point of saving, if we don't go in and take this stuff, we may never get it back.

and we have serious concerns that there is highly classified information, which is not being secured in a way that we could be confident the national security interests. that is the argument but we will not see that today. >> martha: indeed. i want to get back to david spunt but i want to ask you one more question if i may. we will come back to you. several documents contain the president handwritten notes appeared at the next two sections, three sections, four s and more, actually five or six are completely blacked out. what do you think about that? >> you know, there are some things in the intelligence community born classified. but there are some things or aspects of the president show which are purely their ammonium pure than there is the national security aspect of the president's job where if he is dealing with details about military secrets and relations with foreign countries, that stuff is so

sensitive that it is basically if he starts to write notes about it, it is classified. so, i would sense that if they took pains to note note he was writing notes, the president, and they blocked everything out, that is the area that we are running into the stuff that is very sensitive. >> martha: interesting. let me bring david spunt back in here. david, the affidavit that has been released also includes an attached letter from trump attorney dated may 25th, which is a period during which the department of justice and the national archives were negotiating with trump for accounting and returning the documents. what is significant about this letter? speak with this shows former president trump knew months ago back in the spring that he was under investigation. we know there was a meeting in june that intended mar-a-lago but just a few weeks before, he

knew that his attorney at the corporate who also represented steve bannon recently in a trail was communicating directly with jay brett with the counterintelligence and export section of the joe dominic department of justice. this is the letter you are referencing. the second page of the letter -- let me put this up here so be patient for one second. kevin corcoran says doj must be insulated from political influence whereas officials here would argue that they are insulated from influence and doj must be candid with judges and present exculpatory evidence comics open tory evidence is evidence that would show former president trump did not do something wrong depending on the actual situation. so it mentions exculpatory evidence. this is 38 pages and we are still going through it. it is interesting to note the first few pages it gives a little bit of a lay out why they

want to go into mar-a-lago because of classified documents and where they were stored. then you get to page 27 and a lot of pages in the 20s look like this and you turn to page 28, and it looks like this. so, that is where we are, martha. >> martha: still going through this letter an interesting page in here as well. david, thank you very much. bret baier, anchor of "the special report," great to have you with us as we all continue to look at the documents. some of it readable, but a bit of it actually blacked out. what is your impression of what we are seeing here? >> think a lot of what we have seen blacked out is obviously the meat of how they get to this raid. as we feared a lot of what we are seeing is not going to paint the picture of why they went in. i think there are a number of questions that come from the new documents. one is, when was this grand jury impaneled? it seems like it was impaneled long before the lead up to this

raid. which means this element of the investigation that goes beyond just these documents and perhaps it goes to other things like january 6 and perhaps other things. what we are seeing here in these documents are basically the outlines of what we assumed that there was concern after the first 15 boxes of what they saw with classified materials in those boxes that there were other materials that they were concerned about at mar-a-lago. and that is what leads to the raid. but we don't have the meat of the decision-making. that is what this judge referred to the doj to say, it is fine. you make the redu redactions i'y with it. and that is where we are. i don't think it gives us a ton of new information. >> martha: and i think that is the purpose designed for that purpose perhaps. and judge reinhart, the

magistrate in florida was criticized by trump supporters initially for signing off on this raid in the first place. so then, he says to the department of justice, okay show them what you showed me to the greatest extent that you can to try to shed some light on the reasoning for all of this. so now we have this sort of thing in the middle, brett, that doesn't satisfy the reason for going in. the justification for going in, or it opens a lot of boxes and people will read into some of these lines along the way. nbc legal analyst who basically said, look, you are better off not releasing any of this until you signify your next legal steps here. so, we are now in the middle ground based on this. >> we are in limbo. we are in limbo when it comes to what the real reason is here. we are going to keep digging through this. there may be something around the edges that shows us a little

more, but there is a lot of meat of the explanation is entirely blacked out. and that is what we feared from the beginning. and the reason is they are protecting witnesses that they say helped in the grand jury and they hope to move this fall along. but why? what is the end to this for the actions that they took? so, we are back to square one. we know there were classified materials. we know that they saw them in the first 15 boxes and that they believed there were other materials. after the raid, they have a list of materials and some of it the most classified that the u.s. has. and we are in the same circle that we have been since the beginning. >> martha: yeah, there is a whole political side to all of this as well. it feels like first we need to get through the document side of it. you make a good point about when this grand jury was impaneled. and this is what we don't know

because the department, there are at least four potential criminal investigations that are underway into the former president. two of them fall under the department of justice. when is this nara issue of the archive issue brought to the department and referred to the department of justice and the other of the january 6 investigation. one of the things we are trying to figure out as you mentioned, brett my weather intersection between the two. an effort to dig for january 6th information and still an outstanding question. >> it really is, and i think andy mccarthy has shed light on this before that there is a belief that perhaps there was something bigger that they were searching for. but the impetus for the classified documents in the possession of them, even trust the possession of them is the question, even though it is a former president. there is a lot here that we have

to digest. the 1978 presidential records act and how that affects all of this. we are going to dig tremendous trumpian move, we have the letter from the department of justice that they previously indicated, they have seen where the documents are stored, they don't think it's secure enough and they have asked for, we remember, another padlock to be put on it. the big question that remains, is why. right? why did the president, why was he holding on to these materials despite the fact that they continued to ask for them, why was there not an ability to make some sort of agreement about returning all of it that he could, you know, sort of be at peace with and then the reporting that he sort of felt like this is my stuff and i have the right to it. >> bret: but why also wasn't there another subpoena, another effort at interaction. were they seeing a total stiff-arm from the trump people? that's not in this document yet,

at least we can't see it. >> and that's the big question, why fight so hard to hold on to the documents, what is in them and what did he want to retain the possession of and for what reason, and is their claim legitimate based on that. bret, thank you. i have a feeling we'll be seeing each other throughout the course of the afternoon. i'll be back at 3:00 p.m., and bret at 6:00 p.m., covering this breaking news. stay tuned for more on fox news. >> sandra: martha, bret, thank you. as we begin "america reports" with the release of that redacted version of the affidavit, connected the fbi raid of mar-a-lago. all of this after a federal judge rejected the doj argument to keep the entire document sealed. it is a breaking news friday, hello, everyone, sandra smith in new york. great to be with you. >> john: john roberts in washington. the affidavit is heavily,