he's entitled to obviously hear the charges but he already knows what they are. then he's expected to enter a plea. there might be some discussion about another court date, although the judge who's ultimately going to take this case to trial, judge aileen cannon is the one who will set that date. it could be over relatively quickly. one thing that will be interesting to see once we confirm who all is in the courtroom, it will be interesting to see whether, in fact, jack smith is in the room. we haven't seen very much of him, lester. we actually managed to see him on camera very briefly last week, just walking the street, but he's maintained a very low profile. he's only spoke one time when the indictment was actually unsealed to stand up for the rule of law and to stand up for his colleagues at the justice department, but that was highly unusual. otherwise we haven't heard anything out of him. now, not saying if he's there that he'll be the one who actually stands up in court. it's a showing of solidarity for his colleagues who have been under attack. >> and if he is there, i think it would be incredibly notable

because donald trump has been attacking jack smith in furious way calling him things like a deranged psycho, suggesting without presenting evidence that he is in some way partisan or compromised as part of this investigation. the former president and his legal team have gone after the prosecutors handling this case, making allegations of prosecutorial misconduct, without presenting evidence. obviously the investigation continues into the dynamic of -- if that is the case, and i don't want to get ahead of our skis here, but if jack smith and donald trump are in that courtroom together, it is going to be a significant moment optically and visually probably for both of them, but especially for the former president who has really put jack smith, the special counsel in the bull's-eye. >> there's also some question team, you know, he's lost three members now in the last -- >> he lost two members just hours before the indictment was unsealed, which was something of a surprise, and it was interesting we were questioning whether they had been fired or whether they quit.

they put out a statement saying they had resigned. he hasn't blasted them, at least that we've seen on social media, and so perhaps they ended on good terms, but how in the world you have a situation where the former president is facing felony serious charges and he doesn't have the most robust legal team that money can buy. anybody else in this type of situation, think about any other defendant who is well to do and has, you know, the wealth and privilege of someone like former president trump. they would have law firms lined up, but in this case, that is not what we've seen. we've seen people quitting at the last minute. he does have at least one member of his team, todd blanche, who is also on the manhattan hush money case, so he's managing these two major cases against the front runner. >> and keep in mind who donald trump wants as his attorneys, he doesn't just want people who will defend him legally. he wants people who will also defend him politically. this came up in the indictment as we looked through some of those details we've been talking

about. you saw in many ways the expectation that donald trump wanted his attorneys to be fighters for him first, right? to be the people who would back him up on all fronts, right? this is something we've seen are from him. he wants people like we saw from his attorney earlier in this special report who came out in front of the courthouse and spoke, he wants that political defense as well as the legal defense too. >> let me bring back chuck rosenberg. you're privy to this conversation we're having here. explain how this will work after the arraignment, the motions that we may see and the process going forward. >> certainly, lester, well, laura was talking about the fact that the arraignment today, which is really a rather perfunctory hearing is in front of a federal magistrate judge. the action will then move to the courtroom of a federal district court judge in article 3, and by that i mean presidentially appointed senate confirmed lifetime tenured --

>> chuck, let me interrupt you here for a second. we just got word from inside the courtroom that mr. trump has pleaded not guilty. our correspondent gabe gutierrez has been in the courtroom, he's going to run out here shortly. we should get a little bit more information, but that tells us at least that the arraignment is underway. he has formally entered a plea of not guilty. he does have, of course, the presumption of innocence. we've talked about delay tactics and dragging feet, all these things are allowed. it's part of the process. how does a prosecutor, though, try to gain -- sorry, let's go to gabe gutierrez. gabe is out right now. gabe, what can you tell us? >> reporter: hey there, lester. well, we just ran out of the courthouse in an overflow room where some reporters were able to listen to the proceedings, which are still underway. just moments ago, the counsel for former president trump todd blanche entered a plea of not guilty on behalf of the former president. former president trump is sitting inside that room and at

the defense table, sitting at the same table as walt nauta, his alleged co-conspirator. we can tell you we were able to see through a video feed, again, the proceedings still underway, and former president had his hands crossed on that table. the judge in this case, the magistrate judge, just had arrived, jonathan goodman and was going through several procedural steps. the defense waived the reading of the entire indictment, which is typical in this court system, so now the proceeding continues to be underway. again, the former president pleading not guilty on this sweeping 37-count indictment. i can tell you that he also appeared with co-counsel, chris kise, the florida-based counsel, todd blanche also is representing him. he is of course a well-known white collar defense attorney

from new york. stan woodward another attorney is also in the room. he is representing walt nauta. there were several members of the counsel's office there, the prosecutors. i'm going to list them, judy ed el ston, jay bratt, this all unfolded over the past few minutes, lester. the proceeding began just before 3:00. we did not see the former president enter the room, the video feed started up when he was already seated. it is a packed room. there were some members of the public there as well as members of the media, and again, we were led in early this morning. we were taken to a media overflow room. no phones, no devices of any kind were allowed. this is an unprecedented arraignment as i'm sure you've been discussing, the federal arraignment of the former president. todd blanche, again, this is different than what we saw in new york several months ago, in new york the former president got up and said the words not

guilty himself. in this particular case, he let his attorney todd blanche to do the talking saying we most certainly plead not guilty. the proceeding is ongoing. just before the arraignment started, we were told the former president was booked, that he had his fingerprints taken with a digital device, and again, we're told that he did not have a mug shot taken here, that they would use a previous photo, that no mug shot would be taken here. again, that's the latest we have from inside the courtroom. the former president of the united states pleading not guilty to this indictment, lester. >> all right, gabe, just to be clear, jack smith then was not -- was not in the courtroom? >> we believe that he is in the courtroom, lester. it was difficult to see exactly who was in the courtroom. it was a grainy video monitor.

we did speak with somebody from the u.s. marshal's office who did tell us that jack smith was in the building, and we believe that he may have been seated in the first row. again, we're trying to get confirmation on that because of the quality of the video feed, but we were told by a spokesperson for the u.s. marshal's office that jack smith was in the building. we believe we saw him in the first row, but certainly several members of his team were there representing the government seated just feet from the former president, lester. >> and i understand the video feed was of poor quality, but did you get any sense of the former president's reaction to anything that was going on? >> reporter: he had his hands in front of the desk -- on the desk in front of him, lester, as the proceeding got underway. when the magistrate judge started speaking and laying out some of the charges, he then

crossed his arms very briefly and was listening to the proceedings unfold. now, i can tell you, lester, this is different than the proceedings that we saw in new york because it just seems to be that much shorter at this point. the plea came just within a few minutes of these proceedings getting underway, and so there was not the discussion, the motions that we saw in manhattan in the hush money case where there was immediately some discussion and there almost seemed to be opening statements from the prosecution. this delves right into it and the magistrate judge asked the former president's team to enter a plea almost right off the bat, just several minutes into this arraignment. again, no reaction from the former president, and we could not hear if he was, you know, may have been discussing anything with his counsel. we can tell you that walt nauta was seated two people from him. in fact, it set the scene, there was a defense table and the prosecution's table, of course,

five people seated at the defense table. walt nauta seated second from the left of that table. i can tell you lester, it was remarkable to see that happening. they are alleged co-conspirators in the case, whether or not there might be conditions placed on, you know, on the defendant as this case moves forward, whether they can speak to each other or not, very difficult in this case considering that walt nauta works for the former president, and as of now, they seem to be in lock step seated at the same table, again, nauta with his own attorneys, the former president with two attorneys, one based in new york, one based here in florida. these proceedings are still underway. we are waiting to see what else comes from them. if i can give you some

background on what we experienced today as members of the media here, we were brought into the courthouse, brought to the fifth floor. we went through one metal detector and were kept there. again, no access to devices, no access to cell phones. we did see through a window the former president, as i'm sure you saw part of our live coverage being brought into the building, his motorcade going into a secure portion of this federal courthouse. then we were told by the u.s. marshal that he was processed. no mug shot taken, that process didn't seem to take very long at all. only a few minutes. then there was a system where some reporters were let into the actual courtroom. it was a packed courtroom, large courtroom with room for several dozen people. there were also members of the public there as well, though very few, mostly made up of reporters. again, for those just joining us, the former president

pleading not guilty to the charges. not saying the words not guilty himself, but rather letting his counsel todd blanche do the talking for him, lester. >> all right, gabe gutierrez, thank you for your excellent reporting from the courtroom, a sense of what's happened there. again, the former president now has entered a plea of not guilty. laura, let me get your thoughts, first of all, having his attorney offer that plea. do you read anything into that? is that standard? >> it's totally standard. for folks at home who might be wondering if there's any practical difference about entering it yourself or having your attorney do it. there's no practical difference. obviously we would be interested in any words spoken by the former president in this context, but at this stage we wouldn't expect him to say much if anything at all. i do find it interesting that the special counsel is there. we talked about the fact that we haven't seen him very much. he's made very few public remarks, only earlier when the indictment was actually unsealed and so the fact that he's there

supporting his two colleagues, one of those colleagues, jay bratt, the head of the counterintelligence division, and also someone that the former president and his allies have been making a lot of unsupported allegations against. and so to have all of these people in the same room at this moment is quite something. >> give me your take on walt nauta sitting at the defense table together. i mean, are they officially charged together, nauta is alleged co-conspirator. that's the way you would do it. >> that's the way you would do it. they've been charged in the same charging instrument as it's known in this indictment, and we should also note for our audience, walt nauta's attorney is being paid by the former president's super pac, so their fates here are inextricably intertwined. it doesn't mean they will always be that way. we know from our reporting there were times where prosecutors actually tried to get walt nauta to cooperate, to turn against the former president, and he

resisted those efforts. at least for now they are very intertwined here and aligned. >> can danny cevallos is watching with us, a defense attorney, danny, i don't know how much you were able to hear of gabe's description from inside the courtroom. did anything stand out to you? >> no, because this is an arraignment, and in federal court an arraignment is really mostly a non-event. it certainly is a significant legal event. it signals the kickoff of the case. it is the beginning of the speedy trial clock. most arraignments are measured in minutes if that. sometimes they're done in a long list of defendants who have to be arraigned, especially in state court. less though in federal court where it's not as crowded. but in this case, i didn't expect anything shocking at the arraignment. there doesn't appear to have been anything shocks or surprising. there's almost nothing surprising that could happen at an arraignment. so limited are the missions of the arraignment, and most defendants don't bother or don't want to have a formal reading of

the indictment. so what happens now is a lot of quiet. as the case -- or the parties go back to their corners and the discovery period begins. as the defense assimilates the discovery, examines it, evaluates it, they may can ask for more. they may start filing discovery motions, dispositive motions. those are weeks and weeks if not months and months away. the defense, while we have heard glimmers of what they may advance as their defense, they haven't truly started formulating their defense. they can't just based on the indictment. they need to look at discovery, and that for a defense attorney in a federal case is often a daunting task because modern discovery, e discovery is measured in terabytes. this means thousands, if not millions of documents that defense attorneys, we have to look at each and every page, even if they're completely insignificant, and it can look like a haystack, and we're looking for the proverbial

needle. with trump, hopefully he can get a team together that can review all those documents. for a solo practitioner, it can be overwhelming. so they have their work cut out for them throughout the discovery process, which is not something we're going to see in public. it happens behind closed doors. behind me wall of privilege, and of course another interesting factor is that it appears, although i don't know that nauta and trump likely may have a joint defense agreement, which means that they could possibly be sharing information and retain privilege. now, here's what happens, though. if one of those people, maybe nauta down the road decides that i don't really want to go to trial anymore, then he may have to leave that joint defense agreement if he ever wants to cooperate with the government. reportedly, nauta has no interest in cooperating at this point, but everyone knows prosecutors and defense attorneys alike that that is only a for now decision. that decision can change over

time as the trial approaches, as this case drags on. defendants who are staunchly i will never plead guilty sometimes change their tune as the months drag on. >> it's an interesting point, i want to further it with former u.s. attorney and former senior fbi official chuck rosenberg. chuck, again, these men are considered co-conspirators in this indictment. they appeared in court today at the defendant's table, but what is the likelihood that there could be a split there, if in fact, there's a joint defense agreement? >> well, danny's quite right, lester. people act in their best interests and defendants are people, so they also act in their best interests. typically for a defendant in a federal criminal case once they have received discovery, which danny described, and they filed motions and let's say the court rejects the defendant's motions and the case is proceeding to

trial, the best decision for most defendants in most cases is to plead guilty. why? because under the federal sentencing guidelines, which determine the advisory guideline range for a judge within which to sentence, you get credit for pleading guilty. in other words, if you plead guilty and if you cooperate, you could ended up spending a lot less time in jail than you would otherwise. in fact, you may end up spending no time in jail at all if your cooperation is unusually valuable. so i wish i had a dollar for every defendant who i heard would never cooperate under any condition and later did when it became apparent what their best interests were and how to effectuate that, pleading guilty and cooperating is often the exit ramp for them. so that doesn't mean mr. nauta will do that. he may hang in there. he may insist on a trial.

he may or may not be convicted. time will tell. but many defendants often go their own way. and by the way, regardless of who is paying for his attorney, that attorney has an ethical obligation to mr. nauta only. at the very least, they will have a conversation about pleading guilty in cooperating. it would be remarkable if they did not because mr. nauta needs to know what his options are, and then to make the best decision for himself. will mr. nauta and mr. trump go separate ways? i don't know, but defendants who are charged together and who are to be tried together often do end up going their separate ways, lester. >> all right, chuck, i'll ask you to stand by. i'll bring back nbc's gabe gutierrez here. we just heard from, came out of the courtroom, told us the president has pleaded not guilty. you've got some more color from in there, gabe. what can you tell us? >> reporter: yes, lester.

so i imagine over the last several days here it's been an open question of the trump legal team in which florida-based counsel would represent him or help represent him given that two of his other attorneys had resigned late last week. ask you know, a little bit more about chris kise, he's been a fixture in south florida for quite a long time. he is currently inside that courtroom with the former president, and something that i also heard inside that courtroom, the magistrate judge asked both him and todd blanche whether they plan to be here permanently, so this suggesting this wasn't just a temporary legal counsel, are you here for the trial and the appeal, and they both said they plan to be here for the trial and appear. suggesting as we know right now the intention is to keep both of those as part of his legal team, chris kise and todd blanche. now, lester, i also want to talk to you about just some of the differences since i was in that courthouse in lower manhattan

when the former president was arraigned on those state charges, just a very different feel here in south florida, of course, just in the layout of this courthouse, but also in the proceedings so far. again, this proceeding is still underway, so i don't know what's going on there at this moments. i can tell you in the few minutes i did see, it was a much less contentious hearing than the first one, than the first indictment, the first arraignment was several months ago where almost from the get-go the state prosecution in manhattan really started tussling with the trump legal team almost immediately. so had a very different feel at the start of this proceeding. again, we were waiting to see when we rushed out of there once the former president pleaded not guilty, we were about to hear walt nauta's plea as well. we had ever indication that he would plead not guilty as well, but what we're also waiting for at this point, lester is what are going to be the conditions of their release.

you know, will they be able to speak with each other, you know, i'll let our legal experts weigh in on that, but what will be some of the conditions imposed and whether we might get some sort of a timetable for discovery. you'll recall wak during the arraignment in manhattan, there was a lot of back and forth at the tail end of the hearing over the timetable of this case and whether, you know, whether the attorneys could agree on the discovery process here, and the time line here and the state prosecutors up there had major concerns about whether the former president could take some of that discovery and publish it on social media, legal back and forth over the last several months about whether he needs approval to post certain things about social media, about that charge. so at this point still a lot of unanswered questions about how this federal case moves forward. for those of us just joining, i can tell you once again, no reaction from the former president. all i saw him, he crossed his

arms briefly and put his hands on the table, but no reaction with regard to anything just yet. we are waiting for our colleagues still inside the courtroom to see how long this hearing ends up. there were some indications it could be potentially a very short hearing, perhaps even as short as ten minutes. it's now gone well past that, and of course the unprecedented nature of this case, you know, it's anyone's guess at this point, lester. >> all right, gabe gutierrez a lot of information there. yes, we do wait on our colleagues who are still in the courtroom to give us a sense of where this is or when it's over and what things may have been discussed. in the meantime, let me bring hallie jackson back into the conversation. what are you picking up on here? >> one of the first indications that we'll get is probably from donald trump himself on truth social. he has been active on that media platform as he used to be on twitter. i wouldn't be surprised if he's got his phone if he's in his car

if he's talking about what he just experienced here. he's getting ready to head back to bedminster, the chairs lined up ready to go, vip seats ready to go including for mike lindell, for example, somebody who echoed the former president's election fraud lies, kash patel, who ended up going in and testifying to the grand jury in this very case, it is likely to be a full throated condemnation of the people who were in that courtroom with him. i'm struck by if jack smith was in court, the way that that was a symbolic i have your back message to his team, to the people around him because they have been under attack from the former president and his allies. his sort of inner circle here who believed that jack smith is leading a partisan witch hunt as donald trump often says against him. i think it's also interesting, the walt nauta connection here. we talk a lot about how in the indictment as you're reporting, laura, there was an attempt to try to get walt nauta to testify

against his current boss. donald trump prizes loyalty to an incredibly intense degree. donald trump also sours quickly on that very same loyalty. i think that's going to be a dynamic to watch. >> speaking of loyalty, it's interesting that the judge is asking the attorneys on the case to confirm that they're in it for the long haul. it's not easy to get out of a criminal case once you're in it. you can't just withdraw. there's actually a process for that, and you have to get permission from a judge, and it's interesting, at least in the case of chris kise in the appearance form he submitted earlier today just hours before this hearing at the very bottom of it, it says that the actual appearance won't be withdrawn, if there's any dispute about the fee between the attorney and the client, which is not something that you just see routinely but sort of speaks i think to the nature of the attorney/client relationship in this case. it will be interesting to see whether other attorneys get added. we know that they're in active discussions about recruiting other members of the team. in a case like this, two lawyers is not enough.

obviously people at home might be wondering how unusual this is. you need a team for a case like this, as danny was explaining, to go through the mountain of evidence that prosecutors have amassed and to be able to file motions, to write motions, to be able to argue this case as robustly as he's going to need. you really need a long bench for this. >> and yet the special prosecutor has gone out and said we want a fast, a speedy trial. is that something that generally works in the prosecution's favor? >> normally the right to a speedy trial is for the defendant. in this case we've heard jack smith say that, but it's not going to be up to him. it's going to all come back to this judge. i can't emphasize enough how much power she wields in terms of the time line. >> all right, and will she pick up on the initial hearings? obviously a magistrate today. >> now it's out of the magistrate's hands. as soon as they leave today, we will not see him back in front of this imagine street. he'll be in front of judge

cannon. >> let's bring back frank figliuzzi, a former number two at the fbi's miami office. i'm curious in looking through the indictment where you saw the strengths and maybe weaknesses in the government's case? >> it's important as we talk about delay, complications, speedy trial, that we also factor in the potential complications involved whenever classified material is part of the prosecution's ragy, and the indictment clearly indicates that at least 31 documents are part of charges. in fact, each one of those 31 documents, constituting a cha of willful, unlawful retention of national defense information. so the national security community, the intelligence community has been scrambling with the damage assessment, but yet, has had to agree, sign off on the use of those 31 highly classified documents for this

prosecution, in some way, shape, or form. so how will that delay things potentially? well, you're talking about defense attorneys getting cleared. you're talking about operating sometimes in a scif, which by the way, the miami federal building has a secure facility for classified information, and you're talking about exposing citizens, jurors to some classified information. the other thing that intrigues me really about this indictment is about what's not in it because we know that the search warrant by the fbi on mar-a-lago produced 102 classified documents, yet only 31 were chosen for the prosecution purposes. so why is that, and one has to wonder whether the documents not chosen are even at a higher concern in terms of sensitivity and the intelligence community agencies that may have said to the prosecution this can never see the light of day. you cannot go with these, and

that would be stunning because the ones in the document are highly sensitive. >> all right, frank, thank you. we're getting some indications that former president trump may be back on the mood that the proceedings may have finished. the garage door has been peeked open a little bit. let's go to gabe gutierrez. what can you tell us? >> reporter: i'm trying to see those live pictures and i can't see them at the moment, but i can tell you what the process was last time in new york. typically if we get the indication that former president trump is on the move, they will typically keep the reporters and the public that is in the courtroom for at least five or ten minutes potentially while the former president and his motorcade leave the scene, and then we'll be able to get more information. several colleagues in there that may give us, you know, some fresh reporting on what went inside after we left.

as soon as i left, we were awaiting that plea from walt nauta. we had just heard from the attorney or from the former president, and then we hoped to also learn potentially if any conditions for his release, obviously if he is on the move, he is, you know, we'll just have to find out what, if any, conditions were placed on his release, and what comes next in this case. and perhaps whether there's a time line laid out for discovery, but again, since there's a magistrate judge overseeing today's hearing, it could be that, you know, we might just have to see another status conference with aileen cannon, the judge that is assigned to this case. again, lester, just an unprecedented federal arraignment here of the former president, and i'll send it back to you. >> all right. we'll continue to monitor this picture for signs that the trump motorcade is leaving, and toward that, a busy night still ahead for the ex-president.

kristen welker, he's going to continue to make his appeal to the court of public opinion. >> he certainly is, lester. he's going to return to his bedminster resort. we anticipate we'll hear from him later on this evening, and i can tell you in talking to sources inside trump world tlrgs there is a defiance that i anticipate will be on display tonight. all of the things we've seen on truth social we will likely hear tonight when the president, former president steps in front of the podium. he will reiterate likely all those familiar refrains that this is a witch hunt, that the doj has been weaponized and what's really interesting as i've been talking to republican strategists who say, look, prior to these indictments the former president was focused on rehashing 2020. that was his big talking point, that was his big selling point. now he has a new foil. now he has a new line of attack and basically a place where he can focus his anger, his ire, and try to rally his supporters

around that. and that is when he is often the strongest. we saw his poll numbers go up in the wake of the indictment in new york. will that happen this time around? we'll have to wait and see. one notable thing, someone said, look there is a question of fatigue here. do voters start to feel fatigue? because he continues to fund-raise, to ask voters to support him. is there a moment, and will you start to see some republican candidates say, look, he's focused on himself and not focused on helping the american people. we'll have to see if that line of attack comes out in some of these gop campaigns. i anticipate we'll hear a defiant and fired up former president trump, lester. >> thank you. looking down from the helicopters at the crowd here outside the federal courthouse. we are expecting to hopefully be joined or hear from more of our team who have been inside the courtroom, monitoring these events. keep in mind that tv cameras not allowed inside federal

courtrooms. there will be no video recording of it. we're waiting for the information. we've seen some signs the motorcade may be on the move here shortly, activity at the garage. we're going to follow this and see where it takes us. let's go back to nbc's sam brock. he's out with protesters. i don't know what your vantage point is. i've seen people mingling around but nothing in the way of major organization from either supporters or detractors of the former president. >> reporter: there's a lot of people who are mingling around lester. the reality is these folks are not going to see former president trump. the motorcade that you're describing is going to be leaving from the other side of the building. this is all blockaded here, but to kristen's point a second ago about trump trying to rally and really energize his base, this is the first time in the history of this country that we've seen an indictment on federal charges against a former president. this is the crowd here. we're talking about a few hundred people, right, a fraction of what trump used to get during his campaign rallies. that's what's out here on a footnote to history.

as we go through the side of the street i'm closest to, this is miami avenue, and you're not going to see necessarily the motorcade here. you will see cars that are coming through with trump flags and megaphones and people screaming. this is the street and the courtroom is right over there. so it's a very unique dynamic here in miami where they've essentially allowed what the mayor said is free speech, with certainly security preventions. you can stand a couple hundred feet away, drive your car right down the street here, honk, flags all of that, a couple hundred feet away from where that arraignment took. i did speak with mayor suarez earlier today. he said there were no notable threats made regarding potential attacks or anything violence related. he had not seen any, multiple sources close to both the fbi and dhs had been planning the security outlay here, also said they had not seen any credential threats of violence. and thankfully so far today it has gone rather smoothly. there have been brief confrontations.

you talk about the crowds here, lots of maga folks, latinas for trump, women for trump, all different groups. i'm talking to the folks who came out. not that many of them are from miami. many from west palm beach county, or palm beach county or new york or nashville or texas or all over the country to be here. just in terms of scale, it's several hundred people. we're not talking thousands. again, you're seeing another bus come through here. i'm not sure if this is related or not. this most certainly is with trump flags. all this happening in realtime. the arraignment of a former president is happening as you have people in miami driving right down the street. there were no barricades or metal fences or anything of the like that would obstruct someone from coming right down into downtown miami, pulling up in their car or walking from their nearby apartment and taking all of this in. that's what you're seeing in realtime. people lingering around the courthouse potentially waiting for the former president to leave. they may or may not be aware of where we stand in the cycle of things. an incredible experience to see

this cross section of people here right now with this level of proximity and the media is all sort of intermixed into this plaza. we're all standing there together. it's a crush of reporters and people who live nearby, and certainly demonstrators who have been out here all day, and all blended together standing this far away, the other side of that building is where we expect the former president to ultimately leave in his motorcade before he gets back to new jersey. this right here is a miami way of absorbing history and all of the dhs and local police officers who have been on the ground here, the county police as well, have been here and provided a steady presence but not an overbearing one by any stretch of the imagination. it's not like you look around and really feel like they're on every square inch of this space. it's a lot of people milling around watching and waiting for the former president to leave the courthouse. >> all right, sam brock, you continue to watch that. we'll continue to keep our eyes on the garage where the

ex-president is expected to emerge shortly to make a trip to the airport in this case, to go back to new jersey to make some remarks later on tonight. let me bring hallie jackson back into the conversation. hallie, we haven't talked much about president biden, facing a real discipline challenge as this goes forward. >> we haven't talked much about him because he hasn't said much about it at all, lester. that is extremely intentional, if you listen to the signaled that the white house has put out about it. because of so much attention and pressure from republicans on whether or not this investigation politicized, i think the white house is very intentionally taking a hands off approach on that front, and the president today is doing what presidents do, the business of the office, right? and it is a kind of split screen in a way with the former president here as president biden continues on with his scheduled appearances, his scheduled interviews, of course after that root canal yesterday. will there is a notable exception, first lady jill biden

had a fundraiser overnight, she was a little bit shocked by the response of some of these republicans to this indictment. that is more than what we have heard in the past from people in and around that sort of inner circle for president biden. but it does speak to the way that the white house wants to be sure that the president does not end up accused of having a heavy hand on this. the appearance from merrick garland, the attorney general for special counsel jack smith to have full independence is essential for credibility for a large part of the country. you look at a way a large part of the country sees it, lester, and based on the latest snapshot polling since the indictment, 80% of people think it's a huge concern that these national security documents were put at risk. when you look at the gop slice, it's much smaller, something like 38%, which again gives you a glimpse into the way this is being perceived in different corners of the country. >> special counsel, laura, was appointed essentially in anticipation of concerns about

conflict, correct? >> he was appointed after the former president announced that he was running again recognizing sort of the extraordinary situation they were facing. the attorney general announced that he was doing it to try to protect the integrity of the process, and so it's so noteworthy that mr. trump keeps saying obviously the justice department has been weaponized and this is a political persecution, not even a prosecution. and yet, everyone is trying to distance themselves from that process. the current president is distancing himself from the justice department, and the current attorney general is distancing himself from the process as well by giving it to jack smith. when in reality, none of them will be immune from the attacks and from all of the vitriol that's being thrown at them. and from all of the vitriol that's being thrown at them. and eventually the president is going to have to address this. eventually he's going to be asked about it in a way he won't

be able to stay silent, and you can imagine at a debate if mr. trump ends up being the nominee, this is going to come up. >> if he does a debate. >> if he does a debate. this is going to come up. he's going to be challenged in some way. for right now as you said, it will be a test of discipline, but at some point he's going to have to say something. >> keep in mind, he's also under investigation from a different special counsel on the issue of retaining documents. >> and in a much different posture in terms of the time line, according to our reporting that is not nearly in the same position this one is. he hasn't been interviewed yet as far as we know. i think there's been some reporting that he would actually sit down with the special counsel that he has. he has his own special counsel, a different prosecutor rob hur, the attorney general announced would be overseeing that case. but we still don't know anything about what the results will be in that case. it's just in a different spot. >> there was also somebody else who had their own classified

documents investigation skprgs and that of course is former vice president mike pence, who is now a candidate for the white house himself officially going up against his former boss. and in many ways pence has this unique ability alone in the republican field because of what he faced to be able to talk about the national security potential harms, the national security potential implications. you've heard him describe this as serious, these allegations, obviously continuing to echo the doj concerns, but he alone in this race has that perspective of somebody who can say, well, i cooperated. i did what i needed to do. i didn't get, you know, charged or indicted or arraigned on federal charges here, and i wonder how much we'll see that as this race continues to play out. >> he could make the chris christie argument, right? he's not. he could say, look, i cooperated. i gave them all the access in the world. they didn't have to get a search warrant. they didn't have to go through that whole process because i decided to let everyone in. you could see him do that, but he hasn't gone there.

he's still trying to do this delicate dance of appeasing the voters while at the same time trying to explain that this is still serious and it's unclear if he can have that both ways. >> let me bring chuck todd back to the conversation. chuck, one of the games that's often played in washington we call what aboutism, and we see it on both sides from time to time. and it's playing largely here. hillary clinton, beau biden, president biden, i'm sorry, not beau, hunter biden. these all come up in a way that could be confusing for people. so walk us through the relevance of these various cases. >> well, look, they're relevant within what happened in that moment, but the biggest difference between every one of these cases and donald trump is the cooperation aspect in that whether it was the classified documents of joe biden and mike pence, whether it's the email investigation into hillary clinton, whether it's the

financial investigation into hunter biden, the biggest difference between all of them is the obstruction. and the former president has essentially stood in the way, and he's done this with every single investigation starting with the muller report. in some ways this has been one of his moves. and you know, the ultimate, we're talking about the politicizing of all of this. donald trump announced in november two weeks after the midterms simply to dare the justice department to indict a sitting candidate for office. and so each hand forced the other, right? he does that, it forces -- that's when garland, who had said he was not going to go down a special counsel, decided to go down that road because he felt as if trump's decision to be an announced candidate forced his hand and it put us on this road. this was an intentional act by donald trump so that he could use the cover of his candidacy

at his chief defense. sometimes you don't know where his legal strategy begins and his political strategy ends. he has morphed the two together. >> is the political clock going to run out here at some point as we march on towards the primaries and general election given the length of time that this case alone could take? >> it's possible. you keep referring to something that i think is very smart during this coverage, lester, which is just sort of, you know, we're so used to the trump era has brought nothing but blockbuster, unprecedented moments in history to the point we're numb to it. it's possible republican voters get numb to this. they may get worn down. i think hallie brought that up. you know, that's always possible. i think it really depends on whether he can sort of keep their -- keep hold on them. the fact is i thought he'd have worn out long ago, okay? i mean, he wore out swing

voters. that we know, we've seen it 1822, that we know. he has not yet worn out enough republican primary voters to make the party walk away from him. >> all right, chuck, thanks. let's bring back our chief white house correspondent kristen welker as we continue to await the president's motorcade to emerge from the garage. but kristen, weigh in on the politics here. the clock is ticking. you know, these issues, comparisons between other -- what may sound like similar cases. how is all of that playing? >> well, i think one of the big unknowns, lester, that we're all waiting to see is will there be more titles. he's obviously under investigation in georgia. could there be an indictment there. the special counsel is still investigating the events surrounding january 6th. there could be an accumulation factor if there are more indictments, so that's one thing i think that his political

rivals are watching for. i want to go back for a moment if i could to the current commander in chief to president biden. this is a very deliberate strategy not to weigh in on these indictments on these legal challenges of former president trump. his calculation is not only to draw a sharp distinction with the former president to say, look, the doj is separate, yes, i'm also under investigation for my handling of classified documents, but i'm not going to weigh in on what they are doing, but he's also trying to and aiming to show every day that he is carrying out the duties of the office of the presidency. that is a political strategy as much as it is part of him going about his daily business and trying to say, look, it's business as usual here at the white house. because trump is the strong front runner, obviously biden world is bracing for the possibility that he could be in a rematch with former president trump again. and so all of this is laying the groundwork for what could be a be a really fierce fight between

these two again if the former president does win the nomination again, lester. >> all right, kristen welker, thanks, and the left side of your screen, the overhead shot here of miami outside the federal courthouse. you can see some of the agents, security folks at that exit where we believe the motorcade will exit here after a short time. former president trump entered through his attorney a plea of not guilty in a brief court proceeding here. walter nauta is an alleged co-conspirator, his co-defendant in this case seated at the same table. we got the reporting leading up to the point of his arraignment, so we're not quite sure where we are right now. let's go to gabe gutierrez right now who was in the courthouse for the first part of the proceeding. what can you tell us, gabe?

i don't think we have -- gabe, you with us? >> no, no, yes, i'm sorry, lester. some people coming out of the courtroom, karen duba, she's a producer with us here. we're trying to get the latest information. hi, karen. yeah, we're live on the air. just tell me what transpired, what just happened in the past few seconds. >> okay, the last few minutes -- sorry, lester, this is of course we just saw some producers, and reporters, journalists running out of the federal courthouse. karen, if you could just stand over here, or lester if you want to just for a few seconds chat with your panel and we can get some of the latest information from karen here. we're trying to figure out exactly what happened, again, in the last 15, 20 minutes or so since i left the courthouse. >> just give us the sign when you're ready. >> he did leave? >> yes. >> okay. >> they released recommendations

to the prosecution to render passport no, no travel limits. they said no to all the limits of domestic travel, no, southern florida outside southern florida, not necessary. they agreed on all of that, those conditions. >> so you're saying no. >> the prosecution. >> so there are no limits to any sort of travel, so lester, those were some of the conditions that we were talking about here e. we're waiting to find out what would be the conditions on former president trump's release. i'm being told by our producer on the scene, no limits on any travel, no surrendering of passport, is that correct? >> avoid all -- this is what the most prosecution and the defense spoke about 20 minutes about the special conditions about avoiding all contact with witnesses and the victims, and that's where the -- got argumen discussion back and forth. the prosecution feels like they need to present a witness list

because president trump does not know who these witnesses are, and that he has people on his staff, secret service where he will have some communication with them. >> right, and so karen, if we can stop here so we can bring our viewers in through this. there was a discussion, again, on the limits of this release. you're saying that was about 20 minutes of discussion. the question i have for you, was there any limits placed on his conversations with walt nauta? of course one of his employees. was there any restrictions or was he told not to speak with his alleged co-conspirator? >> not about the case, and at that point the president -- when they started discussing that, president trump crossed his arms, and you could see a little bit of not being pleased about those. >> so just to be clear, the judge said that he could not speak with walt nauta as this case moves forward, is that correct? >> about the case. >> about the case. >> so the former president's reaction, he crossed his arms and seemed not pleased about that. >> he seemed not pleased about that. there was a good 20-minute

discussion about that, and the government feels that there is a way to be workable about this and to create this list. >> a list essentially -- >> of the witnesses. >> a list of the witnesses. okay. and so no contact is too broad, no communication. >> karen, thank you so much. lester, i'm going to send it back to you in case we get more information. i was just speaking with our producer here. i'm going to send it back to you. >> all right, some great raw reporting there. let's go to adam reiss. he just stepped out of the courtroom. give us what you have. >> lester, good afternoon, the hearing just completed. it was 47 minutes long. earlier, prior to the hearing, mr. trump and walt nauta, his valet, were booked at the same time when they arrived at the house in the courtroom, the attorneys were lined up on both sides. on mr. trump's side he was

represented by both todd blanche and chris kise. he sat with his hands early on clasped in front of him. on the other side, you had david harbaugh with the special counsel's office, jay bratt, the assistant to the special counsel, and julie ed elstein. court officers, secret service, judge jonathan goodman began the hearing. he thanked the chief judge for the u.s. of the courtroom. he thanked the u.s. marshals. he thanked the clerk for making all the arrangements, and he said that mr. trump's hearing first appearance would go first, then mr. nauta. he welcomed the attorneys, and he said that mr. trump's attorney, his second attorney todd blanche from new york was welcomed pro hock viche, which means he was allowed to represent him even though he was not part of the florida bar.

trump sat most of the hearing with his arms crossed. blanche said they waived the formal reading of the indictment and they entered a plea of not guilty. that plea was entered by todd blanche, essentially mr. trump didn't say a word throughout the entire 47 minute hearing. they requested a jury trial, and they said there's a standing discovery order. i will just go through it quickly for you, lester. essentially there was a lot of back and forth, and that's why something that's typically 15 minutes long, a first appearance in an arraignment took so long because the judge was actually going beyond what the prosecutors wanted. the judge said that he wanted to impose special conditions to essentially have mr. trump avoid all contact with witnesses and victims unless through counsel, meaning trump cannot contact anyone including mr. nauta about the case.

very specifically about the case. long story short, after back and forth between the defense and the prosecution, they came to an agreement that the judge said that he will be very specific and that the government will come up with a list, one list. it won't be exhaustive. it will be narrow in terms of scope, and it will reasonably accommodate mr. blanche, mr. trump's concerns, and the restrictions will be limited only to contact about the case. so essentially the upshot is that mr. trump can't talk to any potential witnesses about the case, and essentially, mr. nauta went next. mr. nauta, his valet kept his chin down, his eyes down. he was very subdued. he went through the same process. his arraignment, because he did not have a florida-based attorney, his arraignment will be on june 27th. >> i'm going to interrupt you

just for a moment to call attention to the motorcade. it appears to be leaving the courthouse now. we've seen a couple of suvs making their way out of the garage. one of them carrying former president trump who has now through his attorney pleaded not guilty to the charges against him regarding often referred to as the documents case. there's the aerial shot. i'm sorry to cut you off because you have a lot of rich information. please continue. >> lester, i want to mention about that specifically. when we left the courthouse, we were able to look from the fifth floor back out onto the streets, the front of the courthouse and then the rear of the courthouse, and we had heard talk of thousands of people showing up. we didn't really see that. when i left the courthouse, we did see hundreds of people on both sides of the courthouse gathering, whether they were trump supporters or anti-trump protesters, we don't know, but

as you see from the aerial shot and the ground level shot, there were large numbers of people here showing up for this arraignment of mr. trump. the judge went on to say the same challenges with the co-defendant exist with many of the witnesses as well. one of the key witnesses is still the president's lawyer. that's a big problem, so this is all from mr. blanch. he said the facts of this case are everything in mr. trump's life, especially it relates to his staff and secret service, mr. blanch said he's very concerned how mr. trump can go on in his everyday life dealing with his staff and the secret service when he's not able to communicate. so they came to an agreement. you can communicate with all these people until that master list is given by the government. he can communicate. he just cannot discuss the fact

s of this case or discuss any of this with fact witnesses related to this case. mr. blanche said in reference to the prosecution, he said look over there, there are 13 lawyers. the government said that there is a way to make the court's decision workable. the elephant in the room the government said is we don't have a list yet, there isn't a list of witnesses yet. i promise it won't include every conceivable witness that they might call at trial. the judge made a final decision. he said i'll take one list from the prosecution. it would be no contact, no communication about the facts of the case without approval of counsel. lester. >> all right, thank you. i just want to point out again, we're looking at ex-president trump's motorcade now. it was a number of people who appeared to be able to run up to the former president's car. we saw him waive as they came out of the garage. we saw police -- there it is, police apparently subduing one individual who appeared to

charge the vehicle carrying the former president. but they're on their way to the airport leaving the miami area after adam is reporting a 47-minute arraignment. i want to bring laura jarrett into conversation. we learned a lot from adam there. what stood out to you? >> so we had wondered whether there would be any conditions on their release, not that we thought that they would actually have to give up their passport, but on this issue of mr. trump and mr. nauta being able to communicate given that nauta still works for him, even traveled here with him, and yet is still a co-defendant, alleged co-conspirator. we wondered whether there could be any conditions. we've now learned from adam and all that great reporting that the judge actually, not the prosecution, but the judge said they are not supposed to communicate about this case. you might wonder how is that supposed to work in reality. the whole point of it is so they

can't collude on their testimony. they can't try to get their stories straight and because the investigation is ongoing and the prosecution is worried that mr. trump doesn't know all of their witnesses who have testified including, it sounds like some employees of mr. trump, they're worried about providing -- >> hold on a second, our reporting is that they traveled together to this arraignment today. >> yes. >> i don't know if that meant they were in the same vehicle, but it sounds like they'll be able to be together. >> he'll still be able to work for him. it sound like the judge acknowledged the unusual circumstances given that he's a current employee, but they're not supposed to talk about this case. they're only supposed to talk through their attorney. we had wondered if they were engaged in a joint defense situation. we have to do more reporting about that. for people at home, the reason that matters is because of attorney/client privilege. if they have a joint defense agreement, their attorneys can talk without having to worry

about privilege. she can share information, they can essentially be aligned in their defense on this case. we have to learn more about that. it is interesting that the prosecution is going to have to turn over a list of witnesses, other people that the former president cannot talk to when it comes to this case. the whole reason for that is because you're trying to protect that witness testimony, protect the integrity of the investigation. there may be witnesses who are coming before the grand jury in this case, and also becoming before the grand jury in the january 6th investigation, and so that's also a concern. again, shows you just how complicated the legal situation here is for the special counsel, and it's interesting, you know, that this went on for so long, and it sounds like it was really largely led by the judge. as you heard adam say, this normally takes 10 to 15 minutes, but it sounds like the judge was trying to be careful and methodical and impose conditions that the prosecutor wasn't asking for. >> but not required to give up a passport or eliminate travel. >> that's to be expected. >> t