methods and ongoing criminal investigation, but what we do see reveals a wealth of new information that shows that the justice department did not take the extraordinary step of seeking a search warrant to search the home of the disgraced ex-president lightly, and that it was a last resort after months of back and forth between donald trump's lawyers and the fbi and the national archives. doj also making clear that donald trump keeping records that contain what is known as national defense information at mar-a-lago poses a national security risk to the united states. here is what the affidavit says about the records retrieved by the archives in january of this year which contain 184 classified documents. quote, fbi agents conducted a preliminary review of the 15 boxes provided to nara and identified documents with classification markings in 14 of those 15 boxes. according to the fbi, some of

the material was marked with the highest levels of classification that exists, material that is meant to be held only in secure government facilities not at a private club where basically anyone can pay for membership and wander around. arguably, the agent's most alarming finding that we were able to see in this redacted version was that the boxes contained classified information that came from human intelligence sources meaning if the documents were mishandled, leaked or transmitted they could compromise the identity of american intelligence assets and the affidavit also lays out why doj had good reason not to believe or trust trump and his lawyers knowing that back in february of this year, after the archives notified congress that there was classified material and what they got back from mar-a-lago, trump put out a statement that very fact. investigators write this, quote,

there is probable cause to believe that additional documents that contain classified national defense information or that a presidential record subject to record retention requirements currently remain at the premises. there's also probable cause that evidence of obstruction will be found at the premises. the release of the affidavit that underpin that search warrant used in the search of donald trump's private residence is where we start the hour. jackie alemany, investigative reporter and msnbc contributor. andrew weissmann is back and member of the robert mueller's special counsel investigation and frank figliuzzi, former fbi assistant for counterintelligence and an msnbc national security analyst and miles is here from the department of homeland security co-founder of a new national political group that recently launched called forward. >> i want to start with you, jackie alemany.

you've had some of the reporting that's been way out in front of the taking of the documents and the efforts to get them back to mar-a-lago. what do you find when you dive through this affidavit? >> yeah, nicole. i think what jumps out is the volume which is what everyone's headline is leading with today. this is a number that we had been looking for, but was previously unknown. we had been described the volume of classified documents in various different ways as we had previously reported. we were told the page numbers of items that were listed and there were certain numbers of sets and we did not know that there were 184 classified documents that were initially seized, retrieved, recovered whatever word you want to use from mar-a-lago during that -- that first time that the former president's legal team finally allowed the archives to recover their materials from the white house, so -- and that was really

just the beginning of this entire saga that has been going on since two weeks before the former president left office according to an email that we reviewed earlier this week, as well, from gary stern who said that two dozen of these boxes that were in the former president's were told that they needed to go to nara. it is unclear how they ended up at mar-a-lago and whether everything has still been recovered, but we are now piecing together all of these different streams of information that have come out and all of it amounts to a very large volume of classified, top-secret information that has been taken in january, in june and most recently on august 8th when the fbi executed their search warrant. >> andrew weissmann, the affidavit gives us a window into

some of the different buckets in which these documents in their rightful place and in the hands of the right people which they are not and were not and some of them are in violation of the presidential records act which means the president gave a speech and he made notes on it. you take that set of the remarks with the notes on it and they go in the national archives forever, every speech bush ever wrote and their notes are preserved and the second is what jackie is talking about, that in the boxes that they got back, there are 15 boxes and 14 of them held classified documents and not just a schedule that was classified to protect the president's security while he was traveling abroad, but the most sensitive. the most sensitive signal intelligence and human intelligence. what on earth -- what on earth would anyone be doing shoving that kind of intel into the

boxes? >> so it's important to note that those numbers as astounding as they are are just the numbers of what was given back to the archives. so it does not include what was then also found pursuant to the search because what was unsealed today was in advance of the search being done. so just remember that, and then the answer to your question, nicole, on what would somebody be doing with that is something that donald trump knows has not in any way, in spite of all of his venting and epithets, all addressed as to why he took and kept all of this and you know, one guess is that obviously, there's speculation about monetizing and giving it to foreign adversaries and you don't have to go that far and when you think you're above the law and you are the state, you just take whatever you want and one of the ways that that is

just not my speculation as to what's going on. the letter that was given to the court by the justice department as part of this affidavit and it's attached. you can read it. it's in may of 2022, and it's by mr. corcoran to the justice department actually says that the president cannot violate the criminal laws involving classified information. that's the title of one of his sections. upon there's the law, of course, doesn't support the proposition, but that is the kind of thing that you can see donald trump himself writing. that should be your lead point, and i can't break the law because i essentially am the law. >> his surrogates have been on tv making that point. the affidavit analyzes the lame defenses and we'll ignore them for a minute, but what the affidavit emphasizes, frank

is -- is, you know, frankly your area of expertise as well as andrew's and miles' and the national security threat with the handling of these documents posed to the country. talk about that and as andrew is saying, we don't know what they got and we don't know that they're satisfied they got everything. >> no, nicole, it's been 35 years of my career that i've been involveded in either law enforcement, national security intelligence and global corporate security or commenting on national security. 35 years. there's not much that astonishes me, but i have to tell you, reading the classification markings, just the classification markings referred to in the affidavit made the hair on the back of my neck stand up. when you see h for human sources, when you see si for signals intelligence, it doesn't get any more gravely serious than that. literally human lives can be at

stake. we are often talking about intelligence that is singular in nature. what does that mean? it means that it can only come from one source. the microphone in a foreign intelligence service headquarters that took a human source to plant it. the human source reporting on the illness of a world leader or the plans against us. it took 20 years to recruit that person. they may not have had to infiltrate human beings out of nation because they were at risk depending on how this damage assessment comes out and i'll say something that i don't think i've heard talk about in this busy day which is this information and these markings indicate it is so sensitive, so sensitive that it will be problematic to prosecute trump for this. i have had cases, numerous cases in my career, and i as a.d. of counterintelligence, i oversaw all espionage cases where certain three-letter agencies

came to us, nicole and said yes, you caught the guy, but this can't ever see the light of day and we're not going to support a prosecution. we go back and forth. well, let's give everybody a clearance. yes, okay, we can do that. let's do this in camera with the judge, okay, but ultimately we have to get out there and explain what it was and how damaging it was. so incredible i challenging that it's going to be a challenge to prosecute it. >> cia and the nsa is involved in creating the two intelligence that we're talking about with signal intelligence and we have patterns. donald trump doesn't do anything for the first time when he finally gets caught and there's a pattern of sharing that kind of intelligence while he was president, and if you take the portrait of him that's been painted by ex-insiders by people like miles, what sort of

investigative avenues would you suppose are open and under way? >> so i think -- look, there's clearly now, i'm convinced because it's obvious there are references to multiple witnesses so they've got multiple witnesses likely within trump's orbit who have said probably reported in two areas. one, they're still classified which gets you to the search warrant and two, there's some kind of obstruction going on and i'm fascinated by that, by the way, for a couple of reasons and one is they had probable cause to believe there's evidence of obstruction inside mar-a-lago? >> what is that? i've seen people markup class if i kagsz and footers. >> can the it off and literally copy it as if it's not uncls phi. >> kash patel better get worried

periodese part of an inquiry because i don't believe for a second there was a declassification order. i don't know what that is, in addition to the damage assessment which is separate and apart from the criminal investigation they may be focused squarely on obstruction because that, you might be able to get obstruction charges without getting into the really sensitive data that can't see the light of day. you might be able to prove, look, you did the things to cover this up. destroy, falsify and you might be able to do that, without getting the substance, but look, if a special master is appointed and his stafferer and his staff had to get the clearances which is no easy tank and they have to take their time and go through it. >> frank is almost discussing a parallel probe that resembles the mueller probe and the

original national security question of coordination of tactics and russia and obstructing the very probe looking at that question. >> well, there are those two pieces. i do think that one way to look at the obstruction might be simpler which is simply the statements that were made by the trump team to the national archives saying that they returned everything and they're repeating that statement through counsel to the department of justice when we know for a fact that that was the very least inaccurate, and there's reporting that it was intentionally so that the president deliberately withheld thing. >> i think frank is flagging an important, and there is a law that was create sea, into's case

like this to back away, i than is a prediction and speculation and an educated one is that the former president is going to be prosecuted. >> wow. >> i don't see how you can not given this information and not just that it's so clear that there is an active, thorough investigation and just how much was done here, but when you compare it to precedent, when you compare it to general petraeus which happened while i was at the bureau and what we are seeing is so much worse both in terms of the volume and the length of time and then the sort of repeated obstruction and

false statements that were made. i don't see if you're somebody like merrick garland who is a former judge, who thinks about precedent, about treating like defendants equally, i don't see how you fashgs void that conclusion in this case. >> and i want to understand on on for all the conversation with you, and your wife said i want to follow up with it quickly. how is it that one of the windows this we have from this affidavit is that donald trump knowingly took these things, knowingly kept these things and knowingly lied about what he had? >> extremely. for all of the people who say why didn't the ar kwiefs in the department of justice act faster and by the way, when you piece together the time line and this affidavit does give you more, the department acted quite

quickly once they had the referral and in spite of the fact that donald trump had his lawyers were trying to keep that referral away from the bureau, that all is going to be really damning evidence intentionality. just imagine if somebody by accident took some documents, even a box and again, the volume belies the idea that it would be an accident, but here that length of time and the fact that you only returned some of the documents, but not all of them and then you made statements that you did return everything and that's leaving aside as frank said they clearly have talked to a whole series is clear le refuting the kash patel statement was that they were declined and it's clear that the

justice department doesn't believe that for a minute. all of that goes to the discretionary decision that merrick garland is going to have to make. and as i said, i don't see how if you were concerned about precedent, how you really can avoid the ultimate conclusion here that he needs to be charged. >> miles, i want to ask you, you're the only person who would have been on the inside watching donald trump deal with matters of national security and state secrets impeach i want pull this thread that and andrew, and he is full of "kwo ub what. kash patel who is described as a former president administration official characterized as misleading reports that nara had found classified materials that the former president provided to nara from mar-a-lago.

patel reports this such reports are misleading and the president had declassified the materials at issue. you know how trump rolls. the tell that they seem to know that they're in some degree of trouble, even their weak defense hasn't been bolstered by any evidence that he did that, and there's this news no evidence at all and they didn't declassify anything. what can you tell us about donald trump's cavalier attitude about national security parties and cls fied materials? >> yeah, i mean, first, i've that's i believe and that's one of the things that they were looking for which is evidence of destruction which could have a declassification order and i have to think that investigators are looking into that right now. it was my very first reaction is that somewhere donald trump was running to write on a cocktail action some sort of retroactive

declassification order. again, speculative, but that's the behavior we've seen from donald trump. also, what's not said in this affidavit i think is very telling and there are three categories of people that investigators are clearly worried about. one is spies and the other is detectives and the other is whistle blowers. when i say spies and the doj justification says they don't want to reveal certain information because it could affect secret service operations and that tells me they're not only worried about the president's safety at mar-a-lago, but that there are security vulnerabilities that likely made this information vulnerable to infiltration, to spies potentially on the property and that's one thing they're clearly worried about. a second, it is clear they want to investigate theps whistle

blowers and andrew noted it earlier or frank noted it earlier that there are clearly multiple witnesses here, and i will tell you in trump world they are in a full panic. they are in a mole hunt to try to find who these people are who are clearly around him and who clearly ratted donald trump out and the investigators want to protect the security of those individuals because they know from donald trump's history that he tries to root out and punish whistle blowers whether it was the intelligence community whistle blowers or others in his orbit. his first treat in response was treason, question mark, and they demanded that "the new york times" handed me over to him for legitimate purposes and they have concerns about these. >> just to follow up on that. i think that there's some great reporting that's relevant because it happens more than in just this one instance. "the pittsburgh gazette," the

fbi investigation, a year before the spectacular raid of the former president's seaside home, the russian-speaking immigrant from ukraine made several trips into the estate posing as a member of the famous family while making inroads to the key supporters. the ability to bypass the security at trump's club shows the ease with someone with a fake identity and it's one of the power centers. penn penn and republican property for intel jens marked as confidential in containing signal intelligence, mike? >> yeah. i saw the reporting out of palm beach on this woman. the fbi is investigating this, reporteded le this is a wild

investigation in this reporting. it's not the first time that the fbi has investigated somebody that penetrated -- penetrated is a strong word. you can be invited. this woman is photographed with trump at some golf outing in mar-a-lago. she has a fake i.d. that says her name is rothschild, and it's not and there she is. this is scary stuff and there's been a chinese national that's been found to have been wandering around there doing who knows what that is under investigation. it's not an optimal security environment, and i'm sure the secret service could never have picked this environment as a kind of weekend residence for any u.s. president, but it goes to the heart of this issue which is this is not an approved storage location to top-secret

information and it gets back to my point, i understand the deference shown by the archives and the doy and can you pretty please put another lock on the door? that doesn't make it a skiff? the urny which is rather interesting is the deference and delay this occurred, and that's where obstruct started to occur, and there you have it. so that's when you put your trust in trump. >> no one going anywhere. >> inchewed the serious happens of potential crimes. the ex-president hez made a habit for this entire time on the national stage. plus president joe biden with his first comments on the trump search affidavit. we'll play it for you as well as his blasting of maga republicans rallying democrats and just how

the midterm elections are, labeling the gop philosophy as semifascism. white house chief of staff ron klain will be on later in the shows, and he will weigh in on just how dangerous the ex pf president's refusal to return secret documents is to u.s. national security. all those stories and more when "deadline: white house" continues after a quick break. stay with us. ues after a quick . stay with us “shoot it?” suggests the scientists. so they shoot it. hmm... back to the miro board. dave says “feed it?” and dave feeds it. just then our hero has a breakthrough. "shoot it, camera, shoot a movie!" and so our humble team saves the day by working together. on miro.

>> tech: cracked windshield? don't wait. go to safelite.com you can schedule service in just a few clicks. it's so easy. and more customers today are relying on their cars advanced safety features, like automatic emergency breaking and lane departure warning. that's why our recalibration service is state of the art. we recalibrate your vehicle's camera, so you can still count on those safety features. all right, we're all finished. >> customer: thank you so much. >> tech: thank you. don't wait--schedule now. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ wanna help kids get their homework done? well, an internet connection's a good start. but kids also need computers. and sometimes the hardest thing about homework is finding a place to do it.

so why not hook community centers up with wifi? for kids like us, and all the amazing things we're gonna learn. through projectup, comcast is committing $1 billion so millions more students can continue to get the tools they need to build a future of unlimited possibilities. every year we try

to exercise more, to be more social, to just relax. and eating healthy every single meal? if only it was this easy for us. we are back. jackie, to the point made by andrew about how merrick garland might view a crime of this magnitude and his pledge that

he's made since he's been pushed by journalists over whether how he'll hold everyone involved with january 6th regardless of who they are, whether it's the yeshgs-president, these are some of the sentences that have been levied over the classified material. harold martin who pled guilty to willful retention, he just had them for national defense information was sentenced to nine years in prison. nighia hoang, pled guilty of possession of national defense information, he was sentenced to five and a half years in prison and a familiar name that he mentioned was david petraeus pled guilty of mishandling classified information was fined $ 100,000 and two years'

probation on the light end to nine years' probation, is deadly serious for the ex-president. >> yeah, and this is actually a topic i've been, you know, in conversation with about with a ton of my intelligence world sources and communication sources because there is a feeling here that this is much more cut and dry in terms of being able to potentially successfully prosecute the former president, but it is still a high bar, but in the case that merrick garland decides not to prosecute him how do you hold anyone else accountable for violating classification rules going forward in the u.s. government? that it -- that it is a real, potential issue and if donald trump were not president, something like this case of

taking hoards and hoards of the most sensitive information home with him, hiding it, obstructing it from the fbi, keeping it in inappropriately handling it without proper authorization. it would bar that person from being able to handle classify information in the future or from being able to, you know, hold certain positions in government because of the nature of classified information that those positions require, but if former president trump runs for president and becomes president again and wins in 2024, how will he be held to account? will he do all of this all over again? will it be another four years of completely disregarding the presidential records act and the way the filing system is supposed to operate and not just for his benefit, but for the benefit of national security, the american public, democracy,

really, and -- and this is a question that is a more philosophical question that is looming over a lot of people who work in this world and study this world closely. the other thing, nicole, that i wanted to mention. miles, you had used the word mole. it is very important that we try not to play into the former president's narratives here. while this entire situation is extraordinary, unprecedented and has been pretty shocking at every development along the way, the one thing that is standard operating procedure is the way the fbi has been handling this opinion these interviews that they have been conducting along the way have been with a variety of people and not just national archives' employees and also people who work for president trump on the mar-a-lago, and

they answer their questions truthfully. that does not make them a mole or an informant it just means that they are, you know, again being truthful with investigators and answering questions that have pretty clear answers to them. >> miles, i'll let you respond. >> i think jackie is absolutely right. one of the things that happened here is within days and hours of this becoming public it became so rapidly politicized that now any potential indictment or prosecution will have a huge political cloud hanging over it, and i think that's extremely unfortunate. it -- overall, donald trump's politicization of this damages americans' confidence in the rule of law. i fully believe from having talked to friends in the bureau

and the justice department that this has been handled by the book, that the investigators have no partisan motive behind this whatsoever and these are fbi agents who were following the law and nothing about this, so far has struck me as political on the side of the investigators. so i appreciate jackie saying that. i think it is very, very important to emphasize that so far, what we've seen are folks, you know, stepping up and doing when they're supposed to do in a situation like this and indeed, i have to second what andrew weissmann said in a previous segment. i think for the first time there's been a lot of speculation for years that donald trump will be in trouble and this seems to be the first time that he'll be indicted for something and even though the affidavit was redacted heavily, it does suggest that they're pursuing this in a very, very serious manner. >> andrew weissmann, when donald trump had sergey lavrov into the

oval office there was a firestorm of media attention after ward about him sharing classified information during that meeting and before lavrov left the 18-acre compound, a senior national counsel official was on the phone with me telling me that h.r. mcmaster was saying the same thing to the press. would all of the people who saw donald trump's mishandling and leaking information be potential -- if he's charged? >> there's something called in the rules of evidence 4b, which is a rule of evidence that talks about prior instances of the same type of conduct so those kinds of stories and evidence about how he handled things are

potentially something you could show. i have to say, just putting on my prosecutor's hat, this is -- as miles said, this is a cut and dry issue. i would not go there. i would try this in a clean, short, lean way. in other words, yes, we all observed many, many ways in which the president sell either cavalier or worse, but i don't think you need to go there, and i do think i need to be distracting for a jury. we were stepping way ahead in terms of where we are right now, but if you are, to answer your question, if you are the government, you may want to flush that out so you know what the possibilities are so you have that in your arsenal. one person that we talked to that was clearly flagged in the affidavit is kash patel. he, to me, is clearly in the

crosshairs because the department of justice, i think, very responsibly put before the judge what's called brady information. that is potential exculpatory information, evidence favorable to donald trump, but it's clear, although we don't have the reasoning because it's redacted, it's really clear from the way the redactions are done that the government thinks that all of the information was not declassified while the president was the president and you know that because after they talk about kash patel they continue to refer to the material that was at mar-a-lago as classified. so kash patel, when he sees this will need to be getting a lawyer, and i would say he needs to be getting maybe a better lawyer than we've seen to date in this investigations. >> we have to sneak in a break, but the burning question, i think behind all of of this is

why. why did the president who had to be spoon fed with sugar and syrup and everything nice, his pdb every morning and still didn't take it. why did he steal state secrets and we'll put that to the panel on the other side of a short break. e panel on the other side of a short break. ♪ and kenny on the koi ♪ ♪ and your truck's been demolished by the peterson boy ♪ ♪ yes -- ♪ wait, what was that? timber... [ sighs heavily ] when owning a small business gets real, progressive helps protect what you've built with affordable coverage.

kids don't always take the best care of school supplies. so save money shopping back to school on amazon. while they... 0oh... uh... figure their stuff out. we just moved. so there's millions of -

dahlias in bloom. over nine acres. when we started, we grew a quarter of an acre. now i'm taking on new projects on the regular. there are millions of ways to make the most of your land. learn more at deere.com for decades, i've worked at the intersection to make the most of your land. of domestic violence and homelessness. so when prop 27 promised solutions to homelessness, i took a good, hard look. it's not a solution. 90% of the money goes to the out-of-state corporations who wrote it. very little is left for the homeless. don't let corporations exploit homelessness to pad their profits. vote no on 27.

hi, my name is cherrie. i'm 76 and i live on the oregon coast. my husband, sam, we've been married 53 years. we love to walk on the beach. i have two daughters and then two granddaughters. i noticed that memories were not there like they were when i was much younger. since taking prevagen, my memory has gotten better and it's like the puzzle pieces have all been [click] put together. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. sgloop frank, i want to understand where this

investigation came from. it's a criminal referral that came from the national archives after they got the documents back. it has a national security division where they don't always become criminal prosecutions. help us understand getting this right. >> so there's likely parallel investigation going on clearly with regard to damage assessments like this that this would be handled entirely by the counterintelligence division at fbi headquarters in concert with the other agencies in the intel community that, of course, have become victims here. we call them victim agencies because their material has been victimized. that is counterintelligence professionals and the charges here, even though it's gotten criminal are dealt with counterintelligence because they relate to national security so

they're intermingled here. as you begin the prosecution you have to be concerned with declassification of your own materials and it gets rather complicated, but at the root of this is why did your investigative subject do this and what is the motivation, and in some ways it doesn't matter. so for example, necessarily with regard to the obstruction-related charge. that's more straightforward. he -- they did this or that and they lied about this. okay. but when you're talking about the other two, it really helps. it really helps to show he intended to do something really bad. you don't have to show that necessarily and intent is important and essential, and you don't have to show he transmitted and he didn't intend to transmit to a foreign government, but the reason why is important especially if this becomes a jury trial, and i know we're way ahead of ourselveses and that gets you inside the

head of trump which we tried to wallow around in for five years or more and the short answer as to why is i don't mean to be cavalier is because he can. you'll remember the infamous, you know, statement recorded unknowingly off the bus where he's talking about basically molesting women, and he says the elect you because you can. when you're famous you can do it. it's because he can. it's more complicated than that. he sees information as capital. he sees everything as transactional. if he saw intelligence that could perhaps be used against him he might take it, maybe he flushed that down the toilet, but if he saw something he could use against a foreign lead are. if he saw something that he thought exculpated him, exculpatory, he might take it and sold for millions of dollars later, he might take it for that reason. we've seen that over time and

that will be part of this investigation, nicole. talking to all these witnesses around him and seeing if he's ever made comments as to why. why does he want to keep this? >> frank, i guess i ask because we started and we got to know all of you because we started covering counterintelligence investigation that was opened by andrew mccabe into donald trump when he fired comey and the question that andrew mccabe had and the probable cause that he had to have was whether or not the obstruction was evidence of something else, acting on the part of another -- of an american adversary and is it possible -- and he sought to destroy, destroy and annihilate anyone that was ever part of the counter intelligence arm, pete strzok, lisa paige, andrew mccabe and jim comey, not just fire, but destroy him. that feels like his nightmare, a

counterintelligence question about him, frank. >> wouldn't it be interesting -- what a great point. wouldn't it be interesting that what started this all off and his troubles becomes the end of him because it's a counterintelligence problem and it's of his own doing. it's of his own doing. that would really be the height of irony here, and i really get concerned about the national security implications. i know i'm beating this horse, but think about even phone calls. think about his lawyers who are not cleared to see this, who probably saw it. who probably didn't say oh, no, no, no. they probably peaked at it. think of who he showed just to say hey, look at this, a satellite photo or whatever he's got in there. look at this. it scarce the hell out of me. did he pick up the phone and have a conversation with lawyers and say what about the t.s. document that involves north korea. what about that one? someone intercepted that phone call. someone abroad, a foreign

service may have picked up that call and already has a reference to what we're trying to protect. it's really unthinkable. >> jackie alemany, andrew weissmann, frank figliuzzi, and miles taylor. i'm grateful to all of you. president joe biden on his predecessor's claim that he declassified all of it and every last one of those documents that he brought with him to mar-a-lago after leaving washington and we'll bring that to you and we'll speak to the white house chief of staff ron klain. don't go anywhere. ron klain. don't go anywhere.

the lows of bipolar depression can leave you down and in the dark. but what if you could begin to see the signs of hope all around you? what if you could let in the lyte? discover caplyta. caplyta is a once-daily pill, proven to deliver significant relief from bipolar depression. unlike some medicines that only treat bipolar i, caplyta treats both bipolar i and bipolar ii depression. and, in clinical trials, feelings of inner restlessness and weight gain were not common.

caplyta can cause serious side effects. call your doctor about sudden mood changes, behaviors, or suicidal thoughts right away. antidepressants may increase these risks in young adults. elderly dementia patients have increased risk of death or stroke. report fever, stiff muscles, or confusion, which may be life-threatening, or uncontrollable muscle movements, which may be permanent. these aren't all the serious side effects. in the darkness of bipolar i and ii depression, caplyta can help you let in the lyte. ask your doctor about caplyta, from intra-cellular therapies. ♪ ♪ ask your doctor about caplyta, ♪ ♪

you're making all the difference out there kid. next big american. pressure, pressure? pressure, pressure. so where do you think this pressure's coming from? everyone. i'm just here for the mints. [ cheering crowd ] so much pressure. pressure makes diamonds. true. pulisic! he scores! incredible! ♪♪ with hand-crafted steakburgers and chicken sandwiches. there's a perfect plate for everyone. great value for all your favorites only from ihop. download the app and earn free food with every order.

president trump said he declassified the documents and did he just declassify them all. why, i declassified everything in the world. i'm president, i can do it all. come on. i'm not going to comment because i don't know the detail. i don't even want to know. let the justice department take care of that. >> that was president joe biden a little while ago essentially mocking one of donald trump's many excuses for why he had 184 classified documents, unsecured, at his mar-a-lago golf club after he left the white house. it's a rare comment from the president on an issue that the president has made a point of steering clear from. his whole team has, and letting the justice department do its work. his remarks follow a fiery rally and speech last night where president biden sought to energize all democrats, drawing a very sharp contrast between his party and his leadership and

the maga republicans who he says are moving farther and farther away from democratic, small "d," democratic principles. let's get to white house chief of staff ron klain. i know how message disciplined you are, so i'll ask a very specific question. we learned today as there were human intelligence sources that may have been compromised. as chief of staff, you have the highest security clearances that anyone in that building has,other than the president, and the national security advisor. are you aware of actions to contain the damage based on what donald trump took to mar-a-lago? >> i'm just not going to comment on this investigation. the justice department's handling it. that's the way it should be. >> are you aware of any efforts that had to be made with foreign governments to assure them that their sources, where they're shared, were safe? >> again, nicole, you're really good at your job. i'm going to try to do mine and say -- repeat just as many times

as you want to ask, we're not going to comment on the investigation. the justice department's pursuing it. >> fair enough. the president, though, did make a sharp turn in terms of highlighting the threat that this version of republicans, which i'm guessing to him is somewhat unrecognizable, knowing of his history of close friendships across the aisle. talk about the importance of his message last night. >> well, look, we're entering campaign season. we've spent 19 months delivering for the american people. we've spent time working with republicans and democrats in congress to deliver. we've had our democratic allies just deliver a huge win for the american people, standing up to the special interests, standing up to big pharma to deliver prescription drug reform, standing up to the climate deniers to deliver the largest climate change legislation in history, but now it is campaign season, and what you heard the president say at the first rally of the campaign for him was to draw a clear distinction between what he and his allies have been

delivering and what maga republicans are trying to do, getting rid of social security and medicare every five years, denying election results, putting forward candidates who participate and believe in the big lie. and the list goes on and on. and, look, the president also made it clear. that's not all republicans. he spoke favorably about the republican governor of maryland, larry hogan, as a very different kind of republican, and he explicitly reached out to republicans last night to join with democrats and stand for small "d" democracy in 2022. it is on the ballot. we all need to come together and stand for it. >> i asked your colleague, kate bedingfield, about this yesterday, but when you see the way democracy is on the mind of voters as a top issue, and i went back this week and read the president's inaugural address, and it's all about this moment of peril for our democracy. has the president had -- has he grown more concerned about those

threats to our democracy in his months in office? >> look, nicole, you know, as you said, it was in the inaugural address. it was actually in one of the earliest speeches that he made in this campaign when he talked about fighting for the soul of america, reclaiming our soul as a country, what we stand for, what we believe in. it guides him every single day in the oval office, and it is of concern as we look at the upcoming election, and we look at the number of people who have been nominated for offices in this country, including for the u.s. senate, congress, other offices, who are saying, basically, they put their views ahead of the views of the american people on who won an election. you have people running for election management jobs like secretary of state in many states who are saying, basically, they're not going to follow the will of the voters. so, democracy is definitely on the ballot, and he's going to fight for democracy, and again, he's reaching out to people of goodwill across the political spectrum to join him in that effort. >> ron, i wonder if you can

share your inner dialogue. inflation is real, and it sucks, but how do you feel about the kind of press coverage you guys get? >> well, nicole, we -- i will say, on good days and bad days, we try to get up and do our jobs here, and the president's had an agenda since he came to office, and there have been times when people have doubted that. they've doubted his ability to deliver. but as the president said a few weeks ago, we've entered a season of substance here where we've been able to really deliver on some important things, and win historic victories. i've been in washington a long time. for 30 years, people have talked about giving medicare the power to negotiate prescription drugs. the big drug companies fought it. we beat them. we delivered. we've been trying to do gun control since i was on joe biden's senate staff 30 years ago, and this summer, we stood up to the nra, we delivered gun control. we've been trying to make the tax system fairer for decades.

big corporations pay no taxes at all. many of them do, at least. and we finally got the congress to come, and with, you know, democratic votes, no republicans helping us, passed a minimum corporate tax. so, you know, we have been working hard to deliver these results. we're starting to see the benefits of that. as you said, the unemployment's at a 50-year low. we had a new report out today that shows that inflation is moderating. in fact, prices went down last month when you add up, what went up, what went down, on the net, they went down. gas prices down 73 days in a row every single day this summer. so, we're making a lot of progress on the agenda. we have a lot more work to do. but i think there's a lot of -- for the president to be quite proud of. >> ron klain, we are always grateful when you stand up there and take our questions. we know how busy you are. thank you for spending time with us today. >> thanks for having me, nicole. up next for us, more on the investigation into donald trump's refusal to return

classified white house documents. the former doj national security official who oversaw investigations just like this one will be our guest after a quick break. t like this one will be our guest after a quick break. pool floaties are like whooping cough. amusement parks are like whooping cough. even ice cream is like whooping cough, it's not just for kids. whooping cough is highly contagious for people of any age. and it can cause violent uncontrollable coughing fits. sometimes followed by vomiting and exhaustion. ask your doctor or pharmacist about whooping cough vaccination because whooping cough isn't just for kids. i don't hydrate like everyone else. because i'm not everyone else. they drink what they're told to drink. i drink what helps me rehydrate and recover: pedialyte® sport. because it works... and so do i. ♪♪ hydration beyond the hype. ♪♪

for decades, i've hydration beyond the hype. worked at the intersection of domestic violence and homelessness. so when prop 27 promised solutions to homelessness, i took a good, hard look. it's not a solution. 90% of the money goes to the out-of-state corporations who wrote it. very little is left for the homeless. don't let corporations exploit homelessness to pad their profits. vote no on 27.

♪♪ every republican should be suspicious of what's happened in the past, happening again, so we need the affidavit. show your cards. merrick garland can't have it both ways. he can't give us the inventory of the warrant without telling us why it was necessary to raid the former president's home, and there was no less intrusive method available.

>> on the affidavit, is that something that you would want to be sort of publicly released? or do you kind of want the committee -- >> it should be released to us, and it should be released to congress. we have demanded it be released to us. >> the real story will be with the release of the affidavit itself. there is a baseline presumption that that document be released to the public in the interest of transparency. that's what's going to tell us, really, what most of us want to know. >> all three of those men huddled, coming up with a new talking point. it's 5:00 in new york. keep an eye on how they shift the goal posts. those were the republican defenders of donald trump in the aftermath of getting today exactly what they asked for, the historic, almost unprecedented release of the affidavit at the center of the search warrant in mar-a-lago. hours ago, a wave of new details in the public interest were revealed, including exactly what the fbi found back in january in 15 boxes that were returned to the archives. they contained 184 unique

documents bearing classification markings. that included 67 documents marked "confidential," 92 marked "secret," and 25 documents that were at mar-a-lago marked "top secret." the unsealing of the affidavit raises as many questions as it answers, which is why we called in some expert help from our next guest, who has spent his career at the intersection of national security and criminal law in his more than ten years at the justice department, brandon van grak was a crucial part of some of the most sensitive and consequential investigations of our time from robert mueller's russia investigation to high-profile cases against trump allies paul manafort and mike flynn. he is considered one of doj's foremost experts on national security, and the unauthorized disclosure of classified information, and he has personally investigated and prosecuted dozens of cases involving and touching the espionage act, meaning he is quite possibly, singularly qualified to help us understand

the new information that was unsealed today and the potential national security implications for the country and legal ramifications for donald j. trump. let's bring in brandon. thank you so much for being with us. i know you don't do a lot of this, but we're grateful that you are here today. >> yeah, thanks for having me. >> so, what should we make of the fact that the classified documents, they weren't schedules, they weren't mementos. they included things like human intelligence with the marking "human," fisa material, original -- originator control, which means that the agency that had created the intelligence product didn't want it to be disseminated without their input. intelligence that wasn't to be released to any foreign nationals, not to be shared with other foreign leaders or others, and signal intelligence, some of the most classified and sensitive intelligence because it also reveals a method for gathering. what do we make of someone

having that kind of stuff in their basement? >> well, it shows that there are real serious national security concerns here. we're talking, when you combine not just the classified documents that had the 184 classified documents in the affidavit, but other documents that were seized from mar-a-lago, you're talking hundreds of classified documents. you're talking many hundreds of pages of classified documents. there aren't that many cases,criminal cases, that have been prosecuted that include that number, that volume of documents, and then when you add on top of that some of the markings you're talking about r it really raises the prospects that there could, in fact, be real serious harm to national security. we don't know that, but it raises the prospects when you have markings of that level. >> so, what would this look like, leading up to the search? what kind of alarms were going off inside the fbi for them to say, these 15 boxes came back,

14 of them had classified materials in them, and we know there's more. take me inside what that looks like. >> i think "alarm" is the right word, and actually, part of the reason we know that, in fact, there was an alarm is because, based on this search warrant, we know that it was approximately may 16th when the fbi began reviewing these 184 classified documents from the archives, and just two weeks later, the department of justice was at mar-a-lago, on june 3rd, the reporting is that the chief of the counterintelligence and export control section was at mar-a-lago serving a subpoena, trying to get additional information. that's a very quick turn around. and so, it really does signal that there was heightened concern, and i think there is another point, which is not in the search warrant, but it's in the letter from the archives, which talks about the fact that some of these materials were special access programs, and it's all along the lines, again,

of information that was highly classified, but for anyone that has held the security clearance, that has been inside a secure facility, when you're talking about special access programs, it's a different level of protection. there are different layers of protection. there are restrictions, and you can see them. in fact, oftentimes, there are secure facilities within a secure facility to see these, and so it just really does raise the prospects of some real harm to national security with the fact that these documents weren't properly secured. >> let's explain that for our viewers. so, people call it a skiff, but we were talking about, when you're dealing with the kind of intelligence that might reveal signal intelligence or human intelligence, you would look at something secure within a secure location. does anything like that exist at mar-a-lago? should these even be at mar-a-lago? obviously not. >> well, that's right. and the point is, i mean, there are two aspects. one is, the distinction i just made is irrelevant to the fact

that there was not a secure facility at mar-a-lago for classified documents, period. those documents cannot be there, and you see the department of justice making that very clear, including in some of the communications that are disclosed in the affidavit, that there was no place for these documents at mar-a-lago. my point is a secondary one, which is, the national security implications here are really paramount, and when you see some of the markings here, when you see references to human sources, to signal intelligence, when you see references to information from the foreign intelligence surveillance act court from that type of surveillance, it raises a concern that there are, in fact, sources and methods that could be seriously compromised here. we don't know that, but it's just what we can glean from here, that there really are reasons to be concerned and to justify the search that occurred. >> when you look at donald trump's record of disdain for the intelligence agencies, and then you look at the kinds of intelligence that he took with him, if you were just profiling

him, what kinds of motives could there be for taking something that gina haspel and others couldn't make him receive? >> well, i think a couple interesting points on that, which is, part of the, i think, what i gleaned from this affidavit is to make sure that this isn't just about the former president, even though that has been a focus. that's not indicated that that's the singular focus or the former president is the singular focus, and in fact, there's interesting wording on paragraph 17 of the affidavit that talks about the process and procedures to get a security clearance. that doesn't apply to the president of the united states or the former president of the united states. an interesting inclusion in this affidavit, because i think it signals that the former president is not the only individual that could be the target of the investigation. >> you were involved in some of the most sensitive and, by the trump side, politicized investigations during the trump presidency. i imagine you're less surprised

than the rest of us at the appalling and incendiary attacks on the fbi and the justice department. what effect does that have, not on how they do their job, but in their very real concerns about their family's safety and the integrity and trust of the institutions? >> it's a very real concern, and what's remarkable is the investigations you're talking about that i was aware of, which were only a few years ago, i think the level of threat and harassment now actually is not comparable to what it was back then. i think it's reached a whole level of -- a new magnitude, and so i think that concern is very real, and part of the signal we have that that is a driving concern is we have the chief of the counterintelligence and export control section, a section within the department of justice that focuses on these cases, a chief is the one that's signing these documents, that's making these arguments. that's not the typical role for a supervisor. in fact, it's supervisor's supervisor we're talking about. typically, it is a -- it is a

prosecutor, a line attorney who's not a supervisor, that's leading this, and one of the reasons why i surmise that's happening is to protect the other attorneys on this case from threat, from harassment. it's very real, and i think it also ties to the broader point here as well, which is, regardless of your political persuasion, regardless of whether anyone is charged on this, the national security implications here are such that we should all want this investigation to be completed and thoroughly and appropriately done. that has to be the driving priority for all of us, and threats, intimidation, harassment of not just the prosecutors but the witnesses, undermines our ability to do that and it's something that should concern all of us. >> we were talking to frank figliuzzi about these counterintelligence questions about donald trump. they go back to andrew mccabe opening a counterintelligence investigation into trump in 2017 when you were at the justice

department. do you feel like the questions about donald trump as a counterintelligence threat have ever been answered? >> well, you know, what i'll say is, that's not -- that's not a part of this affidavit, and that doesn't mean it's not relevant, but that's not a part of this affidavit. >> it's not a "no." >> so, it's not a no, but part of this is, like, the reality is, we could spend multiple additional shows talking about sort of that piece, but i think, you know, part of the concern here is, like, where's the department of justice right now with respect to this document? if you see how this is drafted, there is a part of this, and in fact, there's a letter from the former president's attorneys, talking about, well, these classified documents were unknowingly at mar-a-lago, and they have been returned to the archives. and what you have here is this evolution where, at some point, the department of justice is at mar-a-lago, is talking to the attorneys, and saying, we are concerned that there's classified information here

that's not secured. regardless of any mistakes, misunderstanding, regardless of whether it's credible or not, there is a line that was drawn in june, and then what we have is 14 lines of redactions. something changed. there was some material additional evidence, some action, i think, that's the basis for obstruction, that changed, and that's really the driving factor, in my opinion, on why we're even seeing a criminal search warrant used in the investigation. >> so, say more. i mean, obstruction is the word that jumped out at us, but you're right, it comes after a big redacted section. is that in other investigations sometimes because of concerns that evidence is being destroyed, that evidence is in danger? is it just the very sensitive nature of what these documents are? >> well, i think what's remarkable here is, normally, you don't have obstruction when you're dealing with cases involving classified information. typically, what happens is, you learn there's classified information and you seize it and there are criminal charges. that's the evolution here.

regardless of ultimately how sensitive classified documents are, there's no room to compromise. if the fbi, if the department of justice learns of them, they have to act, and they have to act immediately, and i think that's what we've seen here. what's remarkable, again, is that sort of time and time again, the department of justice gave the former president, his attorneys, and others involved the opportunity to return that information. and what's interesting, it's paragraph, i think, 62 to paragraph 78 that are redacted, after the discussion where the department of justice draws the line, that are redacted, which suggests that those are the paragraphs where there was some conduct, whether it's the fact that the boxes that were supposed to be secured were not secured, that were removed, that raised the prospect that this classified information was in real jeopardy and that caused the department of justice to take this unprecedented step. >> not for nothing, there's some reporting -- some great local reporting about a fraudster who

made her way into mar-a-lago, posed with pictures of donald trump and lindsey graham, seems to prove the kinds of national security concerns that are detailed in the affidavit itself are very real, are really a live wire. i mean, as you sort of put on your national security hat, and just look at the fact of this, that these very sensitive documents were taken, they were asked to be returned, they didn't return them, donald trump, according to "the new york times," said, they're mine, i'm not giving them back. he knew he shouldn't take them. his lawyers told him not to take them in the first place. what do you make of what is ongoing? we don't know what the fbi got back earlier this month. >> i think that's exactly the story, whether true or not, is exactly the type of concern that the fbi and the intelligence community has with having that volume of classified documents in an unsecured location. the documents that were provided to the archives, that means for at least 12 months, they were in

an unsecured location. the documents that were seized at mar-a-lago, going on, i think, 19 months, and it is a nearly impossible task to try to understand who may have had access to these documents, and that is what ultimately the fbi and the intelligence community are going to try to figure out and are in the process of trying to figure out. what level, you know, was this information compromised? do they need to do something to protect human sources or signal intelligence, methods of collection and communications? what do they -- they're going to have to make assumptions, and given how long this information was left unsecured, they're probably going to have to make some pretty difficult determinations, sort of worst case scenarios, because i suspect it's going to be nearly impossible to determine who may have had access to the information. >> frank figliuzzi, former fbi official, wondered out loud if it might be the kind of case that's too sensitive to prosecute, should that determination be made, because

of the sensitive nature of some of the most classified documents. what is your thought about that? >> so, the fact that there are hundreds of classified documents indicate that ultimately, if this case was prosecuted, they would be able to find a way, ultimately, the department of justice in this particular section, this is what they do. they find ways to utilize and prosecute the mishandling of classified information in ways that protect it. but what frank was referring to, which i agree with, some of this information, if it is as classified and sensitive as it appears to be, could be so sensitive that the intelligence community quite simply would not let the department of justice use this, because ultimately, there would have to be some disclosure to defense counsel. there would have to be some disclosure to a jury, and at some point -- and i've experienced it as well -- there's just simply some information the intelligence community says, no way. >> if you had to look at these

facts just as an outsider, which i know isn't the reality for a prosecutor at justice department, but do you think there's enough evidence that's public facing that donald trump should be seriously concerned about criminal exposure? >> well, certainly has to be anyone to receive a criminal search warrant, especially to justify the unprecedented search of a residence, of course, there's reason for serious concern. there absolutely has to be. i think in terms of the next step, in terms of, you know, certainty of charges, i do think that there are a couple points here, which is, one, the department of justice has said that this investigation is in its very early stages, and again, it's the one that -- they have more information, and that doesn't mean, by the way, it's not incredibly serious, but the department of justice hasn't made up its mind what to do with this one, so i think we have to be cautious. but what we do know is, absolutely, this investigative step was justified in terms of

how serious it was, in terms of the volume of information that this step was necessary to take, and i do think, if you look at the affidavit, there are, in addition to some of the information in terms of the volume of information that was taken and the classification levels, there are the pieces there, and that's been talked about, for example, the reference to the former president's handwriting. the reason why you include that information is because the department of justice is specifically trying to connect the former president to this specific information. the other piece that i think is -- it's important to take a step back and recognize, is that this is classified information that was marked. this isn't information that, after the fact, and to analogize, for example, to the clinton investigation. after the fact, there was a determination made this was classified. that will happen. but the point is, there were

hundreds and hundreds of pages of classified documents that have headers and footers and marking clearly indicated. it just -- it's an incredible amount of information, and it really, in terms of justifying probable cause, is an indication of awareness of whomever went through that information -- those boxes that there was classified information there. >> and all the news accounting suggests that it was donald trump himself that went through them. brandon van grack, it's a pleasure to get to talk to you and put our many questions to someone with experience. thank you for starting us off today. >> thanks for having me. coming up next for us, continuing to break down the stunning revelations from the unsealed affidavit behind the search of mar-a-lago. our panel weighs in. plus, for years, we saw the ex-president rail against his own intelligence agencies. how his past behavior gives us insight into this criminal investigation of which he is now a target. and he is 25 years old and may soon become the youngest member of the u.s. house of

representatives. democratic candidate maxwell frost joins us after his primary win in florida with the powerful message, do not count the young people out. "deadline white house" continues after a quick break. "deadline white house" continues after a quick break. thinkorswim® by td ameritrade is more than a trading platform. it's an entire trading experience. that pushes you to be even better. and just might change how you trade—forever. because once you experience thinkorswim® by td ameritrade ♪♪♪ there's no going back.

(vo) give your business an advantage right now, with nationwide 5g from t-mobile for business. ♪♪♪ unlock new insights and efficiency, with leading ultra-capacity 5g coverage. t-mobile for business has 5g that's ready right now. make your home totally you. i did with wayfair. sometimes i'm a homebody. can never have too many pillows. sometimes i'm all business. wooo! i'm a momma 24/7. seriously with the marker? i'm a bit of a foodie. perfect. but not much of a chef. yes! ♪ wayfair you've got just what i need. ♪ i'd like to thank our sponsor liberty mutual. they customize your car insurance,

so you only pay for what you need. contestants ready? go! only pay for what you need. jingle: liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. as a business owner, only pay for what you need. your bottom line is always top of mind. so start saving by switching to the mobile service designed for small business: comcast business mobile. flexible data plans mean you can get unlimited data or pay by the gig. all on the most reliable 5g network with no line activation fees or term contracts... saving you up to $500 a year. and it's only available to comcast business internet customers. so boost your bottom line by switching today. comcast business. powering possibilities. (announcer) enough with the calorie counting, carb cutting, diet fatigue, and stress. just taking one golo release capsule with three balanced meals a day has been clinically proven to repair metabolism, optimize insulin levels, and balance the hormones that make weight loss easy. release works with your body, not against it,

so you can put dieting behind you and go live your life. head to golo.com now to join the over 2 million people who have found the right way to lose weight and get healthier with golo. let's bring in our panel. phil rucker is here, "washington post" deputy national editor, as well as an msnbc political analyst. also joining us, former cia officer and fbi special agent, tracy walder is here. and harry litman is back, former u.s. attorney, former deputy assistant attorney general, now the host of the "talking feds" podcast. you have a newly released op-ed.

you talk about, legally speaking, a knife at the throat of the ex-president. explain. >> well, so, you know, when this first started, and brandon really underscored it, there was an -- it was an absolutely exigent operation to return documents. we didn't know what kind of criminal possibilities it would present. we now do. all these documents, by the way, were signed to underscore the point by both the u.s. attorney and the southern district of florida and the head of counterintelligence, some of them just by the southern district, and the affidavit itself, while a search that was primarily or at least independently justified to get documents he had no business having and that honestly could have killed people and maybe even did, now presents, in the affidavit itself, proof of even the unredacted parts of the criminal charges and especially obstruction, the one that caught everybody's eye at the beginning. evidence, in other words, that

he knew what he had, that he purposely kind of bobbed and weaved not to give it and then finally, at least, someone in his camp lied outright about it. that's sort of three quarters of the way to obstruction, and so it now appears to be a very serious criminal investigation, which we couldn't have been sure of come august 8th. >> tracy, we've been talking all afternoon about damaging our intelligence community and damaging our human intelligence assets and our signal intelligence methods. you have the most sort of granular understanding of what that means. talk about what a -- what a sort of confirmation of donald trump's disregard and disdain for our national security agencies this affidavit reveals. >> you know, it's funny, it really goes back to what you wrote in 2017, which is, i thought, that if trump were to

be elected, that he would be a national security threat, and it turns out that he is and was. and basically, the way that i look at this, this kind of larger ripple effect. obviously, i dealt with human intelligence. i recruited human assets, and your biggest responsibility as a cia officer is to keep those human assets safe. their job, they are putting their lives on the line to help our country, and to help our country stay safe. and having documents being around in an unsecured manner where anyone can get their hands on them will absolutely get people killed. we also have to think about the fact that some of these documents were labeled for signals intelligence. that even at a smaller level, we have to think about our cooperation with other countries. we have an agreement called the five is agreement, and that's with canada, u.s., new zealand, kind of the usual suspects, and we share, regularly, signals intelligence with them. and that is for the safety of everyone, and now, they may be apprehensive to share some of

that, knowing that we're not keeping it safe. >> you know, phil, it was a constant thread through the kinds of stories that you wrote regularly during the trump era. and it almost migrated from norm busting to what tracy's talking about, threatening national security, threatening allies. i talked about when he had lavrov in the oval and mcmaster ran out to the driveway to assure reporters that he hadn't leaked classified information to sergey lavrov, who hadn't been inside the oval office in years. what do you make of sort of the confirmation that he was, as tracy said, all along, a very serious threat to national security? >> well, you know, i think we knew this throughout the presidency, but what this affidavit, the redacted affidavit, shows us today is just how serious his preservation of these documents

was. i mean, this is endangering, it appears, our intelligence sources, our methods. these are highly sensitive documents, and we're not just talking about a couple pieces of paper marked "classified." we're talking about scores of pieces of paper that were kept not only unsecured in the estimation of the government but in sort of a disorganized fashion, in boxes with all sorts of random things in a storage room with all sorts of items at his residence and golf club. and we should just keep in mind that we're not just talking about his home. it's not some sort of private home that five or ten people have access to. mar-a-lago is a club, an event venue, that hosts weddings and charity galas, hundreds of people go through there in the months when it's open during the year. so, clearly, this was a risk. it underscores why the fbi was so determined to go in and do this extraordinary move to search that property, and i think, you know, for a lot of people who studied the trump presidency, and people who

worked very closely with president trump when he was in office, it's really affirmation of what they knew all along, which is that he didn't have a regard for systems and norms and was, you know, misusing classified information and documentation. >> phil, in your reporting for "i alone can fix it" and "very stable genius," you report out a lot of the friction between national security officials and trump. there's an unbelievable scene in the tank where national security officials are disrespected and disregarded. he leaves, they call him an idiot, and it's just a constant refrain. there's also reporting from maggie haberman and others that he regularly shredded documents, flushed them down the toilet. what to you, with your body of reporting and the reporting in the two books, what do you think he took? >> oh, i can't speculate on what he took, but i can tell you what interested him when he was in

office. he was really interested in any sort of information that our intelligence agencies could learn about his counterparts around the world. there was a period in his presidency when he was obsessed with the german chancellor, angela merkel. there's a line in the inventory of what was seized at mar-a-lago a couple of weeks ago, info re president of france. that's interesting to me. i don't know what that says, exactly, but these are all things that were of interest to trump. he was very interested in all things north korea and nuclear programs in other sort of national security operations in iran and in our european allies. again, not speculating on the documents he held on to, but just shedding some light on what interested him, personally, when he was president, according to the interviews i conducted at the time. >> tracy, he was also obsessed with the investigations into him.

andrew mccabe opened a counterintelligence investigation into him, i think, in 2017, looking at whether the firing of jim comey was both obstructing the investigation and something done to benefit a foreign adversary. i wonder if you can speak about the questions that were never answered about donald trump as he was president, because he went through and purged his fbi and justice department until he ended up with bill barr atop it. >> you know, i think that's a hard thing to answer, because i think the reality is, the biggest -- the best way to answer that question is figuring out why. why did he take the documents that he did? because it was very clear in the affidavit that he was asked multiple times for these documents, and he gave them back sort of in dribs and drabs, so i think we're looking at a mixture of documents that could possibly incriminate him in doing something nefarious with national security, but then i also think that we can be, just like what phil was saying,

looking at things that really sort of interested him. so, i want to know why he kept what he kept, and because that's going to tell me what he really planned on doing with what he kept. >> harry, the conduct revealed in the affidavit does follow a different pattern. i mean, when mueller was looking at his campaign's ties the russia, he wanted don mcgahn to fire him, and that's why don mcgahn also quits. he writes his resignation letter, it's all detailed in volume two of the mueller report. with the impeachment, the first one, the call is defended as a perfect call. in this one, he's told before he leaves not to take it by pat cipollone and i always want to see regis philbin. that's not right. >> pat philbin. >> i got half of it right. the most senior white house lawyer and the deputy, we all know their faces now from the january 6th hearings. then he gets there and the lawyers he assembles to sort of

negotiate, they do a combination of returning and lying about what he has. his intent to keep something he knows he shouldn't have is so much more brazen. is that a product of never being held accountable for any of his other criminal or corrupt acts, or is it a variation in his pattern, in your view, harry? >> yeah. so, this is one of the trump imponderables. i could see it either way, but it's so secondary to what he did, so secondary to knowing that he took the documents. by the way, imagine him just before, after cipollone says he can't take them, foraging around, seeing what's good, what does he want. he takes them all. and then, yes, bobs, weaves, and eventually flatout lies. is it just, you know, i'm trump and i get to have what i want? or does he see a deal of sorts to be made there? but it's so important to understand, it doesn't matter. these are the kinds of things, and everyone around him --

another thing it illustrates, philbin, cipollone, grown-ups in the room. he's now been at mar-a-lago with a small circle of people, none of them, by the way, have security clearance. the lawyers, you know, i'm sorry, are just -- it's just amateur hour for them. there's no one to counteract the voices, and we've had some reports of some of them just today who are telling him to do the worst kind of things. so, this trump, that trump, that path lies madness, i think, but either trump is a criminal trump. >> amazing. phil rucker, tracy walder, harry litman, thank you so much for spending time with us today. up next for us, trump criticized his intelligence officials at every turn. once even telling them to go back to school. even publicly sided with vladimir putin over every one of his intelligence agencies and professionals. how the ex-president's astonishing disregard for united states intelligence agencies and their products brought us to where we are today.

stay with us. brought us to where awere today stay with us ryone, our mission is to provide complete balanced nutrition for strength and energy. woo hoo! ensure, complete balanced nutrition with 27 vitamins and minerals. and ensure complete with 30 grams of protein. ♪ ♪ your record label is taking off. but so is your sound engineer. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. indeed instant match instantly delivers quality candidates matching your job description. visit indeed.com/hire

they think it's russia. i have president putin, he just said it's not russia. i will say this. i don't see any reason why it would be. i have great confidence in my intelligence people, but i will tell you that president putin was extremely strong and powerful in his denial today. >> do you still have confidence

in gina haspel and dan coats? >> i disagree with certain things they said. i think i'm right, but time will prove me right, probably. when my intelligence people tell me how wonderful iran is, if you don't mind, i'm going to just go by my own counsel. >> the twice impeached ex-president throughout his time in office did that all the time, went out of his way to undermine and denigrate the work of american intelligence agencies, which makes his current predicament at the center of a criminal investigation into the mishandling of national defense information all the more sinister. let's bring in katty kay, msnbc contributor, and former maryland congresswoman donna edwards. katty, what are your thoughts today as we've had a few hours to digest this redacted version of an affidavit? >> look, i mean, trump has a long history of disrespecting the u.s. intelligence agencies.

you played there, you know, some of the most extraordinary clips, but you can go right back in the relationship to 2017 when jim clapper and the other heads of the intelligence agencies had to go up and tell him that russia had got involved in his election campaign, the fact that it was a cia whistle-blower that led to the first impeachment of donald trump, there's so much bad blood there. i don't -- there is no evidence, and you could speculate why did he take these documents? you were just doing that for the last few minutes. i don't think there's any evidence that he took them to get back at u.s. intelligence, but he certainly saw u.s. intelligence as part of the deep state out to get him. he liked their intelligence when he thought it was useful to him and when it helped him with his narrative. you were saying, he wanted intelligence on angela merkel. it seems that he wanted intelligence on emmanuel macron as well. but he did see them as part of the deep state, people who were trying to undermine his presidency right from the very

beginning and i think you can date that back to the trip up to trump tower the intelligence made where they said, look, you got your election, but vladimir putin helped you get it. >> i remember it so clearly. it was before his inauguration, and it was after he had likened the intelligence agencies to nazis. i remember having general hayden on. i was filling in for brian, and i remember that moment as being so fraught, and it is a really apt bookend. katty, i want to follow up with you. we were talking about how signal intelligence, much of it, is the -- not property of but is shared with all of our allies, the five is. what is the international concern at a moment like this when an affidavit like this drops? >> look, i mean, tracy hinted at this. i think the big picture story of what's happened in mar-a-lago is that it's not just what america's adversaries might try to do with u.s. intelligence or what america's adversaries might try to do with donald trump to

get hold of that intelligence. america's allies share intelligence with the united states in the belief that this intelligence will be held securely. that it won't fall into the wrong hands. it is critical to the relationship america has with not just the five is but with allies around the world when it's trying to build intelligence. if those allies start to think, you know what, the processes in america are not reliable for holding on to that intelligence that we have shared with them, then that does pose national security implications, because it weakens the bonds. the bonds were weakened under donald trump anyway amongst america's allies and i think that's part of the reason there is this robust kickback from the justice department is, in a way, it is a demonstration to the world that people will be held to account and that the systems will be supported to the degree that the justice department can do that. >> and i mean, donna, we've tried to spend as much time on these national security questions as the criminal questions, and in some ways, the criminal questions are more

intriguing. donald trump has broken more laws in full view of more people, and nothing has seemed to happen, but these national security questions have also been asked very publicly, and people paid a price for asking them. andrew mccabe opened a counterintelligence into donald trump and donald trump set out to destroy him and everybody that was involved in the fbi. to my reading, nothing ever was pursued. we never got the answer to the questions that led to the opening of a counterintelligence investigation into the ex-president. and brandon van grack, a veteran of the justice department and the national security cases like this, was very careful to say, this has nothing to do with that. but this case may answer some of what he -- finding out what he took is interesting to me. what did he remain interested in from agencies that he publicly derided? >> well, what did he remain interested in, and why? and i think that we still don't have the answers to those questions, and i actually think it's really important for us to answer those questions. one, so that we can rule out any

potential nefarious use of the information. but also, so that we can assure our allies and our friends that we are able to control that information and that we've gotten it back into properly secured hands. you know, trump's relationship with -- or nonrelationship with the intelligence community actually dates back to before -- while he was campaigning for president. recall that secretary clinton reminded us many times that donald trump would be a danger, a national security threat to the united states, and i think that that is true. however this shakes out. i mean, you know, we know that those documents were stored in an unsecured location. we don't know all the people who had access to it. even the fact that they were just there, we know that it's important, and you do as well, that when those documents are viewed, that they're viewed in a

secure environment, and certainly that was not true in the basement at mar-a-lago. i think that it's really important for us to get to the answer to these questions, not necessarily for criminal pursuit, but so that we have those answers and a complete picture of what it is that the president -- the former president of the united states was doing. >> donna, the january 6th hearings and other work, frankly, by the justice department, have made clear that donald trump remains a domestic security problem. his lies behind a lot of the agitation behind domestic violent extremists right now. we also know that he had the most classified kind of intelligence in an unsecure spot at an unsecure location that we learned today was breached by someone posing as a -- an heiress that made her way in and posed for pictures with lindsey graham and donald trump. what do you make of the fact

that republicans are nowhere on the homeland security questions and threats, and they're nowhere on the national security questions and threats. not interested. >> well, i mean, i guess, nicole, i've relieved myself of the challenge of trying to address where it is that republicans are. what i will say is that for the american people, i think this is an important consideration as they go into these midterm elections, to make sure that we have people who believe in democracy, who are interested in protecting our national security, and who want to hold accountable those who put it at risk. i mean, i just don't even know how to answer for republicans anymore. they will never be able to stand on the side of law and order. they'll never be able to stand on the side of the united states national security interests ever again, given where they've been over this period of time, and their patent unwillingness to hold the former president

accountable for really egregious mistakes, both as president and as a former president. >> it is amazing. every time the justice department meets their bar, we have to see the affidavit -- saw the affidavit. crickets. katty kay, donna edwards, thank you so much for joining us on such a busy news day. we are grateful. up next for us, maxwell frost first started getting involved in politics following the sandy hook elementary school shooting. he then became national organizing director for march for our lives, and now, he may very well be on his way to becoming a member of congress. frost will be our guest after a quick break. he'll speak about the power of the mass shooting generation at the ballot box. stay with us. g genetiraon at the ballot box stay with us

there's a monster problem and our hero needs solutions. so she starts a miro to brainstorm. “shoot it?” suggests the scientists. so they shoot it. hmm... back to the miro board. dave says “feed it?” and dave feeds it. just then our hero has a breakthrough. "shoot it, camera, shoot a movie!" and so our humble team saves the day by working together. on miro. kids, one year they want all dinosaurs stuff the next, camels. - llamas. - llamas. so save money shopping back to school on amazon. you sure that's not a camel? yeah. whatever you say.

your shipping manager left to “find themself.” leaving you lost. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. indeed instant match instantly delivers quality candidates matching your job description. visit indeed.com/hire no matter who you are, being yourself can be tough when you have severe asthma. matching your job description. triggers can pop up out of nowhere, causing inflammation that can lead to asthma attacks. but no matter what type of severe asthma you have, tezspire™ can help. tezspire™ is an add-on treatment for people 12 and over... that proactively reduces inflammation... ...which means you could have fewer attacks, breathe better, and relieve your asthma symptoms. so, you can be you, whoever you are. tezspire™ is not a rescue medication. don't take tezspire™ if you're allergic to it. allergic reactions like rash or an eye allergy can happen.

don't stop your asthma treatments unless your doctor tells you to. tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection or your asthma worsens. sore throat, joint and back pain may occur. avoid live vaccines. by helping control your asthma, tezspire™ can help you be you. no matter who you are, ask your asthma specialist about tezspire™ today. 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!

this came was more than a name on a ballot. it was about electing an agenda. it was about electing a movement. my name is maxwell frost and let's go to this. >> that was tuesday night, maxwell fast giving his victory speech after he clinched the democratic nomination in the race for florida congresswoman val demings open house seat. winning the primary by a wide margin f. he wins he will be the first gen z member of congress. he's just 25 but fired up florida voters. joining us now for the florida's 10th district, maxwell frost. i covered this earlier in the

week, because i think no matter what party people are in we should be relieved andel ated that your generation wants to come in and fix the mess some of us have made. >> definitely. part of the reason why we want it well is having to do with our message and despite what folks in the state have been going through, for this whole year. our governor is someone that because of his failures to provide for working class familiars he's scapegoating and blaming our lgbtq plus community and black folks and immigrations for every issue on the sun and it is our message despite what we've been through and it is that hope that will help us win this general in november and replace ron desantis and marco rubio and stay on the right track. >> and you're running as the mass shooting generation. have you done massive shooter drills your whole time in school. >> -- >> yeah. well, for a good amount of the end of my schooling. we're from a generation that has

been through more school shooting drills than fire drills. and it is important for folks to recognize this, because the leading cause of death for children recently went from automobile accidents, to gun violence. and so our children are on the front lines of this issue, that could be preventible. what got me involved in this fight ten years ago was the sandy hook shooting. i remember speaking with matthew soto who lost his sister vicki in that shooting and seeing the pain in his eyes, hearing the pain in his voice and from the families of the victims. and the thing that really got me wasn't even just what happened but the fact that it was preventible and a few months ago we saw the exact same situation happen in texas. so we have to work to prevent this. we have to work to save our children, save our families and save our communities. >> people count the young -- the youth vote out. they don't think it is achievable. they don't think you guys are reliable voters. what are all of the pieces of evidence to disprove that?

to -- or to change it? to make more people of your generation politically active. >> well, we have the highest youth voter turnout in a midterm in 2018 right after the march for our lives movement. a movement that bridged the gap between cool and consciousness and conspired convictions of not ome young people but people across the world and with my race if you look at map at precincts, one of the best was the university of central florida, the first largest undergrad university in the country. so things are changing. young people are just getting old enough to really vote now. just getting old enough to run for office. and so the answer here is to put more resources and more training and more attention on the youth vote, not to just cast it aside. young folks have a specific focus on specific issues. have a perspective that should be valued and at the table and that is one of the many reasons

i'm excited to go to congress to fight for my district and to also provide that perspective. so don't give up on the the youth vote. it is trending up. we have to keep talking with young people and flock on the doors and nake the phone calls and show them you're working for everybody. >> you're going to be on a ticket with val demings and charlie crist. and if they ask you, how do i get to your friends and how do i get to 25-year-old voters, what do you tell them, where do your friends get their news. what do they want to talk about? what is the answer to that he that question. >> i think the most important thing here is the messaging. young folks want something to vote for and not against. they want to close their eyes and think about the future they want to live in. a place where we're free of gun violence, where everybody has health care and people have the ability to just live their lives, right. and almost not have to think about politics because government is working for them. that is what we really focused on in march for our lives in 2020 when we reached out to young voters. that is what i focused on in

this campaign, reaching out to any voter and that is my piece of advice. and i've told val demings and charlie crist, to put me to work to get the youth vote out for them and it is not just about them or me, we're names on a ballot but this is about building power in this state that so desperately needs it. >> yeah, and you are running at an important moment in a tough state. we'll keep our eyes on your race. you wave whenever you want to come on and update us and let us know how it is going. congratulations on your win on tuesday night and thank you for spending some time with us today. >> of course. thank you so much. and if folks want to support us they go to frost for congress.com, have a good night. >> quick break for us. we'll be right back. k. ♪ ow, ow ♪ ♪ with a big, fresh carrot ♪ ♪ and a whole lot of cheese ♪ ♪ and the mirror from your van is halfway down the street ♪ ♪ well, you can say that -- ♪ wait, what?

i said, "someone just clipped the side view mirror right off the delivery van." when owning a small business gets real, progressive gets you right back to living the dream. now, where were we? why, you were fixin' to peel me. [ laughter ] your record label is taking off. but so is your sound engineer. you need to hire. i need indeed. indeed you do. indeed instant match instantly delivers quality candidates matching your job description. visit indeed.com/hire hi, i'm debra. i'm from colorado. matching your job description. i've been married to my high school sweetheart for 35 years. i'm a mother of four-- always busy. i was starting to feel a little foggy. just didn't feel like things were as sharp as i knew they once were. i heard about prevagen

and then i started taking it about two years now. started noticing things a little sharper, a little clearer. i feel like it's kept me on my game. i'm able to remember things. i'd say give it a try. prevagen. healthier brain. better life. ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ ♪♪ "shake your thang" by salt n pepa

thank you so much for letting us into your homes during these extraordinary times. we are grateful. "the beat" with ari melber starts right now. happy friday. >> happy friday. and this is a friday with breaking news. today a judge released the road map to that unprecedented search of donald trump's mar-a-lago home. meaning the world now knows more now, tonight about this search than yesterday or ever before. and to be clear with you, we are also learning some things about what prosecutors don't want anyone to know about the open criminal probe. so we have this information, which we didn't have until today and that is legally interesting. we'll go through it. we also have this not information. a large swath of redactions, i could even put them like, redact my face