good to be with you. i'm katy tur. will she say yes or will she say no? the hearing regarding donald trump's request for a special master started an hour ago, which means it is very likely we could find out what she decides or is inclined to decide any moment now. after all, she's already heard from d.o.j. and from trump's team twice. the former president's lawyers filed a response to the d.o.j. last night and while they disputed d.o.j.'s description of the june 3rd meeting where the legal team handed over a taped of envelope of classified documents saying it was significantly mischaracterized, trump's team did not push back, citing pages of specifics d.o.j. listed, not that they specifically did not allow d.o.j. to take a look inside the

boxes in the storage room or signed a certification letter saying no other documents were there during that june meeting. despite saying documents were only in the storage room, the fbi found more in donald trump's over office. and not that they repeatedly delayed and seemingly misled investigators. instead the response focused again on why they argue donald trump needs the protection of a special master. quote, the united states attorneys office has filed an extraordinary document with this court suggesting that the d.o.j. and the d.o.j. alone should be entrusted with the responsibility of evaluating its unjustified pursuit of the president's possession of personal and presidential records in a secure setting. the former president addressed

himself curiously not denying he knew they were there in the first place, instead arguing that d.o.j. put them on the floor to make him look bad. the fbi took them out of cartons and spread them around on the carpet, making it look like a big find for them. they dropped them, not me. so donald trump is not arguing he never had the documents and he is not arguing he did not conceal the documents. he seems to be arguing they were his documents and he could do whatever he wanted with them. joining me now from west palm beach is kerry sanders, tom winters, lisa rubin and from the d.o.j. national security division, david laufman. this hearing has been going on for an hour. any indication of what's going on inside the courtroom?

>> well, yes. i was in the courtroom and left as it was just beginning. this is the largest courtroom in the federal courthouse. it is mostly full, a few empty spaces. right now our producer is inside the courtroom and monitoring every development. it's not as if we've gotten to the point this far in and some thought it would take about 45 minutes for the judge to at least hear from both sides after having read the briefs but it's going on a little bit longer of whether the judge here will decide whether there needs to be a special master. from the notes coming out in the courtroom, we do know an attorney representing mr. trump in this case, saying, quote, this is an unprecedented situation and we need to lower the temperature on both sides. we need to take a deep breath. what we're talking about is presidential records on the hand of the president of the 45th president of the united states.

and he's going on saying that this hearing itself suggests a significant lack of trust and that is why this is so important. these are the arguments basically reflecting what we have already reported, what you have examined since the filings here, not only by the department of justice but by the lawyers representing the former president here. getting down to the specifics of the judge asking questions, which is going to be the most important part here has yet to unfold. when we start here with the judge asking question, that will likely lead us to an indication of where she's going to go in determining whether a special master is needed or not at all, as you so clearly laid out, the department of justice feels that this is not necessary while the former president's lawyers and former president arguing that these documents should be reviewed by a special master. katy? >> and, tom, the president's legal team filed a response to

d.o.j. last night and it was about 18 pages long and it focused very heavily on the need for a special master, used a lot of harsh language saying that, again, this is unprecedented, it was an unconstitutional search. at times it read a little bit like a political document, talking about donald trump's political prospects and the fact that he could potentially run for office again. but just expand a little bit more on what they're arguing here and how they did or did not push back against what d.o.j. was saying. >> we kind of previewed and telegraphed this yesterday when i suggested i thought this was going to be part press release and part legal filing. that's essentially what we received last night. i think you've hit the nail on the head here with the fact that it was definitely focused on the special master component of it. it did raise the fact that it was unprecedented. i think that's one thing that every party and people watching us believe it is unprecedented.

as far as the president running in the future and any potential political prospects, that's out of the judge's purview today. the judge has to make a decision on the idea of special master. the judge could rule from the bench, the judge could say i've listened and i've got briefs and want to write up a written order or the judge could have a prepared written order and inserts or fine tunes and changes their ruling and files it. as far as your point last night, a couple of other things came up, the idea that the documents were put across the floor, they raised the photo that it was included. obviously the president has stated that the fbi had strewn them across the floor. with respect to that, it's very clear when this image widens out

or if we take the full image, you'll see there's actually a ruler on the floor. so there's kind of an evidentiary component to this and they're putting them on the floor to show this is what we found in that room. you're looking at it there. if you look at the center screen where it says secret sci, that document in the lower center par, you'll see a bit of a ruler next to it. that's part of the evidence process. so that's something that i just wanted to point out after the president's statement. this is not unusual for us to see and you see the placard with 2a there, not unusual for us to see this as part of an evidence photo. so the filing definitely coming after this idea of special master, can we trust the government to have effectively gone through this? are they going to pay attention to our privilege issues? that's what they seem to be focused on and driving at today. interestingly the one part of the dispute with the justice department that's not in writing because a lot of what we know about this and the timeline,

katy, is between letters exchanged between the two parties, the national archives and trump's own attorneys, the one area that isn't papered, so to speak, that we don't have memorialized in writing is a meeting in june that trump's attorneys are disputing of the characterizations of the justice department. it will be interesting to see if we hear more about that meeting during today's meeting. >> that's what i was going to ask next. i do want to ask you about who is arguing for the justice department. i'm going to read your title again because it's relevant. you were the former chief of counterintelligence and export control in the d.o.j.'s national security division, the man who is arguing today is a man named jay bratt. he is your predecessor or successor, i should say, and he has that exact same title. so what does it mean that he's there? >> well, first of all, it means that the government's case is in strong, steady hands. jay is a stellar advocate, he's a stellar litigator on top of his substantive national security expertise, he enjoys

the wide, respected admiration throughout the department, the department's law enforcement partners, the u.s. intelligence community and if he's arguing the matter for the government today, continues to signify both the importance of the case, writ large, and the importance of ensuring consistency and how department enforcement policy is applied in cases involving the mishandling of classified information, including who gets to decide what documents in a search are reviewed by whom, under what circumstances and here the government played it by the book, procedures for a privileged team in this case are precisely as they would be in any other case where the government would think there's a chance and here appears to be a slim chance where there would be attorney/client privilege documents at issue. they are not going to look for documents that belong to the executive branch. they are the executive barrage. it's nonsense that they belong

to trump. >> can we stick on that for a second. in reading donald trump's legal team's response, they repeatedly assert that these are donald trump's records, his only personal records, his presidential records, he has a right to them. they're not the government's records. but the presidential records exact says that they are the government's records and i found that to be confusing that they wouldn't even argue that point with any specifics. >> i mean, katy, they seem to be cedeing lots of things, including the former president's willful retention of classified documents. everything that comes out of former president trump's mouth is a potential admission against interest that could come into evidence in a criminal trial. and where he's complaining about the fbi in essence mishandling classified documents that he

cause unlawfully to be sent to mar-a-lago, he's admitting there are classified documents in mar-a-lago, where they're not authorized to be, in carton where they're not authorized to be and he's digging a deeper hole for himself every time. >> do you have some news? >> the judge has apparently decided to keep the more detailed list of documents that were found in exhibits under seal. so we're still trying to get a little bit more from our colleague and connor sanders is on his way back into court. this hearing is still ongoing. i think it's important to know what was filed under seal yesterday, which is this more exhaustive list of what they found, the judge is going to keep that under seal. that was also apparently, according to our court reporter, that was something that the

trump team also asked for. they're looking to keep that locked down at this point. that's not uncommon in a normal investigation. i just want to share that as well. not something we would normally have access to but perhaps something media companies might fight for. >> that's interesting because there was a footnote, correct me if i'm wrong, in their lengthy filing that said there were prepared to unseal that. they had prepared it in a way that would allow more public access to it. interesting now that the trump team is saying, no, please don't do that. >> it's particularly interesting to me because when you look at the filing from last night and when they talk about what they really want, the special master that they want, they say they want that special master to review all the materials that were seized but in service of what? when you read the details of the filing, they want the special master to batch up those documents for the trump team's own review so that they can make

assertions about attorney/client privilege executive privilege and what documents are, quote, highly personal, including medical conditions. that's not the way a special master review works. the fact that they want to see every page here but don't want anyone else to see the detailed inventory they called for, that reeks to me, that smells fishy. >> let me play this from fox news last night. >> everyone who knows president trump's office, they have guests frequently there, it's a joke. they literally must have gone in, taken out documents they wanted or cover letters and put it out there so the public believes these are top secret documents on his floor. it's ridiculous. >> so you have her saying that

there are frequently guests inside his office where these records were found and then there were indications that someone had gone through trump's desk in his office in trying to comply with the subpoena from new york into the investigation of the trump organization. how would that factor into this. >> elena submitted an affidavit or declaration in a new york court. it has to deal with the new york attorney general's investigation of donald trump and the trump organization for overvaluing certain properties for tax benefits or in order to impress potentially insurers of potential lenders. in that affidavit where the new york attorney general was saying we don't have the staff that we signed a subpoena for. she said i went into mar-a-lago and searched every desk drawer and looked for the documents being called for by the subpoena. now there's a question in doing

that search did she come across classified information that she didn't have the clearances to look at? that's one question. the second thing is her accusation that the fbi did something wrong here by putting things on the floor and that that is somehow a gotcha or ah-ha moment. it's equivalent to doing a shopping spree at tiffany. it would be nice if they gave in it in a box with big bows. if i walked in and there are six diamond bracelets on the floor, they're still diamond bracelets. we don't know why the photo was taken why it was taken. the sign that says 2a, that corresponds to the portion that has been made public. there's a designation saying 2a are verified top secret or sensitive compartmented information that were found or we believe to have been found in the leather-bound box inside

mr. trump's office or residence. i think the fbi was trying to demonstrate everything they found by laying it all out together. if you took a picture of the box as it were, you wouldn't see that. but irrespective of how we got to that picture, nobody is questioning that those documents were found in the room. >> one other question before we take a break from this story, obviously we're going to follow it because we're expecting this decision to happen any moment. david, if she does rule in favor of a special master, can she argue because this is an unprecedented scenario, can she argue this is so sensitive, i want to be extra careful here and getting a special master in is not going to delay you all that much, after all you guys went through this pretty quickly, it won't be that big of a deal to add this extra layer of protection. is that a fair argument that she might rely on? >> i mean, she might rely on it.

it's hard to say how much of an adverse impact it would have on the government's continued investigation. there's a classification under way and damage assessments. as long as a special master doesn't interfere with those things. trump team is going to continue to try to kick this can down the road to litigation. it's hard to imagine any higher court reviewing the matter that would find favor with the trump team's league arguments with the executive privilege and we'll have to see if it bears on any charges on donald trump. >> we will come back to you as soon as we get word from the judge so please don't go anywhere too far and you at home don't go anywhere either.

right now a sentencing hearing is under way for an ex-nypd officer for an assault from the january 6th riot. he's there in the red jacket. he was found guilty in may of attacking a capitol police officer. he faces up to 17 1/2 years in prison, which would be the longest sentence handed down so far in the january 6th case. his lawyers are seeking a lesser sentence on the grounds that webster says he suffers from ptsd. webster says his actions on january 6th are a result from suffering flashbacks he experienced during the riot. joining me is julia ainsley. this is an ex-nypd officer. as i understand it, he showed up wearing his nypd body armor to the riot. talk to me about what he was arguing and the way that it was pushed back against and why he might get this very lengthy sentence. >> that's right, katy.

it would be the longest sentence to date if he's sentenced according to the guidelines. he pleaded in may this was an act of self-defense but he was found guilty and now this court or this judge will have to decide whether or not to agree with his team that that sentence should be reduced. what they're arguing, what his lawyers are arguing, is that he has ptsd because as an officer, as an nypd officer, he experienced trauma, they point to one specific incident where he got into an altercation with an armed robber in the bronx. this person was trying to get his gun. he ended up having to go to the hospital to be treated for injuries. he said that he started to have those kind of flashbacks, that anxiety that was triggered on january 6th and that is the reason he acted in the way he did. you see he had that pole there, the flagpole there that he took to the officer. in his defense he tried to say he was waving the flag and then showing the officer his hands but really what he's doing is he's grabbing his face mask.

so much of this is caught on video because that day had so much heavy surveillance from the media and from cameras around the capitol. so we're able to see exactly what happened. the officer in that case said he had a hard time breathing when his face mask was being held and that later thomas webster did actually tackle him to the ground. so he's being charged with hurting an officer here and we'll see whether or not the judge actually sympathizes with him and his argument that it's a result of ptsd. his lawyers have submitted a testimony written and sworn by his psychiatrist on this matter saying that he also had a rough childhood and a lot of his trauma is what led him to those actions that day but his lawyers also say he regrets it, wishes he stayed home that day and knows that is not the answer. >> an ex-cop beating up another

cop is just striking. >> and another day of no drinking water in mississippi's capitol and no idea when they'll get it back. plus, president biden is going to address the nation tonight and says democracy is at stake and being threatened from within. and body cam video was just released of an unarmed black man fatally shot by police in his own bed. fatally shot by police in his own bed.

. up to 200,000 people in jackson, mississippi are still without water. mega distribution sites are stocked with truckloads of water bottles but residents are being turned away since demand is so high. officials still can't say when the water will be safe again. >> i do want to be clear and set expectations that there will be future interruptions, including the one today. they are not avoidable at this point and they will be as limited in time as we can possibly make them. >> the predominantly black city has been plagued with water problems for decades. in 1988 a study found that city leaders opted for cheap materials when they commissioned the water system at the beginning of the century. as jackson's population grew, extensions were made in haste and small, old pipes were never replaced. nbc's morgan chesky joins me

from mississippi. when the government says it's unavoidable, it's going to be pretty frustrating for people to hear. >> beyond frustrating. i think it's important to know the people here have been on a boil water notice for the past month. this has been exacerbated by flooding that forced the water plant offline. when i ask people about reaction to their cries they say, well, we've had to boil our water for the past month and come to water distribution sites like this one to get bottled water so this is kind of how life has been going on. what's even more frustrating, katy, is the fact that this is life for the foreseeable future. you hear what some of the folks here in jackson had to say about the situation. take a listen. >> it really sucks, man. i'm a lifetime jacksoner and i

hope the city gets together because we need water. >> it's really, like, hard on people who do work and their children need to be in school to learn. they can't learn. we have no water, no water pressure. >> they need to figure it out and make a plan. this isn't the first time that it's happened. it's just going to keep on happening. >> unfortunately that's the sentiment shared by too many people here in jackson. as for that failing plant, we are told that a water pump has been rented and installed. that should hopefully restore some of the water pressure. but it's this unpredictability that's such a problem, katy. yesterday we were at a school. kids showed up, they had water pressure in the morning and then it disappeared. they had to call the parents, have all the kids go back home. one of the administrators told me we always have a plan b but now we're having to have a plan c, d and be in situations that we never thought possible. and even though that officials are telling residents that they can bathe in this water, some.

folks tell us that it's still brown when it comes out of the shower. they'd rather take a few bottles that they can pick up here, rinse off as best they can and try to move on. katy? >> i don't blame them. who wants to shower in brown water, how do you trust it? morgan, thank you very much. let's bring in reverend al sharpton. this is a predominantly black city and they've experienced it before and they're being told it's going to happen again because their system is just not good. it's old, it's aging, it wasn't adequately repaired, it was made -- improvements were made in haste. the mayor told one of our reporters yesterday, guad venegas said it will take a billion dollars, $4.4 billion is what the infrastructure little will give mississippi, about a half billion or so is allocated

toward infrastructure issues around there. how do you feel about what's happening and how do you fix something like this when it feels like it's racially targeted? >> well, it is not only feels like it's racially targeted. if you look at the history of those communities and cities that have suffered this kind of infrastructure failure, they've always been majority black or people of color. flint, michigan being one everyone can recall, but it's more than that. you must remember that the mayor has done a good job and his father before him who was mayor have been raising these issues before. and then when we see them come about, we act as though we did not understand that they were in trouble when they were saying that we are any day now going to face this. if this was in a wealthy white community, it would not be tolerated, and it should not be

tolerated in jackson, in flint or anywhere else. where we're now having to find ways to try and get bottled water there to help them and the response has been reverend dr. jamaal bryant called me this morning, his church, and he's calling others and his church sending four trucks down, we're sending two from the action network. but where's the response from the government, federal and state? clearly the infrastructure bill has sent money into the state. the priority ought to be where there was disproportionate neglect and jackson was disproportionately neglected, it ought to be disproportionately helped. >> you're talking about what should happen and you're talking about the national action network sending some help itself. do they have the organizing power right now to make those demands, to put that pressure on the state government and the federal government, which says it's helping, to make sure that

this problem is fixed once and for all? >> i think they have the organizing power. i think the mayor has a mobilized well. the question is during the mid-term elections, can we put enough pressure on officials? many people right there in mississippi need to remember they're going to be asking for your vote, both republican and democrat. and if they can tell you that they're going to make america great again, just keep taking a bath in brown water, then you can have all the leverage you want. this is a political decision made on people that have no problem with children having not to be able to go to school or being sent home, as morgan's report just gave us, because the water ran out before the lessons ran out. this should not be tolerated in a civilized society. >> reverend al sharpton, thank you very much for coming on and

discussing that with us. stay with msnbc. the next hour hallie jackson will interview fema administrator deanne chiswell. >> and coming up, what sunk sarah palin in alaska? k sarah palin in alaska?

only at vanguard, you're more than just an investor—you're an owner. we got this, babe. that means that your dreams are ours too. and our financial planning tools can help you reach them. that's the value of ownership. age is just a number. and mine's unlisted. try boost® high protein with 20 grams of protein for muscle health. versus 16 grams in ensure high protein. boost® high protein also has key nutrients for immune support. boost® high protein.

♪ ♪ boost® high protein also has aleve x.ents its revolutionary rollerball design delivers fast, powerful, long-lasting pain relief. aleve it, and see what's possible. (dad) we have to tell everyone that we just switched to verizon's new welcome unlimited plan, for just $30. (daughter) i've already told everyone! (nurse) wait... did you say verizon for just $30? (mom) it's their best unlimited price ever. (cool guy) $30...that's awesome. (dad) yeah, and it's from the most reliable 5g network in america. (woman) for $30 a line, i'm switching now. (mom) yeah, it's easy and you get $960 when you switch the whole family. (geek) wow... i've got to let my buddies know. (geek friend) we're already here! (vo) the network you want. the price you love. only from verizon. for decades, i've 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. ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪ ♪

i typed in my dad's name... and i found his childhood home. he's been wondering about the address for seventy years... (chuckle) and i found it in five minutes. travel back in time in no time with the 1950 census on ancestry. democrat mary potola defeated sarah palin, with 51.5% of the vote. she'll be the first alaskan native ever elected to congress. she will take over the seat vacated by representative don young. he represented the state 50 years before diving in march. she only gets the seat for the rest of his term, which is four months. that means she technically still on the campaign trail hoping to win again for a full term in november.

and tonight president biden is back in philadelphia to deliver a primetime address on, quote, the battle for the soul of the nation. the white house is billing the remarks as an official white house event, not a campaign event, but it is his second of three stops in battleground pennsylvania this week and with less than 70 days until americans cast their votes for the mid terms, it is the latest example of biden's sharpened rhetoric toward the trump wing of the republican party as democrats attempt to hang on to congress. joining me now is the founder and president of brilliant corners research and msnbc political analyst, cornel belcher. and also washington bureau chief susan page. we've heard a different tone going after maga republicans saying they're a threat to democracy, they don't believe in the rule of law, they don't believe in our system of

government, no holds barred. what did the white house look at when they considered to change the way that president biden was talking about not just the mid terms but the next presidential cycle? >> well, it's campaign season. legislative season is over. now you turn the white house and the president and vice president are turning full attention to campaign season. and what the white house is trying to do is -- is determine the terms of the debate of the campaign season, right? the president and vice president are using their bully pulpit status to go and the country and define the debate and define the debate in terms that helps democrats. we see it in the nbc polling that ideal threats to democracy is rising to the top of issue concerns for voters and the president is talking about that and laying out a clear, clear contrast. it's do you want more chaos,

lawlessness, corruption, danger, threats to your freedom or do you want freedom and democracy? and unity? and i think that's the way democrats think that -- are framing that they think benefits them going into the fall election. >> it's interesting, susan, that he's doing it in pennsylvania where there is a prominent election denier, somebody who marched on january 6th in washington, d.c. currently running for governor in that state. >> a key state in a couple ways. the governor's race, the senate race also, the democrats' best chance of picking a seat held by a republican. and also a state that biden likes. how often have you heard him talk about growing up in scranton, pam. pennsylvania. i thought the poll was interesting. i'd be surprised if that turns out to be true on election day. i think we know that voters tend

to care most about the things that affect their own lives like the cost of living or jobs or education or crime. but it is an issue that motivates joe biden. it's the one that he has talked about most from the very beginning of the presidential campaign the last time around so it's surely one that means a lot to him. >> do you read anything in to sarah palin's loss last night in the special election there, susan? >> yes. it's one more sign that there are some election reforms that states are trying that are having a real effect on who prospers and wins in elections. the only two republican house members who voted for impeachment who have managed to make it to the general election are both in states that have open primaries. you look at places like new york city and alaska that are doing rank choice voting and you see that this has an impact in empowering more moderates at the cost of some of those extreme

ends of both parties. so i think this is something that we may see voters and reformers take a serious look at as they try to figure out a way to repair the breach in our politics now. >> we have a generic congressional ballot, would vote for republican 44% say yes, would vote for democrat, 47% say yes. it's a lot different than the way it looked in march. >> it is. and, by the way, you should have susan and i back on to debate the merits of the new voting. she and i would love to do that, by the way. but i will say, look, i think what you see in that new polling is also sort of what you saw in alaska. look, that is not a seat that's been historically a democratic seat. what you saw in alaska like you're seeing all over the country are more women being energized and the registration pick up.

you're seeing it where the president is and in michigan but you also saw it there in alaska where it was five points advantage for men in new registration and seven point advantage for women in new registration, if my memory serves me correct after the roe decision. so women are being energized by the decision and i think we're going to see a gender gap very large in this upcoming election in a way that you did not see in 2010 and 2014, which were better elections for republicans and democrats. >> i like when you get to my question without me even having to ask it, about you role of women in this next election. cornell and susan, thank you very much. stay with msnbc for the president's live speech at 8 p.m. coming up, we're waiting for president trump's request for a special master. we believe the decision or indication of a decision should come out any moment. co omeut any moment.

this is the moment. for a treatment for moderate-to-severe eczema. cibinqo — fda approved. 100% steroid free. not an injection, cibinqo is a once-daily pill for adults who didn't respond to previous treatments. and cibinqo helps provide clearer skin and less itch. cibinqo can lower your ability to fight infections, including tb. before and during treatment, your doctor should check for infections and do blood tests. tell your doctor if you've had hepatitis b or c, have flu-like symptoms, or are prone to infections. do not take with medicines that prevent blood clots. serious, sometimes fatal infections, lymphoma, lung, skin and other cancers, serious heart-related events, and blood clots can happen. people 50 and older with heart disease risk factors have an increased risk of serious heart-related events or death with jak inhibitors. this is the moment. but we've only just begun. speak with your doctor about cibinqo today. an innovation from pfizer.

one prilosec otc in the morning blocks excess acid production for a full 24 hours. unlike pepcid, which stops working after 9. 24 hour protection. prilosec otc one pill, 24 hours, zero heartburn. it's the all-new subway series menu! 12 irresistible new subs... like #9 the champ. rotisserie style chicken double monterey cheddar. the champ is truly made for a champ. gee, thanks chuck. who said anything about you? it's subway's biggest refresh yet.

♪ ♪ we believe there's an innovator in all of us. ♪ that's why we build technology that makes it possible for every business... and every person... to come to the table and do more incredible things. so we need something super distinctive... dad's work, meet daughter's playtime. thankfully, meta portal auto pans and zooms to keep you in frame. and the meeting on track. meta portal. the smart video calling device that makes work from home work for you.

all right. the court in south florida is in recess. judge eileen cannon has not yet indicated that she has reached a decision. joining me is former chief of counterintelligence and export control section in the d.o.j.'s national security division. the d.o.j. and trump's team have been going back and forth, trump's team saying this is a situation of the government's wrong doing, that a special master can be expedited and conducted quickly. they just want to get another set of eyes on it. it been going on before recess for an hour and 40 minutes. are you surprised by the length of time that eileen cannon is considering? >> no, katy. i think in this magnitude of national prominence, she's going to give both parties as much time as they need to make their

arguments to the court, even though it's been included in briefs that have been filed. i think it would be appropriate for her to take a pause and issue a memorialized written opinion in something like this. this hearing, this ongoing side show is not going to affect an ongoing criminal investigation in the main. the fbi and justice lawyers are going to continue consider witnesses and other logical investigative steps, compulsory process, whether search warrants or grand jury subpoenas need to be issued, they'll continue to review record intrinsic to this investigation, and continue to look for what steps to take necessary to form a fully mature judgment about whether to exercise prosecutorial discretion. unless something that judge slows down that process, i'm not sure they're going to be material live impeded. the intelligence community is going to have to come to a view

about what particular classified documents the justice department might want to use as evidence in a case in chief, if this case proceeds towards real consideration of a criminal case, that takes some time. there's a lot of socialization and debate sometimes about what documents to use. the government doesn't want to use documents that are so sensitive in a public case that they're going to further compromise sources and methods. at the same time, they want them to be enough sensitive so that a jury looking at them on their face, especially with a colored classified coverage sheet would say, wow, this is a pretty important case, these are classified documents we have to deal with. so there's a lot more the government can do to move this case forward, even while this litigation is going on. >> as somebody who has no security clearance whatsoever, i will say it was interesting for me to see just frankly what those cover sheets look like. i had never seen one of those br. kerry sanders is out of the

courtroom. judge eileen cannon called a recess. what was going on right before? >> we're at this point waiting for the lawyers on both sides who will come out and give us their take on what they have presented to the judge here. most importantly the judge says that it's not going a ruling from the bench. it's going to be a written ruling in due process, which means that it may not be today. however, it may be today. it may be just a filing. so what we've done is just a short distance away here set up some cameras and we have a camera there where the lawyers will, we believe, will go and tell us what they think. they're exiting the courthouse right now over my shoulder here. while there are a group of reporters who have gathered around them, they're not speaking just yet. i have a producer over there texting me that -- well right now, they're literally standing there as reporters are shouting questions. we'll wait to find out what it is they say say and hair their

analysis. the department of justice is saying the former president does not have access to these documents. he cannot say they are his to have. they are part of the government. while his attorneys are arguing not only that department of justice name and took those with the fbi, took those documents, but that they didn't even have the authority to go in and take these documents. we're going to hear how this plays out with the judge. i mean it's important to note a federal judge appointed in 2020 by donald trump but that does not mean that she owes any allegiance to who was in the administration, who the president was when she was appointed, and that she has to go through what essentially here is the rule of law. whether there will be a special master that is appointed to look at these documents or not, i mean the department of justice here is clear that is not needed and so, you know, whether a

special master is appointed or not, it will be just a step. i'm not sure that any of the lawyers can today or after a ruling is made, whether anybody can really claim victory. this is an ongoing process and while the department of justice doesn't want to see a special master, they will continue on with what they are doing on their investigation in this case of top secret and above documents. it's important to note a lot of people are wondering this is a bunch of papers, there may be important information in there, we're not sure, back and forth, both sides arguing. remember that all of those documents lead to what in top secret documents leads to human intelligence and that's a fancy way of saying people, people's lives who may be in danger, if those documents have information that can reveal about what they do and what they are provided and if that information had ever gotten out. >> sources and methods. i know aileen cannon said she

will written an order and in the past indicated what way she's leaning. we have andrew with me as well. one of the questions that's been nagging everybody here is, why did donald trump want to keep those documents? he's now admitted he knew he had the documents -- he's posted on social media about it saying that it was doj that took them out of his desk indicating he knew the stuff was there -- why did he want them? how does doj go about finding that out? >> we don't know the answer to that. obviously donald trump knows what he took. he knows why he took the documents. he also knows what he planned to do with the documents. none of which has he addressed in spite of making all sorts of accusations. the motive for why he did it and what he was planning to do is

technically not something that the department needs to know and prove at any potential criminal trial. it, obviously, is nice to know what someone's motive is. it can provide evidence at trial, but it's unnecessary in this case, and we may never know the answer to that. but i would like to just say something about the court not making a ruling from the bench, that is orally, and reserving to do a written decision. obviously, this is speculation, but informed speculation, i think that is a good sign for the department of justice. it can now go forward with whatever it has been doing, the national security review by the dni, the criminal investigation, all of that can go forward. it suggests to me, especially since trump wanted everything to be stopped and to have a special master appointed, that still

could happen, but the court, obviously, doesn't take this as something so imminent and necessary to order everyone to put pens down and stop who they're doing. it suggests she might be concerned about the small number of potential attorney client documents and that's something that she could deal with and would be a reasonable decision say if there's some dispute bring it to me. that's sort of some tea leaf reading on that. >> we'll see about that. as to why he might have held the documents, we don't know. he has not said. michael cohen, who is donald trump's old former attorney, was working for him a long time, obviously, fell out quite dramatically, had an idea. here's what he said. >>. >> i stand firm when i say that donald wants to use this in order to hold the country hostage. that's his goal. for all we know he's already given it away. there's definitely more that's there.

he's going to use this to ensure that he doesn't spend the rest of his natural life behind bars charged with treason. >> that's what michael cohen is saying. again, michael cohen had an aggressive fallout, falling out with donald trump. but lisa, in terms of the search that was done in mar-a-lago, donald trump has other homes around the country. he has trump tower in new york, bedminster in new jersey, places he frequents. why has doj and fbi not executed a search of those properties or would we know if they've gotten anything back from those properties? >> look, the fact that donald trump announced there was a search of this particular property leads me to believe if there had been searches of any of his other properties we would know about it. that being said, why haven't they done searches of those properties? we don't know what witnesses -- we know there are multiple

civilian witnesses -- we don't know what the witnesses have told the fbi about the existence of documents at mar-a-lago and to what extent witnesses told the fbi about other documents that may be other places. i will point out to you that there's something very odd about the certification that was signed by christina and its says she was authorized by the office of donald j. trump to represent that a detailed search was done of the boxes that were brought from the white house to florida. i read that and i scratched my head because i thought to myself, does that mean that there might be other materials that are at mar-a-lago other than the boxes that were transferred from the white house to mar-a-lago when donald trump exited the presidency? maybe. those could have been the ones found during the search. that also leads me to question to your point, are there dmoumtsz other places? public reporting has suggested there might be. >> we will see. all right, everybody. we're still waiting. don't go anywhere.

lisa, andrew, david, kerry, thank you for running to a camera for us. court is still in recess. that is going to do it for me today, but hallie jackson will pick up our coverage of this in just a moment. don't go anywhere. moment. don't go anywhere. never been more active. shingles doesn't care. i go to spin classes with my coworkers. good for you, shingles doesn't care. because no matter how healthy you feel, your risk of shingles sharply increases after age 50. but shingrix protects. proven over 90% effective, shingrix is a vaccine used to prevent shingles in adults 50 years and older. shingrix does not protect everyone and is not for those with severe allergic reactions to its ingredients or to a previous dose. an increased risk of guillain-barré syndrome was observed after getting shingrix. fainting can also happen. the most common side effects are pain, redness and swelling at the injection site, muscle pain, tiredness, headache, shivering, fever, and upset stomach. shingles doesn't care.

but shingrix protects. ask your doctor or pharmacist about shingrix today. ♪♪ in order for small businesses to thrive, they need to be smart. efficient. agile. and that's never been more important than it is right now. so for a limited time, comcast business is introducing small business savings. call now to get powerful internet for just 39 dollars a month. with no contract. and a money back guarantee. all on the largest, fastest reliable network. from the company that powers more businesses than anyone else. call and start saving today. comcast business. powering possibilities. this is xfinity rewards. our way of showing our appreciation. with rewards of all shapes and sizes. [ cheers ] are we actually going? yes!!

and once in a lifetime moments. two tickets to nascar! yes! find rewards like these and so many more in the xfinity app. we've got breaking news as we're coming on the air with a judge in a florida court right now weighing whether to appoint an independent third party to review the documents found at mar-a-lago. you're looking at a live shot of the media members that have gathered for this. she said she's going to make her decision in a written statement, no timeline other than in due course. we'll take you there live for the details in a minute. also, a former nypd officer sent to be sentenced for his role in the attack on the capitol. the sentencing should be any mi