routine cases. no one expects that that will happen here. but we need to avoid a judge who will unduly delay and that's the feeling. thank you to both of you, great to have you both. kara carroll, attorney for judge and msnbc analyst. -- a former -- and an msnbc contributor, and a columnist. please join us back seven day mourning from ten to noon eastern. a quick programming note, be sure to join my friend for a lead up to trump's arraignment on tuesday, seven pm eastern. first, stay right where you are with inside which of sake. it begins right now. >> the united states of america versus donald j trump. jack smith true speaks, the indictment is unsealed, and the former president promises to stay in the race even if he's convicted. former attorney general is standing by for a sunday

exclusive, and that's coming up first. plus a preview of trump's day in federal court this week with robert mueller's former top prosecutor andrew weizmann. also today, a conversation with congressman dan goldman. he knows a thing or two about making the case against donald trump. later, former cia director, john brennan joins us to discuss just how dangerous it is to handle our nation's most sensitive secrets like this. so we talk about a lot of issues on the show every week. we will definitely continue to do that. today, we have one focus. making sure you have a better understanding that the end of the show of the federal indictment of donald trump. the former president was back on the campaign trail yesterday attacking the special counsel and trying to muddy the waters as much as possible. the rhetoric from his supporters is getting increasingly violent, and his arraignment tuesday in miami

could be a circus. so it's super important that everybody understands the facets of this case as widely as possible. the indictment unsealed on friday stems from trump's efforts to retain hundreds of documents at mar-a-lago after leaving the white house. contrary to most sleep inducing legal documents, this one is actually pretty retain. the indictment includes text messages, wildly hypocritical quotes from trump in 2016 about his supposed respect for classified information, and it even has an itemized list of classified documents. 31 of them trump held on to. those classified documents include information about u.s. weapons capabilities, as well as the capabilities of foreign countries. they contain information about u.s. nuclear programs, and information about u.s. vulnerabilities to afford attack. it's all in this indictment. it isn't just that trump valued these documents so much that he knowingly kept them.

that is a problem. he also systematically moved them from location to location to evade the governments efforts to retrieve them. even hiding some from his own lawyer. more than anything, this indictment tells the story of a former president who lied, schemes, and misled federal investigators. and doing so, trump recklessly stored this country's most classified secrets in places he obviously shouldn't have. boxes of classified documents were kept in the mar-a-lago ballroom, or events and gatherings took place. some of the boxes were stored in a mar-a-lago bathroom, including the shower. they ended up in a storage room that could be reached by multiple outside entrances, including one accessible from the patio. that matters because these nuclear secrets, these military plans, they were in places we don't know who had access to them. this photograph shows the contents of some boxes, including classified materials,

spilled all over the floor. the unsealing of the indictment by special counsel jack smith this week marks the beginning, not the end of this process. that's why it's so important to know all the details. the fate of donald trump will be decided in a courtroom, were jury of his peers will hear his case. as jack smith said, he must be presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. that, by the way, is how the system is supposed to work. yes, this is jarring. this is sobering. it is a lot to take, and although this is a riveting indictment to read. i've heard the indictment referred to as a sad day in america over the last couple days. to me, that's the wrong description. while our institutions have certainly been tested over and over and over again over the last several years, this week show that our justice system is working. it's doing what it's supposed to do. for all the criticism of president biden, attorney

general garland, they stood their ground and safeguarding the independents have the special counsel's investigation. this gave jack smith the space and time to allow this process to play out at its own pace. to that point, when my former colleagues at the white house got the news, they didn't have advanced notice, they saw it on their phones just like everybody else. they found out just like everybody else. well donald trump may believe that he lives by a different set of rules, this indictment is a heart mean signs that justice still matters in this country. as jack smith reminded as of monday, equal justice under law. it's not a lofty theory found only in textbooks, it's a fundamental principle that he is actually put into practice. >> we have one set of laws in this country, we apply them to everyone. applying those laws, collecting facts, that's what determines the outcome of an investigation. nothing more, nothing less. >> nothing more, nothing less.

starting us off today's former u.s. attorney general, eric holder. so i wanted to start, you written your fair share of indictments, you certainly read many of them. one in particular stood out to you when you read this one? >> well, it is what we call a speaking indictment. the indictment of this is striking. when one looks at the indictment and you see what i think can only be described as an extremely strong case. the detail that is contained in there, the specification of all of the actions that the former president took. what also strikes me is the fact that these attorneys are clearly going to be witnesses in this case. you know, most of these cases, and i've seen a lot of these types of indictments, but also in these cases end up with please, because the ability of the government to prove it is pretty apparent. it is very apparent here that the government is going to be able to prove this case.

this is a strong case. this is the incredibly strong case. it, will i, gusts go to trial. you know, you don't want to predict anything but it's hard for me to see how the defendant in this case, the defendants in this case will not be convicted. >> donald trump was back on the campaign trail yesterday. he said that he would stay in the race for president even if he is convicted in this case. and i know there's not a lot of precedent here, but when you consider that possibility, what concerning is the most? >> while the notion that you could have a trial, defend it, convicted, at somehow when the election, to be sworn in as president, or wherever it happens. that seems inconsistent with our notion of fairness, of the rule of law. at that, point i would hope that it impeachment proceeding might be considered. not only considered, brought. ultimately, he would be moved from office. the notion that a convicted felon, convicted felon, would serve as president of the

united states is absurd. it's simply absurd. >> if he is convicted, he still running, you think there should be an impeachment hearing, impeachment proceedings in congress and that as is that they should take? >> that's assuming that he is convicted. that's assuming he wins the election. i think people underestimate the impact of this indictments, in the one in manhattan, the two others that i expect, one in georgia, the january 61 that i suspect will likely be placed in washington, ece. i'm not a political pundit, but i think at some point, he certainly will get beyond the trump cult base, but for people who are on the fringes of that, the outside of that, they're likely to have negative impact by all of these cases brought against the former president. i think that that will have some electoral effect. the likelihood that he be able to survive this, in one of general lexington, i think that's pretty small. >> former attorney general bill

barr was on fox news this morning talking about this indictment. let's take a quick listen to that. >> i think that counts under the espionage act, that he will fully retain those documents, are solid counts. i do think we have to wait and see what the defense says, and what proved to be true, but i do think that even if half of what eddie mccarthy's, that if he -- then he is toast. it is a pretty, it's a very detailed indictment. it's very, very damning. >> i'm sure you don't find yourself a grain with bill barr all that often. what is your reaction to those comments that he made this morning? what significance is that have? >> well, you're, right i don't agree very often with bill barr and john mccarthy, but i think they both have a right. the case is a strong one. if even half, as andrew mccarthy says, if even half of what is alleged in the indictment is ultimately accepted by a jury, this case,

he will be convicted. this is a pretty straightforward case. you have examples of the former presidents lying to his lawyers, telling him -- moving boxes that they, the lawyers, can access the materials that the grand jury requested. one part of it that really struck me, one of the lawyer says that the former president made a plucky in motion, as if to say, take out the bad documents so that we don't have to turn those over. i mean people really do need to read this indictment. it is something that lays out in graphic detail what it is that the government is charged. ultimately, what i think the government will be able to prove. again, with the assistance up the lawyers that the former presidents employed at the time. >> the new york times is reporting this morning that trump appointed judge eli canning with selected at random in this case, which is how it works in many districts, and

will oversee it unless she recuse herself. how concerned are you about this, and should she recuse herself? >> well from the perspective of the government, and from my perspective as a citizen, i'm concerned about her handling this case. based on what she did in the earlier faces of this matter, i'm not sure she has the legal -- to be a judge in charge of such an important case. i certainly don't think that she has the ability, based on what happened before, in the ways in which she was -- by the court for trying to interfere with the fbi search of mar-a-lago. i don't think she has the ability to produce, project the notion of neutrality that a judge who's handling this matter has got to be able to do. i would hope that she would see within herself, or that somehow she would have convinced that she can get off the case, in some other judge should handle

this matter. i don't have confidence in her abilities to be fair, or to be seen as fair. >> if she doesn't recuse herself, is there a, role cause the department of justice can take. do they have power to change the judge? >> it's hard to recuse a judge. she ultimately makes the first determination about whether or not she should be recused. i suppose there could be an appeal to the circuit court. for the circuit court to say that we are going to take off the case would be pretty extraordinary. you have to understand, people need to understand the power that she will have as the presiding judge. i think it gives me the most concern is the ability she would have to delay this proceeding. the amount of time she gives both sides to fire motions, the ability she would have to rule on objections over the course of the trial, the way in which she would conduct fair -- there's a whole range of ways in which she could have a really negative impact on the

case. the one that concerns for the most is the notion of delay, and pushing this case past the general election. certainly well into the -- one she is scheduling things. the fact that i even say that, you know, i would not say this about some judge i didn't know, i'm saying this about a judge who has demonstrated, i think, and ability to lean towards the former president, to favor him. he did extraordinary things that the circuit court says were inappropriate for a trial judge should do when it comes to the search of the former presidents residence in mar-a-lago. >> i know you are also celebrating a huge victory before the supreme court this week, which roles on thursday that the gerrymandered congressional district in alabama discriminated against black voters. as we look ahead to additional states, louisiana, georgia, texas, do you think that there could be action that would help address those issues that before the next election cycle? >> yeah, thursday was a big

day. there was the indictment, but there also was a ruling for the united states supreme court. it essentially said that alabama had put in place of racial gerrymandering that dilute the ability to block citizens and that state to fully express themselves. the rationale of that case will have an impact in georgia, and texas, and florida, and other states as well. the reporters already said that as a result of that decision, there are at least five, probably more, at least five districts that go from solidly republican, leaning republican, to neutral or now leaning democrat. so that decision by the supreme court will have a impact on the composition of house of representatives in 2024. he also demonstrates it as a result of these racial gerrymandering that will put in place earlier, republicans got seats that they were not entitled, and probably got control of the house of representatives as a result of these racial gerrymandering. it was a good decision by the supreme court that will have an

impact far beyond the borders of alabama. >> a moment of light in the challenging lake. thank you so much for joining me this afternoon. his book, are unfinished march is available in paperback. up next, he's been making lots of core at predictions about this case. my guess? he will stop now. my friend andrew weizmann joins us at the. plus, former cia director and what was actually in those documents found at mar-a-lago. later, dan goldman is looking at all of this as a congressman, and a career prosecutor. i'll get his view of this case through both lenses when he joins me just a few minutes. we'll be right back. ht back.

the subway series is elevating your favorite subs. why mess with the sweet onion teriyaki, chuck? man, this aint messin', it's perfectin'! with marinated chicken and double cheese. sweet and savory... ...kinda like you and me, chuck. bye, peyton. try the refreshed favorites at subway today. i've never been healthier. shingles doesn't care. bye, peyton. 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. ask your doctor or pharmacist about shingrix today. ♪♪ dads are special. fun.

inspiring. always there for you. so make father's day extra special with gifts he'll love from weathertech. floorliners... cargo liner... seat protector... sunshade... ready-to-wash system and cupfone. or our newest product, the golf cart mat. order these american made gifts or a gift card at weathertech.com have a very happy father's day. hi, i'm tony hawk, and like many of you, at weathertech.com i take a statin to reduce cholesterol, but statins can also deplete coq10 levels. that's why my doctor recommended qunol coq10. qunol has the number one cardiologist recommended form of coq10. qunol. the brand i trust. we know patients are more than their disease. that's why, at novo nordisk, we've spent a hundred years developing treatments to help unlock humanity's full potential. these are the greats: people living with, thriving with — not held back by — disease. they motivate us to fight diabetes and obesity, rare diseases and cardiovascular

conditions, for generations to come. so, everyone can meet their moment. because your disease doesn't define you. so, what will? novo nordisk. driving change. ♪ shelves. shelves that know what taste buds want. shelves smart enough to see, sense, react, restock. ♪ so caramel swirl is always there for the taking. so... i know you and george were struggling with the possibility of having to move. how's that going? we found a way to make bathing safer with a kohler walk-in bath. a kohler walk-in bath provides a secure, spa-like bathing experience in the comfort of your own home. a kohler walk-in bath has one of the lowest step-ins of any walk-in bath for easy entry and exit. it features textured surfaces,

convenient handrails for more stability, and a wide door for easier mobility. kohler® walk-in baths include two hydrotherapies— whirlpool jets and our patented bubblemassage™ to help soothe sore muscles in your feet, legs, and back. a kohler-certified installer will install everything quickly and conveniently in as little as a day. they made us feel completely comfortable in our home. and, yes, it's affordable. i wish we would have looked into it sooner. think i might look into one myself. stay in the home and life you've built for years to come. call... to receive $1000 off your kohler® walk-in bath. and take advantage of our low monthly payment financing. this indictment laid out damning allegations against the former president and his handling of national security secrets. there is a lot to take away from the indictment, but one of

the things that sticks out is where the evidence came from. the evidence in this indictment is not secondhand, it's not hearsay, it's not from consequential fbi sources. it does not from watchable witnesses. most of it is from donald trump some people. take the photos of boxes the documents being stockton ballrooms and bathrooms. those were not taken by the fbi, they were taken contemporaneously by trump's aides, and employees. his own people. then there is this moment in the indictment, when trump motion for his lawyer to pluck out anything bad. the former attorney general just referenced us. from a folder that would be handed over to the department of justice in accordance with the subpoena. the witness to that was not some random mar-a-lago employee, that was from donald trump's own lawyer. of course the special counsel has donald trump's own words on tape. one recording us from july 2021 meeting with a book writer publisher, and to have a staffers, or trump pulled out

sensitive information pertaining to military attack plants. here is that exchange according to the entitlement. trump, see as president i could have declassified at. staffer, yeah. trump, now i can't, you know, but this is still a secret. staffer, yeah, laughs again. now we have a problem. trump, isn't that interesting? >> as a matter of fact, it is interesting. it straight from the source. ask any prosecutor, it's hard to find evidence cleaner than that. joining me now is a brilliant former prosecutor, andrew weissmann, who's the lead prosecutor for -- two before that was general counsel of the fbi. he hasn't slept in probably 3 to 4 days. i very much appreciate him taking the time. , and do we want to start with that point. the majority of evidence in this indictment are trump people, basically. explain why this helps make it such a airtight case in your view. >> that was the thing that i was struck by.

mary mccord, another former career prosecutor was struck by. it just stands out. these cases are usually kind of inferential. somebody has all the documents at their home, and then we know that they had access to it. you would ask a jury to and for that they must have known, they must have taken it, they must have knowingly possessed it. occasionally you might have a case where you put a witness on, like michael collin, who has admitted to cross. and his case, including perjury. so there is baggage, this means the feds can attack that person, legitimately attacked them for their prior bad acts. here, there's none of that. as you pointed out, the witnesses are employee one, ploy to, underlines with no baggage that we know. of attorney one, attorney to, attorney three. his own attorneys. they have contemporary us notes, text messages. as you mentioned, tape accordions. >> there are tapes.

>> this is commonly known, in my world, it's a rock pressure. you just rarely see this amount of proof laid out in an indictment. just remember the indictment itself is a summary that presumably the best parts of the proof, but it's not everything. >> given that, and, are you out with fellow prosecutors, an op-ed before the indictment was unsealed, arguing that these cases were so hard to defend that the usual approach is to plead guilty. there has been other cases like this that have been convicted, people have been convicted. if you were advising trump, you're not going to be doing, that but given your experience, would you tell him to plead guilty. if you plead guilty, what does he get out of that? >> i think there are sort of two issues there. on the political side of things, that sort of more your lane, as to whether or not he should do. it my, line which would be as a prosecutor, or criminal defense lawyer, he gets a lot out of

it. this is where i sort of wanted to make this point, jen, which is for people who are saying that trump is being treated differently, that is just simply not the case. many people, and junior people, have been prosecuted routinely. the former heads of the cia have been prosecuted. the former national security advisor have been prosecuted for crimes that are less egregious, related to classified documents. that's where people under democratic presidents. this is something that is very important to the intelligence community. now, to your point, the people who have done thus, and pleaded guilty, admittedly in cases that are less egregious, particularly of your senior, the department of justice generally works out an agreement where you do not to jail time. or you do minimum jail time. i think that's actually wrong, because junior people tend to do time, we saw just last week a person who was in the

military who was sentenced after pleading guilty to three years in prison. these are really serious crimes, but it is true that senior people could take a plea, they tend to be treated better. from a legal perspective, to answer your question, if i was the defense lawyer, the defendant has to make a choice, but i would certainly advise him as to the track record of the department of justice, and what could be gained. having said, that i don't expect that he will plead guilty for the -- because of the political line. >> one of his lawyers alluded to that this morning. looking ahead, i mean the last few days have obviously been a world went. there's a lot to consume. big for explaining it to a lot of us. tuesday, trump is going to be a rain to miami. what are you going to be watching for, what kind of the best-case scenario for jack smith and his team as we look to tuesday in this week? >> the things that happen is donald trump will plead not guilty. bill will be sad, he will certainly be released on his

own -- there might be certain restrictions on what he can, do it where he can go. the main thing that the best-case scenario, is to mean this judge is staying on the case, because the best-case scenario, it's from the government perspective, she decides to recuse herself. as soon mean -- jack smith is going to pursue a speedy trial. that is sort of the whole ball game, what the judge is going to set a trial in anytime soon, or whether it's going to be kicked into after the republican nomination, or after the election. i think that that would be such a disservice to the american public. i think it's really important to have a jury make this decision. one way or the, other whether it's not guilty or guilty, it feels like the public should know that information to make an informed decision. >> andrew weizmann, thank you. i'll be listening to your

amazing podcast, prosecuting donald trump, which tells us a lot about what we need to know. there was also a special project on that feat today msnbc anchor, ali velshi, reading the entire indictment word for word. coming up? i can think of nobody better to ask about the national security concerns surrounding these documents that donald trump had over mar-a-lago than a former cia director are, john brennan. he joins us next. he joins us next chase freedom unlimited card. and i'm gonna cashback on a few other things too. starting with the sound system... [autotune] that's caaaaaaaaash. cashback like a pro with chase freedom unlimited. how do you cashback? (wheezing) asthma isn't pretty. it's the moment when you realize that a good day... is about to become a bad one. but then, i remembered that the world is so much bigger than that, with trelegy. because one dose a day helps keep my asthma symptoms under control. and with 3 medicines in 1 inhaler, trelegy helps improve lung function so i can breathe easier for a full 24 hours.

trelegy won't replace a rescue inhaler for sudden breathing problems. trelegy contains a medicine that increases risk of hospitalizations and death from asthma problems when used alone. when this medicine is used with an inhaled corticosteroid, like in trelegy, there is not a significant increased risk of these events. do not take trelegy more than prescribed. trelegy may increase risk of thrush and infections. get emergency care for serious allergic reactions. see your doctor if your asthma does not improve or gets worse. ♪ what a wonderful world. ♪ ask your doctor about once-daily trelegy for asthma - because breathing should be beautiful.

(vo) this is sadie. she's on verizon, and she has the new myplan where she gets exactly what she wants ask your doctor about once-daily trelegy for asthma - and only pays for what she needs. she picks only the perks she wants and saves on every one! all with an incredible new iphone. act now and get iphone 14 pro on us when you switch. it's your verizon. (tap, tap) listen, your deodorant just has to work. i use secret aluminum free. just swipe and it lasts all day. secret helps eliminate odor, instead of just masking it. and hours later i still smell fresh. secret works. ohhh yesss.

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. now available in cinnabon® bakery-inspired flavor. learn more at boost.com/tv donald trump is of course a huge legal story. the story of potential crimes in our justice department prosecuting those crimes. this is also a story about our national security. i want to take a second just to talk to the inventory of just some of the documents found at mar-a-lago, storden a bathroom, and ballroom, and spilled all over the floor. documents concerning military contingency planning of the united states. documents concerning military capabilities of foreign

countries. documents concerning nuclear capabilities of a foreign country. document concerning nuclear weaponry of the united states. it's not just that trump had them, is that he kept them and he refused to give them back. these are some of the country's most secrets, sensitive secrets. the question is, why were they so valuable to donald trump? joining me now is former cia director, john brennan. i just want to start with the fact that in this, in the indictment, it outlines in summarizes 31 specific examples. there are far more than that. we know from the numbers of what was pulled in by the fbi. how do you explain the discrepancy? >> i think that according to the indictment, they were 120 classified documents that were obtained by the government as a result of that subpoena. this is only 25% of that total number. i do think the government was very careful in terms of what they're going to put up publicly. >> some of them could be pulled back because the intelligence committee would want them in

the justice system, or in the court process. >> yes. it would be difficult to provide the type of documentary evidence that is necessary in order to prosecute this case. i think the government, for example, 31 documents, the broad sweep of the most highly classified, highly sensitive, and the most strategic intelligence would be national security. this is the type of documents that go to a president. it's not things that are not really substantial. these are things that are most significant, most strategic to the defense in this country, as well as for our relationship to countries around the world. >> you are a career intelligence officer. you have classified, things you brought a lot of classified documents at the highest level. as you look at the summary, what stuck out to you the most? was there any one specific documents, our theme here? >> well as all the different types of subjects that are covered here, as you pointed out, in terms of nuclear capabilities, war plans, other types of things. also, i can tell from the code words that are on, they're not just the classification numbers, with the code words, the types of very sensitive collection

systems that the system is derived from. whether they be satellite, imagery, or technical sensors that we have to avoid around the world, insights in a covert manner about what our adversaries are doing no planning. it is that exposure that is very -- in this indictment. if these documents were accessed during their many months have been on secure urge at mar-a-lago, if this was the target of foreign intelligence services, and i would think that it was going to be a very easy target for sophisticated intelligence have histories around the world to go in, their make copies of these documents. that's why the committee is really challenge to try to determine what might have been compromised, because this clearly was not 24/7 video coverage of these documents throughout this period of time. they're going back, they're checking to see what sources might have been compromised, because there -- >> and these sources are people

we may have worked with for decades who are on the ground, challenging -- and we get imperative information fountain. >> absolutely. acs, which is the control system, it means that there was information that was brought from those human sources around the globe, who put this -- to find this information. that's the type of information that goes into the documents that provides the president -- the fact that this was so unsecure, for so long, i know that my former colleagues are shuddering because looking at this indictment, i'm sure many of them, for the first time, saw in very stark language exactly what was in mar-a-lago for so long. these are professionals who are obligated to keep very tight control over these documents, and then for trump to be able to treat them in so cavalier and careless, reckless fashion, it just undermines the very foundation upon which the whole national security apparatus is founded. >> we don't know this, yatton obviously all be litigated through the legal process, but

knowing what you know about these types of documents, and the themes in here, what do you ascribe the motive here for trump. why did he want to hold on to these things? >> that's a big question. clearly he felt as if he owned all of this stuff. when he was going to do with it afterward, whether it was going to impress people, as i think we've seen things that have come, now including in the indictment, that he was making reference to these classified documents, and secret information. whether he was trying to do that to carry favor with individuals here in the states, or overseas, who knows? again, i think that the violation here clearly is the unlawful detention, handily, movement of these documents. almost irrespective of what that motive was. >> one of the classifications on there is five eyes, right? that pertains to intelligence shared with some of our key intelligence partners. how, if it were you, if you are still in the government, you'd be having some awkward conversations right now, presumably, about what intelligence is out there. how do our partners consume

this. how do those conversations go in the intelligence of another country may have been compromised? >> unfortunately i have to have several of those awkward conversations with my counterparts in these countries. as a result of unauthorized disclosures, swinging a document or two documents goes out there, or somebody who decided to ignore their obligations that share these documents. never ever has there ever been somebody with such status, and stand a, and as the former president of the united states, with potentially responsible for that. now i'm really concerned that our closest partners are really wondering just how shaky our system is. if a president of the united states treats their information, and we rely heavily on their sources, they're technical, they're human sources. when they see that it is left this way, unsecure, i really think this is going to give them some pause as far as continuing to provide the extent, in the depth of the

information that they have. >> before i let you go, there's been some speculation that the map that former president trump was joining 2020, one august 2020, want to september, they have been about afghanistan. is there anything about any of the timelines of these documents that gave you pause because you knew at the moment was? >> there were several of those things that i think i know what it might be linked to. i'm not going to provide anything more, any more insight into that, then what was in that indictment. it is clear that i've been able to put pieces together, and i'm sure adversaries and others don't able to put pieces together, even if they didn't see it. that's why it's so outrageous that so many members of congress, and candidates, continue to make excuses for donald trump. it's outrageous. >> former cia director, john brennan, thank you so much for joining me this afternoon and, clarifying a lot of this for us. one very prominent republican's john comparison between this new indictment, and in impeachment trial that my next guest was a key player and. prosecutor trent --

dan goldman joins me with his reaction, next. reaction, next to your hair, ingredients matter. that's why herbal essences is packed with naturally derived plant ingredients you love, and none of the stuff you don't. our sulfate-free collections smell incredible... ♪ and leave your hair touchably soft and smooth. ♪ herbal essences

it's easy to get lost in investment research. introducing j.p. morgan personal advisors. hey david. connect with an advisor to create your personalized plan. let's find the right investments for your goals okay, great. j.p. morgan wealth management. my most important kitchen tool? my brain. so i choose neuriva plus. unlike some others, neuriva plus is a multitasker supporting 6 key indicators of brain health. to help keep me sharp. neuriva: think bigger. as shocking as the revelations

from trump's indictment are, and yes, there are a lot of shocking things in here, it is worth taking its back and asking ourselves whether we should really be all that surprised. republican senator certainly isn't. he released a statement saying, quote, these allegations are serious, and if proven, would

be consistent with his other actions consistent with the national interest, such as withholding defensive weapons from ukraine for political reasons and failing to defend the capitol from violent attack insurrection. senator romney is right, this is more than an isolated incidents, this is a pattern with trump. we should be viewing his actions outlined in this indictment through that prism. joining me now is congressman, dan goldman, who joined me -- which senator romney runs in the statement. congressman, i want to start their. you obviously were leading that impeachment effort. do you see parallels between trump's behavior that led to his first impeachment, which you, look at, or a lead role in, and this case surrounding the documents? >> there is a through line with donald trump from the moment that he walked down the escalator to today. he does not believe that the law applies to him, he believes

that he can push the envelope, avoided, obstructed, and that it does not matter. he also believes, the senator romney put a, that everything he wants, whatever is in his personal interest, it's also in the national interest. that's how we end up where we are today, where he completely abused the classification of national security process. he disregarded at and such a blatant and dangerous way. one of the things that people underestimate is how potentially devastating it is that donald trump not only had this top secret information, but was showing it to people without security clearance. we know of two incidents that are explained in the indictment. from my experience as a federal prosecutor, there are likely many more that just can't be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. >> it wanted to ask you about that specifically, because obviously this indictment has a lot of shocking information annette. as a former prosecutor, this is

not the totality of likely what they'll use in court. how should we understand that? >> well that is generally true with indictments, although i will say that i was very struck at the end mountain specificity of evidence that was included in an indictment. you don't have to do that when you're charged a defendant, but clearly the special counsel wanted to lay out a full narrative, including some of the most damning evidence. this indictment will likely be the only true speak gain aspect, public aspect of this case for many many months. it is oftentimes, as a prosecutor, we would present didn't admit to the grand jury that would reference recordings, or text messages, or video surveillance, among other things. in this case, the special counsel lays it out in incredible detail, including transcriptions of the text messages.

most damningly, that record e with donald trump where he admits that the information that he had was still classified. it had not been declassified yet. that he knew, it'd knew that he should not be showing it to those people. >> i mean indictments, legal documents, no offense, but since your former prosecutor, this is certainly not sleepy. reading the, as you say those damning evidence in here. it's obviously very detailed. the tells a story. one of the questions a lot of people ask, is there enough and hear if donald trump is convicted, for him to go to prison? there were out ones at the very end about the very maximum sentences, but what should peoples expectations of happy? >> well it should not be whatever the maximum sentences. there are sentencing guidelines that govern sentencing, and which will be dramatically less than the total, you know, statutory maximum of all of these crimes combined.

you know, there is wheel potential, and likely, headed jail time, if he is convicted. the concern i think for many right now is that the judge that it was assigned to is a judge that has demonstrated unusual and somewhat lawless by a list towards donald trump in favor of him. was seriously were beat by the court of appeals when she issued an order related to the search warrant at mar-a-lago. i think that the department of justice will have to evaluate whether or not they would seek recusal, and whether that judge would determine that there is at least an appearance of bias that would warrant for recusal. she would have control over this up to. >> you're of course referring to judge aileen cannon, who is ruled in trump's favor in the past. and what, and since you reference kind of what you can do, here she can delay, she

could make it easier for trump in many ways. what are the options the department of justice has at their disposal, if she delays, or if she looks like she's acting in a way that's biased towards the trump team? >> well, if she goes forward and decides not to recuse, there are lots of different ways that she could put her thumb on the scale. some of which will be appealable to the court of appeals. certainly, for example, she dismisses the indictment. that would be immediately appealable. there are lots of other smaller, less dramatic ways that she could influence, including, and i think most importantly, evidentiary rulings. where there is a lot of latitude and discretion for the trial judge to make that determination. i hope that we don't see the same kind of clear abuse of discretion, and abusive parole that we saw with the documents case. now i'm not saying that because

she is a trump appointee. there are many judges who are appointed by different presidents who, of, course most of the, judges almost them, recognize they have a duty to recognize the law. the concern here is specifically with her actions and the documents case that were clearly so outside the bounds of what her discretion was that she was reversed and rebuked by the court of appeals. >> congressman dan goldman, thank you so much for joining me today. coming, up donald trump on tape talking about classified documents. no, i'm not talking about that tape. i'll explain we come back. ll explain wcoe me back.

♪ tourists tourists that turn into scientists. tourists taking photos that are analyzed by ai. so researchers can help life underwater flourish. ♪

it's easy to get lost in investment research. introducing j.p. morgan personal advisors.

hey david. connect with an advisor to create your personalized plan. let's find the right investments for your goals okay, great. j.p. morgan wealth management. okay, i want to take a little trip down memory lane. the years 2016, and donald trump is very fired up over hillary clinton's handling of classified information.

>> in my administration, i'm going to enforce all -- the protection of classified information. no one will be above the law. we can have someone who, in the oval office, who doesn't understand the reason of the word confidential or classified. >> one of the first things we must do is to enforce all classification rules, and to enforce all laws relating to the handling of classified information. >> we also need the best protection of classified information. that is the worst situation. hillary's private email scandal, that put our classified information in the reach of our enemies disqualifies her from the presidency. >> i mean, he sounds pretty protective of classified

information they're, committed to it. there is hypocrisy, and there is what you just saw there. fast for the present day. this is rhetoric we've continued to hear from the republican party following trump's indictment. what about hillary clinton? or to keep the 2016 rhetoric going, her emails? despite this being hypocritical, which we come to expect from donald trump in september's of the republican party, it is simply inaccurate. is totally wrong. hillary clinton's case concerns her use of a private email server during her time as secretary of state, which by the way her predecessors also had. there is classified information that was found on some of those emails. prosecutors concluded that there was no evidence that she knew the emails contain classified information at all. donald trump admitted he knew he ate classified information in documents on a tape. hillary clinton also turned over her private email server to the justice department as soon as she was asked. donald trump spelled out page

after page in this very indictment went out of his way to hide classified information. now it really is quite something, take some putts about that donald trump's rise to the white house was fueled by the sphere that he created himself over hillary's head a little sensitive information. now he's accused of doing is far worse. he led relentless chance to lock her up. now he's preparing for his own second quarter appearance in just two months. he insisted ad nauseam that we force all laws concerning the protection of classified information. well from his lips a counsel jack's year is. those are the words the federal indictment against him. sometimes the truth really is no stranger than fiction. coming up, a very special announcement we have about something we're cooking tonight. we're back after a quick break. fter a quick break this game from you

just like i stole kelly carter in high school. you got no game dude, that's a foul! and now you're ready to settle the score. game over. and if you don't have the right home insurance coverage, well, you could end up paying for all this yourself. so get allstate, and be better protected from mayhem, yeah, like me. thanks, bro. take a lap, rookie. real mature. our heritage is ingrained in our skin. t and even when we. metamorphosize into our new evolved form, we carry that spirit with us. because you can take alfa romeo out of italy. but you best believe, you can't take the italy out of an alfa romeo. what are folks 60 and older up to these days? getting inspired!

volunteering! playing pickleba...! it's easy to get lost in investment research. introducing j.p. morgan personal advisors.

hey david. connect with an advisor to create your personalized plan. let's find the right investments for your goals okay, great. j.p. morgan wealth management. >> a little bit of news to

share before we. go one hour today just didn't feel like enough. so i'll be back for an hour of special coverage of the trump indictments tonight at seven pm eastern. so come back and hang out we have a lot more to discuss. but stay right where you are because alex witt reports starts right now. >> thanks, jen. and we have breaking, news a dramatic story unfolding this hour in philadelphia.