>> expected as i just said, we might get new charges against donald trump. today at the beginning the day all days were on this federal courthouse in washington, d.c., where we have been awaiting a possible indictment of former president trump for his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. that indictment did not happen today. but this evening they'd issued new charges against trump, just not for trying to overturn the 2020 election. today, locksmith issued additional charges against donald trump and the other case against him. the one dealing with his handling of classified documents down at mar-a-lago. special counsel smith issued

what is called, in the business, it superseding indictment to add three new charges to the mar-a-lago case today. that is one count, one new count of willful retention of national defense information, and two new counts of obstruction against both mr. trump, and his ballot. the special counsel also charged a new third defendant in that case. a man named carlos de oliveira, who is the head of maintenance at mar-a-lago. and it is the addition of mr. deliver at where things get really quite interesting. today's new charges all center around one of the enduring mysteries of this case, the mar-a-lago security footage. remember, that footage is the reason we know in the very first place that trump had boxes of documents moved around his property from the days leading up to a visit from federal investigators. we know that because there was literally tape of will not with boxes to and from that storage room to other parts of the

property. but there were also gaps in the security footage. and now jack smith is alleging that donald trump conspired with him and carlos de oliveira to destroy this footage. after the footage, a series of phone calls took place between trump, and de oliveira. following those calls, mr.nauta, who was scheduled to fly to illinois with former president trump, now suddenly changed his travel plans to rush back to mar-a-lago. this is quoting from the new indictment. now, he provided inconsistent explanations for sudden travel to florida. at 7:14 pm on june 21st he texted one person that he would not be traveling with trump the next day, because he had a family emergency. and he used the xing emoji. shifting emojis, as in each. it is a secret. around the same, time mr. de oliveira reached out to another employee, the head of i. t. at mar-a-lago, and he is likely the trump employee number 4.

quoting, again, from the indictment. on monday, june 27th, 2022, at 9:48 a.m., de oliveira walked to the i. t. office, where trump employee number 4 was working with another employee in the i.t. department. de oliveira requested that trump employee number 4 step away from the office so that de oliveira and trump employee number 4 could speak. at 9:40 90 am, trump employee number 4 and de oliveira left the area of the i. t. office together and walk through a basement tunnel. de oliveira took trump employee number 4 at a small room known as an audio closet near the white and gold ballroom. once inside the audio closet, de oliveira and trump employee number four had the following exchange -- de oliveira told trump number 4 that their conversation should remain

between the two of them. de oliveira asked trump employee number 4 how many days the server retained footage. trump employee 4 responded that he believed it was approximately 45 days. de oliveira told employee number 4 that the boss wanted the server deleted. trump employee 4 responded that he would not know how to do that, and that he did not believe that he would have the rights to do that. trump employee 4 told de oliveira that de oliveira would have to reach out to another employee who is a supervisor of security for trump's business organization. de oliveira then insisted to trump employee 4 that the boss wanted the server deleted and asked, what are we going to do? so that is clandestine shots in the audio room about the leading security footage, as requested by the boss. and trump was allegedly being apprized of all of this, as it was happening. again, according to the

indictment, at 3:55 pm that same day, trump called de oliveira and they spoke for approximately three and a half minutes. about six weeks later, the fbi searched from his home, and the indictment says not just over two weeks after the fbi discovered classified documents in the storage room, and trump's office, now to call another trump employee instead, words to the effect of, someone just wants to make sure that carlos is good. carlos, as in carlos de oliveira. in response, the other trump employee told nauta that de oliveira was loyal and he wouldn't do anything to affect his relationship with trump. that same day, trump called de oliveira and told de oliveira that trump would get de oliveira an attorney. joining me now is devlin barrett who covers the fbi and justice department for the washington post. a lot of us have been focused on washington d.c., obviously things have been happening with that grand jury in florida.

what has changed in the intervening weeks to result in this new superseding indictment as far as the doj is concerned? >> i think what you are seeing here is the culmination of issues we've reported about before and have finally come to a head. specifically, what was ken dilanian -- carlos de oliveira's role in this. there is legal strategy here as well because remember, walt nauta, his lawyer signaled he wanted to get out of the case with trump. he wants a separate trial. but what this new indictment does is that it ties walt nauta that much more closely to trump. and it creates an allegation that nauta is essentially going on a secret mission for the former president. i think that dynamic will serve to, among other things, undercut any efforts by it will not add to get out of this case. >> is that your assessment? do you have any reporting on maybe a cooperating witness here? is that why these charges are coming to light now as opposed to earlier with the first

indictments? >> i think that there was some work that still needed to be done on the carlos fiala vera piece that is investigation, and prosecutors didn't want to wait to result that, and part two, there are clearly, as this indictment shows, cooperating witnesses had provided evidence against carlos de oliveira, and others in this case. including walt nauta. >> one quick question for you, are they still interviewing witnesses down in florida? is this the end of this case? is this it or could there actually be more? >> i do not think that this is it. we knew carlos de oliveira was on their, essentially their target list. so that is not really that much of a surprise to see them finally making a decision on that. but they are not done with this investigation. there are still other issues involving honesty and possible obstruction that prosecutors are trying to understand.

>> fascinating. thank you for your great reporting. thank you for your time tonight. i want to bring in the former federal and state prosecutor and tanya perry, former chief of the criminal division for the southern district of new york. ladies, not the indictments we thought we would be talking about this evening throughout the bingo card. let's first talk about the charges. one count, of national defense information, maximum sentence of ten years, let's set that aside for the moment. two counts of conspiracy to obstruct justice related to deleting the security camera footage. maximum sentence of 20 years. put this, if you would, in the context of the other charges that trump is facing from mar-a-lago. when you say superseding we often think that these are more serious. are they? >> no, they are as serious, but the more charges that are added, in particular i think the obstruction type charges, the

worse it gets for the defendants. the one additional retention of classified documents charged is serious because so much has been said about this particular document, but according to reporting and to the indictment, it was actually disseminated and bedminster. that is going to be very important piece of evidence at trial. it also is charging it that ensures this recording, and testimony about it will come in. otherwise, there might have been an argument about whether it fits a pattern, now it will come in, and that is devastating. of course, the destruction of evidence charges, known as -- are equally devastating. it really does go to a lot has been said about consciousness of guilt, but prosecutors love evidence that shows that shows

a guilty mind. especially for the former president, he usually says whatever is on his mind and that is usually has passed gambit. here, clearly, there was concealment and even destruction and that is generally quite fatal. >> we don't know whether the security footage was tampered with. that wasn't actually in the indictment. there is a suggestion that they wanted to do it, there were gaps, but as yet we do not know. that sort of seems to be beside the point. it is the intention that it's enough, right? >> it's totally besides the point because they wanted to destroy it, and you do not want to destroy something unless you saw what you were doing on that tape was wrong. so there are serious charges on their own but they kind of cast an extra cloud over everything else back up all of the other charges and we tell you that he knew that what he had done, in retaining those documents for mar-a-lago was wrong, and he

wanted to erase the record. >> i think as a public has to be shown the reasons why this matters, the idea that the i. t. guy and thevalet are huddling in the audio room stepping away from the office, this remains between the two of us, it is a conspiracy and the most obvious sense, right? the suggestion in the document and the indictment is that trump knew about all of it. he was monitoring all of this all along. this seemed very pointed to me. the inclusion of the conversations with trump. do you read it that way? >> absolutely. the reference to the boss monitoring this entire situation, and then reporting back to him, and them stating over and over again what his desires were. the boss wants to see this. and that is really damning evidence. >> so, my second question though, the boss wanting this stuff deleted, is that--i'm not a lawyer--it is not

circumstantial, it is not a direct conversation with donald trump, it is someone saying the boss wants this deleted. it thuds that matter if they do not have someone on the record saying trump told me to delete it, it is basically an interlocutor saying the boss wants it deleted. >> that will come in because there are conspiracy counts here, and there is a scheme, that is alleged, statements that in a civil trial would be considered hearsay can come in against the defendant. so that should come in. i will note a lot is riding on employee number 4, clearly, who is cooperating, it is not clear he did anything wrong. he is giving testimony, and evidence. clearly, the government is going to want for this new defendant, mr. olivera, to cooperate as well. because otherwise it doesn't seem like this indictment is chalked full of recordings, and documents and clearly there is telephone records or signal conversations. there's a lot of documentary record evidence here. but that conversation which is

so critical is a verbal one. and it relies on employee number 4. so i won't say that it is a weak point but it is something that clearly the government would want to shore up as much as possible. >> is this an indictment as much for trump as it is to flip walt nauta? it just seems to me at one point walt nauta's utility has diminished. with this it seems like walt nauta is back in the sea and that there is so much pressure on him that he is on the center of this, and a fishman to carry out trump's plot. do you think, if you are his lawyer, using it is time to talk to the doj? >> if i were the doj i would want nauta, or de oliveira on the witness stand giving the story, narrating all the documents and all the different things we've talked about. it's always just much better to have somebody tell the story live. and i actually think what we are seeing here is that there was an attempt to get de

olivera to cooperate, because the new charges against him that have to do with his false statements to the fbi in january were so obviously false, it's not like they had the transcript of them and they are just blatantly lying. >> sometimes, you know, you interview somebody and they tell you something but you don't realize at the time it's false and it takes time to figure out that they were lying. but here he says, i don't know, anything about moving anything anywhere in mar-a-lago. he almost says i've never even been to mar-a-lago. i mean -- >> it is footage that he tried to delete. he knows that they have him. we were talking about this before. >> so they've had that hanging over him all this time. that tells me they've been in conversation with him saying you could charge this, and not to mention all the other stuff. if you don't come along, and either they gave up on him, because they decided he was incredible, they couldn't use

him on the stand, or they decided to give up on him to stick with trump, hope for a pardon if all of those things happen, that would put trump in a position to pardon him. and when those negotiations broke down, is when they had to bring these extra charges, even if it means as it does that this is going to delay the case. >> hold on. just put a pin in that one. we talk about employee number four. we don't know if he is a cooperating witness but i'm saying that the reporting, the early reporting is that employee number 4is the yuscil taveras, head of the i. t.

department on mar-a-lago. he's being represented by stanley woodward who is also will not his lawyer. who's being paid for by donald trump super pack were has been paid by trump super pac. that seems interesting to me, because if one of his clients is potentially cooperating witness, and the other's time a tricky opposed to him legally speaking, how do you represent both of them without a conflict of interest? >> i don't know. there is a conflict there as far as we can tell looking from the outside. that is a clear conflict. i would be surprised if that is not raised by the prosecution, and they don't ask the judge for what is called a -- to decide whether, objectively whether or not there is intact conflict, and so i think that that is one of the things that we can probably look to see. >> there's so many question marks and so many more questions that i have including everything that you just raised. thank you so much for your time, please hang with us, we have a lot more to get to in tonight's big breaking news. including new information about a sensitive classified document that trump allegedly took to his golf club in new jersey. danya was just talking about it. and then he waved around in front of people who didn't have the clearance to see it. that is the bedminster audio. coming up, next. i will be a travel influencer... hey, i thought you were on vacation? it's too expensive.

use priceline, they've got deals no one else has. what about work? i got you. looking great you guys! ♪ go to your happy price ♪ ♪ priceline ♪ >> woman: why did we choose safelite? we were loading our suv when... crack! ♪ go to your happy price ♪

safelite came right to us, and we could see exactly when they'd arrive with a replacement we could trust. that's service the way we want it. >> singers: ♪ safelite repair, safelite replace. ♪ amazon has great deals on everything kids need. instead of spending more, he spent less. seemed obvious. why would a person spend more money? he's eight and he gets it. i'm 10. well, that's less impressive.

every day, more dog people are deciding it's time for a fresh approach to pet food. developed with vets. made from real meat and veggies. portioned for your dog. and delivered right to your door. it's smarter, healthier pet food. why do dermatologists choose dove? the dove beauty bar, is gentle. it not only cleans, it hydrates my skin. as a dermatologist, i want what's best for our skin. with 1/4 moisturizing cream, dove is the #1 bar dermatologists use at home. >> okay, buried in this 60-page

super indictment has an additional charge against donald trump concerning the willful retention of national defense information. remember, trump was already facing 31 counts of willful retention of classified

documents he hoarded down at mar-a-lago. but this new 32nd count is a bit different. this is about a presentation concerning military activity in a foreign country. and that charge answers a question that was raised by the previous indictment about whether trump had a certain document in his possession when this conversation took place at his bedminster golf club in 2021. take a listen. >> i just found -- isn't that amazing? just totally wins my case, you know? except it is like highly confidential. secretive. >> according to the superseding indictment, the document that trump possessed and showed on july 21st, 2021, the one referenced in that very audiotape we just played, the document is charged as count 32 in this superseding indictment.

still with me tonight is state prosecutor tali farhadian weinstein. tali, now we know that it wasn't just bluster, at least according -- it sounds like trump had the plans and his him but he was waving around whoever was in his office. why are they charging this now? >> they've always had the documents. that, we know. remember, alex, we have more than 100 documents and only charged 31, not 32. so they've made an initial decision of which to leave on the cutting room floor. i think that there were two categories of things, one where the ones that didn't have jury appeal, i think, which were too boring, maybe technically classified but didn't really tell you why this was a danger to the country. and of course, more importantly, in these cases, prosecutors often hold back ones that are so sensitive they don't want to expose them in an open trial. and generally, the agencies that have what we call the equities in those documents had to work in putting together information, they get to weigh in and say it is not worth it

to prosecute based on this. so i think it fell into the pile. and they eventually got, i think a witness who, or some other evidence that connected it to the waving around of bedminster. and once they made that connection they decided that it was worth including in the indictment. i think that is for two reasons, one is, as we talked about a bit earlier, this means that this is going to get in front of the jury before they would have had to litigate a bit whether evidence of uncharged crime could come in, because it is generally considered prejudicial to a defendant to say here are other bad things he did that we are going to tell you about without charging him. so there are various rules for the admission of that evidence, and now they don't have to deal with that, they short-circuit all of that. but i also think that it just has a lot of jury appeal, because it is so serious. a war planned against iran, and the reasons are so and serious. i would want to be able to say that sentence to a jury. and now they can. >> it sounds like the

difference maker is that they have someone who can confirm who is in the room at that time in bedminster, yes, indeed, he was waving around the iran war plans. the doj was like oh, check, we have those in our possession, we got them back in the first documents that were returned to us after we begged trump for an unspecified numbers of months. they have them, they could say we know that this was real. this was really the president waving around secret military plans to people, to basically own mark milley. even though he didn't own mark milley. own in the colloquial sense, anyway. i have to ask as we talk about classified documents, laura jarrett is reporting that trump's lawyers are now requesting that trump be able to discuss classified discovery outside of a classified setting, notably in his home. the prosecutors have responded that there is no basis for the defendant's request to be given the extraordinary authorities to be given classified information at his residence,

and it is particularly striking that he seeks permission to do so and be very location at which is charged with willfully retaining the documents charged in this case. the irony? never been thicker. >> indeed. i think what he's saying with this, really, borderline frivolous motion, is i am not like other defendants. and i don't want to be inconvenienced the way that other defendants are. because of course, when you are given access to these things as a defendant you have to look at them in a scif with your lawyers. >> secured classified information facility. >> indeed. i actually feel kind of sorry for his lawyers when i read this motion because this cannot be good for their credibility. it suggests that as a team, they are not taken seriously, what is at stake here. and it seems to me he made a calculation that it was more important for him to puff up that he is a former president, and wants to continue instead of thinking about the confines

of this case. >> can i look at classified information in my bathroom with a gold chandelier, please? absolutely not. you are not allowed to do that. >> maybe in acts of his defense that he was allowed to do this. >> also, on the day when it's very clear that some of his employees are breaking with him, and talking to the feds, this just seems like dangerous legal strategy. >> this one was just a real mistake. >> we are going to be following this. the questions we will continue. i am so happy to have you on set. thank you for sharing your wisdom with us tonight. when we come back, one of the revelations on the new indictments over trump's handling of classified documents, which one of those revelations has in common with some of the most dramatic testimony in the january 6th committee's investigation. we will get reaction from committee member, congresswoman zoe lofgren coming up next. when i was diagnosed with h-i-v,

i didn't know who i would be. but here i am... being me. keep being you... and ask your healthcare provider about the number one prescribed h-i-v treatment, biktarvy. biktarvy is a complete, one-pill, once-a-day treatment used for h-i-v in many people whether you're 18 or 80. with one small pill, biktarvy fights h-i-v to help you get to undetectable—and stay there whether you're just starting or replacing your current treatment. research shows that taking h-i-v treatment as prescribed and getting to and staying undetectable prevents transmitting h-i-v through sex. serious side effects can occur, including kidney problems and kidney failure. rare, life-threatening side effects include a buildup of lactic acid and liver problems. do not take biktarvy if you take dofetilide or rifampin. tell your healthcare provider about all the medicines and supplements you take, if you are pregnant or breastfeeding, or if you have kidney or liver problems, including hepatitis. if you have hepatitis b do not stop taking biktarvy without talking to your healthcare provider. common side effects were diarrhea, nausea, and headache. no matter where life takes you, biktarvy can go with you. talk to your healthcare provider today.

type 2 diabetes? bidiscover the ozempic®u. tri-zone. in my ozempic® tri-zone, i lowered my a1c, cv risk, and lost some weight. in studies, the majority of people reached an a1c under 7 and maintained it. ozempic® lowers the risk of major cardiovascular events such as stroke, heart attack, or death in adults also with known heart disease. and you may lose weight. adults lost up to 14 pounds. ozempic® isn't for people with type 1 diabetes. don't share needles or pens, or reuse needles. don't take ozempic® if you or your family ever had medullary thyroid cancer,

or have multiple endocrine neoplasia syndrome type 2, or if allergic to it. stop ozempic® and get medical help right away if you get a lump or swelling in your neck, severe stomach pain, or an allergic reaction. serious side effects may include pancreatitis. gallbladder problems may occur. tell your provider about vision problems or changes. taking ozempic® with a sulfonylurea or insulin may increase low blood sugar risk. side effects like nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea may lead to dehydration, which may worsen kidney problems. join the millions already taking ozempic®. ask your health care provider >> in this new superseding about the ozempic® tri-zone.

indictment, there is a paragraph that is quite telling. quote, just over two weeks after the fbi discovered classified documents in the storage room and trump's office, nauta, as in walt nauta, called trump employee number 5, and saying words the point of, someone just wants to make sure carlos is good.

carlos, as in carlos de oliveira, the mar-a-lago maintenance worker who was added today's new indictment as a coconspirator. in response, trump employee 5 told walt nauta that de oliveira was loyal and would not do anything to affect his relationship with trump. that same day at nauta's request, trump employee 5 confirmed with the chat group that de oliveira was loyal. that same day, trump called de oliveira and told him that trump would get de oliveira an attorney. the lawyer trump got to represent de oliveira is a man named john irving. he has been paid by donald trump's save america pack. as is an attorney stanley woodward, representing two other clients involved in this matter, walt nauta and yuscil taveras, the i. t. worker who is presumed to be employee number 4 in the superseding indictment. trump, or trump's leadership pack, i should say, has made it a practice to pay for legal

representation for the witnesses, who might have important information as it concerns the former president, something the house january six committee explored at length after learning that cassidy hutchinson, a key witness, had been contacted by trump allies to make sure that she, cassidy hutchinson, remained loyal. remember that miss hutchinson's first lawyer, stephen passantino, was being paid by trump, and was coaching her to tell committee investigators that she did not recall certain critical information. joining us now is congresswoman zoe lofgren of california. she was of course a member of the january six committee, and as she wrote in a recent msnbc op-ed, special counsel jack smith is vindicating the committee's work. congresswoman lofgren, thank

you for joining us tonight. i wonder what your thoughts were when you read that paragraph in this indictment about whether mr. de oliveira was loyal and whether or not that was the threshold with which he could get an attorney paid for by trump. >> well, it was reminiscent of the testimony we got from cassidy hutchinson, and not just that he was loyal, but that finding the lawyer and making sure that he was on the team would keep him from telling things or revealing things that would be damaging to the ex-president. hutchinson's testimony basically was that she wasn't told how much the lawyer was being paid, basically that this lawyer was counseling her not to tell the full truth. and in fact he advised her to put herself in a position to be held in contempt of congress. they dangled jobs in front of her to make sure that she stayed loyal. it's sort of a mobsters type approach to people in your, quote, organization, and it's sort of reminded me of that.

>> i know these are incentivized deals, but does this not qualify as witness intimidation? >> this was one of the things the committee referred to the department of justice. we are very disturbed about the testimony. we didn't have any corroborating evidence. but there were a lot of the witnesses that appeared before the committee were paid for by trump world, that's their word, not just mine. it did cause concern. was that part of the same sort of situation that happened with miss hutchinson? was it influencing their testimony? was it keeping these witnesses under control? we were unable to find out, but it made us very suspicious, and we hope that the department of justice would look at it and be able to do more digging than we were able to do. >> we know that walt nauta and

employee number 4 is reported to be yuscil taveras, the head of i. t. at mar-a-lago, they're being represented by woodward, woodward is being paid by trump 's pack, there's a curious dynamic here, which is yuscil taveras is clearly, if he is employee number 4, giving a lot of information to the doj, maybe even a cooperating witness. walt nauta, represented by the same lawyer, is not a cooperating witness. does that strike you as an odd arrangement and potentially problematic? >> it causes anxiety. it is not necessarily improper for someone to help or assist with payment of council if they are an employer, per se, is not illegal or improper. but the concern is is that this is being used as a tool to keep a witness under control, to keep them from being fully

candid with the department of justice. i can't say that that is what is happening here, we don't know that, but it does raise a concern and really i guess some of it is, stemming from the testimony that miss hutchinson gave us, because clearly that was the pattern they were using with her, and it didn't work, because she was an honest person. >> that is such a key point. it didn't work with cassidy hutchinson because she was an honest person. in your experience as a lawyer, does it all come down to these clients looking at their own internal moral compass and say what kind of person do i want to be, or making this naked calculation that trump might not be reelected and i could be in deep legal peril if i continue to basically align myself with him. what goes into convincing someone that their lawyer is not the best representative for them?

>> every person is different, but miss hutchinson told a wonderful story, which was, she was advised to do the look in the mirror test. would she be able to look in the mirror and face yourself based on what she was doing. and i think that's pretty good advice. if ten years from now you can't look yourself in the mirror and be proud of what you did, you want to think about doing something else. certainly there are calculations about, will you end up in jail, et cetera, et cetera, but in the end, having honor and being truthful is something that we all should do. if you are not telling a lie, you never have to worry about what you said before, just tell the truth. >> truer words have never been. spoke. congresswoman zoe lofgren, thank you for your time tonight. we appreciate it. as the world waits on the next big federal indictment, don't

take your eyes off what is happening in the states. we're going to tell you about some very big indictment news out of the state of michigan and what it has to do with the investigation in georgia. that is next. ♪ limu emu & doug ♪ what do we always say, son? liberty mutual customizes your car insurance... so you only pay for what you need. that's my boy. now you get out there, and you make us proud, huh? ♪ bye, uncle limu. ♪ stay off the freeways! only pay for what you need. ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪

my asthma felt anything but normal. ♪ ♪ it was time for a nunormal with nucala. nucala is a once-monthly add-on treatment for severe eosinophilic asthma that can mean less oral steroids. not for sudden breathing problems. allergic reactions can occur. get help right away for swelling of face, mouth, tongue, or trouble breathing. infections that can cause shingles have occurred. don't stop steroids unless told by your doctor. tell your doctor if you have a parasitic infection. may cause headache, injection site reactions, back pain, and fatigue. ask your asthma specialist about a nunormal with nucala.

dove invited women who wanted their damaged hair trimmed. yes, i need a trim. i just want to be able to cut the damage. we tried dove instead. so, still need that trim? oh my gosh! i am actually shocked i don't need a haircut. don't trim daily damage. stop it with dove. >> believe it or not, we have more big indictment news this

evening, involving a special prosecutor and an attempt to overturn the results of the 2020 election. but i'm not talking about jack smith. i'm talking about michigan. last night, on a conservative podcast, a lawyer known for pushing the big lie, a woman named stephanie lambert, claimed that she has been indicted. lambert was part of a group of trump allies who, after the 2020 election, allegedly went around michigan conning three different counties into handing over a total of five voting machines. they then allegedly took those machines to hotel rooms and airbnb's, where they allegedly broke into them, the machines, and ran what they believed to be forensic tests. they were looking for evidence that somehow these voting machines had thrown the election to joe biden. there are a ton of wild parts to the story, like how the reason this investigation is

being handled by a press special prosecutor in the first place is because one of the suspects in this case is a man named matt deperno, who last year was the republican nominee for the attorney general of michigan. or how two of the other suspects are a former state lawmaker and a literal sheriff, both of whom allegedly used their former positions to give this whole scheme an air of credibility. but the part that i think that is important tonight is that of the nine people involved in this alleged scheme in michigan, five of them were also involved in another scheme in a different state. the names you might remember from these nine people are jeffrey lenberg and doug logan, both of them consider themselves forensic tech experts. you might remember logan as the ceo of the now defunct cyber ninjas group that caused all the chaos in arizona, and as it turns out lenberg and logan are two of the guys caught on surveillance footage repeatedly breaching the voting equipment

in coffee county, georgia. that alleged breach is why the focus is on fulton county d. a. fani willis and her investigation into trump's attempt to overturn the election in the state of georgia. so jeffrey lenberg and doug logan were busy guys. very busy. trump attorney sydney powell and rudy giuliani were the ones to allegedly coordinate all of this breaching. they use five members of the michigan plot to do some more voting machine tests down in georgia. and the data that these guys get from the alleged breach of this voting equipment in georgia was ultimately sent to none other than stephanie lambert. that lawyer who now claims she has been indicted in the state of michigan. so i know everyone is waiting with baited breath, me included, for a charging decisionfrom jack smith. but don't sleep on the states. michigan in georgia are busy right now. up next, a calendar is getting

crowded as trump's legal woes pile up. what today's big announcement means for his mar-a-lago trial date, when we come back. 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 we used to struggle with greasy messes. now, we just freak, wipe, and we're done! with mr. clean clean freak, conquering messes is that easy. clean freak's mist is three times more powerful, and it works on contact. clean freak, just freak, wipe, done.

hey bud. wow. what's all this? hawaii was too expensive so i brought it here. you know with priceline you could actually take that trip for less than all this. i made a horrible mistake. ♪ go to your happy price ♪ ♪ priceline ♪ to help prevent bleeding gums. try saying 'hello gumwash' with parodontax active gum health. it kills 99% plaque bacteria. and forms an antibacterial shield. try parodontax active gum health mouthwash. i'm sholeh, and i lost 75 pounds with golo. i went from a size 20 to a size 6. before golo, nothing seemed to work. i was exercising for over an hour every day. it was really discouraging. but golo's so easy, the weight just falls off.

♪ ♪ ♪ new double chicken chopped salads. so, you've got the power of xfinity at home. now take it outside o with xfinity mobile. like speed? it's the fastest mobile service around. with the best price for two lines of unlimited. only $30 bucks a line per month. that's hundreds in savings a year when you wave bye to the other guys. save hundreds a year over t-mobile, at&t and verizon. and now, trade in your current phone, >> these new charges dropped and get up to $1000 off the new galazy z flip 5 and z fold 5. ♪ the new summer family meal. starting at $24.

only at el pollo loco.

on don trump today add to a real pile of legal concerns. we are still waiting and indictment from the special counsel for trump's attempts to overturn the 2020 election, but the calendar is already quite full. there is the civil fraud suit against the trump organization that was filed by a new york a. g. laetitia james. that is scheduled to bring to begin october 2nd of this year. on january 15th of next, year e. jean carroll's other civil defamation suit against trump is scheduled to be back in court. that is incidentally the same day as the iowa caucuses. then comes super tuesday, a big thing if you are running for president. and a few weeks after that, on march 25th, trump will be in court to face his first criminal trial, brought by manhattan d. a. alvin bragg over falsified documents related to his hush money payments to an adult film star. we are also awaiting potential

charges out of fulton county, georgia, which may happen in the next few weeks. at this very moment the mar-a-lago classified documents trial is scheduled to begin in a federal courtroom in florida on may 20th of next year. joining us now is our not so secret weapon, msnbc legal analyst lisa rubin. lisa, people don't even know how many questions you answered for me off air, but thank you for answering the questions on air. the first one is, does this superseding indictment change the timetable for the mar-a-lago trial? >> it could. we now have a three defendant case. we're gonna see some additional discovery. i don't think it will be as voluminous as what we have seen before, but there is going to be additional phone records, additional texts, additional surveillance footage. we know from the superseding indictment that they had surveillance footage of nada and de oliveira walking along the pool emitter of mar-a-lago.

>> the whole part of them working through the bushes from one part of the property to the other. >> they have surveillance footage from multiple locations referenced in this indictment. the discovery burden will increase that, plus we have the possibility of additional pretrial motions that can't be stopped. one of those is called the severance motion. that is when one defendant says, i can't get a fair trial if i'm sitting next to that guy. that's a hard argument for someone like walt nauta to make, particularly given that he remains employed as trump's body guy. but we don't know what the status of carlos de oliveira is right now. he also is not as implicated in the criminal charges here as nauta and trump are. he could see the pretrial publicity surrounding the former president is so massive that he and nauta can't get a fair trial is ordinary people in the service of the former president. >> that seems a reasonable case to be made. >> i think they are lawyers probably will make that case. >> when you talk about the

evidence and discovery, there seems to be a lot of electronic records mentioned in this. i know this is something that you have flagged. what stood out to you in this superseding indictment? >> one of the things that stood out to me is really that there are more phones than we knew that we're in jack smith's possession. one of the things we know is that they have nauta's phones. how do we know that? because his lawyer said so in open court last week that two of his, at least two of his phones were seized through a search warrant. what we now know is that they must have either de oliveira or trump employee 4, believed to be lucille tavares, they must have their phones as well. how do we know that? because they have electronic communications that are solely between the two of them. >> that they couldn't have gotten out of nauta's. we other pieces there seems to be some kind of witness who paid a key role in bringing

this bedminster audiotape, bringing that kerfuffle or whatever you want to call it and it's not been charged with the dissemination case, bringing them to florida. someone said nothing trump was waving around was under iran war document. now the feds can charge trump on that because they have, in their possession -- >> the way they have the iran war plan is revealed in this indictment, and it is surprising to me. one of the things we see in this indictment is a list of all the documents, the classified documents that trump is being charged with willfully and unlawfully retaining. the around word document as dates of when he unlawfully retained it. they all start jerry 20th, 2020, won the day he left office. most of them and june 3rd, 2022,

the day that they went the doj went down to mar-a-lago to meet with evan corcoran. what's the date on it of? joe 20 of the children to, the same day that trump returned the first tranche of boxes to the national archives. we know that because it's in the indictment as well. >> what does that suggest? what do you draw from that? that they had this document in their possession for a while. they didn't charge on it, initially. >> they might not have known that was the document and we were discussing earlier tonight with tally weinstein, that is the document, a witness confirmed, i saw it a meeting in bedminster in july of 2020. >> and they can now they can bring the episode to the trial. that seems important for a block opinion. the whole thing with this case is, will how grave is it? how serious is it? and now they can bring into the courtroom, in florida, this is how serious it was. u.s. military plans to attack iran and the president was waving them around to just anybody just so that he could

basically have a war of words with mark milley and try and win that war. >> that's right. and we have always known that that episode was imported in then down demonstrating trump's intent. should i should be showing you this, but look at this. now we have the document in question. you remember that after the initial indictment, trump told multiple media outlets, no he never had a document, or i was rummaging in my drawers, i have newspaper orders and all sorts of stuff in must've and one of those, or they were some plans, oh i meant golf course plans, he was all over the place in explaining what this was, but he repeatedly denied that he have a classified document that was shown to people at bedminster. we now know definitively that that is not true. special counsel would not have put in the indictment that the document he waved around was in fact the document charged in count 32 unless they have very crystal clear evidence of that. >> the consciousness of guilt on all three, on the part of

all of them, the ssh emoji, the audio ram, sneaking around the property, waving around the document then lying about it, knowing that it was not declassified, it's all in there. it's a real read, this indictment. lisa rubin, always good to see you. that is our show for tonight. now it's time for the last word with lawrence o'donnell. good evening, lawrence. >> good evening, alex. we have andrew weissmann joining us tonight, and he has been the hardest working man at this network today. i want to get to him as quickly as i can. >> as you should. >> thank, you alex. we now know who the star witness is going to be in the case of united states of america versus donald j trump, walt tea nauta and now carlos de oliveira. carlos de oliveira was added as a defendant in the case today in a superseding indictment which added nine new