>> nothing wins over the hearts and minds of prospective voters like warning a kid about the sugar content in her icee at the peak of summer. ♪♪ tonight on "the reidout" -- >> there was no document. that was a massive amount of papers and everything else talking about iran and other things. >> oh, yes, there was a document, according to that superseding indictment. and special counsel jack smith has it. plus the boss wants the server deleted. the alleged words of a trump employee who is now the third defendant in the classified

documents case leading to additional obstruction counts against the former president. wouldn't it just be refreshing if ron desantis could just admit that teaching the benefits of slavery is a mistake that needs to be corrected? instead he's doubling and tripling down on it and blaming vice president harris for the controversy. i'm michael steele in for joy reid, and we begin tonight with what has become abundantly clear. donald trump has met his match with special counsel jack smith. unlike trump who always relies on insults, conspiracy theories, and alternative facts, smith is putting in the hours and doing the hard work to uncover actual facts and evidence. and last night, that due diligence was on display when the special counsel's office issued a superseding indictment in the classified documents case. it added three new charges against trump, one count of

willful retention of national defense information, and two additional counts of obstruction. it also named a new defendant, carlos deoliveira, a property manager at mar-a-lago. de oliveira allegedly helped trump's longtime valet and codefendant, walt nauta, move boxes containing classified documents out of a storage room. he allegedly spoke with "trump employee 4" which we now know to be yusuf taveras, the director of security, for trying to delete the security footage showing the boxes moved. we'll get back to that. i want to focus on something else we learned from the superseding indictment about the top secret iran memo that trump is heard on tape showing of off during a july 21st meeting at his new jersey golf club. >> except it is, like, highly confidential. >> yeah. >> this is secret information.

look at this. and he said, he wanted to attack iran and what -- these are the papers. >> you did. >> this is done by the military and given to me. i think we can probably -- right? >> i don't know, we'll have to see, yeah. we'll have to try to -- >> declassify it. >> yeah. >> as president i could have declassified it. now i can't. >> yeah. >> isn't that interesting? this is so cool. >> not only does donald trump confirm in that audiotape that he did not declassify the document like he has repeatedly claimed he did, he also confirmed that no one in that room had security clearance. of course, trump has denied he actually showed off any top secret memo. >> there was no document. that was a massive amount of papers and everything else talking about iran and other things. and it may have been held up or may not. but that was not a document. i didn't have a document, per

se. there was nothing to declassify. these were newspaper stories, magazine stories, and articles. >> and he even had his lawyers go on tv to call it all a lie. >> all we know is that in the indictment itself, there was no iran documents named as part of it. just want the american public to realize that. that document that they claim he had was not part of the indictment. it doesn't make sense because it's a lie. it's a ruse. >> like i said earlier, unlike trump, jack smith doesn't seem to deal in alternative facts. he comes bearing the reteets and has now included that very document that trump and his minions claim doesn't exist to include it in the superseding indictment. as you can see, it indicates that they have actually had the document in question since january 17th, 2022. the same date the very first 15 boxes of documents were delivered from mar-a-lago to the national archives.

we learned something else last night in yet another filing from the special counsel, and it amplifies trump's pure brazenness as part of the ongoing discussions with trump's legal team over the protective order for the documents. trump not only wants to be able to discuss classified discovery with his counsel outside of a classified location, but he wants to be able to do so at mar-a-lago or possibly bedminster. no, i'm not making that up. the special counsel writes, quote, there is no basis for the defendant's request that he be given the extraordinary authority to discuss classified information at his residence. and it is particularly striking that he seeks permission to do so in the very location at which he is charged with willful retaining the documents charged in this case. the government is not aware of any case in which a defendant has been permitted to discuss classified information in a private residence, and such exceptional treatment would not be consistent with the law.

joining me now is mary mccord, former acting assistant attorney general for national security, cohost of the "prosecuting donald trump" podcast. barbara mcquaid, former u.s. attorney at university of michigan, law professor. i am lawyered up, folks, i am ready for this one. because i'll start with you, mary. it is very intriguing to me how jack smith has developed this narrative. and people were impressed when the first set of indictments came out. and now we have this. and we're still sitting there in anticipation, wondering and waiting what will be next? jack smith would not be doing it this way, number one, but certainly not allowing -- not having allowed a grand jury to come and meet and include any of these charges if he didn't have the goods.

is that how you're looking at this? what should we be taking away from this new development? >> i think with respect to the new document that's been charged, the 32nd count, that is the document that is not named as an iran document in the superseding indictment, but it is reflected in the narrative that the document that's charged in count 32 is the document that mr. trump was showing to these people who had no authority to be viewing it or seeing it at bedminster in july of 2021. and so it's unclear if at the time of the first indictment, they had actually isolated that document and determined it was the one. even though it was in their possession, there were many, many hundreds of documents. so it could be that they just decided at that time not to include it as a separate charge. maybe it was so sensitive that they were nervous about including it as a separate charge. but certainly now they have located it, they have determined whether by witnesses or some other way that that, in fact, is

the one. that's the part that we are still missing, right? how do we know for sure it's the one? as opposed to, this looks like it might be the one. that's where i think you're right. jack smith is not going to add this as a count and say it was the document if he can't substantiate that at trial. >> frank, one of the interesting aspects of this for me is the introduction of this new figure in all of this. mr. deoliveira, who in reading through the transcript at once seems hesitant, at other times compliant. how do you read his role in this? particularly given when you look at the indictment, i want to read this to you when they talk about his loyalty. there's some concern about whether or not he was going to be loyal enough. just over two weeks after the fbi discovered classified documents in the storage room in trump's office in august 2022, nauta called trump employee 5 and said words to the effect of, someone wants to make sure carlos is good. in response, trump employee 5

told nauta, de oliveira was loyal and would not do anything to affect his relationship with trump. that to me says a lot. not just so much about whether or not de oliveira was in the game, but there was some interesting concern about whether or not trump could manipulate or use this guy to get his ends met in regards to these documents. how did you read his role here? >> de oliveira played a significant role are he's a player here. he would not have been charged like this if he wasn't significant to the conspiracy. remember, conspiracies involve two or more people. we've certainly got that here. i can't help but reminisce back to reading la coasta nostra transcripts for organized crime where the mob certificates will say, "is he okay? is he one of ours?" "yeah, he's one of ours, he's

good." this is exactly like that. this is what we hear about de oliveira. we've got a description of him and nauta meeting in bushes, multiple meetings going into the far periphery of mar-a-lago property, adjacent property, and having meetings in the bushes. he knows exactly what he's doing is wrong. he's keeping a secret about nauta traveling with regard to taking care of the server. he's the one interacting with the i.t. guy, saying the boss wants this done. he talks to nauta about it. they're conferring about it. a major player who it appears they could not flip, at least not yet, at least not fully. and that's why we're seeing him charged. and he's going to have to make a decision here. he's got a lawyer that appears to be paid for. again, a mobster-type thing. paid for by the boss. he's going to go down with the boss if these three guys show up in court and go to trial

together. someone's going down, and they're all going to go down unless there's a severance or they decide to get separate lawyers. >> the separate lawyers piece, barbara, to me is a fascinating aspect of this. because they don't have separate lawyers. trump is paying for the lawyers that these gentlemen are currently using. how does that shape the way jack smith moves forward with his prosecution? and does he get to a point where he goes to the court and says, your honor, we've got to get something else going on here because this is not going to work with the way this evidence is being presented, and i have these two individuals represented by the same lawyers. when the facts may show they have different roles that, you know, may be beneficial if they're separated versus being in the same pool? >> prosecutors usually show a lot of respect and deference to

a client in their choice of a lawyer. they don't want to get between that relationship between lawyer and client. but as we saw with cassidy hutchinson, sometimes lawyers are not putting their client first. their eth cat duty is to their client, not the person who's paying them. but we know from the history of cassidy hutchinson, that's not the way it always works. one option is there's a court rule that allows them to raise with the court concerns that a lawyer might have a conflict of interest in a case in representing a client. if so, it's not the prosecutor's job to delve into that but to just raise it with the court, then the judge can have a hearing where they actually bring the client in and ask the client under oath if they've been satisfied with their legal representation, and if they understand that there is this potential conflict of interest. so that is one way that there can be a protection here if somebody is being pressured. but i don't know how many clients would show up in that situation and say, yeah, i'm being pressured. not too many would probably have the courage to come clean at that point, especially someone like nauta or de oliveira who

have already sort of staked their loyalty with donald trump. >> mary, i want to sort of connect what both frank and barbara have said so far to the two locations that we now find ourselves looking at. the jurisdictions of new jersey and bedminster and florida and mar-a-lago. speak to how that now seems to work actually in the prosecution's favor, given the way these facts seemingly have unfolded? >> it establishes now that this document has been charged a couple of things. it establishes, as we talked that jack smith must have the proof that it was a document in bedminster. that means that document not only went from the white house to mar-a-lago, and it shouldn't have. it went from mar-a-lago to bedminster, and it shouldn't have. traveling on some sort of unsecured transportation that it shouldn't have. then it went back to mar-a-lago, where it shouldn't have. and so there had been some

concerns about would there be objections to the government being able to introduce into evidence at trial, that dialogue up at bedminster where trump is referring to a document, the dialogue you played at the top of the show? or would that be ruled by the court to be more prejudicial than probative since the document was not the basis for a charge? guess what, the document is now a basis for a charge. so i think any argument that that audio shouldn't be admissible is going to fail. or if it doesn't fail, if there are successful motions to suppress, those are things that government can appeal. >> that part of it, to me -- i could just hear trump thinking that, you know, he's figured it all out. and despite -- just by transportation, right? >> right. >> he creates the nexus that now brings it all together. which, frank, begs the question for me, what is trump thinking at this point in light of all of

these charges that are coming forth with more potentially coming? i want you to listen to trump on real america "voice today" where he sort of shared his views not only about running for president with these charges, but conviction potentially as well. take a listen. >> if, if going forward, right, you've got these indictments, there ends up you've got a jury in d.c., you get convicted and sentenced, does that stop your campaign for president if you're sentenced? >> not at all. there's nothing in the constitution to say that it could. and not at all. and even the radical left are saying, no, that wouldn't stop. and it wouldn't stop me either. >> frank, dispatch with that quickly if you would. >> yeah, look. what we see happening here is, moving forward, a strategy, a legal strategy, that's going to

be more about delaying for a campaign and for an eventual win that trump wants, rather than a solid legal strategy. we're seeing that already in motion. he's thinking delay, delay, delay. fund-raise, fund-raise, use this to my benefit, push it out. we're going to continue to see that for the upcoming months. >> all right, stay with me. we can't forget about trump's next expected indictment, this time for his role in the events of january 6th. "the readout" continues after this. 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.

amid all the news of the darm charges against donald trump in the which is guide documents case, let's not forget any day now trump is expecting to be indicted again. this time for his attempt to overturn the 2020 election. charges against the former president would seem to be imminent. trump's legal team met with prosecutors from the special counsel's office yesterday, which is typically the last chance for lawyers to convince prosecutors not to bring charges. and the last step before an indictment is handed down. back with me are mary mccord, frank fleguzzi, barbara wade. this next case which i think is the seminal one, this is the thing that really kind of pulls for me a lot of this together.

how do you see, particularly given the way the prosecution has set up the documents case -- what do you anticipate with this january 6th case and how jack smith is going to lay his cards out on this one? it sounds like there's still loose ends. i know some thought when the trump target letter came out, the 30-day deadline, that that meant that day. there's still a few things that have to occur. for example this meeting with defense counsel i think is something you could have anticipated. there's been reporting bernard kerik has produced a lot of documents and they want to interview him in august. and that there are two fake electors who have been subpoenaed to appear before the grand jury. it seems most likely they'd want to complete that work before they filed the indictment. so i can see it taking a couple more weeks before we actually see that indictment filed, early to mid-august. where does it fit in a trial

with the mar-a-lago case? i would imagine it would probably get a trial date but sometime after that. here's an trig dynamic. if that superseding indictment that was filed yesterday ends up pushing is mar-a-lago indictment, the trial date down the road a few months, there is a possibility that jack smith could argue that that january 6th trial was wedged in between. that is interesting because i think that's is big one. if you can have that tried and completed before the november election, i think that would be in the best interests of the public so that they could have access to that information when they make a decision about the election. >> see the wall of shame of the january 6th participants. we get a sense of exactly the players that are in the mix here.

i think the most intriguing is the former chief of staff, mark meadows. i want to play a very quick little verbiage from mr. meadows on his way into an office building recently. >> you know, i haven't talked about anything january 6th related. >> "that's all i got to say, i don't talk about anything january 6th related." i've heard, and there's been reporting, that when someone like mark meadows is taking that posture, that potentially could mean something relevant to how the conversations he's having with the special prosecutor -- what's your take on the sort of stoniness of mark meadows when you consider some of the other players who are a little bit more vocal about what they're doing here? >> i think that's a completely natural reading that potentially he's cooperating with the special counsel's office. so he's been instructed to keep his mouth shut and it's in his interests to keep his mouth shut. i also think it could be

consistent with him expecting he's going to be charged and his attorneys saying, keep your mouth shut. so i think a lot of us have speculated about how valuable he might be to a prosecution, unlike people like rudy giuliani, who i think are utterly incredible, meaning sponsoring a witness like that in front of the jury is really challenging because he is such a liar. mark meadows has a little bit more gravitas than that. it could be somebody that the prosecution could feel comfortable putting on the stand if they satisfied themselves that he's telling the truth. it could be he's going to be on the other side. >> the intriguing part, how someone like meadows could be in a number of spots in this scenario. and then you layer on top of that what's happening down in georgia now over the last couple of days. they started putting up

barricades around the courthouse, signaling what, we don't know. but how does this georgia case, which is also not a lot of conversation about it recently because of the activity of the special counsel, jack smith. but that's also a potential knock upside the head for trump when that one lands in the midst of all these other trials. how do you read that potential case flowing in the midst of both the documents case and january 6th? >> you know, it's interesting. when you talk to people who live abroad, they look at this mess and they go, boy, it seems your legal system seems very chaotic. there's no centrality to it. each state doing their own thing. the feds in different districts and jurisdictions. turns out there's a beauty to this system. because the states, as you know, the state charges cannot be pardoned by a president. so all eyes really need to be on

fulton county. there's a lot of moving parts there. because you've got this whole issue of meadows that straddles -- meadows is key because he straddles two components of the january 6th case and the fulton county case. and of course he's immersed in the fulton county case, which is the at slate of electors, the security breech, january 6th at the capitol. meadows is in the room, he knows what's going on. he straddles both issues, for smith. with regard to fulton county, there are security concerns with witness protection, protecting the courthouse, protecting prosecutors, protecting fani willis. she's already alerted law enforcement well ahead of time that they see this coming, start preparing. and i know that the federal agencies are offering help to the county sheriff and the county police and the city police and the georgia state patrol. so we're about to go through, as i look at this from law enforcement, the nation and the

nation's law enforcement with all of this on the table, it's about to go through a kind of stress test. whether they can get out in front of something bad happening, find that lone actor, respond to what trump and others around him are maybe doing to instigate potential violence. law enforcement has to get it right every single day. >> barbara, we've got a minute left. i want to get your thoughts on an aspect of this, of all these cases, all the prosecutions from the state to the feds that i think could be interesting to watch. trump's reaction. his insistence that he speak to these matters, that he calls out individuals, calling the special prosecutor a name. i can only imagine what he'll start in on the prosecutor in georgia. how should the courts be handling donald trump and his outbursts on social media and in public? >> it's tricky when you have someone running for president, because they certainly have a

first amendment right to speak political speech and defend themselves. i think the judges really should be more proactive here. i can't believe the judge has allowed donald trump to already say the things he has said about jack smith in light of the climate that we live in. we know after the mar-a-lago search, for example, a man in cincinnati stormed the fbi office and ended up killed in a standoff. so it's very dangerous to allow trump to go after the prosecutors by name. i think he can defend himself, but if i were to that judge, i'd be entering a protective order to talk about lowering the temperature on the rhetoric. >> mary mccord, frank fa gus zee, barbara mcquaid, thank you very much. coming up, growing backlash to florida's new curriculum teaching about the benefits of being a slave. now coming from black republicans in congress, hm. we'll be right back. limiting when it was okay.

no tech behind closed doors. but social media's algorithms of addiction always won out. it's not your fault. alone you can't stop it. together, we will. we have a plan. join us. ( ♪♪ )

as someone living with type 2 diabetes, i want to keep it real and talk about some risks. with type 2 diabetes you have up to 4 times greater risk of

stroke, heart attack, or death. even at your a1c goal, you're still at risk ...which if ignored could bring you here... ...may put you in one of those... ...or even worse. too much? that's the point. get real about your risks and do something about it. talk to your health care provider about ways to lower your risk of stroke, heart attack, or death. learn more at getrealaboutdiabetes.com

backlash continues over florida's new public school standards that require instructors to teach students that enslaved people developed skills which could be applied for their personal benefit. hm. this time the rebuke comes from two of the very few black republicans in congress. congressman byron doalds called on florida to correct its state's black history standards. tim scott of south carolina, the only black republican senator,

said to a reporter, quote, there is no silver lining in slavery. what slavery was really about was separating families, about mutilating humans, and even raping their wives. it was just devastating. he called on florida and especially those running for president, ahem ron desantis, to again clarify their positions. meanwhile, vice president kamala harris, who desantis keeps attacking in this black history feud, says the new guidelines are about a larger agenda. >> i do believe that we are witnessing a national agenda that is about a full-on attack against hard-won, hard-fought freedoms and rights. consider this issue and then think about what is happening around a full-on attack on the freedom to vote. >> joining me now is dean abadala, msnbc columnist and host of "the dean abadala show"

on sirius xm. welcome. brendan, this cuts close to home for us. we can talk about kamala harris all day long and make it about her. but it really isn't. sy want to play for you real quick, ron desantis' response to byron donalds asking him to fix this. >> at the end of the day, you've got to choose. are you going to side with kamala harris and liberal media outlets? are you going to side with the state of florida? i think it's very clear that these guys did a good job on those standards. there wasn't anything that was politically motivated. these are serious scholars. >> so the question is, why can't he recognize in this moment that he's in the wrong lane on this?

the idea that slavery somehow benefited black people. then to have two black members of congress from his party say to him, i think as politely as they could -- because i certainly wouldn't have been as polite as they were in reprimanding him on this -- that he still doesn't seem to get what they're saying and why he's tone deaf on this. not asking you to get in his head, but the politics of this, i would think you would shift very quickly, oh, my bad. but he's not doing that. what do you think's going on here? >> because he's incredibly stub born. that rate much is root of all of this. we're on day six or seven of ron desantis having to, in some ways, look like he's defending slavery. meaning this is supposed to be a campaign reset. this is not part -- this should have been flushed down the toilet in a single day. i don't think that ron desantis actually thinks that there are upsides to slavery, but i think he's so stubborn and unwilling

to admit error that he can't help himself but to engage in a fight. just say, slavery was abhorrent, there were no upsides, these guys drew up these standards, they missed on this one, we're going to cut that out, and the story goes away. instead, the week that he's supposed to be resetting, he continually looks like he's defending the situation. it's incredibly -- you and i worked in politics for a long time. i cannot understand the thinking, the political strategy behind this. i think it just comes down to his personality. >> dean, i mean, that's the point. i mean, i get the personality in politics. brendan and i have dealt with personalities in politics, particularly on the republican side. and that's all good. you know how to manage that. but then what i find troubling is to sort of, you know, switch this over and try to make it about kamala harris. the vice president. who i think rightly called it out. what do you think of that part of the strategy? how do you think the public sees that, more importantly, trying

to shift this back to her and making this somehow that she is defending the indefensible? >> michael, first of all, when republicans are fighting each other, it brings me an inappropriate amount of joy. so that point right there. >> what can i say, right? >> second of all, let's take a step back. you're looking at this like, ron desantis is in the wrong. i'll tell you this. overwhelmingly, republicans support critical race theory bans, which is banning teaching black achievement and the suffering of black people at the hands of white people through time. secondly, polls show a majority of republicans now think they are the biggest victims of discrimination, more than black people. and i think this is all consistent with that. other polling showed republicans less supportive now of teaching any black history at all. so i actually think you guys -- you're thinking like a democrat, i'm so happy about that for both of you. but in reality, for the gop

base, the idea of teaching slavery has an upside is consistent with white victim hood. that is the currency of donald trump. if you're teaching black people suffered? doesn't play well. teaching slavery was bad but not as bad as you think -- that plays well to the gop base. that's what poll shows. i'm not a republican, i can't get in your mind, but that's polling shows, though. >> since we're supposedly thinking so much like democrats, i want to say to you democrats, why can't you seem to get your act together when it comes to joe biden and biden nom mics? what is the problem that you seem to have in understanding what this man has done under very difficult circumstances to generate the kind of growth in the economy and movement in the economy away from recession, away from the cliff of economic collapse, on to something a little bit more positive. you've got "the washington post" and others out here telling the story, and yet democrats are

sitting there going, i don't know, i think he's too old. right? right, brendan? what's up with these guys? no, this is for you, dean. go ahead. >> reality -- on my show last night, my entire open was about bidenomics and how it's working and how some in the corporate media -- not you, sin yearly -- many in the corporate media, so much as trump sucks all the oxygen out. there's real news bith donald trump, more charges. the democrats have to get out there and talk about this. unemployment the lowest since the 1960s. inflation the lowest point in two years. consumer confidence hit a new two-year high this week, three months in a row that's on the uptick. gas prices down 25%. i agree with you 100%. democrats should be getting out there and repeating the message over and over again. the problem is you have two democrats and you hear three opinions on any issue. you can book one deposit for both sides of the same issue.

the gop is much better at messaging. democrats got to own the economy. it's a winning issue for 2024. >> brendan, i'll give you the last word on this before we go to break. >> yeah, it might be a winning issue, but the stats you cited are not all that encouraging. inflation is still really high. a two-year consumer confidence is not that long ago when things were really bad. this is a risky play. i don't think they're doing this because they're going on offense, i think they know they have a problem. they have a huge weakness and they're trying to fix it. but they may have no choice but to try to ladies and gentlemen into the economy because it's probably going to make or break this election. i understand why they're trying to get ahead of it. but there is a pretty easy target for republicans still to be going after, the economy, when inflation is still really high. even if less bad than it was. >> all right, dean and brendan, stick around for a moment as we check in on tonight's big dinner for republican presidential candidates in iowa where we don't expect anyone to bring up the fact that trump lost the

iowa caucus to ted cruz, because it might make him angry. tired muscles and joints were keeping me from doing the things i loved most. not anymore. blue-emu gave me my freedom back. it supports healthy muscles and joints. shop our expanded family of products at major online retailers.

trying to control my asthma felt anything but normal. ♪ ♪ enough was enough. i talked to an asthma specialist and found out my severe asthma is driven by eosinophils, a type of asthma nucala can help control. now, fewer asthma attacks and less oral steroids that's my nunormal with nucala. nucala is a once-monthly add-on injection for severe eosinophilic asthma. nucala is 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. talk to your asthma specialist to see if once-monthly nucala may be right for you. and learn about savings at nucala.com

there's more to your life than asthma. find your nunormal with nucala. i was told my small business wouldn't qualify for an erc tax refund. you should get a second opinion from innovation refunds at no upfront cost. sometimes you need a second opinion. [coughs] good to go. yeah, i think i'll get a second opinion. all these walls gotta go! ah ah ah! i'd love a second opinion. no. i'm going to get a second opinion. with innovation refunds, there's no upfront cost to find out. so why not check like i did for my small business?

take the first step to see if your small business qualifies for the erc.

okay. i know that it feels like we're still trudging through the 2020 election. but the 2024 presidential race is in full swing, ask in iowa tonight, republican party is hosting its annual lincoln dinner. 13 republican presidential

candidates are speaking tonight with former president donald trump headlining the event. hm. the last time trump attended this event, businesswoman carly fiorina stole the show and trump was still just a former democrat considering a run for the presidency. he went on to close the -- to lose the iowa caucus to ted cruz, senator ted cruz, yeah. but don't ask trump about that because he claims he won and ted cruz stole it from him. sound familiar? yeah. well, today trump maintains a double-digit lead in iowa polls with the party firmly in his grips and functioning as an extension of his legal defense fund. dean own bawl la, brendan buck. joining the conversation is debris onfinely steele, "the des moines register." you're there. set the scene, let us know what's happening. i understand that ron desantis

came out just a moment ago and declared there will be no cocaine in his white house. as well as that he would enact the death penalty for pedophiles. i think these are all rousing topics to talk about. what are you hearing? >> that's exactly right. governor desantis is still speaking behind me. he's getting a really enthusiastic reaction from the crowd. he's only the third person to speak, as you mentioned, donald trump is the last speaker. we'll see how this goes, but so far he's really animating this crowd on some of the talking points that you've just mentioned. >> it's interesting to me, briana, that you have this cavalcade of candidates coming through. but donald trump is the keynote. he's the one that everyone is sitting there waiting for. what is the vibe in anticipation of his speech tonight? have you been able to get a sense from the audience that, we like some of these guys but

that's the main stage we're waiting for? >> that's exactly right. donald trump still is leading all of these national polls. and here in iowa, he's still very much beloved by a lot of these republicans. he's someone who has been in the state very regularly, even after he became president.he kept up e state. he's got deep roots with a lot of the organizations here. and so people are really looking to see whether or not he can hold on to that support in the face of new options. his speech tonight is a real test. it's the only cattle call that he is attending where all of these candidates are going to be in the same room on the same stage, back to back. so it's going to be a real test [applause] of how he does compared to some of these other candidates. >> brandon, the chan challenge for the other candidates's, they won't go where they need to go with donald trump. my take on this event tonight is, this warm up act for

trump's performance at the end. how are you looking at these types of events, where they get on these stages in front of the base and yet not take down the guy who is hitting 40, 50 points ahead of them in the polls? >> it's confounding. you don't get anything for coming in second. it seems like what that's what a lot of people are praying. for their unwilling to upset anytime trump voters and i get it because they're a lot of die hard trump voters. but if you criticize, and they're gonna get upset. by definition a die hard trump voter is not a persuadable voter. you won't win them over. if your goal is to win, you've got to write those people off. one of the things i find so much encouraging is, trump is leading by a lot, but he seems to have hit a bit of a ceiling. he is in the low 50s, and as much as desantis has stumbled, and no one else has taken on, it's not that he is in the 60s or 70s. there are a lot of people who want an alternative.

they want someone to be good other than donald trump, and if someone would fill that space and understand that you can contrast yourself with this person. i promise you, when he stands up there later tonight, he's not going to dance around the other candidates. he's probably gonna take some swings. that's what he does. it has worked for him. maybe they should take a listen. >> they just want. they have had time to learn that lesson. school has been in for a while now on this. and yet, we still see republicans placating and explaining and excusing donald trump when they have the opportunity to bring this point to really lay him bear and move on. i want to play for you ron desantis on the possibility as president desantis pardoning donald trump. >> would you commit to pardoning him on any federal charges against him? >> i'm going to do what's right for the country. i don't think it would be good for the country to have an

almost 80-year-old former president go to prison. >> so that the. yes >> it doesn't seem like it would be a good thing. and i look at ford pardoned nixon, took some heat for it, but at the end of the day, do we want to move forward as a country, or do we want to be mired in these past controversies? >> so as the general election message to the country after going through what will probably be a very difficult primary and general election with donald trump. >> first of all i don't think ron desantis will be making that. he has no shot at this nomination. he gets weaker by the day. if you wants to get some traction apparently get the base excited you should commit some crimes. maybe knock over a liquor store. rob a bank. so before felonies right now. runners in his has none. so excited attack on georgia. maybe you'll get the people. the idea of pardoning will

we're gonna move on so imagine that sentiment after 9/11. let's just move on as a nation. we had a terrorist attack on our capitol, amassed of act of terrorism. everyone involved has to be held accountable. we don't move on, we hold people accountable. so it doesn't happen again. that's very important. democrat, republican, doesn't matter. your president, you attempt a coup, you must go to prison. i think you should spend your last days in prison and not to be cruel but as a message to anyone even a democratic demagogue in the future, you can't do this in getting away with this, as we believe in this democratic republic. i wish republicans will join in this. let's protect our republic. >> brianne, we have about 20 seconds or left. tim scott just got on the stage. how was the response to him? [applause] what has he said, real quick, that is rousing the crowd there?

>> well, he is someone who really tends to play up his faith in his life and that really speaks to iowa events center calls. i think we'll hear more of that tonight. >> all right. dean obeidallah, brendan buck, and brianne pfaffenstiel, thank you all very much. we'll be right back. you all hi, i'm denise. i've lost over 22 pounds with golo in six months and i've kept it off for over a year. i was skeptical about golo in the beginning because i've tried so many different types of diet products before. i've tried detox, i've tried teas,

i've tried all different types of pills, so i was skeptical about anything working because it never did. but look what golo has done. look what it has done. i'm in a size 4 pair of pants. go golo. (soft music)

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. we moved out of the city so our little sophie could appreciate nature. but then he got us t-mobile home internet. i was just trying to improve our signal, so some of the trees had to go. i might've taken it a step too far. (chainsaw revs) (tree crashes) (chainsaw continues) (daughter screams) let's pretend for a second that you didn't let down your entire family. what would that reality look like? well i guess i would've gotten us xfinity... and we'd have a better view. do you need mulch? >> and that's tonight's read what, we have a ton of mulch.

out. joy is back on monday. all in with chris hayes starts

right now. right now. ha good evening from new york. i'm jen psaki in for chris hayes. it's been a huge week of legal news for donald j trump. and we learned a lot on the several criminal cases circling the ex president, including a bit of an unexpected turn of events yesterday. last night special counsel jack smith filed a superseding indictment against the ex president in the classified documents case and named a new codefendant and coconspirator, i mar-a-lago property manager named carlos de oliveira. the new indictment also hurled three additional federal felony counts against the ex president. enough aces ground total, for the mathematicians out there, of 40 counts in the classified documents case. 40. two of those additional charges are for obstruction, relating to a cover-up that can only be described as a scene out of the mob movie, if you like to watch those. federal prosecutors subpoenaed mar-a-lago security