behind a lot of this reporting, and i understand you have new reporting about the thinking of john eastmanefense lawyers. so, what can you tell us about their expectations for a looming indictment. >> first, let's start with mr. eastman. we spoke with one of his lawyers this afternoon and he says they're working on drafts in a letter to prosecutors both in washington and in georgia. both the federal -- >> washington and georgia, okay? >> they hope to have this memo drafted by next week to say to prosecutors, look, he did nothing wrong, he was just a lawyer floating theories, floating ideas on how president trump could win the argument and stay in office. there was nothing criminal here. we are not going to cut to any plea and we hope to get this letter in front of prosecutors before they make any charge and decision regarding mr. eastman. >> now, i know it was described as a hail mary. based on your reporting, why did they think it was necessary at this point in time and at this moment? >> well, there are some legal experts who would call it a hail mary, the defense lawyers believe that he

john eastman, john eastman is a likely target, this lawyer who is working with trump to really helped you conceive of and spearhead this scheme. chesebro was another lawyer who wrote memos. laying out the steps they could take to overturn this election. so i think it's pretty likely that there will be one or two others charged. but it is certainly possible that there could be a conspiracy between donald trump and other people and for a variety of reasons, prosecutors could choose not to charge them. >> noah, i'm always so much smarter for listened, you thank you, i could talk to you forever, i appreciate your analysis on this work. noah bookbinder is the president ceo of the seasons of responsibility, and ethics. more on this, i'm joined by the time the credit congressman of california. , i'he's a member of the house judiciary committee in 2001, he served as a house manager during the second impeachment trial of donald trump which essentially made him a prosecutor of that particular impeachment case. congressman, good to see you, thank you for being with us. i want to ask you about so

so, yeah, people who should be worried include john eastman who created this scheme, and the people who apparently oorg niezed and financed it like the my pillow guy, mike lindell. rudy giuliani is also a possible target although he appears to be cooperating with the investigation for now, which could help him get a deal. >> mark meadows i think also is maybe cooperating. it's interesting. it remains fascinating. joshua stanton and paul butler, thank you very much. >>> up next on the reidout, president biden stands tall at the nato summit, vigorously embracing the expanding summit. elections really do have consequences. the reidout continues after this. consequences the reidt oucontinues after this tect this: living with hiv, i learned i can stay undetectable with fewer medicines. that's why i switched to dovato. dovato is a complete hiv treatment for some adults. no other complete hiv pill uses fewer medicines to help keep you undetectable than dovato. detect this: most hiv pills contain 3 or 4 medicines. dovato is as effective with just 2. if you have hepatitis b, don't stop dovato wi

john eastman, he was a part of that, was the legal mastermind behind the fake elector strategy.have roger stone. john eastman, who i just mentioned, came in to talk to the select committee, and pled the fifth over 100 times. roger stone came and to talk to the select committee for about 90 minutes, he pled the fifth the entire time. these are individuals who we wanted information from but couldn't get it. one thing there about the extremist groups that -- roger stone, who many folks are familiar with, had a very close connection with one of the groups that was charged with this conspiracy, the individuals that were charged. including joshua james who pled guilty to seditious conspiracy, who was roger stone's bodyguard on the day of january six. right? this is a big point of connection, if you can connect donald trump in the white house, to folks and the willard, in this command center. the select committee wasn't able to hear from. if jack smith can get information about this, it will be valuable and important investigation. >> lisa, before we ask you about meadows, is there any

we believe that there is more than sufficient evidence to refer former president donald trump, john eastman and others, for violating title xviii, section 371. this statute makes it a crime to conspire to defraud the united states. third, we make a referral based on title xviii section 1001, which makes it unlawful to knowingly and willfully make materially false statements to the federal government. the evidence clearly suggests that president trump conspired with others to submit slates of fake electors to congress and the national archives. the fourth and final statute is title xviii section 2383. the statute applies to anyone who incites, assists, or engages in insurrection against the united states of america and anyone who gives aid or comfort to an insurrection. >> we don't know for sure, but history may very well reveal it was that moment that brought us to where we are today. the looming indictment of donald trump and the federal criminal investigation into the plot to overturn the 2020 election is where we begin today with some of our most favorite reporters and friends. former le

same with john eastman.ct of the scheme of the he's got a plan a and a plan b involving mike pence. i note that the justice department did seize the telephones of both of those men so they've got the text messages and the phone calls that can be a treasure trove of evidence so i'd be surprised if they're not involved in the indictment in some way. >> let me read you some of the recent reporting in "the washington post" about the disbarment holding john eastman accountable for what barbara described. duncan carling argued that all of his conduct was focused on the single purpose of obstructing the certification of joe biden's electoral win on january 6th. quote, dr. eastman sought at every turn to avoid every public test of his theory and he privately confessed that his theory had no chance of persuading the court. carling said in the opening statement -- he was fully aware his plan was damaging the nation including putting pence in danger during the insurrection and his actions, quote, breached the most impo

tonight, there's a particular focus on people like jeffrey clark and john eastman, and rudy giuliani. the lawyers in the trump bunch. part of a rant on his social media platform, truth social, he claimed tonight that lawyers and the legal system itself are under siege. he called that siege a gift from crooked joe biden, merrick garland, and deranged prosecutor jack smith. who knows what trump meant by that. if i were a lawyer, if i were a lawyer that would help trump to try and overturn the 2020 election, i might be keeping an eye on my mailbox. joining us now is barbara mcquade, the former u.s. attorney for the eastern district of michigan. barb, we are waiting for your shot also with us is the great lisa rubin. hi, lisa for -- thanks for saving my height. lisa, let me start with the notion that jack smith, his very busy and can apparently juggle a lot, was at the courthouse today on a wednesday, which is not traditionally when his grand jury's, meet. what's the signal to you? are you making a mole -- do you think there's something significant be inferred here? >> alex, it's hard to

john eastman took the fifth when the january 6th committee in congress tried to talk to him. we also know that doj has spoken with all three of these, what we'll call other lawyers, white house lawyers, who stood up against these ideas, who basically told giuliani and sidney powell, these ideas won't work. they're not legal. we know that prosecutors have spoken with certain crucial state level officials who were on the receiving end of pressure campaigns. of course brad raffensperger who received the call from donald trump asking him to just find 11,780 votes. another georgia official we learned this week in an interview with kaitlan collins, doj is looking at other states, arizona, the former house speaker, told us that he has spoken with the fbi. so we know doj is looking more broadly. and, finally, remember the fake electors? doj has spoken with some of them. they've given them immunity. they have to testify but their testimony cannot be used against them. doj is casting a very broad net and, finally, the last gasp effort was the pressure campaign on mike pence, various co

. >> what do you remember about john eastman's presentation that day?t it was ridiculous. >> these significant statutory violations are in my view more than enough -- >> he saw it as the duty of the legislature to step in and basically throw out the will of georgia voters and for the legislature to convene a special session and appoint their own republican alternate electors. >> i don't think it's just your authority to do that but quite frankly i think you have a duty to do that, to protect the integrity of the election here in georgia. >> he didn't have a clue what he was talking about. i'm like, he's wrong. and anybody who can read, and especially somebody who purports to be some kind of constitutional, you know, expert, this is -- this does not feel like it's legit. >> reporter: the december 3rd hearing wouldn't be the only appearance by giuliani and other trump allies in the peach state. giuliani appeared at two other hearings in front of the georgia legislature, in december 2020, where he continued to push the debunked claims of fraud. >> there ar

and tonight there's a particular focus on people like jeffrey clark and john eastman and rudy giuliani, the lawyers in the trump bunch. and part of a rant on his social media platform, truth social, trump claimed tonight that lawyers and the legal system itself are under siege. he called that siege a gift from crooked joe biden, merrick garland, and deranged prosecutor jack smith. now, who knows what trump meant by that, but if i were a lawyer, if i were a lawyer who had helped trump try to overturn the 2020 election, i might be keeping an eye on my mailbox. joining us now is barbara mcquade. barb, we're waiting for your shot. and also with us is the great lisa ruben. >> here i am. >> thank you, lisa ruben for saving my hide. let me first start with the notion that jack smith who's very busy and apparently can juggle a lot was at the courthouse today on a wednesday, which is not traditionally when grand juries meet, what does this signal to you? are we making a mountain out of a molehill or is there something to be inferred from that? >> it's hard to say. and i know that's an answer de

so people like john eastman and kenneth chesebro and rudy giuliani and others have been mentioned. so the idea that ultimately trump will be indicted by himself seems highly unlikely to me, although as of today, we haven't heard about target letters landing on anybody else's desks. i would mention, however, though, the delivery of target letters is not a requirement in the department of justice. it's certainly not a legal requirement. so there is no hard and fast rule that says anyone else has the get one. >> evan, do you have any insight into this one while rudy giuliani hasn't received a target letter? >> yeah, we don't really have any insight. but as andy mccabe just pointed out, a couple of people that we know have been at the center of this investigation, people like john eastman, for instance, right, who was stopped by the fbi, they seized his telephone. jeffrey clark, a former justice department official, again, at the center of all of this, his home got raided. so that's pretty much is a notice from the justice department that you are the target of an investigation. so i th

people like john eastman, for instance. stop by the fbi, seized his telephone. jeffrey clark, a former justice department official, again, at the center of all of this. he got his home got rated. that's a notice from the justice department, that you are the target of an investigation. so, i think for some of those folks, this is not necessarily a surprise that they are at the center of this. rudy giuliani is a different one. he just went in for a couple of days of testimony. we don't know what he said. so, that one is certainly one of the ones that everyone is asking, questions about. >> anything to add to, that? john i >> think what people who were in the room have told me that the subject of those two days was basically process. it mirrored his january 6th committee testimony. some of it was covered by lawyer quiet privilege, i can't tell you that, because that was privileged between my client, donald trump, and i. but a lot of it was, so, you thought there was election fraud, what did you do? you gathered up allegations, we brought them to different courts an

>> donald had a teary that people like john eastman were pedaling. if you want, the popular vote can be thrown out in any individual state and state legislatures have the right to appoint their own fake slate of electors and send them to the electoral college. so you could have a state that let's say is 90% for biden but the state legislature can say, eh, nice but your votes don't count, throw them out and instead put in the electors that the state legislators want, which could be of course all for trump. so that was kind of a key theory in seven different states in the 2020 election, propose these fake slates of electors. and notably this case that i just argued, moore versus harper, in the u.s. supreme court court solidly put to rest any notion that this is a viable legal theory whatsoever. it wasn't viable anyway. maybe you can get a person like john eastman to say it, but nobody in their right mind believed this. we live in a democracy after all. >> josh, so when i hear about the sort of chaotic meetings and this is one of the beauties of last ye

. >> john eastman. that we mentioned specifically. i don't know if mr.pstein is an attorney, but he also had called and i believe we discussed his phone call to me later, much later. >> can you refresh our memory on the call? because you were talking about boris epstein who is someone who is still often seen with trump. he was in court with trump in new york when he got teindicted here in manhattan. what was -- can you remind us of the nature of that call that he had to you. there was a bill that one of my former colleagues, mr. fincham had introduced into the legislature that he wanted me to hear, and it would attack the ballot outcome of the 2020 election and put that outcome on the ballot for the people of arizona to vote on, whether they still felt that way or not. it would -- if they voted against that election, then it would be thrown out. that was the essence of this bill, and i said i'm not going to hear that. well, let's just say i won't hear that bill, and mr. epstein was trying to get -- convince me that that was a good bill and i should do it

the same day that eastman cooked up that plan, december 28th, 23rd, that same day john eastman sent an email to molly michael. quote, is the president available for a very quick call today at some point? just want to update him on our overall strategic thinking. five minutes later, mr. eastman got a call from the white house switchboard, a call that lasted 23 minutes. molly michael could be a heck of a potential witness. and that would be a new development, because ms. michael did not seem to be the most helpful witness in the house january six committees investigation. and reference to the actual day of january six, molly michael was present in the oval office that day but, the committee seemed to note, with some frustration, that she claimed not to remember nearly anything from one of the most memorable days in recent american history. and molly michael's testimony to the committee is filled with, i do not recall, i'm not sure i recall, i don't specifically recall. her lawyers during that investigation were from former trump lawyer mark kasowitz's law firm. we do not know if that mea

we believe there is more than sufficient evidence to refer former president donald j trump, john eastman, and others, for violating title 18 section three 71. this statute makes it a crime to conspire to defraud the united states. third, we make our referral based on title 18 section 1001, which makes it unlawful to knowingly and willfully make materially false statements to the federal government. the evidence clearly suggests that president trump conspired with others to submit slates of fake electors to congress and the national archives. the fourth and final statute we invoke for referral's title 18 section 23 83, the statute applies to anyone who incites, assists, or engages in insurrection against the united states of america and anyone who gives aid or comfort to an insurrection. >> leaving offer discussion tonight is barbara mcquade, former u.s. attorney and a law professor now at the university of michigan law school, also with us is andrew weissmann former fbi general counsel and chief -- in the district of new york, he's a professor of practice at nyu all law school. both are

very well produce valuable information about whether washington was involved and what folks like john eastmanurtherance of the fake elector scheme. >> so give us an example of the questions that could be asked that might be helpful to jack smith or lead to something in his own investigation. what are we talking about more specifically here? >> oh, chris, these 16 state fake electors who are now charged with felony crimes facing the very real prospect of prison terms, each one will be grilled on who came to you and proposed to you that you should execute these fake, you know, elector certificates and then do everything you could to make them seem like they were real, they were legitimate, they were authentic. who did you talk with? i think they would have to acquire cell phone records and emails and text messages and see how this information was brought to each and every fake elector. and if they get different answers, they're going to be able to play one against another, and i have a feeling this is a real danger zone for the folks in washington, not just for the people being prosecuted in mi

we heard in the january 6 hearings that ronnie mcdaniel received calls from donald trump and john eastman to discuss this and she didn't want anything to do with it. the fact that all accept states -- seven states came up with the same plan suggests that somebody was organizing it. i know in michigan some declined to sign the fake slate of electors because they knew what they were signing was false and a lie. so the mere fact that they have been charged in michigan does not preclude jack smith from charging them federally. although he may prefer to focus on the leaders and the organizers of the scheme and leave for the states to prosecute the individuals who knowingly signed these false slates of electors for the purpose of defrauding voters. >> easier to prosecute somebody whose signature is on the line, right? but how do you connect that to donald trump? >> yeah, exactly. and that is what jack smith will have to look for. there is nothing that would prevent the states from charging the individuals. but i imagine one of the things that jack smith will examine is whether he can make that

john eastman said no. that's the question they're trying to figure out the next piece of the puzzle. what they were expecting if trump were to be charged in this, it would surround potentially conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding with his efforts obviously with what happened on january 6th related to the oval office meetings they had, trying to get pence to do things he didn't have the authority to do. we don't know what the charge is going to be. they know what it could be but it's mentioned in the target letter. >> that's what's fascinating and dramatic about today, there had been talk would this be the people around the former president charged? as of now, it seems like haems the only one but we don't know where the other letters may go. >> i was just talking to a legal source who was following this closely and the source said the cleanest case is to just do trump. to go narrow. you can start with him and then the others can follow. it may be a very short list. look at what jack smith did with

the war room is where, as you said, steve bannon, and rudy giuliani and john eastman, kerik, mike flynne are a number of people they're working on they are sort of investigation into these bogus theories of election fraud in the strategy for january six. roger stone was there. he had security, as did mike flynn, from the oath keepers and the proud boys. it was always an assumption that he, that's ban, and that others were sort of the connection between the white house and those extremist groups. we didn't get that kind of cooperation and could not establish that length, but that is precisely why, the special counsel, i think, is interested in the activity at the war room. special counsel has totals we didn't have, that getting additional information about what occurred there. looking for that connection between but sort of head of this conspiracy to disrupt the joint session, the former president, and some folks who were on the ground. >> okay. perry and tim, thank you so much for being with us. and a programming note, one of the key january six committee witnesses has a big revelation

any of those three, rudy giuliani, steve bannon, john eastman? >> joy, they all ought to be worried. i mean, and there's probably several more that need to be worried about this. this was not limited to those three. i mean, there were people in the meetings. there were people back and forth. we don't know what communications may have been occurring between any of those that have been convicted. that's the one thing that the january 6th committee never was able to get. that is those people that have either been found guilty, pled guilty, that are now maybe cooperating. as kendall just said, there is a sea of possibilities out there and just the conspiracy, the largest, largest investigation the department of justice has ever done. i think anybody who was near the proximity of the oval office and donald trump ought to have some concerns about this going forward. i think they had them, by the way, not just with the target letter. i think they had those concerns. >> and i have a whole list. and i'm going to hold it. we're going to take a quick break.

people like john eastman, sidney powell, rudy giuliani, a lot of these key players who were involvede outside efforts that trump was directing from inside the white house, and who were involved in some of these key moments that we know that prosecutors have recently been asking people who have come in to testify before the grand jury. we have also heard from our sources and reported this morning that this target letter comes as jack smith's team is continuing to interview witnesses. so this is still very much a live investigation indicating that more target letters could come, but right now we are just focused on trying to figure out what exactly this target letter said to the former president other than obstruction, as he posed in his truth social post. >> and most, of course, defendants or would-be defendants are less inclined than the formal president to be the ones who publicize their target letter. that's information these other potential defendants would be disinclined to share. robert, we saw after the rush money case in new york, the mar-a-lago classified documents, the indic

lawyers like lawyers like john eastman and kenneth jespro.stman who according to evidence that the house select committee amassed had admitted at one point he knew this was unlawful. so, that so, that defense only goes so and and particularly when even if what you can't do is you can't have a bunch of lawyers like we know president trump did in his own white house counsel's office, you can't have a bunch of your lawyers telling you no, you can't do this, and go find a lawyer who tells you, yes, you can and then rely on advice of >> counsel. >> and then, it has to be a lawyer that is actually on your counsel, right? it can't just be, well, it is a lawyer that just happened to be invited for a couple of days to the white house. >> right. you have to establish there is an attorney/client relationship and so that's not entirely clear to me in this matter and it depends on which lawyers he's going to claim he relied on. >> mary mccord and garrett haake, thank you very much. appreciate it. >>> up next, senator mitch mcconnell is -- his office is ma

and we found out today that john eastman says he did not get one, that rudy giuliani did not get one. what does this mean? >> i don't think it means much. unlike a lot of people. the reality is they've been in contact with eastman and his lawyer for some time. they'd been in contact with rudy and his lawyer. remember just last week, he visited with him i think for two days. they can have those conversations orally to the extent that those people actually are targets. target letters are not required. and, frankly, they typically go out in cases such as this to people who the government is confident will not flee. so, i wouldn't put a lot of stock in the fact that not everybody has received a target letter because, unlike trump, many of the other people that have been involved have made efforts, at least to discuss their situation with the justice department and been in contact with the department. >> all right. it's interesting that your perspective on that. so then, the bottom line is you've talked about the significance of the mar-a-lago documents case. >> yes. >> that if convicted -

john eastman is named by the committee. not as much as a household name, kenneth chesebro is named by the committee as conspireing with him. in some ways they have even more legal liability because their fingerprints are on a lot of the false elects or the. they were running that scheme. >> a lot of fingerprints. boil it down for us if you could. what do you think when you look at this? why do you think the special counsel is so focused specifically on the legal team and the advisers? what does that tell you about the direction? >> so it tells me that in the direction that this is also about the false electors, and they are the runs that are running point on the false electors scheme. they have the greatest legal liability in that sense. rudy giuliani is running this across the seven states. that's all reporting in the january 6th committee as well. that's a lot of documentation to st suggest that there really is a very strong case that could be brought, and he could potentially fliep these people too. there are ways the sp

john eastman, a lawyer who is widely discredited, but at the time, a known constitutional scholar who clerked on the supreme court, and my lawyers told me that mike pence could throw out electoral votes, ande advice of counsel, and that is a defense to certain charges to certain portions of the case. so it is a combination of i was contesting this election maybe in an aggressive way but not criminally, and i am voicing donald trump's defense to be clear and/or told my by attorneys that it was legitimate for me to do. >> standby, elie, and we will have much more on this breaking news. two sources have said that donald trump has received a letter from the special counsel jack smith informing him that he is the target of a special investigation into january 6th, and that is on the very same day that donald trump's legal team is to be in court in florida on the first hearing before judge eileen cannon on the charges that he is facing related to classified documents. we have much more on this. stay with us. hase freedom unli. so i can save on something special for a first date? wait! that'

john eastman, a legal adviser to donald trump embraced this fringe theory as a way to overturn the 2020e pence had the power to refuse to certify the results. in an email exchange with nbc news, eastman claim that the ruling would prevent legislatures from addressing illegality and fraud in a timely manner. when asked if the ruling invalidates the arguments he made in 2020, he's been wrote quote, no, but it will be murkier than it was previously. let's bring in the attorney who brought that supreme court case. neil ktvl, he is an msnbc legal analyst. i love to hear what you think about eastman's comments on this and what were the main considerations before the justices that made this 63 rather than unanimous. >> thank, you push to be with you, it seems to me that john eastman can read supreme court decisions about as well as he can read the constitution. i don't think it is worth talking about his views quite honestly. but basically look, here is what happened this decision, there was a legal theory that all trump peddled that john eastman peddled, other republicans peddled in 2020. sta

they set up as the spark for the rest of the plan as conceived by john eastman. from the very beginning from when the plan was first conceived days after the november election, attorneys for the trump campaign were well aware of the fact that their plan for slates of fake electors was -- how should we put it -- fake. "the new york times" reported on emails from trump lawyers that say this, quote, we would just be sending in fake electoral votes to pence so someone in congress can make an objection when they start counting votes and start arguing that the they need to be counted. he wrote that on december 8, 2020 in an email to boris epshteyn, an advisor for the trump campaign. in a followup email, the same guy, mr. will len chick wrote that alternative votes is probably a better term, a better word than fake votes. he added a smiley face emoji. the plan quickly gathered steam as the trump campaign lost case after case after case up to 16 defeats in court. rurg attempting to get legislators to intervene failed. cassidy hutchinson told the january 6th select commit

>> if donald trump did what john eastman was saying, pressure mike pence to throw away the votes, this what he is going to say, here i am in a room full of lawyers and some of them are saying it is legitimate, and others are saying, that is crazy and it is not legal, and i am in a room full of lawyers, and i am not a lawyer. >> and so, what kind of evidence would they need to prove in their minds that trump knew? >> remember in the january 6th hearings where a parade of meetings when there was a parade of people including ivanka trump who came in, and said, we told him that he lost the election, and so he knew that it was illegal and conspiring and collaborating with some of the lawyers in the room, and he had an illegal objective, you can charge him, but the point of this, it is not cut and dry, and it is not black and white, and you can't point to that meeting and say, oh, my goodness, look at this kay, you and who are we going to charge here. >> we are getting some good reporting, and many of it from our own team about this special counsel, and many are saying that they are close to

trump's lawyer's have been the focus of that january 6th we know we know from public reporting that john eastman'sone has been seized pursuant to a search warrant, the same with jeffrey clark, former doj official, again, you need probable cause to get search warrants for individual devices and particular lawyers, so, you know, it seems as though the lawyers are really a focus here. >> yeah, and, of course, lawyers being a focus is a through line and evan corcoran who clearly was a key part of building the case particularly for obstruction in the indictment against donald trump. you said this, and, again, all of us are essentially flying blind. we don't know but can just glean together from the clues, prediction, look for charges in special counsel jack smith's january 6th probe against trump and his former lawyers this what sort what sort of moved you to make that prediction. >> well, there's been public reporting that prosecutors are nearing charging decisions but you have seen a steady stream of witnesses before the federal grand jury in recent weeks and there was also reporting that the special

are multiple attorneys who face several these issues, rudy giuliani, sydney powell, lynnwood, john eastmaniously, today an ethics panel found giuliani's law license should be revoked because of the work he did on a field lawsuit challenging the election results. it is not a final decision to does bar him but how do you see this ending? good to go the way of what we saw having to lynnwood who basically retired before he could be disbarred? >> certainly, look, this is where judy -- rudy giuliani says all these outlandish things and at the same time doesn't know what standing is, outrageous performance, so i during this time, these lawyers, the final stalwarts for trump really think it's okay to say anything and everything, you are right, it is just a recommendation but more often than not the recommendations are accepted, i think rudy giuliani's law license to practice in dc is about to be pulled from him, the twilight of his career, don't even know if he needs or wants to practice anymore, but definitely all of these lawyers who the final circle around trump, they face not just criminal pos

you don't talk to jared kushner, because you are going to bring up charges against john eastman or someone that kushner does not believe that he has criminal liability or he would have taken the 5th. so he is testifying ultimately, and they are preparing to come forward in the next month or two. >> and also, there are other court filings that the charges that donald trump faces over the mishandling of the classified documents, and the attorney for the court handling has ripped into the trump team, and the special counsel says that trump's team is giving a misleading picture of the amount of evidence, the amount of material that the defense team needs to look over, and trump's team is pointing to 800,000 pages of discovery, and they say it is a fraction of that and 4500 key documents, and they say that in some, neither the amount of classified discovery in this case for the timetable for this production is a reason for indefinite discontinuance of the trial date. what do you think of this? >> both sides are presenting a somewhat slanted picture. i think that the government is trying to push

c., top-down orchestration created by the donald trumps and john eastmans, and rudy giulianis to try and help donald trump cling to power over the will of the american voters. it doesn't surprise me jack smith continues to get after it. i have to believe, at the end of the day, we are very likely to see and enormous, what we call, a 371 conspiracy, a conspiracy to defraud or commit offenses against the united states, it's a broad sweeping statute that i think works nicely to, kind of, bring through under the criminal conspiracy umbrella, all of these fake electors, and all of these schemes across the seven battleground states. >> glenn, before we switch topics, i want to ask, walt nauta, he is appearing in court tomorrow, in miami, in the documents. casey stones and have a florida lorida lawyer that we know if. what happens if walt nauta it doesn't have a lawyer he is supposed to be in court tomorrow? >> symone, i have been in court dozens of times were lawyers either fail to appear or defendants had not yet retained lawyers, or have lawyers appointed to them. judges will turn to the

seized phones from a lot of folks including the my pillow guy, but also some of the lawyers like john eastman this gives him the opportunity to distill this very complicated set of information, to decide what crimes were committed and then present that to the grand jury in a way that makes sense and can be charged. >> before i lose, you i've got to ask about giuliani and pushing the election lies. we know he met with prosecutors through a proper agreement. just your sense of how much legal jeopardy really giuliani finds himself in. >> rudy giuliani looks like someone who is worried. he is signaling to trump's talking to federal prosecutors. the source of this information about his cooperation was at a minimum confirmed by him, but it's hard to figure out who else could have brought that to the forefront. will he be charged in georgia? will he be charged by jack smith? they are in both of those investigations. >> thank you so much, molly. you are sticking with me next, the battle of the billionaire. zuckerberg's new threat is about to cost 100 million users in just four days. will we fall into

john eastman is also involved in all prongs of that. it potentially coming to an end? >> well, you know, first of all, let me say i stepped down as the chairman of african-american studies. i am no longer chair and i need to make that known. this is the first step, one of the important steps in holding donald trump accountable. people are innocent until proven guilty. we've had a wide range of evidence that suggested to at least me that trump should be held to account. and there is the beginning of that, it seems to me. and he's at the center of it but there are a host of other folks. lindy graham, rudy giuliani, mark meadows. a range of people directed at trump's will by his orders to in some ways follow up on this second prong that you just laid out. so it seems to me this is the beginning. it is slow. we're beginning to get into a political season. it's slow. we're trying to hold them to account for the evidence that many of us have been digesting for almost over a year now. >> yeah. to eddie's point, the evidence that is in the publ

he was involved with john eastman, who came up with this crazy scheme to get mike pence to basically not qualify joe biden as the winner of the election. so, yeah, he was involved in every aspect of this, including, as i said before, being at the willard hotel where all of the basic no good niks were kind of sitting around. all of those people there had either been pardoned by donald trump or had asked for pardons by donald trump. so, yes, he could be a key witness here. he also would have to deal, though, with what's going on in georgia because i think he's a target of that investigation as well. >> yeah. >> so if he's to cut a deal, he's got to do it in both places. >> it's complicated. andy, we're also learning the justice department has spent re than $9.2 million on jack smith's investigation of donald trump since jack smith was appointed in november, and that number, it's interesting wn you look at how it breaks down more than $2 million in salaes for all the people who are part of this investigation. $80,000 in relation costs to get people to, you know, where they need to be fo

john eastman was a very conservative and reputational expert. he told me this was okay.ied upon rudy giuliani. other lawyers were involved. lawyers were on the call that i had, the very controversial call to brad raffensperger on january 2nd. another very prominent, very conservative election lawyer was on that, cleta mitchell. that's not going to work, though, jim. and neither are the other arguments that were likely advanced today. there's very substantial rejoinders on advice of counsel. the answer is, you can't use a lawyer to advance something that you know, or reasonably should know was a crime. and so many other lawyers told trump you can't do this. and it's already been adju adjudicated in a federal court in a different context by eastman. i don't think that's go to work or immunity or defiance. >> by the way, white house counsel advised against it. we do want to get more of your thoughts about john laurel, you worked with him for some time, the newly minted trump attorney. first to kristen holmes, trump repeatedly said he didn't want this meeting to take place,

in that period of time before the 2020 election right after the sydney powells, rudy giuliani, john eastmans, people telling him there was fraud in the election and there was proof of it that they never produced. what is clear from this letter obviously is that jack smith is also focusing on the former president himself. and we had an indication that that is where jack smith was going and so did trump's attorneys when we found out they talked to jared kushner and hope hicks, people who can offer information into trump's mindset. so certainly a level of concern. trump is on the campaign trail today. he's going to iowa and we will likely hear from him in his response to this target letter, beyond putting up a defense to this already. >> stand by. take us inside today's hearing in the trump classified documents case. what was discussed about a possible trial date, paula? >> reporter: it's pretty clear from what i saw inside court today that this case is unlikely to go to trial this year. special counsel prosecutors had told the court they'd be ready to take this to trial in december but today j

and he said he was asked about donald trump, rudy giuliani, john eastman. but flashback to almost a year ago today when rusty bowers testified in front of the house january 6 committee. let's listen to what he said. >> at some point did one of them make a comment that they didn't have evidence but they had a lot of theories? >> that was mr. giuliani. he said we've got a lot of theories but we don't have the evidence. and i don't know if that was a gaffe, maybe he didn't think through what he said. but i said what would you have me do? and he said just do it and let's the court sort it out. >> so crucial testimony there and again we now know that he has spoken with jack smith's team. >> we learned that the arizona secretary of state office has been subpoenaed by the special counsel. >> yeah, this is a subpoena meaning that the arizona secretary of state has to turn over documents to the special counsel team. now, what could they be looking at. let's remember one of the key focuses of the doj investigation is this fake elector scheme. here is what it means. t

he was involved with john eastman who came up with this crazy scheme to get mike pence to basically not qualify joe biden as the winner of the election. so, yeah, he was involved in every aspect of this, including as i said before, being at the willard hotel where all the basic no-good-nicks were sitting around. all those people had either been pardoned for donald trump or asked for pardon by donald trump. so, yes, he can be a key witness here and he would also have to deal, though, with what's going on in georgia because i think he is a target of that investigation as well. >> yeah. >> so if he is to cut a deal, he has got to do it in both places. >> it's complicated. andy, we are learning the justice department spent 9.2 $9.2 million of jack smith's investigation of donald trump since jack smith was appointed in november. and it's interesting when yo see how it breaks down.more thas for those that are part of the investigation, $80,000 relocation costs to get people where they need to be for interviews and et cetera. is that standard for investigations of this magnitude? >> well, noth

john eastman, so they don't necessarily need to get a target letter because they know they're targets because the fbi and justice department went to them and did searches. so they are on notice they're potential targets in this investigation. and then obviously, the other factor is that it is possible because we know that prosecutors are still doing investigation, still gathering evidence evidence, it's possible that they first tackle the president in an indictment and then go to the other parts of the alleged conspiracy later on. >> we know in the michigan investigation, they arrested and charged these fake electors just in michigan but that's a fake investigation not a federal one. stick around i said to bring in jamie and elie honing. if there are charges the justice department will have to release the indictment. what specifically will we learn from that document should it appear? >> if there is an indictment, i think it is fair to bet this will be a speaking indictment. it won't be a dry listing of the charges, it'll read like a narr narr narrative. we look at jack smith's mar-a-

and there is a coup memo that was written literally by one of trump's attorneys, john eastman, the famouse, one of your colleagues got it and ran it on cnn. and in it eastman says, "oh, there is seven states with contested electors." mike lee, the republican senator from utah, a big trump supporter, started looking into this and discovered there were absolutely zero states with contested electors. he was quite upset about this. senator lee actually sent me the coup memo saying "it is unsupported." senator lee, when the certification of biden came -- finally came after january 6th went to the senate floor and said there is nothing to this. lindsey graham said nothing to it at all. these are trump supporters who backed trump and investigated and found nothing. and to your point, it will be interesting to see if they can make this case in a court of law where they make publicly where they are not under oath, the audits were done. the recounts were done. all the court challenges were done. yes, the president had the right to make those cases. they were done by january 6th and he lost them all

for instance, we know john eastman, you know, equipment was seized in the case of jeffrey clark, hiss searched. you don't expect he would not be getting a target letter. he knows he's been at the center of and a target of this investigation since that day. again, we don't know who else might be part of this, but it's unlikely it's just trump that the special counsel is homing in on. >> you're painting the potential picture here of something very dramatic spanning multiple people possibly, so it's going to be very interesting to see what ultimately it is. thank you so much for taking us through that. boris? >>> now that donald trump has been identified as a target in jack smith's interference probe, we're learning trump's legal team are working to figure out if there's any evidence or witnesses they're unaware of that may be strengthening the special counsel's case. >> reporter: i've spoke on the a number of trump lawyers and advisers who are trying to figure out what exactly they have in terms of evidence and witnesses that potentially trump's team did not know of. that's because the

documents case is that if they are able to pierce the attorney client privilege, especially with john eastman and his role as a quote unquote lawyer advising donald trump, or rudy giuliani, for that matter, that would be pursuant to the crime fraud exception and that might be available to the special counsel, and it would not be available to congress. those are just a couple examples that you will see more evidence in this indictment and in this prosecution. >> let's talk about the politics of. this you heard joyce vance saying that what may happen to keep this thing tight and not subject to donald trump and his lawyers carrying on about the fact that he's very busy running for president so he can't be prosecuted, you may see what joy suggested might be a less satisfying set of charges and then what we expect from a sprawling investigation, something that is tight, that prosecutors can make the case about and do so in a short amount of time. what is your thought on that? >> i'm particularly interested to see who else is charged and whether they are charged in the same indictment as donald tru