this probably would touch on that same area of violating or coming close to violating that olc memo. sort of our traditional notions of separation of powers and why we need the president to be able to focus all of his attention on being president. >> judge mershon has a difficult decision to make as well, as he is awaiting this guidance or suggestions from the prosecution. i mean he has a truncated timeline to make this decision as well. do you expect, after he hears from alvin bragg's office today, that he will give his decision today? >> i don't expect he will give the decision today. first of all, if alvin bragg's office comes back to him and says, we are prepared to dismiss the case, i don't think we will see a written decision from judge mershon on the pending motion any time, ever. on the other hand, if alvin bragg's office comes to him and says, either we are prepared to stay the case but not vacate the conviction or we think nothing should change, i think judge mershon is going to want to hear, more fully, from donald trump's team, which to date has only put in, as far as we

hence we move to dismiss and remember this olc memo opinion, whatever we're going to call it. >> this has come up with trump before this came up when he was president previously, and there was the robert mueller investigation, and there was the question of will trump be indicted in this investigation? and it was easy to lose track of this, but it was pretty clear that mueller was very unlikely to challenge that policy. and he never did. >> yeah. but you know, the idea that he's saying charges could still be brought in the future, i mean looking at that, is that at all realistic? i mean, there's certainly some people who would be hoping that that would be revived in 2029. but the idea of that happening, i think, you know, and trump could pardon himself, i don't know. >> let's be real that's not happening. i mean, it is only in the most theoretical possible sense. i mean, imagine this, right? fast forward four years. who knows where anyone will be in four years. you're going to have whoever wins the white house, whether it's gretchen whitmer or jd vance or whoever new ag is going to say

i think the part of it that is interesting is jack smith is saying in this filing, olc not only toldi have to get rid of this, but it told me i have to get rid of this before he's inaugurated and not, jack smith is making the determination on his own, not on december 20th at 11:59 a.m., but now. so, then, that begs the question, why now? i have one thought as to why that might be. and it has to do with the special counsel regulations. noting, of course, that the trump folks think that the special counsel regulations are unconstitutional, and jack smith's very of course ccupancy role is not proper. it should deliver a report to the attorney general at the conclusion of his or her work. what does it mean to be at the conclusion of your work? andrew knows better than anyone, one way you get to the conclusion of your work, you sort of transfer the cases that you're currently work on to other branches of doj, like the southern district of new york or main justice. but maybe jack smith's take on this is for me to get to the conclusion of my work, given that nobody else in the department is

it could be brought after donald trump is no longer president because olc office, office of legal counselartment of justice binding on jack smith requiring him to move to dismiss the case and only provides a temporary immunity while a president is a sitting president. now, that does not mean there wouldn't be issues involving, like, the statute of limitations. if a future department of justice after mr. trump is no longer in the white house were to rebring that case, no doubt, mr. trump's attorneys would argue the statute of limitations expired. there is legal argument when prosecution had to be ended dismissed while donald trump was president, a legal argument that statute of limitations should be paused while mr. trump is in the presidency and could be rebrought later nap would be subject to litigation. do i think that would happen? in the similar issues i would say, also take place with respect to the mar-a-lago prosecution involving mishandling of classified documents. whether that happens or not depends on many, many things. depends in ways on mr. trump's conduct throughout this comi

i expect that he didn't get a lot of different opinions hoping for the right one that the olc, the officetaken this position. it would be doubtful that they would change it here. smith had a gratuitous end of his term. he pushed not only for a trial of the election and pushed four months fort. but he also released damaging information before the election. something that many people saw as an effort to influence the election. smith knew that if trump won, he was out of a job. this release of the information was entirely unnecessary. the judge admitted that it was procedurally irregular. she went along with it. i think that did tarnish his position and certainly in history, because he didn't have to do that. he had become so absolutely fixated on trying trump before the election that he lost credibility with the courts. he went up to the supreme court. they didn't accept that it was the overriding consideration and looking at these legal issues. i think it is also very important to remember that smith's case was riddled with constitutional problems. when the supreme court reached its immuni

after careful consideration, the department gerald that olc's prior opinions concerning the constitution prohibition on federal indictment and prosecution of a sitting president applied to this situation and that, as a result, the prosecution must be dismissed before the defendant is inaugurated. a similar situation in the classified documents case on appeal after the judge dismissed the case, this is down in florida, smith asking the appeals court to dismiss that case. given that trump won the election. now, smith does go on to note this outcome is not based on the merits or strength of the case against trump, meaning he believes he had the evidence to convict trump. in a court of law. but he won't prosecute a sitting president. he will however continue with prosecuting the two other defendants in the documents case. trump's team quick to react telling fox news, in part, today's decision by doj ends the unconstitutional federal cases against president trump and is a major victory for the rule of law and the american people and president trump wants an immediate end to this political wea

on the first page, he comes to the conclusion that the department, meaning doj, has determined that olc, the office of legal counsel, a prior opinion concerning the constitution's prohibition on federal indictment and prosecution of a sitting president applied to this situation and that as a result this prosecution must be dismissed before the defendant is inaugurated. >> reporter: that is an interesting question that they have come to that conclusion. chris, one of the reasons has to do with the interplay between this case and the special counsel regulations. special counsel regulations say at the conclusion of the special counsel's work, they are to deliver a report to the attorney general perk. we are familiar with what those reports look like. usually those reports are generated when the investigation and the prosecutions come to a close. it may be one of the reasons they breached the determination, unless and until these cases are over, jack smith does not feel comfortable releasing the report in compliance with those regulations and he very much wants to release the reports before

donald trump's lawyers are very fond of citing a bunch of constitutional concerns that underline the olcce of legal counsel, at the department of justice. but that policy is not binding law on anyone. and it's a policy that the department of justice that has no application to a d.a.'s office. will there be pressure on somebody like an alvin bragg? yes. but would he have to? no. >> all right, lisa ruben, i mostly followed that. >> you always follow it. >> i mostly followed that. always good to have you. thank you very much. >>> coming up, what government aid program republican leaders are considering scaling back to pay for donald trump's tax cuts and who could get less help. >>> but first, what a former fema worker claims she was told to do in the aftermath of hurricane helene and what fema's administrator is saying about it on the hill today. 's administrator is saying about it on the hill today. but now, i have rinvoq. rinvoq is a once-daily pill... that reduces the itch... and helps clear the rash of eczema— ...fast. some taking rinvoq felt significant itch relief as early as 2 days.

now because of the olc opinion and because of the supreme court's opinion we're in a very different political, because he is going to be president can't be prosecuted. similarly, there are probably certain sentencing remedies that if judge merchan was to decide that these charges should stand and he should go forward with sentencing, certain options are off the table. judge merchan wants the parties to weigh in and help him as he reaches this very critical decision. >> even before this latest development there are a number of different pathways that judge merchan can go with this decision in general, right? it's not just dismiss the case or sentence trump to whatever, right? >> yeah. exactly. so the supreme court's decision from the summer gave the president-elect very broad immunity for official acts that he committed as president, but what it didn't do was offer a lot of detail about how to define what an official act is. so this is the meat that judge merchan is getting into here, but even if he finds that these acts were official acts, it doesn't necessarily mean it leads to dismissal of

what is and isn't constitutional and what we see here from the filing is that they did consult the olc. they didn't get a new opinion. but there is apparently, you know what they did is they read they talked to the to the office of legal counsel and they determined that because donald trump is now president elect, that he is that he enjoys all of the privileges of a sitting president, which means that they can't be prosecuted. and in the case of the justice department, they're saying they can't even, you know, pursue a case that's already in existence. and it's telling also that if you look at the filings, you'll see jack smith points out that this doesn't this isn't a reflection on the strength of these cases against donald trump. right. remember the thing that that that should hang over all of this is that donald trump, according to the special counsel, according to the justice department, resorted to crimes after he lost the 2020 election. and then, of course, in the case of the classified documents case he left the white house and took hundreds of documents that were classified, th

presidents can't be indicted or prosecuted would apply to a president-elect before he's inaugurated, and the olc came back and said, yes, we believe it would apply. at that point smith felt he had no choice but to seek the dismissal of the case. he could have potentially resigned first and kept the case around and let the trump justice department deal with it, but he then would have lost control of what he would say in concluding this case. you can imagine a trump attorney general saying, we can no longer stand behind the case. to the contrary, jack smith made very clear in the filing that this decision does not speak at all to his view of the evidence of the case, of his chance for conviction. they are standing behind the prosecution. and, as you said, he will file a report. now there's some question whether there could be any new information given the compressed time frame here because normally the intelligence agencies have to review, in a case like this, whatever new information is released. they had to view everything that went into the indictments, and there just isn't time for a review li