jonathan, i would like to get your reaction to this argument from trump's lawyer alina habba that weam not sure that you want to admit that the classified documents that we have found searching donald trump's office or the turn back to the national records openly available to anyone who walked into the room. there is a reason that the nation's top secrets are usually viewed and secure facilities, and that the people who have access to those are unable to email them, for instance -- she did not say that donald trump was showing classified documents to people. at the same time, the reason that the government wanted to recover these documents is they would not want what they would call a leakage of disinformation. >> alicia, the new york times reports that the photograph displays documents is in keeping with standard for the polls for federal agents. you see arguments from trump and his lawyers that are believable at all at this point? they are doing whatever they can to see if it sticks? >> at this point, i think what is clear is that we have a deeply corrupt and problematic man who is

fox news legal analyst greg jarrett and alina habba. alina, i'll start with you.illary clinton took this dossier and never verified it and fed it to the media and lied about donald trump and the media ran with it and then the fbi use it had, applied for fiza applications four times, says on the top of the application verified and it was unverifiable and they all got away with it. why isn't she being held accountable for what she did? >> because when you have a clinton judge as we did here, judge middle brooks that i asked recuse himself and he said he didn't need and would be impartial and proceeds to write a 65 page scathing order where he basically ignored every factitial basis, which was backed up by indictments, by investigations, the mueller report, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera not to mention durham and all the testimony we heard there, we get dismissed and he says this is not the proper place for recourse for donald trump. he has no legal ramifications. what is the proper place for him? the fbi won't help when you can do anything of justice. blatantly lie

here with reaction is trump attorney alina habba along with fox news legal analyst greg jarrett. we'll get to you in a minute you were dead on accurate i just quoted you. alina let me get to you and get your reaction being part of president trump's legal team. >> outrage. complete outrage. not surprised but outrage. this is now the third person that we found out has been indicted and was on the payroll of the fbi. that is -- you know, it's unbelievable. i'm the domestic terrorist because i'm a maga republican but the fbi can pay informants that we now know were serving disinformation to the clinton campaign and to serve the dnc and all of them. but we're the domestic terrorists. explain that to me. plus, one thing we didn't mention, october 2020 was when mr. danchenko. do you know when that was sean? i know you do but people watching, october 2020 was when durham was appointed special counsel. that's when the fbi said, oh, we better get you off payroll now because this might not look so good that we've been paying you for three years and you're a paid informant. unbelievable. the

you think of alina habba, christina bobb. there are privilege issues and what they can talk about and the extent to which this is in the special master's authority but to supplement, this is all a problem of donald trump's own making. he brought this civil litigation when he didn't need to. he gave doj the opening to provide the public with more information about what was going on that he didn't need to let them do and now he has both the 11th circuit and special master breathing down his neck telling him what are you doing here? you can't just make these wild accusations. you have to back up with sworn affidavits, with exhibits. you've done none of that. we're not going to play games with this stuff. either you provide the evidence or your case is done. >> listen, you know this. a lot of people will say especially when a high profile person they want the court of public opinion. they think they can sway people, they think they can sort of push the legal system into what they're thinking. i want to continue talking about what

alina habba is representing for president trump.hat they have exceeded the statutory by prying into transaction for absolutely no wrongdoing that's taken place. your thoughts choice? it's abundantly clear that alina ho is a little out of her lane on this case with our assessment of this law. it's a corporation that has fraudulent activity. tish james has assembled 200 specific incidents for a fraudulent statement that changes the resources to obtain favorable agreement for economic deals or deflates to obtain better tax treatment. so, this is a very strong complaint it will have to be tested in court and it is two over former top executives that is a strong starting gambit. >> you have been dealing with these dealings now, this is how long it goes back. were you surprised by how much new york, laetitia james found? was there anything in this that you having sort of threw a lot of this found surprising? >> this is hard for me to admit that there is a lot that i found surprising. a lot of things that i've been looking for that i had n

if alina habba a lawyer working on a different case, and we know who had access to the documents and we don't have the answer as to what these documents even pertain at this time. >> nbc's vaughn hilliard, west palm beach, florida, thanks so much. ken dilanian, i will let you respond to the stunning pathetic argument that they threw these documents all over the floor. donald trump made the argument yesterday. the fbi haphazardly threw the documents on the floor. no that is an evidence photo. but part of the filing from trump's lawyers were on privacy, that donald trump had the right to privacy, and the fbi couldn't come in and take documents, effectively that belonged to him in his private home. of course, the documents don't belong to him. we can explain that again. is there anything in this new filing from the trump attorneys that says to you, maybe there will be a special master, maybe the justice department will take another look at how they're reviewing these documents? >> in the filing, no, but i mean i think it's very possible there will be a special master. the justice depart