national security, security clearances and government investigations, like the one trump and carlos de oliveirafor joining me. i wonder what you make of this argument that carlos de oliveira and walt nauda were following orders, despite the fact they had a meeting with the fbi where the fbi was clear about what was in those boxes. >> sure, good evening, alex, pleasure to be here. i don't like the i'm just following orders argument. it makes me think of world war ii and the and we know how that turned out, which i'm not making the equivalent, obviously, with what this situation is but, pretty much as judge aileen canon was describing, as much as one can assess from the bench how a judge reacts , this is mostly a fact and trial issue. today's hearing was a very routine, typical, expected defense motion to dismiss charges, try and get additional information. but, it really comes down to is it a fact or not? did they know, did they not know? it could be a viable defense that could ultimately lead to their acquittal. that will be for a jury to decide, likely not this judge. >> you mentioned get more

itemized list of every illegal action the government, the special counsel believes walt nauda and carlos de oliveiraould want this bill in particular. he alleges walt nauda's motion asks how the government will prove facts at trial and is therefore a thinly veiled attempt to get the government to disclose its trial strategy. do you agree with that? >> it is very typical from both sides. this part of the case is a normal criminal case. we are dealing with conspiracy allegations, concealment of documents, obstruction of justice, false statements. it doesn't have to even involve classified or national defense information. this is the nonesexy part of this case. so, the defense is trying to get more information, the prosecution is trying to prevent that from happening. this is a very detailed indictment, superseding to bring in carlos de oliveira . so, in this sense, now, you know, whatever, this is just some going back and forth. what we are really waiting for is more proceedings with respect to the classified information procedures act, where trump's next submission is due by may 9th, where do we want

the judge will hear arguments from two of donald trump's co-defendants, walt nauta and carlos de oliveiraseveral motions including the bid to get the charges against them thrown out. ken dilanian is outside the courthouse in fort pierce, florida. also with us paul butler former federal prosecutor and msnbc legal analyst. ken, what else do we know about today's hearing and these two co-defendants? >> reporter: ana, good morning from sunny fort pierce where normally donald trump is the star of the show. he's been attending these hearings, and when he does, the street behind me is usually packed with throngs of his supporters. today is about the supporting cast, the two co-defendants, his employees, his valet, walt nauta and carlos de oliveira accused of conspiring to obstruct justice and to destroy video surveillance footage. their lawyers are going to argue that the charges should be dismissed because they weren't aware of the criminal investigation and they weren't cognizant of exactly what was in those boxes so they couldn't have obstructed justice. jack smith's team is going to argue th

seemed skeptical of the motions to dismiss the charges against codefendants walt nauda and carlos de oliveira, suggesting that this argument should be made to the jury during the trial. this comes as we are learning more from the newly revealed transcript of walt nauda's interview was fbi special agent a few months before the fbi executed a search warrant at trump's florida club and recovered dozens of boxes of evidence. joining us now from miami is harry stein, justice department reporter at ""the washington post"," and bradley moss, attorney who present people who work in the intelligence community. thanks to the both of you for being here. perry, it was a quick breakdown of what happened in the courtroom today. >> right, we saw trumps two codefendants make their motions to dismiss the case. i think the best way to describe it is that they said "we are charged with all of these allegations around obstruction. you say we lied to and misled investigators and, tried to block investigators from getting back these documents. but, what their attorneys said is we didn't know that there was an inve

> well, this is a hearing i went for more than two hours and the lawyers for walt nauta and carlos de oliveira were arguing that the obstruction related charges should be tossed. they said that the government hadn't met its burden to show that they even knew that there was classified documents in those boxes, that there accused of moving at mar-a-lago. they also said they didn't even know that there was an investigation or that there was a subpoena that had been served on the former president, the judge really showed some skepticism to those arguments, saying that a lot of what they were saying we're essentially things that should be presented to a jury that you should go to trial and argue that four before the jury. so she seems at least an inclined to buy their arguments we also heard though, during this hearing, something interesting that we hadn't heard before from jay bratt, one of the prosecutors on jack smith at the special counsel's team. he said that at least some of the documents that were transported from here in florida to bedminster at the former president's golf club in new jerse

it's about the supporting cast whose two co-defendants, walt nauta, and carlos de oliveira who are accusedobstructing justice by destroying video surveillance evidence of mr. nauta moving boxes, something prosecutors say he lied about. what the lawyers for both men are arguing today is that the prosecution hasn't met its burden here to prove that they acted corruptly because the lawyers say, they didn't really understand that there was a criminal investigation. they didn't understand the implications of these documents being subpoenaed. they didn't know the extent to which it was clatsz classified documents. all of that disputed by the special counsel's office that will argue in response these are questions for the jury. they are fact questions, not legal questions, which are the kind of thing that normally are raised in a motion to dismiss. it's supposed to be about how the law applies to the case. all of that said as you rightfully pointed out, judge aileen cannon has shown herself to be quite responsive to some rather interesting arguments by the defense in this case, and that's really

for example, walt nauta's lawyers, and carlos, de oliveira, the property manager, he's not aware there was a criminal investigation so he couldn't have conspired to obstruct justice. jack smith's team disagrees with this, and they say this is fact issues with the jury, not a matter of law for a motion to dismiss. also interesting, chris, is that last night, lawyers released a transcript of the initial voluntary interview with the fbi where he told him that he thought there were personal items in the boxes, including hair spray, shampoo, newspaper clippings, even underwear, it later emerged, though, that he took photos of at least one box at mar-a-lago where you could visibly see documents marked classified spilling out of the box. so he's got some explaining to do on that one. he's charged with obstruction of justice. again, his lawyers are trying to get him thrown off this case, and they are arguing that before the judge right now. >> ken dilanian, thank you. >>> now to miami where a former u.s. ambassador and confessed spy is in court. sam brock is live outside the courthouse. get us

perez has more victor anomer the lawyers for donald trump's two co-defendants, walt nauta and carlos de oliveira were in federal court >> arguing for the obstruction-related charges to be thrown out. they said that the government had not provided any proof that the two men even knew that there were classified documents that were being stuck gd in these in these boxes, there were being moved at mar-a-lago, the former president's estate in palm beach. they also said that the government hasn't hasn't even provided evidence that they knew there was an ongoing investigation or that there was a subpoena that had been served on the former president the judge appeared skeptical of some of these arguments. during the hearing that lasted over two hours jay bratt, one of the prosecutors on the team of special counsel, jack smith. he's told the judge that the fbi doesn't know whether they recovered all of the boxes of documents there were documents that were moved in june of 2022, and were taken to bedminster in new jersey. the former president's golf estate up there and the fbi doesn't know whether they've

co-defendants in the classified documents case, trump aide walt nauta and mar-a-lago employee carlos de oliveira both hope, uh, judge will dismiss the obstruction charges against them. cnn's kaitlan, poland's with us this morning to explain the departure of evan corcoran haleine john, it's a long time coming in. a lot of ways. evan corcoran was the lead attorney for a long time in the investigations around donald trump, both the mar-a-lago documents investigation and the january 6 investigation he developed all kinds of institutional knowledge about what the prosecutor here's was were gathering. he was there and he was taking notes for his conversations with donald trump. >> the >> split that eventually culminated now in kaitlan collins reporting that he is formally left the trump team and that circle around the former president that began when the justice department wanted his information to make him a witness in the mar-a-lago documents investigation. they pursued it in this extraordinary court fight, getting him ultimately to talk to a grand jury and to turn over his notes and records of his

carlos de oliveira and walt nauta are accused of conspiring to help trump hide the documents and lie to the fbi. it's their first major test before that, judge elsewhere in trump legal lands, cnn's kaitlan collins reports a trump attorney who became a critical witness in that classified documents case quietly left the trump legal team and kaitlan with us now, caitlin, who tell us who this attorney is and how big of an issue could this be for mr. trump? >> yeah. so people will remember this attorney because he was often seen going in and out of courthouse in washington. he accompanied trump when he was arraigned in washington on the federal election charges last fall. but this is evan corcoran. and the reason this is such a big deal that he is quietly left trump's legal team without a lot of notice. is that he is not just a former trump attorney. he became a critical witness in the classified documents investigation. and that's because this was the attorney that was brought on to help trump tried to fend off charges in that case, but in turn, he was the one who was sent to the mar-a-l

. >> so in the next hour, we're going to see lawyers for walt nauta and carlos de oliveira. these are employees of the former president. they're still employed by the former president and they're accused of helping to move some of these boxes that contain that the prosecutors claim say contained in these classified documents that are at the base of this of this of this case in this trial, they're asking for these obstruction charges to be thrown out because they say they didn't know what was in these in these boxes and they did not obstruct, they did not try to block this investigation, didn't know that there was an investigation going on i'll play you just a little bit of brian butler, who we anticipate is going to be unimportant witness for the prosecution. he was identified in the indictment against all of these menn as employee five, and he talked to kaitlan collins about his interactions with walt nauta with regarding these boxes. listen during the us getting luggage, walt asked, hey, i need a minivan. sure. go ahead and >> then he left and i was i didn't think anything

because also we got the filings, the transcripts of the fbi interviews with walt nauta and carlos de oliveirais team are basically arguing to have the case against him dismissed because they said he didn't know he was moving classified documents. he had no knowledge of x, y, and z, anything you see in those transcripts that raises your eyebrows and do you think he's got a case here today? >> yeah. you can see from these transcripts, even just the cursory review, the fbi agents clearly weren't buying what nauta was initially selling. they were very skeptical of his claims. they had an they were very much looking at it as you sound lutcher coach, that's usually necessary using those words, but sort of expressing that kind of skepticism. it sounded like he was coached and it certainly they came back to it later on and where he admitted to moving certain things and that he had more knowledge than he had originally admitted to that played a key role in him getting hit in this indictment on the obstruction angle. now, what he indel a very are trying to do certainly within it a right to do. they're

of hours and right now, you have the lawyers for these togas co-defendants, walt nauta and carlos de oliveira both still currently employed by donald trump at mar-a-lago and what what the argument from these two from the lawyers is is that they did not know that there was an ongoing investigation or at least a government is not proving that they knew there was a there was an ongoing investigation and that they didn't know what was inside these boxes he's boxes, of course. it contained classified documents according to the government, some of the highest most sensitive classifications of documents that were contained in those documents. and that according to the government, according to prosecutors they have on video evidence of them moves moving boxes multiple times, trying two according to the government, trying to evade the fbi, which came to retrieve them. so right now, i'm john irving, who is a lawyer for mr. oliveira, is getting some sharp questions from the judge. she's going she's pushing back a little bit on his argument that the government hasn't done enough to prove that there was o