you have it all, here is my signature, christina bobb. she is the one who according to the new york times who put her name on that in writing, something that has proven to be false. if that was an intentionally false statement in writing to the fbi, she has a big problem. >> and if she said it because she believed it was true and her client lied to her about it, that means her client was trying to conceal evidence of what he was doing even from his own lawyer which is potentially an important thing in terms of intent and consciousness of guilt. either way it's not good, and it's not good that there are 300 plus documents marked classified including from the national security agency, and the fbi and the cia. as adam schiff just told me, it doesn't seem like it was just one area of interest that provoked this shiny object reaction in him like he was a small mouth bass. seems to be in a lot of topics from a lot of agencies and a lot of different things related to national security. that is just really bad. >> we're gonna get right into it wi

who is christina bobb and is this former oan host really the best a former president of the united statesld do. >>> meanwhile the republicans can't break with trump though we're seeing cracks in the blind loyalty. we begin the "the reidout" are a food note. in an overnight filing about stunning revelations about trump's happened lipping of highly classified material, the doj wrote this investigation is not simple police about efforts to recover improperly retained presidential records. moreover, 18 uscc 2071 criminalizes the concealment or removal of government records, including presidential records. in short, this is an investigation about lies, about deceit and potential obstruction of justice. that's all spelled out in the doj's 36-page response to trump's request for a legal -- for a special master in what is nothing short of a damning report about the lengths to which trump and his legal team went to withhold subpoenaed information. just remember, it took eight months for trump to turn over the first 15 boxes of documents to the national archives in january, including classified doc

what could you advise christina bobb to do?k for, because i did get across the law for a brief time and regretted it and tried internally to get my colleagues to do the right thing. so there were some 45 lawyers in watergate that got on the wrong side of the law. so i took that knowledge and travelled the country and tried to explain to others you can very easily slide across the line. particularly when you have a powerful client, a powerful figure, it is just not a great step to agree to do something that you later realize you shouldn't have done. now, i don't know if there have been violations of the law by the attorneys. it certainly appears they have jeopardy. if they didn't know before they have problems, they certainly know from reporting in the last several weeks that others are looking at this certainly think they do have problems. that means they should probably recuse themselves from the case, which is an unfortunate thing to do, because it sends signals, because they have a conflict. >> john dean, thank you very much

christina bobb signed her name to it and corcoran drafted a statement.they drafted a statement there was not true. christina bobb signed an untrue statement in a written communication with the justice department where it is a crime to lie to the fbi. the times goes on to explain why the investigation didn't and there. justice department officials had just visited mar-a-lago themselves. they had been ushered in writing by the trump lawyers with that documents signed by christina bobb that the justice department was now in possession of all of the classified documents that were there. but here is what happened next. soon after that visit, investigators who were interviewing several people of mr. trump circle about the documents, came to believe that there were other presidential records that had not been turned over, according to the people familiar with the matter. on june 22nd, the justice department subpoenaed the trump organization for mar-a-lago's security footage. it revealed people moving boxes in and out, and in some cases appearing to change the c

corcoran should be the one who signs it, and another lawyer, christina bobb. if those lawyers believe that that was true, because donald trump or someone else told them it was true, then perhaps they don't have any liability. if they knew that they were continuing to retain documents and representing in writing that all documents have been returned, they have a very serious problem of obstruction of justice, as we just discussed. that is a 20-year felony. now, it could be that they were unwitting agent, but someone told them during that representation. if that someone is donald trump, that he is also liable, or could be liable for using those unwitting agents to make his own statement. if he knew that that statement is going to be passed on to the justice department, and he could be guilty of that offense. >> the last thing i want to bring up as we talk about his crackerjack defense team is the fact that today is the deadline, i believe, the legal team representing donald trump, today is the last day they had to file their papers, requesting a special master,

christina bobb did not argue on behalf of her client, the former president. this was a hearing about something he is apparently incensed about. and yet donald trump did not want an argument to be made on his behalf, which is interesting. here is nbc's report from inside the courtroom. quote, a top counter intelligence and national security official argued that detailed and reasonably lengthy document needed to be kept completely under wraps because it contains substantial grand jury information in a unique case with national security overtones. he also said the government is very concerned about the safety of the witnesses in the case, whose identities could become compromised if the affidavit is unsealed. the government lawyer pointed to amateur sleuths on the internet, who could maybe find personal information. this is a volatile situation with respect to this particular search, across the political spectrum, he said. and with one side, in particular. the justice department also made the case that the criminal investigation is in its, quote, early stages. b

i don't feel convinced by the arguments christina bobb made on television.hey were anyone but the president of the united states. this makes hillary clinton's emails look like a child's petting zoo. i mean, this is massively significant, that they were storing information, allegedly of this high classification, down in a basement. the other thing i would add, john, is earlier, you know, you were wondering why trump would ask for the affidavit to be redacted. he's not playing three dimensional chess, in my view, and thinking that it will help to have the redactions out there. i really think this is about revenge, and i have been on the receiving end of it when i was still anonymous. trump tried desperately every way to find out who the critic was. i think he wants the affidavit released because he wants to know who around him is ratting him out. and he's worried about what else might come out. that's what donald trump wants to see, and his lawyers probably won't be able to hold him back. >> i want to clarify one thing here, because now that you have informed

and i think there's a recognition here, especially when we talk about someone like christina bobb, whoding to what we've reported, signed a document saying we've given you all the classified documents and then the government came back and found some more. these are extremely problematic facts and it's problematic not just for those individuals but also for the former president himself. >> carrie, i want to ask you about the president's legal team. does it surprise you that given the legal jeopardy that he's in that he doesn't have more of a significant, more polished legal team? i mean some would argue that defending a former president would be the opportunity of a career. >> well, he has cycled through lawyers all wait through his presidency and now afterwards. so we've seen this over the period of his entire presidency where he cycled through white house counsels, he cycled through attorneys general, he cycled through impeachment counsels, and so it is sort of consistent with that recent history that he is cycling through post-presidency lawyers. but just to come back a little bit to

the biggest person who is at risk here is christina bobb, trump's lawyer. i suggest she looks into hiring her own criminal defense lawyer because she signed that misleading letter. >> in your view, how concerning is that for her? how concerned should she be for legal exposure here? >> you know, it's never a good idea when you're a lawyer and some other lawyer hands you a letter that the other lawyer drafted and said you sign it, that's what happened here. evan corcoran, one of the other lawyers who drafted the letter, he wouldn't sign it himself, so he had christina bobb sign it, and now she's on the hook for potential obstruction charges. the penalty for obstruction is up to 20 years in prison. that's twice the peniment as the espionage statute. at the very least, she's witness. >> phil, bringing you in here from national security perspective and all the implications on that front. i want to put up the photo on the screen. as someone who worked at the cia and fbi, how alarming is this? >> let me give you a book end. when we started this and i was speaking

and kaitlan, to that point, what more do we know about christina bobb, the trump lawyer who signed the document? >> she's been in court at times for trump, but mostly when you look at the documents, the filings that have been happening in actual court, it's not her name on them. she's often the one going on television, who is making the former president's arguments there when it comes to ever since the search happened, but when it comes to this, this is actually the first look we have gotten at the document. we knew it existed and someone had atisted to the fact they claimed they had turned over all the classified information at the june meeting. of course, the other key part of this and what preet was referencing there was what i have heard from trump sources, it says to the best of my knowledge. it says they did a diligent search. basically trying to argue they did look into the best of her knowledge she's attesting to this fact. i should note her name is redacted when you look at this filing, but we're told she is the one who was the custodian of the records, the one who signed that

christina bobb, trump's lawyer, saying we haven't seen this affidavit, so we don't know what's in it, so she didn't know what to say about it, which seems reasonable, she hasn't seen it. so why the stock from trump world about releasing the whole thing, unredacted, everything in, they were not sure what's in it, but released the whole thing. i'm having trouble as a non legal person, understanding what this dance is that's going on? >> it is a dance. it isn't a serious legal position. you are not alone being baffled. i scratch my head. you cannot say to the american public, i want this released, but i'm not willing to go to court and make that argument. he doesn't want it released because he knows, and his lawyers know that there will be very damaging information in that. it will -- yes, release the names of people that we should not have, and there is no way, in my view, that this judge or any judge in america would release the names of people who are cooperating with the investigation, because it would endanger not only the investigation, but the lives of those. and also, it would de

john eastman ended up in the oval office and now christina bobb is the public face -- >> maybe she's a great attorney. everybody deserves great attorneys. >> kristen is reporting there are a lot of people in trump' inner circle that are worried. he does have two other attorneys who are working behind the scenes and are not publicly on television, but trump likes to have people on tv defending him, not just in court. both of them are almost equal in importance. >> is it important that he picked an attorney named trustee? he always liked his generals to look a certain way. >> i think he knows jim trusty from being in washington and from other recommendations that he got. >> he's being described as one of the most experienced attorneys that the former president has around him. >> same with evan corcoran, he also defended bannon. so when bannon would come out of the courthouse and talk, you'd see evan corcoran behind him. i think there's some questioning about the legal team and the strategy here. one thing that surprised me, they haven't added anyone to the legal team in the sense of wh

one of them being christina bobb.mp's legal team on conservative media. her name has been out there as we were talking about the search warrant and such. i want to play for you what she said about the fbi search. >> this was a completely unnecessary power flex. it was a weird flex. quite honestly it's sad to see what they've done to our country. no, there is no security that something wasn't planted. i'm not saying that's what they did. >> should people be questioning the competency of this legal team? >> oh, absolutely. i mean, they haven't done anything that's really sensible or right. the motion they filed last week was incomprehensible. and clearly, there's nobody there who's qualified to represent the former president of the united states in this kind of investigation. the problem he's had all along is good lawyers will not work for him in a personal capacity because he doesn't pay them, for one thing, and he doesn't follow their advice. and he goes around shopping for advice and undermining any good and discardi

what you're even is evan corcoran is the lead attorney and he has christina bobb. she was presenti at mar-a-lago when the search was going on, on monday. she was there in the investigators visited back in june as was evan corcoran. he is the one standing behind steve ban on when he was in court dealing with his legal difficulties. so he's got a few others on his team. but i am told that he is searching to add someone else because this is such a sprawling case. it is multi-pronged. it involves the justice department not just in florida but also in washington. so they are looking to add someone from florida. they have not yet announced who that attorney is going to be. but i am told that trump has been on the phone with potential candidates for this just as recently as this week as they are trying to figure out what their legal strategy is going to be here. >> what sort of fund-raising is the former president doing off the search at mar-a-lago? >> a lot. he is bringing in a lot of money from this. it's not a surprise. if you get his text messages, which obviously rep

trump, christina bobb says his legal team had been discussing records stored at mar-a-lago since this spring. the news was first reported by "the washington post" who also said federal authorities were increasingly concerned mr. trump and his aides had not returned all documents that were public property. on monday bobb says the fbi removed about a dozen boxes from a basement storage area. >> they also said they were looking for evidence of a kriep as far as classified documents go. >> reporter: it comes as the former president and his allies are escalating attacks on the fbi claiming without evidence that the investigation is politically motivated. >> we're a nation that has weaponized its law enforcement against the opposing political party. >> reporter: former vice president mike pence who has broken with mr. trump publicly is urging attorney general merrick garland to give a full accounting of the search. the justice department is not commenting. the search warrant remains under seal meaning details about what agents sought to remove from the residence are still secret. but expert

we know it's christina bobb. so that's a fact. if she was allowed to come in, she would have said what are you looking for. here are the documents, here are the boxes, be on your way and leave. i can only conclude one thing, dan. the fact that they would prevent a counsel or lawyer or target of a search warrant to be prevented from watching just as a bird's eye view. i understand officer safety. we don't want anybody to impede or obstruct the search. but it would only be one reason because they came in there not knowing what they were looking for. it was a fishing expedition. they rifled through everybody and they were hoping they have were going to find some smoking gun. that's the reality, that's the optic, that's the perception and the divisiveness. dan: you have some fascinating thoughts about what was behind the see kret service change out the lock that these alleged classified documents were behind the door. >> i think obviously there is a potential they enlisted a secret service agent to utilize that or let him be used as a

joining me now is christina bobb, attorney for president trump, who was on site for that raid. stina, thank you for joining us tonight. does president trump support or oppose the release of the affidavit? >> well, president trump has been very straightforward in that he supports all transparency through this process, and he wants what's best for the american people and he's going to rely on the courts to do the right thing. >> laura: so he will not then submit or you will not submit a motion to the court to release the affidavit in opposition to what the government said today. >> we support what judicial watch has started. we're watching it very closely trying to gauge what's happening and will respond accordingly. i don't have an exact answer today. we're watching the situation and seeing how it developments and we'll respond in a way that we think is best for the american people. >> laura: so no determination on that as of now. because that is the most crucial piece of information, because that document -- >> yeah. >> laura: -- apparently establishes, they say, probable cause.

the document signed by trump's lawyer believed to be christina bobb has been redacted from the document. it says a diligent search was made and everything had been turned over. whether she knew that was untrue or if she was herself misled, obviously we don't know. but it's not true that everything was turned over, not even close. that's what's important about this filing last night, which emphasizes something we also saw in the last filing last week. this is not just a question about whether laws were violated. it's an investigation into possible criminal obstruction. not, oh gosh, we just took some documents we shouldn't have had or we had documents we disagreed on whether he's allowed to have it or it's declassified. what the justice department is saying here in this document filed last night is the president or the people around him potentially violated the law by trying to hide and keep the government from knowing what was going on. that is a whole different level of crime if it's something the justice department decides to pursue. that brings this to a whole bigger level. >> ryan,

and then, one of the trump lawyers, christina bobb actually signed a written statement saying, that's a, that's all the right material we have here. signed her name to that. no more government records, no more classified material left in the home after that day in june. federal investigators became convinced very quickly that that that was not true, and then they convinced a florida federal judge to issue a search warrant of donald trump's florida home for evidence of illegal possession of government records and illegal possession of classified records, and evidence of obstruction of justice. and that search was carried out on august 8th. tomorrow, that same federal judge in florida will decide how much of what the fbi told him, about the possible crimes in this case, can be revealed to the public. judge bruce reinhart will consider releasing the fbi affidavit, or portions of it, that convinced him to issue the search warrant tomorrow after a 12 noon deadline tomorrow that he imposed on the justice department, asking the justice department to submit to him suggested redactions to the

around that time, trump attorneys evan cork ran and christina bobb together provided the justice department assurance about trump having returned classified materials. the person did not provide the specific wording of the letter which was signed by bobb. person familiar with the matter said the document is of interest to the fbi which is investigating the veracity of its claims. joining us now is washington post national reporter carol leonnig bylined on the story tonight. carol, thank you so much for being here. it is breaking. it is explosive. i think the first thing that at least grabbed me in reading this article is just how deeply the former president appears to have been in selecting these documents. what more can you tell us about that? >> well, what's clear in the -- both the interviews we have done with sources and also as revealed in a lot of new records and letters that are coming out is that the president was very involved, the former president, was very involved in at the last minute hastily and chaotically packing up his documents that he thought were, quote unquote, his and

christina bobb said trump and his legal team had been cooperative with the fbi and doj. in a statement the former president said these are dark times for our nation as my beautiful home mar-a-lago this palm beach florida currently under siege. nothing like this has ever happened to a president of the united states before. and we've already seen republicans rallying to the president's side declaring this some kind of political attack. sara murray, cnn, washington. >> they ever befohave never bef husband u.s. has the fbi executed a search of a former president. the deputy director explains what it would take to make that happen. >> this is not a couple agents showing you at some judge's door in the middle of the night to get an emergency warrant. this is something that would have been planned out and re-evaluated and legally examined from every possible angle by the entirety of the leadership structure of both organizations. so let's remember that to get a search warrant in any case, whether it is you or i or the former president, you have to go before a federal judge and

but when they had the hearing yesterday, even though as you point out he had a lawyer, christina bobb in the courtroom, he didn't say anything. she didn't make a motion, she could easily have said the person whose home was investigated here, he also supports release of the affidavit, but that case had to be made entirely by media people. people like cnn and other news organizations to release the document. she didn't say anything. and that's because i think frankly he knows that while it might help him a little bit in the defense, there is probably a lot in that affidavit that is very damaging. yes, it is only allegations, hasn't been proven, probable cause, not beyond a reasonable doubt, but, you know, he probably doesn't want to have that affidavit released because there be with a lot of stuff in there that he wouldn't like. >> that makes sense. i'm very excited this morning. it is one month until your show debuts. so -- >> i was wondering. >> it is a very exciting, very exciting as we get to look toward this date. what should we be prepared for, how is this all going to go down? >>

an attorney for the former president christina bobb who also happens to be a former most of one american news show confirmed to us that, quote, paper was taken away and removed during the search yesterday. >> and, gabby, worth noting that trump and his allies are not shying away from talking about this? >> they are not. in fact, there's been a surge of criticism of the justice department from top republicans over the past 12 hours including potential 2024 candidates who may have previously considered running against donald trump in a primary but might now want to reconsider doing that. one of those republicans is house minority leader kevin mccarthy who has been very critical of the justice department. brianna, i want to read you what he posted on twitter yesterday. he said attorney general garland preserve your documents and clear your calendar. i've seen enough. the department of justice has reached an intolerable state of weaponized politicalization, when republicans take back the house, we conduct immediate oversight of this department and follow the facts and leave no stone unturned

we've become familiar with christina bobb, a former one america news host who is now working as an attorneyrney from new jersey and of course evan corcoran who signed a letter to jay bratt that was at the end of this affidavit today. jim trusty is seen widely as the most competent member of the former president's legal team, but right now there are definitely concerns inside his orbit that he does not have adequate representation and that his current team of attorneys are just not up to the task of defending him in a moment like this. >> yeah. he also has that deadline today to refile his initial motion. gabby orr, thank you. >>> let's go to the white house now where phil mattingly is. so, phil, is president biden or anyone on his team saying anything about what we've just learned in the past hour or so? >> reporter: you know, beianna, in short no. certainly as it relates to this investigation they are not weighing in and not to have any particular insight on any moment as this has transpired. the white house briefing started about 20 minutes ago and the top official to speak, deputy econom

the affidavit or affirmation signed by the custodian of records who we believe is the attorney, christina bobb, it couldn't be more inaccurate. they say they conducted a diligent search, they say they recovered any and all documents described by the subpoena, and that no copies of those documents have been retained, we now know that's absolutely not true. so you can understand, you know, originally we were, like, why did the government feel there was such urgency to take this extreme step of searching the former president's residence? well, it is perfectly obvious now. it wasn't a rush to judgment, it was only at the conclusion of a year and a half worth of back and forth trying to recover this important material and then at the very end they had as the document indicates multiple sources to indicate that documents, despite the assurances they had been given, still existed on the property, and were being moved to other locations contrary to their instr instructions. s so it is really damning on the facts. >> so, caroline, from a legal perspective, i'm curious what is necessary in court to prov

one of his attorneys, christina bobb was in court but said she was just there to watch. >>> joining us now, to talk about this is, msnbc legal analyst danny cevallos. thanks for being here this morning. we could use your expertise. when a federal judge says he is inclined to unseal parts of the affidavit and the government has an order to submit redactions, what is your reaction to the ruling yesterday? >> i envision the d.o.j. attorneys going back to their office, shutting the door and looking at each other and what the heck just happened here, that's what i did when the ruling came out because this doesn't happen. search warrant, probable cause affidavits, do not get released unless and until the government wants them released. it's their investigation. they are allowed to keep it private until they decide they don't want it to be private. which is usually never or when they indict somebody. that is usually when you find out what is in the probable cause affidavit, is maybe later on, in discovery, but you need a case for that. this was a huge surprise. this is not something that happ

. >> trump lawyer, christina bobb was inside the courtroom today. however, she was just a spectator. she made no arguments. she filed no motions. she did not lift a single finger that would advance getting this affidavit unsealed. however, tonight she was talking on television and she was asked about that very thing. >> we believed that judicial watch in some of the other parties actually had argued it quite well and we believe it was very interesting and somewhat encouraging that you had parties from both sides of the aisle -- of course, liberal media outlets, coupled with a conservative watchdog group, really together on the same side. we really just chose to see how it would play out. we need to wait and see. i cannot be certain at this point, because we have not seen the affidavit. we certainly have not seen the redactions and how it is going to play out. but we will be making that decision as it comes out. we have got to see. it we haven't seen it. it has been under seal. so, i don't know. we can't say. >> trump, who has been in thousands of la

that was purportedly drafted by evan corcoran, one of trump's lawyers, and signed by another, christina bobb. that statement was reportedly signed when the fbi agents came down to mar-a-lago, and it apparently says, hey, we've turned over to you all materials we understand to be here that were classified. if that statement was made, if that statement exists, it was false when made, and there could be real consequences for that. so, in addition to the back and forth, starting in early 2021 between the national archives and lawyers representing trump, i'm looking to see even the later correspondence, including, but not limited to, that statement from june. >> let me ask you on another topic, looking backwards a little bit, ken. going back to the mueller report and the barr summary of the mueller report. the doj has just been required to release the memo behind the reasoning to not charge donald trump with obstruction. walk us through what we learned. >> so, this was an nine-page memo written by two trump-appointed senior justice department officials that bill barr used to support his contentio

>> the lawyer was christina bobb, former oan anchor who started working for the former president earlierar. we know since then the fbi and others investigating this have started looking at footage of the club and talking to lots of folks, even his household staff, his personal staff, political advisors about whether there was more material left there. through the footage they combed through and doing the interviews, what they learned were two things. one, that there was a lot more classified material still at the former president's club, including top secret and some of the most sensitive documents that the government holds. then in the room where these classified documents were, there were people coming in and out of the room that concerned them. they decided that after doing these additional interviews and watching this video footage, that the former president's team was not being entirely truthful with them. that led to the search warrant and subsequent raid a month or so later. >> barbara, elise jordan here. the law is the law. if you take classified documents out of a skiff, you mis

i want to share with christina bobb, trump lawyer, did on tv again, talking about the classified recordstigation. watch this. >> i don't see an indictment coming down. i also think the nation's reaction to this raid, i think the department was surprised how angry america got, and how frustrated we all are that we feel like we are losing our rights, and this is so overly political. so, i think it's causing them to go, oh, maybe we don't have what we think we have, so i hope that they take a second look and are cautious about doing something as stupid as trying to go after president trump. because they've tried it before. >> harry, that kind of sounds like a not so keenly veiled threat to the department of justice. how they're gonna take that? >> it's an empty threat, and you know, he's got this two track strategy, and it's evident to anyone who knows the law. on the one hand, he comes out with political rhetoric like i want full accountability. but of course he doesn't. for a moment, want to really release the affidavit. and that's just one example. so, the same thing, on the other hand,

. >> let's start first with a curious behavior of christina bobb, who is representing the former president in all this. do you think there is a reason why she did not actually choose to speak in the courtroom today? it's sort of -- maybe one could draw the inference that trump doesn't actually want this affidavit unsealed. what did you make of it? >> i'm not really sure what trump's motivation is or what her motivation is. but i think we have seen, through his presidency, and post presidency, that is what's powerful statements come on social media, before cameras. he does much better in those venues than he does in a court of law. >> well, according -- he has made quite a bit of hey, if you, will over all of this. the mere fact that he is not saying anything, to prove his case in court, is kind of interesting in the context of all of this. but i have got to say, throughout all of this, trump has created a lot of smoke that he himself could have cleared if he wanted to. do you know what i mean? like, there is the question about why donald trump just simply hasn't explained why he hasn't giv

though he did note that one of the former president's attorneys, christina bobb, he did not name her there in his press conference but did say one of the former president's attorneys was on the premises when this search happened. and i think the more that we've learned in the days since the search happened about the subpoena, about the fact that they did take that step, about how investigators did go and visit mar-a-lago back on june 3rd and then later asked trump's attorneys to further secure the documents that they still had in their possession speaks to what was going on behind the scenes and why they felt the need to carry out this search warrant because they didn't feel like they were getting all of the information and all the materials certainly that they still had at mar-a-lago. >> all right. let me read from this filing. at the time the warrant was initially executed, this is the filing that the attorney general mentioned just a few minutes ago. he says, "the department provided notice directly to former president trump's counsel. there were no public statements about the sea

christina bobb hasn't be been paid as attorney. she was custodian of records in this case. she showed up at the court. josh and i were there together. we tried to ask her afterwards her opinion on what happened and she refused to comment. next thing you know she's on fox and raising a whole set of new issues. there's this sort of ad hoc lawyer committee that periodically pops up in right wing media and says stuff and they they don't quite follow through with it. it's difficult to say awhat their legal strategy is. one person in trump world told me, one person, strategy? you think we have a strategy? that's not how we operate. that seems to be the guiding principle the trump legal team is operating under. which is there isn't uch of a team approaching this in a coherent faction. >> josh, let's talk about law enforcement. you've recently been writing about doj and the concerns surrounding the threats towards law enforcement. do they feel that releasing a part of this affidavit, obviously not stuff that would harm an investigation, but even releasing some information would do

trump attorney christina bobb, the former oan reporter who helped spearhead the recount said trump's legal teams were in discussions with the justice department this spring about records stored at mar-a-lago. but the lawyer who was present when the fbi arrived along with a number of other lawyers said the agent took 12 boxes of material. trump and his lawyers received a search warrant for his tate and the manifest of the materials the agents gathered and removed. he knows what they took, but they have so far refused to make that public and that's no coincidence. it allows the former president and his followers to dishonestly accuse the fbi, the same group catching the oklahoma city bomber and some of the world's worst child predators. >> how do we know that they didn't put something in the box tone trap him? >> they didn't allow anybody on the inside of mar-a-lago so we have no idea if they planted evidence. >> newt, i have a couple of thoughts. number one, i wish i trusted law enforcement. you need some form of law enforcement to have a civil society. i'm right with you they are pla

finally, we do know a lawyer for donald trump, christina bobb was at mar-a-lago and received this documentm. she was there for the search, on the day of the search, and they gave her this receipt. what's not seen? >> the main thing not seen in the boxes is the affidavit where the doj lays out the narrative of probable cause approved by a federal magistrate. donald trump does not have that, only the prosecutors and the court has it under seal. >> you talk about the laws that doj said they had probable cause to think might have been broken. >> yeah, a couple of really important qualifications before we get into this. this is probable cause, a lower standard than beyond a reasonable doubt which you would need to charge and convict somebody. these crimes are not alleged as to any particular person. the doj has not alleged donald j trump committed these crimes, just that these crimes were committed. the here are the statutes. section 793, the thing drawn so much attention is it is part of the espionage act. it is. that's a big word. it makes people think of cinematic movie craft, james bond or

that's christina bobb, the former host of the right-wing one america news network talking about the searcht is now one of the faces of trump's legal team in the aftermath of the mar-a-lago search. >> i'm a little befuddled as to why they would do such a drastic thing so disrespecting and dishonoring other than the fact that it's a political tool. >> reporter: throughout his presidency and after, trump has used the ever-changing cast of characters on his legal team to operate as his own personal pr machine. and the outlandish claims have known no bounds. listen to lawyer sidney powell who for years has been pushing the false narrative of massive fraud in the 2020 presidential election. >> it's been organized and conducted with the help of silicon valley people, the big tech companies, the social media companies and even the media companies. and i'm going to release the kracken. >> reporter: powell was part of the elite strike force, a team of lawyers who claimed to be rooting out election fraud. they falsely accused dominion voting system and smartmatic of helping orchestrate the alleged fr

we also have the actual search warrant here, and all of these documents are signed by christina bobb,u were just talking about, it laying out the various statutes of the potential crimes they believe could have occurred, the reasons they were there to investigate. >> elie, the description of miscellaneous top secret, miscellaneous classified, that is the degree of both specificity and generality, you suspect, because they're not going to list what the top secret documents are because they're top secret. >> exactly. understand what the document is. it's a receipt that the fbi hands to the person who's just been searched, usually on the way out the door or a few hours after saying, here's a record of what we took, you are not going to have the time to go through 8, 10, 12, however many boxes of documents. several hundred boxes, you will see a high level of generality. typically i would see this in my normal cases, this is not a normal case of 20 boxes of documents. here, they did go further and specific that some of these are classified and what levels of classification. the substance i

they've not done -- they had someone there, as you said, christina bobb, who was one of the people at the search, she was there when the fbi was searching. and look, you've seen them say in some of these appearances on various networks, they've said that they want to know who these witnesses were, they want to know who dropped the dime on the former president. and i get it. that's -- obviously anybody would want that. that is not something that the judge is going to allow. right? but the problem is as elie's pointing out, it depends on how you do these redactions. we have seen redacted versions of these documents and, you know, have been able to figure things out. we probably -- even in the unredacted versions, right, don? there wouldn't be names of witnesses. but it will say, you know, person a or person 1a or something like that. >> it will say person 1a saw whatever take the -- >> and they give enough clues that we could figure it out. which i don't think anybody wants because you'll put those people in danger. >> yeah. elie, let's talk about the trump organization's former cfo all

>> well, christina bobb, the trump lauer in palm beach and saw the search warrant said nothing about january 6. it was all about this document case. but you're right. speculation about that does flourish. >> charles: byron, once you get into the home and you know what you're looking for and you know where it is, but you spend hours the president trump's private office, you go through melania trump's wardrobe, doesn't it sounds like a fishing expedition? >> the search warrant gets you in the door. and then there's a lot of cases about picking up evidence with unrelated activities. that's an issue here. we know that the fbi in this case like in a lot of other cases were not too discriminating about what they picked up. they stuff out and they'll have to go through it later. so you're absolutely right about that. it's really weird. you do have -- you did have a grand jury in washington looking into this documents case. a separate grand jury in washington looking in to the january 6 case as far as it concerned president trump. so there's a at least two investigations of president trump r

and even though on june 3rd, the dates are in order, on june 3rd, christina bobb, trump's attorney, said all classified material had already been returned. so what does it signal about maybe potential charges knowing that timeline? >> it gives a lot more details as to what investigators were building on. remember, we saw in the search warrant application that was released recently that investigators there specifically focusing on three different criminal statutes that include willful retention of national defense information, concealment of government records, and obstruction. and what we're seeing now is the unredacted parts of this affidavit really give us the glimpses of how investigators are building their case on all three of those. so we see how extensive the classified information was that they retrieved in january and how it did cover in fact national defense information, which is in this willful retention statute. you know, the affidavit, you mentioned it, laura, refers several times to obstruction, saying that these investigators believed in fact they would find evidence of obs

here's what he heard from trump's legal team sterday, including christina bobb, the attorney who was on the property during the fbi search. >> i don't think that there was actually anything there that's worthwhile. we'll see what they come up, you know, if they did. it will be interesting, especially since they precluded me from actually watching what they did. but at this point i don't necessarily think they would even go to the extent of trying to plant information. i think they just make stuff up and come up with whatever they want. that's the way they will have to proceed in order to actually try to indict the president. because they don't have anything. there's nothing there. >> this is a joke. thisis memento, quite nestly, i'm concerned they may have planted something, at this poin who knows. >> the investigati is being led by the justice department national security division. trump and his attorneys do have a copy of the warrant that explains the probable cause of the search. >> why won't they release the warrant? like donald trump -- isn't that the you who said yesterday, don

and the attorney christina bobb have been so uncooperative to lead agents to expect that the trump team might be obstructing the investigation. what stood out to you as you read this last night? >> that's right, willie. this is the most significant rebuttal we've seen from the justice department to the trump team. i think we're learning more from this than we ever did from the warrant or the affidavit that we were waiting for last week. now, we're learning this is not just a matter of the president taking back records that should have been stored in the national archives. in fact, they go as so specific to say that in a footnote that this is a matter of taking classified document where is they should not be and obstruction. and they talk about how they believe that some documents were taken from a storage room. that they were first today, look, here's everything. the trump lawyer signed it. handing everything over. then they get significant information that there was still more left behind. they were told anything left behind would be in a storage room. that's also what the trump legal