and i assume back to your point about how long ago did jack smith figure this out, how smart of jack ew anyone who ever interviewed trump after left the white house to see what he might have said to them. but it assumes there is a real document there. in the rest of that cnn reporting, i noted that the -- this interview with trump where the recording was made, where he claimed to have this document and said i sure would like to show it to you except that i know i'm bound because it is classified, that is very telling of his intent, but it could be that he's making it up. because according to the cnn story, this is right after there was some other reporting that said it was milley who was trying to push back against trump's intent and interest in baiting iraq and that apparently trump was very aggravated about milley saying that. suddenly here he is on tape saying i have a four page classified document from general milley recommending this type of troop activity. and i don't know and presumably jack smith knows whether there is or is not such a document, you about either way his intent

the day, jack smith is the special counsel.he same reasons that the attorney general articulated why he felt he needed to appoint a special counsel, those are the same reasons that he, i believe, is going to maintain the same position that this is an independent special counsel. i've reviewed his findings. i have no strong -- there is nothing there that reaches the level within the special counsel guidelines to overrule him. he is going to maintain that independence that initially caused him to name the special counsel in the first place. so i agree, absolutely. this is going to be a very deliberate process as it should be for something of this magnitude. i expect, my expectations, however long that takes, weeks, months, that we're on a path to see some sort of action this summer or this fall. >> to betsy's point about juries, a jury just delivered a unanimous judgment and found trump liable of sexual abuse and actual malice and defamation in the e. jean carroll case. when a jury is presented evidence this close to trump, and i

>> well, we see that the jack smith investigation is very active.e's not doing it publicly, but we're learning now facts about the expanding case and possibly prosecution against donald trump. it's dee remember that these documents don't have to be classified, the ones that he took or stole in order for him to have legal jeopardy here. it's still wrong and perhaps criminal to take sensitive documents whether they're classified or not. but what this tape that cnn is disclosing shows is he saw these document as classified, something he claimed isn't really true. that he mentally declassified them or magically declassified them even after he left the white house, which of course he has no power to do as an ex president. and the fact that he was talk about these documents also with people who presumably do not have clearance is another problem. she's then sharing classified information, which is a possible crime. whether or not you have a document you're handing to someone or not. the information itself, sharing that could put him into a legal problem.

jack smith is running this investigation, not garland. reached out to the special counsel's office today and asked whether trump's lawyers had also requested a meeting with mr. smith before sending that letter. the special counsel spokesperson declined to comment. joining us now is a former federal prosecutor who also served as law clerk for merrick garland, and also joining us is mary mccord, former acting assistant attorney general at the doj. there are no two better people to speak with on this. let me first ask you about what you think is happening in this letter? first of all, do you have any reason to suspect there is an official purpose here? there's cleary a political purpose. if there is some official purpose to this, what might it be? >> so i don't think there's an official purpose to this, alex. i don't think it's really a serious letter because as you pointed out, the attorney general is not the right person to meet with the would-be target, you know, would-be defendant donald trump. so it is common for sort of high profile ta

we start with special counsel jack smith closing in on former president donald trump.

i will note though, despite the independents under the special counsel regulations of jack smith, jackstill obligated to send what are called urgent reports. he's treated just like a u.s. attorney. and required to advise the attorney general of any significant developments in sensitive litigation. or sensitive investigations, clearly, the investigation of a former president is a sensitive investigation. so, significant developments would include things like a charging decision. so, it's not as though he will go to the grand jury, he'll seek an indictment, tell returning to go to court and then say, hey, merrick garland, i did this thing. you probably already heard about. he will, because merrick garland, if he were to choose, and if he were to think that jack smith's recommendations in terms of charging were so unwarranted and inappropriate garland could overrule them. if you were to do, that he would have to give notice to congress about doing that. i don't expect that he would do that. he made it clear, he was going to give jack smith leeway to operate independently, just like he gav

jack smith won that case because judges agreed with jack smith's argument that there was reason to believet trump could have used corcoran's legal advice to commit a crime. the guardian said that corcoran's warning to trump about the need to hand over all classified documents was, quote, one of several key moments that corcoran preserved in rustily 50 pages of notes described to the guardian anonymously. the notes revealed how trump had unusually detailed knowledge of the botched subpoena response, including where corcoran intended to search and not search for classified documents at mar-a-lago. as well as when corcoran was actually doing his search. the notes described how corcoran told about the subpoena before he started looking for classified documents. because corcoran needed him to unlock the storage room which prosecutors have taken as a sign that he was closely involved and essentially in every step of the search. notes from a key trump attorney that reveal what trump and his aides knew and when they knew it about classified documents and their location at mar-a-lago is where we be

now the prosecutor jack smith doesn't need this for the mar-a-lago case.classified or sensitive information is enough. it violates the espionage act. and obstructing justice is enough. what we were talking about before about hiding the documents. but what this says is perhaps there is an even more -- there is even more. there is a whole another set of potential criminal charges. of course, this is just early reporting. but basically, what this reporting is saying is that since 2017, that the prosecutors were looking at trump's conduct while in office while president and after he left office. so they're not just looking at the stormy daniels kind of time period, which is before trump took office, or the inflation of real estate assets, which was before trump took office. they're looking now at presidential and post presidential conduct. it looks linked to the mar-a-lago investigation, but it may be that they'll also uncover things related to that entirely. >> yeah, and neal, to emphasize something that you just said, which is important for people to underst

according to the wall street journal special counsel jack smith is wrapping up the criminal case involvinge has all but finished obtaining testimony and other evidence according to people familiar with the matter. trump is trying to take his case directly to the justice department. today his lawyer sent out a letter to attorney general merrick garland requesting a meeting to discuss the special counsel's investigation. of course donald trump is

and the investigation jack smith understand taken turned to the point of obstruction. where do you understand things should be. >> and that statement on her part was false, false, false and false. and most important for her is the addition that she made off the top. we have 50 pages of written notes that i think leave no dote at all about what he was told. and to frank's point, you don't need a lot of extra persuasion when the subpoena shows up. i think that we've been for many weeks in a kind of final make sure that we're cross going ts and dotting is including the latest subpoena from the "new york times" about foreign deal ings. they do source it to people familiar with the matter. and so it does seem with having everything he could including housekeepers and the like, earning that he is done and that is where i think that we are. very close based on the "wall street journal" report thinking. >> and if garland did decline, it would be a departure from the way that he dealt with durham. we do have a special counsel standard established, don't we? >> yes, he would hav

what kind of things would jack smith take into consideration when and about charges?oes issue a report similar to i think of robert mueller? >> the mueller report, yes how jack smith we know him, extremely methodical prosecutor. you want to go into that courtroom and he wants to win. he's not afraid to cut bait on a possible charge that he doesn't think he can prove beyond a reasonable doubt. he's going to be looking at the evidence from these witnesses thinking about a couple things, who can i put on the stand in front of a jury, will they help me prove my case? who will provide a roadmap to jurors to help prove my case? what evidence do i have that's the strongest? and what could donald trump have? what could he say that would undermine me in court? he has prosecutors basically moved to their arguments meaning they have to almost play as of what they would do in front of a jury in front of one another, and they all shoot one under down. it is very tense! that's a kind of process they're gonna go into as they figure out what to do. now, if he decides to prosecute, he

that's what jack smith is trying to look at. we can't lose sight of the fact that there is now overwhelming evidence that is in the public domain that there was a concerted effort to overturn the election. so even if you stop short on the actual part of the violence of that day for donald trump as a charge, you have the recordings georgia, you have the fake elector scheme, you have all of this effort in arizona, it is all coming to the surface of a wider plot to overturn the election. that's what jack smith should be looking at in terms of how did we get to the the pointed of election day to the violence of that day. there's an entire gamut of charges that are at his disposal. >> i want to deepen our understanding of what that looks like. i also want to put a pin in this idea of radicalized americans. trump make it is harder for them. but he is more aligned with them publicly than he was on january 6th. someone in the white house made him do a video telling them to go home, but he's talking about full presidential pardons for an

it's likely a key element of jack smith's criminal probe into the former president, and, of course, that awareness would fly in the face of trump's public comments about declassification. >> is there a process? what was your process to declassify? >> there doesn't have to be a process as i understand it. different people say different things. if you're the president of the united states, you can declassify just by saying it's declassified, even by thinking about it. >> a source close to trump's legal team tells cnn the former may go to court to prevent those 16 records from being handed over from the national arrives to jack smith, but he'll have just one week before the national archives says they're giving the record to special counsel jack smith. jamie is here. you obtained this copy of the letter. tell us the key headlines. >> can i start by saying you can't declassify just by thinking about it. >> it's an intricate, long process. >> what these 16 records show are that trump and his closest allies were aware -- his closest advisers were aware during four years in the white house that

jack smith is a very experienced prosecutor. is terrible, we asked for a new one. >> he looks for a hang man. >> he look like something from harry potter. but he's been very aggressive to try to get certain pieces of evidence to answer these questions about obstruction and handling of classified information. he'll be able to say that he's turned over every single rock and stone, and yes, he's earned his reputation as being aggressive. it is hard to imagine a scenario where he will give his final report or present his find togs the attorney general and he has to override. >> in 2016, hillary clinton got a lot of blowback, maybe even lost the presidential election because of her email server and allegations made by the fbi that she didn't take the classification process seriously enough. this is obviously much starker, because this is not just a secretary of state sending documents perhaps with not as much care as she should have, this is a president taking documents. is it more serious? and what would you say to somebody who come

which is being overseen by jack smith. the witness is said to have provided investigators with a picture of the storage room where the material had been held. the times report tonight, goes on to reveal much more than the existence of an insider witness. at least four more mar-a-lago employees have been subpoenaed, along with another person who had visibility into mr. trump's thinking when he first returned material to the national archives. nearly everyone who works at mar-a-lago has been subpoenaed and that some who serve in fairly obscure jobs have been asked back by investigators. the times also reveals tonight, some of what trump criminal defense lawyer, evan corcoran, told the grand jury, when he was forced to testify, under the crime fraud exception to the eternal client privilege which forces attorneys to give testimony against literal clients when the clients may have involved the attorneys in crimes. evan corcoran provided the document that was given to the fbi in june of last year, swearing that there were no mo

but jack smith is the person he should be meeting with not me. >> but so barbara in your experience, is this a relatively common kind of meeting for, say the u.s. attorney in a particular federal district to have with a potential criminal defendant? >> yes, and a high profile case it's not uncommon for the defense attorney to reach out and say, we all know this has been under investigation for many many months, it appears that you are getting very close to an indictment, and i want to persuade you why it would be a bad idea or not in the best interest of justice for there to be an indictment filed. there is some facts you don't know and i would like to come present them to you for you to consider when this charging decision gets made. that is a fairly typical process that occurs in high profile cases. >> and just a final question on this, is it possible that jack smith has come to that point in his investigation where he offered such a meeting to donald trump's lawyers, and they decided to go over his head to merrick garland because i'm wondering about the timing, what makes the trum

so, you know, this is something that could have broader implications for the jack smith investigation in terms of being able to convince a jury that an individual was part of a conspiracy that involved breaking into the u.s. capitol even though they weren't themselves at the u.s. capitol that day. >> and we were just showing that video of dominic pezzola that you were talking about. using the police shield. here it is again to break open the window at the capitol that day. ryan, stick by, stay close to us. we'll get you in here. many more verdicts are read or any more news comes out of the court which should be just a couple of minutes. don't go anywhere. joining me now is msnbc legal analyst, and former prosecutor charles coleman. i want to pick up with where ryan left off. that's talking about the broader implications of convicted enrique tarrio successfully who was knot there that day, he was in another city entirely because he was kicked out of d.c. and what that could mean for the prosecution, potential prosecution, if it comes to that, of donald trump and jack smith's investigat

and what's important to jack smith? what's important to jack smith is was donald trump advised by counsel, by aides, by other assistants, by even perhaps his white house staff going back all the way to 2020, and as he left in january 2021 and those boxes were being packed, was he advised and warned this stuff's classified, you can't take it? or when he got to mar-a-lago, if you have anything that's classified we need to put it in this special folder and give it to the fbi when they come tomorrow, i think it's january 3rd. >> do you think the boxes had been checked and trump was told how to handle classified material? >> i think it was clearly checked before he left the white house and clearly checked after. we know from the same reporting from the guardian what corcoran told him. i want to flip it around once more. who could possibly issue the ultimate orders that would make nauta or corcoran you can look in the storage room, i think there's only one person here when a subpoena heb received in response to who they would

but i'm already feeling very good 19 jack smith is feeling very good about obstruction.what this does is make it even more severe and bring it earlier so we had been considering the receipt of the subpoena is the moment that silver's him up and makes him know he has to comply. now in fact he's already plotting out his criminal noncompliance before he even receives it. that's good stuff, and it adds to what i think is already mounting evidence. for us though, lawrence, it's new news. for smith it's old. news and the other, to other things really caught my attention in the post article, first grand jury hasn't met since may 5th, the longest hiatus since smith was appointed, and i think that is behind these reports that maybe smith is readying charges. second, that point you just raised a couple minutes ago, that he may have shown them to others, that's a whole new crime. that is espionage act 18 usc 793, and if they have that, it would really add to the time and everything. but it is a real judgment collier, how much he wants to load up his case and complicated if he alrea

it also seems jack smith is getting close to the end. the grand jury has got to be one of the very last things you would do. that suggests to me they're close to a decision. >> we only have about 30 seconds, but as we await this verdict, any more from the courtroom? how close are we? >> reporter: still waiting. this trial went on for a very long time. i think waiting a little longer here to find out how the jury ultimately comes down. this isn't the end of it. they're going to be back in there being told to deliberate further. there's a lot of things going into a friday, whether or not they would want to settle this and call it an end after that. we'll see what happens. >> again, a verdict in the proud boys seditious conspiracy trial expected any minute here. i'm going to hand it over to my colleague jose balart after this. don't go anywhere. balart after this don't go anywhere. (bridget) with thyroid eye disease i hid from the camera. and i wanted to hide from the world. for years, i thought my t.e.d. was beyond help... but then i asked

the reason all of the lawyers have been before jack smith's grand jury is because a federal judge alreadyn the commission of criminality. crimes have been committed. they're so far along, much farther than mueller ever got. >> i think that's correct. the saying that it's not the crime, its cover-up. it's the cover-up and the crime here. it seems to have been both. and the more we learn about it, the more serious both of those things seem to be. >> i want to read some more of what -- when you lay over the reporting of what jack smith is getting his hands on, with the investigative reporting that has emerged, it will be a year in august since the mar-a-lago, since a judge approved the mar-a-lago search. let me read this from april. in the classified documents case, federal investigators have gathered new and significant evidence that after the subpoena was delivered, trump looked through the contents of some of the foxes of documents and found apparently out of a desire to keep certain things in his possession. people familiar with the investigation said. melissa, when you look at how much

mike's reporting did not say jack smith was the source of the subpoena. so it could be in some other part of the justice department. it could be an unrelated prosecution or investigation that we just haven't heard about. but if it is jack smith, then we get into those questions that mary mccord was saying before. is this part of the underlying document, motivation, and the like, or is it something else. so far we've known jack smith is investigating mar-a-lago and january 6th. how the saudi piece fits in to either of these is a difficult thing to try and speculate about. >> i'll come you to, michael steele. i have to take a break, but i don't want to do that without getting your take on this. if it's friday, we're talking about trump, we're talking about the saudis, and talking about a potentially mature criminal investigation into his obstructing another investigation. >> yes. to all of that. and i just love the opening of the show today because it is so rich with reporting and legal analysis to give you a real sense of what's at play here and how doj's

that is what jack smith is operating under.se regulations provide that jack smith is to have day-to-day independence and his decisions to be afforded great weight by the attorney general. so the attorney general can overrule it but there's a very high standard. here garland has signalled that he believes jack smith should basically make these calls. he'll jump in if something is wrong, that's what he did in the durham investigation, another special counsel appointed under similar authority and garland, even though durham was going off the rails in ten different directions, just let him go on and conclude his investigation the way he saw fit. durham tried to bring two prosecutions against individuals, both of those fizzled in front of the jury, which is an amazing thing to have an 0-2 loss in front of injuries if you're a criminal prosecutor, but nonetheless garland had a hands off approach. and that's what i think donald trump himself is thinking. if you were a serious lawyer and you wanted to have a meeting with the attorney g

june 2nd, the events of that day may be key to jack smith's case. tonight, the washington post described the events that took place that day as being of particular importance to investigators in the classified documents case. we had previously known that on may 11th of last year, trump's attorneys received a grand jury subpoena seeking all documents bearing classification marking still in trump's possession. then, we knew that almost a month later, june 3rd, an attorney from the department of justice, and three fbi agents met with trump's lawyers at mar-a-lago to collect those documents from trump's team. now we also already knew that at some point, between those two dates, boxes of documents had been moved around mar-a-lago on the presidents orders. and we knew that the special counsel put that on video. what we did not know, until tonight, was this. the washington post reports tonight, the boxes of documents were moved into a storage area by trump's body man, walt now to, and another employee. the day before the justice department came to get the

obviously you have not talked to jack smith about this. you can't be immune to the calendar. >> not at all. he's got one eye on the calendar with everything he does. with every subpoena he's handing out, his folks are watching that. he's most concerned about the doj policy as you get close to the election. doesn't really -- it's kind of a vaguely written document. nobody is 100% sure on it. it wouldn't seem to limit him in any respect vis-a-vis the primary schedule. it will limit him as he gets close to the general election. i think he's much closer to making a decision on the indictment than the general election. >> how is the republican party and how are his 2024 republican rivals reacting? how do they view this investigation? i've heard all along for months and months and months from people who are expert and investigators like you and maggie haberman, this is potentially the most serious of all the investigations into trump? >> absolutely. we're seeing more and more republicans get into the race. clearly in the party there are candidat

of course, the georgia case is a subset of what jack smith is looking at. he is not limited to georgia and that territory. i would like to underscore what ryan said. it's very important to see that you can bring cases even if the person wasn't actually at the capitol attacking the capitol that day. >> we should point out why he wasn't at the capitol. he was under a court order not to enter the district of columbia because of a previous protest where he was involved for the burning -- for demonstrations and burning a flag or a banner in front of an historic black church in the city, in connection to the george floyd demonstrations, right? that's one reason why he was not in the city. >> carry the analogy to the reason the former president wasn't at the capitol was because the secret service was refusing to take him. it's not for lack of will that he wasn't there. legally, it doesn't matter. that's been now shown by this verdict. you do not have to be the triggerman to be found guilty if you are part of a conspiracy and typically if you are leading that consp

there are a number of fronts where jack smith has had some significant wins. and i wonder, you know, what you make of trump's sort of exposure at present. >> sure. and i thought his participation in the town hall last week, and this has been said so many times i'm sure on your broadcast as well, was great for him politically to his base, but his lawyers must have been just shaking their head with, you know, their hands over it because the things he said are going to come back to haunt him before jack smith. and i agree a lot with what charlie was saying, and it's a legal issue about whether the mental aspect of the declassification could occur, but there is no process. i represented two of his secretaries of defense and his national security advisor, and there is no one other than cash patel with devon nunes' as the chair and the chief of staff at the defense department he came forward and said i knew there was a standing order and he was pulled before the grand jury. we haven't heard what in fact he said, and he hasn't come back on-air anywhere to say or prov

jack smith doesn't need that, of course, to bring an indictment for mar-a-lago.ing classified information is enough. obstructing the investigation is enough. but now, there's this new third dimension of possible financial crimes. and so, that's what i think is going on there, that starting with mar-a-lago. of course, smith may find evidence of other criminal wrongdoing with respect to these foreign dealings, which is something you've been talking about on the show. >> i sure have. well, former trump lawyer ty cobb thinks trump could actually go to jail over the document situation. so, we're obviously watching it closely. neal, always good to see you. thanks for joining. coming up, right-wing media were quick to jump on a report that migrants had displaced almost veterans. but guess what? cracks in the story a marriage, not just cracks, the whole thing turn out to be a big fat lie. our next guest is when the extraordinary reporters getting to the truth of it all, when the 11th hour continues. 11th hour continues. trelegy for copd. ♪ birds flyin' high, you know how

and now, those warnings, they 16 records could become a key part of special counsel jack smith's case against former president trump. according to cnn, the 16 presidential records may provide critical evidence establishing the former president's awareness and to declassification process, a key part of the criminal investigation into trump's mishandling of classified documents. records may also provide insight into trump's intent and whether he willfully disregarded what he knew to be clearly establish protocols. so these records seem fairly important, which is why the doj apparently subpoenaed them earlier this year. since then, trump's legal team has done everything in its power to make sure that these 16 documents don't see the light of day, although for the record, trump's legal team says the fight is really a strategic fight about constitutional and presidential protections rather than keeping evidence from the special counsel. which is, okay -- we now know that yesterday, the archives sent the trump team a letter that basically said, sorry, the 16 records are underway to jack smi

michael, can we just start with your new reporting on jack smith? what more are we learning about this new witness and where the investigation stands right now? >> well, we know that this witness provided some sort of photo that was taken inside of mar-a-lago in the room that housed the boxes that the investigators are so interested in knowing about. the investigation is trying to determine what was in these boxes in this room, and why the boxes were moved around and whether they were moved around at a time and in a way that was designed to obstruct the investigation. we have to remember this is an investigation that is not only looking at how donald trump handled classified materials, but also whether he and his aides and lawyers obstructed that investigation, took steps to throw sand in the gears of how the justice department and national archives were trying to get these materials back. this story also has information about a flurry of new subpoenas that have gone out and how one of those subpoenas, that wants the trump organization asked for inf

walk us through what jack smith is looking for. it appears. >> jack smith, right, special counsel has subpoenaed the trump organization for information about any potential business deals with seven different specific countries including russia, the uae, a number of other ones where we know the president has had a past. what he seems to be looking at is there a nexus between these documents taken and any potential money making ventures the president was up to since leaving office which would help explain why. one of the things we have seen so far is a complete mystery as to why he took them. he's been defensive. i had every right to take them. i'm the president, all these things, none of which are true, at least the way he presented them. but he's never offered an explanation as to why he took them. >> the motivation factor here. how essential is that for jack smith to prove that there was wrong doing? >> i don't think it's necessary as i understand. i'm not a lawyer, but he only has -- wasn't supposed to take the documents. he refu

i think, in terms of evaluating the case against trump, that's just not on jack smith's mind.looking at his evidence, and i think devlin is very accurate when he says prosecutors like to play with their food. we definitely do. and after you're done playing with it in the grand jury, the appellate lawyers want to come along and take a look at with the food that you've gotten your plate. and figure out if it's enough to pass some of the legal benchmarks that they're looking for. for instance, do you have enough evidence, both to obtain and to sustain a conviction. so, sometimes, we see a little bit more legal work going on in the background. i think it's relatively rare for prosecutors to consider these sort of extraneous factors like other investigations that may be underway. setting aside the timeline, which, of course, is a mystery to all of everybody except for jack smith, probably. devin, the strength of the case here, the evidence that we're learning about, the fact that evan corcoran was a copious notetaker, down to the reporting in the guardian says, in addition to his e

the afternmath of 2020 election his direct conversations with donald trump and jack smith has many prosecutorsving smith himself there, wolf, just so much underlines how significant this was to secure the former vice president's testimony. something that has never happened in a grand jury proceeding before where there's a vice president testifying. potentially for a case against the former president himself, donald trump. >> it was truly a historic moment, indeed. stay with us. i also want to bring in defense attorney shan wu. what does it suggest to you that jack smith actually sat in during the grand jury testimony? >> besides the historic nature as kaitlyn pointed out, i think his presence there is out of deference to that possibility. from a prosecutorial and defense cou council, it csignals it's activ and operational. very rare for a leader to be personally sitting there in the grand jury room during that testimony and i think it signals that he's, it's a very vigorous style of leadership. i mean, it's a little bit of a contract to the approach we saw in the mueller investigation where fr

clearly either saw on the tape or knew existed on the tape, how do you assess the strength of jack smith's>> well, at the top of the hour, nicolle, you said there were a bunch of basic building blocks that have fallen into place in the smith probe, and that's right. so we already knew that donald trump had these stolen documents, more than 100 of them, in his golf club in florida. we already knew that trump had these documents after his attorneys swore that he didn't. we also knew that these documents were very significant. some of the nation's most sensitive secrets. and we also already knew that a federal judge, not just the trial judge, but the d.c. circuit, our nation's second highest court, believed a crime was committed here, and that the crime was so serious that the attorney/client privilege that donald trump had, had to be pierced. we also knew that another donald trump attorney, who has been working with him on this investigation, has quit on the eve of major prosecutorial decisions, and we also knew that there were about 50 pages of notes that his attorney, corcoran, had turned

wero learned last month that special counsel jack smith's office is looking at trump for doing an eerilyimilar thing to congressman santos. prosecutors areco trying to determine whether mr. trump and his aides violated federal wire fraud statutes as they raised as much as $250 million through a political action committee by saying they needed the money to fight to reverse election fraud, even though they'd been told repeatedly that there was no evidence to back up those fraud claems. so prosecutors right now are alleging mr. santos defrauded donors, claiming they were giving money to support his campaign when really the cash wasmp allegedly just going into george santos' own bank account. and they're saying mr. santos did that via e-mail across state lines, which could be wire fraud. and jack smith's office is also investigating trump for potentially defrauding voters, using false claims about election fraud to kwens them to donateel via e-mail across stat lines, which could also be wire fraud. and by the way that one will be defrauding to the tune of $250 million, a quarter of a billion

which is, as andrew said, i want my appeal for my meeting with jack smith, or i'm gonna jump over jackhearing in new york, all of that hand wringing that you saw by defended donald trump about the date. that date was all worked out, lawrence. the judge said it, it was worked out among the lawyers. either trump knew and put on a show on television that showed, oh jeez, i really don't like this during primary season. or his lawyers didn't tell him that the date was worked out. i suspect that given what you're saying about the lawyer to the attorney general, this is all theater for him. >> then we're, what's that very much for joining, us once again tonight, always appreciate it. >> thanks, lawrence. >> coming up, judging by the disastrous first night of his presidential campaign, florida governor ron desantis is much better at banning abortions and then banning books then he is at campaigning for president. the victim of the latest desantis book been's amanda gorman, who were cited a poem that president biden's inauguration, that is now banned at a florida elementary school, thanks to th

and now jack smith is going to make his move.nd i do suspect it will be an indictment because we know that trump had the documents, more than 100 of them in his golf club in florida. we knew that he had them even after his attorney -- and we know these are very significant documents, but now the news today shows the criminal intent and of course it will have to be stand up in a court. but it sure looks like trump knew exactly what he was doing when he sent out his lawyer to say, don't worry about -- we have turned over all these documents, when in fact he had. and >> let's talk about these documents. because, now, these allegations come from notes that were taken by trump's attorney, evan corcoran. why doesn't attorney client privilege apply here? >> because a federal judge, and our nation's second highest court, the d.c. circuit sense them. normally, you're right stuff, if you come and talk to me in a criminal matter and i am representing you, that's secrecy. you cannot get that information out into the public where as prosecuto

so no, i think jack smith is coming for the documents. for january six, for the conspiracy, for the attempt to overthrow the united states government. i'm still skeptical about that. i'm still skeptical about whether smith or anyone at the doj has what it takes to come after trump before his attempted coup of a nation. but the documents thing? yeah, i think that's going to happen. as hugo was saying showing them around is not in and of itself an additional charge. but, as a point where you're doing, it fits establishes, culpability for the charges that they are already investigating from. and i would love to know that if you are showing them around, if he had any of those sticky price tags on them. how much would it take to get your very own copy of this document? that would be an additional charge. but showing them around itself goes to his culpability. >> hugo, so new york times prosecutors want to know if the documents were moved before the trump lawyer went through them. what is the significance of that? to me, i do not know why innoce

no, we also learned jack smith's office has gathered evidence even before trump received a subpoena in may he had what some officials called a dress rehearsal. we learned smith's office had been told by more than one witness trump at times kept classified documents out in the open at his florida office where authorities could see them and that he sometimes showed them to people including aides and visitors. you put all that reporting together, certainly looks like jack smith is forming a case here. now, nbc news has not independently confirm any of this reporting and former president trump denies he did anything wrong, but this certainly doesn't look good for the former president and does seem time is not on his side either. tonight bloomberg reports this investigation is coming to a close and that jack smith is poised to announce possible criminal charges in the days or weeks after memorial day. joining us now lisa rubin, msnbc legal analyst. ladies, what a treat to have you here tonight. we'll get to the reporting on a possible time line. but we have this reporting from "the washingt

in this case, it's jacks smith with who is in effect in a position of a u.s. team of assistant u. s. attorneys. this is the only instance where we are aware of where there has been any reporting, that jack smith decided to be in the grand jury room himself when vice president pence was questioned for five hours. what do you take from that? >> probably the nearest analogy, because that kind of circumstance just doesn't happen, is how often does the u.s. attorney, the leader of a particular office, sit in on a grand jury testimony? and that's very rare particularly in a big office. but what i think it means is that this is a witness of singular importance and that the person is going to ultimately have to make the decision to recommend charges or not recommend charges to the attorney general, wants to see the credibility of the witness, wants to see directly for themselves, what does this witness have to say, how persuasive are they, are all the questions that the special counsel wanted answered? have they been answered so that he can make the most informed judg

jack smith is investigating what trump was doing with classified documents that he wasn't supposed to have at his home after he left the presidency. he's also investigating trump's efforts to try and stay in power even after he lost the 2020 election. "the times" is reporting tonight as part of jack smith's investigation he has reportedly sent a subpoena to trump's business. and the subpoena asks about trump's business dealings in seven different foreign countries starting with when he took office as president in 2017. the subpoena reportedly asks about trump business dealings starting in 2017 in china, saudi arabia, united arab emirates, kuwait, aman, turkey, and france. now, we have no idea what the nexus might be between him having potential business dealings in those countries while he was president and his efforts to overthrow the u.s. government and stay in office after he was voted out. we have no idea what the nexus might be between him allegedly having business dealings in those countries and him spiriting lots of classified documents out of the white house after he was voted

jack smith is wrapping it up. you walk us through your reporting on the special counsel's timetable, specifically what if anything remains to be done in the classified documents investigation? >> thanks for having me. what we know is that a few weeks ago, they had brought in a ton of people back to go before the grand jury, press them on very specific questions they had, and gave very tight time frames for people to come in. it seems like all those requests have pretty much wrapped up at this point. there doesn't seem to be that many outstanding requests. what we understand is that they are essentially -- they have everything that they're going to get in this investigation on the table right now. they are moving fast to make a decision here and we expect to see an ultimate decision on whether to bring charges in the coming weeks and months. >> what have you learned about this activity over the past several weeks? >> we heard that there was a lot of grand jury activity, people coming in, people described the courth

but also putting a target on merrick garland and jack smith.seen what your colleagues, and some of the committees who served in congress, have done to alvin bragg, over whom they have extremely tenuous oversight roles. he's a local prosecutor in new york. how do you anticipate what it could happen from the committee to serve on, with house majority, dedicated to defending donald trump. should there be an indictment from the department of justice? >> one thing we've learned over the past seven years following donald trump, the place that he wants to avoid more than anything is a courtroom. where he does not control the narrative. it is not a pr battle. there are rules, there are laws, there are facts. there is evidence. he does not get to dictate any of that. so, what he is doing, and what the house republicans are enabling, is to try and do everything that he possibly can to undermine the entire criminal justice system and law enforcement in order to be able to defend himself in public. it's why we're having so many of these bogus hearings abou