what is the goal of jack smith here? >> well, jake jack smith is trying to salvage his indictment as any prosecutor would and should do. and just to refresh everyone's memory jack smith brought his initial indictment back last summer of 2023, a few months ago, the supreme court said much of what's in that indictment is immune. donald trump has immunity and it's out of the case. then jack smith came back with a narrow down indictment. and in this filing, jack smith is arguing to the court what's left in my indictment is all kosher smoke, so to speak. it's all good to go for trial. and the key dividing line there is, if it's an official act, then donald trump is immune and it's out of the case. but if it's private, then it's not an official act and it can stay in the case and that jake is the number one word that you see. the number one theme that you see repeated throughout this filing by jack smith private, he argues all of this conduct was private. it was criminal, and it should stay in the case. jack smith argues bill,

now the sentence that you pointed to at the beginning basically says to jack smith, that is, jack smith is basically saying to judge chutkan, don't plead me down just one avenue so that if that turns out to be the wrong one we will have to go back again. give me an alternative set of rulings. affirm my view that the president as a candidate has no immunity under the courts opinion. but if part of what the president is doing is not in his role as candidate, then please agree with my elaborate argument that any presumption of immunity is overcome. take, for example, the 70 or so threats that trump makes to pence, basically saying you better do this, whether it is legal or not. so what. it does not matter or i will basically sick them on you. those threats to pence, even if you don't know which hat he is wearing, cannot be part of the president's official function. for an outgoing president who, as the evidence compellingly shows, knows he has lost and says it doesn't matter whether i have lost, we have to fight anyway, even if i have lost. for that president to say i have an official role

diversion out there is that you hear special counsel jack smith was coming from.ssentially he was saying that donald trump was resorting to crimes after the 2020 election and in these documents, goes into great detail as to his actions on january sixth when the president quoting here, "took to the stage to speak to supporters who were gathered there, heat new that mike pence vice president has refused to use the defendants for argument "this is coming from jack smith's office out of the time for the defendant referring to donald trump also note he had only one last hope to prevent bytedance certification as president, the large an angry crowd standing in front of him. for more than an hour the defendant delivered a speech designed to inflame supporters and motivated them to march on the capital. donald trump said he was urging them to march peacefully, goes on to say that he said in the same rise he was telling for months privately and publicly, including to the officials in the targeted states and that he knew were not true. this is all in the eye of the beholder

>> what jack smith did is he gave it all.put it all out there in this filing because he knows what's going to happen is chutkan is almost 100% agree with his assessments set forth by him. and because of that, despite trump's protestations otherwise, it's going to get appealed. the decision by chutkan will go to the d.c. circuit. the d.c. circuit already determined that there's no immunity for donald trump in this capacity, meaning there was this whole issue of misconduct. so now you have to get it back to the supreme court. but what jack smith did which is so beautiful and elegant, is he cites to amy coney barrett when it comes to fake elector schemes and the fact that she said that cannot be private conduct when your doing this with the fake electors. and the other thing that really hurts donald trump is the following -- two things, one, there's forensics on his phone that we're learning about that has been done by jack smith that was included this n this filing. and mark meadows. tried to remove this from state court to fed

that from the filing from jack smith. we are talking about it all is the -- we are talking about it on the washington journal as axios notes, the details continually note the president was asking in his capacity as a candidate and not a president, this an effort by jack smith to respond to the bombshell supreme court ruling that said presidents have immunity for official actions. if you go to the filing itself, it is about 165 pages. you can read it online, plenty of news sites and also on c-span.org. "the defendant asserts he is immune from prosecution for his criminal scheme to overturn the 2020 presidential election because he claims it entailed official conduct. not so. although the defendant was the incumbent president during the charge conspiracies his schemes were fundamentally a private one. working with the team of co-conspirators the defendant acted as a candidate when he pursued multiple criminal means to disrupt and defraud the government function by which boats are collected and counted, function which the de

. >> jack smith said a couple weeks ago judge chutkan we want to go first. judge chutkan said that's quite unusual but she let them go first. the effect of that now is we essentially have jack smith's case at least on paper, at least the parts that haven't been redacted 30-some days before the election. >> there is no question this jack smith's only real opportunity to try this case in the eyes of the public before the election. >> bret: 34 days before the election. this is 165-page filing by special counsel jack smith the parts here, excerpt. three days before election day p 1, person one described the defendant, which is former president trump's plan to a private gathering of supporters and what trump is going to do is just declare victory, right? is he going to declare victory. that doesn't mean he is the winner. is he just going to say he is the winner. it goes on. but truth social, the former president posted moments ago. democrats are weaponizing the justice department against me because they know i am winning. they are desperate to prop up their faili

that from the filing from jack smith. we are talking about it all is the -- we are talking about it on the washington journal as axios notes, the details continually note the president was asking in his capacity as a candidate and not a president, this an effort by jack smith to respond to the bombshell supreme court ruling that said presidents have immunity for official actions. if you go to the filing itself, it is about 165 pages. you can read it online, plenty of news sites and also on c-span.org. "the defendant asserts he is immune from prosecution for his criminal scheme to overturn the 2020 presidential election because he claims it entailed official conduct. not so. although the defendant was the incumbent president during the charge conspiracies his schemes were fundamentally a private one. working with the team of co-conspirators the defendant acted as a candidate when he pursued multiple criminal means to disrupt and defraud the government function by which boats are collected and counted, function which the de

jack smith filed that brief under seal. judge chutkan chose to unseal this, not jack smith. and i do take issue with the framing that this case has been delayed or is going forward at this time because of jack smith it was delayed because the supreme court took so long to took this action. it was delayed because the former president has sorted every angle to stop this from going forward. so i do think that personally for me, i think what jack smith has done so far is prosecutor's case honorably, quickly and appropriately, and the public has a right. there's a public interest in an open process which means seeing this evidence, which means moving quickly and yes, moving quickly before an election that's what should happen. the people should know what happened and get the evidence that a grand jury, as beyond probable cause, said that the former president likely committed these crimes so that people should get to trial as quickly as possible and should not be stopped because an election happens to be happening, he's a defendant firms candidate second how many times did you eve

this is from page 61 of jack smith's filing.oconspirator two in a memorandum stands in stark contrast to concessions he had made about the vice president's lack of authority in the certification proceeding. two months earlier on october 11th, he had written to a colleague that neither the constitution nor the electoral count act provided the vice president with discretion and counting of votes or permitted him to make the determination on his own. just one day earlier on december 22nd when asked by other attorneys to provide views that would have filed raised the issue of the vice president's authority on january 6th, two recommended that the complaint not be filed. he wrote this, quote, the rik of getting a court ruling is very high. that all the people all the lawyers around trump knew so early that there was no legal predicate for what they were pressuring pence to do with brute political force. with this brute intimidation that the committee developed evidence including from ivanka. that the lawyers had researched this thems

okay, so jack smith says that's fine. what trump did on january 6 and before january 6, smith argues, is not official. it was him in his capacity as a presidential candidate. the most telling part for smith is to say the constitution is really clear on this. the one thing the president doesn't have power over -- he has lots of powers, but the one thing he does not have power over selection of the next president for the most obvious of reasons because he is the most self-interested person in the world. >> go back to this point but first i do want to say your phrase, lawyering at its best, you are one of the few people in the world that believes there such a thing as lawyering at its best. most people dread the idea. the fact that prosecutors are saying despite the fact that he was president, his scheme, they use the phrase, was fundamentally private. explain that and what do you make of the argument? >> what the supreme court said is they were worried about government officials, particularly the president, being attacked fo

a federal judge says the american people should be able to learn more about jack smith's case against donald trump for alleged interference in the 2020 election and they should be able to hear it today and loved and politics, how dating apps are helping singles swipe right to find love in the leadup to the election and asked questions like, what does the communist just seeing it too much but i want donald now can you slice that? >> the bodyguard news for you tomorrow at nine on cnn you're leaving me for a turbotax expert seeing it, adam turbotax will be your pride's >> were turbotax live expert and we'll beat the price you pay your pro last tax season came to reeva's support your brain health. mary janice. hey, eddie know appraiser, frank frank bred. >> how are you for up to seven brain health indicators, including memory when you need to remember, remember nerivan what does searching for medicare plan feel like? it's kind of confusing. >> it's so complicated. >> it's a pain, it's really, it's really difficult. it's strong ehealth is a less stressful way to find health insurance to pr

let's talk about jack smith. i want to know what stuck out to the filing and you think it'll have any effect on the 2024 race? >> suffers well, what sticks out in the filing i think is where the fight will be which is over the discussions that donald trump had with vice president mike pence and whether those things are allowable as part of the prosecution, given that the supreme court has made this distinction basically saying that the official acts of the president are not things that he can be held accountable for by prosecutors, so the question is, which of the conversations between vice president pence and president trump when president trump was trying to get him to overturn the results of the 2020 election, might be admissible, so there's a lot of discussion in this filing, in the filing, of just what mike pence told folks in fact, i felt one of the most interesting things that he said, the prosecutor say donald trump was told by a lawyer that his plan to have pence basically reject the certification of ele

. >> the prospect of mike pence being killed or harmed, what jack smith found is that donald trump's response was quote, so what. >> 34 days before the election, new details on how the republican candidate for president tried to overthrow the last election. rachel maddow and lawrence o'donnell join me live tonight then -- >> did he lose the 2020 election? >> tim, i am focused on the future. >> that is a damning nonanswer. >> senator chris murphy on the plan to subvert the selection. >>> plus, original war as israel invades lebanon and my interview on the book. all in starts right now. good evening from new york. i am chris hayes. 34 days out from the election voting has started in a number of states. the judge in donald trump's january 6 special counsel case has unsealed a new court filing just this afternoon. in the filing, special counsel jack smith outlines the details about why donald trump should be federally prosecuted for his attempted coup, so we have a special to show tonight. i'm going to be joined in just a moment by rachel maddow and lawrence o'donnell. the filing is hund

then jack smith goes on and does that with respect to all of the other aspects of the scheme. first, these things are not official acts. they are private. he was in his conduct as a candidate, et cetera, et cetera, and even if they were he can read about the assumption. last point on that, amy coney barrett in her concurrence, she led the way. she said i think the majority should have answered some of these questions and she said in my opinion, donald trump's efforts to orchestrate the fraudulent elect or scheme is purely private conduct because he has no role as president in the states choosing electors. she also said that in her view the pressure on state legislatures, for example in arizona, the speaker of the house. because there is no authority of the president to have anything to do with how states choose their electors, that there is no way that that kind of thing, that kind of prosecution would intrude on the functions of the executive branch. so he is following her lead and the lead of the majority. >> that is a great point about amy coney barrett's concurrence, but s

did jack smith have any control over the timing of the release? >> in the immediate term, he did not. this was a decision by the judge to unseal a sealed filing. the special counsel's office didn't know this was going to be happening yesterday. there's a larger issue here where you can question whether jack smith could have done something to avoid this happening until after the election, could have asked the judge for more time, but the justice department's position is this does not violate guidelines. they have a case to litigate. the supreme court has asked that this procedure happen to sort out what's private and what's official, and that they need to move forward. and judge tanya chutkan made clear she believes the election has no bearing on how the case should be handled. >> vaughn, trump calls the timing election interference, aren't his legal moves the reason this all was delayed to this point right before the election? >> right. let's be clear, when we were talking about him disputing underlying facts of the case, donald trump has maintain

come maybe not anyone, but certainly jack smith did. we talked with you, josh because you call this filing a blueprint for special counsel, jack smith and a jury presentation. if that would happen one day, what do you think is his goal in doing this? knowing the audience is not really a jury in this case. it's the judge. what is he trying to do? >> well, he's trying to give her as much of the evidence as he can because so far what she's really had is only the indictment which was just sort a bare-bones outline of its case. and this really fills in a lot of the details that a lot of the juicy nuggets that you just relayed, our him laying out the facts. there's one in there where they talk about a trump camp campaign aide talking to somebody down in an arena where they were counting votes on election night and telling them to start a riot. now that allegation in sort of vague terms was in the indictment, but now we have a direct quote to back it up. so it's that kind of particularity. but i do think that the overall just this argument is

give us your analysis of jack smith's latest document. this brief, did any of this new evidence that is contained their surprise, you lot of new details that are really eye-popping, but the supreme court in the trump defense basically invited the submission of this document because what the roberts court did to try to placate trump was to say well, the president is essentially immune, immune no, i used for official acts are presumptively immunized for official acts, but not for private unofficial acts. >> and what this document does is to go through step by step by step through every chapter of this assault on american democracy to show how donald trump was not acting in an official capacity to take care that the laws are faithfully executed, but rather acting like at very best, a private candidate. and really like an outlaw, like a tyrant, attacking the constitutional system and it every point he engaged in what jack smith describes his deceit, fraud against the system, lying about the facts, lying about the law and lying in a way that h

case against trump should proceed despite the conservative led supreme court's new immunity test jack smith main goal of the motion is to show that trump's actions, as he tried to overturn election results, were those of a private person and not those of a present carrying out official duties. smith draws a critical distinction between whether trump was acting as president or as political candidate. the motion point the new testimony from a secret service agent who said trump's securityc detail on january 6th, quote, was not getting information about the rally from their counterparts at the white house. it was noticed after the event. this was a campaign driven event. the motion highlights trump's practice of exuding white house advisers and relying on private or campaign lawyers when pressuring pence to overturn the electoral count. according to the filing, quote, it is hard to imagine stronger evidence that conduct is private and when the president excludes his white house counsel and only wishes to have his private counsel present. the filing also presents communication showing that trum

all judge chutkan -- it was her decision, as ken said, not jack smith.was judge chutkan's decision to unseal this document. all she was doing was following the law and treating donald trump like any other criminal defendant. >> tim, let's talk about the real nut of this, which is new revelations about mike pence. mike pence did not testify. he refused to testify to the january 6 committee that you worked on. now we have his sworn testimony to a grand jury and notes. if true, it's devastaing if it can be introduced in a trial. this will go to the supreme court again. there's an argument over whether there's any instance where a president and vice president are acting in an unprofessional -- unofficial role. >> it's meat on the bones that the select committee put in place. we told the story, this narrative of an intentional multi-part plan led by the former president to disrupt the joint session and prevent the transfer of power. the pleading puts an important new meat on those bones. we didn't talk to the vice president. he refused to speak with the commi

jack smith violated court doj policies and principles. so who can throw the book at jack smith? aileen cannon said he's got no legal standing because his entire office is unconstitutional. >> correct. but the whole point is they, the biden-harris administration is using the legal system, a continuation of the lawfare against trump. they're using the legal system with the thinnest of heel veneer as a political weapon against donald trump. but also a, liz, you have to understand this is also them viewing an -- elizabeth: let's stay on this, hang on -- >> donald trump as an existential threat. elizabeth: well, can you sue, what about suing to to stop jack smith? i mean, honig also wrote that judge chutkan is i trying to have it both ways too. she claims not to care about the coming election despite her earlier effort toss fast track this case before the election. she gotchastized by the supreme court. so, you know, when you see what's going on, how do you stop it? >> first of all, i think how you stop it is going to be a massive rebuke to this behavior on november 5th. that's ultim

then we will tell you what comes next after new bombshell report from jack smith. >>> pete buttigieg joins to talk about battling information amid hurricane relief efforts including his effective fact checking of elon musk. >>> okay, everyone. this is a week that really seemed to remind us in stark terms what is at stake in this election. take tuesday night's vice presidential debate. that moment at the end when everyone watching was reminded that this election is anything but normal. >> did he lose the 2020 election ? >> tim, focused on the future picked it kamala harris sensor americans from speaking their mind in the wake of the 2020 covid situation ? >> that is a damning not answer. >> m waltz face says it all. the republican nominee would not even say who won the last election. that was tuesday. on wednesday, a new filing from jack smith was unsealed painting a more vivid picture of donald trump's scheme to overturn the election. on thursday, former congresswoman liz cheney reminded the american people why all of this matters. >> donald trump was willing to sacrifice our capital

that is the mission, and as jack smith steam has seen it.p in mind, that superseding indictment, normally for a defense attorney, a superseding indictment is terrible news. it means there are more charges or more defendants. and more defendants are generally bad for an individual defendant, for a number of different reasons. not the least of which is that they may cooperate. but that is not what this indictment was. essentially it removed some allegations and a streamlined and reworded it so that jack smith could make the argument that this had nothing to do with official conduct. this was purely private conduct. that is what every filing, since the immunity decision several months ago and now has really been geared around doing. that, and moving the case along as quickly as they can. but i say that with an asterisk, because now jack smith and everybody who is following this realizes that if donald trump is elected, it really doesn't matter when this trial is scheduled. the key is that it won't happen before the election. >> he just comes in

bret. >> bret: isn't this jack smith's edification? >> jessica: no. that's what pushed this timeline back. jack smith was very clear he was going to proceed. he was exactly the same charges in this. he slimmed it down but he was able to convince a grand jury that he should move ahead with all of these counts. and they -- they have some smart lawyers that are working for them who might have been able to mention to donald trump. that this just means that this case is going to come up closer to the election. and. >> harris: not the trial. >> jessica: but that doesn't matter. >> bret: it does. it really does. >> jessica: no, it really doesn't. people aren't buying en masse they are not buying this lawfare argument that he is a big victim and didn't do anything wrong. there is evidence in this of clear cut crimes. >> bret: what is not in this, jessica, is not a defense. there is not a defense. there is not anything that says this was an official act or wasn't. i understand what you are saying about painting the picture. but the timing, lawrence, is a quest

overseeing donald trump's federal elections case just released thousands of pages of evidence from jack smith. the heavily redacted pages offer a glimpse of what the jury could see if this case ever goes to trial. it also shows how smith is working around the supreme court's immunity decision to approve trump's criminality from his actions on and around january 6th. joining us now, someone we really appreciate being here, msnbc legal analyst mary mccord, former principal deputy assistant attorney general for the department of national security. she is also the cohost of the podcast "prosecuting donald trump." good to see you, mary. >> a lot of this was redacted. >> most of it? >> let me give you this, this is really what i have got. it is involving a valid on january 6th. trump watched us what becky's switch-- walk back his speech on that day. he learned about the riot at 1:20 p.m., three hours before he tells his supporters to home. what does evidence like that do for jack smith? >> this is a part of jack smith's overall charges that donald trump is responsible for, right, for things that oc

i call him deranged jack smith. he just lost the documents case, the biggest of them all and toughest. let me tell you, we just won it strongly and completely, a total victory in florida. and he is a person who is trying -- and he works for kamala and for joe. this was a weaponization of government, and that is why it was released 30 days before the election. and there is nothing new in there, by the way, nothing new. they rigged the election, not me. then they go around getting people and persecuting people and prosecuting people that did nothing wrong. they rigged the election. these are crooked people. deranged jack smith is a prosecutor that was put there to screw up the election for the republican party. people know it. i know it. everybody knows it. and it is not going to happen. they should have never allowed the information to come before the public. but they did that because they want to hurt you in the election. so far, and you know we have had great victories, but what has happened so far is if you take a

what is new in jack smith's latest filing? smith's latest account of january 5th provides striking new details about trump's state of mind in the lead up to january 6th. it counts widely criticized the ruling in july, which vastly expanded presidential immunity. smith is pulling out all the stops this time to convince the courts that the case against trump should proceed, despite the conservative led supreme court's new immunity test. jack smith's main goal is to show that trump's actions, as he tried to overturn the election results, or the actions of a private person, not those of a president, carrying out official duties. importantly, draws a critical distinction between whether trump was acting as president or as a political candidate. the motion points to new testimony from a secret service agent who said, trump's security detail january 6th quote, was not getting information about the rally from their counterparts at the white house staff, because this was not a staff-driven event, this was a campaign driven event, end q

after an explosive new filing from special counsel jack smith that was unsealed by a trump appointed judge overnight smith with never never-before-seen evidence, arguing trump's alleged january 6 crimes were a quote, private criminal effort and therefore not protected by presidential immunity. zachary cohen is joining us now to walk us through all of this at first, what's the most crucial bit of this new evidence that you have assessed yes, there are taken together this 165 page filing from jack smith lays out how he believes his case could clear that hurdle set by the supreme court and its ruling that donald trump how does enjoy some partial immunity and cannot be prosecuted for actions considered part of his official presidential duties. >> but jack smith argues that many of the steps he took to allegedly try to overturn the 2020 election. he took them in his capacity as an office seeker, not as an office holder. a really a key distinction. jack smith argues, is the reason why this prosecution should be able to continue and why donald trump ultimately should have to stand trial. now

this filing of jack smith is a reminder of what trump did on violence. but it's also a warning. because donald trump intends to do it again. and i think that is one of the reasons why this is, you know on really on fire. but also, and you were mentioning just the juxtaposition that the news gods gave us today with what j.d. vance said last night. jack smith's filing explains why j.d. vance was on that platform last night and not mike pence. and it is precisely because j.d. vance is willing to do what mike pence refused to do. and the really the dramatic take away i have from reading this 165 page document, is the incredible pressure that was put on mike pence. all of the threats. all of the lies that were told to and about mike pence. then that decision that mike fence pence made for the first time he was not going to do trump's bidding. he's gone now. he's been decommunicated by trump world. and now j.d. vance is in his place. and j.d. vance with his nonanswer really confirmed look at the narrative how trump tried to overturn that election. the role that mike pence played and t

this is a jack smith pleading for both the court and for public attention. again, in a case where jack smith pushed this ridiculous theory of a speedy trial a non-incarcerated defendant who is waving speedy trial really had to go to trial before super tuesday. that's the tell here that this entire thing is politicized. a real part of justice wouldn't be pushing for a speedy trial. they'd say, we're going to be transparent. we're going to turn over everything we can turn over. and you tell us when to try a judge that didn't happen? been hearing that poisons everything that comes after it. >> well, i mean, the judge here is the one making the decisions. it's not jack smith who released this today was the judge, but but jim, you represented trump on this issue. so when trump is claiming and his team is arguing, everything that was done was in his official capacity as president therefore, they've argued none of this can go to trial the special counsel saying it's hard to imagine stronger evidence that conduct is private, that when the president excludes his whit

this is jack smith unilaterally laying out as evidenced. it's not been subject to the rules of evidence. in fact, some of the stuff that jack smith puts in there, he says, i don't even believe this can come into the trial, but i'm telling you, judge but can now that's fine to do. but it means the jury wouldn't say it, and i would argue this has not been subject to cross-examination. so anytime a prosecutor has the floor to him herself for herself, i've had it you can make a quite compelling case, but i think trump's team for now is going to say he has a right to defend himself and he will when the times right? >> how successful do you think this case will be? because it has changed it had to change because of the supreme court ruling and it has changed quite a bit yeah look my position all along, sara, is that donald trump was deservedly indicted for what he did leading up to january 6. >> i've believed that the case against him, his strong, but they supreme court's immunity decision changed everything. it already removed a large pillar of

does your memory align with how jack smith says things played out that day? >> i think that the filing from what i read is consistent with testimony that was offered and consistent with the way the facts played -- the events played out. i think it is also consistent with the way the vice president told it in his own memoir in his book. >> you spoke to the grand jury. were there other key moments during that period that didn't make it into this special counsel's filing? >> well, you know, i think that there is obviously a lot of focus on the day of january ofth. and this was an effort over several weeks and i think that from my personal perspective, i believe that once the electoral college had acted on december 14th, much of this would sort of dissipate and i think when it didn't, it became clear that the focus would be on the vice president's actions on january 6th. his last few weeks were certainly, you know, more intense in deliberations between the president's office and the vice president's office. but, you know, i think there is some pieces that probabl

important to remember, jack smith first indicted the case a year ago. it was a very broad indictment. the supreme court then polled certain parts out of it, are told jack smith that certain parts of his indictment were going to be subject to immunity. for example, jack smith removed the part about donald trump pressuring the justice department. i think with respect to what's left, jack smith makes a fairly compelling case here that it was not official action, that it was done for private purposes, for criminal purposes and therefore should stay in the case if this argument does not pass muster, does that mean that special counsel, jack smith's case against trump is effectively dead. and so i mean, ultimately donald trump did what he did. we all saw what he did the reason why there are so few headlines about this is because he did so much of it right? right out in the open in front of us on twitter. i didn't speeches. i mean, is that there's no accountability those are exactly the stakes, jake, if jack smith fails on this argument, if judge chutkan rejec

special counsel jack smith argues mr.mp is not immune from prosecution for his efforts to overturn the 2020 election, saying he was acting as a candidate. mr. trump criticized the release as a political act. >> this was a weaponization of government, and that's why it was released 30 days before the election. >> they rigged the election. i didn't rig the election. they rigged the election. >> as a reminder, former president trump and his allies brought more than 60 illegal challenges after the election in an effort to overturn it. nearly all of the cases were dropped or missed due to a lack of evidence. in a striking display on thursday, former republican congressman liz cheney campaigned for vice president harris. >> donald trump was willing to sacrifice our capitol to allow law enforcement officers to be beaten and brutalized in his name, and to violate the law and the constitution in order to seize power for himself. i don't care if you are a democrat or a republican or an undependent, there is a depravity, and we must

he wrote a piece this week for new york magazine jack smith's october cheap shot elie said this, anyone who objected to james comey's outrageous announcements about the hillary clinton email investigation. and on the eve of the 2016 election, should feel the same way about smith's conduct. now, what's the distinction? both violated ordinary procedure to take public steps shortly before an election that plainly would have an impact on that election. i wouldn't know if you agree with that. go vote at smerconish.com continue to hit me up on social media i will share some reaction during the course of the program. for example, what do we have, catherine? this has come in already, michael, the american people deserve to know the truth about the effort trump went through to overturn the 2020 election right up until election day. joe brown, i agree with that premise. i absolutely agree that you deserve to know and i think the record is pretty darn complete. i am one who doesn't think we learned a heck of a lot new from smith's publication this week. but does he not have his thumb on the scale

i think that jack smith and his team did a phenomenal job in briefing the issues here. remember, judge chutkan needs to make immunity determinations, decide whether or not the evidence that jack smith is relying on will be admissible at trial, whether it conforms to the immunity ruling that land mark decision that the supreme court handed down on july 1st. remember, jack smith has issued a superseding indictment and then within this within his october 2 filing, he positioned a lot of the arguments as these are all private acts, the conduct here is private. it was donald trump acting as a political candidate and not as president. and for those acts that could be considered official acts, but those are only presumptive immunity there. and then we'll rebut those presumptions. judge chutkan is going to meticulously go through all of the allegations, go through all of this evidence, and remember, while this evidence is redacted for us, the party he's have full view. judge chutkan is reading it all, so she will make those determinations. i personally believe that there are th

what this entire filing by jack smith is designed to say is, look.mp, everything he did that day basically, he was the political and vice versa, there was no -- there was no independent official act. run as a candidate or take his position as a candidate. and not acting as the president. so for example, andrew talked about how there was this dear election of duty on january 6th, but at the same time, trump is tweeting things twopence and the like. the most important point in the jack smith filing is that one of his aides came in and said to him, hey, trump -- hey, pence is under attack. trump's response is, so what. that paints the picture of someone on january 6th is not protecting the country, who is out for his own personal ends, and that is why trump is trying to distract from this filing and say, i'm looking forward and the like. it's not surprising he's looking forward. jack smith just showed 77 potential witnesses and statements that are going to be used against trump at his criminal trial. >> no surprise at all. i want to ask you about this c

for example, jack smith initially wanted a trial date five months after the indictment. judge chutkan said it for seven months after the indictment, but it's important to note in its ruling on immunity the supreme court actually went out of its way to excoriate judge chutkin for quote expediting this case without conducting adequate fact-finding and adequate legal analysis. >> okay. so if you'd take out your issues with the timeline and your issues with the style that of the way they've done this. do you think they still have a strong case against former president trump >> i want people to understand this. has been my public opinion, spoken many times on cnn, which i hold now that donald trump deserved to be indicted for january 6, he deserves to be indicted for the classified documents case at mar-a-lago. the evidence on both looks quite strong to me. but i just simply don't subscribe to the view that well, if a person has done something bad, we can bend or change the rules. maybe i'm a prosecutorial purist in that sense. but i do think these two indictments, two federa

they didn't get it but jack smith did. so we will get

we obviously know mike pence is a key part of these charges against donald trump and jack smith. again, alleges that at trump tried to pressure mike pence to overturn the 2020 election and goes into what donald trump allegedly was trying to do on january 6. he sent that now infamous tweet, right? it looks like mike pence not have the courage to overturn the results jack smith writes, quote, it was at that point alone watching news in real time and with knowledge that rioters had breached the capitol building, that the defense and it issued the 2:24 p.m. tweet attacking pence for refusing the defendants in treaties to join the conspiracy and help overturn the results of the election. it goes on to cite a witness who told prosecutors that when trump was informed that mike pence was being evacuated from the capitol, his response was, quote, so what so that sort of gives you a sense of the tone of this, of the allegations in this new filing. it also goes through some additional evidence and witnesses told prosecutors during the course of this investigation as well. it refers to an in

this is professional misconduct in all likelihood by jack smith and should be investigated.senator tom cotton saying jack smith should be investigated and having a temper tan drum and -- tantrum and deranged person. welcome supreme court justice neil gorsuch and author of this project mike davis. legal pros are saying it's election interference and trump's trial are being violated and constitutional rights. >> senator tom cotton is exactly right. what biden/harris special council jack smith has done here is a direct violation of the department of justices. a manual for the federal prosecutors and agents that makes sense unlawful for them to take action piling 165 middle age political document out of order highly irregular and this obama judge and in is a political assassination attempt by jack smith. liz: should he request de-pate baiting and be disbarred and cnn top legal analyst and el lee honen said these are president trump and ellie calling it a cheep shot and violated ordinary justice department procedures and principles to get trump before the election. he says there'

new evidence tonight involving donald trump from special counsel jack smith. the evidence involves what smith says donald trump did inside the private dining room off the oval office as the january 6th riot was unfolding. tonight, donald trump's response, and here's our chief justice correspondent pierre thomas now. >> reporter: tonight, just 34 days before the election, special counsel jack smith presenting new evidence of donald trump's alleged criminal conspiracy to overturn the 2020 vote and cling to power. in the sweeping 165-page filing, smith arguing trump's deeds were not the official acts of a president, protected by the recent supreme court ruling on immunity, but the desperate efforts of a losing candidate. the brief presents the fullest picture yet of smith's case that trump knew he lost, but lied to the american people anyway. prosecutors claim they spoke to one white house staffer who said he overheard trump telling family members, "it doesn't matter if you won or lost the election. you still have to fight like hell." and then on january 6th, trum

this is part of the evidence that jack smith wants to use to say that he could have tried to intervene to stop some of the violence and chose not to. that's again, part of what they are going to try to bring this in court now, judge tanya chutkan is the one who decided to release these documents. the former president has argued that this is election interference 18 days from the election. why are you putting this out now? she responded to that to that with this statement, she said, if the court withheld information that the public otherwise had a right to access solely because of the potential political consequences of releasing it that withholding could itself cost institute, or appear to be election interference. in other words, the public has a right to see this information and therefore, this is why it is coming out. now all right. evan, thank you so much for taking us through that. let's bring in cnn legal commentator tim parlatore, a former lawyer for donald trump, and tim, as we noted, nearly all of the pages out of nearly 2000 appear to be completed italy redacted. i wonder if

he called jack smith strange and says that there is no case calling it election hunting. what got released today was a 4 part appendix of what smith plans to use to back up his arguments which the judge ordered him to do after the supreme court ruled trump had some immunity over official acts as president. smith was order to refile similar charges arguing those actions were not official. the timing of this release just 3 weeks before the election in a case that won't go to trial until well after is perhaps is not worthy is the content of what we see released. this trove of documents is nearly 1900 pages long and heavily redacted and it's much of what is already been made public including social media posts by trump, transcript so witnesses interviewed by the january sixth house investigation and a memo from trump attorney john easement made public first by bob woodward laying out a legal strategy for vice president mike pence to block or delay the election certification that included a scenario for how pense would take over the electors counting process at at the capital

jack smith makes his case in public just one month before the election. the special counsel is demanding that donald trump stand trial for his quest to cling to power. it is a revealing new accusation in a major filing and it shows that the former president knew the conspiracies were bs he peddled them anyway, and he did so illegally in his personal capacity. but here are some of the newer headlines from jack smith that you should pay attention to. donald trump was told many times, many, many times by many people that these claims were false. he even acknowledged that one of his fame favorite conspiracy theorists was crazy. he was told that the conspiracies were quote, f'ing nuts. and he plotted to declare victory even if he had not won he and his allies look to spread conspiracies to create chaos one, even saying quote, make them riot when trump was told that mike pence was in danger at the capitol on january 6. trump responded. >> so what the testimony, the phone evidence shows trump refused to take action during the insurrection but here's the big pict

jack smith's case got one word easier today, by the stupidest criminal defendant jack smith has ever had to prosecute by him saying we. we did not have guns. today in federal court in washington dc judge tonya issued a ruling saying that jack smith can reveal even more of the prosecutions information against donald trump. in the criminal case that charges donald trump with conspiracy against the united states of america to overthrow the presidential election leading up to and on january 6. and a case that became a bit easier today for jack smith to prosecute thanks to donald trump's rank stupidity saying we did not have guns. the others had guns, but we didn't have guns. after listening to donald trump's rambling answer to his question including donald trump firmly putting himself on the side of the attackers of the capital against the police officers defending the capital, ramiro gonzales said donald trump did not win his vote with that answer. here is what kamala harris said about that today in wisconsin. >> i am campaigning for every vote because i want and intend to be a presiden

but now you wanted to hear, so jack smith is like, okay. here you go. this is it. >> just proceeding in normal course. >> as they shed. please stay with us. we want to discuss donald trump office revenge tour he will go on, if he wins the second term. this is the weekend on msnbc. >>> legal experts concerned should donald trump win a second term he would follow through on the to prosecute his political adversaries. as peter keisler, founder of conservative federal society tells the "new york times", there's every reason to believe that donald trump would seek to use criminal enforcement and the fbi as leverage for his personal and political ends in a second term. george conway is back with us. >> that is a huge piece of this, that i think folks also need to focus on in the context of it is not just the election but what happens. what does, you know, february, march, april, next october look like in this country when you have a president, knowing donald trump as we all do, feel vindicated, to now do whatever it is he wants to do. because the supreme cour