back with me now are alyssa farah griffin and nick ackerman. i am going to start with you, i think, nick. you know, if this ends up going to the supreme court, i mean, do you think -- first of all, do you think it will? >> no. >> not a chance? >> no. i think this is so basic, donald trump has no proprietary interest in classified documents. there is no way he ever has the right to get this information or see it. i mean, that's really the underlying basis of this whole opinion. these are classified documents. and the court comes right out and says based on the affidavit that was submitted saying that both the criminal investigation and the civil matter, the intelligence investigation, looking at whether or not anything had been comp miedsed were so intertwined that the courts don't get involved in second guessing that kind of information. >> i want to get into what trump's lawyers have been saying because they raised sort of vague questions about whether the materials are actually classified or have been declassified. and the court basically cal

. >>> let's continue our conversation now with former watergate prosecutor nick ackerman. thank you for joining us on this friday. we have this new detailed list of inventory. what stands out to you? >> i think what really stands out to me is that there are 35 folders, empty folders, that have beeners on them that say classified documents that were in trump's office. i mean, you have to ask yourself did the government really get everything, are there other documents out there somewhere that we just don't know about? i mean, i think that that is probably the biggest concern at this point. of all those empty folders that had classified markings on them, most all of them were in donald trump's office at mar-a-lago. >> we know 27 documents marked classified were taken from his office alone. and again, more than 100 total documents in all of the materials recovered had the classified markings. beyond that, there were 11,000 documents and photographs also in addition to those classified documents found at mar-a-lago. how does the shear volume of documents recovered impact the ca

we're joined by nick ackerman, sidney gerberer. judge gertner, i want to start with you. based on what you heard, that this judge will appoint a special master? and when do you think we might hear? >> i have no idea. that's not the answer you want to hear. it sounds like she -- the arguments are overwhelming against appointing a special master. for one thing, trump waited three weeks almost to do this, and the review is already done. for another thing, he has no right to these documents, any of the documents, right? these are presidential records. there is no executive privilege. there's color bli a right to attorney/client privilege issues, which they have already identified. having said all that, it's clear that this judge wants to split the difference in some way. and she wants to appoint a special master. the problem is, how do you begin to disentangle the responsibilities of a special master so that you allow the intelligence community to deal with classified information, you allow attorney/client privileged information to go over what the doj has already gone over,

we are joined by nick ackerman. nick, let's start with the simple question.rge something that he was already pardoned for federally? >> because double jeopardy, the exception to it, double jeopardy means you can't be prosecuted for the same crime twice. the exception is the dual sovereignty rule which says the state can prosecute for the crimes it has and the federal government can prosecute for what crimes it has. up to a few years ago, new york state had by statute basically that, that you couldn't be prosecuted for two crimes. which is the same crime, which is why paul manafort was never successfully prosecuted, even though he was indicted by a grand jury. the legislature changed that law specifically in response to donald trump pardoning all of his cronies and buddies. so that is why at this point they're able to bring essentially an indictment based on the same facts in which he was pardoned in the federal case. >> understood. now that we go from that and the recent history to the case itself, mr. bannon is well known to be wealthy. we just showed the hi

former assistant special watergate prosecutor, nick ackerman, cnn political commentator scott jenningshis is a lot. i told you guys the break, really concentrating on which trump legal situation. >> you need a scorecard. >> let's talk about it, because of reporting but this is a very bad week of the for the president, what is your assessment? >> bad legally and politically, bad because this complaint from the ag's office is absolutely devastating, basically going to put them out of business, asking for $250 million, and he really has no defense because on every single one of those allegations, i'm convinced the ag got them to take the fifth amendment on each one of those, meaning that a truthful answer would tend to incriminate him, and on that basis, a judge or jury has no choice but to basically find him guilty on those charges. >> use other sources in the trump world. >> north carolina he had a rally for ted but for u.s. senate down there, using this as part of his speech to the crowd, the witchhunt, the rafters again, he has effectively done this since he started. >> that's lisa's

let's bring in special watergate prosecutor nick ackerman and errol lewis.trump legal issue i'm talking about. >> you need a scorecard. >> what did you say? >> you need a scorecard. >> you do need a scorecard. this is a very bad week for the president. what's your assessment of this week? >> terrible. it was bad legally and bad politically. bad because this complaint from the a.g.'s office is absolutely devastating. it's basically going to put him out of business. it's asking for $250 million and he really has no defense because on every single one of those allegations, i am convinced that the a.g. got him to take the fifth amendment on each one of those, meaning that a truthful answer would tend to incriminate him. and on that basis, a judge or jury has no choice but basically to find him guilty on those charges. >> you still have sources in trump world, right? >> well, tonight in north carolina he had a big rally for ted bud, the u.s. senate down there. he was using that for his speech for the crowds, witch hunts, they're after us again. >> that's what he'

. >> let's discuss with former watergate prosecutor nick ackerman and former federal prosecutor shanssume you think the justice department should appeal this decision? >> absolutely. i think not only is the decision legally flawed but i think it's a very dangerous decision. it gives this judge the power to meddle in a criminal investigation and logistically for the doj, it could really have the potential to not only slow down but derail their ability to prosecutor. >> nick, what do you think about that? would an appeal be successful, do you think? >> i think it's going to be hard because there is this kind of innate reaction to all of this by the judges. the same reaction that the magistrate judge had with respect to trying to release more information. that is, this is a very unusual situation. it involves a former president, never happened before. and they are kind of looking for a transparency or an ability to make it look like the process is fair. now, the magistrate judge applied the law properly. this judge did not. but i think it's going to be very difficult to appeal this to t

. >> nick ackerman, did the trump folks box themselves in? you know, maybe him saying, and there's people saying, oh, a president can declassify into whatever he wants. determining what's classified and what isn't is done by intelligence agencies were officials have the deep understanding of levels information. it's now in the hands of the judicial branch, which does not have any expertise. but, judge dearie seems to want to give that a lot of difference. but it seems to me that they may have box themselves in because there is no -- doesn't appear to be any official declassification process done by this particular president. >> it's more than boxing himself in. he shot himself in both feet right from the beginning. i mean, over a year ago, his former white house counsel, eric herschmann, told him to turn this stuff back in, or he's gonna be in trouble. at no time did donald trump ever say to him oh, i've declassify these documents. in january, he turns in five, 15 other boxes of documents that have classified information. at no time did he ev

john miller, and former assistant special watergate prosecutor, nick ackerman, and former federal prosecutord to have all of you on. john, i'll start with you. so the special master is telling the trump legal team he wants them to submit specifically a declaration of, quote, any specific items that were on the doj's list that they believe were not taken from mar-a-lago. so basically he is saying, his pr strategy that this is planted and making that claim, he is saying, prove it. >> the special master for judge dearie, is a special master, in this case, not a judge. but he's acting a lot like a judge. what he saying, is if we're gonna make these allegations, make them sworn, under oath, and bring proof, starting with, did the fbi plant the classified documents at mar-a-lago. he's trying to speed up the process, which, is put up or shut up. >> how do you think, nick, trump's lawyers will respond to? this >> i think they're gonna hide under the rocks. this whole thing is designed, basically, to get donald trump to come forward with a sworn statement, under oath, saying that yes, stuff was plant

former white house communication is here, nick ackerman, u.s.dny, and also scott jennings. they're all here right now. look, i'm going to do a little bit of a voir dire for you for a second because i've seen the voir dire form. however you want to pronounce it. the questions you want to ask a juror to figure out if they can be impartial. here are some of the questions that they were asked already trying to figure out how much they knew about something. let's put the screen up for everyone. one of them is whether you voted in 2020. one was how exposed you had been to the videos from january 6th. did you tune into the january 6th news coverage, including the day it actually happened? and also, have you been exposed to the hearings? essentially trying to get at how much do you know. what do you think about this particular trial? this is a very big one. it's pretty important to look at. not a very we will tested area of the law. >> this is a slam dunk for the government. >> really? >> yes. they've got three cooperating witnesses, which is absolutely

nick ackerman, thank you. >> coming up, the aftermath of hurricane ian is a huge test for florida governorderal aid after hurricane sandy hit new york and new jersey. stay with us. 80% of couples sleep too hot or too cold. because quality sleep is vital, the sleep number 360 smart bed is temperature balancing, so you both stay cool. our smart sleepers get 28 minutes more restful sleep per night. save 40% on the sleep number 360 special edition smart bed.now only $1499. only for a limited time. ("this little light of mine") - [narrator] in the world's poorest places, children with cleft conditions live in darkness and shame. they're shunned, outcast, living in pain. you can reach out and change the life of a suffering child right now. a surgery that takes as little as 45 minutes and your act of love can change a child's life forever. please call or visit operationsmile.org now. thousands of children are waiting. >>> this is a professional grade damage. >> what was your first reaction when you came out and saw this? >> thank you, jesus. that it didn't go -- because it could have fallen on my

we are joined now from former assistant special watergate prosecutor, nick ackerman, former federal judgeat harvard law school and conservative lawyer george conway. given everything we know so far, do you think and believe based on what you heard that this judge will appoint a special master, and what do you think we may hear? >> i have no idea. that's not the answer you want to hear. it sounds like -- the arguments are overwhelming against appointing a special master. for one thing, they would get two or three weeks to do this, and the review is already done. for another thing, he has no rights to the documents, and he at the documents. these are presidential records. there is no executive privilege. there is a right to attorney-client privilege issues, which they have already identified, having said all that, it is clear that this judge wants to split the difference in some way, and she wants to appoint a special master. the problem is, how do you begin to disentangle the responsibilities of a president -- special master so that you allow the intelligence community to deal with classif

right now, we have professor melissa murray from nyu law and former watergate prosecutor nick ackerman. professor, you know, we try to keep it clear around here. i mentioned that a lot of people are familiar with the idea that trump doesn't always tell the truth and that, at times, that's legal. what's different here, you know, you can hold this up this way or this way, it's really quite a voluminous case, is documenting the ways that she says lies were illegal. how strong is this new case? >> i think this is a really strong case going forward and it's almost 220 pages, and it details, in really granular detail, the degree to which the trump organization overinflated the value of almost all of its properties in its new york holdings in order to secure more favorable loan policies, more favorable loan terms and also to take advantage of tax breaks, for example, for conservation easements by being able to write off the difference between the alleged value of the property and what would be donated because they didn't recoup that by selling it because of the conservation easement. she's do