if you remember the case of sandy berger.t into the national archives, he literally shoved documents down into his crotch, in his backside, into his socks, and walked out with those documents. within every buddy in the media, every democrat that she was just sloppy, very sloppy as he shoved it down his pants. he was sloppy, he didn't mean to take them with him. and everybody bought that excuse. so this therein brings up a double standard issue. what are your thoughts? >> well definitely there is a double standard. we've seen so many instances of allegedly classified material being compromised. the key point that everybody is missing here is that donald trump was not at mar-a-lago, so there was no reason not to issue a subpoena. returnable tomorrow. so that there's no claim claim that trump could have destroyed anything. this should have been a subpoena, not a search warrant. if it is a search warrant, it has to have a high level of cause demonstrating that the evidence would have been destroyed. not only that, but under the l

, sandy berger went intowe the national archives, he literally shoved documents down into his on his in his backside into his socks and walked out with those documents. but then everybody inn the media, every democratedia, e was just sloppy, very sloppy as he shoved it down his pants, his sloppy. he didn't mean to take them with them and everybody bought that excuse. so thiss they're in brings up the double standard issue. >> what are your thoughts? well, definitely there is aef doublein standard. we've seen so many instances ofn allegedlyy classified material being a . the key point that everybody's missing here is that donaldha trump was not in marat lago. is so there was no reason not to issue a subpoena return bowl tomorrow so that there's no soclaim that trump could have destroyed anything. been aould have been subpoena, not a search warrant. if it a subpoena, not a searcht, warrant. if itt is a search warrant, it has to have a high level of cause demonstrating that the evidencece would have been destroyed. not only that, but under the law, if yo seize a safe, you don't go into

one former top aide for bill clinton named sandy berger, remember sandy the burglar? he tried to ended steal classified material about 9/11 right from the national archives. in other words, he went into the national archives, found the documents he was looking for, shove them down his pants on his backside into his socks, and walked out. and sandy berger was punished with a mere slap on the wrist, a misdemeanor, fine. everyone in the media mob, they said he was being sloppy, sloppy, sloppy. he didn't mean to take them when he threw it right down his crotch, he had no idea that was classified material that made its way into his underwear. former president of the united states get the predawn raid. does any of this seem normal to you? on top of three years of russia conspiracy, lies, hoaxes, misinformation, propaganda and an abuse of power and corruption like we've never seen in history before. on twitter, house leader mccarthy told merrick garland to preserve your documents and clear your calendar for an investigation into the weaponization of the department of justice

"special report" is up next. >> bret: if i say sandy berger do you get upset, dana?: we will see you. >> bret: good evening, welcome to washington, i'm bret baier, breaking tonight three major stories to tell you about. president biden touting new numbers showing a very slight decline in the run away inflation most americans have seen big increases at the grocery store cash register. we will look into that. we are learning dramatic new information about a plot to aas sin nate not only john bolton but

and like sandy berger. that's the appearance of justice. not only must justice be done, it must seem to be done. and it's not being seem to be done. the affidavit may respond, may answer all these questions, maybe it will answer them satisfactorily. maybe not. we have the right to know. >> sean: gregg, we have a magistrate that is a trump hater, obama lover, and even recused himself in a previous case fairly recent as it relates to donald trump. then we have the issue of the affidavit. i want to get your thoughts on that end, you know, as a look at what they're trying to do here, you know, why won't they release the surveillance video that they wanted to have shut off? why would the fbi want that shut off? i thought for years we wanted body cams on cops and we wanted -- cams on cops so that it kept everybody honest. why would they not -- why would they be demanding that surveillance cameras at mar-a-lago be shut down? and thank god they didn't do it. >> because their position is "we have a government, trust us." you know, merrick garland in

have not been applied consistently by the justice department whether or not we're talking about sandy berger biden, hillary clinton or donald trump, and that's why specificity is necessary. howard: let me get liz in here. will there be so many redactions that it'll look like swiss cheese, and journalists will have to make their case based on a sense of here and there? >> yeah. well, possibly. but, let me just be clear, there is actually a very crystal clear reason that if you look at the department of justice and hair movement into mar-a-lago, why they went in there, and that is simply that any documents that have been generated by, read by, touched by a sitting president that has another with his presidential -- that has to do with his presidential rules and what he has to be doing, as far as that is concerned, those are to be preserved and safeguarded. that is really what's at the a heart of this warrant. and will is right, it does not matter, it is totally irrelevant whether these documents were classified because none of the three criminal laws that were cited as a predicate for descendi

sandy berger took the documents and stuck them in his socks and elsewhere. he was doing something wrong. petraeus lied because he knew it was wrong. the question here is, there's conversation and interaction between the national or kais and trump camp. what did he say and what did he do? so obviously he didn't give everything back because the archives are saying, we want our documents bag. it may well be at the end of the day this case is about that. give us our documents back. they're important to national security. we're taking them back. but i may be more than that, because he lied about it or did something urn the table, not wanting people to see what he was doing. given his history, if it's true about ripping up documents and so forth, the national archive had a real concern about integrity and security of the documents. they got them. the question is, under what circumstances were they taken? under what circumstances were they kept? did he lie about it? that may be where the crime is. you have the seizure, and you have a lot more. we don't know the fac

army general david petraeus, and former national security advisor sandy berger neither faced prison time our experts agreed the decision to charge comes down to the question of intent >> basically did this cross the line from the situation of carelessness to one of criminal intent? >> reporter: this investigation differs from the one concerning hillary clinton's e-mails, which the justice department identified as careless. while former nsa contractor reality winner who had just one classified document was sentenced with prison time because she intentionally leaked the information to a news outlet, according to the justice department is there any justifiable reason why former president trump would have classified top secret documents in his possession still? >> it's hard for me to understand a legitimate national security reason why the former president should have documents he appears to have been holding at mar-a-lago it poses a grave danger to the national security of america to reveal those documents. that's why they're classified at that level, so it's very serious. >> maura joins us

. >> bill: tom, if you have material in your possession that belongs to the government, sandy bergerd stuffing it in his sofjts he was given probation and suspect pended for three years but got his top secret clearance returned to him. the question would be have you seen a government official go to jail or be punished more severely than sandy berger was at any level? >> bill, i'm not aware of anything like that. you are right. we have examples like this. they are pretty egregious. sandy berger stuffing 9/11 materials into his socks and david petraeus sharing materials with someone not authorized to see it. the justice department will prosecute but very rare they would crack down with prison sentences or things like that. i don't want to downplay any violation of federal law but there are some federal laws that are enforced more strictly and in a more punitive manner than other laws. >> dana: what about the idea of the warrant and should people be allowed -- should we the public be allowed to see the warrant? i don't think that the president should have to do that, right? the burden i

thinkri like merrick garland if alle we're talking about is what hillary clinton did and when sandy berger did even if in the end it turns out there were some dramatic materials within the classification, i don't think that's going to result ins an indictment. it has to t be a slam dunk reall quick. i'm should they handle q the surveillance video real quick? i know i do. i think that they should handle if you're vaillant's over everything, you don't hide anything. okay, let's ask you, will they indict him? greg jarrett.he and they're demandingyy the surveillance video of the trump people. turn it over real quick. it would be foolish to indict him based on the statutes, i the three statutes cited in the warrant. all of them requiredrrant, deliberation. they use language like knowing and willful and intentional. " you can'tin prove that in a cass like that, unlikee a do, can you prove it in a disloyal court that may be voted 5%% for donalp trump, yet you could prove christmas curse in july in a dc court and but it wouldn't holds, up on appeal. and yes, they absolutely shouldd turn over surve

if they go after donald trump for this, but they didn't go after sandy berger or hillary clinton, what fairness is there in our system? that is something that the doj has to wrestle with. >> if i can jump in, that's an excellent point, a new piece of information that since we've been on the air that is unusual. there's some reports that the cases for the search warrant is the espionage act. we had been focusing on a different act, which is the one about mishandling of documents that can get you disqualified from office. it looks like that they might be using a different statute than going after hillary clinton. in 2701, the standard is willful, which i don't think they'll show it was willful. in a lot of the espionage act, you have to show that it hurts the u.s. or benefits a foreign nation. i'm not sure how that happens with that in his basement. they have real legal problems. this is not what they went looking for in the first place. they went looking for something else and found this and trying to use to it cover their tracts. >> martha: thank you both. thanks, mick mulvaney and ari

talk about sandy berger destroyed some of them, a misdemeanor.knows that hillary clinton story. what to make of it so far as we look at the context in the fbi's history with trump? >> yes, i think there are couple of issues. one is the double standard that you mention. certain politicians seems to get a pass when they are accused of this. there's also the proportionality aspect of it. which you just touched on. i don't understand i don't understand why the department of justice has gone after this especially after the fact there so many other things they appear to be investigating donald trump four. spent will talk more about that in a moment. but first, we've got to take a quick break. the democrats new tax and spend a bill set to beef up the irs for a new job posting from the agencies blowing up the internet and raising serious concerns. we will show you why i have moderate to severe ulcerative colitis. so i'm taking zeposia, a once-daily pill. because i won't let uc stop me from being me. zeposia can help people with uc achieve and maintain re

sandy berger, who was president clinton's national security advisor, literally stuffed up documents into his socks and pants. stole them from the national archives and you got a misdemeanor prosecution. well, thank you steve. steve gill, radio host and political commentator. appreciate you and that's are up for this hour, is most pressing new stories from around the world for more video content. check us out on rumble and odyssey and be sure to also follow up on twitter and instagram. see next i'm at the top of the hour. ah ah, ah a welcome back to will the party with and frame in for president of the jerusalem institute for strategic studies. professor in bar, one of the proposed gold rush and military operation in your praise, the so called cation and i have to say that when i 1st heard this term, it sounded very odd and artificial. i think it was the russian speakers a couple of weeks to even learn how to pronounce it without stumbling. having said that, do you think nasa is an old fashion has ever been a problem in more than day ukraine? a modern day will remember who i did was there

cesspool that continues to infect the fb shawn sad /* /* >> what about the clinton standard, the sandy berger versus the trump standard. hillary clinton has top secret material on servers and destroyed 33,000 e-mails and came up with phony dossier and dissem nated it and the fbi used it, spying on president donald trump and president donald trump. >> let's not forget rosenstein, who worked for the fbi has his fisa warrant overturned because it is based on bs. democrats are treated differently than republicans. for anybody who decides to have a secret server like hillary clinton and smash her phone, a double standard that has to stop or our country is in big trouble. >> this is serious, we'll follow it everyday, thank you. tonight joe biden used his remarks in pennsylvania to preview prime time address that no one will be watching thurthursday vicious attacks on republicans, here is what he said earlier today in pennsylvania. >> let me say this to maga republican friends in congress, don't tell me to support law enforcement if you won't condemn what happened on the 6th. for god's sake, whose s

sandy berger, i remember his name. he tried to escape with classified information.e was handed a life sentence. i heard on television he just got his law license back. he didn't get punished that severely. roger stone, clearly for sensationalism. armed people there. muller calls cnn. peter navarro arrested at the airport. this is intimidation. i think people have to wake up and see incrementally this government is moving in a direction where it is starting to use force, like this capo tactics. to intimidate and coerce the average american so they won't object. it caller: good morning. the main thing i called about was to ask you to make sure these people stay on topic we are going to be hearing about what hillary clinton did it, what barack obama did. they might go back to ulysses s grant. they don't stay on topic. they don't watch the news. they must not watch the news. some of the stuff they are talking about has already been in the news. it's already been proven to be wrong and they are still saying it. then they talk too long. bye-bye. host: next up is rad in ke

here's what you had to say at the time about sandy berger., because i'm an old justice department guy, and i admire the justice department greatly, but it's inexplicable the way this case was handled. >> how did they handle it? >> he ends up getting the sweet heart deal of all time. >> this is a felony in your mind? >> beyond question and probably more than one. david: berger got a sweetheart deal and hillary clinton got off and what do you make about unequal justice? >> the unequal justice is what has people riled up. i appreciate that's a good looking couple of young guys there. there. david: well, you for one. you haven't aged. >> but look, what has people really angry in the country, i think, is the two-tiered justice system we had and for the attorney general to look them in the eye yesterday and say on my watch, we do justice without fear or favor and completely unbiased. we treat everyone the same. it's laughable. david: it is. >> it's a joke. it's not even -- we would spend the whole day itemizing how they don't do that and i think he

the sandy berger case where you had the former national security advisor who removed material in his socks and clearly intentional. he dropped it at a spot where he could recover it later and berger didn't serve any jail time or have clearance permanently removed. he was allowed to plead to a misdemeanor. it is a disconnect to see this type of heavy-handed raid occurring. there is finally the question of why? the trump family insists that it has said they could go through boxes, go through material upon request. somebody is obviously lying here. hard to believe a judge signed off on this if the f.b.i. said we can go in there with a subpoena with no problem. the assumption is there was a suggestion that documents could be destroyed unless the raid was allowed to go forward. >> bill: professor, a couple of things here. in january the national archives retrieved 15 boxes of material from mr. trump, and in trump's statement last night he talked about the cooperation that he was affording law enforcement. we are trying to put one and two together here, right? roe khanna, democrat from cal

the sandy berger one for me, you've got the national security advisor go to the archives and do someuments, and ends up with probation and a fine. his house was never rated and may be because he cooperated, i don't know. the other thing -- let me make two other points. let's say there is a nuclear document. let me make two points. i have fbi clearance, you probably did too. you go to an fbi briefing, there is not a lot of paperwork passed out. if it is, it's collected and everybody takes it back. i don't know how you would even have an fbi document to put in a box. i don't understand that. also, if it's something to do with nuclear stuff, why would that be declassified? it's a letter that says, hey, great time. don't do that little rocket man. if you do it, i'll stop calling you that. i understand classifying that is fine, but that she is the other thing, we may never know. last point i'll make is the presidential record came in after watergate. then we've got an invention called email and the internet. we have tens of thousand documents, and now we've got tens of millions of documen

sandy berger, the 9/11 commission was trying to figure out what we knew about al qaeda before 9/11 2uck it down his pants and socks and hid it in a building and picked it up later. >> dana: the democrats were trying to say it was george w. bush alone that millsed this and didn't want to have anyone say the clintons were dealing with the fact that bin laden was trying to plot and plan over time. i'm not blaming one person. but that was what the political conversation was the left was coming toward george w. bush. >> bill: donald trump is back in new york city today. former president arrived last night a day after the f.b.i. raided his mar-a-lago estate in florida. back and forth between the city and his golf club in bedminster, new jersey. he faces questions from new york prosecutors today into the trump organization as oh business. david lee miller is watching it today. good morning, david lee. >> good morning, bill. another day, another legal challenge for former president donald trump. a little more than one hour ago mr. trump waved to the media as he left trump tower and headed to

. >> along those lines, absolutely know that you can listen to you have people like sandy berger, a formerional security advisor was fun to have taken classified documents home hidden in his socks and he was not prosecuted. you also have record cases like james comey was accused of taking fbi material when he left the fbi. the history has been not to prosecute those cases. >> todd: jonathan, how many raids did you conduct on behalf of the glorified librarian that the national archive when you were an fbi agent? >> it was all the time. now, to be honest with you, that happened about as much as white supremacy arrest. it never occurs. those cases are unheard of at white supremacy, except in present pretty much because this is the thing is you. i was questioning where there is authority would come from for the fbi to get involved to the national archives can actually reach out to the fbi and the doj to do this, but you have to understand something to the fbi cannot tell the doj what they want to go after. they can recommend it, but the doj has to approve it. on the flip side, the doj can tell

. >> it is beyond the smear, sandy berger comes to mind, nothing happened to him.the e-mails and hunter biden that cannot be denied or ignored this is fundamentally outraged. my head is exploding this is an abuse of federal government. d.o.j., fbi, the irs, 87000 agents that are going to be after to you, we are conservative the david webb small business owners, you name it you've a difference of opinion and they are making us the enemy they are pressing down on us. charles: i appreciate both of you, thank you both very much, i appreciate it. back the markets, bank of america estimated 1% hit to the s&p just from the tax proposal. they're going to be other hits as well. the small-cap rally is amazing. more steam against large caps should you be taping this? we got what you need to know next. ♪ ♪ i grew up an athlete, i rode horses... i really do take care of myself. i try to stay in shape. that's really important, especially as you age. i noticed after kids that my body totally changed. i started noticing a little pudge. so i took action! coolsculpting targets, free

anybody who -- any contractor, republican, democrat, officials of the democratic -- sandy berger who was bill clinton's national security advisor, he tried to walk off with some documents and got himself in a whole heap of trouble for it. >> that's what we need. we need that historical context right now. i'm sorry to interrupt. go ahead? i was just going to say it doesn't have a party attached to it and thest the offense that determines the consequence. >> it's important to hear that because maga media is set on the narrative. more importantly, there's a double standard, they're saying republicans are treated harshly and democrats get off. let me show you 15 seconds worth and i want to hear your reaction. >> they've declared war on us, and now it's game on. >> this is dangerous, it's scary. >> the fbi is a disgrace. >> it's a clear and gross abuse of power. >> we're starting to see what a permanent national split looks like. >> what do you want those maga media stars to know, john? >> i think they seem to not want to appreciate that the fbi and other federal law enforcement as well a

the espionage act, 18 usc 793 came up with hillary clinton and sandy berger that went into the national archives, shoved them in his socks and walk out with them and got a slap on the wrist. hillary clinton, even james comey admitted that in fact she had top secret classified information on a server that was hacked by foreign entities, but said yeah, even though we acknowledge the law was broken, no prosecutor would prosecute. now we have what? do we have equal justice or not in this country, professor? >> we have the attorney general saying that equality is the essence of the justice department. but then never explaining why these espionage statutes are used now when they were never used against berger and certainly not against clinton. the question is, do we really have equality or do we have a double standard of justice. seems like garland says we have equality, his actions speak louder than words. going after president trump, who i voted against, i'm a liberal democrat, not a republican. i want to have the right to vote for him or against him when he runs against. i don't went a bur

officials and former government officials who did not safely secure those documents, i'm thinking of sandy berger the national security adviser in the clinton administration, who was fined and placed on probation for mishandling documents. that he had -- was researching of his own documents after he left office. and again, it's not just enough to put them in a file folder and put a lock out the door. these governments even inside a government office, have the tightest, special security. >> norm, it strikes me is something you and i were having a similar conversation about the idea of this not -- there have been a prosecution, there is been the enforcement of laws like this. it's been enhanced by the way, under the trump administration, -- with respect to classified documents more broadly. i wanna play this clip from merrick garland the attorney general from earlier today. here's what he had to say. >> the department filed a motion, and made public the warrant and receipt, in light of the former presidents public confirmation of the search, the surrounding circumstances, and the substantial public

that is why the fed never raided the home of sandy berger who literally shoved classified documents inks. or hillary clinton's home, or -- who shared military intel with his lover. no raid bear "the wall street journal" by the way is now claiming the fed had this raid had something to do with cocktail napkins. an notes from kim jong un. right. everyone knows what this was about. finding something, anything they can use to keep donald trump from running for president. now here's the interesting question. why? well, he's a threat to the entrenched, unelected power in washington. the biggest threat ever faced. from the beginning, donald trump is an outsider but not just an outsider, and outside of the declared war on the military-industrial complex. he stopped buying their weapons and sending them to ukraine, so they impeach trap. as axios reported two weeks ago, donald trump planned to get the federal bureaucracy if he is reelected in 2024, taking a butcher knife to the administrative state. that means eliminating career government employees installed by barack obama. and nothing terrifi

there was no raid of sandy berger's place.on when she took documents on her server. this is so out of context for the charge and you're supposed to use the least intense intrusive means necessary in order to get those, that information. clearly that was not the case with this raid, was it? >> i'm afraid these days with the fbi if it was mixture of incompetence because this was overkill or some kind of a malevolence they're targeting president trump because of january 6, and other investigations and they're using this as some kind of pretext. they might have had a valid search warrant. we'll find out. when hopefully the documents will be unsealed by the judge here but we don't know until we see the affidavits that were filed, all the secret information that went behind the warrant. once we see that, do they really have probable cause? is it really worth this unprecedented move of searching instead of reaching an agreement to get these kind of document the. david: john, we're running out of time, america's faith in our judicial

as sandy berger had one explanation for why he stole documents, general petraeus had another.hey didn't get seriously punished, but it did certainly affect their career. petraeus today would probably be presidential timber, if not for that mistake. the why, i don't think is the key. it's what in fact was done and with wet attitude and with what's mental state or criminal intent if necessary if you're going to go into that kind of focus on this problem. >> you know, in any event, john, 3:00 tomorrow, is frankly, just around the corner in the grand scheme of things. i do wonder when they will decide to do. do you think they're going to, if your trump's team, do you think they're going to try and keep this quiet? in the sense of not public? >> well, his standard operating procedure as was mentioned in the last segment, is delay, delay, delay. i think that's the norm. i think he will probably try to fight it. fight with the magistrate judge. then take it to the district court, get the district court judge decide with him, fail there. go to the court of appeals, taken to the suprem

. >> bret: if i say sandy berger do you get upset, dana? >> dana: i can be available for the panel. i will make myself available. >> bret: we will see you. >> bret: good evening, welcome to washington, i'm bret baier, breaking tonight three major stories to tell you about. president biden touting new numbers showing a very slight decline in the run away inflation most americans have seen big increases at the grocery store cash register. we will look into that. we are learning dramatic new information about a plot to aas sin nate not only john bolton but former secretary of state mike pompeo and our top story outrage grows here in washington and throughout the country over the fbi's surprise raise on former president trump's compound, mar-a-lago in florida. republicans now calling for resignations of the attorney general and the fbi director. meanwhile, the silence is deafening from the men in charge. and the white house continues to deny any knowledge beforehand. but, we still don't have specific details from the search warrant there either from the doj or the trump team. we have fo

another was sandy berger. he put a, he literally put documents in his socks. not sure if i'm remembering this correctly, but from a presidential archive for some, i think a book he was working on. again, he pled to misdemeanors. there was a state department official who received some jail time. that person had large numbers of files they kept in their basements. but what's so unusual is that no president has done anything even approaching this since richard nixon and it was the reason this act was enforced was that nixon you know refused to turn over the tapes from the oval office and other records and he lost decisively in the supreme court. 7-2 decisions. so that's what's so extraordinary about this whole unprecedented situation. >> yeah, i mean, there's nothing to look back on and say well, look, this is what former president did or didn't do related somewhat to this, but there is no case where a former president has done something in any way similar to this as far as you know, mishandling sensitive secrets. >> that's absolutely correct. and it's charged be

types of investigations, obviously we can talk hillary clinton, no search warrant was executed, sandy berger, general pataeus. search warrants were not executed. the department of justice policy is the least intrusive means. i want to understand the negotiations leading up to this. 18 months since the president had left office. two months since in june when they allegedly last met on this topic. why a search warrant now? all the facts that i have that are publicly available suggest actually that the department of justice should have negotiated and should have done another subpoena and had other options. if i was attorney general i think the decision to raid a former president's home is the most grave decision that could be made. i just don't see the circumstances that require this step from a law enforcement perspective. >> harris: i will hit this quickly and move on. if nobody took into account that there might be things that had attorney/client privilege, it just seems sloppy. your quick reaction and we'll move on. >> the team wasn't equipped. f.b.i. agents can't tell the difference betwee

i'm thinking of sandy berger, the national security adviser in the clinton administration who was fined and placed on probation for mishandling documents that he was researching of his own documents after he left office and again, it's not just enough to put them in a file folder and put a lock on the door. even inside a government office these are kept in the tightest special security. >> norm, you and i were having a conservation about there has been the prosecution and the enforcement of laws like this. it's been enhanced by the way under the trump administration with respect to classified documents more broadly, but i want everyone to hear this because i want to may this clip from merrick garland, the attorney general, from earlier today. >> the department filed the motion to make public the warrant and receipt in light of the former president's public confirmation of the search, the surrounding circumstances and the substantial public interest in this matter. >> okay. so if these documents are released and we'll know more about this tomorrow at 3 p.m., what could they reveal? how m

former clinton national security adviser sandy berger was charged with a misdemeanor, find and lost hisor removing documents. obviously, none of these cases rise to the level of ex-president. let us hope and assume that the fbi wouldn't raid an ex-president's house for potential misdemeanor. it's not like trump claims not to know that the national records need to be archived. not only because two chiefs of staff told trump that he needed to preserve records but that trump seems to know a lot about that law when he railed against hillary clinton. >> people have nothing to hide, don't bleep, nobody's heard of it, or destroy evidence to be archived under federal law. >> but hypocrisy and irony are not the main event here, right? the real question is on what grounds the fbi was granted a warrant to search mar-a-lago. and why the presidential act by the ex-president are really the focus. there's also the deeper work here. even beyond the law. the defense of democracy that comes from preserving history and not destroying it. primary records are the life blood of history like the one that davi

sandy berger, the national security adviser, also he didn't wine behind bars, but he lost his law license. and everybody remembers david petraeus, who barely escaped a conviction. so, these are serious crimes. and it doesn't matter whether the documents or classified or not. and that's something to remember. >> you just reminding us of how old we all are, oh wait a minute, you are taking me back. can we talk about allen weisselberg, the former cfo of the trump organization? he pleaded guilty today, 15 year tax scheme where he benefited. the trump organization benefited as well. he can testify against the trump org if it goes to trial, should go to trial this fall. look at that reveal, michael? >> i'm afraid it might not reveal very much. because, from what i understand, they're dealing primarily with what weisselberg was engaged with, that was about one point $5 million estimated value of wrongdoing. nor might know, as an attorney, better than me what's possible. but i keep thinking about the general motors case, where this was a corporation that was responsible for 148 deaths over ten ye

let's not forget sandy berger and all of these -- this whole thing -- you and i jesse were talking abouts the night that it unfolded. it is just a continuation of that 2016 tantrum. furthermore, i think it just goes to show how far democrats will go in trying to target their opposition and drying to hang on to power and it's pretty terrifying that they don't care about running through whatever remaining faith that americans have in these institutions running it down to the ground in order to achieve what they want. it's frankly terrifying. and i have to add quickly to this. i get really rankelled when i see other republicans take the hyperbole of this from the press and repeat it as though it is fact. i have seen enough republicans come out and try to conflate criticism of the fbi and the hiding and accommodation of all of these actions and then act as though that's the same thing as demanding to defund the police. these republicans', we all know exactly who they are and i'm tired of hearing it. >> jesse: are you serious? well, i haven't heard that one. but now that i have, i'm just as a

there have been high profile exceptions like general petraeus, and sandy berger. in most instances it conducts a spill investigation to determine where the materials are. it's part of that investigation the fbi agents determine whether any sensitive national security information has been revealed so the intelligence community can take countermeasures to protect sources and methods. betsy, is your sense on the basis of what you know and your reporting in this period that this is a spill investigation, or is this distinctly not a spill investigation? >> i wouldn't be able to speculate about whether this fits into one or the other categories, but there's no question that it's not necessarily a binary, and even if the justice department, one would certainly assume and hope is trying to figure out the extent to which potentially mishandled classified information could have been inadvertently or deliberately shared with people who shouldn't have been able to see it, that wouldn't preclude doj from simultaneously looking at the possibility of law breaking in association

you go back to sandy berger, national security advisor who was busted putting documents into his pants and his socks and he got a misdemeanor. after that his security clearance was pulled but he got it back three years later. so, in the big picture, how does that compare. then you look more recently, hillary clinton and a lot of people point to the classified information on the personal email at her home, the hammered and destroyed blackberries in that system. i think that there are just -- there are two sides to look at this. we have to fill in the facts we know and so far there are so many facts that we don't know. >> mike: and martha, the justice department and the fbi say they steer clear of politics but we are less than 90 days from midterm elections, that would decide the balance of power in congress and so to think this we are political-free, apolitical, particularly in this town, washington, d.c., would seem naive. >> martha: sure would, mike, and the american people have been conditioned to watch these situations and to hear in some situations you are too close to an election

sandy berger stole documents from the national archives, stuffed it in his pants, they didn't raid his house. two cia directors, john deutsch and dave petraeus were caught with documents in their homes, they didn't get raided. the fbi james james comey took documents to his house and leaked it. they didn't raid him. democrats can get away with murder because their families have been controlling d.c. for decades. but if you challenge them like trump did, you're done. never knock down the door of their own. trump promised to drain the swamp gets raided. the left celebrating like this is the best sex they ever had. watch. >> this has never been done before in the history of this country. he would not have authorized it unless they believed they had significant evidence that a crime had been committed. >> this is a night where you are going to remember where you were. >> this is such an historic day. >> it's not kind of information you could see why lisa, and merrick garland would take swift action. that is all sort of the say good news. >> jesse: these are bloodthirsty savages want to see

was talking about how the articles -- classified documents have been handled in the past and how sandy bergers was handled as a misdemeanor. he lost his security clearance and then he got it back three years later. how the hillary clinton information was handled. i mentioned president obama who went through the process and the documents all were transferred but it hasn't posted online. the president's my point at that is to say presidents have a broad discretion about what is declassified. we don't have the details of this process. >> that's right. as guy was saying, there is so much we don't know. and we won't know -- let's say the search warrant and the will list of things that they got do -- are unsealed, maybe as early as friday afternoon or some time next week, we will know more then. we won't know everything. but we will know something. at the moment all we have is the chattering class talking to each other. if we knew a little more we would be in a better position to say they were forced to take this extraordinary action or they overreached. i think it is very hard to draw any conclusi

against any party, anybody who, any contractor, republican, democrat, officials of the democratic, sandy berger was bill clinton's national security counsel advisor he tried to walk off with some documents and he got himself in a whole heap of trouble for it. liz: but he didn't -- one name is missing there, hans. hillary clinton. were they tough on hillary clinton? >> that's right. you know, they keep missing her. all the other officials they're talking about were not former president. you've got to keep in mind that a president has the ability to declassify any documents which other officials do not have. that is a key issue. also since chuck grassley was there, keep in mind, chuck grassley only recently revealed that fbi, fbi whistle-blowers told him about partisan decision-making in the fbi offices in washington. liz: to block the hunter biden probe as disinformation. congressman issa, hans von spakovsky, thanks for joining us. >> thank you, liz. s. liz: same here. congress' own score coopers, the cbo contradicting the white house and democrat lawmakers finding that the democrats doubling th

as has been documented, sandy berger and some others have been in a similar situation.nt took documents out of the white house that he shouldn't have taken out of the white house. the fbi had to get them back. they've spent a couple years trying to do that which led to this. the most remarkable thing is the way the republican party has reacted to this, vilifying the fbi for doing their job. that's the most alarming aspect of this to me. >> what concerns you the most about the reports of highly classified information was found there? >> well, the biggest thing is that the president of the united states apparently has no respect whatsoever for the basic norms of protecting sensitive information. if this is the way president trump conducted his presidency, what else got out there. this is basic stuff. mostly what we have to deal with when we have classified briefings is members talking to a reporter or saying something they know is classified. former president trump certainly doesn't seem to have any respect of classification. the other thing which we won't know until -- w

well, that can be a misdemeanor like it was for sandy berger, right, former national security advisoro, does it matter what they believe might be in that drawer, or is it just sort of any information, because, as a former president, this belongs to the american people? it does not belong to you. and that's where the political distinction, i think, comes in. because if, in the end, it's just a matter of a couple of pieces of paper, love notes from so-and-so or whatever, kim jong un or whatever, is that enough to warrant a search warrant? how many more conversations need to be had between june and yesterday? >> well, i think if i'm answering that, the fact that -- the fact that there's classified information there is a game changer. there's been a lot of talk about presidential records and the presidential records act and whether or not that's -- it is a rather toothless statute. that's not the case with classified information. possessing classified information carries real criminal penalties, and gloria, what amusing me in the political context, what no republican is mentioning right n

sandy berger also part of the clinton administration, his home was never raided and he stole classifiedntable on the issues. that's part of the reason to believe people are so angry about what happened the other night. >> griff: congresswoman, people are going to start getting angry if they start getting more audits. the reduction act. 80 billion to beef up the irs which could add a lot more irs agents who will likely go after lower and middle income people more than millionaires. >> right. 87,000 agents. the third infantry division is about 21,000 soldiers. we are talking about four infantry divisions of irs agents that are armed that are spying on your venmo, your bank account. they say they are not going to go after those making less than 400,000 a year. we have been told a lot by the biden administration that just hasn't been true over the years. and people are really angry about this. if they were hiring them to get their refunds faster, i think we would all be cheering for joy. because there is a huge backlog at the irs. i get calls every single day about it but, instead, they are

but if you wanted to ask if, took a top secret document with you, and said something to sandy berger, and walked out with documents, you would be in a totally different situation. you've been a world of legal hurt. >> got into a skiff -- >> i agree. >> if someone in your employ, where does the bucks talk? >> someone in your employ, where the buck stops? >> i don't play with anybody. >> somebody in your employ. >> when, in, when -- >> the buck stops with who. >> whoever you can show, knew it was in those documents -- >> elie, elie. >> i do think the big difference is that this time around donald trump is the former president. and we are talking don about how he is managed to -- >> i think a big difference is this time around is donald trump is a former president. so, when you talk about how, again and again, he has managed to evade the judicial system, a lot of the stuff was stuff that was happening when he was a sitting president. when he had protections. when he had the ability to have all these documents, to see all these documents, to, you know, how these documents in his possessio

. >> that's more like sandy berger. >> yeah, he took one piece of paper and stuffed it in his sock. about maybe two dozen boxes, who knows, of materials, of the highest sensitivity. these are things that the president of the united states received. okay, this is about the most sensitive of sensitive information that you can imagine. and he viewed them because he is the world's ultimate narcissist, as his property. and he thought he could take them and they blocbelonged to h just like his generals at the pentagon belonged to him. it all belongs to him and some loser nerd librarian wants to take that away from him. you can see how this happened. and, you know, this could be the thing that really takes him down. >> all right. george, thank you so much. great to talk to you. >>> next, from shredding to ripping to even reportedly flushing. a look at how trump does treat documents he doesn't want anyone to see. his document destruction. new details about the alleged iranian plot to kill top u.s. officials, including john bolton and mike pompeo. we are learning there are other top official

enforcement of the intelligence laws which have been used against many senior officials, democrats like sandy berger and in the clinton administration and general petraeus and what do you see as the national security risk here if any based on the new information we have. i'm looking to pick it back up. based on the new information we have in this rather remarkable list. >> well, i think that what draws my attention, more than anything else are the statutes that are at play here. including the espionage act and that the portion of the espionage act related to defense information. and when you mix the classification ts/sci and the words defense information, that raises a big question. because members of committee, intelligence committee such as myself and others, we deal with those ts/sci documents but there are people looking over our shoulders as we review these documents an never have we taken those documents out of a secure facility. in fact they keep an inventory to make sure that every single document remains in the possession of the folks who are the custodians in this secure facility. >> would

as sandy berger had one explanation for why he stole documents, general petraeus had another, and, you know, they didn't get seriously punished but it did certainly affect their careers. i mean, petraeus today would probably be presidential timber f but for that mistake. the why i don't think is the key. it's what, in fact, was done with what attitude and what mental state or criminal intent, if necessary, if you are going to go into that kind of focus on this problem. >> you know, in any event, john, 3:00 tomorrow is, frankly, just around the corner in the grand scheme of things. if you are trump's team, do you think they will try to keep this quiet in the sense of not public? >> well, his standard operating procedure, was mentioned again in the last segment, is delay, delay, delay, and i hadthink th the norm. i think he will probably fight it with the magistrate judge, then take it to the district court, get the district judge to side with him, fail there, go to the court of appeals, take it to the supreme court if the supreme court -- i can't believe they would take this case. i mea