Latest Breaking News On - National security mary mccord - Page 1 : vimarsana.com
political arena. that's where all of trump's defenses seemed to be designed to really plan to really nail, because the legal analysis of what they're contending seems -- mary's word, pretty meh. i'm not going to play it. he said on fox. accusing president two things. number one some kind of effort to obstruct the january 6th count. just a mob descending on the capitol and the only thin pause in counting so seven contestant states could reaudit or recertify. never heard of anyone getting indicted for asking for an audit. trump was looking for the truth to find out exactly what happened in those seven contested states. that'scriminal. his own people said about known falsity and known illegality of the eastman -- this is pat
agitation on earth, too, in sort of right-wing political media circles already. andrew stick around. mary mccord thank you for starting us off on a day like today. we're really grateful. much more on today's news from washington and what we know about the january 6th investigation. reaction from two former members of congress is next, plus, of all trump's criminal indictment this could be the notice his extremist base. who he ma promised rett trat trat retribution for and to. all this after a quick break. don't go anywhere today. t go a. my active psoriatic arthritis can make me feel like i'm losing my rhythm. with skyrizi to treat my skin and joints, i'm getting into my groove.
already, which, we mentioned yet, still meeting right now at this very moment. just outside that d.c. courthouse where they are meeting members of the u.s. marshals responded meeting with other law enforcement officials outside of the federal courthouse. a looming third indictment of the ex-president for hisettes to overturn the 2020 election is where we begin today. joining us, former justice prosecutor, former senior member of robert mueller's special counsel investigation andrew weissmann and former general for national security mary mccord is here. you have both walked in jack smith's shoes. we can't talk to him. he's busy. but i wonder, andrew weissmann, with your muscle memory what these junctures are like in an investigation into an ex-president and people close to him, what is your best guess what's happening right now? >> the thing we definitely know
happens on the last day, teed up everything, something you're pretty sure you know that there will be what's called a true deal. and if that is what jack smith has done he's not really anticipating some problem today. >> so, mary, i wonder if you can take us inside what these days are like? and i just want to -- i think we all think we've heard all this before, and even through mar-a-lago we lived through some of this before. a target letter has been sent. trump acknowledged receipt being a target letter. trump also acknowledged the three crimes mentioned to be under scrutiny. we don't know if that's ultimately what he'll be charged with or more or less. there is also no dispute that a meeting happened today between jack smith's office and the lawyers. again, that was one of the last things that happened before jump was indicted by jack smith and his office for his role in the mishandling of classified
so you may just see if there is an indictment today or whether next week, that it's simply handed up to the magistrate judge and not under seal. just something the government then is able to have a press release or a press conference and make it public, and to mary's point, then the government is both doing what i think the law requires which would be not seeking something under seal when there's no risk of flight or security but also control the narrative. because they're the ones putting out the story. >> it's so interesting that what we see in cover as part of the trump circus also has ramifications in the legal arena where the stakes are even higher. i want to ask you, mary, what other reason the marshals would have been meeting with law enforcement? obviously, whether today ar next week planning goes into it, but
something that could -- you know, cause them to incur criminal liability in order to sort of please donald trump. because they've seen what happened. more than 1,000 people who followed donald trump's wishes on january 6th are now facing or have faced or have been convicted already of criminal charges. so notwithstanding i think a lot of people are probably deterred from engaging in violence, as law enforcement you have to prepare for the worst and be happily surprised at the best. in terms of fani willis, we've seen today security barricades looks like up around the courthouse there. so, you know, it wouldn't surprise me if at this point when timing is getting the way it is if there isn't some coordination, if nothing else between courthouses what are you doing, expecting, let's make sure we're in communication with each other. >> because, and i appreciate, mary, you know, raising this
and making sure i could see if he truthed it and there is a pattern of how it came out last time, but, mary, what you're suggesting that is less than ideal from the perspective of the u.s. department of justice. >> you know, certainly i would prefer if i'm the department to be the first one speaking about a case and speaking through the indictment. we've talked before about an indictment what we expect in this case just like we saw in mar-a-lago will not just be a bare bones indictment listing offenses a speaking indictment. one that explains the whole story, the facts that lead up to these charges, and particularly since we all expect these to include conspiracy charges, it will tell the story of the conspiracy. it there are other co-conspirators named at defendants they will, of course, named in that because the evidence will have to support the charges against them as well. even if there are additional conspirators not charged they will be named in the indictment
so meanwhile, he is telling his lawyers can't we just make them disappear? he is telling his staff go hide them. he is lying because he wanted to keep them. for two reasons. one, he is an insecure braggart, and two, i think he thought he could monetize them in some way, because at the end of the day, with trump, it's either about one thing, money or lying. >> mary mccord, let me good back to you for one moment. you worked in the national security division. so you are personally familiar with the frequency of prosecutions for this under the espionage act, of people high and low, some guy that's a national guardsman or whatever that goes in and gets stuff. reality winner, was trying to help our country. you could go on and on and on. if trump had given the documents back, do you think that he would have been indicted? >> no, i don't. that would have been more like the situation of mike pence and the national security division and the department of justice have recently sent a letter to his attorneys saying we are
on the stand? could you just use their prior statements as the equivalent of putting them on the stand? >> you mean cross-examination? >> yeah. >> i can't imagine he would, but if he ever took the stand, it would be a dream for anyone cross-examining him. he would have his direct examination and then is it true? and you would just pull up the videos of him, one after another after another. and it speaks for itself. >> okay, mary mccord, let me go to you on this. because this is trump's other defense. he has been using this a lot, and i think to people who don't know the law and aren't familiar with it, to them it probably sounds credible. here is president trump giving the presidential records act. >> i had every right to have these documents. the crucial legal precedent is laid out in the most important case ever on this subject known as the clinton socks case. in other words, whatever
defenses? a confession. >> one thing it's important for everyone to know those statements that you just played are admissible as admissions. regardless of whether donald trump takes the stand or not, those are admissions. so that is part of what he said is just straight out confession. it's not a defense. it's confession. when you are charged with the illegal retention, the possession, the illegal possession of documents, it is not a good idea to say hey, you want to know why i took these? because i could. that is not a defense to that charge. that is an admission to that charge. >> joining me now are former missouri senator and msnbc political analyst claire mccaskill, former acting assistant u.s. attorney general for national security mary mccord, and former assistant district attorney for manhattan, katherine christian. i'm going to start here at the