reimagining public education. tonight, special counsel jack smith and his team have been steaming along and their new federal prosecution of former president donald trump with new wrangling tonight in the last few minutes over a potential protective order concerning what trump will be allowed to publicize when it comes to evidence from this case. they are apparently steaming
potentially by fulton county, georgia. >> it is about the indictment not about the fairness or if he will get help. i think waiting long enough to have a press cycle passed to have her own georgia moment. >> julie: the latest round of legal wrangling and some new drum around these cases. we have tom diprete up next. even minimum payments are tough. it's too much and it's time to hit back. with a newday 100 va loan, you can borrow up to 100% of your home's value to pay off those high rate credit cards and other debt. and you can save $500 a month. that's $6,000 a year. >> woman: why did we choose safelite? we were loading our suv when... crack!
dead right. think about that. >> yeah. >> shannon bream, next step in the legal process. will his team make a motion to, what? >> well, august it'll is the next hearing so this judge is not wasting time. they want to move this thing forward as far as dc case is concerned but there's so many pretrial motions and i think venue will come up and going to try and mar-a-lago case because there's classified documents and so many things involve there had, you've got to vet before going to a jury. there's a lot of pretrial wrangling that'll happen in that as well. >> dana: what about georgia? shannon: georgia we wait because we're in a two week window from the special grand jury. that'll come. there's time. shannon: if there's a mug shot in california. >> greg: the most profitable t-shirt ever made.
with one thing. do you think these cases go to trial before the election? >> i have doubts about that. there's so much pretrial wrangling that you do, motions, appeals. especially on the mar-a-largo case. people will file challenges to it. i have real doubts the federal cases will get there. >> martha: and the other layer of whether or not it is appropriate to bring a case that close to an election. so i think that is something to watch closely. i was just listening to andy mccarthy. he said something that really caught me just a moment ago. he said everyone in america, i'm paraphrasing, sees the haste to get these cases to trial before the political calendar. how do you think that reflects on democrats? >> the cases aren't being brought by the democrats. they're being brought by a special counsel and he's being indicted by a grand jury. he's not being indicted by andy
you are. i asked one of the president's previous attorneys, what would you do if a gag order. he would say i can't imagine if someone running for president would be asked to supply with this. but every one of his rallies is about this. every one of his appearances and fund-raising, they're all about this. so a judge could really tie his hands if they want to and enact a gag order in a case like this. it's what he talks about none stop on the stump. it resonates with people. built him a lead in fund-raising and support. i can't imagine there would be serious legal fights and wrangling and appeals if that was an attempt. >> neil: all right, guys. thanks very much. and those just tuning in, donald trump has pled not guilty on all four january 6th charges here. i want to go to griff jenkins in washington where this is going down.
indictment, it helps in polling, this is good messaging for him. months ago before the first indictment, will you drop out if you get indicted? he said no, it will help. he's got a good ear for these things. he understands. not that he'll will be the capitol and the white house, but the supreme court. that's where this may end up. this is all unchartered territory. new cases, new theorys in many ways. to see a former president facing dozens and dozens of criminal charges, they could end up with those justices, three that came on his watch. a local of legal wrangling to go. the judge that he will face has been tough on the january 6th defendants that have come before her. she sentenced 34 of them. she's rule in 21 against the president on something regarding dockets for the january 6th committee. so his team has a very long uphill fight with this judge. and jury probably in d.c., too. >> martha: i want to follow up
about the -- he described it several times, they asked over and over and over. he described what the weather was. >> greg: again, with the weather. the last time joe cared about the weather, noah was wrangling animals to beat the flood. i guess dan goldman thinks we're as dumb as he is. but maybe they were talking about the weather. like whether or not to squeeze more cash out of those chumps. kt, this -- oh, i've got to read this, too? meanwhile former president trump has been indicted for the murder of elvis presley. [laughter] >> greg: kt, you can't -- 20 phone calls talking about the weather. >> k.t.: okay, so here's how this happens, when the vice-president president of the united states is getting on the phone with somebody you don't just pick up the phone and say hi how you doing how's the weather. there's talking points you get
and watch him manipulate and the legal wrangling he has to go through in this document to actually criminalize thought, criminalize legal advice, criminalize a legal position and a strategy that whether they are right or wrong they had believing that this election was rigged. and so, you don't see any reference tameness rea, the criminal intent, they can't find criminal intent in donald trump or any of these four lawyers, political consultant and a civil lawyer in doj, those are the coconspirators in this case. >> laura: msnbc is trying to frame this as a moment where america is at a crossroads but for another reason than we are, watch. >> it is one of the biggest cases ever in the history of the united states, it is up there with dread scott. it is up there
a shocking statement when i first read that at the beginning of this indictment. they are giving some credibility to the notion that a candidates can say what they want to say, freedom of speech, they can be wrong and they can even say things that are false. that's longstanding law that has been established in this country. so, they give that and then at the same time they try to unwind that and go through their legal and factual wrangling to try to pull back those protections and development of case law over the years. that's when you knew they were in trouble, when they were going to try to force a round peg into a square hole in this instance because they start out with that sort of acknowledgment as opposed to when i drafted speaking indictments, i would start out with the most outrageous conduct of the defendant alleged in the indictment. and it would be -- it would grab you, shock you,
the arraignment, that is when the defendant appears for the first time has a charges read and is entering a plea, that would normally be 70 days so theoretically that would be in october but very theoretically. they can certainly say they are ready to go to trial but looking at the unrelated, another case that is a federal case, prosecuted byjack another case that is a federal case, prosecuted by jack smith, case, prosecuted byjack smith, the team of donald trump says they need time to prepare for they need time to prepare for the evidence and the judge on the evidence and the judge on the other case agreed to that. donald trump and his team attempted to delay that until after the election in november next year but the prosecution said they want to crack on with it as early as december this year and a judge, almost like solomons baby, had to say hang on a minute, one timescale is unrealistic and so is the other and she set the trial date in the mar—a—lago classified documents case for may and we are likely to see that sort of wrangling in this case as well. in terms of trump in his reaction, we had his reaction