"chris jansing reports" follows with ana cabrera right now. ♪♪ hello on this busy friday. i'm ana cabrera in for chris jansing, and it appears to be down to two. a senator from ohio and the governor of north dakota emerging as the front runners as donald trump inches closer to making one of the most consequential choices of his campaign, picking a running mate. but could there still be another name on the list? plus, turning to trump's legal woes, the former president may be the one charged with mishandling secret documents, but in a hearing in florida today, special counsel jack smith appears to be the one with the most to lose. in an unusual decision, the judge is hearing arguments about whether jack smith should have been appointed in the first places and whether he has the authority to prosecute trump going forward. and rain bringing some relief to central new mexico where massive wildfires have destroyed hundreds of homes, forced thousands to flee, and left at least two people dead. but now residents may be facing a new threat, not from fire but from floods. let's start with the breaking news. nbc news learning that the race to be donald trump's running mate has narrowed to two men, although a third is still technically in the mix. also with us matthew dowd, the former chief strategist for the bush cheney campaign and senior msnbc political analyst, and doug hie, former rnc communications director and republican strategist. dasha, talk to us about what you're learning how this field was narrowed and who we are talking about. >> reporter: so ana, the two that are emering as the top contenders right now are north dakota governor doug burgum, and ohio senator jd vance. you mentioned that third option, marco rubio, the florida senator has consistently been on the list but there are some challenges for him, particularly his residency. boat trump and rubio are residents of florida, and there's a constitutional rule that doesn't allow for delegates to vote for a president and vice president from the same state. that would take some leg work to fix. that doesn't mean he's out of the race, and he does have some allies in the trump campaign. suzie wiles is a long-time florida operative who has a relationship with him. she is the campaign manager for the trump campaign, and a lot of folks in that orbit are florida people. he's got some allies but that is a hangup for him. jd vance has a massive ally in donald trump jr. he has promoted his candidacy, a lot of the maga wing of the party is really gung-ho on vance but burgum has impressed former president trump with his central casting looks. he has money, he is a businessman that has become a politician, something that trump is impressed with. there's also debate, ana, about the timing of this announcement. there is talk about announcing it before the sentencing, though some are concerned that then the sentencing on july 11th would step on a new cycle from the vp announcement. there's also talk of announcing shortly after and trying to sort of step over the news cycle of the sentencing with the vp announcement and turn the media in that direction. the former president has said he would like to announce at the convention. all of those options are on the table and being actively debated right now. the central tension that sources are telling us on the campaign that trump is feeling himself as well is they want somebody that's nonthreatening, but they also want somebody who could potentially continue the america first carry the trump mantle into the next generation, and those are the different values, the different benefits and cons that the campaign and trump himself are weighing right now, ana. >> henry, dig deeper, if you will, for us in terms of the thinking in trump camp, but specifically more so trump himself about these two men, what he likes about them, why they stand out above those others who have been discussed. >> yeah, the tension that dasha just mentioned really gets at the pros and cons for burgum and vance. doug burgum didn't have an entirely successful campaign, didn't gain a lot of traction. he did something that helped his chances, he endorsed donald trump ahead of the iowa caucuses. became one of his strident and loyal allies on the trail throughout the year, and they've been traveling together to rallies, to fundraisers. burgum went to the trial in new york. he's been very visible. there's been a rapport that's developed between the two of them. and because burgum is 67 years old and wasn't quite successful as a presidential candidate, he's seen in that nonthreatening bucket. somebody who's not going to be plotting a presidential campaign. the converse of that is somebody like jd vance. he's 39 years old. he's only been in the senate for two years. he also has a very strong relationship with trump and close trump allies like donald trump jr. he is somebody who would represent the future of the maga movement, which is a box that trump might like to check. the question is is this somebody that's going to perhaps outshine trump on the campaign trail, somebody that's going to be looking toward the future early on in a trump administration. so that's why those two have their pros and their cons. they both check different boxes. there is some overlap between them. that's why if they cancel each other out, you can see a guy like rubio staying in the mix. he is somebody that could be more of a safe pick, somebody that appeals to traditional republicans. remember, he was on the short list in 2012, which seems like eons ago, and was a favorite among those establishment republicans like mitt romney who was the presidential nominee that year. >> do we know why some of the others who have been thrown out there like tim scott or elise stefanik maybe didn't make the cut. >> we've not received reporting so much to that effect. to be clear, this is not final until donald trump says the words this person is my running mate, and it's possible that over the next couple of weeks we'll see people, you know, move in and out of contention again. steve bannon, who spoke with us for the story did mention stefanik as somebody that's working really hard out there among the top tier of potential vp contenders. it's possible somebody will find their way back in there. these three have been sort of the top of the list now for a couple of weeks, and we've heard this week that it's now coalescing around a top two with rubio still a wild card. >> doug, what's your reaction to these three top choices right now? again, they are doug burgum, marco rubio is more the third as well as jd vance. does it make sense to pick one over the other? >> i agree with everything that henry and dasha said. i have a grain of salt the size of 30 rock. i remember in february having dinner with a friend, who's very plugged in trump world who said i guarantee you it's going to be ben carson because donald trump is so obsessed with winning more of the black male vote that it is going to be ben carson. well, ben carson is not in this conversation is he? if we're talking a year ago, we're saying sarah huckabee sanders, that's the pick for donald trump. the grain of salt should be massive heres. there are pros and cons with all of these people. donald trump is somebody who views himself as the big decider. he's not made a decision yet. that's the ultimately test here is what does donald think up to the minute before he makes that announcement. >> who do you think would be most beneficial to him to pick? >> i think it comes to a question of what does the trump campaign want to do? do you want to try and maximize the turnout that you'll get from african american males where joe biden is suffering a little bit? then you look for a tim scott, maybe a byron donald, maybe ben carson. do you want to appeal with suburban women? republicans have had a problem with that. maybe an elise stefanik or sarah huckabee sanders makes sense. what does donald trump want? what have we learned about everything about donald trump in these seven years since he's come down that escalator? it is always about what does donald want. >> as we were just discussing, one of the interviewed for this piece is steve bannon. he's quoted as saying unlike 2016, republicans have a deep bench of talent. looks like a cabinet being formed. there will be lots of consolation prizes for these killers. do you buy that? do you think we'll see some of these people in a trump administration if it happens? >> well, yeah, i think we'll see a lot of them. i think the number one quality going to something doug said is not for a political calculation that i think donald trump is making, but is an obsequious calculation. who going to go along with everything he does and not stand in his way at all. i think that was one of his regrets about mike pence. mike pence didn't go along with his steal the electoral college and overthrow the democracy in the midst of what happened after 2020. i agree with doug that we should all put a huge, huge wheel barrel load of salt on this. donald trump is going to change his mind numerous times. if i were donald trump, i'd be looking at someone like elise stefanik. she provides an avenue to women. she's very well spoken in the course of this, and three, she's a new generation politician. the problem with people like jd vance is joe biden can take all the words that jd vance said about donald trump now if he picks him as his vp and play them back to donald trump because jd vance in 2016 said numerous negative things about donald trump including i would never vote for donald trump is what jd vance said. and so that, i think, becomes, you know, jd vance may be on the list. i think jd vance becomes problematic because you can just take his words. and joe biden says i don't have to tell you what i think of him. let me play what your vp candidate thinks about him. >> ana, i agree with that. the last time i sat down with congresswoman stefanik was in the spring of 2016 and what she said to me is we've got to stop donald trump. so all of these people that we've mentioned -- >> joe biden or donald trump? >> donald trump. wait a minute, i thought he was a trump fan. >> all of them on this list have said things about donald trump, that they thought he was unprepared, ill-suited, crazy, whatever it may be. they all have that record. j d vance says it really loudly. >> to that point, henry, doug burgum also has a record of saying he wouldn't even do business with donald trump. that wasn't that long ago, and yet we know how important loyalty is to trump, so how does doug burgum breakthrough that potential barrier? >> so, for burgum, there's a little bit of a recency bias for trump. he's had the chance to make his case in person more than some of the others on the list, but also burgum has been on a cleanup tour himself. he's been doing a lo of conservative and right wing media, and he's been asked this very question about these remarks that he made on "meet the press" a year ago saying he would not do business with donald trump. he's gotten to know trump better since january, with burgum doing a lot more events with donald trump doing, a lot more events on donald trump's behalf and having the chance to make that case directly to him. and trump's had the chance to make the case directly to burgum. they've been able to develop that relationship. it's definitely something burgum has identified as a possible vulnerability. he's tried to clean it up. in comparison to guys like vance and stefanik, he's not been as -- to doug's point as loud about his criticism to trump. he ran a campaign that was definitely not trump like, but he was never one of the ones that was like throwing bombs in trump's direction, and that might help him in the end. >> matt, i want to read another part of the article and i quote, there's rubio, an attractive and perhaps more traditional option because of his potential appeal to hispanic voters, suburban women, and the older guard republicans who ruled the party when he was a finalist to be mitt romney's running mate 12 years ago. but rubio never showed up at court for trump's criminal trial, unlike burgum and vance. what do you make of that? is this a sign that the trump trial is going to be a crucial part of this race? >> well, with donald trump all politics is personal, every single avenue, the way he views the lens through which he sees people is all will they, you know, bend the knee to him as much as humanly possible, and he's -- he's willing to forgive some things they said as long as they're down on both knees praising him in the course of this, and so i mean, i think that's what's in donald trump's calculation in the course of this. my guess is there's probably something about -- because of all the things -- we talked about what elise stefanik said, and we've talked about what others have said. marco rubio ran against donald trump in 2016 and has three or four months of things that he said about donald trump. my guess is donald trump hasn't forgotten all that. >> i'd also say be careful, marco, because if he makes steps to change his residency, which could affect his senate tenureship, donald trump likes to change his mind. if marco goes too far down that plank, has the rug pulled out from under him, he's in no man's land. >> i can't help but just wonder also, doug, about how each of these three people we're talking about that are at the top of the list right now, whether it's doug burgum, jd vance or marco rubio, how they would act as vice president, if they would do exactly what trump wants or if they would hold democracy, the constitution, above all? >> donald trump, doesn't give points. he only takes them away one at a time. so mike pence loyal soldier until january 6th. he made one mistake in trump world, and now he's been banished east of eden and all of that. they're very mindful of that. their political futures are based on being loyal to their president. donald trump isn't any president. >> thank you all very much. dasha burns, henry gomez, doug eheye, matthew dowd, great reporting, guys. in 90 seconds, a hearing today in florida about former president trump's classiied documents case, why the judge there is concentrating on the special counsel during today's hearing. we'll explain next. today's hearg.in we'll explain next anthony: this making you uncomfortable? good. when you've got type 2 diabetes like me, you have up to 4 times greater risk of stroke, heart attack or worse death. even when meeting your a1c goal. discomfort can help you act. i'm not trying to scare you. i'm empowering you... to get real with your health care provider. talk to them about lowering your risk of stroke, heart attack or death. zyrtec allergy relief works fast and lasts a full 24 hours so dave can be the... deliverer of dance. ok, dave! let's be more than our allergies. zeize the day with zyrtec. s it's the latest legal chapter in donald trump's classified documents case unfolding in florida where judge aileen cannon is holding an unusual day-long hearing to decide whether the special counsel should have been able to bring this case at all. keep in mind, this is still a pretrial hearing. the trial itself hasn't even been scheduled yet. as nbc news reports instead of steering the case as quickly as possible to a jury, judge cannon has burned day after day of court time listening to lawyers haggle over defense motions that make what experts say are long-shot arguments to dismiss charges to exclude evidence or otherwise attack the prosecution. that includes today's hearing about whether jack smith was legally appointed as special counsel, an argument the special counsel's team says was resolved all the way back in the 1970s. i want to bring in nbc's ken dilanian outside that courthouse in fort pierce, also with us kimberly atkins stohr, boston globe columnist and msnbc political analyst, and lisa rubin, msnbc legal correspondent, and former federal prosecutor kristy greenberg who's also former deputy chief of the sdny criminal division and an msnbc legal analyst. so ken, bring us up to speed. what's happening inside that courtroom today? >> reporter: yeah, ana, as you alluded to, this argument that a special counsel appointment is unconstitutional has been tried and has failed in several courts before and appeals courts in the case of robert mueller and david weiss, the special counsel who's prosecuting hunter biden. the defense has a little bitd bit of a new wrinkle in this one in that jack smith is the only special counsel in modern history who has not previously been confirmed by the senate. what they're arguing is he wields so much power it's improper he didn't get that senate review. he's a principal officer under the constitution, not an inferior officer. we heard from a friend of the court argument from a group of people opposing that argument who say, as you said, in fact, this was decided back under the old independent counsel law in the '70s when the supreme court ruled that the independent counsel was an inferior officer and was not unconstitutional. and further more, this lawyer argued that jack smith works for the attorney general of the united states who has the authority to block any move that smith makes that the a.g. thinks is beyond the pale and violates the justice department rules. even though the justice department isn't controlling the actions of jack smith, he's supervised. what's extraordinary is this hearing is happening at all and particularly that judge cannon is allowing friends of the court, outside parties to come in and make arguments before her. that is rarely, if ever, seen in a federal criminal trial, ana. >> thank you very much for that update from the courthouse. kristy, do you think this question of whether jack smith's appointment is constitutional is worthy of the level of scrutiny and time judge cannon is spending here? i mean, she's not only spending a whole day on it, she's also calling in outside legal experts, i guess, she would call them. >> none of this is necessary. whether you go to a meeting and you say that meeting really should have been an email. this is hearing that really should have been an order, a summary order that was just denying trump's motion. the statutory text is clear and to the extent there are any questions about the statutory text giving the a.g. the authority to appoint a special counsel, u.s. v. nixon cleared that up. this is the supreme court saying that's what the statute said. appellate courts have followed that since. why this district court judge thinks she would have a different interpretation when the supreme court has already addressed it and appellate courts have already addressed it is beyond me and really it seems like the only basis that i can think of for why you would have all these outside parties coming in who are making crazy arguments. the outside parties tried this actually in the supreme court when they said you shouldn't even listen to the presidential immunity petition because jack smith has no more authority to argue before this court that has taylor swift does. that's ludicrous. she should be laughing this out of court. they should have not been even allowed in the court to make this argument, but again, delay is the name of the game here, and rather than talking about donald trump's egregious conduct in the classified case, we're talking about jack smith. it's deflection. it's distraction, it's delay, and it's unnecessary. >> lisa, what about this argument that trump's team is trying make that the special counsel has too much independence from the justice department and would make him essentially a superior officer and he's not somebody who has been appointed and confirmed by the senate. is there any merit to that argumenting. >> if past is prologue, there isn't, ana, here's why. what we see today as special counsel