good evening from new york, i am alicia menendez. we begin tonight in fort pierce, florida, where today there was another hearing in the federal criminal case over donald trump's wording of classified documents. the morning session, continuation of what we have become used to. trump-appointed judge aileen cannon entertaining wonky and far-fetched attempts by trump's legal team to dismiss the case. the afternoon focus on emotion brought by special counsel jack smith that centered around one of the most dangerous lies donald trump has ever told. you might recall in may, he seized upon an outrageous conspiracy theory, a theory based upon an extreme this characterization at the fbi search warrant of mar-a-lago. trump claimed that president biden and the fbi were, quote, locked and loaded to take me out during the 2022 search of mar-a-lago. he later boasted that biden, quote, authorized the fbi to use deadly lethal force. what trump tried to portray as an attempt on his life really was a distortion of the standard boilerplate language that is every fbi search. it was based on this, the fbi's policy on the use of force. it says agents can respond with deadly force only when their lives are in imminent danger. that language not unique to the search of mar-a-lago. it was the very same policy the fbi used in their search of president biden's home as well. if anything throughout the process of recovering those documents from mar-a-lago, trump got unusual amount of leniency including the fbi notified the secret service before executing the warrant. one other thing. trump and his family and even at mar-a-lago while the search took place. none of those inconvenient facts stop trump's allies from amplifying the lie. >> there isn't trump will unleash assassination squads and is enemies? biden unleashed armed agents in his health authorizing them to use deadly force.oking for a little action. >> something could've gone down beyond looking for the documents. >> why was merrick garland prepping for possible, what, shoot out? >> merrick garland issued a kill order. >> for jack smith, that was real cause for concern and in a recent filing, he urged judge cannon to impose a narrow modification to the terms of trump's release to limit what he can say. trump is left to argue the first amendment will be eroded on this he is permitted to lie about fbi agents intending to murder him and his family. the law requires no such thing. he pointed to how trump's rhetoric has led to imminent threats to law enforcement including an example the term supporter armed with a ar 15 attempting to attack fbi office after the search took place. he pointed hours after trump posted on social media platform about the search, a supporter posted kill fbi on-site. this afternoon, jack smith's prosecutors made their case to judge cannon. they once again cited trump's balls claims that he was the target of an assassination attempt. he told the court there was no reason for such incendiary language that would apply violence, retribution from trump supporters. judge cannon announce, where'd you see the call to violence? another exchange she grew so frustrated that she's a, quote, i don't like your tone. she said that to a prosecutor just trying to protect loan forstmann from threats of violence. i wish i could say i am surprised. kristy greenberg, the criminal division in the southern district of new york. mary mccord the former deputy assistant attorney general for national security at the department of justice. katie phang is a host of the katie phang show on msnbc . she was in court today in fort pierce. my florida woman, let's start with you. you were in the courthouse and jack smith was in the courthouse today. it seems the hearing got fairly heated at certain points. your takeaways? >> you are right about that. i was focusing on jack smith because i wanted to see his expressions on his face when david hart boxes part of special counsel legal team was having the back and forth when judge cannon, judge cannon on previous occasions with this particular attorney has had issues with him and vice versa. i don't think she appreciates the gravity of what was being presented to her because she immediately, not because there was a suggestion made by the other side in terms of the defense, but she immediately said, what about the fact that rejections have been done of the names of law enforcement and witnesses? how is that not enough for me to consider when you're making this argument that there's danger or risk to law enforcement officers. she hung her hat on that throughout a lot of what happened today but the hearing is two hours and special counsel jack smith, poker face even when there was a lot of heated exchange between judge cannon and the attorney for the special counsel's office. there were striking things that stood out. one of the things was the special counsel saying you don't need a tragedy to strike in order to get a modification. the law supports that and that idea. there was another phrase used by the special counsel's office. they said trump has a potent tool and that's his ability to reach his followers on social media. trump himself has acknowledged in writing and verbal statements that he knows the power of social media for him. that is why there was the argument from special counsel's office that you do not need something bad to happen, you don't need a link between the examples you read and explain to our viewers, and donald trump to say that the link creates the need. it's the threat of significant imminent, foreseeable danger to these law-enforcement officers. todd blanche on behalf of donald trump did his meandering thing that he does but he basically said judge, eventually, maybe this will have to happen. maybe a trial when witnesses are called, but otherwise you don't have a direct connection between trump and these incidents that have been raised as exhibits and examples that special counsel's motion and because of that, it's a prior restraint on free speech. he's a political candidate for the office of president on the eve of a presidential debate and you should not do it. >> mary, how would you push back against that lack of connective tissue between donald trump's words and the threat of violence against law enforcement officials? >> the way to push back is a way jack smith and his team have done, have explained in every court where they have sought an order like this. it's different because it's about modifying the conditions of his bail in order to restrict certain speech that causes that significant and imminent, foreseeable danger to law enforcement. in every other case including in d.c. and manhattan, the prosecutors have given example after example of things that mr. trump says over social media or at campaign rallies and actions and threats taken by individuals in the united states. it might be call and threats. threatening witnesses, threatening judges staff, threatening prosecutor and their staff or actual efforts to commit an act of violence like the example from right after the search of mar-a-lago. there are many many of these that they have to .2. to suggest there is not a cause and effect, that's to ignore what several years now have shown us. i think it was reasonable for her to ask, would rejections take care of it? what david harbach explained was even with rejections, there have been leaks of the names of those agents, and those are available out there still. they cannot be taken down once that has leaked i actually think the rejections have probably prevented them from being that tragedy that we don't want to have to wait for. somebody who is determined can find out the identity of these agents. >> she had her eyes and jack smith and you had your eyes on eileen cannon and you wrote only judge cannon could use a hearing with trump's interest lies that the fbi was out to kill him and his family as an opportunity to school the prosecutor at and not trump for lack of decorum. >> so, it makes sense to me this prosecutor was getting fired up about this. this is a prosecutor who has worked with these agents and built this case and knows these people and knows they're putting their lives on the line every day for us. this idea that she would be so cavalier to the fact there is a threat to them, this motion by jack smith was filed one month ago. clearly she does not see imminent threat because she didn't deal with it right away. she sat on it and while sitting on it what happened? there was a: threat to an fbi agent on hunter biden's case and set of trump windsor going to jail and if trump loses, you will be slaughtered and your family will be slaughtered. those are those threats. the idea that she says where's the cause and effect and donald trump didn't tell that person to say this but donald trump can exit. he has said it in his town hall that they listen to me, my supporters listen to me like no one else. he knows the effect he has and we know the effect he has and so does judge cannon. this idea that there is not an women a threat to these agents is frankly laughable, and the idea she's scolding the prosecutor for getting upset about that and for trying to make his point rather than say to a criminal defendant, you can talk about the case agents that way. you can say these things. any other criminal defendant or any judge would school the defendant for making statements like that. >> she's not moving with alacrity, what comes next for this motion? >> she is allowing each side to be able to file supplements, if they want to. for viewers to understand, these hearings you have to have record evidence. the government relied upon 11 exhibits and supplemented with two extra was. a truth social post in another post that was done last year. the judge is allowing a couple more days reach side to decide if they want to supplement because there were additional exhibits included in the government which is the last thing the government filed. i'm not holding my breath on having any time a quick thing. as christy notes, this was filed in may after a particularly bad week, a really egregious posten statements by donald trump. june 24, we are having this hearing. i don't expect her to rule on it soon and if i had to read tea leaves i would say she will deny the motion for bond modification. it seems it's obvious she thought the laws of facts were on the defense side. the defense had their work done for them today by judge cannon. todd blanche didn't have a lot to have to say when he got up to speak, and the burden was on the government because it was there motion but i want to make it clear. the government and seek a gag order because they anticipated a free speech prior restraint argument. we have seen gag order's and judge chutkan and justice and gorn as well as judge merchan. they had to go the bond modification route in florida because it's judge cannon and they knew there would be a prior restraint argument that would come from the defense. >> i wonder what you make of the fact that jack smith chose the state to be in court? >> i think it shows the solidarity with the agents that have built this case whose lives are at risk because the dangerous rhetoric and lies that trump is telling. i do think it's important and we've seen special counsel in court, not every hearing it either mar-a-lago or in d.c. but as often as possible. it's a signal to send. it sends the message that the prosecutor arguing has the full backing of the special counsel himself. and so, that's something that a judge cannot think, maybe this prosecutor is going beyond what the special counsel would want. special counsel is sitting right there and he can have a conversation with the prosecutor on his team if he wanted to do so. it firms up that support for the arguments being made. i would also add to katie's point about why they decided moving to modified conditions of release as opposed to a gag order, i agree the first amendment applies a little differently but i think it's the right thing to do because this is pretty typical in a case where you have a defendant who is saying things that are threatening to witnesses including law enforcement. it's a typical condition of release to require them not to make those kinds of statements or threats. it's very typical to say you cannot have conversations with witnesses. in fact, here trump was ordered not to have conversations with even his codefendants except to the extent that he is still working for him and he has to have conversations related to work. >> i want to ask you, to their part of what happened this morning. trump saying this is all president biden pulling the strings and you have his legal team arguing that jack smith has no oversight. which is it? >> joe biden has nothing to do with this. he put forth merrick garland. it is merrick garland's department of justice and joe biden has nothing to do with it. as to merrick garland's oversight, special counsel says there is some oversight. special counsel regulations provide for that. it's a balance between independence and some accountability. anytime there's a significant event, there has to be notification from special counsel to merrick garland. what does it mean? likely a search warrant on a former president's resident. they didn't go into details but the regulations provide for some limited oversight for these notifications to happen. special counsel is going rogue and doing things they run afoul of doj rules, the attorney general can say i am overruling you. i am not you do it. >> kristy greenberg, mary mccord, katie phang, thank you. the president of the united states and the convicted felon may walk on a debate stage. it is happening and happening thursday night. our friend tim miller and claire mccaskill are standing by and will join me. me. as we content to the debate, none of this is normal. we've never seen a presidential debate as early in the election cycle as this one. one of the candidates is a convicted felon and that candidates are busy trying to reset expectations he's accusing the current president of using performance enhancing drugs. with that disclaimer, it's worth pointing out there are trendlines moving in president biden's favor. don't take my word for it. karl rove on fox news over the weekend. >> there has been a trend since it may 30 guilty verdict in the new york case. the movement is among independence and they have moved in recent polls roughly 9 points toward biden and that's where it's coming from. 21% of independents in a survey shortly after the conviction said they were the less likely to vote for donald trump as a result of the conviction. >> question now? how does biden take advantage of those trends on thursday night? how does he make the cased undecided voters watching that trump's criminality should matter to them? the biden campaign coach offered this road map yesterday. >> the fact of the matter is the sky is blue and donald trump is a convicted felon. the american people have to sit on that a second. the person who wants to be present has to sit with his probation officer before he goes to the debate. it's a fact but it's not just to called donald trump a convicted felon because to his behavior and his character. he has filed bankruptcy six times. he's not just a bad business man but he screwed all the small people who relied on him for a living. the american people are going to see that. >> tim miller, former republican strategist and host of the bulwark podcast and claire mccaskill's former senator from missouri and host of how to win 2024 and both are msnbc contributors and both are going to be in atlanta for the debate this week. i want you to pick up where mitch left off? the question of donald trump's criminality. there is doubt whether or not president biden was going to go after former president trump on this question. we have seen the biden campaign release that adware goes squarely after him on this topic. do you think he goes after him on thursday? >> i think he will go after him. i don't know how important it is to remind everyone that donald trump is a felon. i think everyone knows he has been convicted. there is this calcified group of people that are believing what trump is saying that somehow it's not a valid conviction. it is more important for joe biden to go after donald trump literally, he needs to be the state of a the union joe biden. what a gift he has been given. think about it. trump has spent the last six months telling everybody that joe biden cannot walk or talk. all joe biden has to do is show scrappy joe biden from scranton. he doesn't respect trump. he knows trump allies all the time and needs to say shut up, man and stop your yapping into of those things to put trump in his place and stand up to him. it is about biden showing strength and not so much what he says. >> it's funny the senator used the term junkyard dog over the weekend which i think does some of the president biden we may see. at the same time you have joe biden preparing for this debate, you have reports that trump is not doing mock debates with anyone and instead he's meeting with senator j.d. vance, marco rubio, eric schmidt. i wonder what that tells you about the performance he's planning to put on thursday? >> well, i can't believe it comes out of the trump world. i take all the reports from what's happening in trump world with a grain of salt. i think what we can see publicly is donald trump is concerned about how this debate is being framed as you lead to the debate. that is why he is doing the weird stuff about joe biden being on drugs. it's worth reminding that he tried this in 2020 in a losing debate. you don't remember that because time is a flat circle. he already tried this joe biden is on drugs thing and it didn't work then. joe biden is a teetotaler and it's absurd. you see it with him, the example where he started to say was not to be called the troops suckers and losers. that also shows he's a little worried and thinking about what joe biden's attacks might be and he's trying to take the air out of the balloon ahead of time. there is evidence that trump feels, concerned about the debate. how that manifests in his weird mind to whether he is prepping, i'm not sure. we can see he is concerned. >> i think we accept there's asymmetry in terms of the fact that we expect president biden to talk about policy, talk about his record, talk about the things he would want to do in a second term. we don't necessarily expect that trump over the weekend, i was able to speak with kevin roberts, head of the heritage foundation and asked about project 2025 and said it was about extending trumpism. i know you don't need the reminder. project 2025, a blueprint to disassemble the state and implement christian nationalist agenda. how does trump take that -- how can biden pin that on trump? >> he can do it pretty simply. the campaign for biden is all about contrast. it's competence versus chaos. darkness versus light. is a polonius philanderer versus a family man. it is job creation versus saying america sucks. this really is such a contrast and biden just has to keep drawing that contrast. it is protecting women's freedoms versus breaking up a bringing down roe v. wade. there are so many things where biden can quickly pivot to the contrast. it's going to be very hard for trump to do anything but lather and lie. is when we see when he has debated before, he doesn't do well when called to task. if the microphones are not on one is not his turn to talk, i think this could go very badly for donald trump. we will see. frankly, i'm not sure it will make a huge amount of difference either way how the debate goes except i do believe these independent voters, as they watch trump more on social media, they see how unhitched he has become with weird stuff. he is saying really weird stuff now. stuff that makes no sense. >>