Updated
Summary
The Justice Department even included a photo showing documents marked classified and top secret seized during the search, including filing suggesting Trump`s team hid and moved these documents. Some Republican candidates distancing from the former president while others keeping their silence amid revelations from the Mar-a-Lago classified documents fiasco. Democratic strategist Kurt Bardella joins Katie Phang to talk about the Republicans scrubbing websites of abortion and some GOP candidates fleeing from Trump amid a legal firestorm. Democratic pollster Fernand Amandi joins Katie Phang to talk about Joe Biden giving his prime-time speech on the soul of the nation tomorrow.
Transcript
KATIE PHANG, MSNBC ANCHOR: About those classified documents found at Mar-a- Lago. The DOJ including this picture in the filing late last night. It shows documents seized from Trump`s Florida home earlier this month. Many of the documents have clear classification markings. You can see here “top secret” and “secret.” I`ll have more on what this photo reveals in a bit.
The DOJ writing in the filing they recovered 13 boxes containing more than 100 classified documents, including some at the most restrictive levels. The filing noting, quote, “Certain documents included additional sensitive compartments that signify very limited distribution.” Emphasizing even the FBI personnel reviewing the documents, quote, “required additional clearances” before they were permitted to review certain ones.
Unbelievable. Those highly sensitive documents, they were all found at Mar- a-Lago. Some of them weren`t even in boxes, but rather inside of Trump`s desk in his office. The DOJ writing that the FBI seized, quote, “Three classified documents located in the desk in the 45 Office,” despite a claim from Trump`s lawyer that she herself scoured the office and other areas just days before the Mar-a-Lago subpoena.
Now all of this is obviously very bad for Trump. This filing is the clearest evidence yet that the federal government is also focused on the possibility that Trump and his allies were obstructing the probe, and that is a crime. The government suggesting the documents were moved and hidden while they were searching for them. The filings stating, quote, “Records were likely concealed and removed,” adding, quote, “Efforts were likely taken to obstruct the government`s investigation.”
Joining me now on set is Danya Perry, former assistant United States attorney in the Southern District of New York, and Hugo Lowell, congressional reporter for “The Guardian.”
Both of you, thanks for being here. Hugo, I`m going to start with you. High level. What stood out to you about this new filing from the DOJ last night?
HUGO LOWELL, THE GUARDIAN CONGRESSIONAL REPORTER: The thing that really stood out I think is the obstruction. You know, we`ve been hearing for weeks now about the classified documents and the degree to which kind of sense government secrets were being stashed at Mar-a-Lago. But I think the DOJ really put an emphasis in that filing yesterday night on the potential obstruction.
And of course reading between the lines, we now see that at least two Trump lawyers might themselves be facing some legal peril here with the obstruction side of the investigation. Evan Corcoran and Christina Bobb of course signed the certification to the Justice Department that all documents in response to the subpoena had been turned over and then it turned out of course that wasn`t the case. So I think that element was a particularly significant moment.
PHANG: Danya, I have to ask you, we`re both former prosecutors, private practitioners, as you are doing now. It is wild to think about the possible exposure to the lawyers in this case. Bad actors all the time, right, when it comes to people like Donald Trump. But when you have the lawyers involved, let`s talk a little bit about why they should be worried.
DANYA PERRY, FORMER ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY, SDNY: There is a pattern here. There is a history of the lawyers who Donald Trump surrounds himself with, themselves getting into trouble. And here we have somebody lied to the FBI. It`s either his lawyers or Trump. I think that`s pretty clear from the filing last night.
PHANG: Or both. Or they all — right?
PERRY: Or both. That is exactly right. So, you know, we`ll see who throws who under the bus. But somebody is going to go down for these statements that there was a diligent search, that the lawyers scoured the premises. Either, you know, they did that and they didn`t find these documents because, you know, as is hinted at in these papers, they were moved, or, you know, they didn`t do it and simply lied to the FBI and DOJ.
So, you know, it`s been rumored that he`s had a hard time finding lawyers for this. And it`s really no wonder given the history that we`ve seen here with Trump throwing his own lawyers into harm`s way.
PHANG: So before I go to Hugo, though, let`s follow this, though, a little bit more. Let`s say I`m Donald Trump`s lawyer. I`m the person who signed that certification saying that there are no more classified documents at Mar-a-Lago. I make that affirmative representation as a member of the bar. Would I try to save myself by saying but my client told me that, I relied reasonably on what Donald Trump told me so I don`t have any type of culpability or exposure here?
PERRY: That would be a defense. Maybe not a plausible one, but that`s the only defense that they might have. They also would have to, if they`re the same lawyers that are on this case, would have to withdraw from the case.
PHANG: There you go.
[18:05:04]
PERRY: Which in and of itself would be a tell. So they couldn`t say why they`re withdrawing, but clearly there would be a conflict of interest here, and they should in fact withdraw from the case.
PHANG: Yes, so, Hugo, Trump can`t shut up. He is constantly posting on Trump social. It`s really absurd, frankly, the number of times that he`s posting on Trump social. But since last night`s filing, he has reacted by saying, quote, “I declassified.” I mean, it sounds like an admission to me.
What`s your reaction to the continuing statements and frankly admissions that are coming out of Donald Trump on places like Truth Social, which by the way can be used against him in the event that he is prosecuted?
LOWELL: It`s fascinating that he keeps talking about that he has declassified these documents when we already know the declassification really has no bearing on the statues listed in the search warrant. But additionally the thing that came up yesterday in the filing was the subpoena, the May subpoena that the Justice Department issued to the custodial records representing Donald Trump. And that was of course Christina Bobb.
And in that subpoena, it listed a whole bunch of classified documents, a whole bunch of markings and classifications, but it basically said we want all of the presidential records and all of the materials taken to the White House after the end of the administration. It didn`t really mentioned the classification. So even if it were true that he had declassified these documents, it really wouldn`t make any difference to his case.
PHANG: Well, and the filing makes it very clear, Hugo, right, that Trump and his lawyers never said that they were declassified. Trump and his lawyers never used an executive privilege argument. I mean, this has been a slow moving process that`s been going on for months.
And so, Danya, you know, we do filings all the time in court as lawyers. Start strong, end strong. This entire filing was pretty strong in my opinion. But they talk at the beginning in this filing about standing. The fact that Donald Trump doesn`t have standing to even ask for the appointment of a special master because these records belong to the government. They never belonged to him.
So procedurally, do you think that`s enough for Judge Cannon tomorrow at that hearing at 1:00 to say here is an easy way out for me, Donald Trump, you don`t have standing, bye, you`re not going to get your special master?
PERRY: That should be the judge`s first question to Trump`s lawyer. Do you agree that there is no possessory interest, that there is no standing? And if not, why not? It`s really telling that they omitted any reference to the Presidential Records Act, any reference to the case law, to the fact that these simply are not the president`s records, they do not belong to him. Whatever he thinks, by law, by statute, they belong to the government. And they don`t even address that.
Usually you try and draw the sting. You anticipate the argument and you try and refute it. Maybe they weren`t aware. You know, I don`t know. There were a couple of offshoots to that argument that DOJ made, including that there is no executive privilege within the executive branch, it`s Trumped in any event by a criminal investigation. There are a whole bunch of other arguments. But that one standing alone, I agree. It appears open and shut. And it really should be a gaining question.
PHANG: And to the issue that I was talking about with Hugo, even if Trump had attempted to declassify, and I say attempt because we don`t know if he ever successfully did it, isn`t the mere fact that he had these records in his possession from the beginning evidence of his guilt?
PERRY: In some ways this like a narcotics case. This is if you have it in your possession, yes, you can argue I didn`t realize that white powdery substance was cocaine. But that`s a difficult argument. I`ve never seen that argument succeed. So, you know, we saw some tells in the filing. Some of the documents as you pointed out earlier were in his office, in his desk, and they were intermingled with his personal documents and his passports.
So that`s another tell that he had to know. And if he saw them, if he put eyes on them and they`re in his residence, I do agree that`s an open and shut case.
PHANG: Yes. So, Hugo, to what Danya is talking about, the government is saying it took for example Trump`s passports because they were found in the desk drawer along with classified documents. The filing from the DOJ states, quote, “The government seized the contents of a desk drawer that contained classified documents and governmental records commingled with other documents which included two official passports. The location of the passports is relevant evidence.”
And Hugo, the filing also talks about the fact they`re not going to give back some of these personal effects of Donald Trump because it`s relevant evidence to the guilt in this case. Why is it so important for the DOJ to make this assertion?
LOWELL: Yes, that last line in that excerpt there about the other location pertaining to the evidence, I think that`s really important. Look, this whole case hinges on what did Trump know, what was his intent with these documents
[18:10:02]
And if you talked to people close to the former president, people who have worked in Mar-a-Lago, you know, Trump is a very secretive person. He`s very distrusting of a lot of the people around him. The idea that any aide could get into his desk and, you know, placed his passports there along other documents is just laughable. And so when you learned through the filing that his passports were there next to these classified documents, this whole claim that Trump didn`t really know that he was in possession of classified documents, other sensitive government materials kind of evaporates. And I think that`s a really significant point that the Justice Department picked up on.
PHANG: Danya, I want to go back a little bit to flip the switch a little bit on this. If I was saying to you earlier, I`m Trump`s lawyer. I say I relied upon what Donald Trump told me, Donald Trump critically never has pieces of paper, right? Doesn`t send e-mails. Notoriously doesn`t have that paper trail. But in this instance, we know from the redacted search warrant or the affidavit, excuse me, that`s been partially unredacted, his handwriting was found on some of these documents.
And the fact that they`re now found in his residence, his room, in his office, can Trump then say well, I relied upon what my lawyers were telling me to do, or I relied upon what my lawyers were making representations about, whether or not these classified documents had been returned or still at Mar-a-Lago, et cetera?
PERRY: Look, that`s an argument that he`s made in the past. He often says I surround myself with the best lawyers, with the best advisers, the best accountants. You know, I let them do what they will do. That`s not going to work in this case because he — as you said before, I think it`s really critical. He`s essentially made an admission. He has boxed himself in. The best argument he probably could have made was I didn`t know they were there.
And as Hugo pointed out, that would be a tough argument for him to make in light of his secrecy, and in light of, you know, where they were found and all that. But that`s at least a plausible defense. But now he`s gone and blown that possible defense with some of these other, you know, fake defenses he`s thrown out there, including that he declassified them. So he can`t have it all and he can`t then say, I relied on my lawyer, because the subpoena was very clear, for example.
It said provide anything that has a classification mark on it. And that was not done. So whether he declassified or relied on lawyers or not, those documents were still found in his desk, and they`re marked classified. So that`s why I compare it to a drug case. It`s either there or not, and your criminal intent matters less in this case uniquely than it does in a lot of other espionage cases.
PHANG: So, Hugo, tell us a little bit about what you`re hearing about what`s happening down in Trump world in Mar-a-Lago, in that area. There`s got to be some last-minute panicking going on. 8:00 tonight is the deadline that Judge Cannon has imposed on Trump to file a reply to the Department of Justice`s response. But wasn`t it just yesterday, Hugo, that there was a big marquee banner news that Trump had picked up former Florida solicitor general Chris Kise to join his legal team? I mean, are we going to be expecting to see something that has Chris Kise`s name on it by tonight?
LOWELL: That`s not the indication I`m getting right now. I caught up with a couple of people close to the Trump legal team earlier today. And the indication at the moment is that three lawyers who were originally on the filing will be in Florida tomorrow, and that`s supposed to be Jim Trusty, Evan Corcoran and Lindsey Halligan. And I`m also hearing that probably two out of the three will make it to the courthouse tomorrow. It`s not expected that all three will show up, although again anything is possible. But that`s the team there in Florida. It`s being led by Jim Trusty and Evan Corcoran, and Lindsey Halligan is going to be the local lawyer there who doesn`t have to be admitted pro hac vice.
PHANG: Now I`m intrigued. Now I`m intrigued that I don`t hear Chris Kise to show up tomorrow at this critical hearing for the special master, and Lindsey Halligan, she seems to be making an appearance tomorrow. But of course noticeably conspicuously absent is Christina Bobb from a lot of this. I`m actually surprised Evan Corcoran is going to be there.
Danya Perry, Hugo Lowell, thank you so much for being here. I really appreciate it.
And coming up next, new clues from the DOJ probe revealed in this photo you`re looking at of classified documents found at Mar-a-Lago. Our close-up analysis when we`re back in just 60 seconds.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHANG: And we`re back with more on the photo at the heart of the DOJ`s new filing against Donald Trump, showing for the first time some of the classified documents found by the FBI in a container in Trump`s office at Mar-a-Lago. The batch includes at least five top secret files redacted in this photo by the government in order to protect national security. Those files are labeled, quote, “Top Secret/SCI” which refers to information that must be stored in a SCIF, a special facility for highly sensitive material and protected from even other top secret clearance holders.
They also contain markings for “HCS,” which indicates material obtained from human sources generally meaning informants or spies. Other documents visible in the court exhibit also contain classified markings. At least three of these are on White House letterhead. One of those documents appears to be dated Wednesday, May 9th, 2018 which as Bloomberg News reports is the day after Trump announced the United States` withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal. Bloomberg noting these are precisely the sort of paperwork the government argued Trump had no right or authority to take with him.
Joining me now is former special adviser to the White House National Security Council, Matt Miller.
Matt, thanks for being here. I mean, bombshell filing by the DOJ. You`ve worked with the DOJ. You`ve been affiliated. You`ve had exposure to them. Clearly, Matt, this photo as an exhibit to this court filing, it`s so breathtaking in what it depicts, right?
MATT MILLER, FORMER WHITE HOUSE NATIONAL SECURITY COUNCIL SPECIAL ADVISER: Yes, absolutely. And I think the Justice Department had two goals. First and foremost, I think their primary audience they were trying to convince is the judge. Remember, she is new to this case. She wasn`t involved in the search warrant, wasn`t involved in approving that affidavit to allow the search warrant to go forward. And she is a former assistant U.S. attorney who would be familiar with classified information from her time at the Justice Department, would be familiar with how classified information is supposed to be handled.
And I think they were sending a message to her about exactly what was happening at Mar-a-Lago, number one. And number two, that Trump lied because if you look at the — where this information was found, these documents that are contained in the photo, these are documents that were contained not in the supposed secure storage room, which we know actually wasn`t secure, but in his office, in his personal office at Mar-a-Lago. And I think they`re trying to tell the judge that Trump lied to us. And you can expect that his lawyers will lie to you too when they come in and make an argument first in a brief and then before you.
But I will say the Justice Department also is not unaware of the public impact that this photo would have. They had to know that this impact would have more impact — I`m sorry, that this photo would have more impact on the public consciousness than all the words in the 35-page brief put together. And that`s appropriate. You know, Merrick Garland has said that the Justice Department would speak through its filings.
But that doesn`t mean the filings have to be boring. That doesn`t mean they have to be dull. You don`t have to go out and grandstand like Jim Comey and Bill Barr did at times to be compelling. And I think it was appropriate for the Justice Department to do so in this instance.
PHANG: So I`m going steal a line from the current GOP defense of Donald Trump, and I`m going to ask you this, Matt. Why should we care? Why should anyone care about what`s depicted in that photo?
MILLER: Well, first of all, let`s try to forget that this — these are the same Republicans who criticized Hillary Clinton for e-mails that contained classified information that was not marked as classified, that her aides did not know was classified, and she did not know was classified when she received it. So let`s just try to erase all of that from our memory and pretend that there is no hypocrisy here and look just at these documents which very clearly are classified top secret/SCI.
I will say, I get even the heebie-jeebies kind of talking about this because if you`ve been in the national security establishment, you see these documents and the first thing you think no one should be seeing these if they don`t have the authority to do so. It`s why the substance of it is blacked out. And they certainly shouldn`t be stored anywhere. And you don`t talk about them at all. But if you look at the code words that are across the top of these documents, you know, there are a lot of things that are classified inside the government.
Weapons systems are classified. Troop movements are classified. And intelligence information especially is classified. And you see two types of intelligence information here.
[18:20:03]
One, signals intelligence, or attempts to penetrate foreign government source, terrorist organizations, either through e-mails or phones or other electronic methods. It`s extremely damaging if that information is revealed because let`s say we penetrated, you know, just for example a foreign minister of a hostile nation. We`ve been able to penetrate his phone and he sees information derived from his phone conversations, he knows to stop using that phone and we lose an intelligence source.
But as bad as that is, it`s human intelligence that`s really dangerous in this instance. And if there is information in those documents that is derived from human intelligence, as we know it was from the code words “HES” at the top of those documents, and you`re able to identify from the document, and this is key, because we don`t know if it`s a risk or actual damage, but if you`re able to identify from the document who that human intelligence source is, it puts that intelligence source at risk.
Either risk of imprisonment if they`re operating in a foreign country, or even worse, even death. So it is extremely dangerous. It is why this information has to be taken care — is really has to be taken care of inside the government. You can only look at it inside a secure facility. You`re never supposed to take it out. You`re certainly never supposed to take it to your home with you.
PHANG: Matt, I`d also add other than Judge Cannon as being a potential audience for this filing with that photograph and maybe the American public, I think maybe another person this was directed to was Donald Trump because, Matt, correct me if I`m wrong, but that photo is so obvious with the color covers, right, that even somebody like Donald Trump, putting aside what your estimation is of the man`s intelligence, it would be impossible to ignore the fact that this is top secret classified information.
So if you were ever to make a claim that he didn`t know that it was supposed to be classified, that would completely undercut his argument, right?
MILLER: I think that`s right. I think, number one, it`s meant to undercut his argument. And number two, to send a message to him that we`re not going to let you lie about the Justice Department and get away with it without us correcting the record. And so if you`re going to come out and lie repeatedly about these documents, we`re going make them public in a very compelling way. Not the substance of the documents, but we`re going to put these cover pages out for the public to see so the whole world knows that you weren`t telling the truth.
That you were keeping these documents at your residence in Florida. You refused to turn them over to the Justice Department after we`ve repeatedly demanded that you turn them over. You defied a subpoena. You lied to us about it. And so we`re going to, number one, go forward. We`re going to go to your residence, execute a search warrant and get these documents back. And number two, we`re going consider criminal charges against you.
PHANG: Well, let`s see what happens tomorrow at that hearing on his motion to appoint a special master.
Matt Miller, thanks for your insight and for being here tonight. I appreciate it.
MILLER: Thank you.
PHANG: And coming up, President Biden attacks MAGA Republicans and preps for a primetime speech on the fight for democracy. But first, that DOJ bombshell filing has some in the GOP distancing themselves from Trump. That story is next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:27:39]
PHANG: Some GOP congressional candidates are understandably now fleeing Donald Trump`s toxic brand. “The Washington Post” reporting that at least nine GOP candidates in key races have been distancing themselves from Trump, scrubbing from their campaign Web sites any mention of 45.
“Politico” reporting GOP strategists are frustrated over Trump`s nonstop self-inflicted wounds. “There is a real frustration. And with the exception of people who are too stupid to understand the need to be frustrated, it is nearly universal.”
Now Trump`s feud with the DOJ over top secret documents is front and center news, and no one is defending the president. The president`s biggest cheerleaders, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Jim Jordan, have gone kind of silent. Representative Adam Kinzinger has said that tells you all you need to know.
Now even the conservative “New York Post” calling out the Donald. In an editorial titled “Republicans Must Move Beyond Trump,” writing most Republicans would rather the ex-president go away. And Trump`s already an albatross.
Joining me now is Kurt Bardella, Democratic strategist, former spokesperson of the House Oversight Committee for the Republicans.
Kurt, my friend, so good to see you. My question, why now? Why are they running away from him now? Did it really take Mar-a-Lago to cut that cord?
KURT BARDELLA, DEMOCRATIC STRATEGIST: Well, I think it almost took also the special election in New York 19 the other day where Republicans for the first time saw the consequences of their extreme MAGA-like views at the ballot box. This was the first election that we`ve actually had since the Dobbs decision. And what they saw was Democrat turnout enthusiasm through the roof. We saw that in a district that was a very narrow plus 1 percent for Biden in the 2020 election go for the Democrats in a special congressional election.
That tells them that the big wave that they were boasting about in the first part of this year, the 60-seat majority, NRCC chairman Tom Emmer was bragging in the early part of the year is an apparition. It`s not happening. In fact they are on the defensive. They`re under water in the congressional generic ballot. They`re seeing turnout for Democrats and enthusiasm gap completely narrow the lead that Republicans have is gone and evaporated. And Democrats are engaged. They are energized. Our base is ready to show up. And it`s all because Republicans made the fatal mistake of alienating the largest group of voters in the country, women.
[18:30:00]
PHANG: But Kurt let me ask you something like the Rupert Murdoch, him continuing his attacks on Trump with that new editorial we just talked about in the New York Post. Does something like that move the needle? Does that actually make a difference? Or is it something like the one issue voters on abortion, maybe on economy? Is something like a sign-on like Rupert Murdoch has traditionally so pro-Trump pro-GOP? Do you really think that moves the needle at all?
BARDELLA: Well, I think it`s a signal to the Republicans in Washington D.C. It`s the reason why you`re seeing people who were very vocal not that long ago go quiet. People like Marjorie Taylor Greene, Jim Jordan, Kevin McCarthy, Steve Scalise, they`re not out there right now beating the drumbeat for Donald Trump for defending his mishandling of classified information. They`ve gone quiet.
I think the key thing that I think all of us are watching and waiting for is what happens with Rupert Murdoch`s Fox News. That will be the ultimate signal. If they turn on him, then that`s a completely different story than just a New York Post editorial.
PHANG: So right-wing extremism on abortion you just mentioned briefly that also seems to be worrying Republicans. Here`s what Fox News hosts and you just asked what Fox News is doing. Here`s what Fox News host Brian Kilmeade just said about abortion.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
BRIAN KILMEADE, HOST, FOX NEWS: A lot of the zero tolerance when it comes to these states has — has a lot of people freaked out. I think the 15-week seems to be — even if you`re the most pro-life person, your neighbor probably isn`t. So how do you govern?
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHANG: I mean, Kurt, can the GOP conveniently erase the stench of a connection to somebody like a Uber ultra-right-wing extremist abortion position?
BARDELLA: No, they can`t, Katie, because Republicans have spent the better part of the last three decades talking nothing about anything but getting rid of the right for women to have abortion in this country. And they got it. They are the proverbial you know, dog that caught up to the car. This is what happened.
And now that they did it. Now that they achieved it. All the years special interest money, we`ve seen them spend, all the ads they`ve run about this. Now they got what they wanted. They did what they said they would do. They have not tried to hide this. Voters aren`t going to make casually forget about that just because it`s politically inconvenient for Republicans.
And in their effort to try to figure out what to even say about this. The void that they`ve left has enabled the most extreme right-wing people to go out there and say things like children who are raped should be forced to have abortion. The Republican Party is now the party of forced pregnancy in America.
PHANG: Kurt Bardella, my friend, thank you so much for being here tonight. I appreciate it. And ahead, Congress is asking for a damage assessment on the documents found at Trump`s Mar-a-Lago. We have a special guest. But first, President Biden and the Democrats go there on MAGA Republicans. That`s next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:37:35]
PHANG: Today, President Biden is ramping up for a primetime address to the nation. He`ll speak tomorrow night from outside Philadelphia`s Independence Hall where he`ll talk about the battle for the soul of the nation and the importance of protecting our democracy. He gave a preview yesterday casting the Democrats as the party of law and order and condemning the MAGA wing of the GOP.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Let me say this to my MAGA Republican friends in Congress. Don`t tell me you support law enforcement if you won`t condemn what happened on a 6th. There`s no place in this country, no place for endangering the lives of law enforcement.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHANG: All of this as threats to law enforcement have skyrocketed in the wake of the FBI`s Mar-a-Lago search for classified documents. A new report finding MAGA extremists are calling for hangings and executions of federal agents. One person writing in a pro-Trump online forum, quote, all people need to do is just send one message by killing every one of those agents that stepped foot there.
Many of the threats even more incendiary, using derogatory language and calling for hanging and lynching of law enforcement. We`ve already seen the impact of it. Just days after the Mar-a-Lago search, an armed gunman later revealed to be a Trump supporter tried to breach an FBI field office in Cincinnati. He was ultimately killed in a standoff.
Joining me now is democratic pollster Fernand Amandi. Fernand, my friend, it`s so good to see you. Listen, what kind of political problem does the GOP have when you look at these types of MAGA specific driven by the MAGA, MAGA threats to law enforcement? Isn`t it kind of ironic? Wasn`t the GOP supposed to be the party of law and order?
FERNAND AMANDI, DEMOCRATIC POLLSTER: Katie it`s a MAGA problem or mega problem if you want to think about it. And look, it started off as a meme. But I`m starting to think that there may be something real to this dark- branded thing. Because when you look at how everything is really just perfectly falling into place for President Biden.
I remember the old show the A-Team, Hannibal Smith the George Peppard character would always say, I love it when a plan comes together at the end. And after two years, Biden`s grand plan is coming together masterfully, and this speech tomorrow night is the final piece, Katie, in what I think is going to be the closing argument that Biden and the Democratic majority in Congress is going to make to the American people before they go vote now.
[18:40:00]
They`ve now proven undisputedly that they know how to govern, that they can get big things done for America, they can tackle the econ — economy in ruins, they can make bills around infrastructure happen. They`ve obviously dealt with the COVID situation. And now at the end, this is where Biden makes the final and perhaps most important piece.
The Republican Party of today, under Donald Trump, is a semi-fascist party, I could do without the semi. But the point is, he`s gone there, he said the F. word. And that is the message that he wants the American people to know clearly. Now, it`s also good in politics to be lucky.
And remember, this is being done against the backdrop where the Department of Justice is now clearly looking at what I think is a criminal conspiracy against Donald Trump, over the classified material, which we now have pictorial evidence of a picture speaks a million words.
And also, Katie, what we see happening with the comments by Lindsey Graham saying there`s going to be political violence if Trump is indicted for being held accountable. All of this is part of the Biden message and the final message that is going to go to the voters when they start voting in about a month`s time from now. So, I think it`s all part of the plan. And it couldn`t be happening at a better moment for the Democrats.
PHANG: But, Fernand, I mean, I don`t want to be too Machiavellian about this. But that`s that concept, right? That the ends justifies the means. Should the Democrats go there, though. Should the Democrats capitalize on this violent rhetoric that we know how to become the brand, the very forward-facing brand of the GOP as we head into the midterms? Or should we take the quote higher road when it comes to something like that?
AMANDI: Oh, no, I think the Democrats have a constitutional responsibility to preserve, protect, and defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic. And in highlighting this type of rhetoric, Katie, what they`re telling the American voter, not in a political sense, but in an existential sense to the sanctity of the rule of law.
And our American Constitutional Republic is that one of the major political parties in the country today, the Republican Party is now OK, with the advocacy of violence and political violence to achieve political means. I don`t see that in any way or shape as politicization, but rather their obligation and duty as sworn representatives to defend the constitution. So, it is exactly the message.
And more importantly, what I also think is the brilliance of the message. Biden and the Democrats are allowing all a coalition that is in defense of the rule of law, a coalition that is in favor of defending the democracy to make this choice.
Is it Biden`s America and the Democrats` America that would sustain democracy or is that the MAGA fascist America that puts it in jeopardy and is against the rule of law? I don`t think it can be a starker or better choice for the Democrats to make now.
PHANG: So today, one nonpartisan political report, Larry Sabato`s crystal ball moving the Arizona and Pennsylvania Senate races from, quote, a toss- up to now leaning democratic. I mean, what is driving these shifts? Do you think it was something that you could look at on the timeline of events Fernand and say, hey, it`s this Mar-a-Lago stuff, or is there just kind of a confluence of several factors that you think are justifying this shift?
AMANDI: Yes, I`ll quote Hannibal Smith again. It`s this plan coming together. Some events and variables that the Democrats had no control over, which I think, of course, specifically, is the Dobb`s decision, the overturning of Roe versus Wade, they could not have planned or anticipated that to happen four months before the elections.
But also, the actions and the responsible governance, Katie, that the Democratic Party under this Biden administration, and these Democratic majorities have proven now to the American people that when entrusted with the levers of government, they can deliver and act responsibly on the citizens` behalf and in the citizens` interest.
So, I think it`s all of those combinations. And again, we not don`t just see it there. We also see it even in Biden`s own approval rating as a pollster, I pay very close attention to that. And he has the highest approval ratings now that he`s had since September of 2021. So, it couldn`t happen at a better time. If you want to see the Democrats do well in November.
PHANG: Yes, to — you know, Fernand, I think also January 6th, needs to be talked about. I know that Biden talked about it the other day when he gave his speech, he said, if what if you back the coup then you don`t back the cops, right? So, I think violence has, unfortunately, become the calling card for the GOP. So, let`s see what President Biden has to say tomorrow night when he gives his primetime speech. Fernand Amandi, thank you so much for being here.
AMANDI: Thanks, Katie.
PHANG: Coming up, reaction to Ari`s report on Jay-Z. But first, let`s see how Senator McConnell reacted to that bombshell DOJ filing. That`s coming up next.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[18:49:33]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: I don`t know if you`ve had a chance to review or anything from this morning on DOJ`s report of —
SEN. MITCH MCCONNELL (R-KY), MINORITY LEADER: I don`t have any observations about that.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
PHANG: No observations from Mitch McConnell. Senate GOP leader dodging questions on last night`s bombshell. DOJ filing with photographic evidence of top-secret national security documents found in Trump`s office in Mar-a- Lago. Both the House and Senate Intelligence Committees are asking for a damage assessment which the director of National Intelligence now says is underway.
[18:50:00]
Joining me now is Democratic Congressman Peter Welch, a senior member of the House Oversight and Intelligence committees. He`s also running for Senate. Thank you so much for being here, sir. It is such an honor to have you. I need to know straight out of the gate from you. What are your takeaways from that DOJ filing from last night?
REP. PETER WELCH (D-VT), Intelligence Committees: Well, two things. Number one, it`s likely that Donald Trump did something that`s illegal. If you are had secret documents in our home, we wouldn`t be discussing the contents of the documents, we`d be wondering how long we`re going to spend in jail. This is serious.
He had no right, particularly as a private citizen, which is — was his status after January 28th noon. To have be in possession of those documents. So, I am absolutely delighted that the — you — the attorney general`s office is upholding the rule of law and this will take us time. But secondly, there`s a very serious question about what information was there and what risk this poses to national security.
And there`s two specific areas. One is, are the human intelligence officer`s individuals whose names are identified in are in jeopardy. And then number two, we collect information through secret means, and if those means are exposed, it compromises the ability of our intelligence community to protect us. So those are the two questions that have to be addressed by Congress. And the — the review that is going to be done by Director Haynes.
PHANG: Yes, sir representative, that`s what I wanted to ask you. Your committee has asked for a damage assessment, understandably. So, you need to gauge and assess and evaluate the harm that has potentially occurred and may occur to Americans. What are you telling us or what can you tell us about the timing of when that may be complete?
The reason I asked the DOJ references in its own filing that if a special master is appointed, that it may slow down the process for the intelligence community to be able to do that assessment.
WELCH: Well, there`s a couple of different things that are at stake here. One is, Trump did something that appears to be blatantly illegal. And he is now trying to delay as he usually does. Any resolution of the legal question that is going to be done at some time by the Department of Justice, they`re pursuing it.
Secondly, there`s the question of our national security and how that may have been compromised with him leaving all those documents around in a room where folks like Rudy Giuliani, and the pillow guy could go in there and peruse them at their leisure. That`s where we have to do an assessment.
On behalf of the American people to assess has there been a significant compromise of an individual`s sources or means by which we collect this intelligence? Third is a political question, and that is, what did Trump do? And what we`re seeing is that the MAGA Republicans, folks like Lindsey Graham, are essentially condoning this behavior, which if you or I did, or anyone else did it we`d have — we`d be in handcuffs.
I mean, that`s really the bottom line. But that`s the political environment we`re in. So, Trump is going to do what he does delay, deny, lie, obfuscate. The Justice Department has to do what it does in that as follow the facts and make a determination about what will defend the rule of law. And Congress has to assess of the compromise to our national security. And that`s what we will do on the Intelligence Committee.
PHANG: But representative, how long do you think it`s going to take for that process to happen? Do you have any insight that you can share with us?
WELCH: I don`t, you know, direct your hands to someone on a bipartisan basis. We have enormous confidence in, and some of the questions will be — will — when will she be able to get access to all that material? That was at Mar-a-Lago, so I don`t have the time, but time is of the essence, and the sooner the better in order to protect the American people in their national security interests.
PHANG: Notably, Senator McConnell, as you heard at the beginning of your segment, didn`t want to comment. I am not surprised. I`m not surprised. You didn`t want to touch that hot potato. But what are you hearing from your colleagues in Congress about what was discovered at Mar-a-Lago?
WELCH: Well, they`re kind of freaked out, seriously. I mean, if former president leaving the White House with boxes of top-secret information, I mean, that just doesn`t happen. It`s never happened. Whether it`s been a Republican Party or a Democrat Party. I mean, you know, the mysteries that Donald Trump didn`t even go to the inauguration of his successor on precedent.
And it was like he was taking that time to just pack extra boxes in the van to go down to Mar-a-Lago. So, none of us can really understand this because it is norm-shattering. And frankly very, very dangerous to democracy because this democracy that we have depends on the peaceful transfer of power, the acceptance of the decision of the American people about who they want to be their president. And of course, President Trump has promoted the big lie, and this is all part of it.
[18:55:00]
PHANG: Congressman Peter Welch, I`m sorry, I wasn`t sure if my sound had cut out. I was just about to say before, we have to wrap, I think the adjective unprecedented is one that you`ve used, but I also think it`s wearing out its welcome. I think we`re going to have to find a new one, but it is completely accurate. There has been nothing like we`ve seen with Donald Trump. Representative I really appreciate you being here tonight. Thank you.
WELCH: Thank you very much.
PHANG: And ahead, reaction pouring in on Ari`s report on Jay-Z and drug reform from LeBron to Jay-Z himself.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
PHANG: Finally, tonight, some big-name reaction to a report that Ari did last night right here on THE BEAT, showing how a new song from Jay-Z critiqued decades of injustice in the so-called war on drugs. It got lots of feedback, including from Jay-Z himself and from Lebron James.
LeBron shared the report and wrote, listen, then listen again, to make sure you got the point. Jay-Z then followed up saying, quote, my only goal is to make the real ones feel seen. He also said that`s my passion talking.
If you missed the report last night you can see the pinned tweet at the top of THE BEAT`s Twitter page or go to YouTube and search Jay-Z and Melber. That does it for me. “THE REIDOUT WITH JOY REID” is up next.