this is the katie phang show, live from miami, florida. we have lots of news to cover and lots of questions to answer. so, let s get started. classified chaos! and the smoking gun in the damning classified documents indictment against former president, donald trump, is so sensitive his lawyers have to get special security clearance. plus, the twice impeached now twice indicted one term disgraced ex president cannot stop incriminating himself. my question is, what does all of this mean for the special counsel s case? msnbc legal analyst and friends of the show, joyce vance, joins us in just a few minutes to break this case down like only she can. plus, karma. 30 plus years after trump slashed for placed ads in the new pay for the central park 51 of the now central park 51 of the now exonerated young man has a lot to say about the presidents legal troubles. and his own plans to bring leaders to his community. use of salaam joins us live coming up. later, turning tragedy into tr
question. it is really tough to imagine that they will avoid the topic entirely. will it come up in a way that ultimately causes prosecutors to ask the judge to you know he s not even on a bond. can we revoke his pre trial release? we will have to watch how that pans. out katie i, know you were surprised, like i, was to see the government not at least request some form of bond. not involve some restrictions on international travel. the reporting has been the jacks mitt wanted to avoid anything that could be a drawn out delay. a drawn out fight. any sort of allegation that he, or prosecutors, were interfering with the current candidates ability to campaign. this one is a little bit of a head-scratcher because i think we will see other defendants going into court and saying well, if donald trump doesn t have to have a bond or any conditions why should i have them? everyone is so quick to talk about how they are not supposed to be treating donald trump differently than, quote regular cr
quickly, joyce, in the time say we have left the new york times is reporting that trump aileen cannon doesn t have his notch trial experience that someone should have if they re having a lifetime federal point on the bench. how much of a concern is that going into a case as complicated as this? national security cases, cipa, these concepts are not common, at all. if you have a young inexperienced judged on the bench should there be a fear that she is not necessarily going to follow the law? maybe she will just follow her gut? i think there are two separate things going on here. there are legitimate concerns about them judge hannon s concern of bias when she was handling the mar-a-lago concern. they told that they did not have jurisdiction to be involved in this matter. that is a separate issue. ultimately it is my judgment that the government would be wise to pursue recusal before they get into a trial situation where double jeopardy attaches