pop up here and there. we saw in the indictment about bedminster and the writing of a book, and journalists being present, even aipac person like susie wildes. like, it s a kind of stuff we think jack smith would have beaten already? he might. katie, it could be valuable. as what you know, it s for a four b evidence. evidence of the persons common scheme or plan. even if he doesn t charge it, you can use that as evidence to show that trump is very reckless on he handles classified information. so, every piece of evidence brings value. yeah, in that evidentiary rule would allow the prosecution to basically say it wasn t a mistake, right? it wasn t an accident or mistake on the part of trump. it s part of what he does. it s a part of his motive and his modus operandi. barbara mcquade, as always, i appreciate you being here. thank you for joining us this morning. thank you, katie. coming up next, abortion desert. health care workers are warning the accelerating abortion bans
the fact as katy just said, he disclosed classified information to the oval office, and in fact, brought their news people into the oval office, incredibly, as well, as posting a picture of an iranian facility that was classified when he was president. can that sloppiness be brought in as evidence? so there is a rule called 404 b. prosecutors say this is 404 b evidence. what they mean is, if you ve got relevant evidence that, on either side that you think can help prove the case, even though it is not part of the technical charges, then the court can allow that. and the court weighs, is it more probative than prejudicial? if the court finds that, you can bring in other things. a really good example of something that i think would be very relevant is his statements about hillary clinton and what he said about classification and how seriously he takes it.
no. trace: of course, he s laying the ground work for the appeal. bob, your thoughts. he s bringing out statements about the footprints and the investigative errors and there were errors in this case. that would be a great appellate issue. the appellate issue at play from every homicide prosecutor including myself is the introduction of the character evidence that they call it for 404 b evidence. that evidence that rule is a rule of exclusion, which means you just can t go to trial and beat somebody up that they re a bad person or no good. therefore, they must be guilty of this crime. however, there are exceptions to that rule. for example, if the evidence goes towards motive, the government argued all the previous financial crimes should be admitted as the motive to why it is he killed his son and his wife. now, that s really on the line. the judge allowed it in. what most of us fund problematic this is whether or not you like murdaugh or not.