ndnu prepares you for careers in classes start year-round. advance your career at ndnu dot edu today. msnbc world headquarters in new york. welcome to the new report. we begin with new developments in the mar-a-lago search. this is from the doj. they talk about what could happen if surveillance video of the fbi search of mar-a-lago gets released. the doj officials say that the department would hope that caution and carry would be used by anyone with access to that footage. last hour, former trump lawyer michael cohen gave his thoughts on how trump could approach this situation. if they believe that the tape that benefited them, i promise you that tape would have already been released as we are speaking right now. obviously, they know that it does not. there are thousands and thousands of cameras thrilled mar-a-lago. i can assure you that at the time the rate was taking place, they were watching the raid. they were watching the fbi agents going through the property. that c
it, says about trump s supporters? will they continue this level of support, considering trump s protracted legal battles? by the way, where does all this money go? well, these are questions that not a lot of people are asking. there is certainly precedent for this. this seems to be happening whenever trump feels under siege, whenever he gets exposed, whenever some level of investigation is being brought upon him. i mean, people do rally around him. it s their staying power to? that this actually reflects an initial spasm of loyalty? in response to its own kind of fundraising drive from donald trump the various organizations, or does that sort of level off again, once more facts are known? i think what s interesting here is how republicans have responded to him. it was certainly the off the wagons first, but you ve heard a lot more trepidation, maybe qualified support, but not so much the full breath that we
search was prompted in part by some surveillance video footage. it showed the boxes in one of these storage rooms. i could certainly be part of it. we get the detail on the affidavit. it is definitely intriguing to think about what is in that document. that could contain a witness name. there are details about the investigation. the doj official who testified during that hearing said that it would be a roadmap for their next steps. just by getting not affidavit, getting that search warrant, we know that they found some evidence, some potential evidence that the crime had being committed. whatever is in that document could, you know, lead to it could reveal to the trump team and the public where the trump department is headed. this is a way that the justice department feels is potentially dangerous. trump and his lawyers may not know who the so-called mole is, right? here is the question, do trump and his lawyers do not know
one of trump s lawyers, for not falling a motion to unseal the affidavit. that made him look bad. what more can you tell us about this motion in the race behind it? it sounds like this motion is gonna be centered around some sort of way to get a special master appointed in order to review the material seized from mar-a-lago. i do think that the reasoning behind it is interesting. certainly, trump is working his way. it has been around 14 days now says the search took place. i kind of dug into this a little bit yesterday. it sounded like the former president was not happy with the way that laura ingraham ham from fox news pulled apart christina bob, one of his lawyers. he said, well, why did you file a claim or some sort of motion with respect to the redacted affidavit? from the docket, you cannot challenge it going forward. it seems like this is almost a knee-jerk reaction.
threats that will likely come to those who participated. it has to be something that the doj is worried about right now. they re concerned that if those sources and methods are revealed, those individuals will be in jeopardy. yeah. yeah they re fine, surely, those names will be redacted. at least, in the short term. obviously, things get out, and we don t know always how they do. nonetheless, surely, that would be the first thing to be redacted, protecting the sources. i think you re right. but clues that would give people the idea that they could identify the sources are just as damaging, and it doesn t mean that those chasing those clues we ll be right when the names are redacted, and it s no less safe for those people who could be falsely or accurately identified as having been involved. that s one of the things i think the fbi, the department, or thinking about as they continue what s the release, giving judges. let me play something one of trump s lawyer said about security