the fbi search at trump s mar-a-lago home still the biggest story in the country. a big development over an hour ago regarding the search al mar-a-lago. the judge who approved the search warrant will hear argument as 1:00 p.m. thursday about whether to unseal the search warrant affidavit. the doj has asked a judge to keep it sealed while the former president wants it released. while we re focused on the former president s legal troubles, he s not the only one in the trump orbit facing legal entanglements. rudy giuliani is now a target in georgia s 2020 election probe and is scheduled to go before a special grand jury tomorrow. another longtime trump ally, allan weisselberg is expected to plead guilty to criminal charges in a tax case tied to the manhattan das office. we just learned former white house lawyer eric hirsh man who testified before the house
election. trump s former secretary of state mike pompeo also met with january 6th investigators today. the panel has shown particular interest in talking to former cabinet members about conversations they might have had about invoking the 25th amendment. all of this comes amid the political fallout from the fbi search at trump s mar-a-lago home. let s discuss, and boy, is there a lot to discuss today. where to even start? i m going to start with the republican here at the table. the outrage came quickly. from republicans in the wake of the fbi search at mar-a-lago. but a few voices haven t have been absence. it s really interesting. you have the minority leader, mitch mcconnell, staying quiet at last check, saying he wanted to focus on the flooding in kentucky just recently. senators roy blunt, john thune, they haven t said anything about this. you have a lot of people in the republican side, i just interviewed one, congressman turner, outraged about this or conveying outrage, but so
merrick garland, chris wray, come to the house judiciary committee this friday and answer our questions about this answer today, which has never happened in american history. what was on the warrant. what wuyour really doing, what wuyour looking for? why not talk to president trump and have him give the information you re after? our team has learned trump was aware of federal investigators probing these potentially classified documents he took to mar-a-lago. trump interacted with investigators when they visited his florida home, and in april and may, trump aides at mar-a-lago were interviewed by the fbi as part of a probe into the handling of presidential records. pamela, so far, there s been no comment from the attorney general, merrick garland, nor the fbi director, chris wray, and the white house press secretary actually just said that president biden has not been briefed at all on this search or any investigation here. all right, jessica schneider, thank you for that. i want
procedures for doing so. and he can t do it retroactively. however, we are looking at some statutes, potential violation of statutes that don t involve classified information, that simply involve the mutilation or destruction of official documents. that statute, for example, carries with it a potential for three years in jail as well as a disqualification from holding office. asterisk there, it s highly debatable whether that carries weight constitutionally, but there are a range, i would note, of vileses. it seems that trump and his team withheld information or perhaps gave false statements to investigators. i agree with phil. this goes beyond a mere violation of the presidential records act. this had to be signed off by the highest levels at doj. maerrick garland, lisa monaco, chris wray of the fbi. these are pretty heavy hitters.
they know the political implications of this. even though doj is not supposed to be political. they understand what s happening. they better have the goods. you mentioned some federal laws there. one of them says whoever willfully and unlawfully conceals, removes, mutilates, obliberates, falsifies, or destroys official documents should be fined or imprisoned not more than three years or both and shall forfeit his office and be disqualified from holding any office under the united states. so then caroline, and i want to get your reaction to this, phil, does this mean if trump is convicted of this charge, he cannot run for office again? no. it doesn t. it almost certainly will be litigated. as with so many things in trump world, we are in unchartered territory here. that statute has never been challenged in this way, and indeed, many legal scholars have commented that it s likely an unconstitutional prohibition on