probe into an ex-president s handling of classified material. new york times notes that it is incredibly rare for even a partial affidavit to be released at all. they add this, quote, the submission by the justice department is a significant legal mile post in an investigations that has swiftly emerged as a major threat to trump, whose lawyers have offered a confused and at times stumbling response, but it is also an inflexion point for attorney general merrick garland who is trying to balance protecting the prosecutorial process by keeping secret details of the investigation and providing enough information to defend his decision to request a search unlike any other in history. the impending release of a critical document in doj s investigation into the ex-president is where we begin today with some of our favorite reporters and friends. carol leonnig is here and former national security adviser to president obama and neal katyal is back former solicitor general and now law
that the cameras will undermine the decorum. we have recent examples. the trial of derek chauvin, they allowed cameras in the courtroom. that was a fair, dignified proceeding. it gave the american public confidence that justice was done. we saw the trial of kyle rittenhouse people didn t like the result, but they were conducted fairly. same thing with the trial in the killing of ahmaud arkansas but ri. all three of those we got to watch it and gave the american people confidence in the proceedings and the outcomes. just the judge can decide? it s a little complicate d. there s a federal rule of criminal procedure that says no cameras in the courtroom. but that can be changed. the federal courts can do what they want in this respect. it starts with the judicial conference, which chief justice roberts is in charge of. but they can start the ball rolling by saying i would leak
stolen. that would, if he took the stand, go a long way to developing a number of his defenses, that he looked the intent, he relied on his attorneys. as everyone knows, it is a massive risk, even as bill barr is of the opinion that this could be a disaster if he did take the stand. the other thing we have been asking is will there be cameras in the courtroom. federal court, no cameras is the standard. no case like this has happened before. federal rule of criminal procedure 53 flat out prohibits this. but in the from 2011 to 2015, the courts had a pilot program where they experimented with video cameras in civil cases. so, while it is generally true federal courts never allow video cameras, they have shown a little weakening on this point in the last decade or so. and strangely enough, those three districts in that pilot program including the district of guam kept video in the courtroom after that pilot program concluded.
what concerns me most isn t the fact that she was appointed by a former president. what concerns me most, in an earlier iteration of this case, she decided to grant trump s motion to try and obtain a special master to review documents that were collected at mar-a-lago. that was a decision that was just not based in the law, period. it was a political argument in search of a legal theory. in that decision was actually overturned by a three judge panel of the 11th circuit, two members of whom were actually appointed by the former president. so, it s not really about who appoint you. it s about what you do once you are on the bench. that bias concerns me. how could she affect this particular case? i mean, in ways big and small. but just to be sure that people are aware, there s this thing called rule 29, it s a federal rule of criminal procedure. it allows judges, at a certain point to say, there s not
methods, and three, grand jury information protected by federal rule of criminal procedure 6 e. so all of that will certainly be blacked out. what we see tomorrow maybe could provide some procedural details, nothing substantial, but some details procedurally about why the search at mar-a-lago happened. so there could be some tidbits in there that broaden the public s knowledge since the goal was to make at least some information, put it out there in the public. so we ll see what we get. now former nixon white house counsel john dean, federal judge nancy gertner, also with us tonight senior law enforcement analyst andrew mccabe. judge gertner, were you surprised the judge made this call to release the redacted affidavit? i was. i was very surprised. the only thing that i think your reporter had it right, that it must be that the government showed that it can disclose something without sort of