and as the select committee found, there were four more voices and more credible voices explaining directly to the president that there was no evidence of by-election fraud, as chris krebs said in that statement, no evidence that he voting the scenes were compromised in any way. so, the stuff that the special counsel can really lay a foundation that there were true sellers surrounding the president, telling him, again and again, truthfully, that there was no such evidence, it makes his reliance on other witnesses less and less reasonable. and that s why it s directly relevant to potential criminal prosecution on the former president. and you see special counsel smith s interest in the loyalty tests that was given to potential employees as an extension of that line of inquiry? yes.
the chairman secretly feared that trump would insist on launching a strike on iranian interests that could set off a full blown war. so, general milley was worried that president trump would use the pretext of a war with iran to stay in power, which is, i guess, one way to do it. now, that war, obviously, never came to pass. instead, trump pulled many other insane levers to stay in the white house. but this new yorker story was a big deal. and in that month there were similar articles in the washington post and another in other outlets, and trump was apparently furious. the summer the new yorker article came out, trump was so publicly enraged by all the reporting about general milley and general milley s campaign to stop trump from starting this waco war to stay in office, that trump even released a statement. if i was going to do a coup, one of the last people i would want to do it with is general mark milley. if i was going to do a coup we now know that all that reporting about gen
here. and there is a political and public opinion piece here. so, let s deal with the legal first. it s critical and we have been reporting at the post for, i think, nine months, that prosecutors did not have evidence to suggest at least months and months ago did not have any hard evidence to suggest donald trump took these documents to, quote unquote, make money, make bank on this material, but that it was really about, like, these are mine. i m really still the president. i have things to brag about and boast about. and i hold on to these. we know that prosecutors have continued to investigate, under jacks mitt, ever since the special counsel was appointed in november of last year. prosecutors have continued to seek information about the possibility that donors were encouraged or a lured by the flashing of these documents, that essentially, donald trump s boasting of what he had was used to create some favor with donors and to bring the money
such a small motive in flashing around material that would be valuable to an adversary, that would be dangerous to get into the wrong hands, that would cause grave danger to americans security. this is the trade-off that they are being presented within this future trial that the three of us are envisioning. well, presumably, these are not the only tapes that jack smith has. there s so much more to talk about but we have to leave it there. tali farhadian weinstein and carol leonnig, it s a great to hear from you both. thanks for joining me tonight. so, that was new bombshell reporting on special counsel jack smith s mar-a-lago investigation. and when we come back, we will begin to the fresh reporting on the special counsel s other big investigation into trump s role in january 6th. that is just ahead. stick around. k around (fisher investments) in this market, you ll find fisher investments is different than other money managers. (other money manager) different how? aren t we all just
very useful in an espionage case from mar-a-lago. yeah, which is not something we ve been talking about mostly from obstruction, as it pertains to mar-a-lago, not so much the espionage act. carol, i know the washington post has done some important so important we ve bookmarked it on our browser reporting about trump s motivation for holding on to these documents. and i wonder how you think this creates a more vivid picture of that motivation, and whether the degree to which this could really just be, as tali says, ego. so, i m glad you asked. and i could not agree more with tali farhadian weinstein about the importance of the motive, in telling the story. i ve interviewed enough prosecutors to know that the most important thing to know when they go to trial is, how do we tell the story how do we connect all these dots and make it make sense to our jurors? and there is a legal piece