i m sure some of these people are listed in that affidavit describing what documents are there and what they did to try and keep the doj away from these documents. andrew mackay, the times also reports how mar-a-lago had surveillance footage going back 60 days for some areas of the property. people were showing boxes in and out, in some places appearing to change containers. some documents were held in. when you hear how these government documents were being handled, how does that sound to you? well, it sounds like there was more activity around the documents, and people had access to the documents. people moving documents. then what was promptly represented to the department of justice at that june meeting. that likely caused great concern on the part of the investigators. you have to remember, don, this is essentially like any investigation in which you would access video surveillance. so let s say you had somebody
the current executive, and this entire brief, quite frankly. looks like it was written by negligence or an insurance lawyer. because they just don t understand the privilege issues here. his trump really had an issue with attorney-client privilege, if he was concerned that something in there was a communication between him and one of his attorneys. he would ve put in a declaration to that effect. he would ve supported that memo with some kind of real evidence. but there is none. i mean, i just don t see the judge ordering that this investigation stop or that there be a special mastery report. all right, nick andrew thank you for starting us off. i appreciate it, see you soon. is this all about a legal filing or a pr offensive and who is it really aimed at?
documents? why were documents being taken in and out of this room? was it coinciding with requests that were made by the department of justice? now, i am sure that all of these documents are also being fingerprinted right now. the department of justice wants to know who handled these documents. it is all part of a bigger investigation in terms of what happened and who had access to these documents. so there are, i shouldn t say others, because we don t know exactly who was a target, i mean, there has been lots of speculation, you know, our legal analysts have said they believe it is. but do you think that more people could have some sort of exposure for potential aiding and abetting or helping, the helping of this potential crime? nick? oh, absolutely, because there was so many people involved there. there were people who brought the documents there, people who have to know they were there. they were are also certainly people that basically snitched on trump.
search warrant, had the folks at mar-a-lago simply given back everything they had, it is my strong suspicion that the government would have collected their documents and gone away. the whole thing would have essentially gone away. but it seems to be the indications that there was resistance and possibly folks weren t playing straight with them from mar-a-lago in terms of their requests that lit a fire in the justice department in pursuit of a search warrant. yeah, it s odd. meaning that somebody nick, the new york times reporting that investigators are seeking additional surveillance footage from mar-a-lago. including the weeks leading up to the august 8th search. what does it mean that authorities are still scrutinizing how these documents were handled? well, i think it is all part of this espionage investigation. they want to know who had access to them? who actually saw these