second not guilty plea in a matter of two days. these are based on the additional charges wrought by the special counsel in the superseding indictment we saw in florida in the classified documents case last week. with the filing beans, this not guilty plea on paper, it means trump likely will not be in court for what will be an arraignment date next week in florida. he can submit this plea on the papers. these were charges, specifically one count of willful retention of national defense documents. also two additional obstruction counts in that is related to the alleged attempts to destroy the surveillance footage at mar- a-lago. they added the additional defendant as well. trump will not be in court next week in florida. this is coming at the same time the former resident isg out about all of this on his ueocial page. saying my political opponent
vivek, thank you for coming on, we always appreciate your time. thank you, trace. trace: meantime security in the nation s capitol on alert with former president trump s court appearance just hours away on charges that he repeatedly spoke his mind saying the 2020 election was stolen. the senior national correspondent kevin corke is live in dc with the very latest on this kevin good evening. reporter: evening trace. the former president expected to appear tomorrow afternoon at the federal courthouse over on constitution avenue not far from here his arraignment set for 4:00 p.m. eastern time. the former president now faces four conspiracy and obstruction counts, and it should be pointed out we also expect to learn tomorrow his bail conditions. now, because of the high profile nature of the arraignment, you re right. there are expected to be major street closures in the area and, given the time of day, to say nothing of the time of year, you know, tourist season, some are expecting
that the judges are in charge in the courtroom. the magistrate judge s admonition to him not to influence jurors he s a different man than the one arraigned in mar-a-lago s case because now there are additional obstruction counts against him. it makes perfect sense to admonish him about that because that threat has grown larger but it also creates a potential conundrum here. almost everything he says when he s insulting prosecutor, witnesses, in a normal case can be construed as trying to affect jurors. if he gets called on that, it s going to set up quite a train wreck. in a normal case, he could be held in contempt. that s going to immediately tee up the first amendment argument and the way it s not teed up.
going to look like the indictments will continue. that s not what you want. jonathan turley, thank you. we appreciate your expertise. i m sure i will be seeing a lot more of you as this breaking news is unfolded. bret baier is going to take over in about 9 minutes. it s been a rollicking hour. what do you make out things so far? it is find something. first put it in 30,000 feet perspective for this is the former president of the united states being indicted for the third time. but it is interesting, jesse makes an interesting point. these charges are obstruction counts. they deal with overturning the election. they don t deal with inspiring as far as actual movement of people or the attack or the riots on the capital. there was some thought that there was good to be something about the coordination behind the scenes with folks in the oath keepers. it s not inherence far as we can see. a couple of other points for the
two-minute warning. our producer is in the front row there and ready to ask questions, if we get a chance. with that, let s bring in our analysis our legal eagles. former assistant united states attorney andy mccarthy, george washington university law professor jonathan turley. gentlemen, thanks for being here. to repeat, two conspiracy counts, to obstruction counts. conspiracy to defraud the u.s. conspiracy to obstruct a official proceeding. obstruction of a official proceeding. conspiracy against rights. what do you see and what don t you see? first to andy. i think, unfortunately, bret, this is as weak as it was foretold to be you see a lot of deceitful conduct. the problem jack schmitz has is that congress has not enacted statutes that directly criminalize the behavior that smith is talking about. so what he has to do is it distort statutes in order to try