was declassified when he left. fine, it still doesn t matter. the espionage act does not care if they are classified. it is national defense information. that is all that matters. it could ve been declassified until they were blue in the face. they could still bring the charges. and the fact the feds have managed to bring a case under the espionage act, on unclassified information. i don t think they will need to, because it will be classified anyways. but that s not a defense. as a political attack, he s got, and he needs to pay money. nothing more. well bradley moss, neil katyal, andrew weissmann, thank you very much for doing double duty tonight. and joining us into live broadcast of the last word. we really appreciate it. absolutely. thank you very much. we ll be right back with congressman, eric swalwell.
here is what donald trump s criminal defense lawyer, james trusty, said on television tonight. this is not publicly accurate because i m not looking at a charging document, i am looking at a summary sheet. so there s ones that might actually be reflecting on single counts too. but i think there was a conspiracy count as well. that means that there could be other indictments, have you been told that anyone else is indicted here? we weren t in fisa of anyone else being indicted. and i have a theory that some of the outrageous misconduct has affected in some other case. potential target. but bottom line is all we know about is our client. donald trump has been ordered to surrender for arrest processing and arraignment in federal court in miami on tuesday at three pm. this is how we got to hear. four months after donald trump left the white house, the
is to say no when a client wants you to do something wrong. like submit a false certification to the department of justice. or go on tv and spout a lot of nonsense. which, it s totally right. if you are a lawyer, the three of us are listening to this as you play at. just shaking our heads because it s hard to know where to begin. because it s just not within the bounds of what a criminal statute provides, and what could be a possible legal or factual defense. nail, what i hear and when i listen to trump s defense lawyers speak. is i hear the strength, apparent strength of jack smith s prosecution case. because i m not hearing a single thing that penetrates any thing we know about the case. i m not hearing a single thing that sounds like it could create reasonable doubt on some aspect of what we expect the evidence and the pleadings and the arguments to be in this case? that is exactly right, lawrence. when you talk about how donald trump was surprised by this indictment tonight, i
so that would be the third time. and then, the idea that jack smith is not going to bring a january 6th case seems farfetched may. so we could very much find ourselves with the front runner for the republican nomination. for the presidency of the united states. is under indictment for, four times. which is just truly remarkable. and as rachel said earlier, it s really more about what it says about our country than this type of person that was elected even once. and is leaving a major party when he has no business being behind bars. leader of the free world. bradley moss, it seems like a long time, as we sit here tonight. correct me if i m wrong, i believe it s monday that donald trump s criminal defense lawyers had a meeting with jack smith. and his prosecution team to try to convince them that donald trump committed no crimes? i had one of donald trump s former criminal defense lawyers,
i went to see general forward in his home in colorado. which was on as ski run. nicest man on earth. well-intentioned. and i said, why did you pardon nixon so quickly? why didn t you at least wait for him to be fingerprinted. so that people would feel that there was equal justice in this country. and he said two things. number one, i did not have the stomach for this to go on. it was distracting people from my presidency. and they also took out of his wallet, as he did for many other people. a little card which was printed with a case called birdie versus the united states. 1950. which said that when somebody except a pardon, it is an admission of guilt. those things are never really explain to me. and as much as i admire many things about general forwards