documents. that would mean these statements given after november 2nd were false, that this wasn t inadvertent. we re looking at not just what the president knew or intended when these documents were removed in 2017. we re also looking for knowledge that these documents existed through that six-year period. if the president worked off or looked at classified material, he clearly had knowledge. it wasn t inadvertent they were in these locations. we just don t know that. so the answer to the new york times article might be the same. bill: it continues now. we re trying to figure this out on our own and using your big legal mind to help us through it. back to the new york times. in addition the documents found at mr. biden s residence were in a garage in his private homes that serves as a gathering place for his family on the weekends. by contrast mr. trump s estate is a private club that hosts large parties and events close
obviously the statute is very clear that it s a gross negligence or reckless standard and but you do look to what qualifies under those those intent like characteristics and if there was one location and he says he takes it very seriously then maybe that was inadvertent but now we have at least 3 locations. 20 pages have been found of classified clearly marked documents. and, you know, if he takes it seriously then he knew what the markings meant and having them in the library, home in addition to his garage, i think suggests that maybe it wasn t inadvertent. how can it be inadvertent, correct me if i m wrong, don t these classified documents all essentially have red markings or these red cover sheets that would be pretty difficult to look at it and not realize, maybe i shouldn t have this sitting next to my car. to your point, if you remember the famous picture of what they found at mar-a-lago, that s what they looked like, very obvious red or yellow
box to or outright resisted, because crews are, among other things, a team s work. donald trump, is very good at teamwork. and that may be why, as mentioned, the committee has so many witnesses, including trump aides, and plenty of republicans, who were out here, testifying in detail under oath to his illicit goals in demands. joining us now is professor melissa murray from new york law school. coast of strict scrutiny podcast, and is an educator, and we believe somewhat more skill that teamwork. thanks for joining us on this friday night. thanks for having me, ari. we just laid out where the committee is headed, including some of the theory of the case, walk us through your thoughts on that. i think the big thing here is they are very much trying to show the number was on trump at the center of all these things machinations, this wasn t inadvertent or coincidental. this was something he wanted to