not impossible. kaitlan collins? -- captions by vitac -- www.vitac.com jake, it is 9:00 p.m. in atlanta. we are sitting outside the fulton county jail where donald john trump, the 45th president of the united states was booked as inmate here less than an hour ago. he has already departed. it is also the place where he became the first former or sitting president ever to have his photo taken for a mug shot, a mug shot that you can see here, created during the booking process for his fourth felony booking -- his fourth booking, i should note. the vital statistics read, suspiciously trumpian. he is listed as 6'3", 215 pounds, blue eyes, hair given as -- and i'm quoting now from the booking sheet -- blonde or strawberry. i should note that what we were told before he arrived here by our sources is that was going to be paperwork aides filled out, not actually here at the jail. trump was in and out of the jail in about 20 minutes, arrested, booked, photographed, and fingerprinted. and then he was released under a bond agreement, much like his codefendants. he did not pay the full $2,000, one of the highest bonds we have seen in this entire case. instead he used a bail bonding company called foster bail bonds, llc, another historic first. a short time later, trump was on the way back to his bedminster golf course after about an hour and 20 minutes, inmate p 01135809, wheels up. i'm here outside the fulton county jail with sara murray. but now also joining us is anthony kries, assistant professor of law at georgia college of law. thank you for being here. now that we've seen him go through this process like the other defendants have with a few tweaks, what are you looking for next? >> i think we have a lot of processes to go through in order to figure out what courts these defendants are going to be tried in and how severance might play in. so, what defendants will be tried together. and of course the timing, right? we've got a motion to have an expedited trial for kenneth chesebro in october, november, that time frame. and it's possible that other defendants will want that and others will not. so, there's a lot of motions to go through. >> so, what they made clear today is that timeline. that only applies to him. that's what the judge ruled today. it doesn't apply to all 19 defendants in this case. >> that's correct. >> is that an aggressive timeline? is it doable? what's your sense? >> it's funny. i think when fani willis initially said she wants this done in six months, most of us familiar with the processes in fulton county thought that was probably aggressive and wishful thinking on her part. but it does seem to be the case that they anticipated that some of the defendants would in fact make this demand and seem to be quite ready to go to trial on that timeline. >> she also told me at that time she wanted to try all 19 of these defendants together. and i wonder if you see someone like ken chesebro pushing for a speedy trial, trump team saying, no, no, we don't want that. does that put in jeopardy this plan to actually be able to try all of these defendants in one sweeping rico case? >> certainly they have diverging interests. ken chesebro is only charged with a bunch of conspiracy charges. he doesn't have his fingerprints on things in the way that donald trump has his fingerprints on things or some of the other defendants. donald trump also has an election to campaign for. >> speaking of that election, what we are looking at now is a remarkable image some thought we would never see. sara, we covered trump together in the white house. his first few indictments, they made up a fake mug shot that they were selling on t-shirts. there was this sense of they felt upset there wasn't a mug shot before. now that there's a real one, how does it change the calculus for them? zbliets hard to imagine they don't somehow use this to their advantage or attempted advantage or fundraising or merchandising. you get the same emails i get in the run-up to his appearance here saying, i'm going to be arrested, please donate. we know they need the money because they've spent a lot of money on legal fees, not just for the former president but on a number of witnesses and codefendants involved the in other cases. >> it's just remarkable. they're just reminding people that he has a mug shot and has been indicted on these charges here. >> it's sort of the way he's gotten a full day of television coverage today for showing up to be arrested and processed. i mean, normally, you wouldn't love that kind of a news cycle. but it's the day after a republican debate and donald trump got to take the wind out of the sails of all these other republicans who were trying to nip at his heels, so far pretty much unsuccessfully. he happened to do so by being arrested. >> and they tried to do so when they had the microphone last night. when you were talking about the test this is going to be. this isn't just cases together. it's a broad sweeping set of charges here in addition to the other ones. what does that look like for the system here in atlanta in and of itself? if they try to try this jury or set this jury up while they're getting other juries for other massive cases? >> i think people need to be aware that fulton county's criminal justice system is pretty rough. it's slow going. we have a rico trial right now in the ysl case that has taken eight, nine months just to get a jury in panel. we're not ready to go to trial yet. and that gums up the entire system. that takes up the courtroom. so, you know, especially if there's going to be multiple trials, not just one trial of 19 codefendants. that's really liable to tax the d.a.'s office here and the criminal justice system. and i think, you know, it's really going to test the system to see how efficient we can be into bringing these cases to trial and to an ultimate conclusion. >> i'm also just curious whether we're going to see donald trump in a courtroom here. i mean, the judge has not yet set arraignments for a number of these arraignments. but for ken chesebro, who, again, asked for a speedy trial, set an arraignment on september 6th, unless chesebro wants to weigh in, which seems the judge is going to be inclined to waive arraignments potentially for other defendants in this case. it does feel like a question mark of when is trump going to be in a courtroom. >> we will see monday -- it hasn't gotten time and attention frankly because there's things like donald trump's mug shot we're looking at and watching the hisstoric scene that played out behind us. mark meadows who are similarly has a mug shot, trying to move this to a federal court from a state court. fa fani willis has subpoenaed the secretary of state, brad raffensperger, to come and testify. what does that tell you about what monday is going to look like? and what does it mean if trump follows through? >> i think monday is going to be interesting for a couple of reasons. we've heard so little from mark meadows in any of these criminal cases. the fact his legal team is first out of the gate to make this challenge and show up in court -- and there are going to be live witnesses, not just brad raffensperger, but a couple of other attorneys that were on this infamous call between donald trump and brad raffensperger where he's asking raffensperger to find the votes. this is an opportunity for willis to try to make the case that what was happening on this call was not a part of mark meadows' official duties as the white house chief of staff, that this was political activity, that this was, in her view, illegal activity, and that this should be a case that's -- i'm also curious, i mean, are we going to hear from mark meadows underoath? >> i think we're in store for a full fledged evidentiary hearing. >> can you translate for the people watching at home why that's going to be so important here. >> it's essential to determine whether mark meadows was acting under the color of law. fani willis has said no. you've tried to do two things. one, you were engaging in partisan election nearing, which federal officials are not allowed to do under the hatch act. and she also said you were trying to overthrow an election, which is also not permitted under federal law or is not part of a federal officer's duty. they have the complete opposite duty, right, to protect the electoral process. the evidence that will be brought forth through witnesses and arguments that will be shown in court will fundamentally be asking what were people up to and trying to measure that testimony up against their official duties to see, you know, whether that rose should be shielded by the federal rules statute or whether it should be an issue decided in state courts. >> trump's team has been deeply suspicious. >> kaitlan, thanks so much. we're joined in new york with our panel, jim jordan, testified before the georgia grand jury is also just joining us. what are your thoughts upon seeing the mug shot and all that we've seen today? >> it's pretty incredible. i mean, we've had so much buildup to this point. and as someone who has been part of this scheme, being a big player or a character, it seems, this feels very real and important and heavy. and i hope that everyone who is watching, who is listening, understands this is historic and not in a good way. >> and a lot of people's lives are at stake and a lot of people's lives have been ruined because of the actions of these defendants. >> absolutely. >> election workers who have had their lives -- >> look, election workers. it's really a cavalier way that a lot of folks in trump world acted, especially when it came to just normal people doing their jobs, right? and the statement they made and the way they targeted election workers, which then resulted in folks really fearing for their lives. >> you said -- you call yourself a good player in this. can you explain why you were testifying, what role you were -- >> yeah, a big player in the sense i was in the georgia state senate at the time of the giuliani hearings, served with former lieutenant governor geoff duncan, was present, was there, witnessed and really tried to push back on everything they were doing. and i'll tell you at the time, i had no clue just how expanexpansive it was. it seemed to me, this doesn't even make sense, right? i didn't even understand why they were trying to push some of these theories. as a lawyer for over 20 years, i know the constitution, georgia and federal, and the things that john eastman were saying did not comport with the constitution, certainly didn't comport with georgia law. but it was one of those things where the folks that were in the room that believed it and wanted it and were pushing it, they wanted to make sure that message got out to the larger public. and i think that was the kernel, the beginning of what we saw happened on january 6th. when i was there, i had no clue that that kind of first step, those first overt acts that happened in the georgia state capitol on december 3rd would lead to what we saw on january 6th. >> geoff duncan, you're lieutenant governor, were you of the same mind frame? did it make sense to you in the early days? >> looking back now, it's easy to connect the dots. but at the time there was so much chaos on the battlefield. -- gave center stage to rudy giuliani to start the deluge of misinformation that then was accepted as a fact. but reality now looking back, things like the state farm film that was presented as a group of -- one solid piece of film that was really a 48-hour film that was sliced up into 12-minute cuts. when you talk about 12,000 dead people voting in the election and now it's less than 10 probably, which is kind of standard par, you didn't realize what was going on. but you could feel something was abnormal of epic proportion. there was this coordinated effort that was always one step ahead. and there was few of us trying to figure out how to stop the trajectory of this. i didn't know january 6th was going to happen. i certainly felt like there was just a bunch of zombies following a cult leader off the cliff. and, you know, unfortunately, i never would have guessed that two and a half years later we would still be in the same situation. i would be staring at polling numbers putting this person with a mug shot and multiple, 91, indictments would be in the lead of our nomination process. >> what do you think of the idea that chesebro now is going to have a trial october 23rd and the chances that mark meadows' case will be put into federal court and even possibly the former president? >> you know, what's interesting to me is that what chesebro's attorney did, people have said he was going to try to -- you know, it was a gamble for him or he thought that maybe the district attorney wouldn't be ready. and then of course she called his bluff. i'm not sure exactly what the strategy was there because really if he goes first, he kind of gets -- he gets hung out to dry. but what folks don't realize is that he can always withdraw that, right? it's not something that is set in stone. so, if the attorneys now all get together, we now have steve -- that's come onto the scene, who is representing trump. if they say it's better for us to have a united front, then maybe he might withdraw that and he would have a trial wall of them together. i'll tell you, it is a huge, huge gamble. either we're going to say it's brilliant after october or it is going to be a colossal failure. >> do you think the former president will want to try to move his case to federal court? >> no, no. in fact they've already said -- well, not federal court. i don't think so. the reason i say that is because -- so, we know mark meadows is trying to remove it. he's in front of federal judge steve jones. steve jones is an obama appointee. he is an african american man who's a great judge and widely respected throughout the state. but if i know how trump thinks, and he's pretty, you know, consistent in terms of how he acts, you know, the fact that this is an obama appointee, a fact it is a judge that is a person of color, is going to make him pull back, especially if he thinks in fulton county he's in front after i judge that was appointed by governor kemp, a republican. he may think he's going to have a friendier audience with respect to that judge compared to going up to federal court. >> there's no comparison. i mean, the state judge just got appointed this january. judge jones, he served for years as a superior court judge in athens before he was -- before he went up to the federal bench. i mean, and judge jones is no stranger to controversial cases. he handled the abortion ban case. he's dealt with so many high-level cases that he gets it and he understands and he's not going to play around here. so, if i'm trump and i'm wanting to get kind of more bang for the buck in terms of entertainment value and all of that and also maybe think i'm going to have a friendlier judge or maybe a judge that i can push around or that my counsel can push around, i may go for the judge that has the less experience. not saying that judge mcafee is not going to be able to handle it. but he's untested right now. and really he's the unknown variable. >> with respect to every judge i've talked to, retired judge, federal judges, have all said this would be a tough case for even an incredibly experienced judge to keep control of that center courtroom. >> and this state judge has been on the bench less than a year. he's former prosecutor under the d.a. i think you make a good point about which trial judge he would prefer as between state and federal. but i would be stunned if trump does not seek to move to federal court. the counterarguments to me, the tactical advantages vastly outweigh that. whatever happens at the trial level, whatever decisions get made, whatever verdict ultimately goes up to the appeals court. federally you have the 1st1th circuit, which is very conservative. if you're trump, you want that conservative court. you're going to have a jury pool if you're donald trump in federal court. if you get into federal court, you're into the northern district of georgia. he got 68% in cherokee county, one to the north, 65% in forsythe county to the northeast. so, you would much rather be there for your jury pool. also and most importantly, if you get into federal court, then you can ask for a dismissal. there's a little bit of extra legwork that you have to do. but if you can get that as donald trump, that is the golden ring. i think these are conversations that are happening inside trump's counsel room right now. >> the lawyers are probably telling him this, and this is why drew find lg is not on the case anymore. at the end of the day, you don't have cameras in the federal courthouse, right? and what does the former president want more than anything? he wants this to be on tv. he wants to be able to perform. he wants his lawyers to be able to perform. and that is not going to happen in federal court. even if that is the absolute legal correct strategy and what any good lawyer would be telling him, i don't think this is all about the law when it comes to trump right now. >> we know the other two federal officials here, meadows and clark, have eagerly made the motion to jump over to the other side. >> they are ruled again -- if a judge determines they don't get to go to federal court, does that automatically mean -- that doesn't automatically mean the former president would -- >> it doesn't preclude him. but if you had to rank the strength of the arguments to get into federal court, to me, meadows has the best argument he was acting in his capacity as chief of staff. not saying it's a great argument, but i think meadows has the best argument. clark, saying i acted as doj when he drafted a letter falsely claiming there was fraud. trump is going to have, i think, an uphill climb arguing this was in my scope as duties as president. it's worth noting the federal governments do tend to construe this removal provision quite broadly. i think meadows has a 50/50 shot. i think trump has something less than that. but what happens with one is not going to dictate what happens with the other. >> let's go back to kaitlan in atlanta. kaitlan? >> reporter: yeah, and joining me now is john bolton, someone who worked with trump, was his former white house national security adviser. ambassador, thank you for being here tonight. i just wonder, as someone who worked inside the west wing when donald trump was president, what is it like for you to see his mug shot tonight? >> i thought it was carefully staged. they must have thought about what look they wanted. he could have smiled. he could have looked benign. instead, he looks like a thug. and i think it's intended to be a sign of intimidation against the prosecutors and judges. that's what they picked, and we'll see that picture everywhere. >> reporter: so, you think they actually spent time deciding, you know, should he smile in this? should he have this scowl that he appears to have gone with? >> almost as much time as they spent combing his hair. >> reporter: he posted the mug shot, you know, shortly after on his own social media account, along with the phrase, never surrender. i mean, a bit ironic given he had just surrendered at the fulton county jail behind me. but how do you expect him to try to use this to his political advantage, as he's running for president? >> well, i think in the same way he's used the other three indictments. and i think the evidence is that the indictments have proven the law of diminishing margin of utility. if anything, they're not undercutting his support. they're building it up. and it just underlines, to me, that a lot of what's going to happen before these trials begin is going to pass essentially unnoticed in the political realm. the real issue here is that one or more of the trials occur before the election. and then whether he's convicted or acquitted. and that's why i think this scheduling date for ken chesebro's trial in the georgia court, in this case, is such a stunning development. i don't know what strategy his lawyers were following. i've seen it reported. people have said on your show that he was -- that his lawyers were taking a gamble, that it was a bluff. if that's the case, they ought to be convicted of malpractice. they must have a strategy. they must think they've got some idea what to do here. and i think the consequences are potentially enormous. if chesebro is acquitted, given his role as the author, according to the indictment, of the memos that laid out the alternate elector strategy, if he's acquitted or gets a hung jury, which they will spin as an acquittal, i think that's going to have an unbelievable political effect. i think i had been looking simply at the trump trial. but if chesebro goes ahead and is acquitted, it vindicates trump's narrative. now, if he's convicted, i think it obviously cuts in the other direction. and it could happen in two months. >> yeah, but you're saying it's essentially a risky move because what they're arguing is that he wanted a speedy trial. you saw fani willis say, okay, let's do it in october. the judge signed off today saying that's only applying to ken chesebro, not to donald trump and the other 17 codefendants. >> but that's the point. if his attorneys have thought this through carefully, they believe that separating chesebro from this massive complicated rest of the case may be chesebro's best chance to get an acquittal. and that's what they're counting on, that they can simplify and expedite this particular case. and my point is the thing that i think will impress voters is not all these pretrial maneuverings and extensive discussions about the removal authority, which i'd also be happy to answer questions on. but what is the consequence politically if chesebro is acquitted or if he's convicted? that's what voters will understand, that this guy was convicted by a jury or acquitted by a jury. and it could have enormous political impact. >> we've been talking to our sources in trump's legal world. you just brought on a new attorney today. what they have not done yet but we believe they plan to do is to try to move this from a state court to a federal court, arguing that because of the office he held at the time that this is where this should happen. what do you make of that argument if they do pursue it? >> well, remember, trump's ultimate strategy is always delay. and by moving to remove it, that throws another wrinkle into it. and if the removal is accepted and fani willis tries to get it remanded from the district court, my memory may be imperfect here, but i think that's an appealable order for both sides, which means you're stretching the time out going to the 11th circuit and maybe the supreme court just to decide the removal question. i think this is actually simpler than a lot of the discussion here. the president who is running for re-election is not just the president. he's also a political candidate. he has first amendment rights, like any other political candidate. but he doesn't have a first amendment right to commit a crime. none of what trump did here is part of his presidential duties, just like when al gore contested george w. bush in florida. that didn't have anything to do with his vice presidential duties. he was doing it as a candidate, and he was permitted to do it because he followed the legal path that florida permitted. so, i think actually the case should not be removed because of what these defendants did, they did in a first amendment capacity. and the notion that the hatch act was amended to cover officials in the executive office of the president, which fani willis decided in her brief, i think is unconstitutional. i think political appointees in the executive branch of the federal government can engage in political activity. it's the career people you want to protect from pressure to engage in political activity. so, i think the case should remain in georgia courts, but i think it's highly likely it will be removed. >> well, and mark meadows and making that argument. we'll see if he's successful. you have touted the idea of running for president in this election as a republican. what went through your mind and what does it say about the republican party last night that when those candidates were on stage and were asked if they could support trump, if he had been convicted on charges, many of them raised their hands. >> well, i think there were six wrong answers and two right answers. you cannot believe in a law and order philosophy and say it applies to everybody except donald trump. obviously, if he is convicted before the election, he'll appeal. he'll have that right. but in any sane society, somebody who's a convicted felon should step aside. i mean, the rules of the republican party should provide that if their presidential nominee is convicted, he'll be removed from that candidacy and the party should pick somebody else. that's the argument i think the current candidates are going to have to make against trump when they get to iowa and new hampshire. because of the documents case is the only case that's now even has a tentative trial date in may of next year, after most of the republican caucuses and primaries. so, they're going to have to tell voters, be very careful about voting for donald trump because by the time we get to our convention in august, he may be a convicted felon. >> you once described rudy giuliani as a hand grenade who is going to blow everyone up. he turned himself in also here in georgia. we've also seen his mug shot. does it make you feel like you were right? >> well, this is not a good place to be in. i mean, donald trump may be able to turn it to his political advantage, but everybody around him is going to be, i think, blown away by the blast effect of these various cases. this is the end of the career, the legal career, for a lot of the lawyers who are codefendants in the georgia case. trump has an amazing way of escaping the damage he causes to everybody else. but i think the odds here are a lot of careers are ruined because of this. >> ambassador john bolton, thank you for joining us tonight. >> thank you. >> jake, back to you. >> thanks, kaitlan. it has been quite a day, donald trump's fourth arrest. he has not been arraigned in this case. the three previous arrests had arraignments on the same day. this one did not. then that way it was different from the three previous ones. also, of course, the image on the right side of your screen, the mug shot of the 45th president of the united states. it's not the only mug shot that we've seen this week that might have caused us a moment of pause. here is the man who, in 2001, was time's person of the year, former new york city mayor, rudy giuliani. that's his mug shot for his 13 counts and the indictment in fulton county, georgia. here is former white house chief of staff mark meadows. not the first white house chief of staff to ever pose for a mug shot. nixon's chief of staff, hr bob haldeman, also posed for one and ended up doing 18 months in prison. here is political operative from wisconsin, kenneth chesebro, known or considered to be the architect of the fake electors scheme, perhaps less well known a face, but his request for a speedy trial is going to have an impact on what happens in this case. let's bring in right now pulitzer prize winning "new york times" writer maggie haberman to talk about this important day. and maggie, obviously, mr. trump -- to be frank, it would be political malpractice for him not to do so. but he is using this mug shot and trying to raise money off of it, posting it on truth social. we know that the former president is someone who cares quite a bit about his image and legacy. this pose that he considers to be menacing, we're told, is part of that. he does not like to be perceived as a loser, despite what he would call perhaps braggadocious behavior and statements in light of this. how do you think this latest arrest and mug shot n particular, and the fingerprinting and all of what he went through, how do you think that that's actually sitting with him tonight? >> i don't think especially well, jake. from what i heard from people who had spoken to him, he seemed less agitated heading into today than he had the previous three indictments, which is still a remarkable sentence to say. but he doesn't want to be mug shotted. he doesn't want to be arrested. he doesn't want to have, in his mind, the indignity of going to this jail and submitting to a photo, a mug shot, and fingerprinting. and to your point about the visuals of him. it isn't just that he wants to look menacing, which is certainly true. he has made that kind of face in photos for years and years and years. he doesn't want to look weak. fundraising off the mug shot, owning it, using it for press, that's part of a playbook we've seen him use over and over again. but that does not mean he's enjoying any of this. this is a serious thing. he is facing serious jail time. >> and explain to me to the capacity that anyone on this planet can how refusing to accept a clear, decisive electoral defeat in 2020 and desperately attempting any way possible to hold on to power legally and then extra legally and then illegally, at least according to the special counsel and the fulton county d.a. how is that not weak? >> because, in his mind, he didn't concede. and that has been how he has operated for decade after decade after decade through business failures, through bankruptcies of his casinos, through losses, through products failing, through divorces. it has all been if you pretend it is not happening, if you create your own reality, if you don't give in to what other people are acknowledging as objective reality, then maybe it really isn't there. and he is somebody who does not think in terms of long-term strategy. he thinks in very short increments of time, and it's all about just getting from one post to another. so, that is how somebody thinks like that. it's also how somebody thinks who has lived, jake -- and this doesn't get said enough about him. he lived a fairly consequence-free life before he was president. he did not like the press. he was very unhappy about it. but the bankruptcies were a loss to the banks. generally he had his father to help bail him out. he has moved from one thing to another without having to really face the kind of consequences that other people might have in similar circumstances. so, this is an unusual moment. >> there was another shakeup of mr. trump's legal team today. his new attorney, steven -- was with him tonight, met him in person, met him on the tarmac at hartsfield-jackson international airport in airport. what can you tell us about the decision to bring shim on? why switch now? >> it's obviously notable that he's switching several hours or switched several hours before he went to go be arrested in georgia. my understanding, jake, is this had been in the works for several weeks. he was always planning on adding to the team. sado had been in discussions with trump's world for some time, as understand it. trump, i think, was only recently introduced to him. there was a decision to let his other lawyer, drew findaling, go. my understanding was that trump wanted what he considered a stronger team. sado, as you know, has an incredibly good reputation in the state and i think came very highly recommended to trump. but it is a sign that trump recognizes the significance and severity and seriousness of these charges too. >> yeah, and as you know, the former president is expected to make the move that we've already seen mark meadows make, which is to try to get this case moved from georgia court to a federal court. it's probably underrated how likely that actually is to happen. some of the experts we have been speaking with on the panel today feel that it's more likely than not. if that fails, though, the state trial would likely be televised. the federal one would not. would donald trump, do you think, in the event that this does actually get heard in a georgia court, where cameras are allowed, would he, do you think, embrace that? or would he try to get cameras barred from the courthouse? >> i actually think he would embrace it, jake, although i don't think there's unanimity of opinion around him about how to handle that. i think your point about legal experts think there is a real chance. it's not definite, obviously, but there's a chance the removal motion, meaning asking this trial to be moved to federal court because these actions being taken the capacity of his office. prosecutors would argue it was outside his capacity. but he was a federal office holder. there is a non-zero chance that that happens. if that happens this does change things significantly. >> it doesn't have anything to do with whether or not somebody thinks donald trump is guilty or not guilty. this is just a question of law. and the law would seem to say there's a plausible case that a judge will rule that it does belong in federal court. the jail, fulton county jail that donald trump was processed at today, we've been noting that it's notorious for its harsh conditions. the justice department is investigating it. prisoners, more regularly than they should, die while in custody. we saw images earlier today -- drew griffin, our reporter -- i'm sorry. brian todd, our reporter, showed us images of the inside of the jail. and it's shockingly awful. what do you imagine that experience was like for donald trump, who i think has probably never been inside a building like that before. >> i don't think he has. no, jake, i can't imagine any srks in his life that we're unaware of where he would have been. i think it was jarring. i think we should note he was there pretty briefly. his aides filled out the paperwork about his vitals, his weight, so forth, ahead of time and it expedited the prose is. i think even briefly, it's a jarring experience. as we said before, this is not something he is craving. i understand he is using the mug shot politically. it would be very surprising were he not when there wasn't a mug shot in manhattan when he was indictmented and arrested in april, they generated a fake one. it's not a surprise he's using it. but this is not an experience that he wants. this is an experience that i think brings home the stark reality of what this is, which is a criminal case. and to your point about where he was headed today and how grim the circumstances are and how grim the location was, they've done very little. they've had sort of descending appearances and public statements from him since the second indictment. where the second indictment, he had yet another, as he did the first one, an event at one of his clubs and he gave a big speech, a very defiant speech. he hasn't done that the last two times. and i think that is part of recognition of a, diminishing returns in fundraising, and also concerns of what his legal team was saying in terms of violating release in these cases and saying things that could be problematic in court. and just, again, this is dealing with something real. this is not politics. this is not a game. we don't know what will happen in these cases. and he has the presumption of innocence just like any other defendant. but this is a serious thing. >> well, right. i mean, this is the first time that his lies -- look, it's not illegal to lie to the press. it's not illegal to lie to the public. having been journalists for decades, politicians tell lies all the time. perhaps not at the rapid clip of mr. trump, but politicians tell lies all the time and there's not a crime about it. lying to officials in an official capacity, not just fbi agents, but in proceedings, of course, at least that is the legal theory that fani willis, the district attorney of fulton county, is trying and testing. that can be construed as a crime. that is certainly what she is attempting to do. and this might be the first time this and the special counsel jack smith's indictment of him for the similar attempted subversion of the election in battleground states, this is the first time there's ever really been any accountability as far as i can tell for lies that he's told. >> i think, to your point, he wasn't indicted for lying, which is something his supporters have insisted is what happened. he was indicted for what he lied about and how he used those lies. and it was using those lies, according to prosecutors, in the service of trying to use the apparatus of government to impact these official proceedings. and these official proceedings were about the transfer of power in this country and about his efforts to stay in office despite the fact that he had lost the election and been told over and over again that he had lost the election and that there was no chance. you know, we talk a lot, jake, about how crucial -- and i was having this conversation with someone else this week. we talk a lot about how crucial that oval office meeting on december 18, 2020, that i wrote about and my colleague wrote about after it had taken place. and it was crucial. and that's where he was being urged to, you know, consider using the apparatus of government to seize voting machines and rerun the election. but a really crucial moment came in mid-november when his then-lawyer at the time, one of his top campaign aides, justin clark, was arguing with rudy giuliani. and trump basically sided with giuliani. and that was the moment that said everything that happened after that emotion. >> unlike donald trump's previous arrests, this one was in prime time. do you think that was a deliberate choice because -- not because he wanted to avoid traffic in jersey but because he wanted this prime-time coverage where more people are home and more televisions are home? >> i think he certainly prefers getting out his side and what he wants to say, jake. but i think this was probably an easier time at the jail, where it was less busy. i mean, we are talking about a wildly famous criminal defendant and trying to figure out how to work around that, work around somebody who has secret service protection. the size of that motorcade was massive. it is not exactly like donald trump as someone who rolls light. it's not the same thing as mark meadows getting processed, as he was hours earlier, or rudy giuliani yesterday, despite all the attention around rudy giuliani. this has a lot of mechanics to it. i'm sure they would have accommodated him if it would have been earlier, but i think it would have been a different scenario going to that jail. >> one thing i wanted to ask you, in the indictment -- you and i have talked about that december 18th meeting quite a bit. december 18, 2021 -- 2020, rather, you just reminded folks that he was sitting -- and this is where people on the white house counsel staff and white house staff were arguing with this group that vice president mike pence recently referred as a group of crack pot lawyers. and it wasn't just lawyers. other people were there. but mark meadows has been indicted. rudy giuliani has been indicted. donald trump has been indicted. there are two individuals who were on their side who were there. sidney powell, i should note, has been indicted. she was there also. there are two individuals who were there who have not been indicted, and that's interesting to me. one of them is mike flynn, and one of them is the former national security adviser and general, and the other is patrick burn from overstock.com. i still don't know what he was doing in the room, but in any case, he was there as well. what do you know about why burn and flynn are not indicted and may possibly -- we don't know -- be unindicted coconspirators? >> there's a lot of speculation around all this, jake. in the case of sidney powell, what is clear is that she was involved in a lot more than just that meeting. and we knew that in real time. she held that press conference at the rnc, which is the one where giuliani had the hair dye running down his face. he was talking to trump for a lot of days prior to that meeting. so, i think that with her, it's a continuum. we just don't know what else, if anything, exists related to mike flynn and patrick burn. >> curiousier and curiousier, pulitzer prize winning, maggie haberman. thank you for joining us. >> thanks, jake. back now with our panel and dana bash. donald trump has never one to go softly into that good night. he is responding on truth social. tell us what he's saying. >> well, he's responding on truth social. he's also responding on twitter. >> twitter? >> what is formerly known as twitter. >> has he tweeted in -- >> he's saying something that is not accurate, but it is the first time he has been on twitter. i think we're going to discuss how he put it up there. but the mug shot is on twitter now. donald j. trump is back on twitter. but, again, we're going to be judicious in how we show it because of the expression that he has on there about the election. let's put it that way. >> and obviously, i mean, the significance is he was banned from twitter and a bunch of other social media accounts because of his actions on january 6th. and now i think it's a clear choice on the part of his campaign, on the part of his aides to use this particular moment to be back on there tweeting out the mug shot, tweeting out, you know, inflammatory comments. i don't think anybody at home would be surprised by what he's saying. he says it all the time. but at the same time, we don't have toe to repeat it or show it. it's par for the course for trump. -- events in the minds of folk. they've been holding off on this for quite some time. they chose this moment. >> basically tht the same thing he posted on truth social, which is ape fundraising appeal, defiance, election lies, et cetera. >> two notable things. the last tweet before this, whatever we call them now, was january 8, 2021, to all of those who asked, i will not be going to the inauguration on january 20th. and i think it's worth reading that because we would not be here today and the 18 codefendants would not be here today. all he had to do was concede. >> it's interesting, though, i have to say, i wonder. he has refused to post on twitter, which is now known as x. he has refused to do that because he wants to bring attention to his own social media platform, truth social. and also defiance, i guess, since they kicked him off. it's interesting that he is tweeting or whatever it's called today, xing, because it makes me wonder, a, is that kind of an acknowledgment that truth social isn't doing it? or b, that they need the fundraising help? >> yeah, it's the money, right? >> yeah, they need the fundraising help. go where the people are. >> this is probably the last indictment. this is the last best chance to really juice this. >> i really think, abby, per usual, you hit the nail on the head. it is a full circle moment in the mind of the former president about january 6th and leaving and now coming back. >> everyone hang on. i want to bring in cnn's alaina train who travelled with donald trump's motorcade to the fulton county jail and has some new reporting on his mug shot. alaina, what can you tell us? >> reporter: well, jake, the former president's team had actually discussed what they wanted that mug shot to look like prior to him going to the fulton county jail and taking it. and the former president himself ultimately decided that he wanted to look, quote, defiant. that is something that his advisers have told me. and he chose purposefully not to smile. now, of course you can tell that the former president and his team are taking a lot of attention to this mug shot. they're sharing it. the former president just rejoined twitter, also recently rebranded as x, to share that mug shot. and i think you can expect them to fund raise off of it, as they have fund raised off of fake mug shots in the past. so, my conversations with them also on the ground here in atlanta, they were happy with how that looked. of course that is what they are telling us. there's always a different puck chur behind the scenes. i also know that donald trump, despite wanting to appear defiant today, has been frustrated about this process, was frustrated that he had to come to georgia and go through another process like this yet again. now, some other reporting i have, jake, is that donald trump on the plane ride to atlanta -- watching -- >> alaina, hold on one second. let's just wait for that airplane. i assume you're standing in -- you're sorry because you are responsible for that airplane that went overhead. i do hold you responsible for that. please proceed. now we can hear you rr i'm. >> reporter: on that plane, his team was watching cable news coverage, dissecting it as they do. he is continuing to watch it open his way back. we have another plane coming. apologies. they are tuned in to what the media is saying about his surrender today. with that mug shot, they are happy with it. there's a reason he is sharing this and rejoined twitter to share that. i think you will see them try to monetize off of this and get as much attention as they can. >> she will bring planes in and land them. thank you so much. great reporting. michael moore, in addition to the big question about whether or innot a federal or state cou will hear this case, which you convinced me is a serious question, there's also the question about when this trial will take place. kenneth chesebro wants a quick trial. willis wants to try all 19 together. she's named october 23rd as the start date. i don't know anybody who thinks that is the start date. chesebro is entitled to this. some will be severed. he just got a new attorney today, donald trump. i would think that would bolster the argument that he needs more time to collect himself and prepare. >> yeah, i think that's right. i don't think that's why he got the attorney. i think steve is a good lawyer. i know him. he will be great in this case. he is competent and used to handling these larger cases and high profile cases,cases, rico . there's no way an attorney could be ready in that amount of time. the constitution guarantees a defendant the right to have an effective lawyer, not just a lawyer, but somebody effective. to have that, you really have to have time to prepare. the lawyers has to have time. the judge is not going to hold him or anybody else to this october date. he wants it. it was a good move by his lawyers. it throws down the gauntlet. let's move forward. if you have a case, let's see what you've got. i don't think it could have been welcome to the district attorney's office. that's the way the law is written. i think with the multitude of motions you will see, the likelihood of appeals, that this case is way, way down the road. it would shock me if we see it at all before the election. i don't see how that's going to happen. again, think about just selecting a jury. go by what's happening in atlanta with the jury selection in a rico case. it took seven months to pick a jury. getting it into federal court is not a bad tlinhing for the lawy. it's a more structured process. it's like a boxing match that has rules versus a backyard brawl that doesn't. there will be advantages and disadvantages. if they move to federal court, then the georgia speedy trial act would not apply. chesebro would keep his case like that. >> you talk about how you have a right to a competent attorney. that is a right that donald trump will avail himself of. he should. once again, as we take these opportunities to show people the reality of the judicial system in this country, donald trump complaining accurately about how disgusting and horrific the fulton county jail is. he is probably saying that like, i don't belong here. these people do but i don't. the truth of the matter is, nobody, even if you are a heinous murderer, deserves to live in filth in a prison or jail where people are killed on a regular basis. same with the competent attorney. you know this. i know this. you know this as well. there have been higher courts that have found in the united states that your attorney can fall asleep during a trial, can be drunk, can be seriously mentally impaired or emotionally impaired, and that counts as competent. the u.s. supreme court is making it even tougher to challenge one's conviction based on representation. >> if that's the bottom, the threshold of what qualifies, we contribute again to use the world again, but this two-tiered system. people with access to financial resources that bring them to great lawyers who can get into court and ask for time and prepare, they have an enormously better chance of a positive outcome through the system. if you are at the hands of a public defender who has 150 other cases that they are handling, very different. >> public defenders are not bad. it's the court-appointed attorneys are a bigger problem. public defender offices are usually better. i take your point. >> very tough job. >> we will take a quick break. we will be right back with more. we never just see the numbers, wewe see the people. my dad started trek in a red barn in waterloo, wisconsin. and now it spanshe globe. you wanna take what was given to yound you wanna build it. and you waa pass it along. if i can do that, i would have done well. that's why we're here... to help make it happen. my name is kilah and concrete has been my career. i'm a cement mason by trade. being a mom is hard, it's just hard in a different way. it's really unique to catch a break. i feel like joe biden understands people like me. all the things that biden fought to get passed help the middle class. wages are going up around here. the people that i deal with on a day-to-day basis they're getting a pay raise. what president biden has accomplished is actually helping real people. i'm joe biden and i approve this message. jessie loves playing detective. but the real mystery was her irritated skin. so, we switched to tide pods free & gentle. it cleans better, and doesn't leave behind irritating residues. and it's gentle on her skin tide free & gentle is epa safer choice certified. it's got to be tide hi! need new glasses? buy one pair, get one free at visionworks! how can you see me squinting? i can't! i'm just telling everyone!...hey! buy one pair, get one free for back to school. visionworks. see the difference. i need it cool at night. you trying to ice me out of the bed? baby, only on game nights. you know you are retired right? am i? ya! save 50% on the sleep number® limited edition smart bed. plus, 60-month financing on all smart beds. shop now only at sleep number®. (♪) astepro allergy, steroid free allergy relief that starts working in 30 minutes, while other allergy sprays take hours. with astepro's unbeatably fast allergy relief you can astepro and go! our ears connect us to the moments that matter. give them the nutrients they need with lipo. it's formulated with ingredients clinically shown to protect your ears from dizziness, ear ringing, and even hearing loss. never miss a moment with lipo flavonoid. just before 10:00 p.m. here on the east coast. the home page of the headline of the new york post website reads, bail to the chief. this is not a light moment. it's no laughing matter. it's a first for donald john trump. t t tonight's booking was a first jail visit for a former president. one thing that's not a first was the booking. it was his fourth. he is on his way back to b bedminister. back with the panel. we have seen the mug shot. i was looking up the official photo portraits of all the presidents. that's how most people view the presidents in history books. this is the picture that will probably stand the test of tim