This time than what we might have otherwise been expecting. If the allegations in this indictment are proven Beyond A Reasonable Doubt and a jury convicts some of these crimes, history will not ask, wow, how did america get to the point where they indicted a former president . History instead is going to ask, how did america get to the point where such a person could be elected to the presidency of the United States. Were actions such as these could be carried out from the oval office directed by a person who was elected president by the American People, along with his advisers. This is a grave day and a serious one for our country. Thank you for being with us here tonight. We know you had every choice in the world. But we are happy to have you here on what will go down in u. S. History as a black letter, bold faced date, August 1st 2023 is the date on which a former president and the leading president ial candidate of the Republican Party was indicted in Federal Court, accused of leading multiple criminal conspiracies to try to hold power by force, after he was voted out of office by the people. In the special coverage tonight, we will talk about all of it. The charges that have been brought, these four felony charges, the unindicted, unnamed, but for the most part pretty clearly identifiable coconspirators whose actions are described in detail in the indictment, alongside the alleged actions of the former president himself. We will also talk about what we know about how the case will proceed, particularly alongside all the other legal proceedings, Including Criminal Proceedings already pending against the same very highprofile defendant. Whatever satisfaction there may be in seeing the country demonstrate rather than just say that we are a nation of law, the laws apply to everyone in this country no matter how powerful, whatever the sort of Civic Satisfaction is in seeing our country tested on that point and rising to the occasion when it needed to happen, i think everyone will now need to concede that things are about to get complicated, just in logistical terms. Here we are in addition to the 34 Felony Counts he is facing a new york state, concerning Hush Money Payments made to affect his election to the white house in the first place in 2016, and it into the 40 Felony Counts he is facing already in Federal Court in florida, related to his handling of Sensitive National security material and alleged destruction of evidence after he left office. Now we have four new federal felony charges, unsealed against the former president for conduct of his while he was president. He is due in court, washington post, d. C. , four pm on tuesday to be arraigned on these charges. He is charged with obstruction of and attempt to obstruct an official proceeding. He is charged with three different conspiracy counts. He is charged with conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, he is charged with conspiracy to defraud the United States, and he is charged with conspiracy against rights. That charge has an interesting history. It is section 241 of the u. S. Code. It makes it a crime to conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or intimidate any person in the free exercise or enjoyment of any right or privilege secured to him by the constitution or the laws of the United States. It sounds like a general sort of generic definition of what a crime is like. But what this specifically is something enacted by congress after The Civil War so federal agents could go after southern whites, including the ku klux klan, who were engaging, essentially, in terrorism to prevent Black Americans from voting. That is the origin of this part of the u. S. Criminal code. That fourth count against trump, that conspiracy against rights, it is something sometimes called the ku klux klan act. It has really chilling resonance because of its historical origins. In terms of how it is used now, it is no longer something so tightly associated with racial terrorism. In the modern era, it has been used more broadly, including especially in cases of voting fraud conspiracies. Vote rigging, casting false votes, conspiring to not properly count, properly cast votes in an election, all those sorts of things. But those are the four charges and let us start tonight by how the indictments lays this out. First of all, as i mentioned, it is unequivocally clear, and this is not New Territory for us as a country, the indictment is very clear that it is about conduct that happened while trump was president. All four Felony Counts in the indictment have specific dates on them. Theyre all while trump was president. They all start on November 14th, 2020. The significance of that date, according to the indictment, according to the special counsels allegations against the president , is that November 14th is the day the indictment says trump knew he lost the election. So, all four felonies are alleged to have started to be committed as of November 14th, 2020, and the conduct described in the indictments then ends on a couple of the counts on january 7th, 2021, the day after the attack on congress, and the other two counts, the conduct ends on january 20th, 2021, at the inauguration of joe biden. This is all conduct that took place while trump was president. Now, whatever national agita we may have had about whether a sitting president can be held accountable for his crimes and now as of today, we know by this action from the u. S. Justice department that even if the u. S. Justice department does think a sitting president cant have charges brought against him while hes still sitting as president , now we know for sure that the Justice Department is willing to bring charges against someone for actions they committed while they were president. They just apparently insist on waiting until he is out of office to bring those charges. It is interesting. Hes described throughout the indictment as Donald J Trump and the defendant. He is at one point at the very outset described as someone who, quote, was the 45th president of the United States. But hes never again described as president trump, because he is no longer president. He is just a citizen now being charged for having tried to overthrow the government by force when he was president. So, i cant do much better, i think than the indictment itself does. Here is how the indictment starts. The defendant, Donald J Trump, was the 45th president of the United States and a candidate for reelection in 2020. The defendant lost the 2020 president ial election. Despite having lost, the defendant was determined to remain in power. So for more than two months following election day on november 3rd, 2020, the defendant spread lies that there had been outcome determinative fraud in the election and that he had actually won. These claims were false and the defendant knew that they were false. More on that in a moment. But the defendant repeated and widely disseminated these claims anyway, to make his knowingly false claims appear legitimate, to create an Intense National atmosphere of mistrust and anger, and to erode public faith in the administration of the election. The defendant had a right, like every american, to speak publicly about the election and even to claim, falsely, that there had been outcome determinative fraud during the election and that he had one. He was also entitled to formally challenge the results of the election through lawful and appropriate means, such as by seeking recounts or audits of the popular vote in states, or filing lawsuits challenging ballots and procedures. Indeed, in many cases the defendant did pursue these methods of contesting the Election Results. His efforts to change the outcome in any state through recounts, audits, or legal challenges were uniformly unsuccessful. Shortly after election day, the defendant also pursued unlawful means of discounting legitimate votes and subverting the Election Results. In so doing, the defendant perpetrated three Criminal Conspiracy. And then the defendant lays out the three Felony Conspiracy counts, all described with reference to those statutes i just described. And it continues. Each of these conspiracies, which built on the widespread mistrust the defendant was creating for pervasive and destabilizing lies about Election Fraud, targeted a Bedrock Function of the United States, of the United States federal government, the nations process of collecting, counting, and certifying the results of the president ial election. On page three of the indictment, we get the sort of narrative explanation of the first conspiracy count, and this indictment, in total, it goes on for about 45 pages. The explanation of that first conspiracy count does basically all the work of the plot of this movie. It sort of spells out the bulk of everything that jack smith and his Prosecutorial Team have brought in this indictment to levy against donald trump. In that part of this, it starts off with this. The purpose of the conspiracy was to overturn the legitimate results of the 2020 president ial election by using knowingly false claims of Election Fraud to obstruct the federal government function by which those results are collected, counted, and certified. The defendant enlisted coconspirators to assist him in his criminal efforts to overturn the legitimate results of the 2020 president ial election and retain power. Among these coconspirators were then it gives you descriptions of six unnamed coconspirators. These are people who are not named in the indictment, as far as we know they themselves have not yet been charged. More on that later. But given the descriptions and a lot of really specific detail about what these folks allegedly did, it is not that hard to figure out who most of them are. Coconspirator one is clearly Rudy Giuliani. Coconspirator number two is rightwing lawyer john eastman, the man in the fetching hat here, his own lawyer has confirmed that, tonight, that mr. Eastman appears to be coconspirator number two. Coconspirator number three appears to be the kraken, trump lawyer sydney powell, Coconspirator Four is Jeffrey Bossart clark, the Justice Department official who trump had tried to take over the Justice Department to enlist the Justice Department itself in this coup effort. Coconspirator five appears to be a man named kenneth chesebro, chesbrough, i dont know. Looks like chesebro. Its also awkward because wisconsin, cheese. He is a Trump Campaign recount lawyer in wisconsin who we know spearheaded the Fake Electors schemes in multiple states. And then there is coconspirator number six, all five, those five i just mentioned, all the five of them are all lawyers. Only coconspirator number six is apparently a non lawyer, at least is not described as an attorney. This one isnt quite as clear who exactly it is. This is a person described in the indictment as a, quote, political consultant who helped implement a plan to submit fraudulent states, fradulent slates, excuse me, of president ial electors. So we know of at least one trump ally who was involved with all these folks who fixed that description in the indictment, but we dont to be blunt, we dont exactly know Who Coconspirator number six is, at least not comfortable enough to confidently speculate. There is nothing so clear as the rest of them. But the five lawyers, yeah, they are all cast pretty specifically. The indictment gets us two other operative descriptions before it gets to these pinpoint allegations of who said exactly what and who did exactly what. The first is what is called manner and means. Quote, the defendants conspiracy to impair, obstruct, and defeat the federal government function through dishonesty, fraud, and deceit included the following manner and means. This then lists kind of the meat of trumps alleged actions that from the basis for these charges. Its basically five main things that trump has described as having done, for the basis for all these conspiracy counts, all four of these felonies. And the one pressuring State Officials to overturn Election Results in the states, number two, setting up those slates of Fake Electors. Number three, trying to get the Justice Department to get State Officials to overturn the Election Results and use the Fake Electors, that effort to use the Justice Department to effectuate this plan. 4, pressuring mike pence the Vice President , to count the Fake Electors instead of the real once, or to otherwise mess up the counting and certification of the electoral count. And number five, this is what the indictment describes as, quote, exploiting the disruption. This is about january 6th itself and the violence that day. The indictment accuses trump and his allies of exploiting the disruption that was caused by the mob attack on congress on january 6th. To try to get this thing done, to try to further delay the certification even beyond what was forced by the violence, and ultimately to flip the results and keep trump in power. So, that is the manner and the means. And one last thing before we get to the long, detailed, point by point narrative of how trump and his coconspirators allegedly did all these things. One last section of the indictment that i didnt necessarily know to expect. It is here in very great detail, its at the front of the indictment. It therefore appears to be key to this case. We will talk with some of the lawyers hear about this to get more clarity on it. But you will see immediately and what they are getting at here. It starts on page six of the indictment under the headline the defendants knowledge of the false city of his Election Fraud claims. This is he knew it was all a lie. Quote, the defendant, his coconspirators, and their agents made knowingly false claims that there had been outcome determinative fraud in the 2020 president ial election. The prolific lies about Election Fraud included dozens of specific claims that there had been substantial fraud in certain states, such as that large numbers of dead, nonresident, noncitizen, or otherwise ineligible voters had cast ballots, or that Voting Machines had changed votes for the Defendant Trump to votes for biden instead. These claims were false and the defendant knew that they were false. And then it goes on immediately through a litany of trumps specific false claims about fraud in the election and how it can be documented, how it has been documented by the prosecutors who brought this case that trump knew those things werent true when he said them. And that is apparently a Linchpin Contention of this prosecution. And then we are off to the races. We get all the details. Trump and his alleged Coconspirators Pressuring State Officials in arizona, starting on page ten, in georgia, page 12, michigan, page 17, pennsylvania, page 19, wisconsin, page 20, the Fake Electors scheme in bloody detail starting on page 21, the effort to get the Justice Department involved in the plot, to get doj to tell the states that it would be okay for them to throw out lawful Election Results, that whole plot starts on page 27. The pressure against Vice President mike pence, that starts on page 32. And so, we are in special coverage, weve got a lot to talk about in terms of the strength of this evidence, the nature of the charges, the decision about how to charge this, what it means to have these alleged coconspirators, but to have them not themselves charged, the closeness of these findings to the contours of the Blockbuster January 6th Investigation in congress and how they may have changed what how we got this date. We have a lot to get through. But i just want to note for the record that when you at home have a chance to read this thing, and you should, just to page through it when you have a quiet moment, trust me, you have read things longer than 45 pages, this is double spaced, you will get through it. If you have a quiet moment to read this, and i hope you do, if you are like me, i think the thing that will jump out at you is the violence. Not descriptions of violence on january 6th, but the way trump and his alleged coconspirators talked about how violence was going to be part of this. How that was factored into this alleged conspiracy. In a way that these folks seem to expect. They are not charged with riot, they are not charged with sedition. They are charged with exploiting the disturbance that they apparently, allegedly, intentionally caused. They knew to count on violence, they factored it into their plan. That comes out in the indictment in a way that will keep you up. It comes up, for example, in a section on trying to decapitate the Justice Department and then putting this guy, jeff clark, and use the authority of the Justice Department to tell the states they should throw out Election Results. This is something i want to show you from page 30 of the indictment. The alleged Coconspirator Being described here is Jeffrey Bossert clark, the guy who trump tried to put it in charge of the Justice Department, apparently named him after the Attorney General so that clark could carry out this plot. Just look at this. On the afternoon of january 3rd, Coconspirator Four, who we believe to be jeff clark, spoke with the Deputy White House counsel. The previous month, the Deputy White House counsel head of formed different trump that there is no world, no option in which you do not leave the white house on january 20th. Now the same Deputy White House counsel tried to dissuade jeff clark from assuming the role of acting Attorney General, the Deputy White House counsel reiterated to clark that there had not been outcome determinative fraud in the election, and that if Defendant Trump remained in office nonetheless, there would be, quote, riots in every major city in the United States. Jeff clark responded, well, that is why there is an Insurrection Act. The indictment continues. Also that afternoon, clark met with the acting Attorney General and told him that Defendant Trump had decided to put jeff clark in charge of the Justice Department. That same afternoon, trump decides to put clark in charge of the Justice Department after clark says that day, oh, the country will rise up and every city in the country because we will try to hold power by force. We will use the Insurrection Act. That is what the Insurrection Act is for. What does it do . It allows the president to call up the u. S. Military and use the army to take over american streets and use Military Force against the American People. That is what the Insurrection Act is for. That is why there is an Insurrection Act. A few pages later, in part of the indictment that is about pressuring Vice President mike pence, we are still on january 4th of this point, it is still in advance of january 6th. Look at this. Also on january 4th, when coconspirator 2, trump lawyer john eastman, acknowledged to Defendant Trumps Senior Advisor that no court would support his proposal for overturning the Election Results, trumps Senior Adviser told john eastman, quote, you are going to cause riots in the streets. Eastman responded there had previously been points in the nations history where violence was necessary to protect the republic. On the morning of january 5th, a Defendant Trumps direction, Vice President Chief Of Staff and Vice President counsel met with eastman. Eastman now advocated that Vice President pence do what Defendant Trump had said he preferred the day before. That pence should unilaterally reject electors from the targeted states. During this meeting, eastman privately acknowledged to the Vice President s counsel he hoped to prevent judicial review of this proposal because he understood it would be unanimously rejected by the u. S. Supreme court. The Vice President s counsel expressed to eastman that following through with the proposal would result in a, quote, disastrous situation where the election might have to be decided in the streets. Decided in the streets. The indictment continues, quote, that same day, Defendant Trump encouraged supporters to travel to washington on january 6. He set the false expectation that the Vice President had the authority and might to use his ceremonial role at the Certification Proceeding to reverse the outcome in the defendants favor. John eastman said, sometimes we need violence. Hey, this might be decided in the streets. Trump says, lets get them in the streets. He is innocent until proven guilty. This will be an adversarial process, and the country, for the sake of history and for the sake of the country, has to hope he has an excellent defense and this is well fought and fair. He is innocent until proven guilty, but if the allegations made by the Justice Department in this indictment are proven, history will not ask how we got to the point where they had to indict a former president. History will ask how did a person like this get elected to the u. S. Presidency . These actions could be carried out from the oval office, and directed by an american president. Joining us now to discuss all of this are my beloved colleagues, Lawrence Odonnell, chris hayes, alex wagner, remember, joy reid is with us from watching, it weve got Andrew Weissmann here helping us as well. Chris, let me go to you first on this. Youve had as much time as i had to absorb it. I know theres been a lot of reaction already, weve had reaction from a lawyer for the president and everything. Overall, how are you feeling about your expectations for this versus what it has turned out to be . My first reaction, which is just a personal one, and i a and having covered this, like all of us have, and like the viewers to, right, yes, im not crazy. If this wasnt a crime, nothing is a crime. We watched him do it on television. We sat at this desk a year ago at the January 6th Committee, we knew what he was doing. If thats not a crime, that nothing is a crime. That part of it is just like, i find it really important and gratifying. There is a kind of ballast to it. Yes, yes, of course this was corrupt. Of course this was fraud, of course there was a conspiracy to defraud the u. S. We all saw him engage in the conspiracy to defraud the u. S. The Second Thought i had is about the magnitude of this moment, which i think is just worth taking a second on. With donald trump, lots of things are unprecedented. The first time he was indicted was unprecedented, and the second time he was indicted was unprecedented because of the federal indictment had never come down. This is in the canon of american events, january 6th and its aftermath. The reason is that for 159 years after the cannon fire at fort sumter, there is an unbroken chain of transfer of power. Not only that, the core story of the american experiment is a fight within itself to be true to the radical promise of democracy. That is why lincoln says at the battlefield at gettysburg that the question before the nation is whether a nation of by and for the people can long endure. Its a test whether the thing can last. That is in a category of itself in american history, The Civil War and the death and misery. This is the gravest political crime since secession. And the gravest test that lincoln called on the battlefield in gettysburg of whether a nation of, by, and for the people, that we are our own masters, whether that can long endure. I feel profoundly gratified by reading this document because it calls the question in a way that has not been called yet. If the law is not for this, what is it for . It also calls the question as to these asserted facts. These facts will now be tested in court in an expert, professional, calm, adversarial process from which there is no escape hatch. Yes, you can plead out. I guess that is your escape hatch. But it is meant to be a healthy a healthy twist. If this were the indictment against me, i would plead. But if he goes to trial, these facts will be tested and will be proven or not. It is one thing to decide that you prefer, you know, talk radio guys, and the way they describe the world versus people who talk about the news in a way that is more balanced and based in fact. Its another thing to have the facts tested by the best defense and you can mount and how them held accountable for them, which we havent had these facts and that kind of context. We also havent had the [laughter] facts tested in the middle of the president ial campaign. That is the thing, i think, that strikes fear into the heart of a lot of people who look at this and say, this appears to be irrefutable, look at this mountain of evidence. And yet, there is going to be two iterations of this trial. One is the trial itself, the other is the primary and the election. But one of them is binding, right . The Trial Results are binding regardless of what happens. If we get there in time. Yes. There are so many unknowns about whether that happens and what the reaction is from the Republican Party. This is on the Republican Party, politically, right now. Its not on the democrats to do much with this because they spent a long time investigating this with the help of liz cheney and adam kinzinger. And now its a question of what Republican Voters are going to do with this. I do think there is a real question as to whether this trial goes forward, before the election, whether it goes forward. I mean, what the sentencing and could be if he is found guilty, what the implications of that might be for someone who hads maybe won the republican primary, maybe this is happening the same day that we have a poll showing donald trump and joe biden are running neck and neck. Maybe that is nothing, maybe it is too early to know, but man, there are a lot of storm clouds on the horizon. As of tonight, this case is on the fastest track to trial of any of the trump indictments. There is one name on the front side of this indictment. There is one name. And there is six coconspirators in here. This is clearly jack smith deciding i want to get this to trial as fast as possible. I dont want six separate Defense Attorneys in the room in jury selection. Rachel taught us what that means, in the 1944 there were dozens of defendants that made that case almost impossible, impossible. This is going fast. There is no Classified Information here. There is no complex discovery here. This is a very clear story that the whole country knows. Any jury that is selected for this already knows most of this story, which ends in the description of the criminal conduct, the final entry of criminal conduct in this document is that 11 44 pm on january 6th, when donald trump is still directing a Criminal Conspiracy in this indictment at 11 44 pm. The congress, everyone will remember, is back in session, joe biden is well on his way to the congress, everyone will remember, is back in session, joe biden is well on his way to absolutely being certified and Rudy Giuliani is on the phone continuing to try to commit crimes for donald trump that night. And this tells that story from the beginning to the end and even though they dont have a specific charge about something the people were hoping for, the people who thought they saw it was sedition, most of the crimes and described in this document, the heaviest day of crime in this document is january 6th. That is where most of the criminal conduct that occurs on one day occurs. And it is an incredible stream that includes every single thing that, as chris so eloquently said, you saw that today and then learned about later and thought, well, that must be criminal. Jack smith thinks it is. To lawrences point, how you and the indictment, how you end the story, how you and the case is what is most vital. A jury always remembers the Closing Argument more than the opening. A lot of lawyers like to go second. What you, rachel and lawrence, both allude to that while, no, there is not battery or insurrection charged in this filing, the violence is key and Smith Ends Lawrence shows us with trump continuing after the violence, which is evidence, criminal evidence for the jury that the violence was not a departure from the plan, but part of the plan. Yeah. There are things that are instruments of the conspiracy, to use the legal jargon, that are always separate crimes of themselves. This is likely to go to trial. I dont see anything that would keep it out. Nothing about the posture of the case, its judge or its location, gives a lot of doubt to that. Nothing about Government Rules or secrecy gives doubt to that. This case, when i look at this tonight, i see donald trump, who is running for president and legally presumed innocent, hes trying to get back in the oval office tonight, this indictment makes it a lot more likely that he will be headed, if convicted, to a rectangular case. Can i say quick thing about the timing . Sure. It feels a little churlish to say this but im going to say it because i feel it strongly. I think this is an indictment of Merrick Garland. Because we all saw the crimes committed. We know that there was no predicated investigation in the department of justice. We sat here one year ago at this table and we watched 85 of the facts present here, i would, say somewhere in that range, laid out before the nation. Because the congressional investigation yes. The congressional investigation did an incredible job this indictment reads as an indict endorsement of their work in many ways. The reason that we are now the fasttrack question is, we are now in a tighter space a year later about a guy whos running for president to stay out of prison. He is literally running for his freedom, than we would have been a year ago. There is hindsight 2020, Merrick Garland has a very difficult job, i will grant him that. But i do think that, like, this makes me think that the year where there is apparently not much happening in the department of justice about a Criminal Conspiracy, that happened on live television, as we all watched, was maybe not the greatest look. 30 seconds in the defense of Merrick Garland . I do this retroactively, because i had all the questions everyone else had as this was unfolding. What is he doing . What is he what is going on . He kind of physically looks like a timid man when he comes out in the past to a microphone. But the way ive seen this unfold, he i believe now that the nancy pelosi designed, brilliantly designed congressional investigation done publicly was a necessary precursor to where we are tonight. Because now imagine a country in which this document came out without us having any preparation for it. Right. Without us ever having heard from cassidy hutchinson, without us ever having heard from the white House Counsel on video saying all this stuff. It would seem hard to believe. There are things in here that we know are on tape but we dont know when we read this document, and we would be sitting here saying, well, if you can prove it. We know so much of what the evidence is, thanks to the congressional investigation, which only couldve gone before it. If Merrick Garland went first and bigfooted the congress, there wouldve been no investigation whatsoever. This document wouldve come out out of the blue, as it were, to a country that would be taking this information in for the first time this way. Provided we believe that the Justice Department was capable of developing these facts on their own. Maybe they werent. But maybe it took the congressional investigation to get these people to come forward in a way that wasnt compelled by subpoena or by the legal system in a way that they could follow the contours through the congressional investigation, in a way that the Justice Department wasnt up to the task for. The Justice Department is three clearly good at what they do, the only people in the country to prosecute federal crimes, so we dont have anybody else to compare them to. But maybe the congressional investigation did stuff that at doj was not capable of. Doj did much more than they were capable of. Remember all these ignored subpoenas that the house did. That nobody ignored any of these subpoenas. No one could. Mike pence is in here under oath and you can see in this document, this was something three the congressional investigation never couldve developed, mike pence refused to even talk to them. Three mike pence, the former Vice President of the United States is going to take an oath as a witness in Federal Court in washington, d. C. , against the former president of the three United States. And mike pence is going to be three the star witness. And only the doj couldve done that. Three i think its also a pretty remarkably restrained indictment as well, insofar as january six, to aris point, it is really interesting that this is not seen as the combination of this investigation the way january 6th was very much for the House Committee investigating january 6th. It is seen as a tool in the three larger plot to commit fraud and to obstruct and deny the rights of american voters. That is a really, i think, innovative framing of january 6th, in the same way that the Fake Electors were a means to an end. The violence of January 6th 33 was weaponized to conduct fraud, to disenfranchise the votes. 33 this just doesnt end in the doj having to prove that trump was trying to stage an insurrection or, you know, inside a revolution. It just puts that day, that moment in the arsenal of other weapons he uses for several months to overthrow the results of an election. It makes you see it in a more instrumental way. I feel like we all do know these facts, but if you step three away from the trees we have been studying and look at the forest in this way, you see that the normal course of events, the way weve done this for the entire history of ourselves as a republic needed to be disrupted somehow. We really needed to have a disruption we needed a way to translate that disruption into the possibility of trump getting more electoral votes than he has. Well need some fake electoral votes. Okay, then we will need the Justice Department to tell the state legislature, yeah, okay, those Fake Electors, and if you put all those pieces together, eventually you can get to trump staying in power after he has been voted out. But key to it, none of it can happen without force. Yes. None of it can happen without violence. And january six is the linchpin event. Its not bad side effect of what happened, it was necessary. And they make a point of focusing not on trumps inaction, necessarily, as the insurrection unfolds, but its the fact that hes making calls to senators, because he is using the violence of january 6th as a tool, a delay tactic for him to continue his outreach to those in power who are there to certify the votes it is the most violent smokescreen one can imagine. The worstcase of the dog ate my homework. This is why we cant do this right now. Yes, exactly. But that is what january 6th is, as the doj frame these events. Weve been talking about democracy since donald trump was in the presidency. This is the first time we talk about how many indictments, the, total federal, this is the first time the u. S. Has reached the point you raised in your introduction. Weve gotten to the point where we have to actually indict someone for what they did in the white house in office. Nixon is a footnote because it couldve gone differently. Thats what this is. This is the first time donald trump has ever been indicted for acts he took in office. You dont have to go to law school to have kind of the feel that, well, if you can drop bombs, you can start wars without congress, we know that. It seems like they have a lot of power, yes. This is the Justice Department saying he went well beyond that. The reasons each of you have each dimension, its a list that gets so long that is damning. Its not that we want to commanderinchief to worry about overstepping in one meeting or one statement. No, this is over and over for several months, including violence and also several measures of abusing power. Some of them are quite arcane. I think its fascinating what smith has covered. I dont think we mentioned this on our area tonight. They talk about they had to lie to some of the Activists Ore Trump fans who would become electors because some of them, as rabid as they were, they would do almost anything, but they said this would not be like a coup. [laughter] that was their line, right . Right. They were lied to in some states. Some states like michigan charged them. But in some states, smith says, in fairness to these people, they were duped by coconspirators. In new mexico, there was a plot that said, oh well, this would only be, we would only need you if we overturn the election with a lawsuit. Except, oops, they didnt have any i lost by ten points. There is that other thing, chris, you lost very badly, lost the whole election. That is relevant to stealing it. In new mexico, smith then goes way into the evidence to find that they then added a sham lawsuit to create a pretext to say, well, here is a pending litigation. I can tell hes a lawyer. You are allowed to file all kinds of lawsuits, things that go right up to the line of frivolous. You are not allowed to knowingly file criminal or fraudulent suits for the purpose of executing or supporting other crimes. That is what they stand accused of today. I said it before, but i should note that of the six described unnamed coconspirators, of the six, at least five are lawyers. And this is a lawyers coup. They tried to paper this over in the same way that, you know, dictators in Foreign Countries hold elections that arent real elections because they want to say they are democratically elected. This was a coup that was legalized with people described now as unindicted coconspirators of the president. There is a bunch of different places where smith is at pains to say, here is the First Amendment protected speech. You can lie. No one is saying we are indicting for lying. Obviously, it is the case. The First Amendment protects politicians from lying to people, a huge part of the job. And then here is what he was doing that was fraud. There is a even this moment on paragraph 54 that goes to talking about the unindicted coconspirators, we think its chesebro. Chesebro. It is so hard for him to not be cheesebro. Hes an an herons demonic device. It basically says, look, this guy worked to memos, one was a legitimate memo, and one was a commission of fraud. Here is the one, he writes a memo that is says, look, we dont know what will happen in these lawsuits, but it comes to the case we win, them then we missed the deadline for having a slate of electors. And, so to preserve our recourse, we should be able, we should have this slate of electors. Yeah. Then it marks a sharp departure from his memo by december 6th where they are basically saying, screw it, lets just shove these Fake Electors. Yeah, just get it out there. It makes an important point about obviously, the defenders of the president will talk about criminalizing free speech. Walking up the bank teller and handing them a note that says give me i have a gun, give me the money. I guess writing is illegal now. [laughter] well its not speech, really. Thats going to be the defense. But its interesting the degree of work of pre rebuttal, but in the indictment itself, to delineate between legitimate is sketchy protected activity of politics, politics being politics, and criminal fraud. Lets bring in our friend joy reid, standing by in washington. Joy, tell me about and the distance, if there is any, between what you were thinking this day would be like and what this day is like. First of all, i miss you guys and i wish i was there. First of all, i have to start by saying that it is weird to have read this indictment in the neighborhood. This is the scene of a crime. I was in d. C. On january 6th. I was here, not far from here, a 20minute drive from here. And seeing it happen here in d. C. , knowing the locations, having been at the locations and worrying about whether the insurrectionists were going to find the black History Museum and ransack it as you know they are going near, all the things i was thinking on that, day reading through this brings a lot of that back. It strikes me that, first of all, it feels late to me. I associate myself with those of you on the panel who said that, in a way, i have been a very big critic of Merrick Garland and how long it has taken to get here. But i also agree with lawrence. I think what we saw in the January 6th Hearings needed to preceed this. In a sense, that is the public trial that i hope we will get in this case. But i think that the country needed to see that this is a story about republicans. This is a story about people who, even in this indictment, people are saying no one wanted donald trump elected more than me, and yet i cant go along with these schemes. This is not never trumpers or democrats who are out to get donald trump. This is donald trump conspiring to commit an Armed Robbery. It is an Armed Robbery against the voters of arizona, georgia, michigan, nevada, new mexico, pennsylvania, wisconsin. New mexico wasnt even in contention. This was an Armed Robbery. The way the indictment goes to such great pains to point out Donald Trumps absolute knowledge of the fact that he was lying about each of those states, and lying in order to steal the votes of the people in those states, to steal the election from them, just real quick, georgia, on november 24, coconspirator 3, we now know is the kraken lady, sydney powell, mass Election Fraud accomplished through the voting machine companies, Election Software hardware. We know that is the dominion stuff. Before the lawsuit was even filed, donald trump, the defendant, Retweeted A Post promoting it. The defendant did this despite the fact that when he had discussed coconspirator 3s farfetched public claims regarding the Voting Machine Company in private with advisers, the defendant had conceded, trump conceded that they were unsupported and that coconspirator 3 sounded cra. A. Each of these states, it is donald trump being told point blank, when you say 100,000 people fraudulently voted or dead people voted in state x, it is untrue. Hes being told that by republicans. He is being told that by his own people. He is being told that by people he hired. He is being told by the Election Security chief he hired. It is a lie. And they go through very painstakingly to establish that, as you pointed out, rachel, in state after state, page after page after page. So by the time we get to the violence and the armed part of the Armed Robbery, it is very clear that donald trump understands he lost the election. He understands he lost the election in each of these states, and is still determined to steal the election in each of these states, including by lying to the Fake Electors, as ari points out, by saying, dont worry, you will only have to commit this crime and fill out of these fake forms saying you are the electors, and we will only use these fake elector forms if we win these lawsuits. And then they are like, surprise, not true. We are going to use them. The whole thing, it definitely needed the January 6th Hearings. I agree with that. I think we needed that. But the last thing i will say, rachel, is i hope and pray that we can have a public trial here. Because despite how clean and elegant and conservatively drafted this indictment is, and how really simple it is, its very no nonsense, i dont think these facts that are all about republicans will be believed unless the American People can see this trial. This has to be like the george floyd case. The one thing that scared me tonight was neal katyal saying that its up to chief Justice John Roberts. That chief Justice John Roberts can make the decision of whether this cases televised, in this trial is televised. Joe martin banks did add later that the statutes say the federal judge in this case can make that decision. They can allow cameras in the courtroom. I dearly hope that we have a televised trial, because a simple and straightforward as these facts are, i think they need to be believed at least by a substantial portion of the American Public, because this is an unprecedented case. Weve never had a President Try to remain in power by force and by Armed Robbery. I think we need to see this trial happen on television. And that alone, that question of how much Public Access to allow to the proceedings is yet another test for the judicial system, a test for the legal system that is you just hope they will be able to rise to meet the challenge. Its not necessarily that one answer is always definitely right and one answer is wrong, but you would hope that they would recognize that this isnt just any other case and not any other moment for the country, that this is something they will need to answer to history for. Think about the george floyd case, one of the most divisive things weve had in this country are these questions of Police Brutality and the Police Killing of unarmed black people. That case was unprecedented to televise that, that trial. Right . That court normally doesnt televise those cases. But i think seeing it allowed people to understand that when, you know, black lives matter is marching, they are not making up what they are protesting against. It wasnt a lie. I think that, in many ways, did change peoples attitudes toward these issues of police violence. And i think this is if you just think, i mean, we have never had a President Attempt a coup. It is so unprecedented. I think if we dont get to see it, like we got to see the january 6th, you know, those hearings, the fact that we could see it and see that these are not haters of donald trump, these are not his enemies, these are his friends, his own associates, his own people, i think its so important that that happen and it not be filtered through fox or newsmax. The difference between January 6th Hearings, as we saw them, and the trial, if it were televised, is we would get to see donald trump mount a defense. An adversarial process, he will hopefully have a good defense and that is part of the fairness of the process. I want to bring in our friend andrew westman. I feel like we are having a lot of loose talk over here about how definite is this goes to trial, how straightforward and or simple this is as a case and that the American Public would be able to follow the relatively straightforward allegations herein. Is that accurate . Are those perceptions accurate to you or i . The first thing i did when i looked at this was thought about it as a former prosecutor, thought about the evidence. I was sort of where chris is, which is we all saw the crime in realtime. Then when you read about this and you think about the January 6th Committee and what got added in, there are a lot of details that got added in, this is just to build on what joy said. This is just a list of if you were thinking about how you will make this case, youve got all these republicans, the white House Counsel, the White House Deputy counsel, the Vice President , the Vice President s Chief Of Staff, the Attorney General, the acting Attorney General, the acting Deputy Attorney general, numerous republican State Officials, the head of the department of homeland security. The department of national intelligence, you have the defendant on tape in the georgia case, you have the result of 60 court cases, and then you have the defendants own words being repeated in texts, tweets, and in terms of the strength of the case, in terms of what will be presented, the amount that this is tethered to hard evidence of the defendants own conduct, i mean, this is an overwhelming case. This isnt going to be a case, i think, about the facts, i think the way joy phrased this, this is an Armed Robbery, thats the kind of language you are going to hear from the prosecution, making this very simple. This is about lies to stay in power. I think this is not complicated. I think the key issue here is going to be whether it gets to trial. And whether it gets to trial before the general election. I think that is going to be the key decision for a judge, who is assigned, who is an excellent judge. But that is really the issue that chris raised about whether the delay that was caused jack smith to be appointed so late in the day is going to have a real effect on the trial date here. In terms of the trial date and how quickly this could be both put on trial and adjudicated in the courtroom, should we be looking at the fact that there is just one defendant, there are unindicted coconspirators mentioned but not charged. And therefore, they will not be in the docket alongside him. Should we look at the fact that there doesnt us appear to be a reference to, for example, Classified Information which has all sorts of complicated and time consuming requirements in the courtroom. Do those things make a difference in terms of how quickly judge chutkan can move here . Excellent question. I read this as the reason that those coconspirators are charged is precisely because of the concern of getting this to trial quickly. If i were, for instance, jeffrey clark, i would not be sleeping well. This is my opinion. He is going to be charged, but he is not going to be charged in this indictment. This is clearly, i think taylor to try to get to trial quickly. One quick note on that, which i think is relevant to the decision here, is that alvin bragg made a Statement Last week on a radio show that was quite interesting, quite statesmanlike where he said, you know, if it is necessary to use my march trial date, i am open to, that to what justice are going to be saying that my case came for so i want my trial date. So that is an opening for the judge. You are saying that Lawrence Odonnell is probably right when he says this case immediately goes to the federal line in terms of what gets in court . May very well happen. You hear that . Its always a safe place to be. [laughter] at ten pm when we do our let me just add something. Let me be darkly realistic to the litigation schedule. Here. Every one of these cases will take at least four years, because a guilty verdict is just the beginning of an appeal. It is not the end of the case. Donald trump will be on the steps of the courthouse with any guilty verdict telling all his friends, i am appealing this, he will tell them convincingly that hes going to appeal it and those appeals will take him to varying degrees a couple of years or so. He will try to get the Supreme Court on every one of them. The notion that you will get some kind of completion that shuts up donald trump as a litigant before the election is impossible. Much more still to come on the historic indictment of former president and current republican frontrunner donald trump on multiple felonies for trying to hold on to power by force after he was voted out of office. Congressman jamie raskin from the January 6th Investigation is going to join us. Weve been talking about that investigation a lot. He is the man we will speak to directly about it when we continue this night of special coverage on msnbc. Stay with us. How are folks 60 and older having fun these days . Family cookouts [blowing] [dice roll] playing games [party chatter] dancin in the par im kareem abdul jabbar. I was diagnosed with afib. The first inkling that something was wrong was i started to notice that i couldnt do things without losing my breath. I couldnt make it through the airport, and every like 20 or 30 yards i had to sit down and get my breath. Every Physical Exertion seemed to exhaust me. And finally, i went to the hospital where i was diagnosed with afib. When i first noticed symptoms, which kept coming and going, i should have gone to the doctor and told them what was happening. Instead, i tried to let it pass. If you experience irregular heartbeat, heart racing, chest pain, shortness of breath, fatigue, or lightheadedness, you should talk to your doctor. Afib increases the risk of stroke about 5 times i want my experience to help others understand the symptoms of atrial fibrillation. When it comes to your health, this is no time to wait. I was stuck. Unresolved Depression Symptoms were in my way. I needed more from my antidepressant. Vraylar helped give it a lift. Adding vraylar to an antidepressant. Is clinically proven to help relieve overall Depression Symptoms. Better than an antidepressant alone. And in vraylar clinical studies, most saw no substantial impact on weight. Elderly dementia patients have increased risk of death or stroke. Report unusual changes in behavior or suicidal thoughts. Antidepressants can increase these in children and young adults. Report fever, stiff muscles, or confusion, as these may be lifethreatening, or uncontrolled muscle movements, which may be permanent. High blood sugar, which can lead to coma or death, weight gain, and high cholesterol may occur. Movement dysfunction and restlessness are common side effects. Stomach and sleep issues, dizziness, increased appetite, and fatigue are also common. Side effects may not appear for several weeks. I didnt have to change my treatment. Welcome back to our special i just gave it a lift. Ask about vraylar and learn how abbvie could help you save. Coverage of todays federal indictment of former president donald trump. A grand jury in washington, d. C. Has indicted the former president tonight on four felony criminal counts. Conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, to defraud the United States, and conspiracy against rights. This is an allegation that he deprived americans at the right to vote. And the right to have their vote counted, by trying to overturn the results of the 2020 president ial election and stay in office after the people voted him out. Apart from, and away from the nittygritty details of this indictment, it really is just as stark ast that. According to the charges laid out in this indictment and what we have seen from the January 6th Investigation in congress, what we know of these facts, he gave us a choice. Between the constitution and the vote of the people determining who the president of the United States is, or instead, violence and force determining it. As alleged in this indictment, he chose the latter. And he failed at it. And now the country and federal government will attempt to hold him criminally responsible for what he tried to do. For that alleged felony Criminal Conspiracy. We of course have been expecting this indictment for a long time but it is noes