terms mr. pied biden the president of the u.s. would agree to be interviewed. and a devastating death toll rising on maui as rescue and recovery teams find more bodies and thousands of residents are homeless along with stranded tourists on an island that looks like a war zone. good day, everyone, a busy day in washington. i'm andrea. where u.s. district judge tanya chutkan made quick decisions this morning on the size and the scope of that protective order in the criminal case surrounding donald trump's alleged attempts to overturn the 2020 election. in a ruling from the bench, judge chutkan after prosecutors argued that the order was necessary to prevent pretrial publicity and the defense countered that the pregs counsel's parameters were extraordinary decided that the protective order would only apply to sensitive materials and not to all of the evidence turned over to them from the special counsel. judge chutkan also added a clause to the order that would limit the universe of people who are allowed to review those discovery materials. discussing mr. trump's social media postings and the order, the judge saying to attorney john lauro, quote, your client's defense is supposed to happen in this courtroom, not on the internet. the former president publicly pushed back on having any protective order and is also lashing out at special counsel jack smith's proposal to begin the trial in early january. slamming smith, quote, as an out of touch lunatic committing maximum election interference he says for choosing a date two weeks away from the republican iowa caucuses. joining me garrett haake, tom winter. take us through what we learned from the producers inside the courtroom and an adjacent overflow room including whether trump can review those materials alone. >> right. andrea, this was a hearing that typically we wouldn't even report on, we might just attend and send a note in later but given the public interest in this case involving the former president and given the issues and how much of a megaphone donald trump has it the hearing took extra importance today and it's basically all about what evidence that is going to be shared from federal prosecutors during the scope of their investigation with the defense, what evidence can be shared or can perhaps be made public out of that leading up to the trial date. in a protective order is not uncommon in criminal cases but here there was a pretty wide gulf between the two sides. federal prosecutors say everything is protected, nothing can be disclosed and the defense ways saying we should be able to disclose some things, we will have to interview people and talk to people about what they said and so perhaps you can make it more about certain sensitive documents that might pertain to certain witnesses, personal identifying information, things like that. and the judge made an oral ruling and should docket later today the specifics of what she has in mind, but basically from our producer daniel barnes in the courtroom, the judge says, look, there will be certain sensitive mention that the defense, including donald trump, cannot disclose under any circumstances, but there will be other things that can be asked about, talked about and presumably perhaps if the defense wants or trump wants to be made public prior to trial. to your specific question there, andrea, the idea of what donald trump can review, prosecutors said that he should not be allowed to review evidence alone, that he should not be allowed to take notes or take documents by himself, even kind of winking and nodding towards the florida case saying he has a habit of taking documents that he shouldn't take. so that review by the former president he will have to have some restrictions on how he reviews evidence and that's something that he might have to do with his attorneys as well. again, more details will come out in the judge's order. what will start to happen here once this all gets hammered out, andrea, is 11.6 million pages of documents will be handed over from the special counsel's office to donald trump's defense attorneys, including according to our notes extraction from devices, which is a fancy way of saying images from cell phones. so basically it appears at this point that there are either cell phones or computers, laptops, et cetera, that federal prosecutors and investigators have gotten their hands on in the course of this investigation and they image those devices make, and there's not a perfect term for it, but try to make the best copy possible, better than copying the defense and handing it over to the defense, that's something that happens in every case where that type of investigative work has been done. so a lot of information coming to the former president's attorneys and to the former president. we will get all the specifics laid out a little bit later today. that's the plan at least, what the judge said in court. from there we go to the trial. one other potential issue here, the judge happened -- and we just got this quote. the judge said even arguably ambiguous statements by the parties or their counsel if they could be reasonably interpreted to intimidate witnesses or to prejudice potential jurors can threaten the process and the judge noted that the more those statements are made the faster they will go to trial. so clearly the judge letting the defense know and the defendant the former president of the united states exactly where she stands on the issue. >> wow. that's all i can say. you know, joyce vance, let's talk about this. first of all, there was a quick agreement on a protective order, for all the fuss there was a quick agreement in florida on both sides in the classified documents case and i believe one also in manhattan. so the fact that this was such a big deal early on from the defense side seems extraordinary and possibly for delay. joyce, as a former prosecutor what is your take? >> so i think you are dead "on the money." these are routine, there was always going to be a protective order imposed in this case. the question was just how long trump's lawyers could drag it out for. judge chutkan, who today admonished the parties against permitting a carnival-like atmosphere to take over this case, understands what's going on here. she's issued a very moderate ruling, she gave the trump camp some of what they wanted, only sensitive documents fall within the ambit of the protective order, but by the same token, sensitive documents will include anything that the government received from agencies other than doj. that includes anything that they received from january 6th hearing materials. so there's a win here for both sides, but mostly an end to trump's efforts to delay this process. >> just a quick question. what about grand jury testimony that's not -- that's from witnesses but not from other agencies, is that sensitive or does that have to be decided on a case-by-case basis at sidebar let's say with the judge? >> no, the grand jury material will all fall within the protective order. it can be used at trial, it becomes public then, but at this point that will remain confidential. and judge chutkan is very clear about this. you know, if there is something arguably wrong that happens that could, for instance, prejudice the future jury or could impact the safety of witnesses, she said in no uncertain terms today that she will hold the trump team accountable even if something ambiguous takes place. >> and, garrett, what do you think is happening behind the scenes with donald trump being told that he can't take his phone or any devices in when he's reading these materials and that the lawyers have to be outside? >> look, something like a no phones while you are in the room rule might actually be enforced but there's wide recognition between trump's inter circle and the wider circle of people that support him that the idea he's going to follow a protective order when talking about this case broadly, anything that could be reasonably interpreted as malicious or is meant to influence this case, there is zero percent chance that donald trump will avoid anything that could be reasonably interpreted as trying to influence this case. he and his allies firmly believe this is only political, they have certainly cast this case as entirely political and they're going to continue to make political arguments about it. this order will launch a thousand segments on cable television talking about which thing donald trump said today could be reasonably interpreted to break the judge's order. this judge will be tested on this point. >> how is she going to enforce it? >> that's an excellent question. typically enforcement on something like this you could be held in contempt, you could be fined, locked up. she says she's going to treat this like any other case, she's not taking political considerationes in mind here. in a practical world that's going to be very difficult to enforce. >> joyce vance, do you have any take on how well we can enforce it given the political climate? >> yeah, i think what we'll see judge chutkan do on the first offense is bring donald trump into her courtroom, she will admonish him that future violations will result in more serious action. the big question is whether she will actually revoke his bond and put him in custody pending trial. she knows what she's about. she has a background both as a defense lawyer, she's a very good judge, straight up the middle on the law. if you treat trump like anyone else that means if he violates the protective order he does lose his right to remain on bond pending trial. >> garrett, tom and joyce, thanks for starting us off. a big day in the courtroom. nearly eight months after attorney general merrick garland appointed robert hur as special counsel in the biden classified documents investigation, we are learning that hur's team is in talks with president biden's attorneys over the terms of a possible interview with the president. nbc white house correspondent monica alba broke this story. we haven't heard many developments from robert hur since his investigation began. take us through what you learned. >> reporter: it has been a locked down investigation so this newer phase suggests that these ongoing talks between the president's own attorneys and special counsel robert hur are headed in the direction of potentially agreeing to an interview with the sitting u.s. president, which is something that there is precedent for and something that the president's own advisers have long expected would take place if the conditions can be met. and that is really the keyword here, the conditions of where this would take place, would it definitely be in-person, could it be in writing, what would the scope of an interview look like? would it cover his time and these documents that were discovered from when he was vice president or would it span to some of the material that was found that dates back to his time as a u.s. senator? all of that is still being negotiated and we understand those talks have been under way for about a month or so again, that does suggest that they are in this phase where they would like to nail that part down. once an interview with the certain at the center of an investigation takes place that suggests those would be some of the final steps before that probe could wrap up, a report could be written and we would have some kind of conclusion. until we know that both sides have come to an agreement, we are not at that part yet. this doesn't look like it's wrapping imminently, though then when they could come to the same page and have an agreement and move on, that would suggest that. now, this is a very different classified documents case, of course, as it compares to the former president who refused to hand over a lot of sensitive material. in this case when the biden lawyers found it and when there was that search, they did hand it all over to the federal government and the white house and the biden team continued to pledge the president's full and complete cooperation in this matter. andrea? >> monica alba, thank you so much. and now we turn to hawaii, the death toll continuing to climb in the catastrophic wildfires in hawaii. at least 55 people now have died in the maui blazes, the second deadliest wildfire in modern u.s. history. without power, internet or even radio coverage officials say they have no way to determine how many people might still be missing. hundreds of homes have been lost as walls of flames surrounded mike's home, he and his wife had to dive into the water in the bay to escape getting burned. >> the current was pulling us out, you can't see anything. >> no. >> at one point we have fire on us and we don't know where land is. >> thousands of people have been evacuated and both residents and visitors are crowding into the airport to try to get off the island. joining me now is nbc's steve patterson at an evacuation center at maui high school. steve, i can't even imagine what you've seen there since you've been on the ground. talk to us about what people are saying. >> reporter: first of all, andrea, i want to start with this, the aloha spirit is alive and well here. there are deliveries of blankets, food, water flowing in and out of this shelter, one of six along the island that is filled with people who had to escape their homes. if their homes are still standing, it is a miracle in some cases, especially in that area. there is a certain shared trauma that you can feel, even i was feeling as i was getting off the airplane and into the airport yesterday morning. the pilot as i'm flying in is very mournful as he comes over the speaker he had to do it multiple times to get a message out to people because he knows there are people on that flight that are probably going back to their neighborhoods to find what they find and in a lot of cases it's going to be nothing. so much has been reduced to rubble, especially in that town, and i think until they complete the grim task of pulling bodies out of buildings, as hard as it is to say, it's going to be a long time and a listening road. so these centers are, of course, filling up all over the island. people, though, i think are in higher spirits, that they managed to escape, that they have their lives and families and that they have the clothes on their back. i think for now that is good enough, good enough until they're able to get back into their homes or at least get word of the missing. that is the number one mission, i think, for rescue workers, for crews on the ground, for local authorities to try to connect people to a growing list of missing. we don't know how long that list s we tried to get that information at a press conference yesterday. there has not been as far as we can tell an official list that is compiled of the number of missing, but that is the number one goal of course for people and folks on the ground here. so it is mournful, it is tough, it is hard to hear these stories, but people are keeping spirits up as far as we can tell. >> and, steve, you were also at the airport. so talk to me about, you know, the crush of people just trying to get off the island. >> reporter: yeah, different feeling there, andrea, because we are talking about here locals who have been displaced mainly, although there are some tourists. there it is tourists in a crush of people trying to get off that island as best as they can. the minute you walk off the plane there are people in just about every crevice of the terminal that you can see, a lot of people have been sleeping there for days. i know my producer had spoken to a person who was sleeping in a courtyard for two days straight. didn't want to go on camera but spoke of how badly they wanted to get off the island as quickly as possible. by the time people make it in that tsa line they are in good spirits because they have been sleeping and camping out for so long. we spoke to one gentleman, i believe he is from virginia, to talked about just the exasperation of trying to escape. listen to this. >> i was laying down because i'm tired because we got up early this morning, we're headed to oahu. a lot of people standing around, just waiting for their flight. >> reporter: another man we spoke to slept in his car on his honeymoon. of course, this is such an important place and i think a wonderful place for tourists all across the country and all across the world and to have this happen so unexpectedly and so quickly, displaced a lot of people very rapidly and so the -- try to -- the plan is to try to get out or at least get to somewhere safe. it's been a real trial for people here. andrea? >> and, steve, what about the electricity getting -- the internet, but getting power up. i had heard as many as 11,000 people do not have power. >> yeah, we're still above 10,000, that number continues to persist. there are wide swaths, i don't want to give the wrong impression, there are wide swaths of the island that are okay, especially when you get beyond the east side of the island, but you have to remember still six fires burning, the west side no power, no internet, fuel is limited, food is limited, water in some cases is limited. there is just a basic need, a basic humanitarian need for places that are most heavily affected and we are seeing that even here at these shelters. but, no, their power is still out for a major part of this island and not only does it hamper people's ability to live and to move and to get to where they need to be to be safe, but also the rescue workers and the ems workers and people that are trying to get into these zones to save people's lives or to find what's left. andrea? >> steve patterson, thank you so very much. good luck out there. i know it must be heartbreaking to cover. >> thanks, andrea. coming up next, we are expecting a statement from merrick garland at the justice department, you can see the room is being prepared, you see the podium, the u.s. and justice department flags. we will be going there momentarily after a very short break and we understand that this is a big announcement. stand by. stay with us. we will be right back. you're watching "andrea mitchell reports" on msnbc. watching "anl reports" on msnbc. businesses need 5g solutions today. that's why they choose t-mobile for business. mlb partners with t-mobile to break and we understand that nhe the fan experien break and we understand that but to advance how the game is played. aaa relies on t-mobile's network to stay connected nationwide, so they can help get their members back on the road. and we're helping pano ai innovate, to stop the spread of wildfires. now's the time to see what america's largest 5g network can do for your business. age is just a number, and mine's unlisted. try boost® high protein with 20 grams of protein for muscle health versus 16 grams in ensure® high protein. boost® high protein. merrick garland at the justice department. >> -- i have today notified the designated members of each house of congress of the appointment. in february 2018 after being nominated by the former president and confirmed by the senate, mr. weiss was sworn in. mr. weiss had been a career prosecutor, having served previously in the office for more than a decade. beginning in 2019 mr. weiss in his capacity as u.s. attorney and along with federal law enforcement partners, began investigating allegations of certain criminal conduct by, among others, robert hunter biden. that investigation has been recently referenced in federal criminal proceedings in the district of delaware and as noted in those proceedings, and other public statements by mr. weiss' office, that investigation remains ongoing. in february 2021 u.s. attorney weiss was asked to remain as u.s. attorney for the district of delaware and in that capacity to continue to lead the investigation. as i said before, mr. weiss would be permitted to continue his investigation, take any investigative steps he wanted and make the decision whether to prosecute in any district. mr. weiss has told congress that he has been granted ultimate authority over this matter, including the responsibility for deciding where, when and weather to file charges and for making decisions necessary to preserve the integrity of any prosecution consistent with federal law, the principles of the federal prosecution and departmental policies. in a july 2023 letter to congress mr. weiss said that he had not to that point requested special counsel designation. on tuesday of this week mr. weiss advised me that in his judgment his investigation had reached a stage at which he should continue his work as a special counsel, and he asked to be so appointed. upon considering his request, as well as the extraordinary circumstances relating to this matter, i have concluded that it is in the public interest to appoint him as special counsel. this appointment confirms my commitment to provide mr. weiss all the resources he requests. it also reaffirms that mr. weiss has the authority he needs to conduct a thorough investigation and to continue to take the steps he deems appropriate independently, based only on the facts and the law. mr. weiss will also continue to serve as u.s. attorney for the district of delaware. as special counsel, he will continue to have the authority and responsibility that he has previously exercised to oversee the investigation and decide where, when and whether to file charges. the special counsel will not be subject to the day to day supervision of any official of the department, but he must comply with the regulations, procedures and policies of the department. consistent with the special counsel regulations, at the conclusion of mr. weiss' work he will provide me with a report explaining the prosecution or declination decisions reached by him. as with each special counsel who has served since i have taken office, i am committed to making as much of his report public as possible, consistent with legal requirements and department policy. today's announcement affords the prosecutors, agents and analysts working on this matter the ability to proceed with their work expeditiously and to make decisions indisputably guided only by the facts and the law. the men and women undertaking this investigation are public servants who have dedicated their careers to protecting the citizens of this country. the appointment of mr. weiss reinforces for the american people the department's commitment to both independence and accountability in particularly sensitive matters. i am confident that mr. weiss will carry out his responsibility in an even-handed and urgent manner and in accordance with the highest traditions of this department. thank you. >> well, that announcement was, of course, to have daniel weiss, who is the republican-appointed holdover u.s. attorney for delaware, now appointed with a second job basically as special counsel investigating hunter biden. let's bring in our team, nbc news white house correspondent monica alba, nbc news justice reporter ryan riley, we have former u.s. attorneys joyce vance and paul charleston. paul, let me go to you first because this is basically within a larger political context, but i believe what the attorney general said was that daniel weiss has said several times that this investigation is ongoing, that of course has been a big issue because it was part of the reason that the judge refused -- the judge in delaware refused to accept the plea deal, which is still not been consummated by both sides and not accepted by the judge. what does giving him a special counsel's infra ma tore mean? is it to give him for the appearance of independence but independence from the justice department because of all the criticism that as a district attorney he could be removed or would have to report to the attorney general? >> it gives him both, andrea. it gives the optics, it gives the view from the public that this is an individual who will be acting in an independent fashion. merrick garland has said that the decision as to who, when and where if any charges are going to be brought is up to mr. weiss. this appointment grants mr. weiss an additional and very real layer of independence. previously, although merrick garland was very careful to say he could, mr. weiss, act independently, he was still working under the ambit of the department of justice and all of those officials within the department of justice who supervise u.s. attorneys throughout the country. here merrick garland was careful to say that this special appointment is going to mean that he is going to be able to act without direct supervision from the department of justice. just as other special counsel -- special prosecutors have had to do, they bring a recommendation to merrick garland about whether or not to prosecute or whether or not to decline and merrick garland's commitment here was to make as much of that report available to the public as possible. so this is a very real step towards greater independence and i think it will assist the public in understanding that this is an individual who will act in an independent fashion without any perceived interference from the department of justice. >> and, ryan riley n getting to merrick garland's decision-making here, you cover the justice department, but i know from my own reporting there that there have been concerns that even in the other special counsel situations it was not well understood by the public that merrick garland does not make the decision as to whether to indict or not indict, for instance, in the case of jack smith. that those decisions are made by the special counsel under the law and that the attorney general can only intervene by writing to congress if he or she disagree strongly. if he believes or she believes that the decision to indict or not to indict is outside of the parameters of a reasonable decision. >> yeah, it sort of takes the question off the table for merrick garland because it's not something that he will be able to respond to questions really going forward on because that's really now all in someone who is officially a special counsel's hands. there does seem to have had a pivot point and what a senior justice department official has told us is that this was only a request on tuesday, so that's tuesday, wednesday, thursday, friday we are not at, only a few days before publicly announcing that request, but up until a certain point weiss was saying that he did not feel that he needed to be special counsel. so obviously there's some sort of change more recently that we've seen and as soon as that request was made to merrick garland within the same week officially making him special counsel is the news we see coming out of doj. certainly something significant here. gosh, it's getting tough to continue to keep track of all the different special counsels we have going at this point. it's another one that could go on potentially for a while and it will be curious to see what happens in the hunter biden case specifically with that sort of potential plea deal that was hanging in the balance. >> let's break that down a little bit. monica alba, this is ultimately political because it involves the president of the united states, his son and all the accusations from republicans which have even led to talk of impeachment inquiries into the president, which was sort of flirted with by the speaker of the house. they can open an impeachment inquiry and that rarely gets opened if it doesn't result in a vote. this is all very much part of the campaign. >> and that's all a part of the calculus here and the considerations, andrea. you are absolutely right. and we don't have any reaction yet from the white house, but given how they've reacted to other matters involving the department of justice, certainly a special counsel which we can remind we were just talking about the president's own special counsel dealing with the classified documents, but then you have this new matter where the white house has consistently said anything having to do with a probe of this nature they maintain there is a total independence from the department of justice and that they will cooperate with those kinds of investigations as they proceed, specifically when it comes to the president talking about his son hunter. we have seen time and time again he has spoken out simply to say he loves his son, he supports his son and that that support will continue essentially no matter what. so i think you can expect to see a kind of combination of both of those reactions from here once we get anything officially and we will alert you, andrea, but we do have to remind people here that in terms of this plea agreement that fell apart, it was back then that there were questions raised about where the investigation today because there were formal comments about the investigation being ongoing while the white house and those closest to the president thought if this plea agreement goes through that will close this matter, that will be the end of it and they can put it behind them as a family. clearly that was not the case and that is why you saw hunter when he did plead guilty to those misdemeanor charges related to taxes, the thing that fell apart in court was related to a separate gun charge. that's why they have had to go back to figure out what happens next and then he entered that not guilty plea as that gets resolved. of course, that continues to be ongoing and we do know that obviously the attorney general and the president have a relationship where the attorney general comes to the white house for things like cabinet meetings, he was here recently for a state dinner, the congressional picnic, all of that is incredibly common, but we have heard repeatedly from both men that they do not discuss the cases that are ongoing that touch the president, that touch the former president of which there are several, or now the president's son. and here we do have an interesting timeline question because if david weiss did come to the special counsel -- to come to that conclusion that he needed that authority now and he came to the attorney general to formally ask for it, that is significant because there were questions about whether that had happened some weeks ago when some irs whistleblowers as a part of congressional testimony under oath had suggested that that was something that weiss had already done and weiss actually came out afterwards and said, i have never sought that new authority from the attorney general. clearly, though, now in this newer phase there was a decision or information that led to him now taking that additional step. and that is something we need to drill down into as well. but the political backdrop to all of this and 2024 really around the corner as we look to what polls are suggesting will likely be this rematch there the current president and the former president who are both dealing with their own very different investigations and now the president's son has been added to that list in the special counsel capacity, andrea. >> and, joyce vance, monica, you know -- monica's excellent explanation of all of this brings to mind, does this raise questions about whether there is more there there in the continuing investigation comment by what was the u.s. attorney and now he is the special counsel? you know, is there more to look into? is this a bigger deal in terms of hunter biden's business dealings? >> so i think what this suggests is that the plea agreement that was previously thought to be on is now off, at least for now, and that david would have -- david weiss, the u.s. attorney in delaware, would have sought authorization to become a special counsel because he believes that there is a risk that this case will now go to trial. you will recall that as that guilty plea was falling apart, one of his prosecutors was asked by the judge, might you bring other charges? for instance, might you charge hunter biden for failure to comply with the requirements of the foreign agent registration act? and the prosecutor said in open court that that sort of an investigation was still on the table. so this decision to make weiss a special counsel is another marker that doj is renewing its independence during the biden administration, this insulates decision-making about the president's son from political appointees and assures that only the u.s. attorney now the special counsel in delaware and his team will determine whether or not to charge biden and what with. he was initially charged via an information, that was what he was going to plead guilty to. if new charges go forward because there is no longer a plea agreement, that means an indictment. as i understand this announcement, it means that weiss is free to bring these charges in any district where he believes he has venue. he can bring any charges that he decides and he will have to write a report like other special counsels do. so one of the significant inclusions when you appoint a special counsel is that there will be greater public clarity. we heard merrick garland commit to releasing as much of that report as possible. >> let me pick it up with paul, though. there had been an agreement on the taxes, he has paid back the taxes. there had been an agreement on the gun charge which was not thet determined so that clearly could lead to an indictment and a trial on the gun charge, but because they went into court that day with what they thought was a resolution on both the taxes and the guns and he said -- david weiss said that there still was an ongoing investigation, that does suggest that there were -- could be foreign representation issue, could be other issues regarding his business dealings, but there's more to investigate beyond those two issues that they thought had been walled off, doesn't it? >> it does, and you will recall, andrea, that mr. weiss said as much in his press release. >> right. >> very publicly he has consistently said there is and is an ongoing investigation. the part that seems incomprehensible to me is there was a misconnect, that there wasn't clarity at the time of this change of plea, that the defense didn't seem to understand that fundamental principle, that this plea was only going to settle a unique part of this investigation and wasn't going to address the larger investigation. how it is that miscommunication, that misunderstanding came to be, isn't clear to me. but what we do know is that the investigation is ongoing and that mr. weiss now feels that that is a serious enough ongoing investigation that he wants a greater degree of independence so that he can make a decision with greater authority about whether or not -- where and when to bring these charges if charges are brought. >> this just happened, this has just been handed to me. prosecutors have filed a motion to dismiss the criminal information filed against hunter biden on tax charges in delaware saying that the parties are no longer able to come to an agreement on a plea and the charges may need to be filed in california or washington, d.c., quote, the parties have engaged in further plea negotiations, but are at an impasse. the government now believes that the case will not resolve short of a trial. this is from a filing, this has been filed by our producer, daniel barnes, and here it says -- if i can show this on camera, this is what i'm now reading from. this is united states motion to voluntarily dismiss criminal tax information without prejudice so that tax charges can be brought in a district where venue lies. paul, i interrupted you, but you and joyce are the lawyers among us and i can monica has something to add as well. joyce, why don't you pick it up and then paul as well. >> let's kick this back and forth. >> it's precisely as paul was saying. this breakdown of this plea agreement is iexplicable how the parties could not have understood on both sides that further investigation into hunter biden was anticipated. andrea, at the time that this plea was on the table we talked about how unusual it was. the tax charges were the type of charges that are usually resolved in a civil fashion with repayment. the gun charge is a very unusual one, biden was charged with being an addict in possession of a firearm and typically that portion of the statute prohibiting certain classes of people from possessing firearms is not enforced via criminal prosecution, it's simply not one of the priorities that doj imposes in the absence of having a defendant who presents a clear danger to the community. so it will be interesting to see if weiss chooses to go forward with those charges and if he will add additional ones, but it's the venue question that we touched on earlier. this notion that although the investigation and the guilty plea were going to take place in delaware, if there is going to be a combative process going forward, a trial, which we hear in this new pleading the special prosecutor anticipates, then venue for those charges will likely be in california or the district of columbia and we will see an indictment sought in one of those forums. >> and, paul, do you want to add something to that? i interrupted you only because we just were given the court's filing. the prosecutor's filing. >> only to say, andrea, that this pleading makes it a bad day for hunter biden. what was once a hope that he would resolve these tax cases now means according to this filing he's going to trial on this case and the facts as set out in that plea agreement sound relatively simple, he made a certain amount of money and he didn't pay taxes on them. so this tax case, once looked like it was going to be resolved, now going to trial. you don't get the benefit of the bargain, you don't get the fact that the prosecutors may look at you and offer or suggest a more lenient sentence. now they're going to trial and as joyce knows, when federal prosecutors no longer look at a plea and are preparing for trial the deal gets worse, not better. things are going to continue to build up here and get worse for hunter biden because of this new pleading and withdraw of the attempted plea agreement. >> joining us now as well is nbc news investigative correspondent tom winter. i can't think of a worse situation just in this news cycle for the white house and the president in the middle of a potential, you know, campaign for 2024 when a day that they thought was going to be devoted to the argument in federal court down the street over a protective order on the former president and likely republican nominee, the front runner, now it's all about hunter biden. tom? >> well, that's certainly the political calculus, andrea, and i can tell you that the criminal calculus for the son of the president of the united states this could certainly not be a worse outcome for him, either, because it takes just a little over two weeks ago we were in a delaware courtroom where we thought papers were going to be signed, in fact, papers were signed. this news organization moved and asked the judge to docket the plea agreement, both sides had signed them, they just hadn't been accepted nor rejected yet by the judge who had concerns about the language and terms and hr potential voft in any sort of dispute should there be one over the plea agreement whether or not hunter biden was living up to his end of the bargain. that's what the judge raised. a little bit more from that filing you were just keying in on, apparently weiss' office asked hunter biden's attorneys for their position on a couple of different issues around august 9th and asked for a response by today, actually, and they responded and said, they wanted more time, they wanted until monday. weiss' office said we're going to decline that and went and moved forward. what's interesting is that that's been going on while apparently weiss asked for special counsel -- if i heard the attorney general correctly -- while he was asking for special counsel they were also pushing forward on this potential plea deal. sounds like there was a lot that was going on and probably needs to do -- we need to do a little more reporting on that. but the whole key part of this, andrea, is that once this plea deal came into jeopardy, that there was some sort of a question about it, weiss' office had a serious problem with this prosecution because they didn't have venue for the tax charges. they did not have venue for really anything in delaware. if you look at the statement of facts that both sides agreed to as far as the conduct that everybody agrees happened here by the defense and by the prosecutors, there's nothing that really ties it to delaware. now, of course, if they want to conduct a plea it's a contract between two parties, they could bring that to delaware, but once it became clear that this plea agreement might break down as the prosecutors well note it would be entirely proper for hunter biden's attorneys to challenge any sort of charges that they would file on venue grounds. and the government has the responsibility to prove venue in its case, that there's some sort of a tie or nexus to delaware. now they say they are going to have to file charges as you alluded to earlier in california or in the district of columbia in washington, d.c. or potentially both because that's where the conduct that both sides discussed is. now, there's the broader question here of, okay, tom, we know about this gun charge, we know about the tax charges and that's been going on for a long time and everybody has reported it, but what about the things that have recently come up in congress with respect to bank records? what about the idea in court as one of the federal prosecutors said there could be an ongoing investigation into farrah. well, the question that i would have is you're coming up on stiff statute of limitations concerns, five years since a lot of this conduct allegedly took place. there has been no indication to us and my colleagues in the course of our reports that farrah was ever really considered as a charge here, but we don't know if there's been any new information that's come in. we don't know if there's anything that's come out of the congress documents published that have given investigators pause. we know because we reported it in the spring of this year that the fbi had completed its investigation and the fbi felt like what's the hold up here? i mean, you guys have what you have, we know from an irs agent who testified under oath at congress who began this investigation, he says -- i'm referring to joseph ziegler, in november of 2018 that he recommended in what he says was a 99-page memo from the irs that hunter biden not only just face misdemeanor tax charges which is what he was going to plead guilty to, but felony tax charges for the years 2017, 2018 and 2019. so the question is do those come back into play here? and we are coming up on some statute of limitations concerns in october of this year, sometimes prosecutors can get around things with conspiracy charges, but that's something that's probably going to be a bit of a challenge for them. so two questions that i would have if i could find out anything tied to this case, number one, was this request for this special counsel status purely a way so that weiss could move forward in california, in d.c. without anybody objecting, he has the absolute authority to file whatever district he wants to and has venue to do so. that's the first question. is that the real reason why he requested special counsel status? number two, are there going to be any new charges added to this? is it basically just them repackaging what they've already learned and filing those charges in court? i think a third question that comes to mind is is that what weiss wanted to do all along as some of these irs agents that have spoken before congress seemed to indicate and was he rebuffed in being able to do that? he seems to say in his letters to congress that that's not what occurred, but though that weiss can move forward and do it, that's more of a politics, inside the justice department, what happened here, but as far as the criminal future for the son of the president of the united states, it's definitely worse than it was an hour ago and it's definitely worse than it was when a judge put a pause on his proceedings. he's in a situation now where venue is likely going to be out as a potential grounds to fight this, but on the other hand is there anything more than a misdemeanor tax charge and is what he ends up facing what he was going to face anyway? there's another calculus here that this could be sbha beneficial for him because it sure seemed clear to me and other reporters in the courtroom that the judge was really drilling down on to the last year of the tax misdemeanor that was 2018, what hunter biden knew and did, was he sober at the time, he says he was. was there any sort of an intent when he did not accurately file his tax returns that year or adequately pay them? i need to double-check the language on that but that's essentially the argument. what i was kind of wondering at the time and others wondered as well, was she going to try to build in this idea that there was intent there in that last year and could she sentence him to perhaps a more harsh sentence or perhaps even jail time if that's the conclusion that she came to? now, that is done. these charges have been dismissed. judge mary ellen has no say over the matter. is that a better option for hunter biden or not? time will tell. >> you raised a i lot of issues. i want to bring in paul charlton and raise a couple things that i in reading this pointed out. in this order it says because -- because he did not plead guilty, he pleaded not guilty in delaware, therefore, did not waive venue. after the hearing the parties continued negotiating but reached the impasse. a trial is therefore in order. that trial cannot take place in this district, delaware, because as explained venue does not lie here. so that is the filing from the prosecutor. also, paul, i wanted to point out as we were discussing earlier, the two issues, the tax issue and the gun issue had been supposedly agreed to when they went into that hearing, you know, in delaware two weeks ago, but he still was saying as he said at his press release earlier that he was still investigating something and there is what was just referred to as tom winter as the fara issue, not registers as a foreign agent or other business dealings that had been raised at those hearings. that could be what this is all about as well, but here is something that andrew weissman our colleague has put out. a special counsel is supposed to be from outside the government so how is this consistent with the special counsel regulations, having been a u.s. attorney and still be double added as a special counsel? and then his opinion of this, andrew weissman's is weiss already messed up the hunter plea agreement and now this. so do you see a conflict between him continuing as a u.s. attorney in delaware but having the ability to file an indictment in another venue, as now a special counsel. paul? >> andrew is right, the cfrs, the regulations that control the appointment of a special counsel call for somebody outside of government. i don't expect that that fact, that specific regulation, has escaped merrick garland's attention. somehow they have made this appointment, taking that issue into account, and went forward. i'm not quite certain how it is they did so, but we can be certain that very smart people within the department of justice have addressed that issue, that that point hasn't escaped their attention. we will have to see how it is they navigate that specific piece. but it is interesting, andrea, that this filing comes on the day that merrick garland appointed mr. weiss as the special counsel, meaning, i think, as a fair inference, that this was an independent decisiot this was an independent decision of his, that he is now saying as the independent counsel, i am withdrawing this plea. without prejudice. which means i get to file these charges again, and as we've been saying now in whatever venue and in whatever jurisdiction that may be appropriate. so all of this is to say that hunter biden now has exposure not just for those charges that were the subject of that proposed plea agreement, but now there is a broader arena of facts. now there are a number of other issues, acts, and concerns that hunter biden is going to have to be paying attention to and that the special counsel most certainly will be thinking about in deciding whether or not to bring charges on a broader array of other acts that mr. biden may have been involved in. >> and joining us now is our chief white house correspondent peter alexander. we have monica alba also at the white house. peter, let me put this in a political context as well. we've been going through all of the legal ramifications of this, but without getting into what aboutism and all of the criticism of what the former president has been saying and his allies on the hill, this is the son of the president. he's not the candidate. he's not a political officer, and what he may have done and what we know was involved in the plea agreement opportunity even begin to compare to classified documents and to the indictment here in d.c. and the superseding indictment to say nothing of what may or may not be happening in new york state or georgia yet to be seen. despite all of that, politically, this is a weapon, a political weapon, and a buttress for what republicans have been saying all along. >> you're exactly right. this gives new ammunition to republicans as we head into the key months as americans return from vacation, now there's a new special counsel announced today into the hunter biden investigation. i know my colleague monica alba is with us as well. she's sharing some of her reporting. i want to get right to it right now. this is from the attorney chris clark for hunter biden. prosecutors have now reached an impasse as it relates to this plea agreement that, frankly, the white house, those close to joe biden had thought would have meant the end of the hunter biden situation. these are the words of chris clark, the attorney for hunter biden. he said the attorney general made clear what was always the case in materials of the authority of the u.s. attorney's office in delaware in this matter, whether in delaware, washington, d.c., or anywhere else, we expect a fair resolution on behalf of our client. this u.s. attorney has diligently been investigating my client for five years, and he proposed a resolution, which we fully intend to pursue in court. it is hard to see why he would have proposed such a resolution if there were other offenses he could have prosecuted. we are aware of none. we are confident my client will have resolution and will be moving on with his life successfully. so that's notable for a variety of reasons because it says what we had understood basically to be the case, which is the understanding of hunter biden's attorney, his team was that this plea agreement meant the end of any investigations into him, but to be clear, david weiss had said in his own press statement, he said we're going to continue investigating this. this is not the end. so something broke down, and it doesn't just have legal implications here, as you note, it has significant political implications as well. >> i was discussing that the day it broke down in realtime with chris christie, a candidate, of course, you know, who has his own, but he has his experience as a prosecutor. and in realtime, he was saying this plea agreement is in direct contrast to what david weiss said in his news release weeks earlier that this plea agreement did not end the investigation. monica alba, i have to bring you in here. i know you have some reaction as well. let me read something else we just got from our colleague ali vitali who covers the hill. this is attributable to russell dye, spokesperson for house judiciary for jim jordan, so for the republican leadership. david weiss can't be trusted. this is just a new way to whitewash the biden family's corruption. weiss has already signed off on a sweetheart plea that was so awful and unfair a federal judge rejected it. we will continue to pursue facts brought to life by brave whistle-blowers as well as weiss's inconsistent statements to congress. monica. >> yeah, that just really shows you, andrea, and underscores the high temperature of the political climate and backdrop to all of this, and that is why the white house is not going to be weighing in on this in any substantive manner. i've just been told by somebody they refer all questions on this to the department of justice or to hunter biden's personal attorneys. and that tracks and is consistent with what they have done in the past as it relates to other key probes from the special counsel and the attorney general in making those announcements, and also continuing and following with what we've seen as a pattern, i'm told by several sources that the white house, nobody inside at least, from what we understand had any kind of a heads-up that this was coming. and that is another sign here that attempts to bolster what the president and this white house have made a top priority, which is that strict independence from the the president of justice that, of course, the president technically oversees the attorney general, but when it comes to very sensitive matters like this one, they have long said there is absolutely no interference, and they would never want to even give an ounce of impropriety conducted here, and that is why they learned, they say, just like all of us from the news conference when the attorney general came forth to make this new elevation of david weiss, the special counsel, like everybody else did. that is a significant moment to just remind everybody here, again, that was a top, top issue for candidate biden saying he wanted to get into the white house so that he could be a president that restored that respect, he says, for the rule of law. andrea. >> peter, i am reminded of another american president whom i covered whose name was bill clinton and was very frustrated that he had appointed so independent attorney earning. >> there's been a lot of frustrations with the attorney general and their handling of a series of different matters. i can imagine president biden is not satisfied with the way this is going right now. they thought it was over. donald trump, even with his hand picked attorney generals, there are more than one occasion where he was fuming. i'm struck by a couple of things, president biden who is now back at the white house today, no public events scheduled. we'll see him at roughly 6:00 for the first time today as he prepares to go to rehoboth beach in delaware today. that will be our first opportunity for him to say something on camera if he so chooses to members of the media and frankly to the american public. but separately, just within the last 24 to 48 hours, the president while traveling out west, andrea, was asked one quick question about the devin archer testimony, that was one of the former business associates of hunter biden. he asked about his testimony that said that president biden had gotten on the phone about 20 times over the course of ten years with hunter biden and some of these business associates from burr rees ma, no indication that the president knew who was on the other side aside from his own son, but the president said of that, he basically said it is wrong. not clear what he was saying was wrong, whether it's that there were no calls or that he did nothing wrong, but that is what he said. >> just to suggest another possible misinterpretation or interpretation, it was originally reported by the republican read out that archer had suggested something that insinuated improper behavior by the president and his son, and then when archer came out and the transcript came out, it was very clear that he had exonerated the president. >> that's exactly right. so we saw the transcript and that was our first opportunity to really hold the republicans' feet to the fire is and say the way you presented this is not the way it read behind closed doors. dan goldman one of the top democrats on that committee, the way he had cast it was accurate saying, you know, hunter biden wasn't off the hook here. he did sort of the present the illusion of access here, putting his dad on the phone to his buddies, his business associates, but at no point was that conversation focused on any business dealings, and at no point to his knowledge had the president changed any policy based on these conversations or any awareness of what his son chs doing. >> so merrick garland has appointed the u.s. attorney in delaware, republican appointee holdover from the previous administration, as a special counsel, and that now gives him broad powers to bring a case against hunter biden in d.c., in california or wherever else there might be a case involving taxes, potentially the gun charge, but most likely taxes, perhaps representation of a foreign client or some other business dealings we don't even know about, and he has said already on paper that the investigation is ongoing. >> that's right, i mean, i think where this would have broken is if merrick garland had said no to the request that was made on tuesday, but that's not wait it went. i think next time merrick garland is on the hill, he's going to be able to wash away this or at least try to wash away this despite further questions, saying it's out of my hands, there's now special counsel. he's handling the case. he has all the power he needs tad, whatever he wants to do. and at the end of this, if there's not charges brought forward or unless they follow the recommendation that is being made, that there's going to have to be some report. but basically it's saying that this is all out in the public right now. this is no longer in my hands. he has a little bit of something to be able to tell people on the hill. >> it's been an extraordinary hour. thanks so much to peter alexander, ryan reilly, paul, and before that joyce vance and monica alba and all of the contributors as we continue to cover this full-time on msnbc. "chris jansing reports" picks it up right now. good afternoon, i'm chris jansing live from msnbc news headquarters in new york city, and it is a very busy day. breaking news in just the last 45 minutes, the justice department named a special counsel to take over the hunter biden matter. the u.s. attorney working the case for years had just asked that designation to be put in