pacific. i'm jose diaz-balart. breaking news around the legal drama surrounding former president donald trump. a judge released the full report from a special grand jury that investigated allegations trump and his allies interfered in the 2020 presidential election there. the report includes the names of 21 people that it recommended for the indictment, but were not indicted. the report's introduction and conclusion in a section in which the grand jurors expressed concern that some witnesses may have lied under oath was released in february, but recommendations on who should or should not be charged were kept secret. the panel heard from 75 witnesses over a seven-month period. with us now to talk about this, nbc news justice and intelligence correspondent ken dilanian, katie phang, msnbc legal contributor and host of "the katie phang show," lisa rubin, msnbc legal analyst, also with us susan paige, washington bureau chief for "usa today." katie, let's talk about the big, big takeaways from this report. including the fact that we're talking about the possibility of 39 names on there. >> yeah. so, the way that we want to look at this, jose, it is broken down into sections. and what we want to do is when you're walking through it and viewers walking through it, you're going to see each roman numeral is a section that addresses what the special grand jurors thought was a crime that was in violation of a georgia statute was committed and by the people that they think committed these crimes. so when you look at each section, it will take the relevant statutes and discuss the votes and that's important too because this is what you call complete transparency with this judicial system. we may not know the names of the special grand jurors and that will remin confidential and for good reason. with regard to the january 2nd, 2021 phone call from president trump to brad raffensperger, the grand jury recommends the district attorney seek an indictment against the following individuals, donald trump. you see his name. and there is relevant statutes that are listed and it says 22 votes were made concerning donald trump and his violation of the statutes. you see 21 yeses, one no, and zero abstentions depending upon which of the statutes. the reason why this is important is it shows that there were people who disagreed as it happens in the world, there were people who disagreed with whether or not the persons committed the crimes, but the pages we have been harping about are pages six, seven and eight. that's roman numeral seven of the grand jury report. it talks about the national effort to overturn the election results in specific states. that's why you see noteworthy names. people like united states senators, i say plural, not just lindsey graham, david perdue's name, kelly loeffler's name, and some very prominent legal, trump legal world names like cleta mitchell, lynn wood, boris epshteyn. these are people still in the trump legal orbit or they have since exited as it happens often in trump legal. but there are also people that i want to note that are on page seven. two men by the name of curt hilbert and alex kauffman who are they? they're georgia lawyers that helped donald trump and the trump campaign file and litigate in the state of georgia to try to in the courtroom overturn the elections of that result. but i saw hilbert testify under oath in an evidentiary hearing two weeks ago in federal court. mark meadows in his attempts to remove his state prosecution to federal court had an evidentiary hearing in front of a federal judge. the state of georgia called kirk hilbert. think about this. you got a special grand jury that is recommending that somebody like kirk hilbert, who helped donald trump be indicted for rico, state rico. but then the state used him as a witness. and as i mentioned to ana in the last hour, we know there is 150 witnesses on behalf of d.a. fani willis. we heard that in court two days ago when we were there dealing with whether or not we were going to have a severance of kenneth chesebro from sidney powell and the other defendants of the 150 witnesses, you see some of them here now. is lindsey graham going to be called to testify by the state of georgia against donald trump if this goes to trial, when it goes to trial? these are the questions that remain a little bit unanswered and we now have a little bit more elimination as we sit here right now. >> there are so many different aspects with it, state and in the case you're mentioning, national implications. i'm wondering what are you seeing that stands out to you in this very, very specific series of indictments? >> well, jose, i want to underline the headline for our viewers and make sure it doesn't get lost. a special grand jury recommended criminal charges against one current and two former u.s. senators in connection with their alleged actions to try to overturn the 2020 election. the d.a. in atlanta decided not to bring those charges. and there may be some significant reasons for that including concerns over whether the speech and debate clause was implicated, the clause in the constitution that says that members of congress can't be prosecuted for their legislative acts and lindsey graham argued that's what he was doing when he was making inquiries about potential election fraud. whether you believe that or not, that may have been an impediment. there was a footnote in here quoting one of the special grand jurors as saying they believe that the statements of perdue and loeffler who then went on to lose their re-election battles, were -- pandering to their political base and do not give rise to their being guilty of a criminal conspiracy. that gives you an idea. people may be wondering if the special grand jury recommended charges, why didn't the d.a. bring charges? there may be a host of reasons for that, some of these 21 people could be cooperating. but in the case of the senators, there may have been some political legal impediments that gave the d.a. pause. couple of other prominent names, can't emphasize enough here. boris eshteyn has not been charged criminally. mike flynn, the former national security adviser to the united states and cleta mitchell, a prominent attorney whose fingerprints have been all over the phone calls and efforts to go forward with the fake elector scheme, not charged in atlanta, recommended for charges. there is going to be questions for weeks and months about why these people weren't charged. those questions are going to be difficult to answer because the grand jury process that led to the charges is a secret process. the d.a. won't be able to comment on it. but it is a target for reporters combing this case. >> in that list also, burt jones. >> right. >> lieutenant governor of georgia. >> the lieutenant governor of the state of georgia, current lieutenant governor. >> who fani willis recused from prosecuting him because he donated to a political opponent. >> so, lisa, just wondering when you're mentioning here and you're not indicted, is that done deal, is there any possibility that these could in some further court cases be indicted? >> i would say, jose, possible, but not likely. there is one exception to that and ken mentioned it, burt jones, against him an indictment could still be sought pursuant to the appointment of a special prosecutor. the person who would appoint that special prosecutor has been awaiting this report. and so now that we have it, it is possible for jones could find himself on the opposite end of an indictment. but i tend to agree with others who believe this case is already sprawling enough against 19 defendants, 41 counts and 98 page indictment that the d.a. herself estimates would entail calling 150 witnesses over four months and that's not including jury selection. and we know that in all likelihood we're going to see versions of this trial at least twice. we're going to see ken chesebro and sidney powell tried on october 23rd and then potentially at a much later date, see at least some grouping of the 17 remaining co-defendants and anybody who does not plead out tried at that later date. given how much they have on their plate, given that many of the people listed here could already be cooperating and given some of the other concerns here, ken mentioned constitutional concerns about prosecuting someone like lindsey graham, given the speech and debate clause, i think it is unlikely we'll see any further indictments against some of these folks, other than burt jones. >> the fact is -- we have been talking about it, two former legislators and one current one, lindsey graham. do you think this could -- what do you think it could mean for graham and the others? >> well, it could be very serious business indeed. this is an example of the value of transparency and public affairs. americans of all stripes can read this, make up their own minds. it does give fani willis a response to those who accuse her of overreach with 19 defendants, can you imagine if she had indicted all 39, including one current and two former u.s. senators. so this is a -- these people escaped indictment. i'm sure there are a lot of relieved people around washington and georgia today when they look at the names that avoided being indicted. this also gives us a road map to what is going to be clearly a very serious and meticulous trial. it tells us something about the evidence they have and the fact that evidence persuaded almost all of these grand jurors to support indicting even more people than she did indict. >> the grand jury seeking evidence from or involving 75 witnesses during the course of the investigation. katie phang, what do you think this says to donald trump? >> it says to donald trump i'd be nervous. not only did donald trump create an environment where these are participants. but he created an environment where now people have been indicted alongside him. because in the january 6th case, you see him standing alone with six unindicted co-conspirators and they had a sigh of relief. but when fani willis brought these charges through this grand jury indictment we saw a few weeks ago, the people that were in his orbit, they got indicted too. they were active co-conspirators that had their own criminal liability. i would be nervous if i'm donald trump because now as i noted, there are a lot of people who are going to be witnesses against him. these are people that have been privy to conversations. so these are people that have been in his inner circle that were a part actively of what he was trying to do, thwart american democracy. lindsey graham hasn't been kicked to the curb yesterday, giuliani is in there. >> flynn. >> exactly. boris epshteyn, an active quarterback of the trump legal teams. the fact you see all these names is -- i would be very nervous if i were donald trump. when i brought this up to ana, there are certain investigations being done in other states. not just georgia. look at michigan. donald trump may have criminal exposure in other states based upon investigations that are being conducted at this time. i want to emphasize some language in this report. these special grand jurors sat in service during this length of time, took all this evidence and this testimony and emphasized here at the conclusion on page 8, they wanted to acknowledge the hard working attorneys and staff of the fulton county day. d.a.'s office but said any errors in the report should not be laid at their feet. that's really important. >> is that unusual? >> is that standard procedure? >> when the law becomes politicized, and when people try to use the law as a weapon, as a political cudgel to sit there and make this idea that all the prosecutions are splitly motivated, it is refreshing and honorable to see the grand jurors say we did our job and it wasn't because we were influenced by the d.a. the d.a. had nothing to do with the recommendations. these were lay people and civilians called to service that took this evidence and said, you know what, based upon what we know, this is what we recommend. >> jury of peers, the concept here. >> what a concept. >> lisa, you were talking about what graham and the other two former legislators could talk about, exceptions that one has because one is an elected official. what is that one? >> are you asking what exceptions i'm talking about? >> yeah. that they could come up with. >> the speech and debate clause of the constitution protects legislators in their function as legislators. you'll remember when lindsey graham was subpoenaed for testimony during the special purpose grand jury investigation, he tried to worm his way out of it saying, no, all the calls i made to brad raffensperger were in my capacity as a legislator. i was doing a fact finding because as a push who had to vote on the certification, i was entitled to understand if there was fraud in georgia or other states, even if they weren't my own. he had some protections insofar as he was acting as a legislator doing some fact finding work. that line, while it was sufficient to allow him to testify, may have just been too close for the fulton county d.a. to justify an indictment against a sitting u.s. senator. something i find so interesting here about the jury, when she's talking about the special purpose grand jury and what they did here and how they were just lay people, they were lay people who were impressed by and taken with some of the people who came before them who were indicted. i keep thinking about blayne alexander's interview with emily coors and she was almost giddy with excitement recalling seeding rudy giuliani before her, headaching her hand. she was part of this body of people recommending extensive charges against mr. giuliani and others. that speaks to, i think, what we can expect of jurors throughout this country who are asked to pass judgment on the former president and his allies in a number of these cases. we shouldn't be so negative about the capacity of people whose political beliefs madoff tail with the president's to mete out justice in these cases. >> when one is involved in a judicial process of any kind, they ask jurors can you separate your beliefs on -- or even likes or dislikes about a person so that you can take this responsibility seriously. and that's a question that every juror has to answer. >> air always asked by both sides, civil or criminal case, can you be a fair and impartial juror. and what does that mean? it means i may be a registered republican, a registered democrat, i may be an independent with no party affiliation, but i can sit in judgment because i can take the evidence and the facts and synthesize them. that dove tails with what we're about to deal with in fulton county, picking a jury to sit on a four-month, 150 witness jury trial, for a huge rico case. we haven't found out from the judge whether the remaining 17 defendants including donald trump will have to go on october 23rd. i anticipate the answer will be no. but the juror pool will be fulton county. these were fulton county special grand jurors as well. that's the idea. they will be brought in, sit in judgment, they'll do it when they're fair and impartial and if you have cause to dismiss them, you can. if you want to exercise a preemptory strike, you can. but these jurors are drawn from a community of the defendants, plural, peers. >> and they recommended indictments in connection to efforts in other states like arizona, pennsylvania, michigan, wisconsin. who are those areas and the investigation there have to do with this? >> it is very important. there were fake elector plots in multiple states and now some of that conduct was being and is being investigated by special counsel jack smith. some of the attorneys general in those states said, you know, feds, you can handle this. other states including michigan have launched their own investigations of this conduct and they may glean some information from the investigation that has been done here in fulton county. we haven't heard the end of it. even though i just stepped back for a second, this report today is so important because even though this actual case in atlanta may take a while to foe to trial, a lot of complexities around it as we saw. there is a blizzard of emotions. it may be a year or more before we see donald trump in a courtroom. what fani willis and the fulton county folks have done is elevated the conversation here around the efforts to overturn the election. they have laid it all out, they have created full transparency, the kind we aren't able to see from jack smith and the special counsel. they put all the names out there, even the ones who haven't been charged. it is a good thing for american democracy and folks in the other states and great for journalism and transparency, jose. >> katie was talking about the politization of the process and it has been day one donald trump's mantra. what the is potential political fallout from this report? >> we should be modest about predicting effects on donald trump supporters for anything that happens to him, including the indictments, including the release of this report. i think it is possible over time there is a cumulative effect. trump has very fierce supporters. he also has people who will look at what they have learned and judge for themselves. the massive evidence, the number of people they interviewed at the grand jury, the care they took with these charges is in a way a response to what i predict we'll hear from donald trump, great criticism of this report. what he's done to jack smith and to fani willis and others who have investigated him is so denounce them as frauds and crooks. this report helps counter that line of attack. >> katie phang, if you would stay with us. lisa rubin, susan page, ken dilanian, thank you for being with us this morning. we have much more on this report in just 60 seconds. you're watching "jose diaz-balart reports" on msnbc. s. you're watching "jose diaz-balart repos"rt on msnbc. let innovation refunds help with your erc tax refund so you can improve your business however you see fit. rosie used part of her refund to build an outdoor patio. clink! dr. marshall used part of his refund to give his practice a facelift. emily used part of her refund to buy... i run a wax museum. let innovation refunds help you get started on your erc tax refund. stop waiting. go to innovationrefunds.com you really got the brows. ♪i've got home internet from t-mobile.♪ ♪it only costs $50 bucks at t-mobile.♪ ♪just one cord to set up.♪ ♪say goodbye to that truck.♪ ♪oh, what a beautiful mornin'...♪ ♪oh, what a beautiful day...♪ ♪they won't raise your rates at t-mobile...♪ ♪you'll get a great deal every day!♪ home internet from t-mobile... just $50 bucks a month. 22 past the hour. we're back with our breaking news. katie phang is back with us for which i am very grateful. joining us now also, vaughn hillyard in rapid city, south dakota, and garrett haake. how can we expect the trump campaign to react to this report? >> they're going to lean into it i expect, jose. they're going to continue to make the argument they made all along in all of these cases that they're purely political and this is an effort to get trump. i think what you're going to see and seeing it from some of the pro trump influencers are out there on special media, kind of the leading edge of his response to these kinds of things, is to point out how much further the special purpose grand jury tried to go in indicting additional people, including legislators, lindsey graham, kelly loeffler, and david perdue and they'll point to the footnote that ken dilanian was mentioning, one grand juror felt the actions were political and not legal in nature. that is the basis of every legal and political argument that donald trump made about all of the prosecutions against them and i think t