our top story tonight is a brand new filing by special counsel jack smith. you can see it right here in this paperwork. you can see what they re talking about which is evidence, what lawyers call discovery material. this kind of filing reminds donald trump and his evolving team of lawyers they re on a collision course with jack smith s aggressive office, barreling towards a trial slated to start in august. that could be delight, but only by rulings. it s not a timeline that donald trump s team controls. so they re headed towards that. this filing that we just got outlines the new evidence that donald trump s team will get. that includes interviews of defendant trump conduct bid non-government entities obtained by the special counsel s office. the key word here is interviews, plural, because even in this sparse word we got new information. it means smith has at least one more recording of trump beyond the one we knew about, the one that made news, that was also featured in the
Trumps criminal trial. The judge late today denying another attempt by trumps lawyers to just run away from this thing. Indeed, the judge admonishing trumps lawyers for insinuating that actor Stormy Daniels changed her story while rejkting the mistrial request. The judge said, i disagree with your narrative that theres any new account here. Daniels wrapped up her testimony. She spoke under oath for hours and rhetorically stood her ground during the reports we have we dont have the cameras but we have a lot of reporting from people inside the room that it got very tense with the questioning from trumps Defense Lawyers, trying to make a bet the jury wouldnt be as offended by the line of questions as they would be concerned about the potential questions raised around her credibility. You wanted money. That phrase repeated multiple times by Donald Trumps lawyer today, as she grilled Stormy Daniels during crossexamination. It bordered on, i think, shaming a sex worker. Of course Stormy Dani
we were talking. he gave them some, emily. some isn t all. that s going to be a problem for him because the government wanted everything and why did he withhold some of it. i think we still don t really understand the answer, whether there were particular documents he cared about or whether they were being sloppy. from the government s point of view, that s the point at which this goes from being, you know it s not a mistake, something the government can agree to overlook, not rise to the level of a criminal defense, to something that feels willful and they just can t afford to let go. leslie, i want to ask you about the timeline. as you know, and i think people know from watching, like i said, crime movies and mafia movies, some crimes are like this, and you say this happened. you go to the scene of the crime. it s like the emergency thing. this is a different type of case. and it has obstructive crimes
Impugned him in many different ways. do you think that kind of thing has any impact on someone like jack smith? you know, nobody likes to hear themselves called names by anyone. but i would say at the end of the day, no. jack has been around. jack has done a lot of things. his team are very professional, very experienced prosecutors. you learn as a prosecutor that you can t take things personally and you have to have a thick skin. jack definitely has that. really interesting. our thanks to both of you, leslie caldwell and emily baz lon. there s more pressure on the zourt and today i ll walk through why the buck stops with chief justice roberts. hobnobbing with republican donors. also barack obama speaking out. a brand new interview that involves lebron james and some other fun stuff. first we turn to one of our
Confidential, the consequences of not doing that. he continues to make he meaning the former president continues to make varying and changeable statements about his intent with regards to these documents. i think that s all very interesting and very powerful, and interestingly enough, none of that comes from any external source. that s all coming from a criminal defendant s own mouth. finally, before i bring emily in because of your great experience here, i m curious, we see the refers to witness lists and that material, and the defendant and his team has every right to be prepared on that. how do you think we ll learn about the actual witnesses who will take the stand against trump if this goes to trial? most likely we ll learn when the government discloses a witness list which will be much closer in time to the trial. there may be leaks of that information between now and then. normally that would be the way to learn who will be the witnesses. emily, leslie raised several poi