Welcome to Meet the Press. Now I'm Gabby Terriers in Krachepad in Washington. On a historic day and a fraught moment in this country. For the first time in American history, a former president has been indicted on federal charges.
And not just any former president. He's also a declared candidate for president and the current frontrunner for the Republican nomination. A short time ago, the justice department unsealed a 37 count indictment against Donald Trump. A 49 page document filled with evidence, photographs, text messages, transcripts of audio recordings, witness accounts and more, taken together depicts a damaging portrait of reckless and criminal behavior and handling some of the nation's most vital secrets.
The 49 page indictment includes 31 counts of willful retention of national defense information, one count of false statements and representations, one count of conspiracy to obstruct, one count of withholding a document on record, one count of corruptly concealing a document on record, one count of concealing a document in a federal investigation, and one count of scheming to conceal. Minutes ago, Special counsel Jack Smith spoke publicly for the first time since his appointment more than six months ago as his office unsealed the charges against Mr. Trump. The men and women of the United States intelligence community and our armed forces dedicate their lives to protecting our nation and its people.
Our laws that protect national defense information are critical to the safety and security of the United States, and they must be enforced. Violations of those laws put our country at risk. Adherence to the rule of law is a bedrock principle of the Department of Justice. And our nation's commitment to the rule of law sets an example for the world.
We have one set of laws in this country apply to everyone. Also implicated in Today's indictment is Mr. Trump's personal aid and body man, Walt Nauta, who, according to the special counsel's office, helped Mr. Trump move boxes and conceal items from authorities.
As you might expect, the former president has lashed out of the Justice Department and the special counsel's investigation. In one post minutes ago, he referred to the special counsel as a deranged psycho. And he posted this video last night after disclosing he had been summoned to the courthouse early next week to face these charges. But they can't stop because it's election interference at the highest level.
There's never been anything like what's happened. I'm an innocent man. I'm an innocent person. Now, beyond the legal implications of this indictment are, of course, the political implications.
So far, we've seen Republicans, from the Capitol to the campaign trail rally around the former president and his allies and the House of Representatives are considering ways to potentially try to intervene in the special counsel's case. The while President Biden has remained relatively quiet about the case, here was his response earlier today when asked by reporters about the charges facing his potential 2024 rioter. We have a lot to unpack this hour, but let's first begin with the latest on this sweeping 37 count indictment against Mr. Trump.
Joining me now from Miami is NBC News justice and intelligence correspondent Kendallane, along with former federal prosecutor and legal affairs correspondent for political magazine Renato Mario. And in a moment, I'll be joined by criminal defense attorney and NBC legal analyst Danny Savalas. Ken, let's start with you. Walk us through these 37 counts.
What is the former president facing in this indictment? Gabe? He's facing a devastating portrait of willful misuse of classified information and an alleged conspiracy to obstruct justice. I've covered the intelligence community for more than a decade.
I've covered a lot of classified document cases. I've never seen an indictment as detailed and as powerful as this one. You know, we mentioned we should mention that obviously Donald Trump is innocent until proven guilty. But the details in this document are amazing.
First of all, the, the impact and the, and the moment of the documents itself that he had. And in paragraph three of the indictment, it says that the documents that Trump had included information regarding defense and weapons capabilities about the United States and foreign countries, United States nuclear programs, potential vulnerabilities of the US and its allies to military attack, and plans for possible retaliation in response to a foreign attack. And it goes on to say that the unauthorized disclosure of these documents puts at risk US national security, intelligence sources and methods. And then the indictment says on at least two occasions, Donald Trump did disseminate classified material to people who didn't have clearance to see it.
And in one case, there's a recording of it and there's a transcript of that recording laid out in this indictment. There's also a transcript of a recording that we know was made by one of Donald Trump's lawyers. So there's so many remarkable pieces of evidence in this that you don't normally see in a case like this. And just for context, Gabe, last week an Air Force colonel was sentenced to three years in prison in a case where he was convicted of taking about 300 classified documents home over a course of years.
No allegation that he shared the documents with anyone. No allegation that he obstructed justice. He got three years. This case is much More serious.
And the obstruction of justice conspiracy is a whole separate part of the case. This alleges that Donald Trump conspired with his body man, Walt Nada, to conceal and try to enlist his lawyers in a scheme to conceal the fact that he had these documents even after the Justice Department came after him with a subpoena. And what you see as you read through this indictment is none of this had to happen. If Donald Trump simply giving these documents back the first time the government asked this case would not happen, we would not be here again.
Yeah. And Ken, this seems to be what's called the speaking indictment, of course. And really, as you look forward, it really tells a story here. Talking to me, Ken, about how this feels different than the other indictment a short time ago, a couple of months ago.
Now with the hush money case, how does this feel different than the state indictment up in New York? Yeah. Not to take anything away from that indictment. There's an argument to be made it's an important enforcement of rule law in New York.
But that diamond is very technical. It has to do with tax and business expenses. It was brought by an elected Democratic prosecutor. And almost immediately, even the most moderate anti Trump Republicans dismissed that indictment as a political attack.
Whether you believe that or not, that was their reaction. This is going to be much harder to do with this federal indictment, although people obviously are doing it because this was an indictment brought by a career federal prosecutor who was not under the day to day supervision of Merrick Garland, the Attorney General of the United States. The only role of Merrick Garland here was that he could have blocked any action by Special Counsel Jack Smith if, according to the regs, that action was so outside the normal practice of the Justice Department that it shouldn't go forward. That didn't happen.
Obviously, Jack Smith made these decisions on his own. That's why you saw Jack Smith today, not Merrick Garland giving that news conference or that statement at his separate offices away from the Justice Department. So that's why this feels different. Also, it's a federal case.
Right. And so what you're gonna have when Donald Trump surrenders on Tuesday is this remarkable picture of the former president, the man who was in charge of the federal government now being fingerprinted and his mug shot taken and his passport taken away by the very he used to lead gave. And Ken Bernardo. Correct.
You can just ask me very quickly, Walt Nada, the body man, he's also been indicted. Can you dig into what role prosecutors allege that he played? What they say is that he helped Donald Trump conceal the fact that he had many more classified documents than he was willing to let on and move boxes of those documents when the government was trying to find them. So before, for example, the Justice Department came down to visit, the indictment alleges that Walt Nada took more than 60 boxes of documents outside of that famous storage room in Mar Lago.
And we know from our reporting that the Justice Department gave Walt Nada and his lawyers a chance to come clean and to cooperate, and he just refused to do it. And his lawyers are being paid by a Donald Trump political organization. So right now, he's facing some very serious charges. No.
Whether he stays on Team Trump and maintains solidarity with Donald Trump in the face of this serious criminal case remains to be seen. But that's what they say to state they allege a conspiracy between Donald Trump and his butler and body man to obstruct justice. Renato, what's your reaction to this indictment Now? Is this the best possible case that DOJ could run?
No question. I think it's fair to say that this indictment is more problematic for Trump, more serious than all of his other legal problems put together. This is an absolutely devastating indictment, very difficult to overcome. And I think a big part of his strategy here would have to be to create so much delay that he, you know, that he is in poor health or has ended his life before it actually gets trial.
Because I think that it'll be very challenging to explain away these obstructive statements with his attorney in particular, I think very challenging to explain why he's saying that, you know, they should lie to the Justice Department and say they have no documents to suggest that he praised an attorney who destroyed documents, allegedly. So it's just some comments that are very challenging to explain and can mention, of course, that recording where he's talking about a document that he said he could have declassified but he didn't, and secret, but he's done the less sharing it. Very challenging. And I will say also the breadth of documents at issue here, over 30.
I think it's 31 counts of willful retention of national defense information, including nuclear secrets, for example. I think it's gonna be very challenging for Trump and his team to explain to the jury why those are not important secrets to keep. So I just think on its face, this is not only a very devastating case, but it's a very straightforward type of case to prove and a very difficult case to explain away. And that's a very big host of problems all in one for the former president Renato in your role as a former federal prosecutor, you kind of touched on this, right?
Just now. But do you think those recordings are the most crucial piece of evidence here? I think so. I think they're extraordinarily important.
I think, you know, it depends on the way you look at it. The most important piece of evidence is the classified information found in his residence. Right. In other words, that's the.
That was what started all this. That's the proof of the point. You know, you're seeing it on the screen right now. I think in many ways, this is, this case is very different than the other legal problems that we've seen Trump have.
A lot of the Trump matters have been white collar cases where there's a focus on his state of mind. Did he have the intent to default? Did he have the intent to obstruct? And the thing about the willful retention of classified material, it's sort of like a drug case.
If you have meth in your garage or in your house or in your office, that's a crime. Everyone knows that meth is not lawful to possess or heroin is not lawful to possess. Those documents. It's apparent that after he's president, he is not lawfully possessing those documents.
Particularly, and I agree with Ken on this point, particularly when the Justice Department trying desperately to get that stuff back, and you, to use the words of Bill Barr, the former Attorney general, you're jerking them around. And of course, as you see from this indictment, there's lies that are being fed in a conspiracy, alleged conspiracy to obstruct justice. I just think that's very challenging to explain away. And that at the core point of the obstructive conduct to the side, the fact that he wanted those documents very badly, that he shared them, that he's desperate to keep them, I think that's very, very challenging to explain.
And I want to bring to Danny Savalas. Now, Danny, put on your defense attorney hat here. How do you even go about defending this? Can you.
This is the rare case where we have gotten a preview of how the defense might approach this case. We've gotten it in a letter defense attorneys wrote to Congress, and we've gotten it through interviews that defense counsel and now former defense counsel have given on network news shows. And it may go something like this. Whether it's effective or not remains to be seen.
But you may see a narrative where the defense develops a theme that early and often, Trump, when he was approached by these agencies, he may not have turned over documents immediately, but he wanted to see what Documents he could take and not take. And that initially, when the National Archives wanted these documents, that Trump's team was willing to work with them. And they will probably develop the theme if they're able to make this into admissible evidence, a form of web baltim. In other words, that the National Archives, with other presidents, set up an infrastructure to help them with the president to ex president transition and the moving of documents.
His defense team might argue that Trump didn't have the benefit of that. And if there was a haphazard removal of documents, it was inadvertent. They will probably argue that when the government set a deadline for the subpoena, they were inflexible. They didn't allow rolling production, they set an arbitrary date.
But really, whether or not any of that even admissible, let alone probative of a defense is not really even a sure thing. But at least in terms of the general narrative they may try to put out there, it's probably going to center around inadvertence. And then the government want the burden to prove this was much more than an accident. This was much more than an oops.
This was something that was deliberate. And so far, they've made a lot of those facts out as alleged in the indictment. You know, Danny, looking through some diamond right now, you know, you see on page 19, it says, you know, a message between Trump employees. And one of these employees sent a text saying, quote, he's tracking the boxes.
And Danny, I want to talk about, you know, early on, might a defense have been, look, he's a former president. He has a lot on his mind. He may have not actually known the details of where these boxes were. He wasn't paying close attention to it.
He could perhaps say that this was something his employees did. But according to this page 19 of the indictment, it appears that the former president knew exactly where they were and was asked them to be moved. How does President, former President Trump's team defend against specifically that? I think you hit on the major theme, why are we here with this defendant?
And it goes back to your two words early on. I suspect this could have been averted if early on. And I think the Maginot line here is the time when agencies other than DOJ were involved and the National Archives was saying, we would like our documents back. I fully believe that had Donald Trump negotiated and gotten those documents back before other agencies felt it necessary to make a referral to doj, we never would have been here.
In fact, that's an argument that the defense is making. They're making the argument that this started out as National Archives using a federal statute that doesn't have any punitive measures, but they just wanted the documents back. Maybe the defense doesn't realize they're inadvertently making the prosecution's argument, which is only by escalating this to the point that the National Archives and other agencies felt that they needed to refer this to doj. That was a line that was crossed.
That was the point of no return. That was the event horizon after that point. Once DOJ was involved, you arguably already have intent of all of these. And I call them overlapping elements.
I think concealment shares a lot in common with, you know, hiding documents or retaining documents or some of the other overlapping Venn diagram elements that are contained in this indictment. And Ken, I want to go back to you, and as I'm going through this indictment as well, something that really jumped out at me, I thought it was very interesting, is there were several instances spread throughout the indictment where the special counsel's office decided to put in quotes from things that Donald Trump had said back in 2016 when it came to the handling of classified information. Of course, back then he was talking about Hillary Clinton. But why do you think that the special counsel's office found it necessary to put those specific quotes throughout this document?
Was it a type of storytelling device, or was it perhaps to show that the former president should have known better? I think both, Gabe. I mean, this is, as one of our guests said, the ultimate speaking indictment. And the Justice Department knew that.
They're not just speaking to an audience here of jurors or the media. They're speaking to the whole country, half of whom is predisposed to doubt this case. And so they need to put as much information there as possible. The average person doesn't really deal with classified documents.
It doesn't maybe understand why they're so sensitive and what the implications are of taking them outside of a sensitive facility. And so the Justice Department thought, well, maybe we'll inject some of what Donald Trump himself has said about this to help sort of fill out the picture. And they did a lot of different devices in this indictment to sort of try to explain why this matters. And then you heard Jack Smack Smith.
That was the theme of his remarks really is, you know, the men and women in the intelligence community risk their lives to protect this information. That's why it's so important. And if I just dovetail on something you said, Gabe, not only did Trump know where the boxes were, you know, all throughout this thing, many people made Trump the defendant said, like the President packed his own boxes when he left the White House. Actually, this indictment alleges he did in some cases.
He was actually, according to this indictment, involved in packing his own boxes. So he was personally involved in taking some of this material from the White House tomorrow. Incredible. Some of the details that we learned just a few hours ago when this indictment was unsealed up, I want to bring you back in and I want to mention that this divin includes the exchange captured on the recording at Bedminster.
According to the transcript, former President Trump says, as president, I could have declassified them. Now I can't, you know, but this is still a secret. How key is that piece of evidence? Oh, it may very well be the most important piece of evidence in Holland Diamond.
There's different ways of looking at it. One thing I will say is, you know, we often talk on shows like this about the downside of a person who's under criminal investigation speaking out. And here is part of the downside. You know, Donald Trump, when he realized that the FBI had raided his residence, could have kept his mouth shut, but instead he went on every program, you know, possible.
He went on podcasts, he went on recordings, and he talked about what his defense was. He was telling Sean Hannity that his defense was that he declassified these things with his mind. And of course, you know, he locked himself into what a defense might be here. And the prosecutors wisely developed evidence that totally undercut that defense and by the way, actually prove, actually prove some of the charges that they've set out elsewhere.
For example, he says that he knows that this information is secretly sharing with you. Anyways, as we noted a moment ago, that's trans middle of information. It shows his knowledge that it's a secret. So I just think the fact of the matter is this is just incredibly challenging method.
Danny did a very nice job of setting out a potential defense. And often on the defense side, you're trying to just throw mud against the wall, trying to see what sticks. But it's very challenging to run together a threat that resembles an actual credible defense that would actually get you out from under these charges. I will just say that it's very challenging, and I know this from experience on the defense side.
I've been on the defense side for many years as well. Very challenging to get the jury to select not guilty. Not guilty. And check that box.
30 something times. 30 something times. Yeah. Even if one time they select guilty, that's the underdoubt.
And Ken, before we go, I want to bring up something. Senator Marubio, Florida says the DNI has not provided Congress with an assessment of potential risk to national security from these documents. Why not? Well, one theory is they don't want to create a discoverable document that then gets injected into the trial because if they do a damage assessment, you can make an argument that Donald Trump is attorneys will have a right to have it and that could be a problem.
But they are required by DNA policy that ODI policy to eventually do a damage assessment. Ken, Danny Renato, thank you all for joining us here on the press. Now let me turn now, Raheem Ellis, who's outside Mr. Trump's New Jersey home in Bedminster, New Jersey.
And Raheem, it's good to see who's Trump's reaction to this indictment. You know, redux of the redeemer with the Manhattan indictment, It seems to be that way. The former president has been busy today playing golf with a Republican congressman from Florida, Carlos Jimenez. But he also was busy on his social media site.
Shortly after Jack Smith made his statement about the indictment, the former president took to his social media and said something to the effect of Biden moved his boxes all over the place, including Chinatown and up to his lawyers in Boston. Why isn't deranged Jack Smith looking at that? He goes on and he another post, he says something to the effect of this is crazy, just like Jack Smith. In addition, he says also on his social media site that they are all, they all spied on my campaign.
Nothing is beyond them. So, yes, he is reacting. It's very much like the kind of thing he did after the charges were revealed on him in Manhattan. And we'll see if this continues.
This is pretty much the way the former president reacts. This is not unusual. I don't think anybody is surprised by this. The question becomes one of will it continue again?
Raheem, you just saw just a few moments ago, a few hours ago, with the former president on social media, as you said, attacking the special counsel in such personal terms. But talk to me a little bit as well about the video that he posted last night. What were some of the arguments he was making there? He called himself an innocent man.
But do we have an indication of how his team and likely his campaign plans to deal with this in the coming days? Do we expect these attacks against the special counsel to escalate for him? Well, I wouldn't be surprised unless someone suggests to him and convincingly can suggest to him that his team refrained from doing this kind of thing. You know, even last night, it appears very clear that the Trump team was prepared for this.
He had said so himself on social media that he was expecting himself to be indicted. And he wasn't being casual about that expectation because shortly after the word was revealed last night that he was being indicted, less than an hour after learning that news, the Trump campaign sent out a fundraising email. This is very much what we saw happen in the Manhattan case. And they raised him $12 million after putting out fundraising emails and videos in that regard.
So that was very profitable for them. And they may be hoping that they can do the same kind of thing here because the legal defense charges in terms of the cost of these charges is only growing. It's not shrinking, it's growing. So again, unless someone will say to the president he can be convinced that he should change his ways, it seems like his team is poised, poised to try and control the narrative in terms of public relations events, their way, which is going after the people who are filing charges against them and attacking them in some very clear language.
Raheema Ellis in New Jersey. Raheema, the Trump team fundraising just minutes after this indictment was announced. We'll see how this plays out. Rahema, thank you.
And up next, Trump world chaos, reaction from a Republican presidential field and how far the former president's allies in Congress will go to defend it. The panel's next. They're watching the press now. Stay informed with the NBC News app Breaking news just coming in moments ago.
Watch, read and listen throughout your day. And now unlock even more with a subscription. It's the best of NBC News with fewer ad interruptions, including ad free articles, podcasts and full NBC News shows. Plus deeper access and exclusive content.
Let's just take a step back. It's more context and clarity from the reporters you trust. Download the NBC News app now and subscribe for more. Let's kick start your wellness journey with the dark day app, workouts, meal plans.
It's your fast track to a healthier you. And now during the Xfinity member celebration, members can get an exclusive 50% off an annual subscription. Head to xfinity.com membership to learn more. Xfinity Imagine that subscription automatically reviews each year at 65.
99, plus tax and fees until canceled all the ranks May 20, 2026. Price is subject to change. Visit today.comxfinity for full on preserved details. Hey guys, Willy Geist here reminding you to check out the Sunday Sit down podcast.
On this week's episode, I sit down with one of the biggest fans in the world, Mumford and Sons. As we get the boys together to talk about their new number one album, Prize Fighter and the evolution of that irresistible foot stomping sound. You can get our conversation for free wherever you download your podcasts. And welcome back.
As we know, you're the head of the unsealing of the special counsel sweeping indictment against former President Trump. A number of Mr. Trump's Republican primary rivals and rushed to his defense. His chief rival Ron DeSantis along with Tim Scott and Nikki Haley have all echoed Trump's attacks on the part of justice, decriminal politicization and weaponization.
We haven't heard from them since the charges were released. Another Republican primary candidate, Vivek Ramaswamy, went as far as saying he would pardon Trump if he is elected president. And at the same time as a Hutchinson called on Trump to drop out of the race. And then there's former Vice President Mike Pence who's taken a more nuanced view.
Take a listen to what he said to reporters just before the charging document was released. I think it's deeply troubling to see an indictment against a former President of the United States act. I had hoped that the Department of Justice would see its way clear to resolve this matter without an indictment. That being said, let me be clear on a few points.
No one is above the law in America. We have to stand on the rule of law irrespective of politics. Secondly, the handling of classified materials is a very serious matter given the indictment that Trump suspended his campaign at this point. Look, I think any consideration of that would be premature.
Look, everyone is innocent until proven guilty in America. And I think former president has a right to make his defense. And we have a super sized panel to help navigate this historic moment. Capitol Hill correspondent Ali Vitale, AP White House reporter Darling Superville, senior advisor to Senator Bernie Sanders, Fah Shakir and Republican strategist Doug Hai.
Thank you so much for joining me. The press. Now, Darlene, I'll start with you. Big picture.
What is your reaction to this historic indictment? What stuck out to you? What stuck out to me is what always stuck out to me, which is the question of why, like why did Donald Trump take these documents? He didn't have to be in this position, right?
He could have returned documents when the government and the National Archives asked him to return them, but he resisted. And this is what many in Washington would call a self inflicted wound. And he did not have the gear. And that's what we were talking about earlier, right?
What would have happened if they had just given them back or not fought the returning of these documents. So that is a huge question here. Ally, I want to turn you Republican allies of Donald Trump, they have walked the fine line here, but almost all of them yesterday came out and backed him, including Governor DeSantis. Even Nikki Haley had an interesting comment today.
But I want to get to you. Have we seen any indication in the last few hours that there's been any shift in the Republican narrative here at least how many people are backing the former president? No, it feels like all the people who would usually back him are backing him. The people who would usually be the first to point out his wrongdoing are doing so.
You know, Senator MC Romney said something akin to what you said, which is Donald Trump brought this on himself. He didn't have to be in this position. And then of course, their allies, even though they're technically his rivals, the people who want the same job that Trump is trying to get are all trying to also stack themselves behind them. I actually think one who did the most artful response was probably Pence, who left himself the ability to pivot in either direction, saying it's weaponization, politicization, but also saying that no one is above the law that allows him, I think, the best position to pivot from going forward, even as he's not saying Trump should drop out like as Hutchinson.
Right. And you know, he said he wanted to hear the facts come out. That was Chris. Chris Seal.
Now, the facts about should be interesting to say that message shifts in the next couple hours in the coming days. Doug, I want to turn to you. The last time that former President Trump was in that, by the way, can we just say exactly the last time you invited, we saw his poll numbers go up. Do you think that happens here?
I don't think we know yet. And you know, when you say the next few hours and days are going to be indicative of this, you're exactly right. And it's because it's six o' clock tonight. Ron DeSantis is speaking to the North Carolina Republican Convention tomorrow at noon, Mike Pence is speaking and then Donald Trump, six o' clock tomorrow, will be speaking.
So all eyes are going to be in Greensboro, North Carolina. And if you've now seen what the details are in this indictment, it gives you political permission to make the separation. In politics, when you have an opportunity, you're supposed to take it. They didn't take it with the first indictment and there were good reasons for that.
A lot of people, even Democrats, thought this is political or not the indictment that they wanted. Again, A weird statement. This is very different. It's very serious.
It's federal. And if you're Pence and if you're Desantis and you want to create separation from Donald Trump, you've got your opportunity right now and you have the venue to do it. But they may also have the opportunity to alienate some of his, some of his supporters, which is of course, what can be difficult here. And by the way, this isn't the last investigation.
We know that the Republican nomination doesn't go around Donald Trump. It goes through Donald Trump. You can't hope that somebody else is going to do your job for you. The politics here should be rather static.
You have an opportunity. Take it. When you come to a fork in the road, take it. They haven't done so yet again.
Tomorrow they have tonight. Tomorrow they have the opportunity to end the venue. They got a third indictment. Maybe.
Maybe. Well, father once review President Biden and the White House hasn't touched us so far. Do they have any choice? How do Democrats play this movie?
Well, you gotta honor the legal case, which is to take it out of political realm and say the facts are pretty damn strong, as you see in the characterization. You almost have a picture of comic villain of Donald Trump who's showing off his trophy casers is baseball signed by the things that we don't know that don't come through yet. And the reason why White House has to hold it and I think a lot of publicans are gonna hold is who else is he talking to about this material? Because all we learn through the indictment, as we talked to a couple of individuals writing a book or journalist or whatever, is it possible that a lot of people travel to Mar a Lago?
We'll see talking to about classified materials involving military strikes and what Iran might do, what Iran might not do. And I think that ends up coloring so much of the political case. Right. And that's different from a legal case.
And I think I was making this point that politically you have to hold a bit to allow some of this color visually a lot that might be on tape or on audio and other forms that you don't even know. I would add too, that the White House is holding partly also because they don't want to be seen as playing any role or having any, you know, input in what is happening to the former president. But that said, the challenge for President Biden, obviously the leader of government, is that you have to honor that the DOJ is going to conduct a thorough investigation. I stand with the fi who does an Honorable job serving.
Yes. I'm not going to meddle in this case. However, you do have a role of defending that which you can see. Mike Pence's answer was suggesting that if you put me in charge as president, I too respect law enforcement, whereas the others, right.
They're all sitting claim for like, yeah, you put me in charge, I will screwed law enforcement. I'd fire all these guys, which is a radical position mistake. Ally, I want to get to you because you of course, were with former President Trump back in 2016 and I, you, you saw him speak about Hillary Clinton back then over and over again. Let's actually play something in my administration, I'm going to enforce all laws concerning the protection of classified information.
No one will be above the law. Hillary is likely to be under investigation for many years, probably concluding in a criminal trial. If she were to win this election, it would create an unprecedented constitutional crisis. In that situation, we could very well have a sitting president under felony indictment and ultimately a criminal trial.
Her current scandals and controversies will continue throughout her presidency and we will make it honestly look, it's going to be virtually impossible for her to govern. It is surreal to hear those words now. What do you think of that, Ali? Listening to that?
Seven years later, here we are. I mean, if we were to rewrite our last Morris, it's ironic you need to put a line in about that because he's saying the exact thing that ends up playing out now for him. It's partly why you see Hillary Clinton posting about her emails picture on Instagram, because you almost have to just call out the hypocrisy of that. I do think it's stunning, though, that this is exactly how it happened.
He made so much hay of the emails and then there was a misuse of email within his administration. You saw him now say that I would take care of classified documents. I was taking them back to Marlboro. I mean, you couldn't write it better than this, this way.
And that's why I'm actually surprised that more of his opponents aren't jumping on this because it's such a clear example of if you want to be the law and order party, this is. Law and order is defending national security. And I think to make this case to the public, as we watch this case move through, how does, how do prosecutors prove this to a jail? How do they say it's Iran?
This is, this is detrimental to national. That's going to be a huge part of selling this to the public, too. And Darlene, how do you see this playing out because we at this point are expecting the other trial, potentially March of next year. Hashemi trial.
We don't know if you have the timeline for this one, but chances are it will potentially line up just as this presidential election is ramping up. How do you see this playing with the Republican Party and potentially backing a candidate who is facing a federal criminal trial? It's a little time will tell kind of situation. You know, Trump has a lot of support to face.
I think that we need some time to see whether a lot of those people will stick with him or, you know, take the information that's in this indictment and say, enough is enough. I've had enough. I don't want this person, someone would be this callous with classified information to be present. Doug, I want to switch over to something you said.
You said that this could be potentially the opportunity. Look, I. I've been with Governor DeSantis on the trail the last couple weeks. I just don't see him.
He's a very careful course. He gives stump speeches, not to mention Trump. He only talks about when he's directly asked. Is there any way that you can see him potentially pivoting to attacking Donald Trump's drama here?
But he's gone so far to attack the weaponization of the doj. He's kind of boxed himself into a corner now, hasn't he? I think he can do both at the same time. DeSantis sort of made that remark.
If I don't know anything about paying huge money and things like that, you can highlight the drama and you can say, you know, regardless of whether or not Donald Trump did something wrong or not, there's too much drama around him, too much chaos. He can't focus 100% on beating Joe Biden. And my God, we need Republican who can focus on beating Biden. That's a message I can sell, and it ties directly into Ron DeSantis I'm a winner message.
And we lose too much with Donald Trump, especially when you consider the independent voters, people who voted for Donald Trump in or voted Donald Trump in 2016 and Joe Biden in 2020. The flipped Arizona form made North Carolina so close those voters were not going back to Donald Trump. And all this ties into the DeSantis I'm a winner argument. Right.
And Ally, I think Nikki Haley is trying to make arguments. We're trying to have a place attacking the drama that's saying about position. Do you think it's going to fly for her? I'm not mentioning him by name at All I don't think you can be too cute by half.
I actually think that's a great argument to make. Tackling this through the lens of electability is a really good argument for people because Republicans just want to win back the White House. But no one is actually making that explicit argument. And I do think for voters, A, you can't have them infer that's your argument, someone needs to say it.
But B, the reality is that this legal process is going to drag on for months and we could have voters who voted in Iowa, New Hampshire, in the south car, Nevada before this has even hit court. He could end up stitching up a nomination and then potentially getting indicted. I think for voters, asking them to entertain that as a possibility, every candidate should do that because that is a central focus here that they're not gonna just infer that put right in front of them. I wanna kind of wrap up with you.
We were with a candidate back in 2016, obviously Bernie Sanders, that, you know, had a lot of to deal with in terms of classified documents and all other Clinton emails thing. He famously said, I didn't care about your emails. How is this different? Because the argument that many Republicans will make is like, well, Hillary Clinton wasn't prosecuted.
This is, you know, voters don't care about this stuff. How is this, I mean, certainly if for President Biden and his campaign, I mean, the fear of Trump certainly was a mobilizing factor for many Democrats plus 50% of the country. For Biden, who has his own weaknesses right now, with animation and excitement and passion, he's going to get it out of the. And I think for many people, yeah, get elected.
Many people just say, can you imagine put that guy back in charge of for four more years with that kind of deranged conduct, that kind of range mentality, a person sworn by the FBI, you put him back in charge, what's he going to do to the government? What's he going to do to everybody around him who would want to work for him? Those kinds of common sense thoughts I think are going to mobilize. If 50% majority in this country say, oh no, we're not going down that right.
Well, a super sized panel on a historic day. Ally, Darlene Bozduck, thank you all so much for joining me. Press down. Really appreciate it.
Some of you are actually sticking around. And as we mentioned, we've not heard much from Donald Trump's competitors for the Republican presidential nomination since the full details of his indictment were released by the Justice Department this afternoon. But here's some of what we heard from his chief rival, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis, last night. Quote, the weaponization of federal law enforcement represents a mortal threat to a free society.
The DeSantis administration will bring accountability to the DOJ Xi's political bias and weaponization once and for all. Joining me now is Ken Cucinelli. He's the founder of the Never Back down super PAC that is supporting Governor DeSantis. He was also, of course, a top official Department of Homeland Security during the Trump administration.
Ken, thanks so much for joining me. The press now. So Governor DeSantis put out that statement before the chart is released. So after seeing the evidence today, Ken, should he change his tune?
So I don't think so. I think that he is on the right track. It's one he's been on for some time. He stated a more general level.
Surely this indictment is nothing like the one in New York. Nonetheless, in the context of Hillary, Obama, Biden doing having their own document issues, the average American isn't going to see it much deeper than that and sees the bias that takes place not just in this case for bringing it. And mind you, I was a state attorney general. There's a difference between whether you've got someone dead to rights and if what reads out in the indictment is accurate, you know, there's a strong technical case here against the president.
That's a different question from whether the case ought to be brought just like it was in Hillary's situation. And as is ongoing with Joe Biden himself, this will put a lot of pressure on the Department of Justice to actually bring the Biden case. But DeSantis is still on the same path he has been on and that is the de weaponization of the justice system. And I think that's something that Americans look forward to.
And I see him being very consistent on that. And we're happy to echo that here at Never Back Down. But Ken, you seem in your answer, you seem to suggest that this is different from the previous hush money case. Do you think this is a stronger case case?
Yes, simply because the New York case, the, the district attorney there essentially made up a new legal theory to charge Trump with. That is not the case here. These are long standing statutes and there was a lot more detail in this indictment. Average indictment includes.
If this case is stronger, as you just said, why bring up that it shouldn't have been brought in the first place? Well, because you still have a situation. This is brought not in by itself. There's everything else going on in our society.
And when you have a Department of justice that continues to show demonstrated bias. They cannot expect to bring a case like this. So you bring. You're bringing a political view.
You ask me a question, I'm answering it. And the American people to see it as being made on an objective basis. And that's what Governor DeSantis is going after hard and fast, and he's to made some very firm statements about things he'll do about that. And I appreciate that.
And we do appreciate you coming on here, Ken, and answering questions. But the point I was trying to make, if you think that this is a stronger case and you bring up the politicization of the Justice Department, but if the facts are there, it should. No one should be above the law, right? Well, certainly that's the rule of law is a fundamental American precept, and it's been one that's been bent and abused rather badly over the last 10 years by the FBI and this department of Justice.
They're not in a position to simply expect people to view their actions without being as coming through a political lens. And this just continues that path. I do not think the president's supporters will respond to this in the same way they did the New York indictment. I see.
I was listening to your conversation about the drama that is wearing on people. It is going to be a different response, but I do expect you're gonna see the same response from Governor DeSantis. And that is a commitment at the general level to get into the Department of Justice and to depoliticize it. That's something that every American should want and can.
You mentioned the drama. So did you agree with that argument? Do you agree that Donald Trump just has too much drama and should not be the Republican nominee? Because that seems to be the argument that you're making.
The candidate that you're backing, though, has not made that argument so explicitly yet. Well, the way you ask it is sort of binary. I would say that it is an important factor for an awful lot of folks. And I've traveled to a lot of states already, talked to a lot of grassroots folks and grassroots leaders who don't appreciate the drama.
This is not a plus for the president. And when you Compare it to Governor DeSantis, much more effective governing style in Florida. That is a stark contrast, and it weighs very heavily in the governor's favor with ordinary voters. You've heard of Trump Derangement Syndrome.
There's also Trump Exhaustion Syndrome, and that's among many of us who have or had supported him. And can I read something from the indictment, the government alleges that the classified documents Mr. Trump stored in his boxes included information regarding defense and weapons capabilities of both the US and foreign countries, United States nuclear programs. The unauthorized disclosure of these classified documents could put at risk the national security of the United States.
Bottom line, should he have had those in his possession after he left the White House? Certainly not. He shouldn't have had. No president should have any classified documents even after they leave the White House.
Bottom line, I think you see a focus here on the national security documents as opposed to all classified documents. That's the only limitation I really see the Department of Justice having imposed on itself and bringing this indictment. So why can't Governor DeSantis and other Republican candidates say what you just said? Well, perhaps they will.
Honestly, I've read most, but not all of the 49 pages so far. We're all still digesting this in greater detail. I think that that's going to take a little while for that dust to settle. People are going to want to see what happens on Tuesday in Miami.
I don't think there'll be new information, but one never knows. I mean, some of this information came out before today from unofficial sources. And it's an interesting question to know. How did CNN get the recording of the president on audio?
And those are other questions that, you know, really leave people with concerns of the politicization of this that undermines what on paper might otherwise be a strong case. And Ken, I know you're with the super PAC of backing Governor DeSantis and not with the actual campaign, but do you think that Governor DeSantis would pardon former President Trump? Oh, I have no idea. That's one of those questions that only he can answer.
And you know, that's, that's a long way off. But as your earlier panel talked about, it is a long way off. But there's gonna be trials between here and there on a number of these issues. And that that kind of drama does not weigh well with ordinary Republican voters.
It is not a plus for the president. And having a leader who's already proven like Governor DeSantis, who doesn't bring all of that baggage, is very attractive to people all across America. I want to ask you something about something that, Governor, that the former Vice President Pence said earlier to other Republican candidates as well, including Governor Santosif, made a point of saying that they would clean house at the doj. Do you agree with that, given that you just said that this indictment is stronger than the previous one?
So I understand you have questions about whether it should have been brought at all. But why say that you should clean house at the DOJ if the DOJ did its job here? Well, let's set this case aside entirely and still point out there are reasons to clean house at DOJ and the FBI because of the 10 years of politicized behavior that I talked about that is now extremely well documented, including lying in courts and lying to the American people by doj, by the FBI. There's an awful lot of cleaning out that has to happen.
Unfortunately, you would have expected the director, save the FBI, to be part of that. That's a Trump appointee that he has complained about and that Governor DeSantis has said he would remove on day one. He has failed to depoliticize the FBI. And Governor DeSantis is committing put others in who will.
Ken Cuccinelli, founder of Never Back down, the super packet backing Florida Governor Ron DeSantis. Ken, thank you so much for joining us here. MEET THE PRESS now. My pleasure.
Good to be with you. So even in the face of today's historic indictment, President Biden is staying the course and staying out of former President Trump's legal troubles. President Biden today visited with service members and their families in Fort Liberty, North Carolina, said he narrowly lost to Mr. Trump in 2020.
When asked to respond to the Trump grand jury indictment, he said he had no comment. The White House declined to comment on the news. Earlier today and yesterday pointed reporters to the Department of Justice, emphasizing that the DOJ conducts criminal investigations independently from the administration. I want to bring in NBC News White House correspondent Mike Meneley, who joins me now live from Fort Liberty, North Carolina.
Mike, how is the White House responding to this latest news, the details of the indictment and how successful has the president been? Well, the standout is that they're not responding. This has been really the posture of the White House really since day one of the administration. And it's both a political imperative and a legal necessity.
On the politics, I remember very well covering candidate Joe Biden, who repeatedly promised to the voters in the 2020 campaign that he would not treat the Justice Department as his personal defense attorney, which was his view of how Bill Barr was acting in the Trump Justice Department. And he also continued to he understands full well how Republicans are trying to accuse his administration of politicizing itself, of attacking a political opponent, weaponizing the Justice Department. So that part is really the politics here. The legality is so critical, though, to this administration because the president is himself the subject of a special counsel investigation.
The White House has argued that the Pence, a special probe into his handling of classified documents was much closer to what happened in the Biden case, the improper but, you know, well intentioned bad hacking perhaps of documents versus being very clear as the Justice Department is laying out in this case, laying out of Trump's handling of it. So it's a very different case. But that's why it was so interesting what Peter Alexander was able to get the president to say yesterday at that news conference to talk about this moment when the impartiality of the Justice Department is being questioned, at least by Republicans, and may be an attempt to undermine the public confidence on this. The president saying he's never once done this, that he believes it is completely independent.
And as he also put it in his case, I'm honest, the former president is not even that brief comment is an overstepping of a line in the view of some in the White House. And that's why he's been kept at a distance as much as they can. To just wrap up this event here. And Mike, I wanted to take on something that allies of former President Trump have been trying to argue throughout the day and really the last several days, this idea that President Biden or that Attorney General Merrick Garland somehow authorized this indictment.
How does the president and the White House claim to counter that narrative, that it was somehow Biden's Department of Justice that authorized this indictment against the former president? Well, they're just simply reiterating that this is something that was handled by the attorney general at a very early stage and that handling of it was to defer to a special counsel. Listen, there's been some concern, some frustration even with the attorney general inside this administration that he's been too much of a Boy Scout. Perhaps this is a former joke.
Remember, he was the chief judge on the second highest court of the land in D.C. circuit, and he's acting perhaps too much like a judge to some in the White House. But that being said, that Boy Scout behavior is something that is serving the administration well in this moment because they feel, for instance, that it was an unequal treatment of Attorney General Garland not to appoint a special counsel for the Pence case versus what he did in the case of President Biden. But there's only so much that this White House can ultimately do.
And they're not going to engage in a tit for tat with these Republicans. They're just going to continue to hear from the White House over and over again, no comments. No comments. And to say what they said earlier today, which is they only learned of all these developments over the course of the last 24 hours from public news reports.
Mike Bentley traveling with President Biden in North Carolina. Mike, thank you. And for some final thoughts. Back with me now is our panel NBC Salicatale Faj, Shakir and Doug.
Hi. You know, just so much on Pack youk Alley. I want to start with you final thoughts as we end this historic day. Where does this go from here?
And what do we think is going to go down in Miami next week? Oh, my God. Next week. I wake up through the weekend first.
But I love the way that he went ahead and pushelli on this idea that DOJ is both right to be exploring this and also extremely political and too political and everyone needs to be reformed there. I think that that's a contentious point that I hope more Republicans are pressed on, especially now the indictment itself is out there and unsealed. The fact that he's on tape, theoretically, according to this indictment, it makes it so much harder for Republicans argue. Yeah.
The facts when they came out this afternoon, up until then Wednesday, hypothetical anonymous sources, they can say they don't believe it now it's on paper. And Doug, how do Republicans read that need on the one hand, they need to, you know, argue that this is politicized somehow. But this indictment lays out a very difficult set of facts. You just heard Kenchineli say.
Yeah, I think probably Tally should grant it the smartest Republicans haven't said anything yet. I know, I know. I've been watching. It's very easy to get out there be, you know, all pro Donald Trump all the time.
But the ones who are waiting are waiting to see what the details are. So they're looking at this indictment. It's why we haven't heard from Michael. I think it's probably the most important Republican to hear from.
We haven't heard from John Thune yet. Right. My guess is they're going to be a bit more critical than we heard from some of the House. We've heard a lot of House Republicans.
Yeah. Senate Republicans, not so much. This is going to go though. Kushani's interview, she said is that they want to do hypocrisy if they want to hit Biden as if they were somehow the same behavior.
One is they're trying to dissolve. They want to discuss his behavior. So you get to see that. Do you can you even acknowledge some of the facts in the case?
Can you talk about them? That he could have resolved this himself of this case. He could resolve it at any point he didn't chose not to. He had it intentionally, purposefully, he tried to deceive his lawyers and tell his lawyers to do illegal acts.
So I think the behavior of Trump has more details about are going to compel more Republicans to talk about it. I think if I look at their strategy, they're trying to play as a parker game, as if Biden's behavior is the same as Trump and that's a loser. Right. And, you know, a question I'll ask you about, you know, Miami next week, the spectacle that we could potentially see, you know, on Tuesday.
What do you think is going to happen? Rev. Swanley already said he's going to go down there. Do you expect to see a rallying cry for Republicans, much like they tried to do in lower Manhattan?
Didn't quite happen, but it was, you know, it was there, you know, briefly. And Marjorie Taylor Greene went there and granted there wasn't a huge crowd, but there's this change in Miami, Dade County. I don't think we know yet. But obviously it's concerning.
If you go back to New York, you can see other Republicans saying don't protest. And why do they not want Republicans to protest in defense of Donald Trump? Because of the protests which led to much other things. I'll just keep you watching here on January 6th, I'll give you the last word reading this indictment.
What went through your head and just how stunning was this? I mean, just the fact that he asked at one point to his attorneys, is it better if we say we don't have the documents? Yes, it would be better if you didn't have the documents, but you can't lie to the feds. And certainly that's one of the ways that we saw the special counsel here able to pierce attorney client privilege because you can't use your lawyers to try to do crimes.
This is a conversation we had when we were during the January 6 insurrection in the committee hearings. This is a common thread that we see Donald Trump and the way that he tries to use the people around him. And I think that again, that entire document, the 40 plus pages that we all spent speed reading through today has so many different bullets in it that are damning alone but taken in conjunction are huge. Ally, thank you so much.
And Doug and Foss, thank you so much for being here on this historic day, a very busy news day here in Washington. Thank you all for helping us unpack it. We're back Monday with more MEET THE Press. Now he was a young Marine.
She didn't care about convention. They made a life together. Then one night, the Marine died. And then the death investigation took a wild, unexpected and utterly bizarre turn.
I'm Josh Mankiewicz and this is Trace of Suspicion, an all new podcast from Dayline. Listen to all episodes of Trace of Suspicion now, wherever you get your podcasts.