SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES? >> LET ME EXTEND YOUR QUESTION BECAUSE THE OTHER PART OF THAT PARAGRAPH 3 IS THE UNAUTHORIZED DISCLOSURE OF THESE CLASSIFIED DOCUMENTS COULD PUT AT RISK THE NATIONAL SECURITY OF THE UNITED STATES, FOREIGN RELATIONS, THE SAFETY OF THE U.S. MILITARY AND HUMAN SOURCES AND THE CONTINUED VIABILITY OF SENSITIVE INTELLIGENCE COLLECTION METHODS, ANDREW. >> AND IN COUNT 3, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT'S NOTED IS IT INCLUDES HANDWRITTEN ANNOTATION IN BLACK MARKER. >> WHO USES A BLACK MARKER? >> YES, EXACTLY. SO THIS IS WHAT WE'RE ALL SITTING HEAR TODAY, I HATE TO SAY THIS BUT WE'RE ALL GOING TO BECOME EXPERTS IN CIPA, WHICH IS THE CLASSIFIED INFORMATION PROTECTION ACT. >> WE HAD A LONG CONVERSATION ABOUT IT YESTERDAY ON MY SHOW. >> EXACTLY. THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT IT DEALS WITH IS HOW TO GET THIS INFORMATION BECAUSE YOU DO HAVE TO HAVE PUBLIC INFORMATION THAT GOES TO A JURY AND THE PUBLIC HAS TO SEE IT, DEFENDANT HAS A RIGHT TO SEE IT AND DEFENSE COUNSEL, BUT IT'S A WAY OF DEALING WITH THAT WITHOUT REVEALING THINGS THAT ARE HIGHLY SENSITIVE. >> TWO POINTS ON THAT. ON PAGE 27 ON THIS VERY POINT, YOU HAVE THE MOST DIRECT TABLE, AND ALTHOUGH VIEWERS WON'T BE ABLE TO READ THE WORDS, YOU BASICALLY HAVE A TWO-LINE TABLE HERE, TRUMP'S OFFICE WHICH WAS THE OBJECT OF THE CONSPIRACY. YOU CAN THINK OF THAT AS WHERE THEY WERE HIDING THE DRUGS. >> THE MAR-A-LAGO OFFICE. >> THE TRUMP MAR-A-LAGO OFFICE. AND OOPS 27 DOCUMENTS WHICH ARE BROKEN OUT ACROSS TOP SECRET, SECRET AND CONFIDENTIAL. THE STORAGE ROOM, 75 DOCUMENTS BROKEN OUT OVER TEN TOP SECRET, 36 SECRET, 28 CONFIDENTIAL. IN THIS, ANDREW, WHAT YOU HAVE IS ALSO THE BREAKDOWN OF WHAT LOOKS TO ME LIKE DONALD TRUMP'S WORST NIGHTMARE IN THAT THEY'RE INSIDE, THEY'RE INSIDE THE TEXTS, INSIDE THE LEGAL TEAM. HE WAS DOING THINGS THAT AT THIS LATE STAGE IN HIS LONG HIGH TEMPERATURE -- LONG RUNNING BATTLES WITH INVESTIGATES HE THOUGHT HE WAS GETTING AWAY WITH IT AND HE WASN'T. COUNTS 33 AND 34, THEY TALK ABOUT BASICALLY WHAT THE PURPOSE WAS HERE, AND THEY TALK ABOUT TRUMP ATTORNEY 1, NOW ANDREW YOU SAID YOU'RE PRETTY SURE FROM THE NARRATIVE THAT THAT'S CORCORAN WHO WE KNOW WAS MAKING THESE TAPES, RIGHT? OF COURSE I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT ACCORDING TO THE DOJ THEY'RE NOT NAMING HIM BY NAME, BUT THEY SAY, QUOTE, TRUMP ATTEMPTED TO PERSUADE TRUMP ATTORNEY 1 TO HIDE DOCUMENTS FROM A FEDERAL GRAND JURY. THEN THE CONSPIRACY, TRUMP AND NAUTA MISLEAD TRUMP ATTORNEY 1 BY MOVING BOXES THAT CONTAINED THE CLASSIFICATION MARKINGS SO THAT TRUMP ATTORNEY 1 WOULDN'T FIND THE DOCUMENTS AND PRODUCE THEM TO A FEDERAL GRAND JURY. I'D LOVE, ANDREW FOR YOU TO WALK US THROUGH THAT. THAT BRINGS US BACK TO HERE. AGAIN, THAT'S THE ALLEGATION AND THEY WERE HIDING, THEY WERE SAYING THE STUFF, THE DRUGS, THE CONTRABAND IN THIS ROOM, WE'RE GOING TO HIDE IT FIRST FROM OUR OWN LAWYERS AND THEN FROM THE FEDS. THAT'S PRETTY BAD. >> SO OBSTRUCTION IS KIND OF A BIG THING OBVIOUSLY HERE. AND YOU JUST REALLY HAVE GONE THROUGH IT WELL. I WANT TO GET BACK TO CIPA AT RISK OF BEING CONFUSING WITH ALL THE LEGAL JARGON. IF YOU CAN'T SHOW A JURY THE CONTENT, THE ACTUAL CONTENT OF THESE DOCUMENTS BECAUSE THEY'RE NUCLEAR SECRETS, IF YOU CAN'T SHOW THEM THE DEGREE TO WHICH THEY ARE SENSITIVE, THEY ARE SERIOUS, THEY PUT US AT RISK, YOU ARE ASKING A JURY TO TRUST PROSECUTORS. >> SO THE LAW DOES NOT ALLOW THAT. IT'S NOT LIKE THE JURY'S JUST TOLD JUST TRUST THEM. BUT HERE'S AN ARGUMENT THAT WOULD COME UP IN CONNECTION WITH OBSTRUCTION. THE SUBPOENA CALLED FOR DOCUMENTS THAT BORE CLASSIFICATION MARKINGS. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHAT'S IN IT, THE SUBSTANCE OF IT. OF THE CLASSIFICATION MARKINGS ARE THERE, YOU'RE GOING TO BE LIKE THAT'S ALL THAT THE JURY NEEDS TO KNOW BECAUSE THAT GOES TO -- >> BUT ANDREW, TO HER POINT, TO KATY'S POINT BECAUSE WE DEAL WITH THESE TERMS ALL THE TIME, I COVER INTELLIGENCE, NO FOREIGN -- ON THIS TOP SECRET. THAT MEANS YOU CAN'T SHARE IT WITH YOUR CLOSEST ALLIES. I MEAN, THAT IS EXTRAORDINARY. BUT AT THE SAME POINT, ANDREW, IF YOU'RE TELLING A JURY, A JURY THAT MAY NOT -- >> UNDERSTAND. >> UNDERSTAND, YEAH, YEAH. >> AND A JURY THAT MIGHT BE MORE SYMPATHETIC TO DONALD TRUMP THAN A JURY IN D.C. >> OR AT THE VERY LEAST FEEL THE WEIGHT OF A FORMER PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES BEING ON TRIAL. >> DO THEY NEED TO FEEL THE BREADTH OF THE BREACH IN ORDER TO REALLY FULLY UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY'RE DOING TO A FORMER PRESIDENT, WHAT THEY'RE CONSIDERING FOR A FORMER PRESIDENT WOULD MEET THE THRESHOLD. I KNOW WE SAY EVERYBODY'S EQUAL UNDER THE LAW, I THINK NATURALLY PEOPLE WHEN THEY'RE SITTING THERE WILL THINK, WOW THIS IS A FORMER PRESIDENT. >> THEY'RE SORT OF GREAT QUESTIONS AND THAT IS A TENSION THE PROSECUTION WILL HAVE. THEY CAN OBVIOUSLY DECIDE THERE'S INFORMATION THAT CAN BE DECLASSIFIED. THIS IS ALL A QUESTION OF WHAT WAS THE STATE AT THE TIME THAT THIS CRIME HAPPENED, ALLEGED CRIME HAPPENED. SO THEY COULD OBVIOUSLY DECIDE JUST TO DECLASSIFY CERTAIN INFORMATION AND MAKE A TRIAGE. THAT WOULD SOLVE SOME OF THIS PROBLEM. THERE MAY BE OTHER THINGS, THOUGH, WHERE THEY'RE LIKE WE JUST CAN'T DECLASSIFY THIS. I WOULD ASSUME BY THE WAY, A LOT OF THAT DISCUSSION HAS HAPPENED ALREADY, IN ORDER FOR THIS TO BE LISTED, THERE ARE CONVERSATIONS THAT HAPPENED. >> THERE HAVE BEEN SOME ESPIONAGE CASES THAT NEVER GET TO COURT BECAUSE THEY DECIDE IT'S TOO DANGEROUS TO REVEAL THE EVIDENCE. >> ABSOLUTELY. THE SECOND THING THEY CAN DO IS MAKE THE KIND OF ARGUMENTS I'M MAKING, WHICH IS THAT THE CONTENT ISN'T RELEVANT TO OBSTRUCTION BECAUSE THE OBSTRUCTION IS JUST SORT OF WHAT'S ON THE FACE OF IT. IT IS TRUE THAT THAT TAKES SOME OF THE GUTS, THE SORT OF -- WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THE EMOTIONAL IMPACT OF SORT OF WHAT HAPPENED HERE, BUT IF YOU'RE TRYING TO DECIDE, YOU KNOW, NATIONAL SECURITY VERSUS A CONVICTION, YOU'RE GOING TO BE WEIGHING DIFFERENT THINGS. >> SO THAT'S A CLOSING ARGUMENT? >> THAT WEIGHING, I AM CONFIDENT WHAT WE'RE SEEING HERE A LOT OF THAT WEIGHING HAS HAPPENED ALREADY. HAVING BEEN IN THESE MEETINGS, THERE ARE DISCUSSIONS ABOUT WHICH DOCUMENT CAN WE USE, AND YOU WILL HAVE THE CIA, THE NSA, THE FBI SAYING YOU CANNOT USE THAT DOCUMENT AND OTHERS SAYING, YOU KNOW WHAT? THIS DOCUMENT, YES, IF NECESSARY WE'RE WILLING TO DECLASSIFY IT FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS. THE FACT THAT AS ARI POINTED OUT THERE WERE MORE DOCUMENTS THAT WERE FOUND THAN ARE ACTUALLY CHARGED IS AN EXAMPLE OF THAT KIND OF TRIAGE THAT'S GOING ON WHERE THEY'RE TRYING TO BASICALLY SAY WE HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO THE NATIONAL SECURITY BUT WE ALSO WANT TO BE ABLE TO PRESENT A CASE TO THE JURY. >> LET'S GO TO ROBERT RAY WHO WAS WITH US A LITTLE WHILE AGO, A FORMER MEMBER OF DONALD TRUMP'S LEGAL TEAM DURING HIS FIRST IMPEACHMENT. GREAT TO HAVE YOU BACK. I KNOW YOU WERE SAVING A LOT OF YOUR JUDGMENT UNTIL YOU READ THE EVIDENCE. YOU NOW HAVE HAD UNFETTERED ACCESS TO THE INDICTMENT WITHOUT A CAMERA IN YOUR FACE. WHAT DO YOU THINK? >> YEAH, I'VE READ IT, OBVIOUSLY VERY QUICKLY. I HAVEN'T STUDIED IT. I THINK THAT YOU ARE RAISING THE RIGHT QUESTIONS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, FIRST OF ALL, THE OBSTRUCTION PART OF THIS THING IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT'S BASICALLY THE SUBPOENA COMPLIANCE VERSION OF MUSICAL CHAIRS AND MOVING DOCUMENTS AROUND IN ORDER TO PREVENT WHAT IS ALLEGED HERE, TO PREVENT THE LAWYERS FROM ACTUALLY KNOWING WHAT DOCUMENTS HAVE BEEN RETAINED AT MAR-A-LAGO, AND THEN AS FAR AS THE IMPACT OF THIS CASE, I MEAN, I RAISED EARLIER WITH YOU AND WITH OTHERS THE QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT ANY HARM CAME TO THE UNITED STATES, AND THAT'S GOING TO RAISE THE VERY DIFFICULT QUESTION THAT ANDREW JUST DISSECTED ABOUT WHAT EVIDENCE IS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE PRESENTED IN COURT, WHAT THINGS ARE GOING TO BE DECLASSIFIED IN ORDER, I THINK, TO GET TO THE HEART OF THAT QUESTION. AND THAT'S SOMETHING ACTUALLY I CANNOT TELL YET FROM THE INDICTMENT. >> I WANT TO READ A LITTLE BIT MORE, THIS IS PARAGRAPH 27, IT'S ON PAGE 11, AND THIS IS ALSO EMPLOYEES TALKING AMONGST EACH OTHER AND I'LL READ YOU THE BUILDUP. ON APRIL 5th, 2021, AN EMPLOYEE OF THE OFFICE OF DONALD TRUMP TEXTED ANOTHER EMPLOYEE OF THAT OFFICE, EMPLOYEES NUMBER 2 TO ASK WHETHER TRUMP'S BOXES COULD BE MOVED OUT OF THE BUSINESS CENTER TO MAKE ROOM FOR STAFF TO USE IT AS AN OFFICE. TRUMP EMPLOYEE 2 REPLIED, WHOA, OKAY, SO POTUS SPECIFICALLY ASKED WALT FOR THOSE BOXES TO BE IN THE BUSINESS CENTER BECAUSE THEY ARE HIS -- AND THEY PUT THIS IN QUOTES PAPERS, TRUMP EMPLOYEE 1 AND TRUMP EMPLOYEE 2 EXCHANGED THE FOLLOWING TEXT MESSAGES. TRUMP EMPLOYEE 2, WE CAN DEFINITELY MAKE IT WORK IF WE MOVE HIS PAPERS INTO THE LAKE ROOM QUESTION MARK. TRUMP EMPLOYEE 1, THERE IS STILL A LITTLE ROOM IN THE SHOWER WHERE HIS OTHER STUFF IS. IS IT ONLY HIS PAPERS HE CARES ABOUT? THERE'S SOME OTHER STUFF IN THERE THAT ARE NOT PAPERS. COULD THAT GO TO STORAGE, OR DOES HE WANT EVERYTHING IN THERE ON PROPERTY? TRUMP EMPLOYEE NUMBER 2 RESPONDS, YES, ANYTHING THAT'S NOT THE BEAUTIFUL MIND PAPER BOXES, NOT SURE WHAT THAT IS, CAN DEFINITELY GO TO STORAGE. WANT TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE SPACE AND START MOVING TOMORROW MORNING. SO ROBERT, THIS -- WHAT THIS HAS AND WHAT WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING IS REALTIME EVIDENCE OF DONALD TRUMP'S DIRECTIVES, EITHER IN AUDIO RECORDINGS OR IN REALTIME CONVERSATIONS THAT EMPLOYEES WERE HAVING ABOUT DONALD TRUMP ASKING THEM TO DO X, Y, OR Z. >> AND AGAIN, THAT WILL, I DON'T KNOW -- AWAIT WHAT THE TRIAL EVIDENCE LOOKS LIKE TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT THE GOVERNMENT IS ABLE TO PROVE BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT THAT THOSE OBJECTIONS AND INSTRUCTIONS AND THE INFORMATION HE WAS RECEIVING IS SOMETHING YOU CAN ASSIGN INTENTIONALITY TO. AGAIN, I'VE READ IT. I SEE WHAT IS ALLEGED. BUT ULTIMATELY, IT'S GOING TO BE ABOUT TESTIMONY THAT WOULD BE PRESENTED AT A TRIAL WHEN THAT TRIAL -- WHEN THAT TRIAL HAPPENS. >> IF YOU WERE IN THE TRIAL, WHAT WOULD YOU BE SAYING? >> THERE'S ALL SORTS OF REASONS WHY THINGS AND DOCUMENTS WOULD BE MOVED AROUND, NOT NECESSARILY ALL OF WHICH ARE REFLECTIVE OF CRIMINAL INTENT. SO YOU KNOW, AGAIN, IT DEPENDS ON WHAT THE TESTIMONY IS. IT'S NICE TO READ IT IN AN INDICTMENT AND UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS THE PROSECUTION'S DOCUMENT. OKAY? THIS IS NOT WHAT THE WITNESSES ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO TESTIFY TO AT TRIAL, AND THOSE WITNESSES WILL BE SUBJECT TO, AS ANY WITNESS WOULD BE AT A CRIMINAL TRIAL, SUBJECT TO CROSS KPK
