Summary
Contrary to Trump`s claims, the search warrant affidavit shows that the DOJ made multiple requests to get records back. The January 6 Committee has requested documents from the National Archives.
Transcript
CHRIS HAYES, MSNBC HOST, "ALL IN": That`s right. Good to see you, Congressman.
That is "ALL IN" for this week.
ALEX WAGNER TONIGHT starts right now.
Good evening, Alex.
ALEX WAGNER, MSNBC HOST: Chris, I remember when you were getting that philosophy degree, I have to say.
HAYES: That`s right. I think it`s certainly pretty well.
WAGNER: You`re a deeply thoughtful person. What`s that?
HAYES: That`s right. I think it`s certainly well. I tell people all the time, it`s a great major, learn how to think, learn how to write. That`s more of what you need than lot of stuff.
WAGNER: It`s given you the tools to be a great cable news host that you are.
(LAUGHTER)
HAYES: Of course, that`s obviously why you go and get that philosophy degree. The philosophy to cable news pipeline very well-established.
WAGNER: You have founded application for it that not many others have, my friend. I know your alma mater is proud of you. Thank you, my friend.
HAYES: Thank you, Alex.
WAGNER: And I will say, happy (INAUDIBLE) Friday David (ph) day, I`m trying to make upon. Terrible.
Thank you, Chris. Let me put an end to this crosstalk.
And I`m going to start my show now. Have a good weekend.
Thanks to all of you at home for joining us this hour. And happy not-so- summer Friday.
The federal court system has an electronic filing system called PACER. You may not be familiar with it. It stands for Public Access to Court Electronic Records. PACER is a nifty tool for attorneys to upload filings for cases and for the public to access the filing system.
And today at noon, PACER crashed because shortly afternoon Eastern, we got this. All 38 pages of it, including cover sheets and exhibits.
The highly anticipated FBI affidavit that supported the governments executions search warrant on Mar-a-Lago. And it is highly unusual that we are going to see it, even a redacted copy of it while this investigation is still ongoing.
This document, and it`s completely unredacted form, is what convinced a federal judge in Florida to sign off on a search warrant at Trump`s club two and a half weeks ago. More than half of those today 38 pages are redacted, either whole or in part. But despite that, we learned quite a bit from it.
Here we go, page one, quote, the government is conducting a criminal investigation concerning the improper removal and storage classified information in unauthorized spaces, as well as the unlawful concealment or removal of government records. On January 18, 2022, the National Archives received from the office of former President Donald J. Trump, 15 boxes of records.
I just want to pause here for a second. Remember this was a document that was written before the search warrant that was executed on August 8th. It is kind of starting to see just how much evidence the government had on hand to support probable cause that even more classified documents remained at Trump`s Palm Beach estate.
Here is the FBI describing what exactly was in those 15 boxes that were retrieved in January of this year. For those of you at home following -- for those of you following at home, we`re talking about paragraph 37, page 17.
From May 16th through May 18th of 2022, FBI agents conducted a preliminary review of the 15 boxes provided to the National Archives and identify documents with classification markings in 14 of the 15 boxes. A preliminary triage of the documents with classification markings revealed the following approximate numbers. 184 unique documents bearing classification markings, including 67 documents marked as confidential. 92 documents marked as secret, and 25 documents marked as top secret.
The affidavit knows that documents appearing to contain national defense information were found at Mar-a-Lago -- 184 classified documents including top secret and national defense information found at the former presidents home roughly 1,000 miles away from the White House, roughly a year after he left office if you can call what he did leaving office. It is weird.
Quote: Further, there is probable cause to believe that additional documents that contain classified national defense information currently remain at the premises.
And then this: there is also a probable cause to believe that evidence of obstruction will be found at the premises, which is pretty striking to see in black and white. The DOJ believed that additional classified documents, including highly sensitive ones remained at Mar-a-Lago. No, they were right, evidence of obstruction could be found down there at the beach club.
[21:05:02]
We also learned that the National Archives went through multiple efforts to retrieve the documents before January of 2022, quote, on or about May 6th, 2021 the National Archives made a request for the missing records and continue to make requests and approximately late December 2021. That is a long time. That is followed by paragraph upon paragraph of redactions.
Contrary to what the former president would like you to believe, the government made multiple requests to get those records back. And it took months just to get some of them in January of this year. There did not have to be a search warrant executed at Mar-a-Lago if only the 45th president with just given the documents back.
And, by the way, he still won`t say why he did not do that, or why he took them in the first place. In addition to the public filing the affidavit, the Department of Justice also filed a public redacted version of the memo they submitted to the judge to accompany the redactions. And they dropped a bombshell in their. Quote: The materials the government marked for redaction in the task document must remain sealed to protect the safety and privacy of a significant number of civilian witnesses.
The DOJ has a significant number of civilian witnesses -- yes, that`s witnesses, plural, who aided them in this criminal investigation. Plus, they have 184 classified documents found before the August 8th search warrant at Mar-a-Lago. That search warrant by the way resulted in even more documents. And, the federal government believed evidence of obstruction would be found at Trump`s home too. And, and, and, there is so much to unpack here.
So, let us turn now to Bradley Moss, a national security attorney who has represented federal officials, members of the military, and defense contractors in security clearance proceedings.
Mr. Moss, thanks for joining us tonight.
BRADLEY MOSS, NATIONAL SECURITY ATTORNEY: Absolutely.
WAGNER: So, let`s first talk about this line in the memo that accompanied the redacted affidavit about a significant number of civilian witnesses. What does that mean? The privacy and the security of these witnesses has been paramount and indeed it is cited as one of the main reasons for these heavy redactions. So, when it is a civilian witness in the context of all of this?
MOSS: Yeah, the way I interpreted that is the FBI has been conducting witnesses who work at Mar-a-Lago, people tied to the Trump Organization, who either they`re staffed him there at Mar-a-Lago, or potentially were working at a Trump Organization in New York. But those who would have knowledge, understanding of how he was handling these boxes, who had access to the storage room, who had been going through the boxes.
Mind you, you know, as we`ve learned, they found random things thrown in these boxes indicating people had already gone into them and thrown stuff in there and taken stuff out. We know that there were records, classified, properly classified records found in different parts of Mar-a-Lago, the former president`s residence and his bedroom closet. Things like that.
So, they`re trying to get a sense of where all these things came from, how they got there and what amount of knowledge Trump himself, as well as his lawyers and immediate staff had and knew about what was going on. That`s not only the Espionage Act provision in terms of this unauthorized retention, that`s the obstruction provision. That is why they tried to redact these names, and why the judge upheld it because to reveal that would put those individuals at particular risk of intimidation.
WAGNER: I mean, it goes without saying that Trump does not like leaks. I mean, throughout the Trump presidency, there was a myriad of freak-outs in the White House whenever there was information leaked from the White House, no matter how significant that information was or not. I mean, this is an ongoing investigation and there`s clearly some concern that witness intimidation could be at hand, or that witnesses could just get scared, chilled as it is in the parlance of an investigation.
Do you think that witnesses who potentially are cooperating with the Department of Justice are satisfied with the security that they have been offered in terms of these redactions? I do worry about Trump`s temper as it comes to following leakers and you know turning over every stone to make sure he gets the goods on anyone who might be talking to the press or to investigators.
MOSS: Yeah. So, they should certainly be relieved to see just how extensively redacted was and how little information we have, particularly on the obstruction angles. I was actually looking to see how much information we would learn on obstruction, we got very little insight into that from what was unsealed. Both the judge and the FBI have kept all of that information under wraps, and that is very important when dealing with Donald Trump.
As you mentioned, especially during his presidency, he tried to out-the identity of the Ukraine whistleblower who is protected by law, who reported on the issue of potential criminal activity by the president. There is no doubt that if any of these individuals names got out, especially if they were anywhere close to the president, anywhere employ near him, that they would have been retaliation.
[21:10:08]
That`s why their names remain under seal.
WAGNER: What about the classifications that we learned about on the documents themselves? When you saw the HCS designation and the mention of the clandestine human sources, what does that mean to you? Are we talking CIA operatives here? How do we interpret that?
MOSS: Yeah, not CIA operatives most likely, but rather human intelligence sources, for individuals that we`ve -- that the CIA, that any number of agencies have recruited, individuals that we`ve got -- they are providing information on foreign governments, foreign intelligence services. This is the basic essence of human intelligence. It`s not just, you know, you think of the field operative from CIA going over somewhere, it`s the people they recruit, whether they realize it wittingly or not, who provide information. That`s the basic crux of human intelligence.
We rely on it every day, our foreign policy decision makers rely on that information for making choices of national security. The fact that it had this kind of marking on these documents, the fact that it indicated SI for signals intelligence, that`s -- intelligence intercepts, that`s very sensitive information. That should be nowhere near the beach resort in Mar- a-Lago.
WAGNER: I got to also ask you, we talk about Mar-a-Lago as if that is the end of this. The report suggests that there are other locations that the DOJ is looking at. I mean, do we think that this is an investigation with DOJ has eyes on Trump`s other residences, like Bedminster or Trump Tower?
MOSS: So, we haven`t seen any clear indication of that. I certainly haven`t seen anything that makes that very obvious. My understanding, my guess from what we have learned so far is that this was limited to Mar-a-Lago because this is where Trump basically decamped after leaving the White House. He threw everything in boxes, left the White House after January 6th debacle and being -- Joe Biden becoming president, and just threw the boxes into the basement of first.
He spent months slowly going through it and deciding what he was or wasn`t going to turn over to the National Archives. I don`t see any indication yet that any of these records that are of concern are in any of his other resorts or properties.
WAGNER: You seem pretty final in your judgment about what is going to happen here. I know you have a piece in "The Daily Beast" today. The headline: It`s over: Trump will be indicted.
You seem quite certain there. Can you talk a little bit more about that?
MOSS: Sure. I caveat that with, it is very much my personal opinion and only my personal opinion, just based off my professional expertise and experience. It`s nobody else`s opinion.
My view is that from the information we have seen, specifically what was made clear in the unsealed, redacted part of this affidavit we know Trump was on authorized had -- he was told not once but twice that he was not permitted to retain that at Mar-a-Lago. He continued to possess it despite efforts to recover and finally when the FBI came out there in June, he and his lawyer swore that there was no other information.
He continued to actually have it, despite that sworn affidavit that is not only a violation of the Espionage Act, Section 793E, but that is also potential obstruction provisions in terms of concealing that from the U.S. government. In my view, that is enough, that is sufficient to bring an indictment, it is certainly enough to get a conviction.
Whether not the government will take that path is ultimately in its discretion. I believe they can and should do so.
WAGNER: Bradley Moss, national security attorney, really appreciate your time tonight. Thanks for joining me.
MOSS: Anytime, Alex.
WAGNER: Joining us now is Luke Broadwater, reporter for "The New York Times" who has been covering the search at Mar-a-Lago. He has a new piece out tonight, the headline reads, inside the 20 month fight to get Trump to return presidential material.
Luke, thank you for making time be here, with me this evening after deadline.
LUKE BROADWATER, REPORTER, THE NEW YORK TIMES: Thanks for having me.
WAGNER: The 20-month fright, you`ve done all the service in sort of putting it all together. I mean, we know that there are very searches and subpoenas and surveillance tapes, but really when you look at it in the 20 month period, it seems impossible to argue that the government didn`t make a very strenuous effort to get these records back before executing a search warrant.
BROADWATER: Right. I mean, if you look at it step-by-step, over many months, the statement that Donald Trump made, if the government wanted these things, they could`ve had them, is really contradicted by the facts, right?
So, you have, even before he leaves office, the national -- Trump`s own aides are aware that he has taken some of these documents that he should not have to his private residence, they start talking about how to get them back.
And then after he decamps to Mar-a-Lago, we see the archives reach out not that long thereafter to say hey, we are missing some documents here, where is that letter from President Obama? Where is the letter --
WAGNER: Where is s that Kim Jong-un letter? We know about the stuff, we know we don`t have it, you must have it.
[21:15:01]
BROADWATER: Yeah. So, that begins what they say is a series of months of the archives trying and trying, and trying to get these documents back. One thing that was happening is Trump`s lawyers were reluctant at this time based on the reporting to go to some of these documents because they`re concerned that there might be classified information in them. They might not have the appropriate clearances.
So, they had Trump himself going through them, he is going through these boxes trying to determine what`s classified, what is not, what should I get back, what should I not.
WAGNER: Which seems like maybe not the best tragedy, right? I mean, it`s by necessity, but is not entirely clear that Trump is actually doing the Dewey decimal classification system of the documents that are in the boxes, or even really looking through them in any comprehensive fashion.
BROADWATER: Right. And so, to make a long story short, it keeps escalating and escalating. At first, the Justice Department, the Archives, it seems to be negotiating with them what they believe is reasonable good faith. But then things start to change a little bit, they start to get some what they believe are misrepresentations.
You know, there is the signed statement where Trump lawyers indicate everything has been returned, all the classified information, that turns out not to be true. They start to interview some personal aides to Donald Trump. They subpoena surveillance tape and they see people removing boxes from the storage area before Justice Department comes to visit.
There becomes sort of a break in good faith that they believe is going on. That is when I think you see they feel they have no other choice but to escalate the search warrant.
WAGNER: What to escalate -- yeah. What shocks me in reading your timeline is not just the petulance of refusing to hand over documents, but the brazenness of repeatedly lying to the National Archives and the Department of Justice. I mean, here in January, he is like, here is 15 boxes, that`s all there is. They go back down in June and he is like, also this mug, that`s it, we are done.
And still, of course they come back because it is an all. He is intent on centrifuge, the entire time apparently, I mean, as if he doesn`t truly understand the gravity of this, which leads me to ask you a question that you probably don`t have an answer for. Could he still have more down at Mar-a-Lago? Because it appears that the only things they know to look for are the things that they saw on the surveillance team from June. They`ve gotten that stuff, we think, because they were admitted entry into those storage rooms.
But in theory, a person who`s lied three times to the powers that be could be lying again.
BROADWATER: Sure, they did an extensive search a multiple hours there. Could it be something hidden in some darker cranny that they don`t know about? You know, you raised earlier, could there be something at some other property? Given the way that Donalds Trump handled classified documents, almost anything is possible.
You know, obviously, he was going to rip up. My colleague Maggie Haberman reported that he was allegedly putting some in toilets and flushing them down. So, you know, the idea that this is all there is and they recovered everything I think is still an open question.
WAGNER: Let`s talk for moment about Trump`s reaction which has been to basically throw any of this back in the face of the DOJ. Do you get the sense that he feels like the walls are closing in at all?
BROADWATER: Well, I don`t know. You know, he, in some ways he seems to be relishing this fight. If you go based off of his Truth Social posts, you know, he`s really ramping up the rhetoric. Even after they allegedly put out the statement that they were going to tamper things down, they told that to the Justice Department, the rhetoric has just gone up and up.
I think he may see this as a political winner for him somehow, and that has, you know, the Republicans are rallying around him, he wants to keep the tension up here. So, you know, look, most people I think would stick your head in the sand during this and listened to their attorneys, but that has not been the way that Trump has reacted at all.
WAGNER: We`re going to talk to you more about how Republicans are reacting and whether indeed they are rallying around him. But I`m going to give you a short break.
Luke Broadwater from "The New York Times", so stick around. We have more to talk to you about also other investigations swirling around the former presidnet.
But up next, the affidavit also says the DOJ had probable cause to think there was evidence of obstruction at Mar-a-Lago. And if so, that is a familiar charge laid against Donald Trump. Former federal prosecutor Barb McQuade joins us next.
And later, new reporting today about a woman who literally talked her way into Mar-a-Lago, and how that demonstrates exactly how easy it is to get into that club.
We`ll be right back.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
REPORTER: President Trump said he declassified all these documents. Could he have just declassified them all?
JOE BIDEN, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Well, I just want to know, I`ve declassified everything in the world. I`m president, I can do it all. Come on.
I`m not going to comment because I don`t know the details. I don`t want to know. Let the Justice Department take care.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:24:50]
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
SEAN HANNITY, FOX NEWS HOST: You still have the surveillance tape, is that correct? Will you -- are you allowed to share that with the country?
ERIC TRUMP, SON OF FORMER PRESIDENT TRUMP: Absolutely, Sean, at the right time.
(END VIDEO CLIP)
[21:25:01]
WAGNER: After the FBI searched Mar-a-Lago, there was a drumbeat of conservative calls for releasing the tapes. What they meant by that was, the surveillance footage of plainclothes FBI agents executing their search warrant at Mar-a-Lago on August 8th.
We still do not have the footage, Trump and people never did release it, at least not yet. There were reportedly concerns in Trump world that releasing that tape might show the sheer volume of materials that federal agents seized.
But as of this afternoon, we do have the heavily redacted affidavit for the search warrant used to conduct that August 8th search. On page two of the affidavit, you see this. The FBI is laying out the reason they needed to check Mar-a-Lago after Trump turned over 15 boxes of documents in January.
Quote: There is probable cause to believe that additional documents that contain classified national defense information remain at the premise. There is also probable cause to believe that evidence of obstruction will be found at the premises.
Evidence of obstruction? What could that be?
Well, number one, on June 3rd, after a visit from federal prosecutors, Trump`s lawyers Christina Bobb and Evan Corcoran said, nothing to see her folks, there is nothing to see here. Corcoran prepared a statement to the DOJ claiming that all the classified material had been returned. And Christina Bobb signed it, according to "The New York Times". It cited to people familiar with that.
And then, here is number two. The DOJ unconvinced by Trump`s lawyers, subpoenaed Mar-a-Lago surveillance tapes in late June. Not to tape that Eric Trump is talking about. This was a surveillance tape from earlier, one that reportedly shows people moving boxes out of Mar-a-Lago and the storage room around the same time that the DOJ was asking if there were any more important documents down there at Mar-a-Lago. The tapes also reportedly show boxes being stuffed into differing containers, again, around June 3rd.
When Trump`s lawyers were saying essentially, you have everything already. Of course today, we know that is not true at all. It matters.
"The Times" reports, quote, that June 3rd statement, the one from the lawyers that is, along with visuals from the surveillance camera footage of the property and witness interviews, were said to be part of the concerns among investigators about obstruction.
Joining us now is Barbara McQuade, former United States attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan.
Barb, thanks so much for joining us.
BARBARA MCQUADE, MSNBC LEGAL ANALYST: Glad to be with you, Alex.
WAGNER: So let`s talk about these two elements as it pertains to obstruction. The first is the surveillance footage. How meaningful is that in the potential charge of obstruction? This notion that there were people moving material around Mar-a-Lago around the same time that the government was asking hey, do we have everything down there?
MCQUADE: Yeah. You know, what is interesting about the charge that is identified in the search warrant affidavit is that it is a particular type of obstruction of justice. It`s 18 USC section 1519, which specifically refers to the concealing of documents. It is not like witness tampering or some of the other kinds of obstruction statutes, it is specifically concealing of documents.
And so, as you just described, moving around some of these documents during a time when there has been a great deal of back and forth about what they have, what they don`t have, and what they need to return does suggest that there could be a suspicion, or even probable cause that they are concealing some of the documents that the archives wants back.
WAGNER: It is worth noting that the DOJ is searching the Mar-a-Lago footage again, this time the footage, it is either after the raid, it is after that initial tranche of surveillance footage from June 22nd, right? There is a period of several weeks before the FBI searches Mar-a-Lago. I believe the DOJ is looking for surveillance footage of that period, mostly than month of July.
What does that tell you?
MCQUADE: Well, it does suggest that they had to have some reason to know that there was something amiss, but they wanted to see what might have been revealed on the surveillance video. What it says to me is, perhaps there is a witness within Mar-a-Lago, one or more witnesses who have indicated to them in witness interviews that people were going in and out of those rooms, removing some of those boxes.
It is also noteworthy, Alex, that in the affidavit we saw today, they believe that they had probable cause to search, not just the storage room, but also something known as the residential suit. I assume that`s where Trump lives. Something called the pine room, and something called the 45 office. So, it looks like from those words that those boxes were moved and scattered around other places in the residence.
Even if they had a padlock on the storage room, there is certainly great concern about them being stored in other places in the residence. And so, it seems like there must have been witnesses providing information so they knew how to look on this, perhaps it was the surveillance video that reveal some of the things that appeared in that search warrant affidavit.
[21:30:04]
WAGNER: What about an elector signed by Trump`s attorney, Christina Bobb, drafted by his other attorney Evan Corcoran, saying effectively, nothing to see here, folks? This was a letter sent to the DOJ in June.
How concerning is that when you are looking on an obstruction charge?
MCQUADE: Well, rule number one for aspiring layers, if Mr. Corcoran writes the draft, maybe Mr. Corcoran should be the one who signs it, and another lawyer, Christina Bobb.
If those lawyers believe that that was true, because Donald Trump or someone of told them it was true, then perhaps they don`t have any liability. If they knew that they were continuing to retain documents and representing in writing that all documents have been returned, they have a very serious problem of obstruction of justice, as we just discussed. That is a 20-year felony.
Now, it could be that they were unwitting agents, that someone told them during that representation. If that someone is Donald Trump, that he is also liable, or could be liable for using those unwitting agents to make his own statement. If he knew that that statement is going to be passed on to the Justice Department, and he could be guilty of that offense.
WAGNER: The last thing I`ll just bring up as we talk about his crackerjack defense team is the fact that today is the deadline, I believe, the legal team representing Donald Trump, today is the last day they had to file their papers, requesting a special master, an independent third party review of the materials seized on an early August by the DOJ.
And according to the Trump appointed judge, they did it wrong. They did not file that request correctly. Do you have confidence in Donald Trump`s legal representation at this juncture?
MCQUADE: Well, the document they filed on Monday was so amateurish. It was in the wrong court. It didn`t file alleged cause of action. It failed to provide service. They didn`t explain why it wasn`t related to another case.
And so, no. That is a very shoddy lawyering. But it seems that he`s having a difficult time, finding someone to represent him who may be able to handle this in a more professional manner.
WAGNER: To the understatement of the year.
Barbara McQuade, former U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Michigan, thank you for your time and expertise this evening.
MCQUADE: Thanks, Alex.
WAGNER: Coming up, a jaw-dropping story of an alleged fraud, using a face identity to get into President Trump`s inner circle, and into Mar-a-Lago.
And signs of big things happening in the January 6th investigation. Mar-a- Lago may have stolen the spotlight for now, but that investigation looks like it`s making big moves.
Stick with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:37:36]
WAGNER: What I`m about to show you is a photo of a billionaire heiress Anna de Rothschild, posing with former President Donald Trump and South Carolina Senator Lindsey Graham, at President Trump`s golf club in Miami, Trump International Golf Club.
The day before a Trump supporter had brought Rothschild as a guest to Trump`s another Miami club, Mar-a-Lago. She used her family name and her charm, in the prospect of big potential business deals, to not only get invited to that day of golfing, but to come back to Mar-a-Lago later that night, where she was invited to dine with Trump world luminaries, including Donald Trump Jr.`s fiance, Kimberly Guilfoyle.
It`s not exactly the most sensational situation that you`ve ever heard of, right? There`s just one problem. There is no Anna de Rothschild. "The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette" and the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project have done incredible investigative work, tracking how this woman, a Ukrainian immigrant named Inna Yashchyshyn, allegedly pretended to be an heir to the famous Rothschild banking family, in order to sneak her way into Trump`s inner circle.
This reporting has not been independently verified by NBC News, and the woman in question denies all, of all of this. She claims she has been framed by a former business associate.
But four guests who spoke with "The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette" say that Ms. Yashchyshyn repeatedly told people at Mar-a-Lago that she was a Rothschild and according to one of those guests, everyone was eating it up.
Obviously, in light of the FBI investigation into the classified and top secret documents President Trump brought with him to Mar-a-Lago, the idea that anyone with a fake identity had access to this club is concerning. But I think it`s really worth underlining just how nuts it is that this particular lie or worked.
I mean, there has been extensive reporting done on the Rothschild family and their heirs to that fortune. They`re one of the most famous families in the world. They were the wealthiest family in the world for a large part of the 19th century. And they are the subject of more anti-Semitic conspiracy theories than maybe any other family in the world, and has been for basically as long as they`ve been rich.
There are literally conspiracy theorists who think it was the Rothschild, not the iceberg, that sank the Titanic. And these conspiracies are still alive and well.
A few years back, Marjorie Taylor Greene implied that it was Rothschild Jewish space lasers, remember that one, Jewish space lasers, that started one of California`s deadliest wildfires.
[21:40:04]
It actually was not.
This woman who lied her way into Mar-a-Lago pretended to be a part of a fake dynasty. That would be one thing. I mean, okay, it would still be totally bonkers. But this is one of the most Google-able lies imaginable. And somehow, it got past the Secret Service.
What is even more concerning is that this woman just wasn`t some random person using some thinly veiled lie. Both the Miami FBI field office and the Quebec provincial police in Canada were actively investigating her business dealings.
A charity she led called the United Hearts of Mercy was allegedly a fraud, and possibly a money laundering operation, not only did the payment processor for the charity determined that the hundreds of thousands of dollars flowing into that charity generated for credit card numbers and bank accounts that had not been authorized for use by the owners` account, but the charities own accountant made a sworn statement to the FBI that the charity was actually a source of illicit funds for organized crime.
After charity drive organized by United Hearts of Mercy, that same accounted began to get calls from people who she suspected or from criminal groups, threatening violence and demanding money. The callers a left voice messages from unknown numbers with accents, saying that if she did not return the money, she and her family would be harmed or killed.
"Pittsburgh Post-Gazette" adds that even though the charity was supposed to disclose its revenues to the public because of the amount of funds it took in, it failed to do so. So far, it`s not clear where the funds went.
So, to sum it all up, an alleged fraudster, possibly with links to organized crime, somehow got past the Secret Service and into Mar-a-Lago, where President Trump had stored away tops equipped and classified documents in various unsecured areas. And it wasn`t until March, nearly eight year after their first encounter that Trump`s entourage discovered this woman`s real identity.
Everything is fine here, friends. I am sure that she was the only person to pull a trick like this, and that no one got anywhere close to anything they shouldn`t have.
We`ll be right back.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:46:50]
WAGNER: The explosive events at Mar-a-Lago have overshadowed some of the other investigations which continue to follow Donald Trump. And what we are learning about Trump`s alleged mishandling of classified documents down in Florida -- well, that can prove to be relevant to those other investigations as well. Particularly, the January 6th committee.
Back in January, as the committee was preparing its public hearings, its numbers were regularly requesting documents from the National Archives of the former president. And if you of those documents arrived with a telltale sign of Trump`s total disregard for proper record keeping.
As "The Washington Post" reported at the time, some of the documents sent from the National Archives to the January 6th committee had been torn up and taped together, in keeping with Trump`s habit of ripping up important documents, or otherwise, rendering them unusable.
Now, we know that droves of records have been stashed away Trump`s home, records that can be important to the committees and its investigation of the January 6 event. And by the way, the January 6th committee has not is not done investigating Donald Trump, not by a long shot.
This week, the committee interviewed former cabinet member, and Trump national security adviser, Robert O`Brien. According to "The New York Times", investigators asked Robert O`Brien about discussions inside the cabinet, about whether to invoke the 25th Amendment to remove Mr. Trump from office. The committee has already sat down with three other Trump cabinet members, Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, and Commerce Secretary Elaine Chao. They have also reportedly sought information from Trump`s education secretary, Betsy DeVos.
Just last week, the committee`s chairman, Bennie Thompson, told reporters that they have spoken to pretty much every senior person in the cabinet, and for the most part, they have all indicated their willingness to talk to the committee.
In other words, we may soon learn a lot more about what Trump`s own cabinet was prepared to do to stop their own boss on January 6th.
Back with us again is Luke Broadwater, congressional reporter for "The New York Times", who`s been reporting on the January 6th interviews with Trump cabinet officials.
Luke, you`ve been reporting on and everything that we`re covering tonight. So, thank you for sticking around.
The first question I have for you is do you see an intersection between the documents and the work of the DOJ down at Mar-a-Lago and the January 6th committee?
BROADWATER: Well, yes. I mean, we do know that at least in terms of Trump`s record-keeping, but that has an impacted some of the January 6th committee`s work. Some of the documents they initially wanted were torn up.
We know that Trump`s -- that the shoddy record keeping around one January 6th, resulted in a large gap in missing phone calls. But we don`t know exactly who Donald Trump was calling, or who was calling him, for about seven hours on January 6.
WAGNER: We don`t have the text messages in and around there from the Secret Service.
BROADWATER: Right. The Secret Service, Homeland Security, Department of Defense, all have missing text messages, which is concerning to the January 6 committee.
What we do know is whether these documents that were recovered from Mar-a- Lago are in this latest search which we mean to the investigation. We know there are a lot of boxes. There`s a lot of classified material, but as of right now, we don`t have an indication yet that there is a piece of paper that is a smoking gun for that committee, or even relevant to that committee`s work.
[21:50:03]
So, you know, I talked to the committee regularly, they are very interested.
WAGNER: I`m sure they are.
BROADWATER: Seeing these documents. The intelligence committee has asked to review these documents, and also, to have a national security assessment done about what kind of security threat there was from these highly sensitive documents at Mar-a-Lago. And we don`t know yet whether it`s directly related to the January 6th committee`s work.
WAGNER: We don`t know whether there is a print out of a draft a fake electors that Trump --
BROADWATER: Right, we haven`t received that information.
WAGNER: Where is -- what is the committee`s focus? We are hearing, you, know overtures about the 25th Amendment. Do you think that that -- they were, I think, very smart to break up the last series of hearings, into these digestible moments in the days leading up to January 6ix, the event itself, and the aftermath immediately afterwards.
The 25th Amendment, that seems to be the next shoe to drop, if you will. Can you tell me more about the focus of the committee in these days, when nobody is actually been very much attention to their work?
BROADWATER: Sure, yeah. So, I mean, initially, we thought that the committee would be essentially done by now. They would be wrapped up, preparing their final report. But what they have really done through August, they begun a second investigative push. And a lot of the interviews, the people they brought in, Trump top officials that you highlighted on the screen earlier.
And every one of them is being asked about these discussions around the 25th Amendment. And what I think the committee is trying to get at here is Trump`s unfitness for office shall he run again. But you`ve heard a lot of different evidence in the earlier hearings, but you didn`t see a deep dive into that specific issue, about what his own cabinet thought about whether he was fit after the events of January 6th.
So, they`re being asked that question. And one other data point, as they started their hearings, they received 4,000 calls to their tip line. So, they have tips pouring in, that they`ve been now running down. They even sent people to Denmark last week. So --
WAGNER: To view footage of Roger Stone, a documentary team.
BROADWATER: Yeah.
WAGNER: Are we expecting more to start happening in September? I mean, there is real concern about how close the election they continue these hearings. So, with our expectation in terms of timeline for January 6th?
BROADWATER: Yeah, so, we`ve been promised at least one hearing in September. They may well be multiple hearings. We don`t know exactly the date set or times. We know this committee can call a hearing at the last minute, sometimes. Sometimes, they give us a good notice.
So, we don`t know exactly. I am hearing the report they are going to issue has been pushed back some, and they`re going to continue to work right up until the end of this Congress.
WAGNER: We are excited to see what comes next. Every day brings new news and new information.
Luke Broadwater, congressional reporter for "The New York Times", thanks for being with me, twice this evening. I appreciate it.
Up next, at the very different tune we are hearing tonight from Republicans who demanded the Justice Department release that affidavit.
Stay with us.
(COMMERCIAL BREAK)
[21:57:38]
WAGNER: After the FBI search of Mar-a-Lago, allies of Donald Trump insisted that the action itself was politically motivated. They claimed that if the feds really wanted those documents, all they had to do was ask.
House Republican Leader Kevin McCarthy was so livid, he threatened to launch an investigation into the DOJ and Attorney General Merrick Garland. At one point, arguing, why wouldn`t they just ask the president if they had something in there that they wanted? He surely would have provided it to them. Why did they have to show up in the manner that they did?
Indeed.
It turns out that the authorities did ask for access. And now, even Fox News viewers are being educated on that specific point.
(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)
FOX NEWS ANCHOR: Going back to `The New York Post" headline in the middle of all of this, you couldn`t just ask.
KARL ROVE, FOX NEWS CONTRIBUTOR: They were asking, how many times we don`t know, but the impression in the affidavit is that they asked for multiple times. And president time Trump has had several times all they have to do is ask.
Well, my sense is they were asking for a year and a half. And why he was holding on to these materials, when he had no legal authority to do so under the Presidential Records Act is beyond me.
(ENDVIDEO CLIP)
WAGNER: Again, that is Karl Rove saying the federal government did ask multiple times over a year and a half. So there is that argument.
A small group of fervent Trump supporters have moved on to a new talking point, claiming that there is simply too many redactions in the affidavit, and that there is just no transparency. Look at all that blacking.
The third ranking Republican in the House, Elise Stefanik, told Fox News, quote, the American people deserve transparency, and not an outrageously heavily reacted affidavit to cover up for and politically protect Joe Biden and the FBI for this dangerous and un-American overreach.
Who is to say that if we were to learn which was in those redactions that they would necessarily be good for Donald Trump? I mean, that is perhaps why the interaction from the overwhelming majority of Republicans is simply been silence.
As "The New York Times" notes, even the most bombastic Republicans, people like Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren Boebert, they were initially focused elsewhere in the hours after the affidavit was released. They weren`t tweeting about things like border invasions.
And there is as "The Washington Post" post point out, even GOP leaders like Congressman Kevin McCarthy and Senator Mitch McConnell have gone mum. Neither men have responded to requests for comment tonight for "The Washington Post".
That does it for us tonight. Rachel will be here on Monday. And I will see you back here on Tuesday.
Now, it is time for "THE LAST WORD". Ali Velshi is in for Lawrence tonight.
Good evening, Ali.