Podcast Summary
Impact of full tape recordings vs transcripts: Full tape recordings offer more context, emotion, and impact compared to transcripts, making them powerful pieces of evidence in legal cases.
The release of the full tape recording in Donald Trump's legal cases provides significantly more information and impact compared to just reading a transcript. This was highlighted during their discussion about the Bedminster tape, which revealed Trump's callousness towards national security information and offers strong evidence against his defenses. The January 6th committee's approach to delivering information in various formats underscores this point. The tape recording's accessibility and ability to convey emotion and intent make it a powerful piece of evidence. Both hosts agree that it will likely be admitted in court. Additionally, this situation demonstrates Trump's disregard for serious national security matters, driven by his personal feud with General Milley.
Trump Caught Sharing Classified Info: Trump shared sensitive info with unauthorized individuals, including authors and staff, in a room filled with classified documents, potentially compromising national security.
Former President Trump was caught on tape discussing and sharing classified information with unauthorized individuals, including authors and staff members, during his presidency. This incident, which took place in a room filled with sensitive information, involved plans regarding a US adversary. Trump acknowledged the classified nature of the information and its sensitivity, but couldn't declassify it on the spot. The cavalier attitude towards national security information, as well as the presence of laughter in the room, highlights the serious misuse of this type of information. The details of the incident, such as Trump asking for Cokes while handling classified documents and the involvement of multiple staffers, provide strong evidence for the prosecution in the ongoing case against Trump for retaining national defense information. The implications of this incident extend beyond the legal aspects, as the intelligence community finds it hard to stomach the careless handling of sensitive information.
Legal maneuvers around classified documents: The defense may try to keep evidence of uncharged documents out, potentially leading to a second indictment in a different jurisdiction, impacting the scope and complexity of the proceedings against the president.
The ongoing legal proceedings against the president involve classified documents, some of which may not be among the 31 documents specifically charged in the indictment. The admissibility of evidence related to these documents could be a complex issue, with potential implications for multiple jurisdictions. The rules of evidence generally prohibit introducing evidence of other crimes to make a defendant look bad, but there are exceptions. Rule 404(b) allows such evidence to be admitted if it has any probative value in relation to a material issue in the case. Given the nature of the documents and the potential exceptions to the general rule, it seems likely that the defense will try to keep this evidence out, potentially leading to a second indictment in a different jurisdiction. This tactic, known as forum shopping, was employed by Paul Manafort in a previous case. Ultimately, the outcome of these legal maneuvers could significantly impact the scope and complexity of the proceedings against the president.
Discussing the admissibility of 'other crimes' evidence in the Mar-a-Lago documents case: Judges can exclude 404(b) evidence if its probative value is outweighed by potential for unfair prejudice. The tape showing Trump acknowledging classified documents is a strong example. The defense may argue it's not directly charged in the case and should be excluded.
The discussion revolves around the admissibility of "other crimes" or 404(b) evidence in the ongoing Mar-a-Lago documents case. This type of evidence is relevant to show a defendant's knowledge, intent, motive, and absence of mistake, among other things. However, a judge can exclude it if its probative value is outweighed by the potential for unfair prejudice. The speakers agree that the tape in question, which shows Trump acknowledging the classified nature of the documents, is a strong example of 404(b) evidence. While the government seeks to introduce it, the defense may argue that it is not directly charged in the case and should be excluded. The speakers also discuss Judge Cannon's ruling on the initial court appearance and trial date, with the defense being asked to submit their position on the trial date by July 6th.
Judge Denies Request to File Witness List Under Seal: Judge Cannon denied the government's request to file a list of witnesses related to the Mar-a-Lago case under seal, maintaining that it wasn't necessary and could potentially intimidate witnesses. The list remained private, and the press's request to access it was deemed moot.
Judge Cannon denied the government's request to file a list of 84 witnesses related to the Mar-a-Lago case under seal. The judge questioned the need for the list to be filed with the court and did not see it as a significant issue, as the original order prohibiting contact with witnesses about the facts of the case still stands. The list itself does not become public, and the government was not required to file it in the first place. This decision was made to prevent potential intimidation and harassment of witnesses, and the press's request to access the list was deemed moot as a result.
Maintaining transparency in sealed search warrant: The government filed a redacted version of the Mar-a-Lago search warrant under seal to protect witness identities and maintain transparency, while ongoing January 6th investigation continues with interviews of Secret Service agents.
The government's decision to file a redacted version of the Mar-a-Lago search warrant under seal was likely an effort to maintain transparency and avoid potential criticism from the court. The speaker acknowledged the government's justification for keeping the information under seal and understood the importance of protecting witness identities, especially in the context of ongoing investigations. The January 6th investigation is gaining momentum, with reports of additional Secret Service agents being interviewed by the grand jury. This development is significant as Secret Service agents often have a primary role in protecting those they are assigned to, making their testimony valuable but complex to obtain. The speaker expressed agreement with these developments and emphasized the importance of moving quickly in investigations like these.
Trump allies' plan to submit alternate electoral votes: An investigation led by Jack Smith is focusing on a multifaceted conspiracy by Trump allies to submit alternate electoral votes for Trump in seven swing states, involving people like Kenneth Chesebro, John Eastman, Roman, and Brown, who encouraged electors to meet, ensured fraudulent votes reached Capitol Hill, and pressured state legislatures to intervene.
The investigation led by Jack Smith into the 2020 presidential election is focusing on a multifaceted plan orchestrated by Trump allies to have alternate slates of electors meet on December 14th, 2020, and submit their votes for Donald Trump to Vice President Mike Pence in hopes that he would accept them over the legitimate votes in seven swing states where Joe Biden had won. This scheme involved people like Kenneth Chesebro, John Eastman, Roman, and Brown, who were all involved in various aspects of the plan, including encouraging electors to meet on December 14th, ensuring fraudulent electoral college votes reached Capitol Hill, and pressuring state legislatures to intervene. The fact that multiple people with knowledge of these different parts of the plan are being called before the grand jury suggests that Smith is not giving up on the case and is moving full steam ahead. This orchestrated scheme, as opposed to a grassroots movement, is what makes this a conspiracy, and the drip, drip, drip of information points to a suspicious and potentially illegal effort to undermine the will of the people in those states.
Preparing for Trump indictments in DC: Special Counsel Jack Smith is finalizing details for potential indictments against Trump in DC, while the focus remains on the Mar-a-Lago documents case.
While the focus has been on the documents case, the action is likely happening in DC where Special Counsel Jack Smith is preparing for upcoming indictments. The team is ensuring all details are in order for trial. Stay tuned for more updates on this developing story. Additionally, Mary and I may have a disagreement on a seemingly trivial matter, such as music preferences. Keep listening for more on "Prosecuting Trump." If you have questions, leave us a voicemail at 917-342-22934 or email us at prosecutingtrumpquestions@nbcuni.com. Our team includes Alicia Conley (senior producer), Jessica Schrecker (segment producer), Bryson Barnes (technical director), Bob Mallory (audio engineer), Jen Maris Perez (associate producer), Ayesha Turner (executive producer), and Rebecca Cutler (senior vice president for content strategy at MSNBC). Follow "Prosecuting Trump" wherever you get your podcasts.
