Kate.
Caitlin, I
want to go to you here
on this information
that we are now
getting about
what was contained
inside of this target letter.
There are three potential statutes,
it looks like,
that may be used against Trump
in this election interference case.
Can you tell us about what we know now?
Yeah.
So, Abby,
whenever a subject gets a target letter,
so the Justice Department
basically is telling them
you might be indicted.
Typically in the sample
version, of this letter
and we haven't seen it yet,
but there have been
some reports
in some other media outlets who have said
this letter does identify
some of the crimes
that Donald Trump is very likely
to be charged with,
that the prosecutors are clearly looking
at one of them conspiracy
to defraud the United States.
That is a general conspiracy charge,
but it's a pretty significant in charge.
It's used quite often.
It essentially means
that Donald Trump
was making an agreement with other people
to carry forward
the acts that the Justice Department
believes are illegal.
It is a pretty significant thing
to be charged with that.
On top of that,
the tampering with a witness charge,
that's something that we don't have
a lot of more detail
of exactly what crime that could be.
There's a couple of different ones,
but it might not actually be tampering
with a witness in the classic sense.
It might be the way
that the Justice Department
has known to be investigating here
and has been using
in these January six cases
where they're saying
they're accusing people of obstructing
the congressional proceeding.
And so that is something that we knew
that they were looking at,
at least related to some others.
And then this third potential charge
that's listed here,
according to multiple news outlets,
is that
there is a deprivation of rights,
a possibility of a charge.
That's a civil rights charge.
And I've talked to some defense lawyers
and former prosecutors about it.
It's actually not charged that often,
but it is
a charge used
where someone who's in a public position
uses their ability in some way.
That is wrong.
Either
it's outside of the bounds
of what their role is
or they use their role
in a way to deprive someone else
of some sort of. Right.
It doesn't have to be civil rights
that are classically protected,
but it is
a deprivation of rights charge
that could potentially carry
some pretty serious penalties
if it does have to do with violence.
But, you know,
we don't know exactly what
this case is going to be, how
it's going to be laid out
in the Justice Department's own words.
Whenever they bring this indictment,
there always could be other things
that we see
whenever the indictment is filed,
if it is approved by the grand jury,
But those three things,
that is a pretty significant case
that does track with
what we believe
the Justice Department
has been investigating here
for some time.
All right. Can stay with us.
Again, we have team coverage here
and keep following this as it moves
along throughout the morning.
But
I want to follow up with what
Caitlin was describing there
from a lawyer perspective.
From a legal perspective,
as you
look at these three potential charges,
as have been reported
by other news outlets.
What stands out to you?
Well, I think that we
we obviously don't know
what charges are going to be laid out.
The other thing we don't know is
whether Jack Smith has evidence
that has not been disclosed to the public
at this point.
There's been ongoing interviews
and so there may be other charges
that are outside of
what is actually known to the public
at this point.
But certainly, I think on the facts,
those are very obvious charges
in terms of defrauding
the government conspiracy.
There's a lot of interviews
with other folks about conversations
that Trump had with them.
So that seems clear.
I think the bigger question
is really kind
of the jurisdictional side of things
in terms of his status
as the president at the time.
And that's something
that will also have to be litigated
if there is an indictment in this case.
But again,
these are all speculation
because we don't
have the indictment
that that's been filed
with the State Department,
that the target letter
that will be the scope of it.
What is contained in that letter
in terms of what charges
he could possibly face?
It's possible.
I mean, generally speaking,
in a target letter,
the the prosecutors are going to lay out
what the the allegations are.
But there's no final charging decision
that's made at that point.
And they're certainly not bound by that.
Yeah. So, Paula, let's go to you.
I mean, this is in the context here
of an incredible amount of legal issues
that Trump himself is facing.
It's not just this.
You're in Florida
because of that other case,
the classified documents case.
How is Trump's legal orbit
handling all of this?
And are you getting any indications
that he's
going to need more legal firepower
to go into this next phase of things?
Oh, yeah.
That he is absolutely
going to need additional lawyers,
especially if he is charged
in Washington, D.C. as well.
This actually came up yesterday in court.
His lawyers talked about the burden
that they're currently bearing,
both in New York,
where the former president
faces criminal and civil cases.
Of course, they have won
special counsel criminal prosecution.
And they made a nod to the target letter
saying, look,
another one's likely coming.
And they talk to the judge
about how this was a lot of work,
not just for them,
but also for their client
and preparing their client
for each of these cases.
Now, they were using this in court
to try to delay this trial
until at least next year,
likely after the election.
But it also just
it makes it crystal clear
that he absolutely needs
additional lawyers, his two lawyers,
Todd Blanch,
Chris Kyle,
they're working with some other lawyers
who are in his orbit.
But after the recent departures
of at least three of his key attorneys,
he's going to have to look
for more lawyers.
And Abby,
as we know, that's been difficult for him
over the past few years.
Prospective lawyers have told us
they're worried about getting paid
and they're also worried
about the potential political blowback
or alienating their current client.
So it is likely
he'll find additional lawyers
but it's taken a while here in Florida
and it could take a while in D.C.
as well.
Maggie, I was struck yesterday
in calls
and text messages with Republicans
outside the Trump orbit
I think the frustration
and concern
related to
a major
January six case or a major election
interference case,
just because that issue,
in their view, resonates
with the American public politically,
maybe not
dramatically across
the Republican electorate
or in the primary,
but certainly
more broadly in the country.
My question is, does Trump
do these things differently?
View these cases
differently viewers as one is more
of a threat than another?
So Trump
views broadly all of
these cases as a threat to him.
You put them collectively together, Phil,
and he is facing significant jail time
if convicted
particularly in the federal cases,
assuming, again,
he has not been charged here yet.
I think it's important to note
a target letter
does usually lead to charges.
It doesn't always.
But yes, he is looking at this
broadly as a political threat.
The documents case in particular
had very much
upset them for a variety of reasons
because it was an FBI search on his home.
It was a different type of thing.
In this case, he is upset about it.
I heard yesterday
it was basically a typical plane
ride to Iowa,
but he was not in a great mood
and in portions of it.
I think you're going to hear that
going forward.
He is going to be upset
because this is, as you say,
a dominant issue in the country,
even if it's not the thing
that voters say that they are voting on.
You are correct
that Republicans are aware
that in 2022
candidates who espouse Trump's
election laws
ended up basically paying the price
at the ballot box.
In November,
even if, as you note, this played
well in Republican primaries
where Trump's
voice and vote really do matter.
But at the moment,
he is saying this broadly as a
as a threat to his freedom.
And his advisers have been
in private conversations,
pretty blunt that they see it as
he has to win the election
and that is how he guarantees
that he does not face jail time.
Now, again,
it only takes one juror
in any of these cases.
He has not been convicted of anything
but the fact that they are looking
at an election
to the highest office in the land
as some kind of
a an insurance policy or an out for him
really effects
and I think colors
the entire presidential race.