We have
learned that prosecutors
in the classified documents case
are now zeroing in on a flood
that happened on the grounds of Mar
a Lago.
This was last October
when an employee there drained the club's
swimming pool
and as a result, a room
that store's computer servers,
which contained surveillance
video logs, flooded.
The question now Was it an accident
or was it intentional?
This is reporting that
Caitlin Poland,
Jeremy Herb
and I broke on
the special counsel's investigation.
And here's
what else we've learned
about the situation.
Federal prosecutors
who are investigating Trump's
handling of classified documents
are now
asking about this incident
that happened at Mar a Lago last October.
A maintenance worker
at the club drained a pool
which ended up flooding a nearby room
where computer servers
storing surveillance footage are kept.
That happened about two months
after the FBI executed
a search warrant
at the club
and ended up finding hundreds
of classified documents.
To be clear,
we don't know if this room
was flooded on purpose
or if this was a genuine mistake
that happened.
What we do know is that it has caught
the eye of federal prosecutors
who found it suspicious.
We know that they are looking into
whether there
were any efforts to obstruct
the justice department's investigation.
And we also know that
surveillance footage from Mar
a Lago shows the same maintenance worker
who drained the pool,
moving boxes around the club
with another Trump aide.
That same maintenance worker
later had
his phone seized by investigators
and also recently talked to them.
My colleague Caitlin Pullen joins us now.
Caitlin, obviously
a big question here is the timeline.
Walk us through.
As we were reporting this out,
how this went down.
Well, Caitlin,
this is in October of last year.
That's when the pool was drained
by this maintenance worker
and it flooded that I.T.
room at Mar
a Lago,
not damaging any of the videotape
that we know of.
But clearly,
something that was quite suspicious
that has happened.
And at that point in time
last year, Caitlin,
that was when this was the heart
of the obstruction investigation.
The Justice Department was not trusting.
At that time,
Donald Trump
and his attorneys,
that they had turned over
all of the classified records
in his possession at Mar a Lago.
They were headed
toward a contempt
fight in court in the fall.
We also know this happened after the FBI
search of Mar a Lago.
So a point in time after that FBI search
where the Justice Department,
we now know, went back
to the Trump Organization
and either asked for them
to preserve surveillance footage
or they demanded
for them
to turn over surveillance footage
a couple different times
to the grand jury
as part of this investigation.
So this is really
a moment in time
where the investigators
are bearing down on obstruction.
They're asking a lot of questions
about what might be
on these surveillance tapes,
about the surveillance
tapes themselves, about people
who are moving boxes.
And, of course, that maintenance worker
That is central to this story
about this flood.
That is a person
who was captured
on some of those tapes, moving boxes,
at least at one crucial moment.
And so we see how crucial
the surveillance footage
could potentially be here.
But this is also comes as Jack Smith,
the special counsel
who's heading this investigation,
actually was in the room with Trump
attorneys today
at the Justice Department.
What do we know about what happened?
For those 90 minutes
or so that they were in the same room?
Right.
Well, as far as we know, Jack
Smith was there.
We don't have a full understanding
of what exactly happened in that meeting.
We also know that Donald Trump's lawyers
were meeting with a top career
official in the Justice Department,
so not the deputy attorney general
or the attorney general himself,
but a deputy below
those political appointees.
But, Caitlin,
this is quite a significant
meeting
at a really significant time
where Donald Trump
and his defense team
clearly are gaining the understanding
that we are in a final stage
of this probe.
There's been a lot of grand jury activity
they have scoured Mar a Lago
and the people
working around Donald Trump.
And there's been a bit of a lull now.
It might not be the very last act
in this investigation
because we do believe there is a witness
coming in to a grand jury
in South Florida this week.
But this is the sort of meeting
that doesn't happen
unless you're at the end
and you are a defense team
that wants to either
get a sense of the investigation
or make a case or make a complaint
about how the investigation
in its full arc has gone.
Yeah, absolutely.
And the Trump team
seems to think there could be movement
soon. Caitlin Polanco, thank you.
And joining me here in studio is New York
Times, Maggie Haberman
and former federal prosecutor
Ellie Hoenig.
Thank you both for being here.
Maggie, you've done extensive
reporting on the employees at Mar
a Lago who have gone
before the grand jury
who have been at the center
of this investigation.
What do you make of
this other saga
that Jack Smith is asking about
the pool saga?
I mean,
I think it's all of a piece,
which is that
there is well, now to
who is this aide to Trump?
And then there is this maintenance worker
slash, you know,
odd jobs handler
who is involved in a couple of episodes
that relate
to putting a lock on a door
or asking about footage.
And I think it is all related
to episodes
that the DOJ finds somewhat suspicious.
And they're looking for more information
about what they end up doing with that
or concluding with that.
I think it's unclear.
But they
they don't believe
they are getting a full picture
clearly from these guys.
And look,
you're a former federal prosecutor.
When you look at something like this
and you hear that they've seized
the phone
of a maintenance worker here and
and they're looking at all this footage,
what questions would you have?
Yes.
So the big question here is,
was this on purpose
or was this an accident?
Now, I completely understand
why prosecutors were drawn to this.
Right.
Especially when you consider the timing.
There's already been a subpoena.
At this point,
we've already had the search warrant
and DOJ
is trying to collect the surveillance.
And now the room
where the surveillance is stored
is flooded.
Of course, that
apparently
the surveillance was not damaged.
But still, I'd have questions.
And so
if you get the phones,
you're looking for a communication,
you're looking for a text,
you're looking for an email,
somebody gives an order. Why?
And here's the thing.
Sometimes people think they've deleted
their phones.
They've deleted their text.
If you just sort of swipe and hit delete
that doesn't delete them.
You can still raise those up
back in the FBI lab.
So I guarantee you
they're doing forensics on those phones
and looking for
that kind of communication.
And while we're learning
about all of this,
that this meeting happened,
pretty extraordinary
to see Trump's attorneys
going into the Justice Department
sitting down with Jack Smith.
What is your sense
on how Trump is responding to this?
Because he tweeted
after a posted on Twitter, social,
I should say,
you know, asking why he would be charged
when other presidents
have not been charged. Remember that?
Because we don't although
the indications seem
that it's likelier than not.
We know that the DOJ just said
that they're not charging
anyone in connection
with Mike Pence, for instance,
for documents that he had.
And I think that's a comparison point
I had been hearing before this meeting
took place that Trump expected
he is going to be charged.
That's not because they have
said this to him.
It's just that he believes it.
And I don't think anything took place
in this meeting. That dispelled that.
Now, these meetings
and you would know this better than me,
DOJ officials, typically prosecutors
actually at any level
keep their cards close to the vest.
I don't think this was different
in this meeting,
but I also don't think
they came away thinking,
oh, you know, we've solved this.
And for somebody like Donald Trump,
who treats everything
like it's a deal and an exchange
and a transaction,
I don't think this is the meeting
he wanted.
So what is the
thinking behind
why he thinks he's going to be charged
just because of how he's
seen this investigation progress?
Yeah, because they keep coming
and coming and coming
and because they have subpoenaed
almost everybody around him,
because they have pierced
attorney client privilege
in the case of one of his lawyers,
and because all indications
are that they don't believe
what they're being told.
So Maggie is right
that in these meetings, prosecutors
do and say
as little as humanly possible,
when I would have these meetings,
I would say thanks for coming floors.
Yours and then at the end I'd say,
thank you very much.
That's
and we'll take it under advisement.
Absolutely.
It's great for prosecutors
because you do get a little bit
of a preview of what the defense
is likely to be.
Now, if,
as I think you're reporting, Caitlin, is
the Trump team went in there
and just air grievances, this is unfair.
How about Biden, that kind of thing,
then it's a complete
waste of an opportunity
by the Trump team.
It's a tactical mistake
because what good defense lawyers do
is go in and tell prosecutors,
here's some holes in your case.
You may have a problem with intent.
You may not be able to prove
some other element
and that can actually make a difference.
I take that into account
in these types of scenarios.
I will say Jim Trusty,
who is one of the lawyers
who was there,
was actually pretty well regarded
at the DOJ
I'd be when he worked there, I'd be
he knows Jack Smith.
Yeah, he knows Jack Smith.
I would be surprised
if he walked in and didn't handle
that professionally.
We just don't know how this interaction
was handled.
But again,
I just don't know that
it matters at this point.
The one attorney who wasn't there today
that is on the Trump team
but not on this case
anymore is Evan Corcoran.
And you had a really fascinating story
over the weekend
about his detailed notes
about his interactions
with Trump talking about this very case.
Right.
Well,
so he
recorded them into a voice
app on his phone.
The morning after that,
he met with Trump about the May subpoena.
And they were very detailed,
almost narrative in form,
as if he was a character in this.
And those notes are now
something that the DOJ has access to.
It goes again to mindset, to questions
Trump was asking.
He was asking questions about,
you know, do
we have to comply with the subpoena?
I think Trump's team would say
that's just a guy talking to his lawyer.
That's not saying that he's not going to.
We'll see how the DOJ views it.
How would the DOJ view
something like that especially,
and how much could potentially help them
that there are such detailed notes?
So it is virtually unheard of
to get a copy of or a voice
recording of notes
between the defense lawyer
and the client.
I never did that.
I never even thought about doing that.
But it's important to note
there's got to be something.
Maggie's right.
It is not a crime for a client
to say to a lawyer, can we fight this?
Do we have to comply?
But remember, DOJ went to a court
and won a ruling where a judge said
this is what we call
the crime fraud exception,
meaning
the communications here
had something to do
with some ongoing crime.
So that's an indicator to me.
That's something more than just
a normal attorney
client interaction was happening.
And you just raised an important point
here, too.
There's so much we can't see, right?
We are getting basically a keyhole view
of so much of this.
I have had many,
many people connected to this case
say to me,
there's a lot you guys don't know.
I wish they
would then to share it with us.
But, you know, we're doing our best here.
But there's a ton that we don't know yet.
Yeah.
And but a lot of this has come out
from reporting.
Yes, absolutely.
It's leaks,
but a lot of it has come from reporting.
We're just doing our jobs.