parts of georgia where people of color live to try to disenfranchise them. people like rudy giuliani spread racist lies about election workers in order to try to disenfranchise voters. you cannot disentangle that from fani willis is well. and her view that this is necessary and important to prosecute that. and in this particular scene, which is at the heart of, you know, the voting rights movement in this country. look, the prosecutors motivation matters. and i think that is part of it for her as well. >> we are at just about ten pm, eastern time, seven seconds away. with donald trump seemingly on the cusp of indictments number four, jake tapper here in washington along with anderson cooper and caitlin collins. ? >> a little more than an hour, ago grandeur in atlanta handed of ten vitamins in fulton county journey fani willis's investigation of the former presidents attempt to overturn the 2020 georgia election. >> anderson, those investments are sealed, so we don't yet know who actually it is that

they name. but certainly the former presidents team has spent the day bracing for bad news. they appear to believe that this could potentially reference him. that his name could be one of those on those ten indictments that were returned. they've issues taken just a few moments ago. lashing out at the district attorney, fani willis here. something that we have seen the former president doing repeatedly on social media in recent days. they are actually accusing them of election interference. which we should note is, of course, ironic given that what the -- heart of the indictments potentially. let's go back to cnn sarah murphy who has been outside the courthouse in atlanta all day. sarah, obviously we are waiting to see when we are going to potentially hear from baku district attorney, fani willis, that trump has been attacking here. what's the latest that you have heard? >>, that's right, i mean, she is still expected to make remarks to the press this evening. but obviously they want to get these indictments fully processed, fully stamp. they want them to go through the clerks office before she is making public remarks. we are told that that could

take anywhere from 1 to 3 hours. from when the clerk actually got these documents from the presiding judge, roberts mcburney, which was around nine pm. so we are sort of waiting to see how long this takes before we see her comments. and as you pointed, out we know that there were ten indictments returned from this grand jury today. we know the grand jury sent spent much of the day hearing the trump election interference case. the one thing that we don't know is if this grand jury heard any other regular cases before they started hearing the trump election interference case today. so that is the one caveat. when we see this grand jury hand up ten indictments today, we are still waiting to see what is included in those indictments, who is named in those indictments, if there could be potentially indictments in that stack. that's got handed to the court today. i don't have to do with the trump case, and there may have, been you know, a couple of the other regular sort of murder assault and battery, irregular taco stuff this grand jury has

been hearing. we are waiting to see all of that, and here all of that from the clerk. and then at some point this, evening from the voting county just returnee. >> sarah, i reference that trump campaign there, but i know you and i've got an, asking we haven't heard anything, i mean, i haven't at least. i don't know if you have, either on whether or not trump himself has been notified of any potential deterrents? >> yeah, that is one thing that we haven't heard. we haven't gotten any indication that trump has officially received any kind of notification that he has been indicted. obviously, he is the center of this investigation. he is the biggest target voting country journey fully willis was looking at. you know, we talk about the potential racketeering charges, that sort of rests on the notion that donald trump is up ahead of this enterprise, that essentially is trying to overturn the 2020 election. but we have seen in some of these other indictments that trump team has been notified. potentially as soon as the grand jury has handed up indictments. and we don't have, again, any indication from trump's team at this point that the former

president has been formally notified in this case. >> sarah, murphy outside the courtroom for us, thank you. anderson? >> caitlin back with us, van jones, elie honig, michael more, joining us this. our cnn poll commentator david, even he is a former trump campaign advisor, david, you are just joining us, your thoughts as we wait for the indictment? >> yeah, anderson, obviously very serious. we've had ten different counts coming down, it will be interesting to see who's listed here who's not listed here. but, you know, i obviously just caution everyone to exhale, let's see what is in here. and remember, those images that we just saw this weekend, over the weekend from that iowa state fair, all those folks there who are with trump and kind of campaigning with trump and watching trump and cheering him on, they all knew this was coming at it had no impact on them. and i think that tomorrow the folks in iowa will have no impact us on as well. so i know there is a lot of probably a lot of glee on the other side of the aisle that

this is going to be the demise of trump, but i think, you know, lots of folks have seen this play before, and they know how it turns out. so i think standby to standby. >> all, right alyssa, if past is prologue, certainly it won't have an impact or it will just be used for more fundraising or maybe even produce a boost in the polls. do you believe that overtime as this sort of, i mean, there is a long time between now and the actual presidential race. do you believe this could change? >> we are in the reality of august of 2023, the lead candidates behind donald trump and the republican field just have not taken advantage of the multiple indictments, enough for that we have in front of him. so i don't disagree with david orban, if those who are, you know, the iran desantis, is that nikki haley, start tim scott's, if they continue to actually defend him when indictments come down, i don't think you are gonna see his approvals with the republican base change. at the end of the day, voters are hardworking people who are

focusing on putting food on the tables, paying their bills. when they are elected the leaders that they believe in saying, hey, something wrong is happening to donald trump. they are gonna believe it. that is why we are seeing this. we have just seen such a level of, either dishonesty or running cover by many elected republicans. and not calling donald trump out on what he has done. so i would echo what adam kinzinger said, if at this point you are not going to criticize donald trump and you are running against him a primary, and get out and endorse him? >> congressman, kinzinger, many of, we don't have adam anymore, all right. >> i would like to, go ahead. >> to me, there is something deeper happening, which is that maybe some of these cowardly little candidates are going to say something, maybe they won't say something. if they pick up the mid-smushed down. that is kind of small. there is something deeper going on, which is that you have the country, half the country is slowly coming to the conclusion that our justice system is just corrupt.

>> well that's not good. i think we need to be very clear, no matter who gets the nomination in the republican party, or who doesn't, or who says something, who score something out of a trail. where this indictment, that indictment. the idea that we now are living in a country where apparently half or a third of americans are willing to just say, well, we just believe that all of those grand jurors and all of those prosecutors, and all the people in the department of justice and all of these people who we used to rely on, believe in, have confidence, in our just for some reason have all become zombies. and they all just hate donald trump. they are willing to destroy the constitution and whatever to get one man. that is very very dangerous. so i think it's a bigger, it's incumbent on a bigger slice of america and even just these little cowardly candidates. just start talking about the beauty of our institutions. this is a beautiful system that we have. people around the world don't have this. we are even donald trump, who is an obvious kirk and con man still gets his day in court, he

still gets lawyers, he still gets the chance to precipitate. but regular ordinary people can say, this is the law, and it has to be followed. if we cannot defend our basic system, i think we are in trouble? >> anderson, if i could. >> anderson. >> go ahead, alyssa. >> there is precedent in georgia for having had cameras in courtrooms for trials similar to this, which i know that we are expecting the federal cases. so i do think that that could have a noticeable impact on the public's perception. if they actually are able to see this case, assuming the indictment comes down, see it play, outside the facts, to see exactly what this actual conspiracy would look like and this effort to steal the election would look like. i do think that that could change some hearts and minds. >> david? >> yeah, so anderson, i agree with van, i think van makes a very valid point. it is troubling that half of america can -- have see this as just and righteous and the other half sees this isn't just an undue righteous. and there is a big problem with our system of justice today and

faith in our systems that american people don't have faith with. whether you on the democrat side republican side, whether -- people don't believe there's equal application of the law, whether you are republican or democrat now. and that is really eating away at the underpinnings of our society if we cannot have faith in. it and i think that that is the reason why when this these indictments go out on the former president, trump. that so many republicans just see it as white noise. and agree with van, it is problem some to lose to the point, maybe props for our cameras and not just in the georgia case, but in the federal case. i think people need to be able to see and hear everything so that they understand that justice is being applied, evenly unfairly. i think that is the only way it is gonna be. you can move forward. >> you know, i just want to talk to our legal folks for a bit. elie, just in terms for viewers who are just joining us. based at the top of the hour, tech are on the east coast. explain what we expect to happen over the next say hour

or more. >> right, anderson, so earlier tonight we learned that the grand jury had voted, yes, on at least ten different indictments. and items you saw earlier, as those indictments were -- gregory foreperson, into the judge who signed those documents. and now those indictments are back with the clerk. and so as we sit, here we are waiting for the clerk to go through the process, literally stamping the documents. and eventually they will be uploaded on to electronic filing systems. i expect that around the same time that that happens, the dea will come down and give a public statement. and i think the d.a. is going to try to time it so the moment when she takes the podium is the moment when we all get to see that indictment. important to keep in mind a couple of things, one, the dea is typically going to be constrained to what she says to whatever is in the four corners of that indictment. a general rule of practices that you only say and reiterate what you have already put in your court documents, you don't just sort of go on a bender and say whatever occurs to you. the other thing to keep in, mind and this is to van and david analysis point.

everyone needs to keep in mind that an indictment is the start of this whole process. it is not the end. we say as a prosecutor, you don't celebrate an indictment, to celebrate a conviction. if you are a prosecutor, vice versa. of course, if you are the defendant. our criminal justice process is about the play out in front of all of us, on four different stages. to van's point. and i think it is important that we keep up respect for that system, and look, donald trump has been trying to tear that down, that underlying confidence, through social media, posts every day. let's let the system do its job, our system is not perfect. it's capable of being criticized. but by and large, it is our last -- of truth. so let's all be, patient there is a long way to go in this case. and the other, three let's see how it plays out. >> michael, in terms of logistic, i, mean if there are indeed multiple defendants, will they all have to be arraigned together? >> well, most of the time they would be, but, yeah we just can't escape the fact that this is unique. you did have a former president, and there is unique security concerns. and that type of thing. so typically they would be

brought in and have the chance to be arraigned. even at the same time. the state court system is a little bit more of a gun slinging type system than the federal court. so they are not necessarily as rigid with the rules -- anyone waiting to watch this on tape before the election might be running a fools errand. because i think it's not like, then we're talking about seven, 17 or eight -- [inaudible] in the rico, case it has been going on here. you can imagine the difficulty of getting a jury in the trump case. i just think that is a long time. >> wait a minute, i'm sorry, could you just repeat that? you say it took seven months to get a jury for a rico case in georgia? >> they are still picking the jury, it has been more than seven months. >> why does it take seven months? >> well, we have, got multiple defendants. you've got lawyers jumping into heaven. questioning jurors and all of those things that go along when

you have it. so you can imagine the surface that is gonna happen when this comes out. one thing i do want to add about the sort of system that happened here, but i've been hearing about. remember that trump is presumed innocent at this point. so that has to play into some considerations about timing of the trial, whether or not it knocks him off the trail. all those other things. and ali is exactly right, this is not a case for the d.a. we can come down and slamming outside of what the indictment says. this is not a case, it's funny what i was on trump, this is not the prosecutor versus donald trump. this is the state of georgia versus donald trump. and so she has got to wear that -- causes and exudes impartiality. and follows the rules that are applied to prosecutors. that is that you don't try your case in the media. you try your case in the courtrooms. so she will be contained constraint ihs come out. >> michael, obviously the former president has always been released on his own recognizance, obviously no

mugshot, no handcuffs, with the other defendants, if they are, would they necessarily get the same treatment? yeah, i don't think look at the same treatment as the former president. again, i don't know that any defendants have ever been indicted when the courthouse is surrounded like a military base. so we are in uncharted waters, but i think the other defendants will likely have more of a routine type appearance and be processed in, and then i can be assured in an out by secret service. >> anderson we do see this indictment, to michaels point, i expect to see -- are we going to learn new information about the allegations here? if you think back to jack smith indictment for january 6th, the vast majority of that information had already come out through the january six committee that kinzinger was part of. but let's remember that jack smith had to paint with a broad brush. he had to cover seven states, the first part of his

indictment is five pages long. here, fani willis gets to drill down much more deeply and i think we're going to get a lot more detail and new information that we hadn't seen before. >> i appreciate it, let's go back to jake in d.c.. >> thanks anderson. i'm still's here with -- a cape, abby philip, jeanne, and laura coates. on the channel that is basically donald trump's defense network, lindsey graham, the senator for south carolina, said earlier something along the lines of this should be decided at the ballot box and not in a bunch of liberal droves to strengthen the man in jail. they're weaponizing the law. it is an interesting thing. first of all, what is interesting about that is one of the strongest pieces of evidence against donald trump, that tate from brad raffensperger, who we should once again remind people is a very conservative republican, and that tape trump asks him to find 11,780 votes.

just one more than biden had as a margin of victory, that tape exists because lindsey graham had called brad raffensperger in a previous moment and had said something to him that raffensperger took as a similar suggestion that he should corruptly who find votes for donald trump and lindsey graham denied it, so it just disappeared from there. it was a he said he said. so raffensperger presumably star tape recording his conversations. >> look, the retort lindsey graham is pretty simple. election interference in a democracy is not something that just gets decided on the ballot box. if it's a crime it's a crime and it needs to be handled in the courtroom. if you open the door to people just doing any and everything to try to, quote unquote, find votes that they did not actually win it through lawful means, that is the end of it,

it's the whole ball game. it's why it's so important. the jury will decide, but the allegations here, in this case, in the january six case, they go to the heart of what a democracy is and what it means. so the idea that it is just too tough, let's let the voters decide on a political matter, it's not a political matter. it's a legal matter and we'll find out what the jury ends up. >> let me play that sound if i can, just remind our viewers who are well versed with his excerpt. it is still stunning when you listen to it, this is trump calling the secretary of state of georgia, again a very conservative republican named brad raffensperger, after the election and this is what he suggests that raffensperger do. >> i just want to find 11,780 votes, which is one more than we have, because we won the state. >> i mean, that is just a reminder.

>> you asked the question earlier why georgia? that phone calls one of the big answers to that question. another one, and also relevant to lindsey graham, is that fani willis in 2001 opens this investigation and starts -- >> 2021. >> that's right, 2021. looks into rumors of meddling in georgia and she doesn't get to cooperation, principally from the federal officials who she reaches out to four interviews. people like lindsey graham. and that is what compels her to the special grand jury. it is the only grand jury that has investigative capability and the state of jarreau georgia, and that grand jury really turbochargers her investigation into this malfeasance that of course result in the recommendation to pursue an indictment, which is why we have the conclusion of the regular grand marais

tonight. i think the answer as to why georgia, many different reasons fell into place and not insignificantly the recalcitrance she got from government officials who refused to cooperate with this lawful investigation into unlawful activity. >> remember, graham hired a lawyer to get him out of testifying, if you will recall. but i think both the voters and the juries are going to end up deciding this because the jury, if trump is indicted, the jury can say okay, we think he's guilty. and then he can run for president and he can be elected president of the united states. so it is not an either or situation that lindsey graham is portraying it as. everybody gets their shot at this and again, it was lindsey graham who do not want to cooperate with this investigation. >> we should note, laura, one of the things that we heard

before and during the second trump impeachment for what happened on january 6th was, oh we shouldn't handle this here, this will be left up to the courts and juries and criminal investigators. it was the reasons why republicans gave for why he should not be impeached. because lot enforcement will take care of it, now law enforcement is involved and we're hearing that this should not be up to the courts, it should be up to the voters. i guess it is like bring around the rosy. >> it is like a political hot potato, nobody actually wants to be the one to get burned by their own hypocrisy because it is an absurd notion to suggest that one could commit a crime and, because there is an election around the ward, and it's america there's always an election around the corner. that is what happens in a democracy. voters are able to elect their candidate because an election is right around the corner. it does not serve as a way to immunize and inoculate you for

life. this idea that fani willis, though, should take a back seat to jack smith will come up again. expect that to happen. many will look at this and say hold on, we've got a special counsel is already appointed, by the way we have three special counsel simultaneously right now, but why not just give it to him, defer to him? well, the fact of the matter is that every prosecutor is in doubt and their individual to bring a case -- they need not wait for another one to accompany the decision, she has every right to do so. but that will be a natural talking point to have all from here and the other way to pass that hot potato, should have and have any legs for that reason. finally, when you think about potentially what is at stake here, one of the main reasons that we prosecute cases is in part for retribution, for punishment. but a large part is deterrence. when you bring a case on the half of jurisdiction, you don't get there and say laura coats

versus, or jamie gangel versus, it is the united states or the state of georgia against this person. why? because you have offended the society with your actions. you have offended the people and what they expect in a civilized and social contract. so when you look at this notion of what to do next, the fact that if she is able to bring a case, the fact that she's able to do this for deterrent reasons as, well is because why? there is an election just around the corner. >> donald trump looks at it as a vengeance. he does not look at it as anything else. this is fani willis trying to get back at him all of these people in georgia who didn't like him for one reason or another, didn't vote for him, et cetera et cetera. but nowhere in -- just tonight on the verge of this indictment. i do think, to laura's point

about who's going to take a backseat to jack smith, feels to me like these indictments, the michigan one against the fake electors, the jack smith case, this one, they have their lanes. when you look at the michigan officials what they're talking about are very specific, michigan laws on the books in michigan to protect against election fraud, tampering with voting machines, things of that nature. so we will see what the georgia case looks like, but there is a reason that our system, especially our federal election system is decentralized. it used to be something that republicans were proud of, and that decentralized system is going to create a lane here for fani willis look specifically at the state of georgia, the laws on those books, and a charge more detailed crimes because reading the jack smith indictment, it is a pretty broad brush. they are dealing with federal crimes. in the state of georgia, i think you're going to be getting at a much more granular level and that is why i don't

think there's going to be as much conflict as people might think about these different cases. >> laura, when jack smith sees what fani willis's grand jury has found, can he ask for that evidence for his case? is that something that can be done? >> i mean you get and no to the questions you don't ask, jake tapper. so they might ask for that. he would be able to, if it extends, and there are some basis to extend his own first fiction in florida, remember he did name georgia as one of the different states and the indictment, i would foresee an opportunity for him to solicit it. however, remember there was already a conflict between the january six committee. people can become very possessive of their information because they might fear that, well, obviously there is a federal indictment that is looming. people might want to clam up if you're trial might go before mine, i have an interest as a prosecutor to ensure that whatever you say in that trial

does not undermine my case vaguely. there might be tension, there but is he entitled to ask for it? yes shall he receive it, who knows. >> do you think this fourth indictment, presumably, we'll do any damage to the trump brand within republican circles? just from your take on having covered republican politics for so long? >> we have not seen it yet. look, jared kushner once said about donald trump that he hijacked the republican party. i would say that from what we have seen, much of the republican party was waiting to be hijacked by donald trump and they have not let go yet. elected officials, how many opportunities did they have from mitch mcconnell, kevin mccarthy, lindsey graham, they could have all stopped and they did for a moment after january six. and they said what they saw, but that is not where their power was, that was not where

campaigned fund raising was, that was not how they were going to get reelected. >> let's not let mitch mcconnell off the hook on this one because he let trump continue with these election lies well into december because he didn't want it to interfere with the georgia senate races that were still unfolding, the runoffs. and people in republican circles or basically like, he is just going to drop it. the georgia runoff was basically a couple of days before january 6th, there are a lot of republicans who let trump go on this journey, doing the damage that he did the country in the process for political reasons and they were upfront about that. many of them thought, oh, he would just give it up and go home and go down to mar-a-lago. that didn't happen. >> they are still waiting. >> that's in the public record, it is out there. we lived through it.

they could've said something a day after the election and they didn't. >> the truth is they're not that different from don't, trump it's all about self interest. donald trump cares not about the republican party, but about self interest and his political future. and republicans who made their choice, made the choice to care about their political self interest, which they think, and many continue to think to this day, is still tied to donald trump. >> i should point out that according to ben game and on twitter, don't trump is now under indictment in every national east to city other than philadelphia, assuming that the home of the braves is also delivering an indictment this evening, anderson. >> jake, thank you so much. i want to go back to sara murray who's outside the courthouse in atlanta. sarah, what are you hearing? >> well, anderson, we are still in this waiting game. we are waiting for the first

office to process and make public these indictments today. again, we previously reported that this grand jury that was convening handed up ten indictments today. we don't know who is named in those indictment, we don't know the substance of those indictments, we know that they had heard a lot of evidence, they heard this election interference recording don trump's allies. it's also possible, though, that they heard some of the regular grab bag of cases before they moved into this trump case today. that they hurt armed robberies, they heard murders, they heard that sort of thing. so we are still waiting to see what the seventh instance of this and item in is. after that process plays out, which we are told could take an hour which is now passed, it could take multiple hours. we are expecting to hear from fulton county district attorney fani willis. she is expected to make remarks about this case. but again, i think the d.a.'s office wants to be careful

about making sure that these indictments avoid process before they put her in front of the camera to talk about what may happen with this grand jury. >> based on what you said, there are other cases that they heard when -- it's possible that some of those indictments or in other cases? >> that's waiting find out, that this grandeur has been meeting mondays and tuesday's four weeks in the normal cases they hear murders, armed robberies, that kind of thing. so they may have heard a couple of those kinds of cases before they turned to the trump election interference case. it is possible that when you get through the stack of indictments that some of those are involved in totally unrelated cases. donald trump and his allies. again, we're waiting to get more information on that and we are waiting to see how many of these indictments could pertain to the former president, to his associates, to these efforts to try to overturn the 2020 election in georgia. >> we are still expecting fani

willis to speak, if in fact these indictments do, they are related to the former president in her case? >> we are and we are expecting her to speak this evening. look, we know that the judge stayed in the courtroom late because they were waiting for this grand jury to hand something back in the election interference case. we know all that. but look, this is a district attorney who has obviously come under sharp criticism from trump supporters, she has come under sharp criticism from trump's attorneys, and part of that criticism has been about the comments she has made publicly throughout the course of this case. so i think that when you're at a moment like this or the grand jury has handed up indictments, if you are in the district attorney's shoes, you want to be careful about what you say and when you say it and you want to make sure that you have a document that is stamped through the clerks process, that the press is able to see, read, and hold in their hands

before you stand out in front of the cameras. >> thank you so much. >> thanks anderson, back with -- and dan jones. i want to ask about a common that trump made when he's on the tarmac at iowa at the state fair of the weekend. whenever we talk about these indictments we say that trump and his allies, the state party officials, white house officials that used to work for campaign officials that were all involved in this effort to try to overturn the election results in georgia. and trump was asked about his allies and if he is worried about their potential indictment and the quote he gave them was, many of the allies i don't know because, to be honest, we have so many allies a lot of them i don't know. so i don't know exactly what you are talking about. i mean, when you see him say something like that, does that give you the sense that he is trying to distance himself from other people whose names could be in the indictments? >> absolutely, that's the sound of him backing the bus up over the potential rudy giuliani's, mark meadows, and others who may come up in this indictment. we shouldn't be surprised by

that, this is the trump who instigated what we saw on january 6th and then has led a lot of those rioters and protesters surveilled time while he escorted it. you know him well enough kaitlan, i do too, it is about him and him only. in the other cases where he is also has a coconspirators, they should be prepared for him to throw them under the bus at any given moment, if it means protecting himself. >> david urban, he is running a campaign at this, point of the campaign keeps accusing the prosecutors of election interference here. but he is very much on the campaign trail, he is not doing as many rallies, a lot of that has to do, we are told, without cost of those rallies. we are seeing just the burn rate of the campaign cash and how that is intermingled with what he is using to pay for his legal fees, other people legal fees. i mean, if you are running a reelection campaign and try to be the republican front runner, is that sustainable? >> yeah, obviously it's a concern. that has been chatted about and

talked about in a wide variety of circles for the last -- reported around $40 million being spent on legal fees and that's obviously money that's not going to grassroots organizing and get out the vote and knocking on doors, registering republicans. that is a problem with some. but i suspect that if past is prologue, the former president will be able to keep raising money with a lot of small dollar donors. large money has eluded him in this race so far, but at some point those small dollar donors get burned out. i think it is an interesting, what sara murray was talking about earlier, in the segment about fani willis being very meticulous and precise. we saw this potentially indictment post it on the courts website an hour beforehand and anything go out and walk it back. i tell you that if you go looking through twitter social media and other places right now conservatives and others

are saying that there is a conspiracy within the conspiracy. they'll use those kinds of things to fund-raise off of moving forward and fill it pretty quickly. >> what you are saying, essentially, is that even if this is not -- to have another legal issue, there is already putting out a statement that they have not yet been notified about any indictment tonight? >> kaitlan, you know, take a quick gander through social media. what the police are mostly about, no one seen the indictment, but the ten counts that were posted on the website hours before and the court haven't come out and the district attorney's office coming out and saying that is not what it really looks like. let's see if it is what it really looks like, maybe they're trying to make sure that it doesn't exactly mimic the document that was earlier posted. those the kinds of things that are going to help raise money from the base moving forward. >> i think a big picture, caitlin, and david organisms as

well, listen, there is not a voter who is with donald trump in 2016 but then left him in 2020 for joe biden, but after for indictments is like you know what, i might go back to donald trump? that voter doesn't exist, it is stunning to me at this juncture in the republican primary that so much money and so many polls aren't going in favor of donald trump when, in reality, is not strong head to head to joe biden. i mean, we've seen the polling, joe biden this week as well but if you are looking at how republicans can put up the strongest candidate to beat joe biden, donald trump is not the answer that. you cannot litigate for indictments in the general election and expect to win. >> when you hear what jeff duncan was saying earlier, calling on republican senators, republican governors to come out and called trump out, this call for action to his party, we did not see that that has made a difference when there are republicans who will speak out. i talked to brian kemp who is one of the people that trump personally called and targeted and tried to make sure he didn't get reelected here and he still didn't rule out voting

for trump that he's a republican nominee. he is someone who is saying that, you can imagine what other republicans who has not been personally targeted and victimized by donald trump would say. >> it is a remarkable thing and i think that we're going to have to get our heads in a different position here because this is a campaign. when you're running for president, what do you want? you want to be able to raise a ton of money. he's raising a ton of money. what you want to be able to do is dominate every news cycle. he dominates every news cycle. you what you want people to do is shut off the oxygen for every other candidate so that you can get all the attention. he is out here wrapping like eminem just trying to get attention. this is the campaign, i think that you've got to understand that this is unusual, it's weird, but i don't think donald trump is going to bed at night crying, oh my god my campaign is in trouble. this is the campaign, and it's going to be the campaign going forward because you're gonna have indictment after indictment, arraignment after arraignment, hearing after,

hearing it so i think the political class have to understand that's where we are. i think his opponents have to understand that's where we are, but i don't think this is hurting him at all to get that nomination, people can argue and debate about whether or not it will hurt him in the general election. it depends if the economy is good it will crush, if it's terrible ill skate by. but this is the campaign, right now. >> david urban, thomas massie of kentucky said that all desantis needed was when everyone was exposing his issues and looking at, them was that maybe an indictment would help. he was kidding, but not really maybe? >> no, not really. your point is well taken earlier, kaitlan, about governor kemp. can you imagine somebody, i know jeff duncan is not gonna vote for trump but there are so many people in that boat. you interviewed the former attorney general on who said that he'll jump off that bridge when it comes to it whether we have to vote for trump or biden. and i think that people really need to sit back and think, remember what the current president said repeatedly.

don't judge me against the almighty, judge me against the alternative. i think people are stating him, seriously i think republicans are saying we don't really like donald trump, we might -- but we sure don't like biden and kamala harris, we don't want them in the white house anymore. that is what you're seeing, that's what's playing out here, and just as a van and others poll after poll, reportedly said that we don't want donald trump and joe biden against each other. i think if both candidates decide that if trump wins away biden will go away, we would be able to turn the page. i think that until that happens jeff duncan won't get the kind of mourning in america and bucolic republican party that he is hoping for. >> alyssa, what -- you used to work inside the trump white house and you saw this happen up close. mark meadows, donald trump, all of this. do you think that there is any chance that any of that criticism from the people who didn't work for trump, who certainly were loyal to his politics at least with breakthrough to any republican voters? >> listen, it's been two years

and i have -- i don't know if it's broken through in a real real way. this is the reality, we live in a split screen in america. if you're on another network right now you would basically think that hunter biden is actually the president and his corruption and the things that he has done wrong are the greatest threat to american democracy. i've got real issues with hunter biden, he should be investigated, but you've got not a lot of facts being shared about what donald trump actually did it awry destroy our democracy. i don't think the scary part is behind us, i don't think january six is the end of it with donald trump, i think that if he is reelected again he would tear down our institutions. i think he would put deeply unserious and dangerous people in positions of power. i don't think that we take that deeply enough, and the scariest part to me, by the way, is that i think a lot of people running for president against him know that and they just don't want to say it. they are just hoping that something happens that keeps him from being the nominee and gives them a chance, but wake up, it's august 2023. nobody is going to beat trump to the nominee short of some

kind of a miracle or taking him on directly. >> alyssa farah griffin, then urban, back to you. >> michael moore, former u.s. attorney and senior legal analyst at leoni, and former u.s. assistant attorney. elie, first of all i do think it is important to point out that we know the grand jury has returned indictments and we had ten indictments that were talked about. that does not, i think we really need to reiterate, that does not mean that they are all necessarily related to this case? >> exactly, anderson. there are really two possibilities. here it could be that there are ten different charging documents, ten different indictments, and each of them charges some different individual or group of individuals, all of whom relate to the effort to steal the election in georgia. but it also could be that there is one bake indictment naming all the defendants and the election interference case and the nine other indictments that have nothing to do with the election. and if you're wondering, at home, what how could they

possibly have indicted ten cases in one day, nine other ones, it is because a normal drug case or assault case, you can present that is prosecutor to a grand jury and get an indictment entertainers if the minutes. so they had a couple of hours this morning whether hearing other cases, that is how this could play out. it's important to note that if there was a racketeering charge here, the whole point of a prosecutor bringing a racketeering charges that you get to charge everybody all at once and explain to the jury, here is the whole deal. so wouldn't make much sense to split up a racketeering charge into different indictments. or waiting to see, but those are the possibilities here. >> michael you talk a bit about what happened earlier where a document with put online by the court? obviously it has now become part of the story, and for those who are skeptical about this process here in georgia, it adds fuel to that fire. >> sure. it is not uncommon for a

prosecutor to have communication with the clerks office. that is typically how things get scheduled and trials get scheduled and documents are sometimes filed. so there is nothing particularly unusual about that, but the question came down because there was a document that was on the clerk website, apparently, that lifted charges for the former president and it spelled out specific charges, saying he had been indicted for those defenses. we don't know if that was a draft, if that was erroneous lee sent from the d.a.'s office, we don't know if it is a draft prepared from the clerks office, but we do know that you can't overstate how big a screw up it was because of what we just heard. it provides fodder and gasoline for the people who want to talk about that this is some kind of conspiracy, or the grand jury never even considered it that it was a done deal before it even happened. this document appeared, it was up for a little bit and then taken down. the problem is that some folks

were able to get screenshots of, it so now they'll be a comparison between those sort of administrators journal type entries of the document, and what actually shows up in the indictment. it's-for-tat if they match exactly, it's again going to incite. folks >> michael, i heard you say that it's possible that one or more defendant could actually ask for the state case to be transferred to federal court. can you explain that? >> there is a provision under the federal statute tour that allows for federal official to have their cases transferred. to have that criminal case transferred and heard in the federal court. what is unique here is that bylaw counts and we have not seen -- but that this indictment was enveloped and charge -- against conducting committed while he was president of the united states so you have a sitting state district attorney bringing stage charges against

a former president for conduct while they were a sitting president, actually serving as president of the united states. that very may well, under the federal statute, give a basis to move the case. they tried this in a new york case, and it was different because remember at that time we were talking about did he hide this information, so they didn't get out of the 2016 campaign as related to a certain payments. this conduct, he was actually serving as president. so there might be a move to do that as it expands the jury pool, some efforts that the former president may have as it relates to moving appeals, expeditions through the federal appeals system. but the biggest demand is that it takes the jury selection outside of fulton county, which as you know is a majority democrat county, and spreads it a little bit around and other parts of the state. so i wouldn't be surprised to see that motion, it's certainly a good motion to file. what the court does with it, i

don't know, but it gives a break for an appeal as well. >> elie, i don't know if this is a screw up, a snafu, whatever, this document was put online. how do seriously think it is? >> it is obviously a screw up, a substantial screw up. i promise you somebody at the clerk's office tonight feels absolutely horrible about it. i should say, some of these conspiracy theories that are starting to emerge, there is nothing to them. as a prosecutor, if you have a big indictment, a long indictment, there would be nothing at all abnormal about sending in advanced copy to the clerk saying this may be coming your way. it is pending, the grand jury's actual vote, don't post it please until we tell you that the grand jury has voted, but he would do that as a convenience to move things along. there is nothing illicit or irregular about that. but the fact that it was posted online is a true error by the clerk's office and a regrettable one because, as we can see, it just given birth to release him farfetched conspiracy theories. >> elie, thank you so much.

jake? >> anderson, thank you. let's go to paula reid at the courthouse it has new information about the indictments. paula, we know the ten indictments were returned this evening by the grand jury. can you give us any more information? >> yeah, jake, our colleague ceremony and a -- reporting inside the courthouse right now that at least one of these ten indictments is related to the election probe. we are also learning that we expect that this indictment will be unsealed shortly and then of course we'll have that press conference with the district attorney, fani willis, much later than we expected. but let me tell you, the fulton county courthouse in downtown atlanta here is up and running. they are doing the best they can to accommodate all of the interests that it is generated in those. i think one of the best things about this case right now, about this investigation, are the cameras that were in the courtroom allowing people to see those processes. something that happens every day, many times a day, even

just in this courthouse alone. saying judge signed the indictment, seeing the clerk take it and you saw the interview with reporters earlier and she said i've been doing this along time, i'm very experienced, unqualified. this is interesting to all of, us but she said this is what i do every single day, so democracy, criminal justice, all on display down here in fulton county and hopefully we'll be getting this indictment unsealed anytime now. all, right paula down, they're in fulton, county thank you so. much winningest not to talk more about, this former trump attorney tim parlatore. he now represents former and ypg commissioner bernard kerik, who was a pardoned by donald trump when he was president, mr. parlatore, good to see you. as always, you represent bernie kerik. can you give us and me thing, can you bring us up to speed on what role he might be playing when it comes to any of these indictments or cases? >>, as far as the georgia case is concerned, he doesn't really

have -- one was kind of tangential -- he has not been given a list of anything from it is attorney's office. but he is very much on involved. he and i did meet with the special counsel's office last week though. and, yeah, he was the briefed on all of the efforts that he and the giuliani team took in d.c. as part of the election investigation. >> did you testify before this grand jury in georgia? >> no, he did not. >> when you say he was interviewed, mr. kerik, by jack smith, was that in front of a grand jury, or with prosecutors? >> it was just with prosecutors and a couple of fbi agents. >> what is my response to the news this evening that your former client donald trump, it looks as though, i mean we haven't confirmed it yet. but violent tents and purposes it seems that within minutes will be reporting that he has been indicted. >> well, i mean obviously like

to read it first. to be able to fully understand what they are talking about. it is something that, you know, just based on the information that we do know, i have a lot of questions about it. i certainly have questions about whether this is something that is gonna get moved to federal court. i have read the decision from judge heller denying the removal from manhattan case. and when you read that and you then apply the exact same reasoning to georgia, it seems like a pretty rock solid case to remove. so that is one thing to consider. the other thing to. consider is that a lot of what has been reported, the that fani willis was looking, yet it seems to be outside of her jurisdiction. you know, she is a county district attorney, she does not have jurisdiction in the state house. she does not have jurisdiction in other counties. right now -- calls to the secretary of state, things like that. that's something that the attorney general of the state of georgia is one who always

has the soldiers taken over. and if he didn't specifically delegate that down to her, she may run into a problem jurisdictionally read from beginning whether she threw exceeded her 30 as accounting to secretary. >> a lot of interesting issues here. >> yeah, and obviously we'll await the -- a lot of the issues about georgia, we saw it play out in realtime. we saw because brad raffensperger in the secretary of state's office, someone in that state's office recorded the phone call of donald trump calling him and asking him to find, quote unquote, find 11,780 votes, one more than joe biden's margin of victory over him. we know from reporting of the fraudulent electors, we know that from a judge's ruling last fall that after john eastman's emails were obtained, that

donald trump was told that information in an affidavit, in a sworn statement was false. john eastman told him the information in the lawsuit that was false. in this sworn statement he was about to sign was false. and yet he signed it anyways and turned it and sent it to georgia. there is so many things that we saw play out in realtime. and i am wondering what you think about a criminal case that might be based on some of these, some of the evidence that the public is already aware of. >> sure, as you know, i am a criminal lawyer, i am not part of any campaign. so i don't really look at things from the perspective of, you know, was a good idea? or rather, is it something that somebody should go to jail for. and i think that a lot of that is gonna come down to criminal intent. and, you know, the difference between doing something that may have been ill-advised, doing something that may have, you know, may have been

careless or an error or something that was in an intent to deceive real consent corrupt intent. and i think from the jack smith case to this case, it's really gonna come down to that element of intent. >> well, i mean, one of the instances that i just told you about is john eastman who certainly is one of the last people in the ride or die vehicle with a donald trump. telling donald trump, according to this judge, judge walton, this information is not true. you cannot sign this document. and donald trump signs it anyways. and that is in so many ways emblematic of the entire series of lies that donald trump told. so many people were told that. so many republicans. so many trump supporting republicans. whether bill barr, or top officials, top republicans in michigan. top officials, republican officials in georgia. and, on and on. telling him, no, all of this is incorrect.

his deputy attorney general going line by line by line with every false conspiracy theory that donald trump would tell, him saying, no, we look into that. this is the truth. at one point is there just a,'s refusal to acknowledge the truth indicative of something beyond just, well he believed it? >> sure, there is the concept of conscious avoidance. and if everything as, you just said. >> i'm sorry to interrupt you for just one second, i just want to bring the news, the indictment has been unsealed, and cnn can report that donald trump has been indicted by this grand jury in fulton county, the news this evening, the grand jury in fulton county, which is the atlanta, georgia area. as indebted former president donald trump. this is the fourth indictment of donald trump since he left the presidency. >> i'm sorry, go ahead, and

answer the question. just to bring viewers up to speed. when is an ignorant so willful that becomes not defendable? >> ultimately, that is gonna be a question for the jury to decide. and, you, know i would be interested to see what evidence they have of the things you just mentioned. one of the things that came out when mr. kerik and i met with the investigators, you, know a few days ago, was that bill barr had had u.s. attorney -- in philadelphia double check some of these numbers. and from summers. but the problem is, kerik is then looked at and said, that's nice, why didn't anybody tell us? why was that never communicated? i thought was true. and so it is going to be an interesting situation of what evidence do they have to show that people did go through those things. what did they communicate that was, you know, potentially ignored, who did they communicate it to. all of those things are really things that --

can make a decision as to whether there was criminal intent, and whether there was that conscious avoidance that we mentioned a moment ago. >> >> all, right thank you so much. appreciate your time this evening, and if you are just joining us, i want to bring you up to speed in atlanta, a grand jury indicted former president donald trump on state charges, stemming from his efforts to overturn joe biden's victory over him in the november 2020 election in georgia. this is a historic one, this is the fourth time that donald trump has been indicted. let me bring in caitlin collins right now, caitlin, i am not sure if you have the indictment unsealed. >> yes. >> there is kaitlan there. tell us what, what is in this indictment? is it just a donald trump? or other other individuals?

>> it's of other individuals. obviously there is a 98-page indictment, it's gonna take us a minute to read through it. but, jake one of the most important parts of course is not just trump's name on this, but it's the others that are on this. and so we have donald john trump, rudy giuliani, john eastman, mark meadows, he's on here, jake. canned cheeseborough, this another unindicted coconspirator in the previous indictment. jeffrey clark, that is the former justice department official that wanted to be named the acting attorney general, nearly did. jenna ellis, the trump attorney, ray smith, another attorney. robert chilly, mike roman, that is the trump campaign official who was handling fake electors in that time period. jake, from the election to through december. he is someone who has also been part of the, he had met with investigators in jack smith's investigation. his name is on here. and david james shaver, that i believe is the top former republican official. he was in a campaign fundraising role that is also

part of this. and with somebody who is part of that fake electors scheme involved in that. and so those are the names that i am reading off the sheet right now that we see several different charges for witnesses, which ones of course apply to which people. but the first name that did sign out to me, of course, mark meadows being on there. obviously -- >> it's fascinating. >> when as chief of staff, one of the things that is interesting about that is that there was no suggestion in the federal indictments of donald trump and six unnamed coconspirators, four of whom at least are in this indictment as well. and named, that's giuliani, eastman, cheeseborough, clark. but, mark, short vice president pence's chief of staff told me that mark meadows, trump's chief of staff at the white house, was the ringleader of the whole conspiracy. and he suspected that because

meadows was not a coconspirator in the federal indictment, that he was cooperating. so there is interesting indeed let's mark meadows is indicted in this state indictment. >> yes, and he was the one that with georgia particular, jake, he was the one that went down, he was making phone calls to georgia, officials. he was the one that went down to georgia to visit an election audit site. he was the one who was on the phone when trump called brad raffensperger in that form is called to be days go, before january 6th. he was actually in the room with trump, and listening in another room switchboard calling him in. he is someone that georgia officials, when you talk to him -- ranging a lot of the calls, a big part of this. someone fought testifying in this aspect to others when they were initially investigating this. over the last two and a half years. so it is really just notable to see his name in here.

to see other trump campaign officials, people like mike roman who is not a household name, he is someone who is working on day-to-day parts of this. and has been emailing out about the fake electors. >> so one other thing about this, because this is a breaking news story. and i think you saw the first page of the 98 pages. there are actually nine other individuals, or eight other individuals, 19 total i believe, including donald trump. so just the fullest, including the -- >> that's not even the fullest. >> what you gave us was not the fullest, there's another page. but it's all just gonna go through the whole page again. president trump obviously, rudy giuliani, john eastman, the attorney. mark meadows, the former white house chief of staff, kenneth chesebro, their wisconsin campaign lawyer, the wisconsin political operative. yes, that's right, wisconsin political operative named cheeseborough. jeff clark, the former justice department official, jenna ellis, former republican

national committee lawyer. race mid, robert julie, mike roman, and david schaffer. all of whom you mentioned before. next page, sean micah treasures still, stephen cliff gradually. harrison william prescott floyd, treveyon kuti, or katie, i apologize. sydney powell, sydney powell who donald trump himself referred to behind closed doors as crazy with her conspiracy theories. kathleen latham, scott hall. and missy hampton, a k, emily misty hayes, do you know that is? >> she's actually a very interesting one, she's on a name that most people recognized. coffee county elections supervisor, the story that cnn broke yesterday, about those exercise to access voting machines and voting software in coffee county, georgia, she has somebody who has played a role in that. i believe if jake's memory serving, right mcmanus, when you actually went