CNN: Trump special counsel makes aggressive move in classified docs probe

Federal prosecutors investigating former President Donald Trump’s handling of classified documents have asked a court to force his attorney, Evan Corcoran, to provide additional testimony, two sources familiar with the Justice Department’s motion told CNN. CNN’s Paula Reid and senior legal analyst Elie Honig explains the significance of the decision. #CNN #News

Transcript

Continuing with our politics lead and what appears to be the most aggressive move yet in special counsel Jack Smith’s rather aggressive investigation into Donald Trump’s handling of classified documents as CNN’s Paula Reid reports. Federal prosecutors have told the judge they believe there’s evidence of a possible crime or fraud

And they need more answers from one of Trump’s attorneys. The Justice Department making its most aggressive move in its investigation into former President Trump. Prosecutors telling a judge they have evidence Trump may have committed a crime through his lawyer in an effort to compel Evan Corcoran to provide additional testimony

To a grand jury about the former president’s retention of classified material and alleged efforts to obstruct federal investigator They rifled through the first la closet drawers and everything el Sources say in Corcoran’s first grand jury appearance, he invoked attorney client privi to some questions. Investigators now want to ask him about all

That led up to the FBI search of Mar a Lago last August and even did a deep and ugly sea of the room of my 16 year old so leaving everything they touched in a far different condi than it was when they started. Can you believe it? The FBI and the Justice Departme

Have become vicious monsters. Investigators had subpoenaed any classified documents still in Trump’s possession after he turned over an initial of government records to the National Archives. They should give me immediately back everything that they’ve taken from me. Because it’s mine. It’s mine. Corcoran helped to draft a state attesting that there were

No more classified records at Mar a Lago before the FBI scoured the Florida property and found hundreds more. Corcoran is one of three Trump l who have gone before the grand j What they did was to try and criminalize Donald Trump, as they always do. They found these three mundane s

Espionage and the two others obs Attorney Olena Harbor took the s in mid-January prior to the FBI search harbor. Personally looked through severa Trump properties, including Mar a Lago, for documents in a separate civil case against the Trump family busines Trump lawyer Tim Barletta insists his client nothing wrong.

Nothing that we have found has any implications on him pers The special counsel is going to have another legal figh to get testimony from former Vice President Mike Pence on a trip t today, Pence said. He intends to fight the subpoena he received related to the special counsel investigation into January six.

And Jake, he’s relying on a nove legal theory to shield himself from testifying, but says he’ll take the fight all the way to the Supreme Court All right, Paul Arena, thanks so much for that. Appreci Let’s get some additional insigh now from former federal prosecutor and CNN senior legal analyst Ellie Hoenig. Ellie,

What are these latest court fili Tell you is special counsel Jack going after Trump specifically, do you think, for obstruction of Yeah, Jake, I think there’s no question now that Jack Smith is focused squarely on obstruction of justi And I think even more specifical than that, we can tell that

What really is drawing the most is this affirmation, this statement that Donald Trump’s lawyers gave to DOJ last summer saying we’ve now given you all the classified doc It turns out there were many, many more classified documents. And I think DOJ is trying to fig who made that statement,

Who made a knowing falsehood. There’s really two huge indicato First of all, when they got the search warrant to search Mar a Lago in the firs one of the crimes they established to the judge by a preponderance of the eviden not beyond a reasonable doubt, was obstruction. And now we know

They’re going to a judge saying we should get access to these attorney client convers because they related to a crime of obstruction as well. Take us through the ins and outs of attorney client priv What could Trump’s attorney be forced to disclose if the judge goes along with this request? So ordinarily, conversations

Between an attorney client privilege, meaning you don’t have to testif about them. However, prosecutors can break through that privilege if they can establish that the conversations related somehow to an ongoing cr not talking about a crime that was committed in the past. But you and I, as attorney

And client, are talking about so that is a crime itself. If you can establish that then you can get access to testi about what those conversations w And of course, if that’s the cas that will go right to the heart of the obstruction issue here. And how politically significant

Would an obstruction case be or might it add fuel to the fire of all these Republican allegati of the Justice Department being weaponized by the Biden administration? So here’s the real world dilemma that these prosecutors face. Ordinarily, if you’re a prosecut and you want to charge obstruction, it’s

The last count in the indictment You charge whatever underlying c and then obstruction into that. Here’s the crime. Here’s another Here’s another crime. And here’s all the attempts to cover up through obstruction. Exactly. It’s a kicker. It’s an extra point at the end. However, the law says you don’t have to have

An underlying crime. You can just charge obstruction. The Mueller investigation, perfect example. Mueller said there is no conspir crime with Russia, but he suggested there could be evidence of obstr But we remember what the political attack was. Obstruction of what? So legally, you can do that, but it doesn’t carry as much for

With a jury. And I think politically as well. And then that’s what we saw in a number of investigations that ultimately resulted in not guilty verdicts or that were thrown out to not much consternation the idea that they lied to an FB So they weren’t straight with, you know, during the investigati

Not an actual crime. Underlying that, though, Yeah. It’s one of these issues where there’s a difference between what the textbook says. The textbook says, yes, you can charge just obstruc but when you’re standing in front of a jury of 12 normal human beings, they’re going to be thinking, okay, obstruction,

But obstruction of one. And it really undermines your case if you don’t have that

source