Hello, I'm Ari Melville. Welcome to this special edition of The Beat.

Over the course of the next hour, we're going to be covering some of the developments

in these several cases pending against Donald Trump. He awaits trial on the heat

on the Allies, and the enablers caught up in what we have been seeing as a season of accountability.

I also, in a few moments, have one of these special reports that we do around here,

and it's on Donald Trump's TV confessions. But we begin with a key development

in what might be the largest and as soon as threat to Donald Trump's actual liberty,

the Jack Smith coup trial. Because Jack Smith, in that case, has a new filing asking the judge

for a narrow order on what Donald Trump as a defendant is allowed to say. And it's quite interesting

because it cites the threats that he's already made and things he's said that have been interpreted

as threats against witnesses, other individuals involved, and even law enforcement.

The repeated inflammatory public statements, Smith writes, are likely to materially prejudice

the jury pool, create fear among potential jurors, and resultant threats or harassment.

The order would simply seek the judge barring Trump from public statements about potential witnesses'

identity testimony or credibility, and bar him from making disparaging or intimidating statements

about any party, witness, attorney, court personnel, or potential jurors. Those are the words of

the filing by Jack Smith's office, whether the judge uses some or none of those words in any

potential order is the big question. Smith emphasizes that this is a narrow and well-defined

request, but arguing that it's necessary with Donald Trump as a defendant already creating

substantial danger of materially prejudicing the case. This is the big question facing now,

this case and the judge, and I want to get right to it with Andrew Weissman, a former Mueller

special counsel, former general counsel, the FBI, and a former federal prosecutor. Andrew,

...