andrew wiseman, you're like athena.ou're like zeus and jack smith is like your athena springing forth from your head. pardon the belabored greek metaphor, but the 11.6 million documents argument that stack up taller than the washington monument doesn't seem to be holding a lot of water for special prosecutors. talk about the citation of how much this information should be already familiar to the defendant, what that actually means. >> sure. before i did the special counsel investigation with robert mueller i was the head fraud section add the department of justice. what did we do? we did large corporate cases day in and day out. over 100 attorneys doing large, corporate cases. so when i hear 11 million documents. i don't think big, i think small. >> do you? >> in civil and criminal litigation that is not a large number. and that is before you get to all of the points that jack made in his reply which is it's duplicative, it's been available. but the main reason this is not an issue in this day and age we're not in the 1

joining me now are mary mccorder, former acting assistant security, and andrew wiseman, member of robert mueller's special counsel investigation. they're the co-hosts of the msnbc podcast "prosecuting donald trump" where i get all my good ideas for things to talk about on television. andrew, the burn rate in terms of trump's pacs spending money on these legal problems is staggering, and that was all the data we have is from before these latest indictments landed. does this seem problematic to you as it does to the lay person on the outside? >> so i have a couple thoughts. one is just to put it in perspective there are many, manv people in the federal and state system who can't afford counsel at all. and it is a constitutional requirement when they can show that counsel's paid for, so my heart doesn'tr, really go out t these people in g term of the comparative in terms of the dual system of justice that we have here. but with money, unfortunately, comes power. you see it whether it's in organized crime prosecution i've done in the past where you have so-called house counsel and you've see

michael: again, this is where as andrew wiseman said, the first sentence of each of these indictments is so important. donald trump lost the election. that changes the whole concept of what he needs to try to get them to find the votes to change the results. one more question for you. in the fulton county indictment, there was one set of facts that has not gotten attention before, which has to do with the improper accessing of equipment by people involved with the trump campaign. what is the story of their? why is that important? gowri: unfortunately, this incident in coffee county georgia -- coffee county, georgia. unfortunately, this incident in which those machines were accessed by partisan people with nefarious aim is unfortunately not a isolated incident. there has been 17 attempts nationwide to improperly access equipment in this way. it is important for people to allow this improper axis to be held accountable. it is very dangerous and damages our democracy in different ways. one way, nefarious actors obtain images of software or people's personal information or tamper with equ

facing former president donald trump featuring former federal prosecutor and fbi general counsel andrew wisemanhe highlighted the severity of the charges and what they could mean for democracy. hosted by the brennan center for justice, this is about one hour. >> hello, everybody, andwelcome to this brennan center for justice event, a very special event on a big day. for those of you joining us for the first time, the brennan center for justice at nyu school of law is a nonpartisan law and policy institute. >> we are leaving this to hear from andrew weismann a formal prosecutor on the indictments against former president trump and the impact on federal and state courts. you are watching c-span. nonpartisan law and policy institute. we work to reform, to revitalize and when necessary defend the systems of democracy and justice so they work for everybody in this country. this i am president and ceo of the brennan center. before we get started with this interesting conversation, i want to share a few general principles for how we want to proceed. stability is very important to us all. if you post l

joining us now is andrew wiseman, one of the senior prosecutors from robert mueller's special counsel investigation and co-host of the podcast "prosecuting donald trump." andrew, thanks for being here tonight. >> great to be here. >> as the dust settles, the way in which jack smith wept about and his fellow prosecutors went about constructing this indictment seems more and more brilliant to be honest in a way that it automatically refutes some of the defenses we were starting to hear from trump land. first i'd like to talk to you about the idea of structuring the indictment around action not words, effectively leaving the insurrection itself kind of almost an aforethought and really focusing on the conduct of the fake electors, of john eastman, of donald trump and the actionable things they did to steal an election. that seems very, very purposeful. >> luteally. there was a lot of focus when this first happened on the ellipse and what happened at that moment. and everyone was very focused on the first amendment issues on that which is it incitement? will it meet the supreme court stan

joining my colleagues, we unfreeze -- we are pleased to have andrew wiseman who is known to so many of you, he is a professor of practice at the nyu school of law and he was the general counsel of the fbi and the principal deputy to robert fuller when he served as special counsel and he is the author of the book of where law ends and he probably recommends him from his -- [no audio] we hope you will do that this afternoon. we have a ton of questions. from people watching and we will be asking as many of them as we can but i want to start with you . thank you for being here. if you could take us with as wide of lens as possible. [indiscernible speaking] as i said -- [indiscernible] what do you see is the significant difference between these two potential trials? are there things we should understand about their significance in any way? andrew: thank you so much for inviting me. i am a huge fan of the work you do. it is a real privilege to be participating today in a small way as part of your endeavor. there is a lot that is really in common between the federal so-called january 6 case a

andrew wiseman is with us. what should we understand about this process and wasn't right for us to get nervous? >> i just wanted to give you some insight into what the document was and why there could be some delay. it is standard procedure for a group of people that deal with pretrial services. every defendant, there is a pretrial services report issued. even though this defendant, like many defendants, are released, pretrial services writes a report about the defendant and makes suggestions to the judge about what the conditions of release should be. the later the defendant shows up in court the more there is a reason for delay. they have to interview the person, write the report and give it to the judge. my guess is if he is looking at a piece of paper that they have not seen before, that is what the government gets, that is what the defense gets. they look at it, and the judge will want to look at the proposed conditions. in the mar-a-lago case the magistrate judge did impose additional conditions of relief

universally proven their critics right, jim comey, andy mccabe, peter strzok, james clapper, andrew wisemanall empowered to investigate trump, all have and retain a d hatred of him. if you're looking for fairness or independence do not pick investigators or prosecutors who love or hate the targets of their investigation. everyone on the side of jesus, my mom and my wife are capable of doing something wrong, something unlawful, as such is the nature of humankind. that includes former president trump, he like the rest of humankind is fully capable of committing criminal acts but the public must have confidence in the objectivity, the fairness, the historical equality, the confidence, the independence of those investigating prosecutors. many people in this country do not believe in the objectivity of prosecutors anymore and that is true actually on both sides of the political aisle. our last question comes from sharon from murray kentucky. >> hey trey, what is your opinion on the best way to deal with the corruption of washington? >> send a better people. politics is not going to be fixed with

this special counsel was picked because he was close to eric holder, close to jim comey, andrew wiseman, this isn't an independent operation, i explained it on my show sunday. they took the worse actors under the obama, biden, holder administration, they set them apart, called them special counsel. they have up to 60 fbi agents, 60 fbi agents and prosecutors, we brought in his old chums from the public integrity section, he was sent to the hag, he was so bad he was sent over seas. this march has been reversed by three separate injuries, he was reversed by an 8-0 supreme court, as i explained on sunday, he takes statute that is don't apply, takes statutes and rewrites them. he knows he is in washington d.c., grand jury in washington d.c., he has the worse radical left wing obama judge in america, somehow gets the case. she is in charge of the case. he is going to indict trump for drinking too much orange juice and everybody would say great, he is not above the law. let me tell you something else. this case in florida, this documents case, you also have former federal prosecutors, that's

facing former president donald trump featuring former federal prosecutor and fbi general counsel andrew wiseman the severity of the charges and what they could mean for democracy. hosted by the brennan center for justice, this is

however, as our colleague andrew wiseman pointed out on twitter the way that discovery works on a criminal case is not that you sit down and flip page by page in hard copy form through paper upon paper. that's not how anybody conducts discovery. there are sophisticated computer programs and software that help people process it, subject it to search terms and the like. and so, yes they do not need some additional time beyond january to adequately prepare a defense for the former president. do they need until april 2026, absolutely not. and some of the rhetorical flourishes in their brief while entertaining certainly don't get them there, john. >> certainly there's been a sense this is case might even go first and one that could start and wrap up before voters go to the polls next november. the trump team trying to stall. lisa, lastly, we're still waiting for the details to be worked out when donald trump will surrender in fulton county, georgia. we know it will happen at the end of next week and there are apparently negotiation. how do you see this playing out? is there any chance he'll rec

andrew wiseman, let me ask you what barb is describing there jives the way barbara is thinking about this. >> totally clear. you can tell a great trial lawyer. you can see to barb's point about complementing the indictment and fani willis those chapters is in the introduction where, yes, it's very complex and lots of details. but first she divides it into here are the basic building blocks i'm going to talk about in this indictment. so it's already doing some of that work. i do think some of the work fani willis has been doing when she said i'm going to do them all together, which we don't think it'll be in six months but all together is talking about cooperation, that is signaling i'm here, i'm ready, we're going forward. i mean that is just not what you want to hear. if you're a defendant you want to hear, we'll talk about it, we'll see what the judge wants to do. i mean that is a very strong statement where if you look at her other cases they've taken much longer to get to trial. the jury selection alone in one of the cases i think it's still going on. it's over six months for jur

msnbc legal analyst andrew wiseman pointing out stone was doing this "while out on bail from his conviction in the molar probe." that was for witness tampering and lying to congress, and trump later pardoned him. stone declined to comment yesterday. today, he did respond on social media saying in part, "roger stone still did nothing wrong." we don't know if or to what extent stone elected on the elector plot. the january 6th committee did obtain the contents of the encrypted group chat no one was addressing. according to new york times, "some members are only identified by nicknames or officials." includes stop as the organizers and right-wing organizers like in re guitar yeo, head of the problem is, and stewart rhodes, head of the oath keepers. joining me to speak on all of this is nick offerman, former watergate prosecutor who interviewed roger stone when investigating the nixon case. and emily vaslet, legal writer for the new york magazine. thank you so much for joining us today, because this is astounding. nick, i just want to start with this. given your history with roger stone, given

wiseman, suggested the possibility that a federal judge appointed by donald trump who was presiding over the federal criminal case against donald trump in florida, got her latest idea by watching tv. andrewman points out that the day before the judge issued a very strange order in the case, the fox propaganda channel had a discussion of how unusual it was for jacks mitt to represent evidence to a grand jury outside of flora judge aileen mercedes cannon who was appointed by donald trump told jack smith's prosecutors and donald trump's defense attorneys to file briefs to, quote, address the legal propriety of using a narrative district a grand jury proceeding to continue to investigate and or seek post indictment hearings on matters pertinent to the indicted manner in this district. donald trump's defense attorneys didn't ask the judge to do that. nobody did except for possibly people that she might have heard discussing it the day before on a trump supporting television show. professor laurence tribe is back with us. professor, your reaction to that order by judge can? if >> my reaction is that i could not for the life of me figure and what she was doing it's not a thing, there's no rule,