attorney chuck rosenberg joins us as well. lisa, i noticed when chesebro's lawyers were talking about the tainting of their client by showing the evidence for sidney powell, the pour over effect. they said we have boring paperwork allegations, there's more provocative stuff on sidney powell's side, and they were arguing it's not fair for our clients to be lumped in with that because he might seem guilty in association. >> the judge was essentially saying, look, your clients don't have antagonistic defenses, and chuck can speak to this with greater knowledge than i can. they're not necessarily pointing their finger at each other. your concern about the spillover effect doesn't mean as much, particularly where as here you're being charged with a rico conspiracy. the evidence against one is admissible in general against all. >> they were arguing that this rico allegation, this charge is way too broad and the d.a. is not using it properly. do they have a case there? >> i don't think they do, particularly given the way that rico ha

let's bring in chuck rosenberg, former u.s. official, now an msnbc contributor. chalk, fantastic to talk to you about the stuff. i got to say, i read through these full 39 pages of this indictment, and there are some really stunning details in this indictment. but talk to me about how difficult it is to prove bribery for official duties. >> it's a great question. and the department of justice has struggled with that over the years, because the supreme court, in a 2016 case, i believe, mcdonald, former governor of virginia, has narrowed the definition, yasmin, of what constitutes an official act. but here, like, you i read the indictment. i find it compelling, and the official acts that are alleged, they are trying to, for instance, help the government of egypt. or trying to intervene in a criminal case. or trying to help businessmen when a monopoly. i'll strike me as official acts. so, my sense of is, it is well pled and avoids the problem you and i just discussed. what is an official act? >> i also wonder if prosecutors will t

attorney and senior fbi official, chuck rosenberg. willie, sorry, joe. >> yeah, i mean, let's get to baseball first. lemire, you didn't stay up to see that atrocity last night, did you at the trop. >> the sox had tied it when i called it a day and checked the score this morning and threw my phone across the room. >> geez. >> tough loss. sam, what about you? >> i did watch it. the sox were atrocious. they left bases loaded, no outs, didn't score and, of course, the bullpen imploded again. i will say the trop, the field is an atrocity. baseball should not be played there. there shouldn't be a catwalk in a baseball stadium that interferes with baseballs. this is ridiculous. time to move the franchise from tampa. >> okay. there you go. well. >> i should have just gone to willie. >> hey, willie, let me ask you a question before we get to the senate. have you seen any of "the bear"? >> it's so funny you say that. christine a started it this week. we're almost done with it. >> it's really good. >> i've got to say, so john heilemann for some

. >> you know, really quickly, we want to get -- we have chuck rosenberg here. we want to get to chuck and talk about a lot of things happening in the court cases. first, jonathan lemire, the fact we're all talking about next year, 2024, and, you know, a lot of hand wringing, as james carville said, a lot of bedwetting on his plastic bed sheets. >> okay. >> but you have a republican party that really is, it's split. it's splintered. yes, 50% of republicans support donald trump. great. that's 50% that don't. then you've got this war with fox news. i mean, you know, i talked to somebody this weekend. again, a supporter of trump. we were talking, and i said, you know -- they let me know, they watch newsmax. that's where they get their news. but there's these splinters and divisions. we have a guy who wants to be the republican nominee, who is trashing fox news every day. again, fox news, they'll get by. you know, other people will get by. i'm just saying, when you have a republican party that is that splintered, donald trump dividing it right down the middle, it doe

and chuck rosenberg said it's unfair to release these special grand jury reports. themselves. they want go to trial. they can't clear their names. there's an implication when you say a special grand jury has come to this. and i know it's in response to media lawsuits, incluing msnbc. i want to know what you think of this, andrew. >> it is lawful under state law to do this. nobody has done something improper. but i agree with chuck. mary mccord and i were talking about this on our podcast. in the federal system, it is basically known as you put up or you shut up. a grand jury indicts or it's publicly known and there's a trial and all of the due process, or you have to stay silent. one of the reasons many people who were in the department were so angry with james comey when he spoke about hillary clinton was that it was so against the idea of due process. you don't give your personal views about somebody who was not charged. and so, i agree with chuck that this is really unfair to them. i would note, though, that the judge who unsealed this, not only was complying wi

attorney senior fbi official chuck rosenberg, investigations correspondent tom winter, and reporter on the investigations desk of "the new york times," russ buttner. russ, can you boil down for our audience what's going on here and exactly what trump did, alleged to have done here, and why the judge viewed it as fraud? >> well, it's -- if you read the documents filed in the case and the judge's decision, it's a very clear example of misleading the banks that he's presenting his documents to in a fraudulent way. he's not just overstating values, as he said. he'sctually withholding information that they have found -- they know themselves to be true from the banks. they're taking -- they've had assessments done of the property that show one value. they arepresenting another value. there are documents filed they can't raise the rent on certain apartment buildings, but they act like they could sell those as condos with no regulations on them at all. they have properties where they can't actually develop it, but the recent evaluations say they could develop it. this isn't just playing with t

attorney and senior fbi official chuck rosenberg. n't anybody been charged with sedition. obviously then get charged. we heard time and again, oh, he was just following his attorney's advice. are you saying that a client can't follow attorney's advice without being sent to jail? talk about what this admission, legal impact this admission about donald trump may have on him? >> great questions, joe. we have heard a lot about this purchase ported advice of counsel defense. the idea here is that if you have an attorney/client relationship with someone and she gives you advice and you rely on that advice in good faith and you get indicted you can adduce that advice at trial to negate, disprove your intent. there's a bunch of problems when you apply it to mr. trump. first, he is taking advice from people who aren't his lawyers. the fact that you meet somebody in a walmart parking lot and they tell you that you can trade on inside information doesn't mean that person is your lawyer or you are allowed to rely on that advice. even if you get o

i was talking to chuck rosenberg about this yesterday. 9 codefendants, 19 coconspirators, it's a lot of people. judge mcafee was saying, listen, this is going to be a really difficult thing to try to wrestle with all at once. 19 lawyers, 19 lawyers objecting at different times, side bars, et cetera, not to mention the jury process. you have had the experience of being in a similar position. would you have brought a case against 19 codefendants here. >> it's hard to say without having access to the evidence. there's something to be said about simplicity. keep it simple stud, it's the first rule of law. the three or four incidents don't relate directly. some of the incidents don't know some of the other people, right, and so that could get complicated and difficult. it's going to take a long time because each one of those individuals has an opportunity and a right to object. they all have a right to question prospective jurors, and they have a right to question prospective witnesses. i'm doubtful they can get it done in four months. >> this is your wheel house because it has to do with

attorney chuck rosenberg, glad to have you with us.hment inquiry into joe biden, the white house is preparing its own war room to defend the president. lawyers, legislative aides and communication staffers are tasked with leading an aggressive response. this comes as house speaker kevin mccarthy has signalled again an impeachment inquiry is on the horizon. republicans have been looking into the president's son, hunter's, foreign business dealings, alleging, without evidence, that biden engaged in bribery to enrich his son when he was vice president. joining us now, nbc news chief white house correspondent peter alexander. peter, good morning. great to see you. what is the strategy here? >> reporter: willie, the white house, nbc news' first report, he's stood up this team of two dozen lawyers, legislative aids, communications aides, as well. monica alba and catherine doyle reporting. we spoke to aide sources familiar with the effort right now. they say it's been taking shape for months in the white house counsel's office. they're prepar

>> well, i'm thinking of something that chuck rosenberg said many years ago when he talked about justy're not all smart, right? some criminals are very, very smart ike in the thomas crown affair but the majority of them not so much so. and something your colleague glenn thrush has pointed out is they're down an alleyway making these plans and having these conversations and it's all captured on footage. and the footage makes its first appearance in the original request that goes before the judge. they have these guys on camera at a pretty early stage. >> yeah, and look, a lot of what we know about trump and january 6th is based on things he did or said publicly. there was never -- trump never seemed particularly concerned about trying to hide his behavior when he was in office certainly and in the mar-a-lago case after he left. i can't tell you how many times in the first few years of the trump administration when we were trying to understand how he was trying to get control of the justice department and to use it and weaponize it and try to block it from investigating him that we went