about mike pomerantz having let us know that information at all. but of course, it just makes me want to know more. joining us now for his first live interview and it matches both publications night had been night is mark pomerantz. better in new york lawyer, former federal prosecutor, former special assistant attorney in the new york days office. working specifically on the investigation of former president, donald j trump. mr. pomerantz, thank you for being here. >> thank you for inviting me. i appreciate it. i appreciate the opportunity to talk to you. >> i don't think i am creating more free-flowing rage about you by letting the audience know there is a lot of it. but i have to ask, if anything that just today take issue with other citing that describe wrongly. >> no, though they may take issue with is that my found would take issue this crime is such a big deal. it just doesn't feel that way to me. i'm writing a book as a 70, almost 72-year-old top not quite retired lawyer. but i thank you for having it. >> you are a man who knows which speak.

mike pomerantz says that the manhattan district attorney should've already brought criminal charges againsts what he told rachel maddow tonight. >> bringing a racketeering case, particularly one that incorporates other stuff that trump has its foundation, his university, hash, money financial statements. it's such a big ball of wax that we ultimately said, just focus on a smaller set of charges. >> the very active publishing that but might make it impossible to prosecute the elements of that case. aligned in that book, no matter how well developed the evidence could become. it hadn't districts attorney elton brag does appear to be proceeding with a criminal investigation of donald trump's payoffs to the activists stephanie clifford, officially known as stormy daniels. those illegal payoffs were enough to get donald trump's former lawyer, michael cohen's death sentence to federal prison. in that case, federal prosecutor said that his crimes were committed, quote, at the direction of donald trump. joining us now is andrew weissmann, former fbi general counsel. former chief of the criminal div

and, now veteran prosecutor, mike pomerantz, who resigned in protest for the da's office last year.the office once considered charging trump with racketeering, in his new book. this is based on the theory that trump had presided over a corrupt business empire for years. to help make sense of this, all i am joined this morning by former federal prosecutor, and former independent counsel, michael zeldin. michael, i want to thank you for the show, i supplied you to have you join, us let's get down to brass tacks. weisselberg testified already against the trump organization at its criminal trial last year as part of his plea deal. but he never directly implicated donald trump in the company's tax fraud scheme so why is alvin bragg trying to get weisselberg to flip now when it obviously hasn't worked before? >> because they need his testimony to make their case,, they have documents, and they have michael cohen, and the two together really don't add up to a very secure prosecution. weisselberg is really the person who can be their shepherd through the documents, and have michael cohen su

mike pomerantz saying that the manhattan da had roots of serious mental. law. saying, quote, it was by no means a certain, winner but it was far from. hopeless pomerantz resign from the da's office last year, after his investigation into trump was shelved. however, nbc has learned that the district attorney is reopening the case. with a focus on trump's 2016 payout to stormy daniels. the new york times reports the da's office is putting pressure on former trump organization cfo allen weisselberg. they are threatening to file new charges against weisselberg if he does not flip on his ex boss. joining me now is msnbc legal analyst barbara mcquade. and also j.lo and, vance msnbc contributor and former watergate prosecutor. there are both because of the hashtag sisters in law podcast. i'm so thrilled to have you all both on at the same time. thank you for joining me. jill, i want to start with you. pomerantz says that manhattan prosecutors nicknamed the hush hush money investigation, quote, the zombie case. why do you think the da's office is reviving us now?

i know that in the manhattan da's investigation, former special assistant to the da, mike pomerantz who just wrote a book, he mentions in the book that it considered using a state level rico charge against trump in terms of the trump organization. they ultimately decided not to. this is from the book. pomerantz writes at the task of building up the proof of the entire pattern of enterprise corruption was simply too ambitious for the human and investigative bandwidth. how difficult is that? the trump organization, if you listen to michael cohen's testimony, it really does seem like an organized crime syndicate, the more information that we have. the election fraud piece of this seems much more complicated to prove in terms of your ego charges. how much of an uphill climb with this be for somebody like fani willis, who is too much f thatcan you because it d t that it doesn't ne requi complexity, and understanding of these things. i'm not sure that i fully credit mark pomerantz's assessment there of the team, in manhattan, but i do think they're probably capable, and i think that fani will

developments in the story we first brought you friday, the former new york prosecutor, longtime veteran mike pomerantz has been speaking out. this is pretty interesting, whatever you think of how it's going because he basically resigned in protest after being detailed to work on trump investigations in the new york d.a.'s office because the incoming or new d.a. alvin bragg basically decided after looking at the case not to indict trump. we all know about these big newsworthy "60 minutes"-style interviews, well, he just did one last night. >> if you take the exact same conduct and make it not about donald trump and not about a former president of the united states, would the case have been indicted? it would have been indicted in a flat second. >> like that if it were just anybody else. that's his view as a line or lead prosecutor there but he's also the ex-employee who was overruled by the person actually with the authority to decide whether to indict in a flat second, minute, month or not at all and this is a tell-all book so you do have to look at secret like this with your eyes open on the evidence

though i have been very vocal and saying, i like mike pomerantz, believe that this case could've beenear ago. the question becomes why didn't they. i don't know, that would be something for cy vance to answer, why he didn't bring the case, it be something for alvin bragg to come forward and to say why. it's irrelevant at this point. right now, they are pursuing the case, there's already been people brought before the grand jury, and i, once again, will be reappearing to the da's office for another sit-down. >> michael, i had former federal prosecutor and counsel robert mueller, michael zeldin, on my show last weekend. i asked him specifically about brag bringing a successful prosecution. i want you to take a really quick listen, please. >> if you have a witness like cohen who has pled guilty to perjury, essentially. and you have donald documents that are not clear on their face, then in my view, as a prosecutor, i'd want someone who is a more substantial witness. one who's really not easily impeached on cross examination, and that's why's. >> michael, what do you say to critics that t