welcome back to the weekend. new this morning, donald trump telling lies. that is not that new. he is lashing out at the federal government in his first interview after being convicted of falsifying business records. take a listen. >> it is a scam. the republican party, they stick together in this. it is weaponization of the justice department and of the fbi. that is all coming out of washington. take a look at who opened the case. i'm not allowed to talk about it because i have a gag order. >> joining us is former fbi council andrew wiseman and a law professor at new york university and our msnbc legal analyst, legal assistant attorney general mary mccord. andrew and mary are the cohosts of the award-winning podcast "prosecuting donald trump." >> we talked about a tax on the justice system. i want to get to that. i think it is important to underscore that, in addition to attacking the judge in the doj, he is also attacking the jury itself. these are just average citizens that did their civic duty and he is still going after them in the aftermath. >> one of the things notable is that this jury valued and honored its oath more than a lot of people in the united states congress and certain judges and justices. they really stood up and did their job. it is normal for a defendant to say, it was unfair. that is what they do. they don't usually own what they are doing when they go to trial. for donald trump to say that is fine. that the statement is false but that is what defendants do. but the tell is that, if he really wanted to instead of saying it is the witchhunt, why doesn't he delay three of the trials? with the florida jurors, they will be my people. is not going to go to trial there or in georgia or in d.c.? that is what just happened in new york. a jury of 12 people come with his input, found unanimously beyond a reasonable doubt, and for those of us in the courtroom, it is easy to put a label on this and say that it is unfair and rigged. but let me give you one example. david pekker, his friend was largely not examined. at no point did he say did he lie. or did we have this conspiracy to fix the election. >> that is crazy. mary, let's talk about the new felon in are midst. i think it is important to point out that donald trump is a felon. a felon for those of you know the need that help. the new york city probation department will conduct an interview and generate a sentencing recommendation for justice juan merchan. this will be a moment where donald trump essentially confronts not just what got him into the situation but his whole life story. the aspect of this process is very probing. during the interview, a convict can try to make a good impression and explain why he or she deserves a lighter punishment. i was a good member of the community before this happened and all that stuff. but it is a chance for them to create an impression as judge juan merchan decides to meat out the punishment. how do you think that will go? >> i can hardly imagine mr. trump sitting for that and it going well. one thing that is so different about the case, then the cases of so many individuals who do have this interview before they go to sentencing and for who it is so important is that we know so much about mr. trump's history. the whole country does in the whole world does. and normally is more common for a defendant that has gone through trial and found guilty by a jury that the probation officer and the judge don't really know that much about the defendant as a person other than their crimes, the things that the evidence will put on about at the trial. it is important to convey with their upbringing was like or what their education was like or what challenges they faced in life and what challenges they overcame and life. whether they are thought by others in the community to be good people or whether they expressed remorse, et cetera. we don't need that for donald trump. it is already known. it seems almost a little silly to go through the process with respect to him. but when we do get in front -- when he gets in front of judge juan merchan, the things that typically, somebody would get credit for, i just think some of those things would be lacking. things like accepting responsibility. >> the man is saying -- donald trump is claiming he did nothing wrong. he said it today. >> the judge could decide to say house arrest or jail. >> i'm okay with it. iso one of my lawyers the other day on television saying, you don't want to do that to the press? i said you don't dig for anything. that is the way it is. >> the other one i want to play was he said, i did absolutely nothing wrong. think of it. >> he is entitled as a matter of his appeal to be contesting the cruelty verdict. but accepting the gender -- jury's rendering of the verdict is core to our system. and the judge will be looking at things like the reason for the scheme. the judge will look to see what other cases have been weeded out for falsification of business records and what were they falsifying books often times the motive is financial gain. here it is completely different. it is undermining the results of a presidential election. very significant. there are many things the judge will be looking at. i have a hard time thinking that the interview with the pretrial service folks will be that meaningful. >> feel free to weigh and on this question. >> the grounds for appeal, it is hard to see that they are terribly meritorious. >> what they are going to say is the judge had a conflict of interest. >> that has already been ruled on. this is a diminished this amount of money. we are talking about less than $50. and it is a mistake. it has already been decided and it's not going to go anywhere. the one thing i would say is that for those people who were in the courtroom, i'm not saying there is a transcript of everything but if you are in the courtroom, this judge was so remarkable. the idea that $35 made any difference, he was so careful and ruled in favor of donald trump on all sorts of things. >> in part, because of an awareness that this could move to an appeal. >> absolutely. to make sure was a clean trial. and i think that it is a different role. his role is to be a judge and to be impartial and to weigh what is fair to defendants. that is what his role is. i don't think that is a terribly good ground. i think there will be legal ground about the nature of the charge. i think factually, that is where i see it being the most weak for making any claim here. the judge is experienced and well respected. >> people are going to be around the kitchen tables with trump supporters who will repeat everything they are hearing from donald trump. so let's just get into it which is one of the things they will say. this is weak case law. it is so thin and shallow. how is it possible that the first person brought up on this is the former president of the united states? >> not the first person. false business records are charged all the time. it is true that -- i was responding to this friday where they said these charges are sort of tailored to donald trump. i said all charges are tailored to the defendant. i was like, what does that mean? i was trying to related to these two organized crime cases. charges were tailored to the facts. when we looked at enron ceos, those charges were tailored to those facts. here, as mary alluded to, these charges of false business records are tailored to these facts. and frankly, as mary said, these facts are much worse than the false business records because the scheme that the jury found, that had to be found by the jury beyond a reasonable doubt. and so i think that claim of, this is unique and different and somehow unfair, i think that is going to fall on deaf years. to be clear, it is so disrespectful of jurors. what they are really saying is that 12 people, average american citizens, we should just disregard. because somehow, even though we were not in court, we know better than jurors who took an oath of office and should be disregarded. >> the next phase of this, andrew has touched on a little bit. this gets to an appeals process. what does the d.a. do? what does the office to at this point? are they still engaged at that level? will that be driven more by the defense going and making the case versus what we saw in the trial with the prosecution making the case? >> the defendant is the one who will appeal. the defendant will have the opening brief. and because it is up to the defendant to decide what issues he is taking to the court of appeals. i handled appeals for a decade in the u.s. attorney's office defending convictions. what you do then as the prosecutor and with the da's office will do is that they will respond to what is alleged to be the errors pointed out in the original case. and one thing important to keep in mind is that there might be a lot of possible things that a defendant could appeal on but they need to choose the ones that are loadbearing and would make a difference. even when there are errors like an evidentiary error, it doesn't necessarily mean that it could be reversed. the air could be harmless, right. the defense wants to go for the type of errors that it thinks that if it prevails on, will result in a reversal. >> what mary is saying is that the defense has to be strategic. >> andrew, mary, stick around. we want to discuss the other trump cases and where they stand at this moment. this is the weekend and that's what we do. do. so i smell great all day, all hike, and all night. secret whole body deodorant. liberty mutual customized my car insurance and i saved hundreds. that's great. i know, i've bee telling everyone. baby: liberty. oh! baby: liberty. how many people did you tell? only pay for what you need. jingle: ♪ liberty. liberty. liberty. ♪ baby: ♪ liberty. ♪ special counsel jack smith, for the second time, has asked judge eileen cannon to bar trump from making statements that endanger law enforcement in the classified documents case. judge cannon denied the first motion citing a lack of meaningful conferral with the defense. will flow motions follow trump's false and dangerous claims about fbi agents being prepared to kill him during the 2022 rated mar-a-lago even though they had already secured the fact that trump was not even going to be there. >> not even in town. andrew wiseman and mary mccord are back with us. there we are. >> donald trump said something this morning on that other network about the kind of attorney general he would like. we want to play the sound because i think the dots are connected here. take a listen. >> who do you choose? do you have a name on your list? >> i do have a couple and one in particular. and i made a lot of good choices but i got that one wrong. i was very loyal to one because he was the first senator to endorse me. when the conflict came up, he ran for the hills. and the second one, he ran for the hills. when he heard he was going to be impeached. he was like a different person. i had to get rid of him. >> first of all, he was talking about jeff sessions and he started tweeting nasty things about him starting july 2017. it seems to me, andrew, that donald trump once an attorney general like the judge she believes he has with eileen cannon in this classified documents case. >> there are two issues there. one is the idea that he is really not good at picking people for his administration. it is basically -- jeff sessions wasn't in a good. his understanding of the department of justice was independent. the idea that he is also bill barr, he is no good because he would go along with an insurrection. no pun intended but that is pretty low bar for the attorney general of the united states. i'm not going to engage in a felony to interfere with democracy. it is incredibly scary to hear that from the leading candidate for the republican party. with respect to judge cannon, i should say mary and i were discussing this on the podcast. i never heard mary as upset. and it is unbelievable that judge cannon said, i'm rejecting your motion on a technicality that you didn't meet and confer. one, they did meet and confer and the defendants basically said, this is an important -- i will get back to you over the weekend at the end of the weekend. when the application had to do with danger to law enforcement, i think that issue were judge cannon is being cavalier with this claim by jack smith is going to rue the day. because of this is one where she does not rule and jack smith's favor, i can easily see that they will take this up on appeal. this is the kind of issue that is the reason people are in law enforcement, to make sure the safety of the community is insured and part of the community is law enforcement. so this is one to keep your eye out for in terms of what happens in florida and to expect an appeal to the 11th circuit. final note on that, the 11th circuit has already reversed judge cannon not once but twice. >> we had the special counsel request to impose the gag order on trump over false claims of the fbi raid and we learn from cnbc that the trump classified documents show that cannon is a target of more than 1000 complaints. the appeals court revealed that. where you think this goes from here? >> right now jack smith has come back and re- file the motion to change conditions of release. this is slightly different from asking for a gag order. as folks remember from gag orders issued in the d.c. federal case as well as the case before judge juan merchan, those were things that could be punished. violations could be punished by contempt separate and apart from the underlying criminal case revoking conditions of release and the underlying criminal case. the motion has been brought as a motion to change his conditions, donald trump's conditions, of release pretrial to require him not to make statements at present an imminent danger to law enforcement. and that is done under the authority of a judge to set conditions of release that are necessary to ensure the safety of any person or the community. that is what jack smith asked for. he has said, we now conferred. and according to judge cannon's ruling, included a certified statement of conferral in a statement requested by former president trump's attorneys, which is that they think that the probation department which normally would be weighing in on conditions of release, should be asked for his opinion on whether these conditions should be put into mr. trump's conditions of release and if so, how they would be enforced. jack smith already put a footnote in his motion saying, we reached out to the probation office. the probation office said that because mr. trump is out on bond, we don't have any supervised authority over him and we have nothing to say about this unless the judge ordered it. i think the next step to get to your question is will judge cannon do what the defense is asking for, what mr. trump is asking for, and order the probation office to make its own recommendation which again, you can see the delay and mr. trump's attorneys have said, we should not even have to brief the issue until two weeks after the probation office doesn't interview. to your question, talking about more time going by well dangerous and false statements are being made not only by mr. trump book by other people like steve bannon and marjorie taylor greene who have gone so far as to suggest that this was actually an assassination attempt. >> we have all been so focused on new york as a reminder that there is a lot happening. andrew wiseman and mary mccord, as always, thank you both. be sure to check out the prosecuting donald trump podcast. the latest episode is all about the historic conviction of the former president. scan the qr code on your screen right now with your smart phone camera and start listening today. a quick programming note. be sure to watch tonight's msnbc special, local prosecuting donald trump." 9:00 p.m. eastern and also features andrew wiseman. we will be right back. dangerous ladders. gutter muck. yuck. no wonder you hate cleaning your gutters. good thing there's leaffilter. our patented filter technology keeps leaves and debris out of your gutters forever. guaranteed. call 833- leaffilter to get started. and get the permanent gutter solution that ends clogs for good. they took the time to answer all of our questions. they really put us at ease. end clogged gutters for good. call 833.leaf.filter, or visit leaffilter.com today. when we say it'll be on time, they expect it to be on time. turn shipping to your advantage. keep those expectations with reliable ground shipping. thanks brandon. with usps ground advantage®. ♪♪ the chief justice oversees the judicial coverage which as the senator points out, is a creation of congress. a way in which rules are set for the federal judiciary and that is the chief justice's administrative job so refusing to meet with the body that oversees it and funds it is not smart. the supreme court has put itself in a very, very dangerous position. >> that was democracy duckett founder and front of the show marked elias with us yesterday weighing in on chief justice john roberts' decision to not leave the democrats over the flood controversy. what is next. politico said there are few options to hold alito liable. the house and the senate don't agree on much these days issuing a subpoena to alito. justice roberts, this is so monumental that it could be seen as a separation of power difficult to imagine. >> eric swalwell joins us. a member of the house judiciary committee. welcome, congressman. >> thank you. >> good to see you. >> i'm fired up about this. the speaker of the house mike johnson, he had some thoughts about the supreme court. i would like to play them for everyone because i am thoroughly confused. i do believe the supreme court should step in. obviously, this is totally unprecedented and it is dangerous to the system i think the justices on the court, i think they are deeply concerned about that as we are. i think they will set this straight. but it is going to take a while. you are right. the process takes a while to play out. this will be overturned but it will just take time to do it. >> the chief justice won't meet with the head of the senate judiciary committee because you know, optics. but somehow these justices are having conversations with the speaker of the house about a case, please, make it make since. this is stressing me out. how is this okay and when of the democrats going to march up to the supreme court and knock on the door and say, we are going to have this discussion right now? >> standing on virtue or being on mount olympus the day after the election and lose everything and say, but we upheld the independence of the court. that is not going to save us. speaker johnson has back channeled to the court then we should find out about that. we should do everything we can to make sure that they are independent. and by the way, the hypocrisy. we back the blue. we back the blue. the blue go and issue a search warrant on their guy and then they want to defund the police. they say they are all for state rights and then they get a court that overturns roe v wade and now they want a federal abortion ban and then they said the court should be independent and respected but by the way, if we need to, we can back out. it is not about the constitution but serving trump. >> i want to double down and emphasize what symone said. i think it is important for the american people to understand this context. you cannot tell me in the one instance that, we can't account for the behavior and the way the money flows in and out of this court to certain justices. we don't have an ethical or political obligation to address that with the congress but the chief justice, presumably or some justices, are having a conversation with the speaker of the house about the