From CAFE, welcome to stay tuned, I'm prepared some of my most important mentors was people as different as JANET Reno and Romola. They were very different people, but they had at their core something the ted We gotta follow the facts and the long period That's a looser Monica, she was the homeland security adviser to President Barack Obama and was the a woman to serve as the assistant attorney general for National Security and he o J she joined me attacking your questions along with an Milgram who is this? returning general the New Jersey and serve as a prosecutor at the state, federal and local levels, they're here,

up our series on the criminal justice system. With our all question and answer show that's coming up: stateroom Emily grim unleash a Monaco or both extremely experienced form: a law enforcement officials. Besides me a g of New Jersey and was an assistant answered, Turning the DA's office here in Manhattan LISA, besides being homeland security adviser to President Obama Service Council to attorney JANET Reno Elite, ninety nineties and was a chief of staff, a robber, or when he was running the FBI. They both happened to teach it and where you lost school as well like I do, besides being deeply accomplish that both good personal friends of mine in some of my favorite people in the world, so just f. Why, when we take this interview a few weeks back, I was pretty seriously under the weather. That's, why might sound congested, but the show must go on and it did I get you

and you have a lot of them a pre. This is Barbara from Minneapolis Minnesota. Am, I think, technically, a millennium us born in nineteen eighty six and as much as I hate to give credit to the current president for anything good. I am one of the probably large group of people who has learned a lot about the government recently since he took office since there is so much to pay attention to If you take a minute and show to explain what are? U S, attorney actually is and what you do and where that fits into the general hierarchy and universe of the government they so much. Let me show please keep it up. You dont awesome, So Barbara thinks we're question. There are ninety three use attorneys in America to them is nominated by the President of the United States like I was and has to be confirmed your Senate and they have all

his overall federal crimes in their district, most have a criminal division, also a civil division and am know where I was there, was attorney. Turning in the cellar destructive New York is not just Manhattan, allows often referred to as a man, news attorney. We also had jurisdiction in the Bronx and several others these to the north of New York City, including Westchester, Putnam Sullivan and some others, the usual docket Rennie was attorney's office runs the gamut from gang prosecutions to public corruption, prosecutions to securities fraud, you name it. We do it, but generally speaking use attorney's office. Don't do should have low level street level kind of crimes that are left to the disk attorney's office usage resources have more resources. We have a lot more access to investigative tools to get information from other states Evans there and around the world. My assistant was attorneys, for example, travelled, I think in any given year to forty eight or forty nine different countries, because his crime goes

recently global alone The law has to reach further as well as it was a lot of travel. a lot of resource intensive, long term kinds of investigations. You know you don't bring a case of serious accounting fraud against a company without know a lot of time spent by both assistant use, attorneys and also by federal agents. One of the things that It's hard to sort of understand is that the state and local system is separate from the federal system and the federal system wall. It's what we read about and we hear about a lot- is really a pretty small percentage of the overall criminal justice system in America, and so most dated a crime. Something happens on the street and I'm a long call gets made them make an arrest that is state local crime and its very serious from things like murder, bank robbery, robberies, sexual assaults, anything like that, but it often first while doesn't

state lines at something that's pretty localised and second, whilst the kind of thing where the police immediately respond and make an arrest, and then that goes to the local prosecutor at the state Agee, whereas with federal crimes. In my experience we did long term investigations without making arrests we had leads. They came to us or reasons why we are investigating crimes and we did long complex cases, and so you know what I was a federal prosecutor. I prosecuted human trafficking crimes, mostly they spanned multiple countries. The priorities do change with administrations, political administrations, and so it's a really interesting question, as we look at specific states and local agencies and and local prosecutors thinking about how to prosecute crimes that I guess you know, that's one thing: that's why thing came out at some point. You know what we have a question from Twitter. That actually is totally on point on this question. Is I'm curious about the hierarchy of the major federal investigation, who does

and why from foot soldiers to the prosecutor at the top, who will stop at nothing in the name of justice? Truth in the american way? Please give us a peep behind the scenes. Go any major federal investigations. Gonna have a number of investigative agencies involved in them, It is likely to be the FBI right. So I work the Enron, prosecution and investigation, and we had FBI agents leading that investigation, folks who were accountants? Who were really sophisticated investigators and then they had? U S. Attorneys and those agents would work every day to go through everything from the documents involved. In that prosecution to sitting down with witnesses and people who they ultimately we're. Gonna flip that'll prosecutor oil term to beyond. the what we called team USA to testify for the government? I think my experience, echoing what LISA said is that

In any case, there are lying prosecutors who do the day to day work of the case along with the agents. You know, I've worked FBI Ice Secret service there, all the federal agencies when you're a federal prosecutor, and then you get to the point when you're going to church the case and there are a number of levels overview. My trial chief, when I was at d o J. He would ask questions until you got to the point where you said. I don't know and yet you know day one you set it after two questions, and after six months or a year, you could go hours. You know without saying I don't know. What might be interesting for folks here on. This is regardless of the sophistication of the case. Kind of works, the same whether its Enron or a low level drug case. The law enforcement folks investigate the case they bring and they present to the prosecutors the evidence that they ve gathered and then the prosecutors determine

is a crime made out here and then what they do is they will draft with called a prosecution member? We would call them Pross memos and they lay out we here's what we think we can prove this crime, but the best Ones were ones that also anticipated what the defence might be, and there is also a czech imbalance in that right. I mean there's slammed forcing agents who are out doing sir torrents, who are our gathering, evidence are talking to witnesses and they come up with a view of the crime or the case, and they bring it to a prosecutor. Who, then has to say even at the line level, do you think there is sufficient evidence to charge a go forward and if the prosecutor agree Is you then go forward to your supervisors and asked for, and we should explain what the line means right to align prosecutor it's the low, the level of the person who just stands up in court every day who meets the agent to meet the defendants, meets with the victims and is the

on the front line you know answering from the judge from the victims were: every prosecutor starts at right and every single one of us sitting here today was a line prosecutor at one time. So you know I was a line. Prosecutor, baby prosecutor as a federal prosecutor in Washington DC and the unique responsibility of federal prosecutors in DC was to be both the federal prosecutor and the state prosecutor, the local prosecutor, because of the unique place that Washington D C. Is in our system and so as a first. You know, first year newly minted assisting US attorney in Washington DC. I did everything from shoplifting and prostitution and low level drug crimes, and you know low levels.

we crimes. It was like night court member that old Joe night court. It was like that only everyday, judging the record is passed away. That's that's very true. I worried lobster chef when I was in the days after them into the wash if they called it. The lobster shift because allegedly and I've I dont know if this is true, but lobsters are weak in the middle of the night and we worked from one m tall: nine am and I'll tell you what the most brutal part was? First, if everything is funnier and then all the night, but the worst part was that you took your quote lunch break at like six thirty the morning and you came back at eight for an hour and that our was like we're going out of your shit out. Indeed, did you eat lobster now, because it actually nothing just put. It serves to its aims and we like very impressive royally names. Yeah really was named because lobsters are up at the same time as you are, but basically you know people were arrested in Manhattan there be a lot of crime and it there was a ruin: still less Roland Yorke City, that you have to go through this system within twenty four hours, and so your arrest

three I am you have to be arranged, which means your brought before a judge and asked Jus plead guilty or not guilty and there's a bell decision made. Will you be detain prior trial or released prior to to which are critically important questions, and that has to be done within twenty four hours in New York City and thankfully, in many places at America now it has to be done within twenty four hours but that men we were up in the middle of the night. Ok, so an after you have the lobster shift. You did other things and you were the attorney general of a state in Jersey, LISA. You advised the president of the United States personally on terrorism matters, so you guys are police and prosecutors. It's for a long time in Britain, takes way, because my question is when you were first starting

scared and nervous. Were you about having this responsibility of deciding who should be prosecuted and for what? How to deal with it? So it's pretty heavy stuff, even when the states, I think the thing that most prosecutors learn is even when the stakes are relatively low rates of the shop left in crime or the low level crime. You still hold that person's feet pretty much in your hands, which is why it is so important that prosecutors have an ethical and moral compass

I would argue, did you think about that? I did you did. I absolutely did, and you know it came home to roost in small ways that I later used in cases of much greater consequence right where the stakes were higher right. So as a first year prosecutor will what we called the baby prosecutor in Washington DC each one of the prosecutors was assigned to a quorum. We had to handle the dock at that appeared before that judge every day, and that could be fifty two hundred cases every day there were just cycling, Sir, HU the court system and every one of us would trundle over from the? U S attorney's office in DC every morning with a bunch of case files. We call them jackets and we'd arrive every morning and are appointed courtrooms and we'd have to basically process those cases

and if it sounds a little bit like a conveyor belt, that's true, but the challenge was as a prosecutor not to treat it. right. You had to make sure you were focusing on whether or not you are doing justice in every single case now can be hard to do when you ve got that volume going on so the defensive attorneys. In those cases each also had do a bit of a volume business and their assigned cases, and some of them had dozens of cases they had to deal with and what you found out is as a baby price. Kyoto is the decisions you made in those in

senses while there were low level and the stakes were relatively low, you had to apply some judgment and that would be important later on in bigger cases. Yet when I surgeon unhandy his office, I really you know it was a whole new world and it's terrifying to think that behind every cases someone's life and you have to decide what the right outcome you know, I started with the most low level crimes in New York City, which were at the time we call them fair beats and they were the predominant form at the time of something called token sacking, which you know. The fair at the time in this has many years ago, was like a dollar fifty and the crime itself. It was before we had metro cards in New York City,

We had tokens which were the little metal. They look like quarters, and what would happen is that people would go into the subway system. They would put a token in and when you walk through the turnstile, it didn't always turn completely through, which meant that the token didn't drop to the bottom receptacle, and so that meant that a person who was watching this could come up behind someone you know enterprising. I would argue in many ways would come up behind you and there are two ways to commit the crime. One was you take a straw and you'd put it enters the receptacle on you'd suck. Up that token, the other I was just people would put their mouth on the receptacle, unjust, suck up. That sort of this over second labour, can get caught by the police or they would try to sell to somebody, and these were the first cases I dead, and you know I mean I would stand it arraignment court and look at this and bit someone be. It have been arrested. One time for token sacking, and I would

that is so growth in Europe, a start and luckily cause it's called the cauldron, circling it's called theft of services and by the way, this has now changed him in Hatton. The Manhattan district attorney has recently said he. What was your view mind about crime was. What is that? If someone was willing to go through that that I really didn't want to prosecute cases that I felt that someone deserved to take the token Ngos. I mean there two ways to do it, one of which was more growth and the other, but I I sort of felt like an environmental, that people get to mistakes or crime needs of crime. Are people get a misdemeanor criminal conviction that goes with them for the rest of their life? we'll be back with Annalisa after this. Everyone likes to save money, but I be hard when you're in debt, one way start. Saving is with a credit card consolidation loan from light stream

white stream is an online lender with a simple loan process, an excellent rates and for people with credit there are, no fees their credit card consolidation loan starts from five point: eight nine percent, a pr with ATO pay. Oh it's summer, you might be down by the shore where everything's all right. It is a meeting out you rent, a car. The credit card bill can sneak up on you. That's where light stream can help Now my listeners get an additional interest rate discount on top of lights, dreams already low rates. The only you get this discount is to go to light stream dot com, slash preach, that's Elijah! Ain T asked he r e m dotcom, slash preach. Subject: accredit approval rate includes zero point, five percent, auto pay discount terms and conditions apply and offers are subject to change without notice visit lights, reamed outcome, for more information? with an Milgram unleash a Monaco tackling your question here. The question

twitter from someone named Brooks, which asks defence attorney here: you're, ok, for a prosecutor, thank you we'd love to hear your take on the role and responsibility of the ethical prosecutor from FED Agee to the county level line. Assistant d is fillies new prosecutor, the future, so there's a new prosecutor in Philadelphia Erica. Now who's making a lot of news and the various ways. What you guys think about that this is an I've been estate, local federal prosecutor and I think criminal prosecution is vital, obviously to public safety. But I also think that as we thought about how to make the system better, we have not thought enough about the role the prosecutor, and so all of us focus an incredible amount on the police, but The three of us are honest: ninety six percent of all cases plead and, scooters concerning Anti six percent. Ninety six percent and look erotic, uterus control, the please they control what the crime is, that people flee to what the sentences to one is about. So the problem, the please

Let the temporary not necessarily if the prosecutor is acting responsibly and ethically and really exercising their power Pierre, but here's the thing the biggest pointed at prosecutors are controlling everything in the system and where it used to be an adversary system that things went to trial and and evidence was put to the test. That does not exist in most cases, and there are times at it but most times it doesn't, and I talked to prosecutors all the time, local prosecutors and think about the way the system works. A crime is committed, no one gets called or witness Pfizer police officer down. The police officer makes an arrest that gets pushed to the prosecutor. Those cases are overwhelmingly in America charged. That case then goes on to being of guilty play, and so it is a conveyor belt that move very quickly, particularly with low level crimes in which people are have criminal code, instead of huge consequences for whatever they may be right, but I were in your programme for a long time. Did you think you're doing wrongly? So I think there's a couple of things I mean first of all,

a line prosecutor or local prosecutor, a hundred percent. You look at the case in front of you of police officers, made an arrest their showing you evidence of a crime. It's really easy to think that the right thing to go forward to put some one and look it's a one way system, it's a funnel and the way we treat people as incarceration, and so we should be really honest that that's the way the system goes. Police officer makes an arrest prosecutor charges, judge sentences you to jail or present that's model that we have when I became a g and I started looking for a much higher

level asked a different question which was not are we getting convictions? Are we making arrest, but are we actually making the public safer, and I think we have a problem in the country that we equate public safety with crime and public safety is not just the absence or crime public safety, as do feel safe. Sending your kids school do feel safe, going around a corner to get a carton of milk, and I love the police. I ran the Camden Police Department. I feel hugely invested in the work of law enforcement officers in our country, but they're making a value judgment about. How do you make the public safe and that community and the prosecutors are, as a rule, just signing off, and so, if we really care about public safety than the questions are, how do we stop people from committing more crimes once have come through the system? Had we stop kids from basically getting involved in the criminal justice system, and who do we give criminal records to knowing that criminal records of huge consequences? Look, I believe very

if there are people who belong in jail and imprison, but I also think there's a process by which many people end up in this system and what the Philly DA's doing is he's basically saying wait. Who needs to go into the system? And I I think this is the right question who poses a risk to public safety and should be incarcerated, who doesn't and doesn't need to be incarcerated, who suffer from mental illness. Substance abuse homelessness. Those are the three main drivers of criminal justice, particularly low level offences, and so he's asking these questions and look I personally believe he's gonna be fantastic on serious and violent crime, which I know we all worry about, but it is less than ten percent of all crime in America, and so he will be great on that what he is dealing with those? How do we do with the other ninety percent, anyone who's trying to think differently about it and think creatively deserves every our attention and thus paying attention to are their different ways to to run a criminal justice system. So I think that, if we're time at the federal criminal justice prose,

the criminal justice process generally being a conveyor belt. The one speed bump, compare about is the prosecutor, no one has ever yet what you used to be that's exactly when were you a speed up so at times I was and so tat story about so everyone has in their head Clare, sterile and into the role of the defence attorney as being the buttress against injustice, and that's right in our in our adversarial system. It's very very important that you have defence attorneys who are willing to mount a vigorous defence for individuals who in our system deserve it. you're right, you're, presumed innocent until proven guilty. But the prosecutors also play a very critical role in that, and it's very important, as I learned early on as a baby prosecutor, to appreciate that rule of the prosecutor as having a conscience about this right. So I was part of that

they are both as an junior, assisting United States attorney in Washington DC prosecuting oh level, crime and it was, steady conveyor belt, literally hundreds of cases every day went through that court system and I had to stand up in court and LISA Monica for the United States every day. For cases upon case upon cases and the system assigned a publicly appointed and publicly paid defence attorney for all of those defences for all those defence rather, and those defence attorneys had to do frankly a volume business right. They got paid six five bucks power to represent these defendants and many times, and at least one in my recollection, I remember this very vividly. Defense attorney coming to me, as I miss Monica, were ready to please and I open the case jacket. The case file and I looked at the police report- and for the life of me, I couldn't see that a crime-

was made out in that written police report, so I was a crime charge so too good question and when we had to resolve before the judge, so this defended, I think it was a shoplifting case- had been arrested the previous night by the local police department and a what the PD one hundred and sixty three police department form one hundred and sixty three have been filled out by the arresting officer, and it was my job as the prosecutor to read that report and tell the judge age what crime had been made out and what crime we were charging this defended with. As I looked at that police report, I literally could not make out a crime in what the police reports it, and so I said to the Defence Council, would you like to file a motion council me nothing. Would you like to challenge the fact that there was a crime made out in this police report, but people don't usually do that right. I said

Would you like to file emotion and Defence Council said no Miss Monica were ready to go, meaning he to get in the door. Get his plea, move his defend in law. Because he thought in his defence, in this defence counsel, defence, that it was in his clients interest to get a plea early from the product, You gotta be may because it be about are said to be a bit, would be a better deal if he came in early. Nay it again, and I looked at that police report- and I said really council, Don't you want to file a motion? he repeated again no were- Did you go and it was up to me pre to say to the judge, because at that point The prosecutor is the only one who stands between whether or not that case goes forward or not. The judge actually doesn't have a say in the matter. At that point, it's entirely in the government,

for the prosecutor control, whether or not that case goes forward, and so my choice was: let it go forward or dismiss. It may dismiss the is not the stakes were low, so I'm no hero here, but if you can't, as the government as the prosecutor say in good faith to the judge you ve got a case to be made out later when it goes to trial. You ve got to dismiss that case and it was a low level case, but You dont learn that lesson early as a prosecutor that situations gonna repeat itself later on, who do you think, is the most powerful person in the criminal justice system. The prosecutor brought you a hundred per cent honourably and I think that the even us you're saying this out loud is an important think, as I feel like. Most of America does not understand why the prosecutor because they have the power to charge the case to bring the case and then, if it's a plea, the prosecutor decides what the sentences and what the charges Rizzo really and the terms of the plague completely. You know so, given the

Should you two of the most important people in the system? What your advice to line prosecutors? How should they do their jobs? Don't lose your compass, you gonna have a compass right understand what are the grounding principles here and it's a do just as vital its hokey, but I agree with LISA completely that I think the single most important thing prosecutor can do. Local federal is to basically do what they think is right and, if you think occasion be charged, if the evidence is there, if you can prove beyond reasonable doubt if it, if its unfair, pure in that case, to be dismissed. But the thing that gives me pause a little bit is, I think, a lot of the challenges we think about what the system, our systemic, that, when you're Align prosecutor in your new prosecutor- and you see just the case in front of you- you know to see that that case should be processed

and what the outcome should be into prosecutor to the fullest extent makes sense, and so it's pretty easy to go down that road and for that to be a very legitimate and just thing to do at the moment. The harder thing for me- and I in I think about this a lot is that when I became a g in New Jersey, I literally oversaw the whole criminal justice system and so all the cases we brought. I started asking who we prosecuting, why we prosecuting them. A prior agee had taken over the Cabinet Police Department that, at the time, is the most dangerous city in America, and I wanted to know why we were prosecuting crimes every single day, wise the city not safer

and I don't expect a line attorney or someone who just starting to deal with is the story. I'll tell you guys about Camden is that in I became a g on June, twenty seventh, two thousand and seven five days later to July. Fourth, I spent a day my family's house, it's on a vengeful I wake up on July Fifth, and I read every newspaper New Jersey at six o clock in the morning. I did every day and I see that a guiding peewit common has been killed and he's been

old at eleven o clock he's living in old mobile, that's abandoned outside a housing project in Camden and there's a guy that walks up with a cave forty, seven, it's literally an assassination, and then I find out that he had just turn twelve right, and so I start asking all these questions, and I want to know who is he what's happening? What's going on? Who were the Leeds and first of all, we we knew almost nothing about both peewee and the people who had done the shooting and second law. There is no way we could have prevented it. Given the way we were operating Camden and there is no way we could have solved. It will never solve that crime and it just not at me for months. I d of what is just as justice is public safety, its not being able to say we convicted someone, it's not being able say we made an arrest, and I think that this is what really hard. When you stars Align prosecutor, could you have to learn how to be a prosecutor, but at the end of the day, the question is: are we making the public safer and are we doing in a way that justice

so we ve been talking about how prosecutors do their jobs. What if you're on the other side, even gay in conduct may be criminal, maybe not what advice you to someone considering. You know whether or not to engage council who should they hire were they pick cell and a very basic level you should hire? Somebody who has experience in that system? somebody who's, a repeat player, who understands whether you're in New York City, whether in Washington, see whether, unless Anders whether in Dubuque have somebody who understands that systems, port to have someone as your lawyer, who used to be a prosecutor in the office that is investigating you. I think I can be very helpful if If that proves that person relations exactly right. If that power, and has some good relationships, but it is not its not sufficient to have you know I served in the office. My

you on getting legal representation. Is when you're not sure and look I gotta lotta cause. I'm sure you guys get alot of calls. Which are basically like. What do I do or how should I think about this? Who should I hire and my advice to people's usually few different things, which is number one, the point at which you're gonna pick up the phone and make a call to someone who's a lawyer and say: what should I do? It means you might want to retain a lawyer. Rated might write me a major at a point where you're, not shore and the legal system is complicated and its look. It's a profession that most of the votes, we hope officially you're. The present. The hire someone like Wooded Giuliani, whose famous person someone who's a little bit younger and has more experience in dealing with the southern district of New York. I think you're asking me specifically shit. Donald Trump have higher growth eagerly Annie. I would answer now and I would answer no a variety of reasons? First of all, I think you do want to Someone who knows a lot of the current folks who are in the office? Rudy Giuliani was indeed some real, yes exactly he was in the office years ago, and if you should a hired me, for example, I would

climb out of decline. Of Zion there's that little bit with it. But is it a crony kind of thing? It shouldn't be true that you hire someone who was recently from the officers in the office, because that would help you in some way, but it doesn't seem just sewing. best light, I think- and this is true when I was in the Justice Department as the principal deputy in the deputy attorney general's office, I often had former Justice Department officials call me who were representing defendants in representing banks or other entities that had issues with the Justice Department with those clients are paying, for is that lawyers, credibility,

with the institution. What gives a more credibility? Well, I think you know it's funny when I, when I started in the days office, Mr Morgenthau at Us- and this is stay with me, my my entire career, but he said TAT S. Basically, you know you'll have tons of cases, but you only have one reputation and how you handle cases and how you approach, whether its defence lawyers judges ever run in the courtroom that stays with you and if you get a reputation, someone who's, not truth or who doesn't keep her promise or keep their commitment that stays with you, and so when you know Bob mothers are the same thing to me by the latter's matters. If I colleagues you lately, we have called you when you are you a journey which I would not have done right. So this is a bad because our for whose we're friends, but if people who know one another and respect one another professionally, and so you don't have to have worked in the office. You don't have to work together, but if someone is reputation as a stranger our somebody who's gonna, give you a good and the bad rheumatism matter. It matters in matters when you make that call, and you basically saint. My client wants to come in and talk to you. You know what

looking at that conversations critically important, also that when we but recently put the last by the time ass well, but is it? Is it right, is at fair if a defendant who has been charge has the luck of having a lawyer who has a good reputation in the office? right you're, asking a different question, because I did not look at its being able to afford them. I know you wonder so you a lot of illegal charge. like the local lawyer, who you'll, maybe people at DA's office, think there's a jerk or stupid or not good and they don't get the same benefit. Fair no, I mean, I think the fundamental question you're asking is like do we represent people equally in the United States, dancers now a hundred percent. Now right. Yes, I agree with that completely, but I think if we look at individual states, there is never enough funding for

by defence, and there are a lot of people who can afford lawyers. People are routinely incarcerated seven days twenty days, thirty days before their even charged with and there are many states where people are reigned on crimes, meaning that they are brought before a judge or a magistrate judge who decides whether or not their incarcerated without having a lawyer present and that's because their under funded public defence systems and so look. I am a prosecutor, I think, being criminal prosecutors critically important. I think the prosecutors are the defenders of public safety, but you cannot be a good prosecutor without a robust public defence system. We do not have one in Amerika. I totally agree so time. Time is short sea we're gonna, do a lightning round. Ok, ok, ready! Yet ready. I see the narrative from Long Beach, California, and I'd really like to have some clarification Bout collusion. It seems, like I remember months ago, worrying that collusion is not a crime

so why are we still saying there was collusion? There was no collusion. Why are we clearing your south where people be investigated for collusion the outbreak. I really love your podcast and I know you have a good answer, but you I don't but unwelcome, does go Phoebe? I would love to give you some clarity, but I do not know where that word came from as a criminal prosecutor, local federal state- I have never heard it before. I think they mean conspiracy or aiding and abetting conspiracy to commit a crime is when tour people agree to engage in a criminal act. They share the goal that act in one or more persons does something to further that that goal, and so that's mercy, aiding and abetting, is very similar. Where you know someone preach

he says committing a crime and I'm hoping that why you realise that our aid is everyone. Is that what you owe gave you be someone hypothetically is gonna, commit a crime and you can aid and abet either before or after the crime could be. You couldn't aid and abet after that, to conceal the crime, but there is nothing I have ever heard of in a million years called collusion again. Why has the word collusion? I've got it, once again he had come from. I don't know, I don't know, I don't know, but I would say that they conspiracy indictment Bob Mahler and his team did put forward there on in the middle of February, against whom, against thirteen, russian individuals and entities they brought the case, and it was concerned piracy to defraud the United States, collusion. So I think the closest thing we ve got thus far right. It's alleges that the individuals and entities from Russia put together a cost

piracy to create persona us false persona is, on social media, to put forward false information to hide the russian identities of these prisoners and to basically frustrate the. U S: government in the election laws in the foreign agent registration laws. I am a whole bunch of other funds in the. U S government and the bottom line of than a diamond is that those in. visuals and entities are alleged to have conspired to frustrate the? U S, government in their lot, alas, yes great, but the question, this collusion buzz word collusion, if we look at the letter that the deputy attorney General ROD, Rosen's Tine, sent to Robert Mauler, doesn't that letter, conspiracy, fart browsing more fundamental question: this word collusion gap is meaningless or not. It's me painful in so far as people can understand what it means for peace

Do u s? Citizens to agree with Russians or the right in government to execute that conspiracy. That's laid out in a more think her mother and I totally agree with these- have a thing about it, even more broadly, like the whole investigation. As promised on this question of, did the russian government try to influence the american election and did members of the term campaign do thing in cooperation conspiring with the Russians to influence the election either hacking, the computer, the email servers or coordinating the release of those emails or a coordinating social media would whatever question. It is that's the question, and so I think people have taken collusion Easy way to say was the term campaign working with the right? and not destroy, means I didn't get hung up on the phrase collusion Harper, either love your show. This is in San, Diego California. I want to ask you: what exactly is a constitutional crisis?

on the days when they have talked about firing, mauler they bring up that it would mean a constitutional crisis at first. I thought this was a general. And it didn't mean something specific, but everybody used in me used it. So many times are beginning to think there is some sort of legal precedent. What is the constitutional crisis? Thank you. Ok esteem panel constitutional This gets raised all the time, the hell does that mean phenomena It means the whom we got three branches of government that the founder set up and its and those some number of those branches clash thought the clash all the time LISA actually the founder set up, so that there would be tradeoffs right that there would be tension. Should not necessarily a clash if Robber Malo gets fired. Is that a constitutional crisis?

it's an interesting question right. I mean there three branches of government, judicial, the judges, the executive, the President and the Department of Justice and then the legislative which Congress and at some point, if Robert Mueller was fired, I mean I think when people say it, you know when you should jump in on this street, but I think when people say it they they mean, like the world, will explode because the the What does it mean that its people bandied about in this kind of exit shorthand for the executive exceeding the power granted them by the founders right people talk about if the president were to fire or order ROD Rosen to fire Bob Mahler. It would be how exceeding Authority or putting us in a crisis where the rule of law with somehow under strain right, so I think it is at its base

means that we would be sending by those actions. We'd be sending a signal both to the United States were large as well as internationally, The message that we're not a country governed by law, but by a man who thinks that The rule of law is fear. I feel like I've been. I feel more and a lot or saying constitute everything that goes very easy, raised right. Louvieres. Both of you know that no lesser used to be the cheapest to have to buy Mahler. If parliament were to be fired, would you consider that to be a thing that precipitates or constitutional crisis it might be? I myself, so I hate to be a lawyer, Lebanon. We would depend on how, Well, brain is known as the rice LISA Look. I've described it as it would be a gut punch to the rule of law because as you know, pre how it would have to actually happen would be for the President

the rod, Rosen Stein, who's, the acting attorney general for the rush investigate to fire Robert Mauler? Ok, a crisis know it well, he would as based on what we ve seen. Thus far. It's likely ride. Rosans time would refuse to fire him, but what? If he does not? if he does not, and he firearm Mahler, if it were not for cars, There were no basis and and rod rose, assign has said publicly that there's nothing that he has seen as far as that would indicate there's a reason to require Robert Mahler. It would trigger a crisis because what it would indicate is the President is trying to control that investigation and why that's a crisis is already known

In my view, this is, but there is a difference between already upon us where there is a difference between the president wanting to do something and actually taking action, and so the idea that he wants to fire robber Mauler is a terrible thing, but if he actually fire robber more, I think that's when the crisis comes in and part of it is that that women good cause, ok to justify it, what is the crisis? So the crisis is because, because he has the authority to do it, he doesn't where they actually doesn't. Well, the legal experts and he's got the earth, ready to order right erosion signed to fire has opposed that happens, crisis or not? Yes, because it is the present United States trying to a fact and control criminal investigation where he is arguably within the ambit of that criminal investigation. In what should happen, if the president does that, while their couple things in their different ways to think

this area one, is that Congress could act right I mean good, could and- and I will look- I'm not betting on them. I think the other question is what is the american public do, and this is where I think it gets very interesting agree. This is carry Philip and I'm calling for fortalice or again on the recent devotee of your podcast? I'm not sure if this is in your real, we'll house, but if it is about the here over the last few there's a lot of us, have learned how many ways are democracies and thought standards that aren't enforceable by law, frequently discussed this norms, standard practices, traditions, etc. From your perspective, should any of these newly revealed frailties Remo, by new laws, regulations and, if so, which one and how thanks carry thanks requesting. You know, that's the thing that I've been thinking about and struggling to figure out for a while and loathing alot of people in the country have been it's real

I joined up with former governor of New Jersey Christie, Todd Whitman in a with the Brennan Centre. To put together this democracy taskforce to connect come up with puzzles among lines that you are suggesting. So things very well presented question and people should be thinking about it. A lot, let me through to my friends here. What do you guys think? What I think is extraordinary is watching. President tromp has made me realize that four years from basically most of my life, there have been established norms that both political parties have followed and I think we're seeing something that is really outside of the norm. Bug work so most of the members of the Trump Cabinet, the things that they ve done, spending more than a hundred thousand dollars on offices spending taking first class travel that would not have flown in any Democratic republic in a measure in those are small. option resentment. Yet because at that important look,

it's a sign of how you see the United States government and the people of the United States on whether or not you think that the people of the United States should be buying a hundred thirty thousand our offices, but I do think that if anything, we ve seen that the last couple of years have shown us that there are actually norms that both political parties follow that are not being followed. Now, look, I think it's really important that we uphold the norms and traditions that we ve seen thus far in things like separation when the White House, in the Justice Department on individual criminal investigative matters, not having a political push or influence on individual investigations Those are incredibly important norms, not because of some bureaucratic reason, but to the people can have confidence that the most powerful institutions of the government there executing their powers in a way that free from political and

but at the end of the day, carries question goes to whether or not we can solve this problem by codifying into law, though soft norms were traditions, and I think you know Frank. My answer is gonna, be a little bit disappointing, which has no. I dont think that we can do that. I don't think we can do that wholesale, because at the end of the day, institutions are really people. There are the people who preside over those institutions and enforce bide by those traditions. So some of my most important mentors as a prosecutor and as somebody who worked in government for twenty years before I left government and twenty seventeen. Was people as different as JANET Reno and Robert Mahler. They were very different people, but they had at their core something the TED we gotta follow the facts and the law period. Irrespective of what political party was in Power- and if you don't have people who are fully

on a binding by and following the norms and the institutions and upholding them all the codification Wilma. So, ultimately, I think that the enforcement of the law is a human exercise and I think that's true, because I also don't know what the alternative this cause, I'm not personally willing to give it over to an algorithm. I'm not gonna put my well and if I go to my nose or you, if you have a statute, we have a guideline. Is that enough? Or is it important that people who have a certain ethnic? That's about the true right? So you,

of people who have to apply the law to have to enforce the law, to apply facts, ok, your loss or have you make sure you have the right people? You have to have them steeped in a tradition, in an ethic of an ethical responsibility to enforce the law and to do justice not to get scalps car push on in Sierra Leone is my feeling I half agree, and I have things that were looked one of the most discretionary.

Aspects of our world is criminal, prosecution and policing at all this graph? It's all desire, I should not end, must take a more fundamental step, which is that when we look at unstructured and highly discretionary decisionmaking, we see the people often make mistakes. They have unconscious bias. There's racial discrimination, there, all kinds of outcomes that we dont want rate and the ideal is the human plus information on how systems work. What we're doing what our outcomes- and I think you know in my home states- at a record book- writhing- says it best and God we trust and from every one else we want data Camden. This year, at twenty twenty two murders, when I was eight, you they'd fifty nine and the way we dropped Martyrs and Camden was through data and through understanding what was happening and where we kept the human aspect, and I think we're disagreeing. I just want to say that it's a human system that can be much better, that it s so ears a question from Twitter from Seamus Campbell who asks which television show or movie do. You think most accurately portrays the timeline of appeal.

The commission, including the length of time between when investigation, begins and when the trial ends hashtag aspirate. So the answer That is none none advocating I'm not aware of any criminal prosecution takes place or records of forty two minutes. Forty two that right, you know, that's the including the commercial breakdowns. I guess, if we, if we think about it like that, we would tell shame, is that there are some prosecutions that happened very quickly when people plead guilty at remnants Erika abbot. In thirty seconds, which I don't know, it's not a good thing flit, but I think the process is extremely problematic and if you looked at misdemeanours, they tend to take a misdemeanours. Are cases like think about petty larceny drug possession. They are about seventy percent of the entire american criminal justice system. People tend to be in the system for here. If you look at felonies herbage learn of serious crimes. How long should take for that to be resolved? Look when the three of us, starting about things taking a year,

rage. None of us. Nobody sitting in this room and most people who are listening could take twelve or more unexplained absences from work if you start thinking about in whether you're a witness or you're a victim or a defendant. The fact that get a lead and they get to lead because it's the way the system works, because this is our design or Allgeier does change has in his hatred of his crime yet ass, they it's gonna shit coming or look to investigate. It's gonna take some time you than interview witnesses, you're gonna, get document you gonna analyze, those! That's not that's, not a question of how long after you been charged. Are you within the crow, justice system and I agree investigations can take years and I'd right, that's completely legitimate. The thing. I think that I

data. The american public is that process is substance and that the fact that cases take so long to go through the american criminal justice system is ultimately a complete injustice and a lack of fairness you said process is substance, has twice as is upset, or will you be my wife? So I think that we do not understand that the process through which people go through the criminal justice system actually impacts the fairness of the system. If people are in the system for a year or two years three years and look that includes victims and witnesses as well as criminal defendants, there is a real question affair first of all it changes how cases get resolve it changes whether or not cases can be prosecuted. I agree on the investigation. Investigations can take a long time, but after cases or charge there is now reason why case should be delayed for a year or more to get to trial, and I think all of us, if we really scary reforming the criminal justice system. We have to understand that moving people through that the system quickly and fairly has to be a core value.

Look I'd begins raid victims and their families, who are waiting for justice to be done and to two to be cogs in that? We'll is something we owe victims and their families will happen, and we asked this question: do you believe that people who have been convicted of a crime serve their sentence? Should they be permitted to vote after they get ass? Yes, precisely this big deal and a lot of people are denied the franchise worrying about LISA. I think we're gonna look very hard at that unite. It there's a concept of paying your debt to society and if we recognize that they ve left Incarceration they pay their debt, they ve finished their probation time. I mean we should recognise that I totally agree and it's very odd that there are a lot of people who think that they shouldn't when there are other ways of people, think they should be reintegrated into society, but they can't vote.

In, and I understand that there are in a reasonable restrictions on rights. The people have, after they ve been convicted of a failing in federal court can possess a fireman, for example, in some other things. The idea that they can't vote seems odd to me it seems it seems wrong to look. I think also the restrictions on housing are particularly problematic. The restrictions on financial aid- you can't get college assistance, I mean the best thing for public safety is that people don't come back, and how do you do that you can people housing, suitable housing and jobs with the best indication this at present is that weeds, in common, unprecedented coming together across the political spectrum on criminal justice reform, which is another indication and our polarized politics that we ought to be looking very heart s. Actually, I mean you know that you have this question, but I would say this: I think that the across the political spectrum left him right. There is a huge out of consensus on these types of reforms to the criminal justice system, where I also think it

People elected office are still afraid of criminal justice, and so I think we see a lack of courage when it comes to people actually voting for stuff like this. But you know across the american public. I think people understand that there is a need to improve the criminal justice system and make reforms like letting people vote. Thinking about a lot of different significant issues such as bail and other things, but there's not a profile, encourage necessarily with political leadership. Look, you know these issues of bail incarceration recidivism, how the process works for taking away someone's liberty, there's so important and and so misunderstood often so I could talk to you guys forever about it, but unfortunately we have to go, but we should again sometime Emily LISA Monaco. Thank you so much for doing the thanks ram and really here that. Thank you thanks. Well, that's it this episode of statehood thanks again

my guests and milligram and LISA Monaco. If you like, the shelf rate and reviewed and apple pie, casts every positive review helps new listeners. Fine show send me your questions about using politics, tweet them to me. It free parara with a hashtag or give me a call at six hundred and sixty nine, two hundred and forty seven, seven thousand three hundred and thirty, eight at six, six nine for free, or you can send me an email to stay tuned. Cathay darker, Stay tuned is presented by CAFE its produced by the team at Pineapple Street media cat errand, crisper, Ruby, Henry Molasses, Generalise Berman, Joel Level MAX Linsky, our music. If I hundred dust and special thanks to Julia Doyle, terrifies me, Jake, Maccabees Company Boston, I'm pretty Ferrara statement.