1
00:00:03,200 --> 00:00:08,000
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Brusso from Bloomberg Radio.

2
00:00:10,640 --> 00:00:15,280
Speaker 1: Special Council Jack Smith has recalibrated the indictment against former

3
00:00:15,360 --> 00:00:18,800
Speaker 1: President Donald Trump for trying to overturn the twenty twenty

4
00:00:18,840 --> 00:00:22,320
Speaker 1: election in order to comply with the Supreme Court's ruling

5
00:00:22,400 --> 00:00:27,840
Speaker 1: giving presidents sweeping immunity for official acts. The superseding indictment

6
00:00:28,040 --> 00:00:31,960
Speaker 1: reworks the language and removes some allegations, but the four

7
00:00:32,080 --> 00:00:36,280
Speaker 1: criminal charges against Trump remain the same. Joining me is

8
00:00:36,360 --> 00:00:40,320
Speaker 1: Dave Ahrenberg, Palm Beach County State Attorney. What do you

9
00:00:40,440 --> 00:00:45,040
Speaker 1: make of the Special Council filing to restart basically both

10
00:00:45,120 --> 00:00:48,840
Speaker 1: cases this week Monday and Tuesday, one two punch.

11
00:00:49,479 --> 00:00:51,000
Speaker 2: Jack Smiths had to do what he had to do

12
00:00:51,120 --> 00:00:54,400
Speaker 2: because the Supreme Court pushed him into this situation, and

13
00:00:54,480 --> 00:00:57,360
Speaker 2: Judge Cannon in South Florida pushed him into this situation.

14
00:00:57,520 --> 00:01:01,600
Speaker 2: So Jesus reacting to outside forces. This wasn't something that

15
00:01:01,880 --> 00:01:04,959
Speaker 2: he wanted to do before the election to try to

16
00:01:04,959 --> 00:01:07,839
Speaker 2: make it an election issue. He was just being a lawyer,

17
00:01:07,880 --> 00:01:09,920
Speaker 2: following the evidence of the law and doing what the

18
00:01:10,040 --> 00:01:13,240
Speaker 2: law required. And so I'm glad he did this because

19
00:01:13,400 --> 00:01:15,720
Speaker 2: I've always thought that, at least in the DC election

20
00:01:15,800 --> 00:01:19,200
Speaker 2: interference case, that the Supreme Courts immunity ruling really does

21
00:01:19,280 --> 00:01:21,120
Speaker 2: not got the case at all. I mean, he had

22
00:01:21,160 --> 00:01:23,280
Speaker 2: got to shave around the edges, but other than that,

23
00:01:23,680 --> 00:01:25,040
Speaker 2: the heart of the case still remain.

24
00:01:25,640 --> 00:01:29,880
Speaker 1: So you weren't surprised that the four charges are the same.

25
00:01:30,440 --> 00:01:32,240
Speaker 2: No, No, I would be surprised. I ever, warn't the

26
00:01:32,240 --> 00:01:35,320
Speaker 2: same because the only part of the DC election interference

27
00:01:35,400 --> 00:01:39,320
Speaker 2: case that needed to be excised was any reference to

28
00:01:39,640 --> 00:01:43,960
Speaker 2: Trump's alleged influence on the Department of Justice to try

29
00:01:44,000 --> 00:01:49,760
Speaker 2: to pressure the States to redo the election, to accuse

30
00:01:50,120 --> 00:01:54,720
Speaker 2: the election of being fraudulent, to threaten to remove the

31
00:01:55,040 --> 00:01:58,360
Speaker 2: acting Attorney General unless he did Trump's bidding. That stuff,

32
00:01:58,400 --> 00:02:02,960
Speaker 2: according to the Supreme Court's immunity decision, is all covered

33
00:02:03,120 --> 00:02:06,840
Speaker 2: by presidential immunity because it's within his core duties to

34
00:02:07,000 --> 00:02:10,280
Speaker 2: name an attorney general, to have an executive branch that

35
00:02:10,400 --> 00:02:13,720
Speaker 2: works with and for him. So he's able to get

36
00:02:13,720 --> 00:02:15,840
Speaker 2: away with that. Now if you think, well, Jeffrey Clark

37
00:02:15,919 --> 00:02:19,600
Speaker 2: now is Scott free. No, Jeffrey Clark, who was allegedly

38
00:02:19,680 --> 00:02:23,600
Speaker 2: the coup leader within the Department of Justice, could still

39
00:02:23,639 --> 00:02:26,359
Speaker 2: face justice elsewhere. He was not even charged in the

40
00:02:26,440 --> 00:02:28,919
Speaker 2: DC election interference case. Remember, one of the powerful things

41
00:02:28,919 --> 00:02:32,640
Speaker 2: about the DC election interference case is that only Trump

42
00:02:32,919 --> 00:02:36,280
Speaker 2: is charged there. That case was built for speed, and

43
00:02:36,639 --> 00:02:39,640
Speaker 2: it's going to go first. I think after the election

44
00:02:39,720 --> 00:02:40,600
Speaker 2: of Trump does not win.

45
00:02:41,000 --> 00:02:44,679
Speaker 1: Chief Justice John Roberts in the immunity decision wrote that

46
00:02:45,000 --> 00:02:49,120
Speaker 1: a president is at least presumptively immune from prosecution for

47
00:02:49,200 --> 00:02:54,600
Speaker 1: his interactions with his vice president about constitutional duties, including

48
00:02:54,600 --> 00:02:58,080
Speaker 1: the vice president's conduct in overseeing the Senate. Is that

49
00:02:58,160 --> 00:03:00,960
Speaker 1: going to be the most perhaps problem part of the

50
00:03:01,000 --> 00:03:04,960
Speaker 1: superseding indictment in that it keeps in evidence about Trump

51
00:03:05,080 --> 00:03:09,000
Speaker 1: trying to pressure Pence into disrupting the electoral count.

52
00:03:09,400 --> 00:03:12,320
Speaker 2: You know, I don't think so, June, because all of

53
00:03:12,360 --> 00:03:15,840
Speaker 2: that can be overcome. It's a presumption of community. You

54
00:03:15,919 --> 00:03:19,880
Speaker 2: just have to show that by prosecuting the president, it

55
00:03:19,880 --> 00:03:24,160
Speaker 2: does not impinge upon the powers the official acts of

56
00:03:24,200 --> 00:03:27,239
Speaker 2: a president. You don't want to diminish the powers of

57
00:03:27,280 --> 00:03:31,080
Speaker 2: a president by going after a president for talking to

58
00:03:31,240 --> 00:03:34,120
Speaker 2: his vice president. And the reason why he does not

59
00:03:34,240 --> 00:03:37,400
Speaker 2: impinge upon the core powers of a president is because

60
00:03:37,720 --> 00:03:41,760
Speaker 2: he was not talking to Vice President Pence as a

61
00:03:41,920 --> 00:03:45,680
Speaker 2: member of his team. From a White House perspective, it

62
00:03:45,760 --> 00:03:48,240
Speaker 2: was as a candidate for office, he was talking to

63
00:03:48,280 --> 00:03:50,800
Speaker 2: Pence to help fix the election. He was talking to

64
00:03:50,880 --> 00:03:54,640
Speaker 2: Pence as an office seeker, not an office holder. And also,

65
00:03:54,800 --> 00:03:58,080
Speaker 2: in any event, Pence was acting as the President of

66
00:03:58,120 --> 00:04:00,920
Speaker 2: the Senate, not as Vice presid per se. And so

67
00:04:00,960 --> 00:04:03,320
Speaker 2: that's another way you get around it was that this

68
00:04:03,360 --> 00:04:06,160
Speaker 2: does not hurt the powers of a president to say

69
00:04:06,160 --> 00:04:09,160
Speaker 2: you're going to be held responsible for your improper communications

70
00:04:09,160 --> 00:04:11,640
Speaker 2: with Mike Pence as the president of the Senate. Now,

71
00:04:11,640 --> 00:04:13,600
Speaker 2: if you were talking to Mike Pence about foreign policy

72
00:04:13,880 --> 00:04:16,480
Speaker 2: in his role as vice president, yes that would be protected.

73
00:04:16,600 --> 00:04:18,560
Speaker 2: But not when it comes to Trump trying to overturn

74
00:04:18,560 --> 00:04:21,480
Speaker 2: an election, which is nonofficial act as a candidate for president,

75
00:04:21,600 --> 00:04:24,200
Speaker 2: not as the president as a candidate, and in so

76
00:04:24,360 --> 00:04:27,200
Speaker 2: doing going after Mike Pence as the President of the Senate,

77
00:04:27,279 --> 00:04:28,279
Speaker 2: not as vice president.

78
00:04:28,560 --> 00:04:32,040
Speaker 1: They changed the tone of it by changing the wording.

79
00:04:32,160 --> 00:04:36,280
Speaker 1: For example, in the first paragraph before it described Trump

80
00:04:36,400 --> 00:04:39,000
Speaker 1: as the forty fifth president of the United States and

81
00:04:39,040 --> 00:04:41,880
Speaker 1: a candidate for reelection in twenty twenty. This time it

82
00:04:41,920 --> 00:04:44,800
Speaker 1: describes him just as a candidate for president of the

83
00:04:44,880 --> 00:04:50,200
Speaker 1: United states in twenty twenty. Are those little fixes important.

84
00:04:50,600 --> 00:04:54,200
Speaker 2: Yes, because they are emphasizing Trump as an office seeker,

85
00:04:54,320 --> 00:04:57,560
Speaker 2: not as an office holder. They want to try to

86
00:04:57,640 --> 00:05:01,920
Speaker 2: convince the future Appellate Court that Trump was not acting

87
00:05:01,960 --> 00:05:06,159
Speaker 2: in its official capacity because this Supreme Court decision is

88
00:05:06,279 --> 00:05:11,159
Speaker 2: broad and it is confusing. And Jack Smith went up

89
00:05:11,240 --> 00:05:13,560
Speaker 2: and down the chain at DOJ, talking to the Solicitor

90
00:05:13,720 --> 00:05:16,080
Speaker 2: General and others to come up with wording that they

91
00:05:16,120 --> 00:05:19,039
Speaker 2: thought could pass muster. And I think that he did.

92
00:05:19,640 --> 00:05:22,960
Speaker 1: The Supreme Court's opinion basically changing what people thought the

93
00:05:23,080 --> 00:05:27,039
Speaker 1: law was. And yet there's very little guidance in that

94
00:05:27,160 --> 00:05:30,040
Speaker 1: opinion for prosecutors going forward.

95
00:05:30,640 --> 00:05:33,080
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think that opinion should have been revisited. It

96
00:05:33,120 --> 00:05:37,680
Speaker 2: was confusing, it was way broader than necessary, and it's

97
00:05:37,960 --> 00:05:40,760
Speaker 2: going to at some point, I think, be addressed again

98
00:05:40,880 --> 00:05:43,400
Speaker 2: because of the confusion that's putting out there. I mean,

99
00:05:43,520 --> 00:05:45,400
Speaker 2: I do think at some point, and maybe when there's

100
00:05:45,480 --> 00:05:48,240
Speaker 2: change in the Supreme Court, that this decision will be reversed,

101
00:05:48,279 --> 00:05:51,800
Speaker 2: just like others in the dustbin of history have been reversed,

102
00:05:51,839 --> 00:05:56,039
Speaker 2: like Plenty versus ferguson Cooramatsu. There are a litany of

103
00:05:56,080 --> 00:05:58,640
Speaker 2: dispad decisions that have been reversed over the years, and

104
00:05:58,680 --> 00:06:00,839
Speaker 2: I think this will be one of them, because they

105
00:06:00,880 --> 00:06:03,600
Speaker 2: took something that doesn't exist, a presidential unity. I mean,

106
00:06:03,800 --> 00:06:07,200
Speaker 2: before this opinion, presidential community existed in the civil context,

107
00:06:07,200 --> 00:06:09,920
Speaker 2: but not the criminal context. And the way they broaded

108
00:06:10,440 --> 00:06:14,400
Speaker 2: gave the executive branch unprecedented powers, powers that never existed before.

109
00:06:14,480 --> 00:06:17,000
Speaker 2: And it is set forth all this confusion that not

110
00:06:17,040 --> 00:06:20,839
Speaker 2: only can you not prosecute a president for his official duties,

111
00:06:20,839 --> 00:06:23,599
Speaker 2: and they've defined that very broadly, but you can't even

112
00:06:23,760 --> 00:06:28,880
Speaker 2: get evidence of unofficial acts criminal unofficial acts by way

113
00:06:29,080 --> 00:06:32,400
Speaker 2: of his official duties, meaning that you can't go and

114
00:06:32,440 --> 00:06:37,800
Speaker 2: interview Department of Justice officials to find out that the

115
00:06:37,839 --> 00:06:41,159
Speaker 2: president may have sold pardons for bribes. Right. So the

116
00:06:41,200 --> 00:06:44,440
Speaker 2: way they've done is not just hurt prosecutors when they

117
00:06:44,440 --> 00:06:47,240
Speaker 2: can't prosecute a president for official acts, but they have

118
00:06:47,360 --> 00:06:51,719
Speaker 2: kneecapped prosecutors in their investigations where you can't even investigate

119
00:06:51,839 --> 00:06:54,839
Speaker 2: a president when he's doing something within his official sphere,

120
00:06:54,960 --> 00:06:56,680
Speaker 2: even if it involves a criminal act.

121
00:06:56,920 --> 00:07:01,560
Speaker 1: Also, the revised indictment removed references to Trump's conversations with

122
00:07:01,640 --> 00:07:05,120
Speaker 1: his White House aids and lawyers. In a brief accompanying

123
00:07:05,120 --> 00:07:08,240
Speaker 1: the new in ditment, the prosecutors noted that the revised

124
00:07:08,320 --> 00:07:11,320
Speaker 1: charges had been presented to a new grand jury that

125
00:07:11,440 --> 00:07:15,120
Speaker 1: had not previously heard evidence in the case. Explain why

126
00:07:15,160 --> 00:07:16,160
Speaker 1: that's important.

127
00:07:16,560 --> 00:07:19,080
Speaker 2: The prosters are going to be really careful. They want

128
00:07:19,120 --> 00:07:22,200
Speaker 2: to make sure that they are not going to risk

129
00:07:22,240 --> 00:07:24,440
Speaker 2: getting overturned on appeal. And well, first of all, the

130
00:07:24,440 --> 00:07:27,280
Speaker 2: old grand jury doesn't even exist. That's part of the problem.

131
00:07:27,640 --> 00:07:30,160
Speaker 2: The old grand jury has been dismissed. They don't last

132
00:07:30,920 --> 00:07:33,680
Speaker 2: two years. It's been dismissed by this point, so they

133
00:07:33,720 --> 00:07:35,200
Speaker 2: had to go to a new grand jury. But also

134
00:07:35,240 --> 00:07:37,360
Speaker 2: it's good to show that they got it to a

135
00:07:37,480 --> 00:07:40,640
Speaker 2: fresh pair of eyes and that it wasn't painted by

136
00:07:40,720 --> 00:07:43,000
Speaker 2: any bias from the last go around. Like there was

137
00:07:43,080 --> 00:07:46,600
Speaker 2: an evidence presented to the grand jurors this time around

138
00:07:46,760 --> 00:07:50,080
Speaker 2: that could not be eventually used in a trial. Because

139
00:07:50,120 --> 00:07:52,960
Speaker 2: the Supreme Court limited the kind of evidence that you

140
00:07:53,440 --> 00:07:56,520
Speaker 2: can use against a president. They've expanded, I mean, there's

141
00:07:56,560 --> 00:07:59,920
Speaker 2: so much that it really does tie the hands of prosecutors.

142
00:08:00,240 --> 00:08:04,840
Speaker 2: So the prosecutors understood this. They presented the limited evidence

143
00:08:04,880 --> 00:08:07,240
Speaker 2: they're allowed to present evidence that one day could come

144
00:08:07,240 --> 00:08:09,680
Speaker 2: out in court. They went before a new grand jury.

145
00:08:09,960 --> 00:08:12,239
Speaker 2: There is no taint here from the prior grand jury,

146
00:08:12,240 --> 00:08:14,600
Speaker 2: from the prior indictment, and I think it's a game on.

147
00:08:15,160 --> 00:08:17,920
Speaker 1: Let's talk about what happens next. The two sides are

148
00:08:17,960 --> 00:08:21,800
Speaker 1: going to present papers to Judge Chuckkin on Friday suggesting

149
00:08:21,840 --> 00:08:24,120
Speaker 1: how they'd like to move forward, and then there will

150
00:08:24,160 --> 00:08:27,600
Speaker 1: be a hearing next week. Will the defense object to

151
00:08:27,680 --> 00:08:31,440
Speaker 1: the superseding indictment? And then we have more hearings. What

152
00:08:31,480 --> 00:08:32,240
Speaker 1: do you think's next?

153
00:08:32,920 --> 00:08:36,000
Speaker 2: Delay is their middle name. They're going to keep pursuing delays.

154
00:08:36,040 --> 00:08:40,040
Speaker 2: They're going to say that this superseding indictment is meant

155
00:08:40,120 --> 00:08:43,839
Speaker 2: to influence the election and it should be delayed. This

156
00:08:43,920 --> 00:08:46,600
Speaker 2: is election interference, which is ironic because Trump is being

157
00:08:46,640 --> 00:08:49,800
Speaker 2: accused of election interference. And they'll find creative ways to

158
00:08:49,840 --> 00:08:54,600
Speaker 2: say that the indictment still violates the Supreme Court's mandates

159
00:08:54,640 --> 00:08:57,840
Speaker 2: in the immunity decision, and then once they get a

160
00:08:57,880 --> 00:09:00,480
Speaker 2: negative ruling from Judge chuck In, they're going to peel it.

161
00:09:00,520 --> 00:09:02,160
Speaker 2: And yet they just want to force all this as

162
00:09:02,240 --> 00:09:05,320
Speaker 2: much as possible. Ideally for them, they want this trial

163
00:09:05,800 --> 00:09:09,640
Speaker 2: to take place half past never and I think that

164
00:09:10,040 --> 00:09:11,920
Speaker 2: they'll get what they want. If Trump gets elected, Trump

165
00:09:11,920 --> 00:09:14,600
Speaker 2: will just tell his new attorney general to dismiss everything.

166
00:09:14,840 --> 00:09:17,199
Speaker 2: But if Trump loses in November, then this will be

167
00:09:17,240 --> 00:09:20,080
Speaker 2: the first trial that he faces after the election.

168
00:09:20,480 --> 00:09:25,160
Speaker 1: The Supreme Court directed Judge Chudkin to determine which allegations

169
00:09:25,200 --> 00:09:29,400
Speaker 1: in the indictment involved official acts by Trump. Do you

170
00:09:29,440 --> 00:09:33,040
Speaker 1: think that she can decide about this superseding indictment and

171
00:09:33,080 --> 00:09:36,680
Speaker 1: whether it comports with the Supreme Court's decision without calling

172
00:09:36,720 --> 00:09:37,600
Speaker 1: any witnesses.

173
00:09:38,400 --> 00:09:41,280
Speaker 2: That's a really good question, because a lot of us

174
00:09:41,360 --> 00:09:45,120
Speaker 2: expected her to have a mini trial, which would be

175
00:09:45,280 --> 00:09:47,600
Speaker 2: an airing of the evidence. Mike Pence would get on

176
00:09:47,600 --> 00:09:49,760
Speaker 2: the stand and it would be really compelling, and it

177
00:09:49,760 --> 00:09:52,200
Speaker 2: would happened before the election, and the public would learn

178
00:09:52,240 --> 00:09:55,880
Speaker 2: about Trump's involvement before, during, and after January sixth, even

179
00:09:55,920 --> 00:09:58,320
Speaker 2: though there would be no trial until after the election.

180
00:09:58,760 --> 00:10:01,320
Speaker 2: But according to recent report, Jack Smith and his team

181
00:10:01,600 --> 00:10:04,280
Speaker 2: are not going to push forward for a mini trial. Ultimately,

182
00:10:04,280 --> 00:10:07,680
Speaker 2: it's up to Judge Chuckin to decide. Judge Chuckin could

183
00:10:07,720 --> 00:10:10,320
Speaker 2: decide that she can make these decisions based on the

184
00:10:10,320 --> 00:10:13,839
Speaker 2: paperwork the pleadings. You don't need verbal testimony, but it

185
00:10:13,920 --> 00:10:15,480
Speaker 2: will be up to the judge to decide. And then

186
00:10:15,520 --> 00:10:17,400
Speaker 2: the question is when would it happen. Would it happen

187
00:10:17,400 --> 00:10:20,680
Speaker 2: before the election or after? These are the questions out there.

188
00:10:20,720 --> 00:10:22,720
Speaker 2: I think that you can do a mini trial before

189
00:10:22,720 --> 00:10:25,800
Speaker 2: the election. Ultimately, the decision on whether to have a

190
00:10:25,840 --> 00:10:27,720
Speaker 2: mini trial should be based on the evidence of the

191
00:10:27,760 --> 00:10:29,760
Speaker 2: law and should have nothing to do with politics. You

192
00:10:29,760 --> 00:10:32,480
Speaker 2: shouldn't be concerned that there's an election around the corner,

193
00:10:32,840 --> 00:10:34,640
Speaker 2: and you shouldn't be concerned that people are going to

194
00:10:34,760 --> 00:10:38,000
Speaker 2: interpret it as being political, because whether you do or

195
00:10:38,000 --> 00:10:39,760
Speaker 2: you don't, you're going to be accused of being political

196
00:10:39,800 --> 00:10:42,960
Speaker 2: in this day and age, in this political environment we have,

197
00:10:43,320 --> 00:10:46,280
Speaker 2: you're always going to be accused of weaponizing the Department

198
00:10:46,280 --> 00:10:49,000
Speaker 2: of Justice, even though you're not. So you just follow

199
00:10:49,040 --> 00:10:51,160
Speaker 2: the evidence of the law and tune out the noise.

200
00:10:51,559 --> 00:10:54,320
Speaker 1: But there is so much noise. Dave, thanks so much.

201
00:10:54,360 --> 00:10:58,240
Speaker 1: As always, that's Palm Beach County State Attorney Dave Ehrenberg.

202
00:10:58,880 --> 00:11:03,400
Speaker 1: The Supreme Court refused to reinstate President Biden's latest push

203
00:11:03,720 --> 00:11:07,440
Speaker 1: to reduce student loan bills for millions of people, keeping

204
00:11:07,480 --> 00:11:11,040
Speaker 1: the plan on whole while the legal fight over educational

205
00:11:11,120 --> 00:11:15,280
Speaker 1: debt plays out. The court turned away an administrative request

206
00:11:15,400 --> 00:11:18,360
Speaker 1: to lift a pause a federal appeals court imposed on

207
00:11:18,440 --> 00:11:22,520
Speaker 1: the program in a lawsuit by Republican led states. The

208
00:11:22,760 --> 00:11:27,559
Speaker 1: order didn't indicate that any justices dissented and gave no explanation,

209
00:11:28,160 --> 00:11:31,240
Speaker 1: saying only that it expected the appeals court to issue

210
00:11:31,240 --> 00:11:35,480
Speaker 1: a definitive ruling in the case quote with appropriate dispatch.

211
00:11:36,200 --> 00:11:38,880
Speaker 1: And that's it for this edition of the Bloomberg Law Podcast.

212
00:11:39,240 --> 00:11:41,600
Speaker 1: Remember you can always get the latest legal news by

213
00:11:41,640 --> 00:11:45,480
Speaker 1: subscribing and listening to the show on Apple Podcasts, Spotify,

214
00:11:45,760 --> 00:11:49,600
Speaker 1: and at Bloomberg dot com, Slash podcast, Slash Law. I'm

215
00:11:49,679 --> 00:11:52,120
Speaker 1: June Grosso, and this is Bloomberg