WEBVTT - Will Trump Face Prosecution If He Loses the Election? 0:00:00.560 --> 0:00:05.360 This is Bloomberg Law with June Grassoe from Bloomberg Radio. 0:00:06.320 --> 0:00:08.880 President Trump has more at stake in this election than 0:00:08.920 --> 0:00:11.920 whether he remains in the White House. Being president has 0:00:11.960 --> 0:00:16.320 given Trump what is effectively immunity from federal criminal prosecutions 0:00:16.560 --> 0:00:19.240 and has allowed him to stall civil law suits against 0:00:19.320 --> 0:00:23.280 him and his business. When he leaves office, that equation changes. 0:00:23.800 --> 0:00:26.640 So could there be a United States v. Trump? Although 0:00:26.720 --> 0:00:31.000 any federal prosecution of Trump would be political dynamite, but 0:00:31.200 --> 0:00:34.599 New York v. Trump is a distinct possibility since there 0:00:34.640 --> 0:00:37.760 is an active investigation by the Manhattan District Attorney that 0:00:37.800 --> 0:00:41.440 could result in state criminal charges, and of course, there 0:00:41.479 --> 0:00:44.559 are several civil lawsuits that would likely move forward at 0:00:44.560 --> 0:00:49.120 a faster pace. Joining me is former federal prosecutor Robert Mints, 0:00:49.159 --> 0:00:52.800 a partner m Carter In English, Bob explain how the 0:00:52.920 --> 0:01:00.000 presidency has effectively given Trump a temporary shield against prosecutions 0:01:00.040 --> 0:01:05.000 and lawsuits. As president, President Trump has been able to 0:01:05.120 --> 0:01:09.880 block and delay many investigations and civil lawsuits that have 0:01:09.959 --> 0:01:13.560 been filed against them, essentially arguing that as president of 0:01:13.560 --> 0:01:17.119 the United States, he is too busy to deal with 0:01:17.240 --> 0:01:22.000 heavial cases, sit for depositions for example, produced documents, and 0:01:22.240 --> 0:01:26.160 that under the laws, he is immune from prosecution for 0:01:26.560 --> 0:01:29.880 federal criminal cases while he is the sitting president of 0:01:29.920 --> 0:01:34.760 the United States. Let's turn now to possible federal criminal 0:01:34.880 --> 0:01:40.959 charges after he leaves office. Smaller report detailed several episodes 0:01:41.000 --> 0:01:44.600 in which Trump may have obstructed justice, but didn't recommend 0:01:44.600 --> 0:01:48.920 criminal charges, citing the official Justice Department position that a 0:01:48.960 --> 0:01:52.360 sitting president CAMPI indited. Is it possible that after he 0:01:52.440 --> 0:01:58.040 leaves office, Trump could face obstruction of justice charges? Yes, 0:01:58.120 --> 0:02:02.000 in every regard. The fact that the president leaves office 0:02:02.160 --> 0:02:05.680 makes it easier for prosecutors and frankly plaintiffs and civil 0:02:05.720 --> 0:02:09.440 cases as well to pursue their cases against him. As 0:02:09.440 --> 0:02:12.400 far as the obstruction of justice case that was laid 0:02:12.400 --> 0:02:15.919 out by the Mueller report, you're absolutely correct that Mr 0:02:16.040 --> 0:02:20.320 Mueller ultimately stopped short of making you finding as to 0:02:20.360 --> 0:02:23.440 whether or not there was obstruction of justice, citing the 0:02:23.520 --> 0:02:27.840 Department of Justice is internal memorandum which says that the 0:02:27.880 --> 0:02:31.680 Department of Justice cannot indict a sitting president. So what 0:02:31.919 --> 0:02:35.560 Mr Mueller did was, rather than render an opinion as 0:02:35.600 --> 0:02:38.200 to whether or not there was a violation here, he 0:02:38.320 --> 0:02:42.080 simply laid out the facts and left them hanging out 0:02:42.080 --> 0:02:45.200 there for others to decide whether there was an obstruction case. 0:02:45.919 --> 0:02:49.560 Assuming the president is no longer in office, then those 0:02:49.639 --> 0:02:54.240 cases could theoretically go forward. A Biden Department of Justice 0:02:54.280 --> 0:02:58.760 would not be barred from pursuing the roadmap that Mr 0:02:58.840 --> 0:03:02.120 Mueller laid out in his port as to potential obstruction 0:03:02.160 --> 0:03:05.600 of justice charges if they chose to pursue them. So 0:03:05.639 --> 0:03:09.960 that would be a political question really about whether Biden 0:03:10.120 --> 0:03:13.360 Justice Department would want to bring criminal charges against a 0:03:13.360 --> 0:03:16.960 former president. I think that if the case were to 0:03:17.000 --> 0:03:21.520 be revived by the Department of Justice under a President Biden, 0:03:21.600 --> 0:03:24.640 they would have to be further investigation. In other words, 0:03:24.680 --> 0:03:27.520 they would not simply rely on the work that was 0:03:27.560 --> 0:03:31.840 done solely by Muller and his investigators. There would be 0:03:31.880 --> 0:03:35.240 a new investigation. There would be a new grand jury 0:03:35.360 --> 0:03:39.240 that was impaneled in order to gather more evidence. But 0:03:39.400 --> 0:03:43.240 that would be an absolute political bombshell. The idea of 0:03:43.280 --> 0:03:47.280 the Justice Department pursuing a criminal case against a former 0:03:47.320 --> 0:03:50.880 president is obviously something that has never been contemplated before 0:03:51.240 --> 0:03:54.320 in the history of this country and would be something 0:03:54.400 --> 0:03:57.760 that would be extremely divisive. I think that the Department 0:03:57.800 --> 0:04:01.600 of Justice would consider very carefully before they decided to 0:04:01.600 --> 0:04:05.880 go down that road. Trump's longtime personal lawyer and fixer, 0:04:06.000 --> 0:04:08.520 Michael Cohen, was sentenced to more than three years in 0:04:08.600 --> 0:04:13.280 prison after pleading guilty to campaign finance violations. Cohen said Trump, 0:04:13.360 --> 0:04:17.160 who was identified in case filings as Individual Number one, 0:04:17.720 --> 0:04:22.440 directed the hush money payment just before the election. Federal 0:04:22.480 --> 0:04:26.719 prosecutors obviously never charged Trump, could or would the Justice 0:04:26.760 --> 0:04:29.800 Department bring that case now? He answered, that question is 0:04:29.839 --> 0:04:32.719 the Department of Justice could take another look at that case. 0:04:33.080 --> 0:04:37.359 They did charge Michael Cohen with campaign finance violations in 0:04:37.440 --> 0:04:40.240 connection with hush money payments that led up to the 0:04:40.640 --> 0:04:44.800 seen election. There was a reference in those case filings 0:04:44.880 --> 0:04:49.320 as individual number one, which was later purportedly a reference 0:04:49.600 --> 0:04:54.160 to the President. There was also a non prosecution agreement 0:04:54.480 --> 0:04:58.279 that the Department of Justice entered into with the National Enquirer, 0:04:58.720 --> 0:05:01.560 and where in the National enquire Are admitted working with 0:05:01.960 --> 0:05:05.880 Michael Cone and the Trump campaign to kill certain damaging 0:05:05.960 --> 0:05:10.200 stories about candidate Trump. Whether Department of Justice would then 0:05:10.240 --> 0:05:12.919 take that case up is very much an open question. 0:05:13.200 --> 0:05:15.839 Part of the problem there is that one of the 0:05:15.920 --> 0:05:19.320 key witnesses in that case would obviously be Michael Cone, 0:05:19.520 --> 0:05:22.039 and there's a question there whether Michael Cone would be 0:05:22.040 --> 0:05:25.440 a sufficiently credible witness to build a case around. They 0:05:25.440 --> 0:05:27.640 would really have to be additional evidence for them to 0:05:27.640 --> 0:05:29.599 take a look at that. And then that still goes 0:05:29.640 --> 0:05:32.560 back to the question about whether the Department of Justice 0:05:32.720 --> 0:05:35.320 would want to pick up a case to prosecute a 0:05:35.360 --> 0:05:40.000 former president, something that would again be considered highly controversial 0:05:40.040 --> 0:05:42.400 and a real political bombshell where they could go down 0:05:42.440 --> 0:05:46.400 that road. The New York Times didn't investigative report on 0:05:46.480 --> 0:05:51.400 Trump's taxes that reveal many questionable deductions as well as 0:05:51.480 --> 0:05:56.240 other problems. Are criminal charges for tax fraud possible by 0:05:56.480 --> 0:06:00.160 the I R s. There's a lot of information, then 0:06:00.160 --> 0:06:02.400 a lot of news that's been out there regarding the 0:06:02.440 --> 0:06:05.479 president tax returns, which of course i've never been made public. 0:06:05.800 --> 0:06:09.839 The New York Times did reveal, according to their sources, 0:06:09.880 --> 0:06:12.720 that the president paid only seven dred and fifty dollars 0:06:12.760 --> 0:06:16.200 in income taxes in sixteen, for example. But there's a 0:06:16.200 --> 0:06:20.040 real question here about whether these tax returns would ultimately 0:06:20.320 --> 0:06:24.320 be the subject of a federal criminal tax investigation. These 0:06:24.360 --> 0:06:27.919 are difficult cases to make. Prosecutors have to show that 0:06:28.040 --> 0:06:31.800 an individual deliberately set out to defraud the government, there 0:06:31.839 --> 0:06:35.480 has to be some concrete proof in files or emails, 0:06:35.480 --> 0:06:38.839 for example, or statements made by witnesses that there is 0:06:38.880 --> 0:06:42.320 a conscious effort to defraud the I R s. And 0:06:42.400 --> 0:06:45.560 in this case, as in many cases involving high level 0:06:45.600 --> 0:06:50.440 executives or high network individuals, there are always lawyers and 0:06:50.480 --> 0:06:55.200 accountants who are involved in many layers of these transactions 0:06:55.279 --> 0:06:57.760 and in the preparation of these tax returns, which tend 0:06:57.800 --> 0:07:02.320 to insulate an individual from criminal tax liability. So at 0:07:02.320 --> 0:07:04.679 the end of the day, these would be difficult charges 0:07:04.760 --> 0:07:07.600 to make in a criminal context. That's not to say 0:07:07.600 --> 0:07:10.480 that the I R S might not review these tax 0:07:10.520 --> 0:07:13.600 returns and ultimately have some kind of a civil claim 0:07:13.680 --> 0:07:16.520 against the president for taxes that the I R S 0:07:16.640 --> 0:07:20.040 may claim our owed having to do with certain deductions 0:07:20.040 --> 0:07:22.520 that were taken in previous years. But it's unlikely that 0:07:22.560 --> 0:07:26.920 there would be a federal criminal prosecution that ultimately emerges 0:07:27.280 --> 0:07:31.040 based upon the president's tax returns. The Manhattan d A 0:07:31.160 --> 0:07:34.680 has been investigating Trump, and Trump fought the subpoenas for 0:07:34.720 --> 0:07:38.440 financial records all the way to the Supreme Court. Let's 0:07:38.480 --> 0:07:42.480 take the question of Trump pardoning himself. A president pardoning himself, 0:07:43.080 --> 0:07:46.360 so Trump could pardon himself in federal cases, but not 0:07:46.480 --> 0:07:50.920 in a state case. So the president has broad power 0:07:51.000 --> 0:07:54.840 to pardon individuals from seaederal crime. And that came up 0:07:54.920 --> 0:07:58.520 very much in the context of the prosecution of Paul Manafort, 0:07:58.560 --> 0:08:02.520 for example, the president its former campaign manager, and others 0:08:02.520 --> 0:08:07.520 who were prosecuted for crimes in connection with the President's 0:08:07.560 --> 0:08:10.720 campaign or in many cases in unrelated issues, and there 0:08:10.800 --> 0:08:13.679 was always this question about whether the President might pardon 0:08:14.360 --> 0:08:18.560 Paul Mattafford, Michael Flynn, and others. Uh, that does not 0:08:18.720 --> 0:08:23.560 apply to potential state prosecutions. Under the law, states are 0:08:23.600 --> 0:08:27.880 a separate, separate sovereign, which means that they are not 0:08:28.080 --> 0:08:30.880 able to be pardoned by the president. So that has 0:08:30.920 --> 0:08:35.000 given the Manhattan Deer, the New York Attorney General, and 0:08:35.080 --> 0:08:40.040 other state ages the ability to continue to pursue investigations, 0:08:40.080 --> 0:08:43.000 and ultimately the president is not in a position to 0:08:43.120 --> 0:08:47.800 pardon individuals in connection with those investigations and not able 0:08:47.840 --> 0:08:51.560 to pardon himself in connection with any potential state crimes. 0:08:52.400 --> 0:08:56.080 Now you mentioned the New York Attorney General, she is 0:08:56.200 --> 0:09:00.520 investigate whether the Trump family's real estate company falsely reported 0:09:00.600 --> 0:09:04.680 property values to secure loans or tax benefits. That's a 0:09:04.800 --> 0:09:09.480 civil case. Could that become a criminal case? Well, right now, 0:09:09.480 --> 0:09:13.679 the Attorney's General's investigation is a civil matter. It could 0:09:13.760 --> 0:09:18.000 possibly become a criminal case. But my guess is that 0:09:18.000 --> 0:09:21.600 that will stay a civil investigation and we'll have to 0:09:21.600 --> 0:09:24.520 wait and see whether anything developed out of that and 0:09:24.679 --> 0:09:29.079 the emolument suits. There are congressional Democrats to Democratic attorneys 0:09:29.120 --> 0:09:33.560 general in a watchdog group brought three lawsuits accusing Trump 0:09:33.600 --> 0:09:37.880 of violating the U s. Constitutions and Monuments Clause, and 0:09:37.920 --> 0:09:40.640 it's something that no court has ever ruled on before. 0:09:40.679 --> 0:09:44.400 Are those suits likely to be dropped? Yeah. The allegations 0:09:44.440 --> 0:09:48.760 involving the emolument cases really have to do with the 0:09:48.920 --> 0:09:52.360 charge that President Trump has used his office of the 0:09:52.400 --> 0:09:57.320 President for personal profit, and they focused on specifically that 0:09:57.440 --> 0:10:02.079 the president received allegedly gifts or things of value from 0:10:02.160 --> 0:10:07.000 foreign governments by accepting money that representatives from Saudi Arabia 0:10:07.120 --> 0:10:10.800 or other countries have spent at the Trump Hotel in Washington. 0:10:11.120 --> 0:10:16.320 In particular, those cases will essentially go away if the 0:10:16.360 --> 0:10:19.400 president is no longer in office. At this point, the 0:10:19.440 --> 0:10:21.719 president has been able to deflect those cases and in 0:10:21.720 --> 0:10:24.240 one case had one of them dismissed. One of them 0:10:24.240 --> 0:10:27.920 cases brought by congressional Democrats. But the goal of the 0:10:28.040 --> 0:10:31.360 Monument's cases was always to force the president to fully 0:10:31.440 --> 0:10:35.040 divest themselves from his business while in office. The idea 0:10:35.120 --> 0:10:37.559 behind that is that you don't want a situation where 0:10:37.600 --> 0:10:41.120 a president may be making decisions for personal gain rather 0:10:41.200 --> 0:10:43.640 than in the interests of the country. That will no 0:10:43.720 --> 0:10:46.840 longer be a relevant concern if the president is no 0:10:46.920 --> 0:10:50.600 longer in office, and violations of the Monuments clauses do 0:10:50.720 --> 0:10:55.600 not carry any financial penalty, so the remedy would really 0:10:55.840 --> 0:10:59.079 be already resolved there. If the president is no longer 0:10:59.080 --> 0:11:02.240 in office, then he's no longer allegedly being a position 0:11:02.280 --> 0:11:06.000 to benefit himself personally on those cases will simply go away. 0:11:06.360 --> 0:11:09.640 If the president is no longer president of the United States, 0:11:09.679 --> 0:11:13.199 so would the same applied to Democrats trying to get 0:11:13.200 --> 0:11:17.000 ahold of Trump's financial records. Once he's out of office. 0:11:17.600 --> 0:11:20.120 That would be a done deal. As too many of 0:11:20.160 --> 0:11:23.600 these investigations and many of these civil cases, the president 0:11:23.640 --> 0:11:25.960 has relied on the fact that he is the president 0:11:26.080 --> 0:11:29.560 United States and that can respond to these cases would 0:11:29.640 --> 0:11:33.760 interfere with his duties as president. That argument obviously goes 0:11:33.800 --> 0:11:36.680 away when he's still longer president United States, and he 0:11:36.720 --> 0:11:39.840 would then be treated more or less as any average 0:11:39.840 --> 0:11:42.600 citizen of this country would be in terms of being 0:11:42.640 --> 0:11:45.960 potentially forced to sit for deposition, to have to respond 0:11:46.040 --> 0:11:50.240 to document requests and provide other information. In connection with 0:11:50.240 --> 0:11:54.960 civil cases, President Trump has several civil lawsuits penning against him. 0:11:55.040 --> 0:11:58.320 There's a multi level marketing fraud suit where Trump and 0:11:58.400 --> 0:12:01.000 three of his children were sued for fraud in twenty 0:12:01.120 --> 0:12:04.959 eighteen over their endorsement on Celebrity Apprentice of a c 0:12:05.160 --> 0:12:09.920 N Opportunity LLC, a troubled multi level marketing company that 0:12:10.040 --> 0:12:14.040 later went bust. There's also Mary Trump's frauds suit against 0:12:14.040 --> 0:12:17.280 the President. The President's needs last months suited him for 0:12:17.320 --> 0:12:20.400 conspiring with his brother and sister to defraud her of 0:12:20.480 --> 0:12:24.599 millions of dollars from her grandfather's estate using false documents 0:12:24.640 --> 0:12:29.679 and bogus loans. There are two defamation cases. Summer Zervo's, 0:12:29.800 --> 0:12:33.120 a former contestant on The Apprentice, issued a statement a 0:12:33.120 --> 0:12:36.760 few weeks before the sixteen elections saying Trump groped and 0:12:36.840 --> 0:12:39.680 kissed her a hotel room in two thousand seven, he 0:12:39.760 --> 0:12:43.000 denied the assault and called Zervo's a liar, leading her 0:12:43.040 --> 0:12:47.520 to sue him for defamation. In a really interesting case 0:12:47.679 --> 0:12:50.680 because of the tact that the Justice Department has taken 0:12:51.200 --> 0:12:55.400 is Ee Gene Carol's defamation suit against Trump. Last month, 0:12:55.600 --> 0:12:58.960 the Justice Department tried to step in tell us what 0:12:59.080 --> 0:13:03.880 happened there. That case had to do with an allegation 0:13:04.200 --> 0:13:07.240 from a New York advice columnists who claimed that President 0:13:07.280 --> 0:13:10.160 Trump had raped her in the Department Address Department Store 0:13:10.160 --> 0:13:14.520 address room two decades ago. In response to that allegation, 0:13:14.960 --> 0:13:18.120 the President called her, among other things, a liar and 0:13:18.200 --> 0:13:21.080 said that she had not been telling the truth when 0:13:21.120 --> 0:13:24.360 she made those allegations against him that he had raped 0:13:24.400 --> 0:13:28.079 her two decades ago. What was interesting about that case 0:13:28.240 --> 0:13:31.360 is that the Department of Justice actually stepped in to 0:13:31.480 --> 0:13:33.920 try to take over the defense of the president in 0:13:33.920 --> 0:13:36.320 that case. The first thing they did was to remove 0:13:36.320 --> 0:13:39.320 the case from state court to federal court, and then 0:13:39.360 --> 0:13:43.400 they tried to take over the president's defense, saying essentially 0:13:43.640 --> 0:13:47.319 that the president was acting in his official capacity when 0:13:47.360 --> 0:13:51.320 he was denying those rape allegations. The Department Justice invoked 0:13:51.320 --> 0:13:54.559 something called the Federal Toward Claims Act, which is a 0:13:54.800 --> 0:13:58.760 statute that says that when a government official is acting 0:13:58.920 --> 0:14:02.320 officially in their pacity um and in whatever role they 0:14:02.360 --> 0:14:06.360 have as a government official, that the Department Justice can 0:14:06.520 --> 0:14:11.280 defend them. And most importantly in a defamation case. Uh, 0:14:11.320 --> 0:14:14.960 if there is a charge that a government official to 0:14:15.040 --> 0:14:17.720 fame somebody, and if it was done in their official capacity, 0:14:17.960 --> 0:14:20.720 then that case essentially gets dismissed because the United States 0:14:20.760 --> 0:14:24.200 can't be held responsible for intentional toward claims under the 0:14:24.240 --> 0:14:27.560 Federal Toward Claims Act. So we're the judge to grant 0:14:27.600 --> 0:14:31.440 the Department of Justice's motion and agree that when the 0:14:31.480 --> 0:14:35.520 President denied those allegations that was done in his official capacity, 0:14:35.880 --> 0:14:38.800 then the case would essentially have been dismissed instead of 0:14:38.800 --> 0:14:41.880 what happened is that Judge Kaplan, who handled the case, 0:14:42.160 --> 0:14:46.200 denied the Department of Justice requests and held that the 0:14:46.240 --> 0:14:49.920 Federal Toward Claims Act cannot be read as expensively as 0:14:49.920 --> 0:14:52.400 the Department of Justice was asking the court to do. 0:14:52.560 --> 0:14:55.760 Here and essanctually said that the President is not a 0:14:55.840 --> 0:14:59.520 quote unquote employee of the federal government for purposes of 0:14:59.560 --> 0:15:02.960 the federal for its claim tact when he denied those allegations. 0:15:02.960 --> 0:15:05.360 Thanks for being on the Bloomberg Lawn Show, Bob. That's 0:15:05.400 --> 0:15:10.400 former federal prosecutor Robert Mintz, a partner mcarter in English. 0:15:10.800 --> 0:15:13.360 Gallaine Maxwell is being held in a Brooklyn, New York 0:15:13.480 --> 0:15:16.600 jail while she awaits trial next year on charges she 0:15:16.760 --> 0:15:20.600 traffic girls as young as fourteen for her former boyfriend 0:15:20.680 --> 0:15:24.280 Jeffrey Epstein. Maxwell's testimony a civil lawsuit by one of 0:15:24.280 --> 0:15:27.360 her accusers was made public last week, joining me as 0:15:27.360 --> 0:15:31.480 Bloomberg Legal reporter Patricia Hurtado tell us about the deposition, 0:15:31.520 --> 0:15:36.720 pat Well, this comes from a lawsuit that started after 0:15:37.200 --> 0:15:42.680 Maxwell declared Virginia Drew Frey a liar. Virginia had given 0:15:42.880 --> 0:15:46.880 um interviews and come out and declared that she had 0:15:46.920 --> 0:15:50.560 been sex trafficed as a sex slave for Epstein and 0:15:50.600 --> 0:15:55.200 that Maxwell had been her recruiter. So um, Maxwell hires 0:15:55.200 --> 0:15:58.240 a PR agency and declares her outright, you know, as 0:15:58.240 --> 0:16:01.400 a liar, and then Drew I filed a lawsuit in 0:16:02.800 --> 0:16:06.240 as a result of that, those statements issued the defamation 0:16:06.320 --> 0:16:09.240 lawsuit that was filed in New York, and as a 0:16:09.280 --> 0:16:11.960 result of that, that's how we get a deposition that 0:16:12.440 --> 0:16:16.880 in April sixteen, the Lane Maxwell sat for a deposition 0:16:17.280 --> 0:16:21.280 at the Boy Schiller offices and she was questioned for 0:16:21.320 --> 0:16:27.880 several hours about what her role was with Epstein. You know, 0:16:28.080 --> 0:16:31.200 how did she know him? What were her duties? Did 0:16:31.240 --> 0:16:34.400 she ever have any sexual encounters with underage girls or 0:16:34.400 --> 0:16:37.640 witnessed anything like that? She didn't. Said that she worked 0:16:37.680 --> 0:16:40.800 for him. She was basically an aide de camp of 0:16:41.000 --> 0:16:45.920 arranging his household, hiring staffers. But she she says that 0:16:46.040 --> 0:16:51.440 she not engaged in any illegal activity if it was consensual. 0:16:51.480 --> 0:16:56.080 There was consensual adult activity, but nothing nothing illegal. She 0:16:56.240 --> 0:17:00.200 was Epstein's girlfriend, wasn't she at some point? Yes, she 0:17:00.320 --> 0:17:03.280 was at Epstein's girlfriend from from a period of time, 0:17:03.480 --> 0:17:07.119 and she they remained to be friends, so uh. And 0:17:07.760 --> 0:17:10.679 she was employed by him, so she said. And he 0:17:10.680 --> 0:17:15.679 helped her buy a townhouse, so um. They remained close associates. 0:17:16.000 --> 0:17:19.520 And she doesn't admit to anything illegal. And in fact, 0:17:19.720 --> 0:17:22.960 she is pretty imperious in her answers. Um, there's a 0:17:23.000 --> 0:17:26.120 lot of refusals, and at one point she got so 0:17:26.160 --> 0:17:29.920 angry she slammed her hand on the table. At one point. 0:17:30.000 --> 0:17:33.600 According to a letter that grew phrase, lawyers put in 0:17:33.720 --> 0:17:37.200 and said that she had knocked the slamming of the table, 0:17:37.280 --> 0:17:41.680 had knocked the court reporters computer off the table. There's 0:17:41.720 --> 0:17:46.360 been a lot of speculation about President Clinton. What did 0:17:46.480 --> 0:17:50.119 she say about President Clinton. There's lots of rejections, but 0:17:50.240 --> 0:17:52.879 one name that does show up is President Bill Clinton. 0:17:53.280 --> 0:17:55.439 She was asked about if she'd ever phone on a 0:17:55.480 --> 0:18:00.280 plane with him, and uh, she said she didn't. Eyed 0:18:00.359 --> 0:18:03.600 an account by grew Frey that she Clinton never visited 0:18:03.640 --> 0:18:07.320 Epstein to private Aisland and the Caribbeans. So she takes 0:18:07.359 --> 0:18:13.200 every opportunity to slam grew Frey, saying Virginia is absolutely 0:18:13.240 --> 0:18:19.080 totally lying and basically the cries and denies every allegation 0:18:19.160 --> 0:18:21.720 that grew free mates and gew Fray did tell a 0:18:21.840 --> 0:18:26.199 story several stories their accounts that were given. Um. She 0:18:26.320 --> 0:18:33.440 says that Maxwell piloted uh private helicopter and flew Clinton 0:18:33.760 --> 0:18:36.919 at one point, Maxwell says she does have a private 0:18:36.960 --> 0:18:40.639 pilot's license, but she never flew Clinton. So it's a 0:18:40.720 --> 0:18:43.600 kind of thing where there's these details that are pretty 0:18:43.600 --> 0:18:46.720 extravagant if you think about the high flying life literally 0:18:46.880 --> 0:18:51.080 of Jeffrey Epstein. Um, but a lot of these things 0:18:51.160 --> 0:18:55.760 are very seeny and gritty, details about was gew Frey 0:18:56.000 --> 0:18:59.520 victimized by Epstein and Maxwell? Let me ask you this one, 0:18:59.640 --> 0:19:03.439 was has it in Clinton's name not redacted? When Prince 0:19:03.480 --> 0:19:07.520 Andrew's name was redacted, wasn't it? Yeah? There's so there's 0:19:07.520 --> 0:19:10.520 an account that Giuffrey tells, and I think by now 0:19:10.520 --> 0:19:14.240 many people have seen. She wrote a first person story 0:19:14.280 --> 0:19:18.080 about her life and gave interviews and that Shannon encounter 0:19:18.200 --> 0:19:21.320 with Prince Andrew, who is a friend of Galenn Maxwell 0:19:21.720 --> 0:19:24.400 when she was seventeen, And there's even a photo now 0:19:24.440 --> 0:19:27.680 that's famous where Prince Andrew has her his arm around 0:19:27.680 --> 0:19:31.159 her waist and they're in Maxwell's townhouse. So in the 0:19:31.240 --> 0:19:36.800 transcripts you actually see references to Blank and London town 0:19:36.840 --> 0:19:40.080 house and did you know how long have you known Blank? 0:19:40.280 --> 0:19:42.920 And so those redactions appear to line up with the 0:19:43.000 --> 0:19:48.320 story we know allegedly about her encounters with Prince Andrew, 0:19:48.680 --> 0:19:53.600 including a second encounter in New Mexico. Why Clinton's name 0:19:53.840 --> 0:19:57.560 is not redacted, it's unclear whether that was just clumsiness 0:19:58.040 --> 0:20:02.280 or you know, it's there's nothing untoward about it. So 0:20:02.560 --> 0:20:04.840 when did you see him? No, I didn't see him. 0:20:04.880 --> 0:20:06.879 Did you ever see him on a plane yet? Is 0:20:06.960 --> 0:20:10.439 she denied everything. Why did her attorneys fight so hard 0:20:10.720 --> 0:20:14.600 to keep this deposition from being, you know, revealed to 0:20:14.640 --> 0:20:19.760 the press. That's a great question. It's unclear why she 0:20:19.760 --> 0:20:24.320 would have fought so hard. I guess they're concerned that 0:20:25.400 --> 0:20:30.640 Mr and Mrs Westchester County couples, who people who show 0:20:30.720 --> 0:20:32.959 up on put for jury duty on the day her 0:20:33.000 --> 0:20:36.359 trial is supposed to start, and start hearing that this 0:20:36.560 --> 0:20:40.240 is a woman who's already accused of something pretty unseemly, right, 0:20:40.359 --> 0:20:44.960 sex trafficking girls as young as fourteen decades ago and 0:20:45.080 --> 0:20:49.320 providing them, you know, and snaring them for Epstein. That's 0:20:49.400 --> 0:20:53.920 already unseemly. You know whether or not this testimony couldn't 0:20:53.960 --> 0:20:56.560 be used. But I guess the worry for her was 0:20:56.800 --> 0:21:01.560 anyone who might read this might feel it's such a 0:21:01.760 --> 0:21:05.240 toxic subject. It would paint her in people's eyes as 0:21:05.280 --> 0:21:10.480 being completely innocent of any wrongdoing. So she's accused by 0:21:10.480 --> 0:21:14.520 the prosecutors of lying, and it's in relation to this deposition. 0:21:14.920 --> 0:21:18.200 Do you know which parts of the deposition they're accusing 0:21:18.200 --> 0:21:21.840 her of lying in? Yes, it's when she's asked if 0:21:21.880 --> 0:21:25.640 she ever witnessed Epstein in the company or in with 0:21:25.920 --> 0:21:30.960 a underage minor girl and engaged any sexual activity, and 0:21:31.000 --> 0:21:34.959 she said absolutely not. She also denies being present for 0:21:35.040 --> 0:21:37.359 any of it. She said she never saw him with 0:21:37.480 --> 0:21:41.399 underage girl. She answers the question when at one point 0:21:41.440 --> 0:21:44.760 when she's asked, do you ever see any underage girls 0:21:44.840 --> 0:21:48.040 at Epstein's island, which now we've heard from more than 0:21:48.080 --> 0:21:51.360 two dozen accusers that you know, it was a haven 0:21:51.480 --> 0:21:54.800 for Epstein to just run him up allegedly, but this 0:21:54.880 --> 0:21:58.440 is according to multiple victims. Um She says she never 0:21:58.440 --> 0:22:00.919 saw anything at all, and she's had many of my 0:22:01.920 --> 0:22:05.119 friends have children, and it's sort of like an odd 0:22:05.160 --> 0:22:09.440 answer that, you know, the apropos of nothing. So she 0:22:09.680 --> 0:22:13.600 adamantly denies. She comes out kind of imperious and haughty 0:22:13.880 --> 0:22:17.119 in her tone. Even the reading of the transcript so 0:22:17.200 --> 0:22:21.879 the government used This was highly contested by Maxwell's lawyers. 0:22:21.960 --> 0:22:25.320 They claimed the government got their hands improperly got their 0:22:25.359 --> 0:22:30.199 hands on the sealed transcripts as and use them as 0:22:30.240 --> 0:22:34.000 a basis to bring perjury charges. So the government says 0:22:34.119 --> 0:22:37.560 Maxo lied on nine separate occasions, and it's a basis 0:22:37.600 --> 0:22:40.360 for two perjury counts against her, saying she lied under 0:22:40.440 --> 0:22:44.000 oath I don't know anything about this while i'mdoing I 0:22:44.080 --> 0:22:47.320 never saw Epstein in the company of underage girls. I 0:22:47.440 --> 0:22:52.000 never witnessed any abuse of these underage girls. And um, 0:22:52.040 --> 0:22:55.080 they fought very hard to keep this from getting them sealed, 0:22:55.200 --> 0:22:58.320 and they even went to the federal appeals court to 0:22:58.400 --> 0:23:01.960 try to keep it under steal. And they also argued 0:23:02.160 --> 0:23:06.720 that they had evidence the government had improperly accessed this information. 0:23:07.359 --> 0:23:10.760 But the government does have access to federal grand jury subpoenas, 0:23:10.760 --> 0:23:13.239 so there is a possibility they could have moved to 0:23:13.240 --> 0:23:18.040 get the documents unsealed. And then they saw the testimony 0:23:18.320 --> 0:23:22.520 and realized that, according to their witnesses, she's lying, so 0:23:22.600 --> 0:23:24.720 that they hit her with two perjury counts for that. 0:23:25.000 --> 0:23:31.719 There's another deposition transcript that hasn't been opened. Yeah, and 0:23:31.800 --> 0:23:35.800 it's unclear how long this one is. Um, this one 0:23:35.960 --> 0:23:39.439 was allegedly four pages, when when it finally got to us, 0:23:39.480 --> 0:23:42.560 it was about four hundred sixty pages, and it's from April. 0:23:42.960 --> 0:23:46.800 And there's a later deposition that Maxwell's lawyer that grew phrase. 0:23:46.880 --> 0:23:51.040 Lawyers argued, look judged she never answered the questions properly. 0:23:51.359 --> 0:23:54.359 Here's what she told us. Here's why we think we 0:23:54.440 --> 0:23:56.879 need to question her again, and they put like a 0:23:57.000 --> 0:24:00.280 dossier together of why they what they will looking for, 0:24:00.520 --> 0:24:03.520 and what their theory was and what was really interesting 0:24:03.600 --> 0:24:07.080 in these documents. It almost looks like a roadmap the 0:24:07.240 --> 0:24:11.159 government followed to build their case against Maxwell. You know, 0:24:11.320 --> 0:24:13.720 their theory of the case was that she was part 0:24:13.760 --> 0:24:17.040 of it. She recruited these girls, she brought them in, 0:24:17.760 --> 0:24:20.280 and it was based on this lawsuit that sort of 0:24:20.320 --> 0:24:25.119 triggered this renewed look at Maxwell after Epstein, you know, 0:24:25.160 --> 0:24:29.320 play guilty in Florida to state charges and got to 0:24:29.359 --> 0:24:33.040 do as time part time in jail in Florida. You know, 0:24:33.119 --> 0:24:37.080 she had access to millions and millions of dollars. Can 0:24:37.160 --> 0:24:40.600 you tell from this where she got her money? Now 0:24:40.800 --> 0:24:44.840 it's totally unclear. I mean, her father allegedly was you know, 0:24:44.960 --> 0:24:51.159 a newspaper baron, but died in under unusual circumstances and 0:24:51.240 --> 0:24:55.760 a drowning, and it's unclear whether the family still had money. 0:24:55.920 --> 0:24:59.199 She potentially has money from her parents, her family and 0:24:59.240 --> 0:25:02.560 her father and the trust. But she bought a fifteen 0:25:02.600 --> 0:25:06.720 million dollar townhouse in Manhattan on the Upper East Side, 0:25:07.080 --> 0:25:09.760 very lovely, and you know where she got the money. 0:25:10.160 --> 0:25:13.640 She says that Epstein helped her buy it. Where Epstein 0:25:13.680 --> 0:25:15.960 got his money is also a question. So these are 0:25:15.960 --> 0:25:22.800 all these very murky trans financial transactions that are unexplained. 0:25:23.000 --> 0:25:26.199 Do we know what her defense is at trial? She's 0:25:26.440 --> 0:25:31.320 um arguing that she's possibly a victim as well of Epstein, 0:25:32.040 --> 0:25:34.960