WEBVTT - Hwang Sentence Confusion & Biden Pardon Powers 0:00:03.200 --> 0:00:08.000 This is Bloomberg Law with June Brusso from Bloomberg Radio. 0:00:10.039 --> 0:00:14.280 Yesterday, Arkago's founder Bill Huang was sentenced to eighteen years 0:00:14.320 --> 0:00:18.880 in prison for securities fraud and market manipulation. But today, 0:00:19.120 --> 0:00:23.599 in a really unusual twist, the judge is considering reducing 0:00:23.640 --> 0:00:27.400 that sentence. A jury convicted Wog in July on ten 0:00:27.600 --> 0:00:32.080 charges for orchestrating a scheme to mislead Banks into providing 0:00:32.200 --> 0:00:36.480 Archagos with billions of dollars in trading capacity, which ultimately 0:00:36.560 --> 0:00:39.200 led to the collapse of his thirty six billion dollar 0:00:39.320 --> 0:00:42.840 family office and cost Wall Street Banks more than nine 0:00:42.880 --> 0:00:48.280 billion dollars. Yesterday, Judge Alvin Hellerstein didn't seem particularly open 0:00:48.360 --> 0:00:51.440 to the arguments of the defense, even musing at one 0:00:51.479 --> 0:00:55.200 point that Wang was a god fearing man who cheats 0:00:55.240 --> 0:00:58.560 fellow men. He sentenced him to close to the twenty 0:00:58.600 --> 0:01:01.800 one years the government had asked for, But it seems 0:01:01.880 --> 0:01:06.600 things can change significantly overnight. Joining me is Bloomberg Legal 0:01:06.640 --> 0:01:10.319 reporter CHRYSTL. Mesh, who's been in the courtroom for these 0:01:10.360 --> 0:01:13.440 hearings and the trial, and we were talking yesterday about 0:01:13.440 --> 0:01:17.720 how unusual the sentencing hearing was. Day one of the 0:01:17.760 --> 0:01:22.040 sentencing hearing. And now it's getting even more unusual. The 0:01:22.160 --> 0:01:25.319 judge did impose sentence yesterday of eighteen years. 0:01:25.319 --> 0:01:29.600 What happened today, Yeah, so unusual, bizarre, however you want 0:01:29.600 --> 0:01:32.080 to put it is probably a good descriptor. So the 0:01:32.160 --> 0:01:34.679 judge had extended the sentencing hearing for a day to 0:01:34.880 --> 0:01:37.760 address some other issues such as restitution and forfeiture and 0:01:37.800 --> 0:01:40.720 bail pending appeal. And you know, that's very unusual in itself. 0:01:40.800 --> 0:01:43.560 Christmast sentencings take just a couple of hours. But then 0:01:43.600 --> 0:01:46.279 this morning when they came in, Barry Burke, the lawyer 0:01:46.360 --> 0:01:49.200 for mister Vong, got up and said he had kind 0:01:49.200 --> 0:01:52.000 of tossed and turned all night and was, you know, 0:01:52.440 --> 0:01:55.320 just really wondering if they should have done more. At 0:01:55.320 --> 0:01:59.480 that point, he proposed changing the sentence, essentially not giving 0:01:59.560 --> 0:02:03.960 him less than eighteen years in custody, but having the 0:02:04.000 --> 0:02:06.560 first eleven and a half years be in prison in 0:02:06.600 --> 0:02:09.960 the second six point five years be in home confinement. 0:02:09.960 --> 0:02:12.880 And the reason he did that is because there's Bureau 0:02:12.919 --> 0:02:16.720 Prison Justice Department rules that when you have more than 0:02:16.720 --> 0:02:19.840 eleven and a half years incarceration, you can't be in 0:02:19.880 --> 0:02:22.880 a minimum security prison, which he said, you know, would 0:02:22.919 --> 0:02:25.480 prevent his fanley from visiting. He's sixty years old, he 0:02:25.520 --> 0:02:28.600 has heart issues that may require open heart surgery. He 0:02:28.720 --> 0:02:29.840 was saying, you know, this is the kind of thing 0:02:29.840 --> 0:02:32.520 that happened during COVID, and it sounds like the judge 0:02:32.560 --> 0:02:34.640 is considering that. He said he thinks he's allowed to 0:02:34.680 --> 0:02:37.120 do it. He's not saying he will. The government argued 0:02:37.120 --> 0:02:39.480 against it, saying they think that would kind of take 0:02:39.639 --> 0:02:41.840 the bomps out of the sentence that you know, they 0:02:41.880 --> 0:02:43.880 wanted to send a message to others who would commit 0:02:43.919 --> 0:02:45.960 similar crimes when they kind of noted that a lot 0:02:45.960 --> 0:02:48.160 of his crimes were during COVID. A lot of it 0:02:48.200 --> 0:02:50.480 was just done sitting around a table and known apartment. 0:02:50.560 --> 0:02:52.359 So that's what they're kind of known, a hey, you know, 0:02:52.520 --> 0:02:54.480 he's going to be on home confinement, like that's not 0:02:54.600 --> 0:02:57.680 exactly going to stop him from, you know, committing further crimes. 0:02:58.320 --> 0:03:01.160 So the judge did not decide today, but it's going 0:03:01.200 --> 0:03:05.720 to take post briefing from the two sides by December fifth, 0:03:05.880 --> 0:03:08.920 and then we'll hold a hearing on December eighteenth, presumably 0:03:08.960 --> 0:03:11.920 to direst the forfeiture in a possible find but that 0:03:11.919 --> 0:03:15.560 could also be hearing on whether the sentence is changed 0:03:15.560 --> 0:03:15.840 at all. 0:03:15.960 --> 0:03:19.160 I mean, I imagine that Billhong didn't sleep well last 0:03:19.240 --> 0:03:22.880 night either. So besides tossing and turning, did the defense 0:03:22.919 --> 0:03:27.280 attorney have any new arguments for a lower sentence, I 0:03:27.320 --> 0:03:31.240 mean different from the ones that they already articulated yesterday. 0:03:31.520 --> 0:03:34.360 Not really. I mean, they rested on their arguments, but 0:03:34.440 --> 0:03:37.520 they were emphasizing that they don't want to change the sentence. 0:03:37.560 --> 0:03:40.440 They just think that, you know, being in prison for 0:03:40.520 --> 0:03:43.720 that much, it's also a much more restrictive facility if 0:03:43.760 --> 0:03:46.760 he would be in anything above minimum security, so that 0:03:46.880 --> 0:03:48.680 it know, it would be difficult for his family to visit, 0:03:48.800 --> 0:03:51.280 be difficult for him to get medical care, that sort 0:03:51.320 --> 0:03:54.200 of thing. So they didn't really expand on their arguments 0:03:54.240 --> 0:03:56.760 from yesterday. It was more about his health, the fact 0:03:56.800 --> 0:03:58.600 that he wouldn't be able to see his family, that 0:03:58.640 --> 0:04:01.240 sort of thing. The really interesting part to me is that, 0:04:01.720 --> 0:04:04.560 you know the fact that the judge extended the hearing 0:04:04.640 --> 0:04:08.960 for a second day essentially gave the defense a window 0:04:09.360 --> 0:04:11.880 to make this argument. Not saying they wouldn't have made 0:04:11.880 --> 0:04:14.360 this argument at the end of the day yesterday, but 0:04:14.480 --> 0:04:16.919 you know, given this judge's age, and you know, he 0:04:17.040 --> 0:04:19.240 was clearly, you know, ready to move on at the 0:04:19.320 --> 0:04:21.359 end of the day, at least from day. You know, 0:04:21.400 --> 0:04:23.480 they came back fresh this morning, and it gave these 0:04:23.480 --> 0:04:27.400 defenses an opportunity to make this argument a little more clearly, 0:04:27.440 --> 0:04:29.800 and when the judge, you know, was fully engaged in 0:04:29.880 --> 0:04:31.440 listening to what they had to say. 0:04:31.640 --> 0:04:34.640 He is ninety years old. It's amazing that he's still 0:04:34.920 --> 0:04:38.800 presiding over trials like this, complicated trials like this. 0:04:39.400 --> 0:04:42.000 So yeah, sure, the judge asked. 0:04:41.800 --> 0:04:46.359 Wong's attorneys to submit information on his health status to 0:04:46.560 --> 0:04:49.520 him privately, But what is he looking for in the 0:04:49.560 --> 0:04:51.880 papers he's asking both sides to. 0:04:51.880 --> 0:04:55.280 Submit, Especially, he just wants more arguments on this, and 0:04:55.720 --> 0:04:57.600 I think he's really trying to flesh out more of 0:04:57.680 --> 0:05:01.159 the government's arguments against this, and he's legally allowed to 0:05:01.200 --> 0:05:03.000 do it. I think that's what he really wants to know. 0:05:03.080 --> 0:05:05.440 He wants case law and to know if the law 0:05:05.480 --> 0:05:08.280 allows him to reduce a sentence. He's already given. Another 0:05:08.520 --> 0:05:10.760 kind of procedural wrinkle it to this is that you know, 0:05:10.880 --> 0:05:13.520 at the end of every sentencing hearing, when someone gets sentenced, 0:05:13.560 --> 0:05:16.520 the judge usually signals what he's going to give. He 0:05:16.600 --> 0:05:19.160 asked the parties, as there are reason I shouldn't impose 0:05:19.279 --> 0:05:22.280 this sentence, you know, usually they say no, and then 0:05:22.440 --> 0:05:25.720 he officially imposed sentence. He asked the dependence to stand up, 0:05:25.760 --> 0:05:27.640 and he says, you're sentenced to this, you know, the 0:05:27.680 --> 0:05:30.080 custody of the Bureau of Prisons for X number of years. 0:05:30.400 --> 0:05:34.400 He didn't do that yesterday. Barry Burke noted that, you know, 0:05:34.480 --> 0:05:37.040 at the beginning of his kind of argument today, and 0:05:37.080 --> 0:05:39.880 that might have been, you know, some sort of signal 0:05:39.920 --> 0:05:42.240 to him that he could have made this argument. So 0:05:42.520 --> 0:05:45.600 the sentence has actually not been officially imposed at this time. 0:05:46.120 --> 0:05:49.800 I'm sensing a legal loophole ahead here, and that all 0:05:49.839 --> 0:05:51.719 goes to what we were talking about yesterday, which is 0:05:51.720 --> 0:05:57.080 how bizarre this sentencing was. Of the structure of the sentencing. 0:05:56.960 --> 0:06:00.360 I'll just add this. Usually it folly for a defense 0:06:00.520 --> 0:06:03.839 attorney to attempt to get up to a federal judge 0:06:04.360 --> 0:06:08.360 and essentially re argue their case after the judges imposed 0:06:08.360 --> 0:06:12.560 sent or reargue their their sentencing recommendation. And you know, 0:06:12.640 --> 0:06:15.200 with another judge, I don't know if the defense attorney 0:06:15.240 --> 0:06:18.200 would have done this because they already kind of irked 0:06:18.279 --> 0:06:21.640 him with their request for no jail time. And you know, 0:06:21.680 --> 0:06:23.360 if it had been another judge, they may have been 0:06:23.360 --> 0:06:26.200 hesitant to do that. But he's made it clear throughout 0:06:26.240 --> 0:06:28.200 the trial that you know that he's willing to change 0:06:28.240 --> 0:06:28.600 his mind. 0:06:29.040 --> 0:06:33.800 Chris tell us more about his style, where he interrupts 0:06:34.000 --> 0:06:37.360 the parties a lot, you know, interjects himself into the 0:06:37.400 --> 0:06:40.360 proceedings more than most federal judges do. 0:06:41.560 --> 0:06:45.040 Right, judges will spitball all the time during trials, and 0:06:45.440 --> 0:06:48.240 you know, ask questions of counsel, but they generally prefer 0:06:48.440 --> 0:06:52.200 to allow the proceedings to happen without their interference. And 0:06:52.920 --> 0:06:55.960 this judge was not doing that. He was constantly engaging 0:06:55.960 --> 0:06:58.160 with the lawyers, who was constantly telling them to move 0:06:58.160 --> 0:07:01.080 on or ask a different question times, just asking their 0:07:01.160 --> 0:07:05.120 questions for them. So any attempt to like make another 0:07:05.240 --> 0:07:09.080 argument to most judges is met with scorn. And you 0:07:09.120 --> 0:07:11.960 know it's because they make it clear what they're thinking 0:07:12.040 --> 0:07:15.000 is ahead of any kind of decision. Even if it's 0:07:15.040 --> 0:07:16.880 they don't tell you what the decision is going to be, 0:07:17.200 --> 0:07:21.480 they hint at it. And Hellerstein regularly would reconsider things 0:07:21.480 --> 0:07:23.320 in the middle of the case, and you know, if 0:07:23.320 --> 0:07:25.560 he heard a better argument from either side, he would 0:07:25.600 --> 0:07:27.560 he would change his mind. And you just don't always 0:07:27.600 --> 0:07:31.160 see that with federal judges. They tend to believe in 0:07:31.200 --> 0:07:34.440 their convictions, and they stand on their rulings and they 0:07:34.440 --> 0:07:37.320 don't really reconsider them unless they're significant new evidence. 0:07:37.720 --> 0:07:40.160 Right, They don't want to hear the same arguments over 0:07:40.200 --> 0:07:44.400 and over again. So was there any argument or any 0:07:44.640 --> 0:07:46.800 requests to revoke his bail. 0:07:47.480 --> 0:07:51.440 No, the government did not oppose having him self surrender, 0:07:51.560 --> 0:07:53.480 meaning you know, he would just report to prison whenever 0:07:53.520 --> 0:07:55.880 the judge told him to. But they did oppose the 0:07:55.920 --> 0:07:58.240 bail pending appeal, saying that you know, and this is 0:07:58.240 --> 0:08:01.720 a significant term in prison and he should serve it soon. 0:08:02.400 --> 0:08:06.320 Since the judge granted him bail pending appeal, Wong will 0:08:06.320 --> 0:08:10.200 be out through the entire appellate process, which could take years. 0:08:10.640 --> 0:08:13.800 Yes, unless, of course, the judge decides to reconsider it. 0:08:14.520 --> 0:08:17.120 Was anything else decided today or discussed? 0:08:17.640 --> 0:08:22.480 Not really so forfeitures. Forfeiture is not. However, I will 0:08:22.480 --> 0:08:27.240 say that there were some interesting exchanges about his assets 0:08:27.760 --> 0:08:31.720 and the judge noting that really wondering out loud, you know, 0:08:31.960 --> 0:08:35.080 whether his assets need to be secured in case of, 0:08:35.280 --> 0:08:37.320 you know, a final judgment against him, that would be 0:08:37.559 --> 0:08:42.640 combined with a monetary penalty or restitution or forfeiture, whatever 0:08:42.679 --> 0:08:44.480 have you, because he says he only had fifty five 0:08:44.520 --> 0:08:47.160 million dollars and some of his assets are jointly owned. 0:08:47.200 --> 0:08:49.720 So the judge, you know, wondered whether personal loans should 0:08:49.720 --> 0:08:52.080 be called back, real estate should be liquidated, whether his 0:08:52.160 --> 0:08:55.400 residence should be a quote unquote more modest one, whether 0:08:55.559 --> 0:08:58.720 artworks should be liquidated, you know. But he also noted 0:08:58.720 --> 0:09:01.440 that any kind of four picture you know, would have 0:09:01.440 --> 0:09:04.120 to come after restitution, noting that the most important thing 0:09:04.160 --> 0:09:06.520 is that the victims get paid back first. 0:09:07.040 --> 0:09:09.480 So are those issues going to be discussed at the 0:09:09.559 --> 0:09:11.160 next hearing in December. 0:09:11.520 --> 0:09:14.280 A restitution is deferred, it doesn't sound like that's going 0:09:14.280 --> 0:09:17.360 to be immediately addressed. For a fiture could be. It's 0:09:17.400 --> 0:09:21.280 hard to say. It was not entirely clear exactly what 0:09:21.320 --> 0:09:23.079 they will be putting in those filings, but I think 0:09:23.080 --> 0:09:24.480 they will probably cover the gamut. 0:09:25.000 --> 0:09:28.120 Finally, Chris, I can't think of another case where a 0:09:28.200 --> 0:09:34.480 judge reconsidered a sentence so quickly after imposing it. Of course, 0:09:35.559 --> 0:09:39.200 as you mentioned, he didn't really officially impose the sentence. 0:09:40.240 --> 0:09:47.080 I mean, defendants often make motions for reconsideration of sentences afterwards, 0:09:47.800 --> 0:09:49.720 but that's not what's going on here. 0:09:50.280 --> 0:09:52.600 Yeah, no, that's very true. And you know, that's a 0:09:52.600 --> 0:09:55.840 good point given that, like I said, many of these 0:09:55.880 --> 0:09:58.800 things are done in a matter of hours. They're not 0:09:58.920 --> 0:10:02.840 done over two day, and judges are pretty quick to 0:10:03.480 --> 0:10:06.000 adjourn a sentencing hearing if they feel they need more 0:10:06.040 --> 0:10:08.880 briefing or there are issues they need to resolve before 0:10:09.120 --> 0:10:11.480 they impose sentence. They want that to be the final 0:10:11.679 --> 0:10:14.520 say kind of. It just never really happens like this. 0:10:15.040 --> 0:10:18.640 I have seen a case where the judge this was 0:10:18.720 --> 0:10:22.720 in Connecticut in a white collar case involving a bond trader, 0:10:23.120 --> 0:10:27.400 where the judge did not officially impose sentence that day 0:10:27.559 --> 0:10:30.360 and postponed the hearing for more briefing on I don't 0:10:30.360 --> 0:10:32.600 remember when it was restitution, but it was another issue, 0:10:32.640 --> 0:10:34.920 and then he appoass sence the next time. But that 0:10:34.960 --> 0:10:38.080 was a probationary case, so it's not really the same 0:10:38.200 --> 0:10:39.000 kind of scenario. 0:10:39.320 --> 0:10:42.160 I'm sure both the prosecution and the defense are doing 0:10:42.360 --> 0:10:45.839 a lot of research to find a similar case. Thanks 0:10:45.840 --> 0:10:49.960 so much, Chris. That's Bloomberg Legal reporter Crystal Mesh coming 0:10:50.000 --> 0:10:53.120 up next on the Bloomberg Law Show. Well, President Joe 0:10:53.160 --> 0:10:56.640 Biden use his pardon powers in the last two months 0:10:56.640 --> 0:10:59.960 of his administration? Could he give his son Hunter Biden 0:11:00.080 --> 0:11:03.440 a pardon? And what about the members of his administration? 0:11:04.160 --> 0:11:08.640 On Trump's revengelist, I'm June Grosso and you're listening to Bloomberg. 0:11:12.120 --> 0:11:18.000 This is Bloomberg Law with June Grosso from Bloomberg Radio. 0:11:20.000 --> 0:11:24.679 My conscience tells me clearly and certainly that I cannot 0:11:24.720 --> 0:11:30.000 prolong the bad dreams that continue to reopen a chapter 0:11:31.080 --> 0:11:32.199 that is closed. 0:11:33.320 --> 0:11:37.559 It's probably the most famous pardon in US history. On 0:11:37.600 --> 0:11:42.640 September eighth of nineteen ninety four, President Gerald Ford addressed 0:11:42.679 --> 0:11:46.080 the nation from the Oval Office to announce his decision 0:11:46.120 --> 0:11:49.680 to grant a pardon to former President Richard Nixon, and 0:11:49.760 --> 0:11:52.360 Ford signed the pardon papers on camera. 0:11:53.400 --> 0:11:59.840 Now, therefore, I'm Gerald R. Ford, President of the United States, 0:12:01.559 --> 0:12:06.560 pursuant to the pardon power conferred upon me by Article two, 0:12:08.160 --> 0:12:14.079 Section two of the Constitution, have granted and by these 0:12:14.200 --> 0:12:19.760 presidents do grant a full, free and absolute pardon unto 0:12:19.880 --> 0:12:25.600 Richard Nixon. For all offenses against the United States which 0:12:25.640 --> 0:12:31.280 he Richard Nixon has committed or may have committed. 0:12:32.200 --> 0:12:36.560 That pardon was extremely controversial and may have cost Ford 0:12:36.640 --> 0:12:40.960 a second term. Some fifty years later, people are still 0:12:41.000 --> 0:12:44.800 asking whether Ford made the right decision. But presidents since 0:12:44.880 --> 0:12:48.679 George Washington have granted pardons, often in the final days 0:12:48.679 --> 0:12:52.520 of their presidency. Through almost four years of his presidency, 0:12:52.960 --> 0:12:56.760 Joe Biden has only granted pardons in twenty five cases 0:12:56.840 --> 0:13:00.000 and commuted the sentences of one hundred and thirty two others. 0:13:00.679 --> 0:13:03.880 Biden has less than sixty days left to use the 0:13:03.920 --> 0:13:08.760 pardon power, power he has sole control over. Joining me 0:13:08.840 --> 0:13:11.920 is Harold Krant, a professor at the Chicago Kent College 0:13:11.960 --> 0:13:16.080 of Law who's written extensively about the presidential pardon power. 0:13:16.720 --> 0:13:20.640 How this is an extraordinary power that the president has 0:13:20.880 --> 0:13:24.040 within his sole control. Tell us about the pardon power. 0:13:24.760 --> 0:13:28.120 The president under Article too has the power to exercise 0:13:28.200 --> 0:13:32.520 the traditional partner authority. Within the understanding of the partner 0:13:32.520 --> 0:13:36.960 authority is that the president can get out of jail 0:13:37.520 --> 0:13:40.760 free card to anybody who's been previously convicted, or he 0:13:40.840 --> 0:13:45.520 can preemptively pardon individual by saying that the individual should 0:13:45.520 --> 0:13:48.960 not even undergo a trial, and that he will be 0:13:49.280 --> 0:13:53.000 forgiven for that questionable conduct that the individual engaged. In 0:13:53.360 --> 0:13:56.199 addition to the pardon power, within that is also the 0:13:56.240 --> 0:14:01.000 ability to exercise cleendency to reduce the wishment of someone 0:14:01.160 --> 0:14:05.119 or to infect to restore their right to civil activities 0:14:05.120 --> 0:14:07.880 such as voting, and so that is all encompassed within 0:14:07.960 --> 0:14:11.840 the pardon power. And presidents have exercised pardons from George 0:14:11.880 --> 0:14:17.000 Washington on and indeed President Biden has exercises authority much 0:14:17.080 --> 0:14:19.880 less ambitiously than his predecessors have. 0:14:20.360 --> 0:14:24.320 Has the pardon power ever been challenged in court? 0:14:25.080 --> 0:14:28.640 There's been a number of challenges based upon conditional pardons, 0:14:28.680 --> 0:14:33.480 based upon questions of whether parton authority violates separation of 0:14:33.600 --> 0:14:37.560 powers in terms of underlining what either judges or what 0:14:37.680 --> 0:14:41.800 legislatures have done. But by and large the courts have 0:14:41.880 --> 0:14:45.040 said it's a progres that we can't touch. It's up 0:14:45.080 --> 0:14:47.760 to the president, and the president is to use it 0:14:48.000 --> 0:14:53.640 wisely or unwisely, to pardon friends, campaign donors, but also 0:14:54.560 --> 0:14:58.480 in cases of injustice, both in historical injustices as well 0:14:58.480 --> 0:15:01.880 as more recent justic and presidents have used it for 0:15:01.920 --> 0:15:05.600 all those reasons. President Obama used it widely to help 0:15:05.640 --> 0:15:09.840 people with long senses for drug offenses and had commuted 0:15:09.880 --> 0:15:13.640 their sentences in some cases and give full pardons in others. 0:15:14.040 --> 0:15:17.840 President Trump exercised it for campaign core readers, but also 0:15:18.160 --> 0:15:22.240 in other cases as well, and so far President Biden 0:15:23.040 --> 0:15:27.640 mostly is exercise it in two contexts, one for marijuana 0:15:27.920 --> 0:15:31.800 use on public lands and the second four to clean 0:15:31.840 --> 0:15:34.600 the records for those who previously were convicted of a 0:15:34.720 --> 0:15:38.880 sexual offense for consensual sex in the armed forces. Those 0:15:38.880 --> 0:15:41.960 are the two sets of individuals, but there have been 0:15:42.000 --> 0:15:45.880 amnesties in the Civil War afterwards that were granted through 0:15:45.920 --> 0:15:50.600 the Partner Authority, antesties for Vietnam War drafters. So presidents 0:15:50.640 --> 0:15:54.760 have utilized the Partner Authority in a great many different ways. 0:15:54.800 --> 0:15:57.240 And it's really up to President Biden now as he 0:15:57.400 --> 0:15:59.720 sort of most of these last two months of his term, 0:15:59.800 --> 0:16:02.520 to decide how to wield that authority. 0:16:02.960 --> 0:16:06.120 The first name that comes up when people talk about 0:16:06.640 --> 0:16:10.920 who President Biden will pardon is his son, Hunter Biden. 0:16:11.560 --> 0:16:16.680 He's currently awaiting sentencing on a felony gun charge where 0:16:17.000 --> 0:16:20.360 he faces a maximum sentence of twenty five years, and 0:16:20.440 --> 0:16:24.160 there are also tax related charges. President Biden has said 0:16:24.200 --> 0:16:27.360 he would not pardon his son, but could he commute 0:16:27.440 --> 0:16:30.640 any sentence, And he has said that. 0:16:30.800 --> 0:16:33.600 He actually could commute the sentence, and so Hunter Biden 0:16:33.600 --> 0:16:36.640 would still have the fact of a conviction. He might 0:16:36.640 --> 0:16:39.520 be script of some of his civil rights, such as 0:16:39.760 --> 0:16:43.200 voting or holding particular offices depending upon the jurisdiction, but 0:16:43.240 --> 0:16:45.400 he would not have to serve time. And so that 0:16:45.560 --> 0:16:48.720 is probably one head of bet that would be the 0:16:49.080 --> 0:16:52.920 attack that President Biden would take with respect to his son. 0:16:53.560 --> 0:16:54.760 A tough call for sure. 0:16:55.240 --> 0:16:58.080 Of course, politicians have been known to change their mind. 0:16:58.280 --> 0:17:00.600 I guess he could just say I am going to 0:17:00.640 --> 0:17:02.640 pardon my son because he won't be getting a fair 0:17:02.720 --> 0:17:04.800 shake with the incoming administration. 0:17:05.280 --> 0:17:08.439 And of course President Clinton pardoned his half brother with 0:17:08.680 --> 0:17:11.679 two days remaining on his term as as well, So 0:17:11.720 --> 0:17:14.719 there is president for commuting the sentence of pardoning your 0:17:14.720 --> 0:17:15.560 own family members. 0:17:15.840 --> 0:17:20.120 You know, you mentioned preemptive pardons, and Trump has threatened 0:17:20.160 --> 0:17:24.919 to prosecute people he feels have wronged him, and a 0:17:24.920 --> 0:17:29.720 lot of those people are in the Justice Department or prosecutors. Also, 0:17:29.760 --> 0:17:34.719 you have Alexander Majorcis who Republicans, a group of Republicans 0:17:34.720 --> 0:17:39.359 have tried to impeache already. What about preemptive pardons. 0:17:40.280 --> 0:17:44.280 So again, another tough choice the president has to make 0:17:44.359 --> 0:17:47.359 in the next coming months is whether to protect those 0:17:47.840 --> 0:17:53.040 whom President Trump has accused of illegal conduct, and those 0:17:53.080 --> 0:17:56.120 include many in his administration, Jack Smith, the Special Counsel 0:17:56.560 --> 0:18:00.720 Merrik Island, the Attorney general, or the Homeland Secretary maw York. 0:18:01.000 --> 0:18:05.120 As you suggested, and it's not beyond imagination at all 0:18:05.280 --> 0:18:09.040 that President Pump to somebody would try to indict members 0:18:09.119 --> 0:18:12.760 of Biden's administration for illegal conduct, and then they would 0:18:12.760 --> 0:18:17.800 have the cost and the inminy of standing trial, even 0:18:17.840 --> 0:18:21.800 if they think they're incredibly innocent. So President Biden could 0:18:21.840 --> 0:18:24.440 protect them with the wave of a hand by issuing 0:18:24.760 --> 0:18:27.600 preemptive pardons. But that has a cost too, because then 0:18:27.640 --> 0:18:31.160 it looks as if there's something to pardon. It looks 0:18:31.200 --> 0:18:34.440 as if there's some kind of illegal activity that needs 0:18:34.480 --> 0:18:37.840 to be swept under the rug. So it's again another 0:18:37.880 --> 0:18:41.000 tough choice is do you protect people from the costs 0:18:41.400 --> 0:18:44.560 of being in the public eye with an indictment against you, 0:18:45.000 --> 0:18:48.800 But in doing so, you then open up some kind 0:18:49.040 --> 0:18:53.000 of aura that there might have been illegal condent going 0:18:53.000 --> 0:18:56.159 on in the administration. So that's a tough path for 0:18:56.480 --> 0:18:58.200 President Biden to go down, and he has to make 0:18:58.240 --> 0:18:58.680 that call. 0:18:59.160 --> 0:19:01.800 How does it work. Suppose he says I'm going to 0:19:01.840 --> 0:19:05.359 pardon you know, the Attorney General and the top staff 0:19:05.359 --> 0:19:09.240 at Justice. Does the Attorney General get to say, no, 0:19:09.359 --> 0:19:12.240 I don't want that pardon because it would imply that 0:19:12.280 --> 0:19:13.280 I did something wrong. 0:19:14.080 --> 0:19:16.399 Right, So you can reject a pardon, and there have 0:19:16.480 --> 0:19:19.600 been individuals in the past who have rejected pardons, usually 0:19:20.080 --> 0:19:23.720 in different contexts. Generally, it's more likely that one would 0:19:23.720 --> 0:19:26.720 reject a conditional pardon because one doesn't like the conditions 0:19:26.720 --> 0:19:29.119 that the president would place on it. But you can 0:19:29.160 --> 0:19:33.479 also just reject a straight out pardon. So Amyeric Ireland 0:19:33.480 --> 0:19:36.080 could say no thanks, And again it's just because of 0:19:36.119 --> 0:19:38.000 the fact that you do. The president, by the way, 0:19:38.080 --> 0:19:42.600 does have to identify the conduct or the transactional moments 0:19:42.800 --> 0:19:45.120 for which the partner is being issued. So I can't 0:19:45.160 --> 0:19:48.159 just say everybody in my administration is pardoned. You'd have 0:19:48.200 --> 0:19:51.880 to say for conduct a rising out of X, or 0:19:51.920 --> 0:19:52.840 for this incident. 0:19:53.160 --> 0:19:56.919 Why will you explain what a conditional pardon looks like. 0:19:57.480 --> 0:20:00.159 So a conditional partner is when the president would say, 0:20:00.920 --> 0:20:03.480 I will give you a pardon if you agree to 0:20:03.560 --> 0:20:06.120 leave the country, or I'll give you a pardon if 0:20:06.160 --> 0:20:09.040 you agree not to associate with no felons, or I'll 0:20:09.040 --> 0:20:11.480 give you a pardon on the condition that you take 0:20:11.840 --> 0:20:14.680 drug tests every two weeks for the next two years 0:20:14.720 --> 0:20:17.119 to make sure you don't go back into substance abuse. 0:20:17.480 --> 0:20:22.120 And presidents have issued these conditional pardons for generations. It's 0:20:22.200 --> 0:20:26.080 unlikely that in the preemptive pardon case that President Biden 0:20:26.119 --> 0:20:28.840 would attach to such condition, but they have been very 0:20:28.840 --> 0:20:31.720 controversial in the past. I mean, one example, President Quinton 0:20:31.800 --> 0:20:36.119 issued a conditional pardon to members of the Puerto Rican 0:20:36.640 --> 0:20:39.960 terrorist group the FALN, but when the conditions were that 0:20:40.000 --> 0:20:42.879 they don't see each other again, they don't talk about 0:20:43.040 --> 0:20:47.240 revolutionary activities in Puerto Rico, and if you've reached the condition, 0:20:47.760 --> 0:20:49.840 you risk having to go back into jail. 0:20:50.359 --> 0:20:52.800 Behind the scenes. If he was going to issue a 0:20:52.840 --> 0:20:56.960 pardon to someone in a top person in his administration, 0:20:57.160 --> 0:21:01.480 I assume that they would learn about it before or absolutely. 0:21:01.560 --> 0:21:04.400 I mean, there is a process and a US Pardon attorney, 0:21:04.440 --> 0:21:07.600 and there's now eight thousand petitions for pardons that are 0:21:07.640 --> 0:21:11.919 pending before the pardon attorney, and then those are vetted 0:21:12.080 --> 0:21:14.760 in a certain structured way. But with respect to these 0:21:14.840 --> 0:21:18.200 high profile issues that we're talking about, the president would 0:21:18.200 --> 0:21:21.399 have a discussion with them first, because again, you wouldn't 0:21:21.440 --> 0:21:25.000 want this public relations disaster of extending a pardon only 0:21:25.160 --> 0:21:27.680 for the individual to reject it, you know. And again, 0:21:27.680 --> 0:21:30.000 if you want to just sort of think about scenarios, 0:21:30.280 --> 0:21:32.840 what kind of message would it make if President Biden 0:21:32.960 --> 0:21:36.520 sought to issue a pardon to President Trump? You know, 0:21:36.640 --> 0:21:39.840 on the one hand, it would be seen as, you know, 0:21:39.920 --> 0:21:43.000 can we pull together as a country. On the other hand, 0:21:43.119 --> 0:21:46.200 it could be seen just as more political gainsmanship. 0:21:46.840 --> 0:21:50.359 Is there actually talk that Biden might issue a pardon 0:21:50.400 --> 0:21:50.879 to Trump. 0:21:51.560 --> 0:21:55.280 I'm sure people around the president have thought about it, 0:21:55.640 --> 0:21:58.840 analyze it from a political perspective. It wouldn't get rid 0:21:58.840 --> 0:22:01.399 of the Georgia the New York cases, but it certainly 0:22:01.480 --> 0:22:06.560 would get rid of the DC and Florida cases. Those 0:22:07.160 --> 0:22:09.760 are going to be in hold anyway for four years, 0:22:10.240 --> 0:22:14.440 and so maybe it's worth the kind of statesmanship sort 0:22:14.480 --> 0:22:18.600 of chip to offer the pardon because you're not really 0:22:18.600 --> 0:22:20.600 giving much help. But I think a lot of people 0:22:20.640 --> 0:22:24.440 would feel hurt by that. As well on the Democratic side. 0:22:24.720 --> 0:22:27.840 So again, there's just a ton of tough calls that 0:22:27.880 --> 0:22:30.760 the president should be making, should be analyzing right now. 0:22:31.280 --> 0:22:34.800 Yeah, I mean, don't we assume that when Trump comes in, 0:22:35.000 --> 0:22:38.680 whoever his attorney general is, will just dismiss those cases. 0:22:39.040 --> 0:22:43.719 Absolutely. So again, there's very little to lose by offering 0:22:43.720 --> 0:22:47.760 a pardon now, because the Republicans will just dismiss the 0:22:48.440 --> 0:22:50.399 federal cases against President Trump. 0:22:50.720 --> 0:22:53.360 Coming up next on the Bloomberg Law Show, a group 0:22:53.440 --> 0:22:57.760 of House Democrats are asking President Biden to grant clemency 0:22:58.000 --> 0:23:02.679 to potentially thousands of InCor serrated people, including inmates on 0:23:02.840 --> 0:23:06.840 federal death row. I'm June Grosso and you're listening to Bloomberg. 0:23:07.200 --> 0:23:11.879