1
00:00:04,040 --> 00:00:08,880
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Brusso from Bloomberg Radio.

2
00:00:09,960 --> 00:00:14,160
Speaker 1: The fourth person of the Atlanta Special grand Jury investigating

3
00:00:14,240 --> 00:00:18,720
Speaker 1: Donald Trump's efforts to overturn George's election results has done

4
00:00:18,720 --> 00:00:22,280
Speaker 1: a sort of media tour. Emily Coors has dropped hints

5
00:00:22,280 --> 00:00:25,720
Speaker 1: about the findings of the grand jury, saying on CNN

6
00:00:25,840 --> 00:00:30,160
Speaker 1: that the panel's still secret recommendations include indicting more than

7
00:00:30,200 --> 00:00:33,320
Speaker 1: a dozen people, even hinting strongly that one of the

8
00:00:33,360 --> 00:00:37,159
Speaker 1: targets would be Trump himself. We definitely heard a lot

9
00:00:37,200 --> 00:00:41,960
Speaker 1: about former President Trump, and we definitely discussed him a

10
00:00:42,040 --> 00:00:45,880
Speaker 1: lot in the room. And I will say that when

11
00:00:45,880 --> 00:00:49,000
Speaker 1: this list comes out, you wouldn't They're no major plot

12
00:00:49,040 --> 00:00:52,680
Speaker 1: twists waiting for you. Does her unusual candor about secret

13
00:00:52,680 --> 00:00:56,600
Speaker 1: proceedings complicate the work of the prosecutor? Here to answer

14
00:00:56,600 --> 00:00:59,960
Speaker 1: that question, is David Super, a professor at Georgetown Law School,

15
00:01:00,560 --> 00:01:04,639
Speaker 1: describe the purpose of the grand jury for us, A

16
00:01:04,680 --> 00:01:09,840
Speaker 1: grand jury was set up to provide the authorities with

17
00:01:10,000 --> 00:01:14,560
Speaker 1: information about people who had or might have committed crimes.

18
00:01:15,000 --> 00:01:19,560
Speaker 1: It's an extension in a sense of the prosecutorial powers

19
00:01:19,600 --> 00:01:24,880
Speaker 1: of the state, and it's an effort to inform the

20
00:01:25,040 --> 00:01:29,600
Speaker 1: prosecutor about things that they might not otherwise know, or

21
00:01:29,720 --> 00:01:33,360
Speaker 1: to bring the people's judgment to bear on evidence the

22
00:01:33,400 --> 00:01:36,560
Speaker 1: prosecutor is collected that they believe indicates there may be

23
00:01:36,640 --> 00:01:40,440
Speaker 1: a crime. And why the secrecy Because a grand jury

24
00:01:40,600 --> 00:01:45,480
Speaker 1: is set up to be one sided. There's no defense

25
00:01:45,640 --> 00:01:50,680
Speaker 1: at a grand jury, and there's no cross examination, so

26
00:01:51,080 --> 00:01:57,360
Speaker 1: the witnesses may present a very unfavorable view of an

27
00:01:57,400 --> 00:02:01,000
Speaker 1: accused person without that person having in each to respond.

28
00:02:01,560 --> 00:02:04,840
Speaker 1: It seems unfair to get this information out into the

29
00:02:04,920 --> 00:02:08,200
Speaker 1: public in a forum where there's no chance to test

30
00:02:08,400 --> 00:02:12,000
Speaker 1: the validity of what's being said. What was your reaction

31
00:02:12,240 --> 00:02:16,720
Speaker 1: to the revelations of this four person the media interview?

32
00:02:16,800 --> 00:02:19,720
Speaker 1: She did, I think it was bad judgment, but I

33
00:02:19,760 --> 00:02:24,960
Speaker 1: don't think it really does very much, First because what

34
00:02:25,040 --> 00:02:29,840
Speaker 1: she said wasn't very much. And second because this wasn't

35
00:02:29,919 --> 00:02:33,360
Speaker 1: an indicting grand jury. This was a special grand jury

36
00:02:33,840 --> 00:02:39,799
Speaker 1: with no power to indict, so she wasn't disclosing information

37
00:02:40,280 --> 00:02:43,400
Speaker 1: about how an indictment was formed because they had no

38
00:02:43,480 --> 00:02:45,760
Speaker 1: power to create one. So what do you make of

39
00:02:45,840 --> 00:02:50,639
Speaker 1: all this hubbub surrounding her disclosure and people condemning it

40
00:02:50,800 --> 00:02:54,520
Speaker 1: on different sides? Of the aisle. Again, I think it's

41
00:02:54,880 --> 00:02:59,560
Speaker 1: bad judgment on her part. I think for the people

42
00:03:00,000 --> 00:03:04,560
Speaker 1: who may be implicated, making a fuss about her interview

43
00:03:04,919 --> 00:03:08,640
Speaker 1: is a good way of changing the subject from the

44
00:03:08,880 --> 00:03:12,320
Speaker 1: substance of what some of them may have done. This

45
00:03:12,480 --> 00:03:17,000
Speaker 1: is a special grand jury that's just issuing recommendations. Another

46
00:03:17,080 --> 00:03:20,520
Speaker 1: grand jury will be needed to hand down any indictments.

47
00:03:20,919 --> 00:03:25,480
Speaker 1: But does this interview raise questions about fairness if there

48
00:03:25,520 --> 00:03:29,520
Speaker 1: are indictments down the road. It doesn't for several reasons.

49
00:03:29,720 --> 00:03:33,000
Speaker 1: Number one, grand juries are not fair. If they were fair,

50
00:03:33,040 --> 00:03:37,119
Speaker 1: we would allow defendants to present their side, we would

51
00:03:37,160 --> 00:03:40,760
Speaker 1: allow cross examination of witnesses. Fairness comes to the trial.

52
00:03:41,240 --> 00:03:44,440
Speaker 1: Grand juries are sometimes said they would indict a cheese

53
00:03:44,480 --> 00:03:48,120
Speaker 1: sandwich at the will of the prosecutor. So there's no

54
00:03:48,200 --> 00:03:52,120
Speaker 1: fairness issue here at all. Any charges that a later

55
00:03:52,160 --> 00:03:55,680
Speaker 1: grand jury might bring can be fully tested at trial,

56
00:03:55,960 --> 00:04:00,360
Speaker 1: and if they're unfounded, defeated. So even if this were

57
00:04:01,000 --> 00:04:06,120
Speaker 1: someone on the indicting grand jury, it wouldn't raise fairness problems.

58
00:04:06,480 --> 00:04:09,760
Speaker 1: And as it happens, this is an investigative grand jury

59
00:04:09,920 --> 00:04:14,120
Speaker 1: who told us very little. She said that we would

60
00:04:14,160 --> 00:04:17,919
Speaker 1: see recommendations of people whose names we know, and people

61
00:04:17,920 --> 00:04:20,120
Speaker 1: whose names we don't know. Well, everybody in the world

62
00:04:20,200 --> 00:04:22,360
Speaker 1: was either someone whose name I know or someone whose

63
00:04:22,400 --> 00:04:25,640
Speaker 1: name I don't know, and that didn't tell us anything.

64
00:04:25,720 --> 00:04:28,000
Speaker 1: And she says that some people might have lied to

65
00:04:28,080 --> 00:04:32,120
Speaker 1: a grand jury. Well, people unfortunately, lie to grand juries

66
00:04:32,200 --> 00:04:35,680
Speaker 1: all the time, so that's not very enlightening. I would

67
00:04:35,680 --> 00:04:37,960
Speaker 1: have thought it would be much more important if she

68
00:04:38,640 --> 00:04:42,279
Speaker 1: named a person and said this person is lying, But

69
00:04:42,360 --> 00:04:46,000
Speaker 1: she didn't do anything like that, so there's really nothing here.

70
00:04:46,760 --> 00:04:50,760
Speaker 1: Grand Jury reports are generally secret, but a small part

71
00:04:50,760 --> 00:04:53,840
Speaker 1: of this one was revealed. Do you think that was

72
00:04:54,000 --> 00:04:57,040
Speaker 1: a mistake because it might have set the stage for

73
00:04:57,400 --> 00:05:01,320
Speaker 1: the grand jury four person going further in disclosing more.

74
00:05:01,880 --> 00:05:04,000
Speaker 1: It depends on what you think the purpose of the

75
00:05:04,000 --> 00:05:07,280
Speaker 1: grand jury was. Special gran injuries like this one are

76
00:05:07,360 --> 00:05:11,680
Speaker 1: very unusual because they don't have an obvious purpose. My

77
00:05:11,920 --> 00:05:14,840
Speaker 1: sense is that this one was convened because there's been

78
00:05:14,960 --> 00:05:20,360
Speaker 1: so much said in the media about alleged fraud in

79
00:05:20,400 --> 00:05:26,520
Speaker 1: the twenty presidential election that the prosecutor fell that was

80
00:05:26,839 --> 00:05:30,560
Speaker 1: useful to have an impartial group of citizens look into

81
00:05:30,600 --> 00:05:33,800
Speaker 1: this and clear the air. If that's the purpose, then

82
00:05:33,880 --> 00:05:37,720
Speaker 1: having the information come out probably was a good idea.

83
00:05:37,920 --> 00:05:43,760
Speaker 1: Drew Findling, one of Trump's Georgia attorneys, suggested that these interviews,

84
00:05:43,760 --> 00:05:46,880
Speaker 1: the four persons interviews, could be used against the prosecutor

85
00:05:46,920 --> 00:05:49,680
Speaker 1: if there are indictments, and he said, the lens now

86
00:05:49,720 --> 00:05:53,000
Speaker 1: provided by this four person into the lack of seriousness

87
00:05:53,040 --> 00:05:56,200
Speaker 1: and respect for this process that existed behind the grand

88
00:05:56,279 --> 00:06:00,400
Speaker 1: jury walls is truly shocking to the legal conscience. Is

89
00:06:00,400 --> 00:06:02,160
Speaker 1: there anything he can do with that? If there is

90
00:06:02,160 --> 00:06:05,560
Speaker 1: an indictment of Trump, that's absurd. First off, it's not

91
00:06:05,800 --> 00:06:09,640
Speaker 1: the grand jury that indicted the president that's an issue here.

92
00:06:10,240 --> 00:06:15,560
Speaker 1: Whether this grand jury was extraordinarily serious or completely clownish

93
00:06:15,600 --> 00:06:18,839
Speaker 1: has nothing to do with anything. If a separate grand

94
00:06:18,880 --> 00:06:21,960
Speaker 1: jury does not decide that the president should be indicted,

95
00:06:22,000 --> 00:06:24,839
Speaker 1: he will not be indicted. Fulton County Superior Court Judge

96
00:06:24,920 --> 00:06:29,640
Speaker 1: Robert McBurney, who oversaw the grand jury, essentially said that

97
00:06:30,080 --> 00:06:33,559
Speaker 1: she hadn't violated her oath because you can't talk about

98
00:06:33,600 --> 00:06:37,240
Speaker 1: your deliberations, but you can talk about other things. Is

99
00:06:37,240 --> 00:06:42,120
Speaker 1: that different from federal grand juries. Federal grand jury secrecy

100
00:06:42,279 --> 00:06:46,920
Speaker 1: is extremely broad, But then again, the federal government does

101
00:06:47,000 --> 00:06:52,280
Speaker 1: not usually employ special grand juries of this kind, so

102
00:06:52,640 --> 00:06:57,520
Speaker 1: it doesn't have much of a federal parallel at all. Again,

103
00:06:57,680 --> 00:07:01,320
Speaker 1: I wish she hadn't given the interview, but all the

104
00:07:01,360 --> 00:07:05,600
Speaker 1: reasons why we want grand jurors to not speak don't

105
00:07:05,680 --> 00:07:10,280
Speaker 1: really apply here. It's not a grand jury issuing an indictment.

106
00:07:10,680 --> 00:07:16,120
Speaker 1: She didn't describe deliberations, she didn't describe witness testimony. She

107
00:07:16,360 --> 00:07:20,960
Speaker 1: offered a few conclusions that tell us almost nothing we

108
00:07:21,000 --> 00:07:24,760
Speaker 1: couldn't have guessed before. And you can see that because

109
00:07:25,040 --> 00:07:29,480
Speaker 1: when reporters went to various witnesses and said she says

110
00:07:29,520 --> 00:07:32,240
Speaker 1: they were lying, are you afraid? They all said, well,

111
00:07:32,280 --> 00:07:34,640
Speaker 1: it wasn't me, which is of course what they would

112
00:07:34,640 --> 00:07:40,080
Speaker 1: have said anyway. So she has done nothing that harms

113
00:07:40,160 --> 00:07:45,640
Speaker 1: any individual. She has suggested that they found trouble, and

114
00:07:46,000 --> 00:07:49,560
Speaker 1: that will be tested ultimately at trial. In light of this,

115
00:07:49,640 --> 00:07:55,520
Speaker 1: a Georgia lawmaker has proposed legislation that would effectively bard

116
00:07:55,720 --> 00:07:59,400
Speaker 1: the media interviews by a making it contempt of court

117
00:07:59,440 --> 00:08:03,120
Speaker 1: to discuss presentations made to grand juries. Do you think

118
00:08:03,160 --> 00:08:06,160
Speaker 1: that would be a good reform? I do. I think

119
00:08:06,200 --> 00:08:09,480
Speaker 1: grand juries can cause a lot of mischief, and I

120
00:08:09,520 --> 00:08:12,440
Speaker 1: think that grandjury secrecy is a good thing. So the

121
00:08:12,560 --> 00:08:15,920
Speaker 1: more that can be done to shut down these sorts

122
00:08:15,960 --> 00:08:19,960
Speaker 1: of outside discussions, the better. There have been allegations of

123
00:08:20,080 --> 00:08:24,960
Speaker 1: partisanship against this particular prosecutor. Does that make the grand

124
00:08:25,040 --> 00:08:28,600
Speaker 1: jury process seem even more political or is it a

125
00:08:28,640 --> 00:08:34,800
Speaker 1: political process anyway? Where prosecutors are elected. Prosecutors are elected

126
00:08:35,240 --> 00:08:38,040
Speaker 1: in most places they go through one or the other

127
00:08:38,040 --> 00:08:41,839
Speaker 1: of the major political parties, and no doubt do things

128
00:08:41,960 --> 00:08:45,080
Speaker 1: to support those parties in order to win the nomination

129
00:08:45,160 --> 00:08:48,120
Speaker 1: and support in the election. The point of the grand jury,

130
00:08:48,120 --> 00:08:51,360
Speaker 1: to the extent there is one, is to have a

131
00:08:51,480 --> 00:08:56,520
Speaker 1: random selection of people who are not elected and are

132
00:08:56,559 --> 00:09:00,480
Speaker 1: not holden to any political party look over the evidence

133
00:09:00,520 --> 00:09:04,560
Speaker 1: before anyone is brought to trial. So a grand jury

134
00:09:04,760 --> 00:09:08,760
Speaker 1: is a way of reducing partisanship. Some states have cut

135
00:09:08,800 --> 00:09:12,400
Speaker 1: back on grand juries or abolished them. Do you think

136
00:09:12,400 --> 00:09:15,680
Speaker 1: that's the right path? I think it is. I don't

137
00:09:15,679 --> 00:09:19,600
Speaker 1: think the grand juries serve a useful purpose because the

138
00:09:19,720 --> 00:09:22,800
Speaker 1: presentations they yet are so one sided that they're easy

139
00:09:22,840 --> 00:09:26,280
Speaker 1: for prosecutors to manipulate. I think they waste a lot

140
00:09:26,320 --> 00:09:31,760
Speaker 1: of money, and they also give the false impression the

141
00:09:32,000 --> 00:09:35,200
Speaker 1: serious weighing of the evidence has been done to bring

142
00:09:35,280 --> 00:09:38,160
Speaker 1: someone to charges when in fact, it was simply the

143
00:09:38,240 --> 00:09:41,760
Speaker 1: prosecutor made a decision to do that and presented evidence

144
00:09:41,760 --> 00:09:44,720
Speaker 1: that supported their case. Thanks so much for your insights.

145
00:09:45,040 --> 00:09:51,640
Speaker 1: That's Professor David super of Georgetown Law School. Alex Alec Dunn.

146
00:09:51,640 --> 00:09:56,920
Speaker 1: It's Alex Alex stun Alec billion dollars when you see

147
00:09:56,920 --> 00:10:00,320
Speaker 1: the video of cardib walking out of the courthouse after

148
00:10:00,440 --> 00:10:04,160
Speaker 1: pleading guilty to misdemeanor charges. Beside her with the dark

149
00:10:04,200 --> 00:10:09,839
Speaker 1: shades is the hashtag billion dollar lawyer. Drew Findling, Atlanta

150
00:10:09,880 --> 00:10:13,320
Speaker 1: attorney to hip hop stars and professional athletes who find

151
00:10:13,360 --> 00:10:16,880
Speaker 1: themselves in trouble with the law, and soon Findling maybe

152
00:10:16,880 --> 00:10:20,800
Speaker 1: walking next to an even bigger celebrity. He'll be representing

153
00:10:20,840 --> 00:10:24,120
Speaker 1: former President Donald Trump if he's indicted for trying to

154
00:10:24,200 --> 00:10:28,360
Speaker 1: overturn the Georgia presidential election in twenty twenty. Joining me

155
00:10:28,440 --> 00:10:33,120
Speaker 1: is Bloomberg Legal reporter David Voreakas, who interviewed Findling hashtag

156
00:10:33,240 --> 00:10:37,520
Speaker 1: billion dollar lawyer, tell me what that's about. Drew Findling

157
00:10:37,880 --> 00:10:41,080
Speaker 1: is a defense lawyer in Atlanta who's built quite a

158
00:10:41,120 --> 00:10:45,360
Speaker 1: reputation over the last decade representing hip hop stars in

159
00:10:45,480 --> 00:10:49,880
Speaker 1: reality TV, people who've been caught in legal or criminal problems,

160
00:10:50,120 --> 00:10:54,920
Speaker 1: and he's gotten a number of people either acquitted or

161
00:10:55,000 --> 00:10:59,280
Speaker 1: had their charges reduced, and he's built such a reputation

162
00:10:59,559 --> 00:11:03,080
Speaker 1: of that. One of the rappers that he represented called

163
00:11:03,160 --> 00:11:07,120
Speaker 1: him the hashtag billion dollars Lawyer. This was a guy

164
00:11:07,200 --> 00:11:11,040
Speaker 1: named Young Dolf who Findling was visiting in Hollywood after

165
00:11:11,080 --> 00:11:14,640
Speaker 1: he'd been shot. The nickname has stuck that Young Golf

166
00:11:14,760 --> 00:11:17,800
Speaker 1: died in twenty twenty one from twenty two gun shots,

167
00:11:18,040 --> 00:11:21,400
Speaker 1: and he's in courtrooms around the country. He represented Cardi

168
00:11:21,480 --> 00:11:24,439
Speaker 1: b in New York if there was an assault case

169
00:11:24,800 --> 00:11:28,200
Speaker 1: in the Bronx, and it involved the assaults at two

170
00:11:28,240 --> 00:11:32,600
Speaker 1: different strip clubs, and she had assault charges that were

171
00:11:32,600 --> 00:11:36,560
Speaker 1: reduced to misdemeanors. He's also represented the rapper of Waka

172
00:11:36,640 --> 00:11:40,760
Speaker 1: flocka Flame who had a gun charge after there was

173
00:11:40,880 --> 00:11:43,480
Speaker 1: a weapon found in his bag at the Atlanta airport

174
00:11:43,520 --> 00:11:47,839
Speaker 1: and he was acquitted. And he also represented several members

175
00:11:47,920 --> 00:11:51,720
Speaker 1: of the rap group Migos, most particularly after they were

176
00:11:51,760 --> 00:11:55,559
Speaker 1: arrested at a concert at Georgia's Southern University. He's also

177
00:11:55,600 --> 00:12:00,360
Speaker 1: represented other celebrities like Alvin Kamara, the New Orleans Saint

178
00:12:00,480 --> 00:12:05,240
Speaker 1: running Back, and the rapper to Baby and Findling's fame

179
00:12:05,520 --> 00:12:11,480
Speaker 1: started with representing Atlanta rappers. They find that he is

180
00:12:11,520 --> 00:12:14,920
Speaker 1: a very constant lawyer who also listens to them and

181
00:12:15,040 --> 00:12:19,199
Speaker 1: gives them life advice, and he's had a good track

182
00:12:19,280 --> 00:12:23,960
Speaker 1: record of success. He's been defense lawyer in and around

183
00:12:24,040 --> 00:12:29,480
Speaker 1: Atlanta for nearly forty years, and so he knows the

184
00:12:29,640 --> 00:12:35,120
Speaker 1: prosecutors and the judges and the jurors, and he's able

185
00:12:35,200 --> 00:12:40,000
Speaker 1: to connect with juries in a very powerful way that's

186
00:12:40,040 --> 00:12:42,800
Speaker 1: brought him a lot of good results. He also connects

187
00:12:42,840 --> 00:12:46,800
Speaker 1: personally with the various hip hop people that he represents.

188
00:12:47,520 --> 00:12:52,560
Speaker 1: His practice goes beyond just criminal representation or is he

189
00:12:52,679 --> 00:12:55,600
Speaker 1: or just a criminal defense lawyer. He's a criminal defense

190
00:12:55,679 --> 00:13:00,480
Speaker 1: lawyer who also does civil cases as well, and he

191
00:13:01,160 --> 00:13:04,920
Speaker 1: primarily built a really good reputation in the Atlanta area.

192
00:13:05,200 --> 00:13:07,959
Speaker 1: In the last decade or so, he's done cases all

193
00:13:07,960 --> 00:13:11,600
Speaker 1: over the US. I always find that a lawyer's office

194
00:13:11,640 --> 00:13:14,079
Speaker 1: says a lot about the lawyer. I know you visited

195
00:13:14,120 --> 00:13:17,600
Speaker 1: his office, tell us about it. It's an office in

196
00:13:17,760 --> 00:13:22,840
Speaker 1: a upscale office park in the Buckhead neighborhood in Atlanta,

197
00:13:22,880 --> 00:13:29,200
Speaker 1: and there are dozens of framed photographs and newspaper clippings

198
00:13:29,240 --> 00:13:32,640
Speaker 1: of him with his clients for whom he's gotten good

199
00:13:32,679 --> 00:13:37,560
Speaker 1: results through the years. And there is also three large

200
00:13:37,600 --> 00:13:43,079
Speaker 1: paintings in the entry room of Sam Adams. One is

201
00:13:43,120 --> 00:13:46,760
Speaker 1: of third Good Marshal and one of Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

202
00:13:47,440 --> 00:13:52,400
Speaker 1: He has supported progressive legal causes through the years. He

203
00:13:52,520 --> 00:13:55,880
Speaker 1: was the president for a year of the National Association

204
00:13:55,920 --> 00:13:59,360
Speaker 1: of Criminal Defense Lawyers, where he made a number of speeches.

205
00:13:59,400 --> 00:14:05,120
Speaker 1: And he supports people who are he believes unjustly detained,

206
00:14:05,360 --> 00:14:10,400
Speaker 1: and believes that the criminal justice system is tilted against

207
00:14:10,400 --> 00:14:15,239
Speaker 1: black and brown defendants. So, as you said, he supports

208
00:14:15,360 --> 00:14:19,680
Speaker 1: progressive legal causes. He criticized Trump during his time in

209
00:14:19,680 --> 00:14:22,640
Speaker 1: the White House, once calling him racist and pathetic in

210
00:14:22,640 --> 00:14:27,000
Speaker 1: a tweet. Why is he taking on Trump as a client? Well,

211
00:14:27,040 --> 00:14:30,240
Speaker 1: that's not entirely clear to me, except that he defends

212
00:14:30,320 --> 00:14:34,280
Speaker 1: himself by saying that he's able to separate his clients

213
00:14:34,520 --> 00:14:38,840
Speaker 1: and his commitment to the law and serving them from

214
00:14:39,040 --> 00:14:43,520
Speaker 1: his personal life and his personal beliefs and personal political beliefs.

215
00:14:43,920 --> 00:14:47,760
Speaker 1: Do you know how Trump found him or why he

216
00:14:47,840 --> 00:14:51,760
Speaker 1: selected him out of all the attorneys in Atlanta. Drew

217
00:14:52,040 --> 00:14:56,600
Speaker 1: Finling said that some lawyers who worked with Trump reached

218
00:14:56,640 --> 00:15:02,120
Speaker 1: out to him and interviewed him, and that he ended

219
00:15:02,200 --> 00:15:06,360
Speaker 1: up becoming his advocate in Atlanta. At this point, he's

220
00:15:06,400 --> 00:15:12,640
Speaker 1: representing him in presumably trying to persuade the district attorney

221
00:15:13,000 --> 00:15:17,560
Speaker 1: Funny Willows to avoid indicting Trump. Our understanding is that

222
00:15:17,600 --> 00:15:20,720
Speaker 1: he would also represent him at trial, but I guess

223
00:15:20,760 --> 00:15:22,840
Speaker 1: we'll have to see what happens when and if that

224
00:15:23,000 --> 00:15:27,040
Speaker 1: becomes necessary. And you spoke to colleagues of his who

225
00:15:27,120 --> 00:15:30,080
Speaker 1: said that he's very good at convincing prosecutors not to

226
00:15:30,080 --> 00:15:34,240
Speaker 1: bring charges. Right, It's not only that he's excellent on

227
00:15:34,400 --> 00:15:37,080
Speaker 1: his feet in the courtroom and at earth a cross

228
00:15:37,160 --> 00:15:41,320
Speaker 1: examiner and can really bond with a jury, but that

229
00:15:41,440 --> 00:15:45,720
Speaker 1: he understands how state and federal cases are constructed and

230
00:15:45,960 --> 00:15:51,280
Speaker 1: can convince prosecutors many times to either forego charges altogether

231
00:15:51,440 --> 00:15:54,040
Speaker 1: or not bring the charges that are as serious as

232
00:15:54,040 --> 00:15:57,960
Speaker 1: they're initially contemplating. So it could well be that his

233
00:15:58,080 --> 00:16:01,920
Speaker 1: service to Donald Trump in convincing Fannie willis not to

234
00:16:02,000 --> 00:16:04,440
Speaker 1: charge him at all. And do you know if he

235
00:16:04,560 --> 00:16:07,880
Speaker 1: has met Trump yet? It's not clear to me if

236
00:16:07,880 --> 00:16:10,200
Speaker 1: he's met him, but I know that he's spoken with him.

237
00:16:11,040 --> 00:16:15,200
Speaker 1: What did he say of anything about Trump's case. He

238
00:16:15,240 --> 00:16:19,400
Speaker 1: would not talk about the terms of his engagement or

239
00:16:19,640 --> 00:16:24,680
Speaker 1: Trump's case specifically. What he would talk about is the

240
00:16:24,800 --> 00:16:29,360
Speaker 1: Rico Statute, which of course is the Racketeer Influencing Corrupt

241
00:16:29,480 --> 00:16:34,400
Speaker 1: Organizations Act under Georgia law, which is something that Fannie Willis,

242
00:16:34,440 --> 00:16:38,119
Speaker 1: the distric attorney, has brought a number of times, particularly

243
00:16:38,160 --> 00:16:42,320
Speaker 1: in her war on gang violence in Atlanta, and he believes,

244
00:16:42,480 --> 00:16:47,120
Speaker 1: as many other defense lawyers do, that the Rico statue

245
00:16:47,360 --> 00:16:51,600
Speaker 1: is overused in Georgia and that it gives prosecutors sort

246
00:16:51,640 --> 00:16:55,920
Speaker 1: of an unfair advantage with juries. Most famously, Fannie Willis

247
00:16:56,120 --> 00:17:00,760
Speaker 1: in twenty fifteen was the lead prosecutor in Rico case

248
00:17:00,840 --> 00:17:05,560
Speaker 1: against Atlanta public school teachers who were accused of doctoring

249
00:17:05,880 --> 00:17:09,960
Speaker 1: test scores. He commented on the fourth person of the

250
00:17:10,040 --> 00:17:14,480
Speaker 1: special grand jury that's been investigating Trump and the election

251
00:17:15,000 --> 00:17:18,440
Speaker 1: speaking out, give us the background here. Just to back

252
00:17:18,520 --> 00:17:22,000
Speaker 1: up for a moment, The special grand jury process is

253
00:17:22,040 --> 00:17:27,639
Speaker 1: a bit unique in Georgia. They will hear evidence in

254
00:17:27,800 --> 00:17:33,720
Speaker 1: secret and take testimony from witnesses and then at the

255
00:17:33,920 --> 00:17:40,399
Speaker 1: end make recommendations either on a particular situation or a

256
00:17:40,520 --> 00:17:43,680
Speaker 1: criminal matter. But they do not have the power to indict,

257
00:17:44,400 --> 00:17:48,200
Speaker 1: so for seven or eight months last year, they heard

258
00:17:48,320 --> 00:17:53,320
Speaker 1: seventy five witnesses who were presented to them by prosecutors

259
00:17:53,320 --> 00:17:58,000
Speaker 1: in Fanny Willis's office about Trump's efforts to overturn the

260
00:17:58,040 --> 00:18:03,520
Speaker 1: twenty election in Georgia. Their report, they wrote a report

261
00:18:03,640 --> 00:18:07,159
Speaker 1: that was handed to the judge, who gave it to

262
00:18:07,960 --> 00:18:11,800
Speaker 1: the District Attorney's office, and the media sued to try

263
00:18:11,800 --> 00:18:16,639
Speaker 1: to get access to that report. A redacted partial version

264
00:18:16,720 --> 00:18:20,280
Speaker 1: of the report was released in which the public learned

265
00:18:20,680 --> 00:18:25,320
Speaker 1: that special grand jury recommended perjury charges against one or

266
00:18:25,359 --> 00:18:29,639
Speaker 1: more witnesses, and they also believed that there was no

267
00:18:29,840 --> 00:18:34,159
Speaker 1: widespread broad that occurred in twenty twenty, as Donald Trump

268
00:18:34,200 --> 00:18:39,359
Speaker 1: has repeatedly said since then. Last week, the fourth person,

269
00:18:39,760 --> 00:18:44,879
Speaker 1: named Emily Cores, gave a number of interviews about the

270
00:18:44,960 --> 00:18:51,000
Speaker 1: process and essentially told media outlets that they thought there

271
00:18:51,040 --> 00:18:54,840
Speaker 1: should be indictments coming out of the case. She told

272
00:18:54,960 --> 00:18:59,119
Speaker 1: NBC that she thought a dozen people should have been indicted,

273
00:18:59,240 --> 00:19:03,040
Speaker 1: and when she was asked about whether Donald Trump was

274
00:19:03,119 --> 00:19:07,119
Speaker 1: one of those people, she laughed and left every impression

275
00:19:07,160 --> 00:19:09,359
Speaker 1: that she believed that Donald Trump should have been one

276
00:19:09,400 --> 00:19:13,080
Speaker 1: of those people. It caused an uproar, and there were

277
00:19:13,119 --> 00:19:16,480
Speaker 1: many questions asked about whether she had exceeded her authority

278
00:19:16,520 --> 00:19:20,600
Speaker 1: and said too much. Fulton County Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney,

279
00:19:20,720 --> 00:19:24,600
Speaker 1: who oversaw the case, didn't seem particularly concerned about the

280
00:19:24,680 --> 00:19:29,800
Speaker 1: four persons remarks. We interviewed Superior Court Judge Robert McBurney,

281
00:19:30,160 --> 00:19:33,800
Speaker 1: who essentially said that she was given an oath that

282
00:19:34,000 --> 00:19:38,320
Speaker 1: she was not to discuss jury deliberations and that that

283
00:19:38,640 --> 00:19:42,120
Speaker 1: was the single most important thing for her to do

284
00:19:42,320 --> 00:19:46,720
Speaker 1: is to uphold that of not talking about jury deliberations.

285
00:19:46,800 --> 00:19:50,119
Speaker 1: But he had no problem with her talking to the media.

286
00:19:50,200 --> 00:19:53,840
Speaker 1: Are the rules for grand jurors in Georgia different from

287
00:19:53,880 --> 00:19:57,720
Speaker 1: the rules for federal grand jurors. Yes, they're a little

288
00:19:57,760 --> 00:20:02,119
Speaker 1: more permissive for Georgia than they are for federal grand jurs.

289
00:20:02,359 --> 00:20:07,320
Speaker 1: In Georgia, grand jurs can discuss the evidence that they've heard.

290
00:20:07,640 --> 00:20:11,359
Speaker 1: A federal grandeur cannot discuss the evidence that they've heard,

291
00:20:11,680 --> 00:20:14,960
Speaker 1: and both federal and state panels are not allowed to

292
00:20:15,000 --> 00:20:19,240
Speaker 1: discuss their deliberations. Since all of this happened last week,

293
00:20:19,760 --> 00:20:24,000
Speaker 1: there's a state Senator, Brandon Beach, who's at Donald Trump ally,

294
00:20:24,200 --> 00:20:28,800
Speaker 1: who introduced a bill in the state legislature that would

295
00:20:28,880 --> 00:20:33,439
Speaker 1: essentially toughen the existing law and introduce the possibility of

296
00:20:33,680 --> 00:20:38,760
Speaker 1: contempt of court for anyone who discusses presentations or essentially

297
00:20:38,800 --> 00:20:43,639
Speaker 1: the evidence presented to a grand jury. So now we

298
00:20:43,720 --> 00:20:48,280
Speaker 1: have the background. What did Finling say about this grand

299
00:20:48,320 --> 00:20:53,840
Speaker 1: jury spokeswoman making these revelations. Findling, who has not commented

300
00:20:54,240 --> 00:20:59,640
Speaker 1: on the investigation for months, essentially broke his silence and

301
00:21:00,320 --> 00:21:04,680
Speaker 1: was highly critical of Emily Core's the four person, and

302
00:21:05,040 --> 00:21:09,600
Speaker 1: he released a statement that was quite critical of her

303
00:21:10,160 --> 00:21:15,560
Speaker 1: and said that it is emblematic of a deeply flawed process.

304
00:21:15,600 --> 00:21:18,480
Speaker 1: He said, the lens now provided by this four person

305
00:21:18,520 --> 00:21:22,200
Speaker 1: into the lack of seriousness and respect for this process

306
00:21:22,280 --> 00:21:26,440
Speaker 1: that existed behind the grand jury wall is truly shocking

307
00:21:26,520 --> 00:21:31,119
Speaker 1: to the legal conscience. And they suggested Drew Finlingen a

308
00:21:31,200 --> 00:21:34,359
Speaker 1: couple of other lawyers that he's working with, suggested that

309
00:21:34,440 --> 00:21:37,639
Speaker 1: they may file some type of legal motion in response,

310
00:21:37,840 --> 00:21:40,879
Speaker 1: although it's not entirely clear what that would be because

311
00:21:40,880 --> 00:21:44,040
Speaker 1: there is no case yet and also because it's not

312
00:21:44,080 --> 00:21:46,879
Speaker 1: going to be the recommendations of this special grand jury.

313
00:21:46,920 --> 00:21:49,000
Speaker 1: But Fanny Willis is going to have to go and

314
00:21:49,080 --> 00:21:52,680
Speaker 1: convene another grand jury or use one of the criminal

315
00:21:52,680 --> 00:21:57,080
Speaker 1: grand juries that's already in session to get an indictment exactly.

316
00:21:57,320 --> 00:22:00,919
Speaker 1: I mean, it's an entirely separate decision making process that

317
00:22:01,040 --> 00:22:03,760
Speaker 1: the disc attorney has to make, and a whole different

318
00:22:03,800 --> 00:22:06,719
Speaker 1: panel would make a decision on whether to indict or not.

319
00:22:07,000 --> 00:22:09,159
Speaker 1: I guess we'll just have to wait and see what

320
00:22:09,359 --> 00:22:12,840
Speaker 1: might come of defense efforts to make hay with comments

321
00:22:12,840 --> 00:22:16,640
Speaker 1: by Emily Cores. Trump is also represented in Georgia by

322
00:22:17,080 --> 00:22:20,840
Speaker 1: Atlanta lawyer Jennifer Little. So are they going to work together?

323
00:22:21,359 --> 00:22:23,880
Speaker 1: That's not familiar to me. They both have a lot

324
00:22:23,880 --> 00:22:27,040
Speaker 1: of trial experience in the Atlanta area. She had been

325
00:22:27,160 --> 00:22:30,320
Speaker 1: an assistant district attorney in De cab County, which is

326
00:22:30,320 --> 00:22:35,600
Speaker 1: an ex county over and presumably they'd be working with

327
00:22:35,640 --> 00:22:38,600
Speaker 1: a wide array of other defense attorneys in the area.

328
00:22:38,880 --> 00:22:42,560
Speaker 1: Particularly if Willis tries to build a conspiracy case, they

329
00:22:42,840 --> 00:22:46,720
Speaker 1: would presumably try to break down that case to its

330
00:22:46,880 --> 00:22:51,080
Speaker 1: various parts and attack it as best they can. Drew

331
00:22:51,119 --> 00:22:53,920
Speaker 1: Findling has never been a prosecutor. He's always been a

332
00:22:53,960 --> 00:22:56,920
Speaker 1: defense attorney, but he has good relations with a lot

333
00:22:56,920 --> 00:23:00,200
Speaker 1: of other defense attorneys in the area. Interesting story, so

334
00:23:00,280 --> 00:23:04,400
Speaker 1: much David. That's Bloomberg Legal reporter David Voreachas, And that's

335
00:23:04,400 --> 00:23:07,040
Speaker 1: it for this edition of The Bloomberg Law Show. Remember

336
00:23:07,080 --> 00:23:09,159
Speaker 1: you can always get the latest legal news on our

337
00:23:09,160 --> 00:23:13,320
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can find them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify,

338
00:23:13,520 --> 00:23:18,520
Speaker 1: and at www dot Bloomberg dot com slash podcast Slash Law,

339
00:23:18,920 --> 00:23:21,560
Speaker 1: And remember to tune into The Bloomberg Law Show every

340
00:23:21,600 --> 00:23:25,520
Speaker 1: weeknight at ten pm Wall Street Time. I'm June Grosso

341
00:23:25,640 --> 00:23:27,240
Speaker 1: and you're listening to Bloomberg