1 00:00:00,080 --> 00:00:02,240 Speaker 1: You're listening to Bloomberg Low with Michael Best in New 2 00:00:02,320 --> 00:00:05,760 Speaker 1: York and Greg's story in Washington, d C. The House 3 00:00:05,800 --> 00:00:09,879 Speaker 1: and Senate Intelligence Committee investigations into possible Russian tampering in 4 00:00:09,920 --> 00:00:14,000 Speaker 1: the two thousands sixteen presidential election and also into possible 5 00:00:14,040 --> 00:00:17,000 Speaker 1: contacts between the Trump campaign and Russian agents has taken 6 00:00:17,079 --> 00:00:21,240 Speaker 1: center stage. Former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, who lost 7 00:00:21,239 --> 00:00:24,120 Speaker 1: his job after the shortest tenure in American history as 8 00:00:24,200 --> 00:00:27,400 Speaker 1: National Security Advisor because he failed to fully describe his 9 00:00:27,440 --> 00:00:30,520 Speaker 1: conversations with the Russian ambassador last year, could be a 10 00:00:30,520 --> 00:00:33,479 Speaker 1: witness in congressional probes, and now he has asked for 11 00:00:33,520 --> 00:00:37,040 Speaker 1: immunity before he testifies before Congress, and President Trump has 12 00:00:37,080 --> 00:00:40,240 Speaker 1: tweeted that he agrees with Flynn's request. Here to talk 13 00:00:40,280 --> 00:00:44,199 Speaker 1: with us about the immunity request by Michael Flynn or 14 00:00:44,200 --> 00:00:47,520 Speaker 1: Stephen Vladdock, professor at the University of Texas School of Law, 15 00:00:47,880 --> 00:00:51,760 Speaker 1: and Andrew Right, a professor at Savannah Law School. Andrew 16 00:00:53,080 --> 00:00:55,400 Speaker 1: the House and Senate Intelligence Committee is important as they 17 00:00:55,440 --> 00:00:57,400 Speaker 1: are not the prosecutors in this case. They're not the 18 00:00:57,400 --> 00:01:00,520 Speaker 1: people who will decide whether or not there are going 19 00:01:00,560 --> 00:01:04,040 Speaker 1: to be criminal charges against Mr. Flynn based on his 20 00:01:04,120 --> 00:01:07,160 Speaker 1: testimony or for any other reason. How does immunity work 21 00:01:07,319 --> 00:01:10,480 Speaker 1: in a situation like this? Sure, thanks for having me 22 00:01:10,520 --> 00:01:14,199 Speaker 1: on the show. So the House and Senate committees, under 23 00:01:14,240 --> 00:01:19,640 Speaker 1: a statute that was passed in can choose to grant 24 00:01:19,680 --> 00:01:22,959 Speaker 1: immunity through by means of a court order. Through if 25 00:01:22,959 --> 00:01:25,640 Speaker 1: it's in front of a committee like these are, it 26 00:01:25,680 --> 00:01:27,920 Speaker 1: would be a two thirds vote of the full committee, 27 00:01:27,959 --> 00:01:30,679 Speaker 1: and then they can seek a court order. That's basically 28 00:01:30,680 --> 00:01:33,360 Speaker 1: a ministerial job for the court to grant that order 29 00:01:33,840 --> 00:01:36,040 Speaker 1: to give what they call youth community or castorg our 30 00:01:36,080 --> 00:01:40,000 Speaker 1: immunity that would allow him to testify even over the 31 00:01:40,040 --> 00:01:45,000 Speaker 1: assertion of the Fifth Amendment privilege against self incrimination. That 32 00:01:45,120 --> 00:01:49,480 Speaker 1: statutory scheme also recognized, however, that there's a connection to 33 00:01:49,520 --> 00:01:52,600 Speaker 1: the Justice Department, So Congress has to give the Attorney 34 00:01:52,680 --> 00:01:56,080 Speaker 1: General ten days notice, which both allows the Attorney General 35 00:01:56,680 --> 00:02:00,080 Speaker 1: to um sequester or the information they've already gathered it 36 00:02:00,120 --> 00:02:01,920 Speaker 1: out to that witness to make sure that they have 37 00:02:02,200 --> 00:02:04,800 Speaker 1: a file that doesn't show that they actually use information 38 00:02:04,840 --> 00:02:08,440 Speaker 1: derived from the congressional testimony and gives the A G 39 00:02:08,760 --> 00:02:12,079 Speaker 1: and Department an opportunity to object if they think that 40 00:02:12,400 --> 00:02:17,320 Speaker 1: the congressional effort might complicate the prosecution or frustrated Steve, 41 00:02:17,400 --> 00:02:21,120 Speaker 1: it sounds as though the congressional investigators aren't inclined to 42 00:02:21,639 --> 00:02:24,720 Speaker 1: grant the immunity right now. But what goes into that 43 00:02:24,840 --> 00:02:31,119 Speaker 1: calculation for lawmakers and their investigators, Why would they give 44 00:02:31,160 --> 00:02:34,800 Speaker 1: somebody like Michael Flynn immunity? Well, I guess, I mean 45 00:02:34,840 --> 00:02:37,000 Speaker 1: the real question is whether they think that there are 46 00:02:37,440 --> 00:02:40,880 Speaker 1: material pieces of evidence and information that someone like Michael 47 00:02:40,919 --> 00:02:43,519 Speaker 1: Flynn has they can provide to the committee that he'd 48 00:02:43,560 --> 00:02:47,240 Speaker 1: be disinclined to provide but for the immunity. So, you know, 49 00:02:47,280 --> 00:02:50,040 Speaker 1: this is part of why oftentimes when these kinds of 50 00:02:50,040 --> 00:02:52,440 Speaker 1: issues come up, the first time you hear about it 51 00:02:52,480 --> 00:02:54,919 Speaker 1: is not in a tweet from the witness's lawyer. Rather 52 00:02:55,040 --> 00:02:57,920 Speaker 1: it's in, you know, after the committee has done some legwork, 53 00:02:57,960 --> 00:03:01,359 Speaker 1: after there's been some kind of propersition, where the committee 54 00:03:01,360 --> 00:03:04,119 Speaker 1: has a sense of exactly what kind of information they're 55 00:03:04,120 --> 00:03:07,040 Speaker 1: going to get in exchange for the immunity. That's the calculus. 56 00:03:07,080 --> 00:03:09,519 Speaker 1: And I think, you know, it's interesting here that there's 57 00:03:09,520 --> 00:03:11,880 Speaker 1: no suggestment that's happened, and that what's really going on 58 00:03:12,360 --> 00:03:15,680 Speaker 1: is a public relations campaign where Flynn lawyer is saying, 59 00:03:15,760 --> 00:03:17,800 Speaker 1: you know, he should get immunity, and no one on 60 00:03:17,840 --> 00:03:19,800 Speaker 1: the hill seems to be really you know, publicly talking 61 00:03:19,800 --> 00:03:23,320 Speaker 1: about it. Yeah, it does seem a little odd Andrew 62 00:03:23,400 --> 00:03:25,920 Speaker 1: that you know that a lawyer would go public with 63 00:03:25,960 --> 00:03:28,760 Speaker 1: a request like this when you when you talk about 64 00:03:28,800 --> 00:03:32,560 Speaker 1: doing something like a proffer, as Steve mentioned, what what 65 00:03:32,680 --> 00:03:35,720 Speaker 1: kind of discussions would usually happen between say a congressional 66 00:03:35,760 --> 00:03:40,240 Speaker 1: committee and somebody's lawyer before a decision got made. Well, 67 00:03:40,280 --> 00:03:42,400 Speaker 1: I think the committee would want to satisfy itself that 68 00:03:42,480 --> 00:03:45,160 Speaker 1: he has something that's juicy enough or important enough to 69 00:03:45,160 --> 00:03:48,440 Speaker 1: the committee's work that they would be worth sacrificing the 70 00:03:48,480 --> 00:03:51,480 Speaker 1: potential exposure he'd have for any crimes that were committed. 71 00:03:51,520 --> 00:03:54,320 Speaker 1: So they'd really want to know something about what do 72 00:03:54,360 --> 00:03:56,160 Speaker 1: you have a story to tell? And you know his 73 00:03:56,240 --> 00:03:59,119 Speaker 1: attorney's statement, there's been a lot made of the fact 74 00:03:59,160 --> 00:04:01,720 Speaker 1: that he said General Wind certainly has a story to tell, 75 00:04:01,760 --> 00:04:03,840 Speaker 1: and I think and you know that's that was sort 76 00:04:03,880 --> 00:04:06,200 Speaker 1: of pregnant with that idea that there might be something 77 00:04:06,280 --> 00:04:09,080 Speaker 1: juicy there. However, I think, you know the fact that 78 00:04:09,120 --> 00:04:11,560 Speaker 1: he went public with this is not the kind of 79 00:04:11,600 --> 00:04:14,920 Speaker 1: the way you woo a committee into actually granting an 80 00:04:14,920 --> 00:04:18,960 Speaker 1: immunity um border. So I think, you know, there's some 81 00:04:18,960 --> 00:04:21,320 Speaker 1: pretty good speculation here that they might not have that 82 00:04:21,480 --> 00:04:24,200 Speaker 1: much to offer, They're not offering that much to the committee, 83 00:04:24,360 --> 00:04:27,440 Speaker 1: and that this is kind of a public relations campaign, Steve, 84 00:04:27,480 --> 00:04:31,080 Speaker 1: as we've been discussing, this is immunity just for what 85 00:04:31,200 --> 00:04:33,960 Speaker 1: he might say to the committee, Not immunity from anything 86 00:04:34,040 --> 00:04:37,120 Speaker 1: having to do with the uh the issue of contact 87 00:04:37,160 --> 00:04:40,880 Speaker 1: with Russia. But as a practical matter, if somebody like 88 00:04:41,040 --> 00:04:44,960 Speaker 1: Mike Flynn were to get immunity, how difficult would it 89 00:04:45,040 --> 00:04:48,520 Speaker 1: make Would that make it to prosecute him for any 90 00:04:48,560 --> 00:04:51,520 Speaker 1: crime related to this investigation? Yeah, I mean it would 91 00:04:51,520 --> 00:04:54,200 Speaker 1: make it pretty hard. You know, not formally because you know, 92 00:04:54,320 --> 00:04:56,920 Speaker 1: depending on how the immunity is provided by the relevant 93 00:04:56,920 --> 00:04:59,599 Speaker 1: congressional committees, there are ways to do it that wouldn't 94 00:04:59,600 --> 00:05:02,719 Speaker 1: necessary early applied to a criminal investigation. But you know, 95 00:05:02,760 --> 00:05:05,520 Speaker 1: folks may remember that, you know, the Oliver North indictment 96 00:05:05,600 --> 00:05:09,799 Speaker 1: after Iron Contra blew up largely because there were questions 97 00:05:09,800 --> 00:05:12,000 Speaker 1: about the scope of the immunity he had had been 98 00:05:12,000 --> 00:05:15,800 Speaker 1: provided before testifying before Congress. There were concerns about whether 99 00:05:15,839 --> 00:05:18,880 Speaker 1: there were Fife Amendment implications for not you know, giving 100 00:05:18,960 --> 00:05:21,760 Speaker 1: him a similar treatment in a criminal prosecution. So, you know, 101 00:05:21,800 --> 00:05:24,200 Speaker 1: I think part of the complexity here is not just 102 00:05:24,360 --> 00:05:27,800 Speaker 1: the politics on Capitol Hill, but also the Andy was 103 00:05:27,839 --> 00:05:30,320 Speaker 1: talking about. I mean, the dynamic you're going to necessarily 104 00:05:30,360 --> 00:05:34,680 Speaker 1: have between the congressional investigators and the Justice Department. Um, 105 00:05:34,720 --> 00:05:36,440 Speaker 1: you know, at least some of whom might very well 106 00:05:36,480 --> 00:05:39,320 Speaker 1: want a pretty substantial bite at this apple if it 107 00:05:39,360 --> 00:05:41,640 Speaker 1: turns out that, you know, Michael Flynn can really be 108 00:05:41,680 --> 00:05:44,400 Speaker 1: tied to some of the more serious criminal allegations that 109 00:05:44,480 --> 00:05:48,120 Speaker 1: are being bandied about Andrew. One of the things that 110 00:05:49,400 --> 00:05:51,200 Speaker 1: has been different about this one, it seems, is that 111 00:05:51,240 --> 00:05:53,599 Speaker 1: the President of the United States has tweeted that he 112 00:05:54,160 --> 00:05:58,920 Speaker 1: supports Mr. Flynn's request for immunity because this is, to paraphrase, 113 00:05:58,960 --> 00:06:02,400 Speaker 1: a witch hunt, uh, this investigation in his view. How 114 00:06:02,560 --> 00:06:06,640 Speaker 1: unusual is it for a president to do something like that. Well, 115 00:06:06,720 --> 00:06:09,599 Speaker 1: first of all, it's totally unprecedented. And the second point 116 00:06:09,640 --> 00:06:14,000 Speaker 1: is it's problematic because a President Trump shouldn't know what 117 00:06:14,080 --> 00:06:16,240 Speaker 1: the FBI does or does not have in terms of 118 00:06:16,279 --> 00:06:19,240 Speaker 1: information within its investigation on Mr. Flynn, So he wouldn't 119 00:06:19,240 --> 00:06:21,640 Speaker 1: be in a position to know whether it's actually which 120 00:06:21,640 --> 00:06:24,479 Speaker 1: one or not absent some sort of improper contact with 121 00:06:24,520 --> 00:06:28,880 Speaker 1: the Justice Department. So that's one problem. The second problem 122 00:06:29,000 --> 00:06:31,120 Speaker 1: with that tweet is the fact that it creates the 123 00:06:31,160 --> 00:06:33,880 Speaker 1: perception that he might be publicly trying to signal to 124 00:06:34,560 --> 00:06:37,240 Speaker 1: Flynn to try and seek community or some in some 125 00:06:37,360 --> 00:06:41,360 Speaker 1: other way interfere with the natural processes of the Justice 126 00:06:41,360 --> 00:06:43,159 Speaker 1: Department and the FBI as they go forward with a 127 00:06:43,240 --> 00:06:47,960 Speaker 1: very serious counterintelligence to counter intelligence investigation. Steve, you only 128 00:06:48,000 --> 00:06:49,680 Speaker 1: have about a minute left, but I wanted to ask 129 00:06:49,680 --> 00:06:53,080 Speaker 1: you about Richard Painter and Norm Eisen had had a 130 00:06:53,120 --> 00:06:55,640 Speaker 1: column in the New York Times where they said, we 131 00:06:55,680 --> 00:06:58,440 Speaker 1: gotta go ahead and give Michael Flynn immunity because this 132 00:06:58,480 --> 00:07:00,160 Speaker 1: is so important that we need to get to the 133 00:07:00,160 --> 00:07:02,919 Speaker 1: bottom of what happened as quickly as possible. What do 134 00:07:02,960 --> 00:07:05,800 Speaker 1: you think about that? You know, I think that's I 135 00:07:05,839 --> 00:07:07,920 Speaker 1: think that's you know, good for headlines. I think it's 136 00:07:07,920 --> 00:07:10,640 Speaker 1: bad for policy. I mean, there are lots of reasons why, 137 00:07:10,800 --> 00:07:12,880 Speaker 1: you know, even if it's not good press, we really 138 00:07:12,920 --> 00:07:15,920 Speaker 1: want this investigation to go methodically and slowly and one 139 00:07:15,960 --> 00:07:18,480 Speaker 1: step at a time. Um and before we have a 140 00:07:18,480 --> 00:07:20,960 Speaker 1: better sense or at least before congressional investigators have a 141 00:07:20,960 --> 00:07:23,640 Speaker 1: better sense of just what Michael Flynn knows and just 142 00:07:23,680 --> 00:07:25,960 Speaker 1: what he did, you know to give him immunity a 143 00:07:26,000 --> 00:07:28,560 Speaker 1: sort of a knee jerk reaction. Um. I think it's 144 00:07:28,560 --> 00:07:31,600 Speaker 1: going to be a very myopic move um, and could 145 00:07:31,640 --> 00:07:34,960 Speaker 1: actually handstring the investigation down the road as opposed to 146 00:07:34,960 --> 00:07:37,560 Speaker 1: opening the doors to you know, getting there faster, as 147 00:07:37,680 --> 00:07:41,200 Speaker 1: as Eisman Painter Is suggested. Our thanks to Steve Laddock 148 00:07:41,200 --> 00:07:43,840 Speaker 1: of the University of Texas School of Law and Andrew Wright, 149 00:07:44,240 --> 00:07:47,800 Speaker 1: professor at Savannah Law School. That's it for this edition 150 00:07:47,840 --> 00:07:50,920 Speaker 1: of Bloomberg Law. We'll be back tomorrow thanks to our 151 00:07:50,920 --> 00:07:54,680 Speaker 1: technical director Charlie Valmer and our producer David Suerman. You 152 00:07:54,680 --> 00:07:57,840 Speaker 1: can find more legal news at Bloomberg, Bloomberg Law dot 153 00:07:57,880 --> 00:08:01,240 Speaker 1: com and Bloomberg BNA dot com. Coming up on Bloomberg Radio, 154 00:08:01,280 --> 00:08:04,320 Speaker 1: Bloomberg Markets with Carol Masser and Corey Johnson. Carol, what 155 00:08:04,360 --> 00:08:06,360 Speaker 1: are you going to be talking about, Michael? We're gonna 156 00:08:06,360 --> 00:08:09,400 Speaker 1: talk about another possible Trump administration official with lots of 157 00:08:09,440 --> 00:08:13,080 Speaker 1: conflict of interest, Why investor should be little to skeptical 158 00:08:13,080 --> 00:08:16,360 Speaker 1: about the markets? And the creator Bulletproof coffee about tricks 159 00:08:16,400 --> 00:08:19,480 Speaker 1: for your mind. Tricks for your mind. Stay tuned for 160 00:08:19,520 --> 00:08:22,600 Speaker 1: all of that and more here on Bloomberg Radio. This 161 00:08:22,800 --> 00:08:23,520 Speaker 1: is Bloomberg