WEBVTT - Kavanaugh Confirmation in Doubt After New Allegations

0:00:03.480 --> 0:00:07.560
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. I'm June Grosso. Every

0:00:07.640 --> 0:00:10.440
<v Speaker 1>day we bring you insight and analysis into the most

0:00:10.480 --> 0:00:13.399
<v Speaker 1>important legal news of the day. You can find more

0:00:13.480 --> 0:00:18.040
<v Speaker 1>episodes of the Bloomberg Law Podcast on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud,

0:00:18.320 --> 0:00:22.759
<v Speaker 1>and on Bloomberg dot com Slash Podcasts. As Republicans pushed

0:00:22.800 --> 0:00:26.160
<v Speaker 1>to confirm Brett Kavanaugh before the next Supreme Court term begins,

0:00:26.520 --> 0:00:31.280
<v Speaker 1>his nomination is facing new uncertainty after a California psychology

0:00:31.280 --> 0:00:34.960
<v Speaker 1>professor named Christine blaisie Ford came forward and accused the

0:00:34.960 --> 0:00:37.839
<v Speaker 1>Appeals Court judge of sexually assaulting her when they were

0:00:37.840 --> 0:00:41.040
<v Speaker 1>in high school in the nineteen eighties. Speaking with CNN

0:00:41.159 --> 0:00:46.600
<v Speaker 1>last night, Maine Republican Senator Susan Collins responded to the news, well,

0:00:46.640 --> 0:00:52.960
<v Speaker 1>I obvious surprised, and uh, it's an issue that I

0:00:53.080 --> 0:00:59.120
<v Speaker 1>brought up with him last Friday, and um he denied um,

0:00:59.120 --> 0:01:02.880
<v Speaker 1>as he did an this written statement. Kavanaugh issued another

0:01:02.920 --> 0:01:06.280
<v Speaker 1>statement today saying this is completely false allegation. I have

0:01:06.360 --> 0:01:09.640
<v Speaker 1>never done anything like what the accuser describes to her

0:01:09.800 --> 0:01:12.960
<v Speaker 1>or to anyone joining me. Is Steve Sanders, professor at

0:01:12.959 --> 0:01:17.120
<v Speaker 1>Indiana University Mara School of Law. Steve has the response

0:01:17.200 --> 0:01:20.920
<v Speaker 1>to the accusation changed since Ford went from being an

0:01:20.959 --> 0:01:25.760
<v Speaker 1>anonymous woman to identifying herself. Well, I think it depends

0:01:25.800 --> 0:01:28.800
<v Speaker 1>on who you're thinking about is doing the responding. Certainly

0:01:28.880 --> 0:01:32.120
<v Speaker 1>the White House and the most partisan supporters of the

0:01:32.240 --> 0:01:36.199
<v Speaker 1>Republicans in the Senate, and if Kavanaugh really haven't changed

0:01:36.240 --> 0:01:40.720
<v Speaker 1>their position, which really positions it seems to be one.

0:01:40.800 --> 0:01:44.280
<v Speaker 1>This has come up so late that that it's not

0:01:44.440 --> 0:01:47.639
<v Speaker 1>fair to include it in what we're considering. Another angle

0:01:47.800 --> 0:01:51.360
<v Speaker 1>is that this happens so long ago, memories can be cloudy.

0:01:51.400 --> 0:01:55.160
<v Speaker 1>We can't judge by the credibility. We can't judge the credibility.

0:01:55.200 --> 0:01:57.760
<v Speaker 1>So I don't think so. I I think the you know,

0:01:57.840 --> 0:02:01.800
<v Speaker 1>the most serious responses coming from those in the middle,

0:02:01.920 --> 0:02:04.200
<v Speaker 1>the sort of vanishing middle I think in this in

0:02:04.280 --> 0:02:09.480
<v Speaker 1>this media environment, who say these are serious accusations. They're

0:02:09.520 --> 0:02:12.880
<v Speaker 1>not yet proven, they're not solid, but they need to

0:02:12.919 --> 0:02:16.000
<v Speaker 1>be investigated, and we need to keep an open mind

0:02:16.080 --> 0:02:18.120
<v Speaker 1>and do as much as we can. That is the

0:02:18.160 --> 0:02:21.520
<v Speaker 1>sort of stock and trade of lawyers in the legal system,

0:02:21.560 --> 0:02:26.320
<v Speaker 1>and that is making careful assessments of evidence and credibility

0:02:26.400 --> 0:02:29.480
<v Speaker 1>on both sides as the story moves forward. So send

0:02:29.520 --> 0:02:33.040
<v Speaker 1>a Judiciary Committee chairman Chuck Grassley said he plans to

0:02:33.080 --> 0:02:36.760
<v Speaker 1>start with follow up calls to Kavanaugh and Ford rather

0:02:36.800 --> 0:02:40.440
<v Speaker 1>than calling on Ford to testify before the committee. Alton

0:02:40.639 --> 0:02:43.840
<v Speaker 1>Democratic senators on the committee are seeking a delay. In

0:02:43.919 --> 0:02:48.519
<v Speaker 1>your mind, what should take place next? I think there

0:02:48.560 --> 0:02:53.079
<v Speaker 1>have to be hearing. So as of this morning, uh,

0:02:53.160 --> 0:02:55.960
<v Speaker 1>miss Ford, the the alleged victim in this case, has

0:02:56.000 --> 0:02:59.560
<v Speaker 1>said she's through her attorney that she is very willing

0:02:59.639 --> 0:03:02.520
<v Speaker 1>to testify openly about this. And I believe just this

0:03:02.639 --> 0:03:05.639
<v Speaker 1>morning Judge Kavanaugh has said the same thing as and

0:03:05.680 --> 0:03:09.280
<v Speaker 1>so if you have the two parties to this incident

0:03:09.400 --> 0:03:12.680
<v Speaker 1>willing to talk publicly, willing to testify about it to

0:03:12.840 --> 0:03:16.360
<v Speaker 1>the Judiciary Committee, I don't see how the Judiciary Committee

0:03:16.360 --> 0:03:20.960
<v Speaker 1>cannot reopen this matter, cannot appear to be interested in

0:03:21.400 --> 0:03:24.280
<v Speaker 1>assessing the truth. And at least one Republican on the

0:03:24.400 --> 0:03:28.600
<v Speaker 1>Judiciary Committee, UM Jeff Lake, has also suggested he thinks

0:03:28.680 --> 0:03:31.520
<v Speaker 1>that um, we need to slow down the process until

0:03:31.639 --> 0:03:37.640
<v Speaker 1>this issue has been fully aired. Now. Brett Kavanaugh has

0:03:37.720 --> 0:03:40.920
<v Speaker 1>hired Beth Wilkinson from the law firm Wilkinson Walsh and

0:03:40.960 --> 0:03:43.600
<v Speaker 1>asked of it's to be his attorney, what does it

0:03:43.720 --> 0:03:49.000
<v Speaker 1>tell you that he is hiring an attorney. Now I

0:03:49.040 --> 0:03:52.040
<v Speaker 1>don't know the details of her background, but you know,

0:03:52.680 --> 0:03:56.360
<v Speaker 1>I think it's probably a wise course. Anytime anyone is

0:03:56.400 --> 0:04:01.600
<v Speaker 1>accused of wrongdoing and faces consequences, where their criminal consequences

0:04:01.720 --> 0:04:04.240
<v Speaker 1>or something else, I think you always want to be

0:04:04.360 --> 0:04:09.200
<v Speaker 1>sure you're thinking clearly, that you're understanding the consequences of

0:04:09.280 --> 0:04:12.840
<v Speaker 1>things you might do or say. There's an old, old

0:04:12.920 --> 0:04:15.760
<v Speaker 1>saying that says a person who serves as his or

0:04:15.800 --> 0:04:18.640
<v Speaker 1>her own attorney has a fool as a client. And

0:04:18.720 --> 0:04:21.800
<v Speaker 1>so I think it's probably wise that even someone is

0:04:21.880 --> 0:04:25.400
<v Speaker 1>well versed in the law, as Judge Kavanaugh is deciding,

0:04:25.560 --> 0:04:29.640
<v Speaker 1>you know, in navigating these very serious accusations, even if

0:04:29.680 --> 0:04:32.679
<v Speaker 1>I'm not facing criminal charges for them and he can't

0:04:32.760 --> 0:04:35.919
<v Speaker 1>because of the statute of limitations, I think, um, you know,

0:04:36.000 --> 0:04:41.200
<v Speaker 1>I need some wise objective counsel as I move forward. Now.

0:04:41.640 --> 0:04:45.320
<v Speaker 1>We can't help miss not miss the comparisons to the

0:04:45.320 --> 0:04:49.200
<v Speaker 1>Anita Hill hearings, and last year Joe Biden, who was

0:04:49.240 --> 0:04:53.600
<v Speaker 1>then the Judiciary Committee chairman, said that to a Vogue,

0:04:53.600 --> 0:04:56.000
<v Speaker 1>I wish I'd been able to do more for Anita Hill.

0:04:56.160 --> 0:04:59.479
<v Speaker 1>I owe her an apology what could be done this

0:04:59.560 --> 0:05:03.279
<v Speaker 1>time to avoid making it a trial of this woman

0:05:03.520 --> 0:05:06.120
<v Speaker 1>as it was. Basically it's called the Anita Hill hearings,

0:05:06.160 --> 0:05:09.520
<v Speaker 1>not that Clarence Thomas hearings. Yeah, I think so much

0:05:09.520 --> 0:05:14.440
<v Speaker 1>of that was just because of the seemingly dismissive attitude

0:05:14.520 --> 0:05:17.480
<v Speaker 1>that many senators as well as the public took to

0:05:17.600 --> 0:05:21.240
<v Speaker 1>Anita Hills testimony. I think it's less likely that will

0:05:21.240 --> 0:05:24.320
<v Speaker 1>happen this time, just because, as has been already said

0:05:24.360 --> 0:05:26.800
<v Speaker 1>in lots of commentary about this, we're in a different

0:05:26.839 --> 0:05:29.599
<v Speaker 1>moment now than we were in the nine eighties, with

0:05:29.640 --> 0:05:34.040
<v Speaker 1>the Me Too movement, with the increased awareness of consciousness

0:05:34.279 --> 0:05:39.120
<v Speaker 1>of sexual harassment, sexual misconduct, what women have had to

0:05:39.360 --> 0:05:43.120
<v Speaker 1>endure at the hands of male co workers and male friends,

0:05:43.160 --> 0:05:45.840
<v Speaker 1>and so, make no mistake about it, we're also in

0:05:45.880 --> 0:05:48.960
<v Speaker 1>a very highly polarized time and so again I think

0:05:49.000 --> 0:05:52.760
<v Speaker 1>the most partisan UM supporters of President Trump and the

0:05:52.839 --> 0:05:56.120
<v Speaker 1>most partisan defenders of Judge Cabinet will do anything possible

0:05:56.680 --> 0:06:03.040
<v Speaker 1>UM to undermine UM this person's credit ability, this accuser's credibility. Uh,

0:06:03.200 --> 0:06:06.560
<v Speaker 1>They'll have you know that. They will be interested in

0:06:06.600 --> 0:06:09.320
<v Speaker 1>getting it the truth. But I think the mainstream story

0:06:09.440 --> 0:06:11.960
<v Speaker 1>that we all take away the impression we all take

0:06:12.000 --> 0:06:15.039
<v Speaker 1>away from this incident through the media coverage and the

0:06:15.080 --> 0:06:19.480
<v Speaker 1>broader discussion, will be more respectful of her point of view.

0:06:20.040 --> 0:06:23.120
<v Speaker 1>Whether or not that means most people will be convinced

0:06:23.360 --> 0:06:26.520
<v Speaker 1>that the story happened the way she says that is

0:06:26.640 --> 0:06:31.080
<v Speaker 1>a different question. Now. Many people have said that Justice

0:06:31.120 --> 0:06:34.760
<v Speaker 1>Clarence Thomas has been under some kind of a cloud

0:06:34.880 --> 0:06:38.960
<v Speaker 1>during his entire career as a justice because of those allegations.

0:06:39.680 --> 0:06:43.800
<v Speaker 1>Might the same be true if Kavanaugh is confirmed. Well,

0:06:43.839 --> 0:06:46.440
<v Speaker 1>I think it will certainly be the case if if

0:06:46.440 --> 0:06:48.560
<v Speaker 1>there are no hearings, I think it would be much

0:06:48.600 --> 0:06:52.559
<v Speaker 1>worse for Judge Kavanaugh. If if the Republicans simply tried

0:06:52.600 --> 0:06:54.719
<v Speaker 1>to sweep this under the rug at this point, then

0:06:54.760 --> 0:06:57.240
<v Speaker 1>I think it would be much more likely that he

0:06:57.279 --> 0:06:59.760
<v Speaker 1>would have that sort of cloud, that sort of sting

0:07:00.480 --> 0:07:04.040
<v Speaker 1>attached to him if there are hearings, if he is

0:07:04.440 --> 0:07:07.520
<v Speaker 1>forced to answer tough questions about this, if his accuser

0:07:07.640 --> 0:07:10.360
<v Speaker 1>is forced to answer tough questions, I think it's just

0:07:10.520 --> 0:07:14.040
<v Speaker 1>hard to predict at this point what the lasting damage

0:07:14.160 --> 0:07:17.280
<v Speaker 1>might be to Judge Cavanaugh. With the lasting impression or

0:07:17.360 --> 0:07:20.800
<v Speaker 1>stigma might be that would cling to him I think

0:07:21.040 --> 0:07:24.160
<v Speaker 1>in this environment, with things changing literally by the hour,

0:07:24.560 --> 0:07:28.200
<v Speaker 1>you simply can't make predictions about where we will be

0:07:28.840 --> 0:07:30.760
<v Speaker 1>a week from now, a month from now, a year

0:07:30.800 --> 0:07:34.160
<v Speaker 1>from now, by the hour, perhaps by the minute, even

0:07:34.920 --> 0:07:38.480
<v Speaker 1>Thanks so much, Steve, and let's talk some more later

0:07:38.520 --> 0:07:42.280
<v Speaker 1>about what's going to happen um with Judge Kavanaugh tomorrow.

0:07:42.320 --> 0:07:45.880
<v Speaker 1>Steve standers, He's a professor at Indiana University Morrow School

0:07:45.960 --> 0:07:53.800
<v Speaker 1>of Law. Last Friday, special counsel Robert Mueller's team scored

0:07:53.840 --> 0:07:57.800
<v Speaker 1>a significant win as former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort

0:07:57.840 --> 0:08:01.440
<v Speaker 1>pleaded guilty to conspire against the United States and agreed

0:08:01.480 --> 0:08:05.600
<v Speaker 1>to cooperate in the Mueller investigation. However, speaking with Fox News,

0:08:05.680 --> 0:08:09.320
<v Speaker 1>Trump's lawyer Rudy Giuliani said manaforts plea had nothing to

0:08:09.360 --> 0:08:12.800
<v Speaker 1>do with President Trump. The reality is there was a

0:08:12.880 --> 0:08:17.440
<v Speaker 1>quote put up by source close to Manafort that the

0:08:17.640 --> 0:08:20.600
<v Speaker 1>play agreement has and the cooperation agreement has nothing to

0:08:20.640 --> 0:08:24.720
<v Speaker 1>do with the Trump campaign quote. There's no evidence of collusion,

0:08:25.280 --> 0:08:28.239
<v Speaker 1>my guest, as former federal prosecutor Robert Mint's a partner

0:08:28.320 --> 0:08:31.600
<v Speaker 1>M Carter in English, Bob Mueller seemed to be using

0:08:31.640 --> 0:08:35.920
<v Speaker 1>the classic prosecution strategy of making deals up the chain,

0:08:36.120 --> 0:08:39.080
<v Speaker 1>And we know that before the plea there were proper

0:08:39.200 --> 0:08:44.120
<v Speaker 1>sessions in which Manafort revealed information to prosecutors. So does

0:08:44.160 --> 0:08:48.520
<v Speaker 1>that indicate that Manafort has important information to give on

0:08:48.679 --> 0:08:55.120
<v Speaker 1>those up the chain? Absolutely, m Prosecutors do not agree

0:08:55.200 --> 0:08:59.440
<v Speaker 1>to these cooperating deals unless they already know what it

0:08:59.559 --> 0:09:02.880
<v Speaker 1>is they're buying. So the process that had to have

0:09:02.960 --> 0:09:06.600
<v Speaker 1>taken place here was that Manafort and his attorneys had

0:09:06.640 --> 0:09:10.160
<v Speaker 1>to go have met with prosecutors and given, as as

0:09:10.200 --> 0:09:14.120
<v Speaker 1>you said, a proffer indicating the information that he would

0:09:14.200 --> 0:09:16.880
<v Speaker 1>be willing to give were he to cooperate. And so

0:09:16.960 --> 0:09:20.319
<v Speaker 1>we can absolutely assume that prosecutors would never have struck

0:09:20.400 --> 0:09:23.439
<v Speaker 1>this deal if they didn't already know that the information

0:09:23.480 --> 0:09:26.319
<v Speaker 1>that Manafort has to offer was going to be useful

0:09:26.320 --> 0:09:30.200
<v Speaker 1>to them in some future prosecution. So what's your reaction

0:09:30.240 --> 0:09:34.560
<v Speaker 1>to Giuliani's statements throughout the weekend that there is no

0:09:34.720 --> 0:09:37.760
<v Speaker 1>evidence that this agreement has anything to do with the

0:09:37.760 --> 0:09:42.679
<v Speaker 1>Trump White House. Well, he's technically correct. We just don't

0:09:42.760 --> 0:09:46.079
<v Speaker 1>know at this point what Manafort knows. The only thing

0:09:46.120 --> 0:09:49.079
<v Speaker 1>we can say is that he does have useful information.

0:09:49.160 --> 0:09:53.080
<v Speaker 1>Now that useful information can go in any number of directions,

0:09:53.240 --> 0:09:57.040
<v Speaker 1>one of which is to provide additional information about the

0:09:57.160 --> 0:10:00.400
<v Speaker 1>Ukrainian money that he was involved with the as the

0:10:00.920 --> 0:10:05.520
<v Speaker 1>superseding information, which is quite voluminous, quite detail, talks about

0:10:05.559 --> 0:10:08.400
<v Speaker 1>some other entities that were involved in this, one of

0:10:08.400 --> 0:10:10.520
<v Speaker 1>which is the law firm, one of which is about

0:10:10.679 --> 0:10:14.200
<v Speaker 1>was a powerful Washington, DC lobbying entity. And it's certainly

0:10:14.240 --> 0:10:17.400
<v Speaker 1>possible that his information could lead to further charges in

0:10:17.440 --> 0:10:20.320
<v Speaker 1>that direction. But there's no question that the other area

0:10:20.360 --> 0:10:23.600
<v Speaker 1>that prosecutors will be questioning Manaford about and have already

0:10:23.679 --> 0:10:26.560
<v Speaker 1>questioned about is the meeting in Trump Tower and any

0:10:26.600 --> 0:10:30.360
<v Speaker 1>information that he may have regarding Russia during the time

0:10:30.360 --> 0:10:33.400
<v Speaker 1>that he was involved running the Trump campaign. Under his

0:10:33.480 --> 0:10:37.800
<v Speaker 1>cooperation agreement, Manaford has to not only talk fully with

0:10:37.840 --> 0:10:41.240
<v Speaker 1>the prosecutors to anything they ask any questions, but he

0:10:41.280 --> 0:10:45.400
<v Speaker 1>has to testify if Mueller wants to even participate in

0:10:45.559 --> 0:10:51.280
<v Speaker 1>undercover activities if requested. Is that especially broad or par

0:10:51.440 --> 0:10:55.120
<v Speaker 1>for the course with plea deals? Now, that's really the

0:10:55.160 --> 0:10:59.080
<v Speaker 1>way these plea deals always work. You cannot cooperate with

0:10:59.160 --> 0:11:02.120
<v Speaker 1>the federal government and with prosecutors unless you're a one

0:11:02.559 --> 0:11:06.840
<v Speaker 1>pent in. They don't accept partial cooperation. They won't agree

0:11:06.920 --> 0:11:10.960
<v Speaker 1>to provide information about some things but not others, because ultimately,

0:11:10.960 --> 0:11:13.240
<v Speaker 1>if you have to testify, you have to be prepared

0:11:13.280 --> 0:11:16.280
<v Speaker 1>to answer all kinds of questions on crossing domination. So

0:11:16.480 --> 0:11:20.040
<v Speaker 1>you're one percent in giving every bit of information that

0:11:20.080 --> 0:11:22.240
<v Speaker 1>you have. That all right now you're asked about to

0:11:22.360 --> 0:11:24.920
<v Speaker 1>federal prosecutors. That's up to prosecutors as to what they

0:11:24.920 --> 0:11:28.000
<v Speaker 1>can do with that information. But he is on the

0:11:28.040 --> 0:11:30.400
<v Speaker 1>government team at this point, and in order to get

0:11:30.440 --> 0:11:33.440
<v Speaker 1>any kind of favorabul treatment from the prosecution, he's going

0:11:33.480 --> 0:11:37.160
<v Speaker 1>to have to cooperate fully with everything he knows, and

0:11:37.240 --> 0:11:40.559
<v Speaker 1>he cannot get caught in selling something that's untruthful or

0:11:40.640 --> 0:11:43.880
<v Speaker 1>his deal will blow up. I've heard different assessments of

0:11:43.920 --> 0:11:49.320
<v Speaker 1>how much time he'll be spending in prison. What's your assessment, Well,

0:11:49.440 --> 0:11:51.440
<v Speaker 1>the answer at this point is nobody knows. It really

0:11:51.480 --> 0:11:55.000
<v Speaker 1>depends on how useful this information is. I think we

0:11:55.040 --> 0:11:58.400
<v Speaker 1>can likely say that even if we were to provide

0:11:59.160 --> 0:12:02.120
<v Speaker 1>very useful and for nation Um, it's unlikely that the

0:12:02.200 --> 0:12:04.880
<v Speaker 1>judge will not give him at least some jail time.

0:12:04.920 --> 0:12:07.560
<v Speaker 1>But I think a ballpark is that without cooperation, he

0:12:07.640 --> 0:12:09.520
<v Speaker 1>probably would have gone to jail for the rest of

0:12:09.520 --> 0:12:12.120
<v Speaker 1>his life, and he who can ride useful information here.

0:12:12.160 --> 0:12:15.240
<v Speaker 1>Depending upon how critical it is and whether he ultimately

0:12:15.240 --> 0:12:18.720
<v Speaker 1>testifies in a whole post of other factors, he possibly

0:12:18.720 --> 0:12:20.959
<v Speaker 1>could walk away with a sentence somewhere in the range

0:12:20.960 --> 0:12:23.959
<v Speaker 1>of five to eight years, and that would given the

0:12:24.040 --> 0:12:26.720
<v Speaker 1>opportunity to perhaps get out of prison and have some

0:12:26.880 --> 0:12:30.240
<v Speaker 1>life after his time at jail. President Trump has not

0:12:30.440 --> 0:12:36.200
<v Speaker 1>commented on Manafort specifically so far, But will this heighten

0:12:36.600 --> 0:12:41.800
<v Speaker 1>the legal pressure on Trump? Well, it really all depends

0:12:41.840 --> 0:12:44.840
<v Speaker 1>on what it is that Manafort knows and is going

0:12:44.880 --> 0:12:46.880
<v Speaker 1>to tell the government. I mean, I think we can

0:12:46.920 --> 0:12:50.160
<v Speaker 1>safely assume that whatever he does know, he's giving up now.

0:12:50.600 --> 0:12:53.560
<v Speaker 1>So what that is and what kind of conversations that

0:12:53.600 --> 0:12:56.280
<v Speaker 1>may have taken place, you know, only he knows. And

0:12:56.360 --> 0:12:59.160
<v Speaker 1>those conversations may have taken place with the president, they

0:12:59.200 --> 0:13:01.559
<v Speaker 1>may have taken place of other members of the President's team.

0:13:01.760 --> 0:13:05.920
<v Speaker 1>And remember also June that his uncorroborated testimony is not

0:13:06.080 --> 0:13:08.640
<v Speaker 1>going to be enough for prosecutors to really a forward

0:13:08.679 --> 0:13:11.400
<v Speaker 1>with anything. Prosecutors will listen to Manta for it, they

0:13:11.520 --> 0:13:13.760
<v Speaker 1>listen to what he says went on, but then they're

0:13:13.760 --> 0:13:16.320
<v Speaker 1>gonna have to go out and corroborate that testimony with

0:13:16.480 --> 0:13:20.280
<v Speaker 1>other evidence, because otherwise they really can't use it to

0:13:20.320 --> 0:13:24.040
<v Speaker 1>go forward with the prosecution. They will have some insight though,

0:13:24.080 --> 0:13:28.560
<v Speaker 1>into that June meeting at Trump Tower that's been talked

0:13:28.600 --> 0:13:31.760
<v Speaker 1>about so much about a minute here, Yes, and that

0:13:31.920 --> 0:13:34.920
<v Speaker 1>is exactly one of the focuses certainly is going to

0:13:34.920 --> 0:13:37.800
<v Speaker 1>be about that meeting, because he's the only person who

0:13:37.840 --> 0:13:40.040
<v Speaker 1>they have the opportunity to talk with now who is

0:13:40.080 --> 0:13:42.320
<v Speaker 1>president at the meeting. They'll want to know what happened

0:13:42.360 --> 0:13:44.280
<v Speaker 1>leading up to the meeting, what happened at the meeting,

0:13:44.320 --> 0:13:47.040
<v Speaker 1>and what happened after the meeting, And that information I

0:13:47.040 --> 0:13:49.640
<v Speaker 1>think is ultimately going to be known either by way

0:13:49.640 --> 0:13:52.800
<v Speaker 1>of further criminal charges or in some subsequent report that

0:13:52.880 --> 0:13:55.520
<v Speaker 1>the Muller team puts together down the road. Okay, Bob,

0:13:55.600 --> 0:13:58.600
<v Speaker 1>not the last time we'll be talking about Manaford, Thanks

0:13:58.640 --> 0:14:01.240
<v Speaker 1>so much. That's Robert Mints. He's a partner at McCarter

0:14:01.480 --> 0:14:05.520
<v Speaker 1>and English. Also remember that Paul Manafort is forfeiting and

0:14:05.720 --> 0:14:09.000
<v Speaker 1>estimated twenty two million dollars worth of real estate in

0:14:09.120 --> 0:14:13.520
<v Speaker 1>New York in courting Manhattan apartments of Brooklyn Townhouse, a

0:14:13.600 --> 0:14:17.880
<v Speaker 1>home in the Hampton's. He's also forfeiting bank accounts and

0:14:17.960 --> 0:14:22.400
<v Speaker 1>insurance agreements. Thanks for listening to the Bloomberg Law Podcast.

0:14:22.760 --> 0:14:26.840
<v Speaker 1>You can subscribe and listen to the show on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud,

0:14:26.920 --> 0:14:30.800
<v Speaker 1>and on bloomberg dot com slash podcast. I'm June Brosso.

0:14:31.280 --> 0:14:32.560
<v Speaker 1>This is Bloomberg