1
00:00:03,200 --> 00:00:07,960
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Brusso from Bloomberg Radio.

2
00:00:09,320 --> 00:00:12,559
Speaker 1: Rudy Giuliani has not been charged with any crime yet,

3
00:00:12,880 --> 00:00:16,560
Speaker 1: but could that be changing soon. Prosecutors in the Manhattan

4
00:00:16,640 --> 00:00:20,239
Speaker 1: U s Attorney's Office that Giuliani once headed have been

5
00:00:20,280 --> 00:00:23,599
Speaker 1: investigating the former New York mayor and personal lawyer to

6
00:00:23,640 --> 00:00:27,640
Speaker 1: former President Donald Trump. That became evident when they rated

7
00:00:27,680 --> 00:00:30,680
Speaker 1: his apartment in the early morning hours two weeks ago.

8
00:00:31,600 --> 00:00:36,320
Speaker 1: Joining me is Greg Ferrell, Bloomberg Legal reporter. Rudy Giuliani's

9
00:00:36,440 --> 00:00:40,239
Speaker 1: lawyer offered to bring his client in for questioning by

10
00:00:40,320 --> 00:00:46,600
Speaker 1: Manhattan federal prosecutors two months ago. Why didn't that happen? Well,

11
00:00:46,920 --> 00:00:48,920
Speaker 1: it's this actually goes back a year and a half.

12
00:00:48,960 --> 00:00:53,640
Speaker 1: So Ever since Rudy Giuliani's business associates left Parniss and

13
00:00:53,720 --> 00:00:56,960
Speaker 1: Igor Frewman, the two guys who were charged a couple

14
00:00:57,000 --> 00:01:01,000
Speaker 1: of years ago in November late late nineteen with campaign

15
00:01:01,000 --> 00:01:06,520
Speaker 1: finance problems. Um it's been reported that Rudy was also

16
00:01:06,640 --> 00:01:09,560
Speaker 1: like a person of interest in that and since then,

17
00:01:09,640 --> 00:01:13,400
Speaker 1: since November of Bob Costello, his lawyer, has tried to

18
00:01:13,640 --> 00:01:17,080
Speaker 1: uh get Rudy in there under like either a proper

19
00:01:17,120 --> 00:01:19,640
Speaker 1: agreement or just like, is there anything you guys need

20
00:01:19,720 --> 00:01:22,800
Speaker 1: to know from us? And it's been kind of like quiet,

21
00:01:23,080 --> 00:01:27,120
Speaker 1: uh no response uh from uh, you know, from well, no,

22
00:01:27,240 --> 00:01:29,720
Speaker 1: I shouldn't put it that way. The response from the

23
00:01:29,760 --> 00:01:33,320
Speaker 1: federal prosecutors in Manhattan has been, I would love to

24
00:01:33,360 --> 00:01:34,560
Speaker 1: have you come in a chat, but we're not going

25
00:01:34,600 --> 00:01:36,600
Speaker 1: to tell you what we want, you know that what

26
00:01:36,800 --> 00:01:39,679
Speaker 1: we're specifically interested in. In other ways, they were treating

27
00:01:39,760 --> 00:01:43,440
Speaker 1: him kind of like he was a suspect um. They

28
00:01:43,440 --> 00:01:46,560
Speaker 1: didn't want to give him advanced notice of what they

29
00:01:46,560 --> 00:01:49,760
Speaker 1: are interested in, what their investigation encompassed. So this has

30
00:01:49,760 --> 00:01:52,360
Speaker 1: been kind of a like a little bit of a

31
00:01:53,120 --> 00:01:57,120
Speaker 1: you know, a dance between Rudy and his lawyer and

32
00:01:57,200 --> 00:01:59,800
Speaker 1: the Feds. Rudy, I think, has wanted to get you know,

33
00:02:00,080 --> 00:02:03,680
Speaker 1: put this behind him and you know, move on, um,

34
00:02:04,160 --> 00:02:08,320
Speaker 1: and the prosecutors in Manhattan are like unwilling to like

35
00:02:08,840 --> 00:02:11,720
Speaker 1: tell him what they're interested in. That's why this become

36
00:02:11,760 --> 00:02:15,600
Speaker 1: a stalemate. And yes, as recently as early March, um,

37
00:02:15,680 --> 00:02:17,720
Speaker 1: you know, Rudy, Laura once again said why you know,

38
00:02:18,280 --> 00:02:20,000
Speaker 1: why don't we just come in and tell you what

39
00:02:20,040 --> 00:02:24,280
Speaker 1: we were doing in Ukraine? And they're saying, like, no preconditions,

40
00:02:24,280 --> 00:02:27,840
Speaker 1: We just you know, uh, you know, if you want

41
00:02:27,840 --> 00:02:29,640
Speaker 1: to come in and talk, come in and talk. And

42
00:02:30,639 --> 00:02:33,959
Speaker 1: Giuliani's lawyer who's also in the seventies in very old

43
00:02:33,960 --> 00:02:36,400
Speaker 1: school guy who used to be a prose baby prosecutor

44
00:02:36,520 --> 00:02:39,560
Speaker 1: way back in the seventies at in Manhattan. So why

45
00:02:39,560 --> 00:02:42,040
Speaker 1: are you guys doing this the hard way? So that

46
00:02:42,120 --> 00:02:44,720
Speaker 1: became the theme of the story, the headline and all that.

47
00:02:45,720 --> 00:02:49,720
Speaker 1: Do do prosecutors meet with lawyers and clients when the

48
00:02:49,800 --> 00:02:55,440
Speaker 1: client is the target of the investigation, that's a little different.

49
00:02:55,720 --> 00:02:58,200
Speaker 1: So when they're when they're when you have a target,

50
00:02:58,600 --> 00:03:02,120
Speaker 1: then they don't want to allow the target, uh, to

51
00:03:02,240 --> 00:03:04,680
Speaker 1: just come in and decide what evidence to put forth.

52
00:03:05,200 --> 00:03:08,800
Speaker 1: They want to you know, keep their maximum flexibility, their

53
00:03:08,840 --> 00:03:12,000
Speaker 1: ability to ask any range of questions. They want to

54
00:03:12,040 --> 00:03:15,160
Speaker 1: hold to that and not give any sort of tip

55
00:03:15,240 --> 00:03:17,560
Speaker 1: as to what they might ask about because they don't want,

56
00:03:18,040 --> 00:03:20,760
Speaker 1: you know, otherwise, why not just you know, submit like

57
00:03:20,840 --> 00:03:23,560
Speaker 1: a series of written questions and you know, rely on

58
00:03:23,560 --> 00:03:27,840
Speaker 1: written responses, you know, make it easy for defense layers. Know,

59
00:03:28,120 --> 00:03:32,440
Speaker 1: the prosecutors I think want to basically you know, at

60
00:03:32,480 --> 00:03:34,440
Speaker 1: their own time and choosing decide what they want to

61
00:03:34,480 --> 00:03:36,400
Speaker 1: ask and when they want to ask it. So then

62
00:03:36,400 --> 00:03:43,960
Speaker 1: does that indicate that Juliani might be a target here? Right,

63
00:03:44,000 --> 00:03:45,800
Speaker 1: they haven't declared it, and of course they don't go

64
00:03:45,840 --> 00:03:49,320
Speaker 1: about declaring that, and um, you know, as of March,

65
00:03:49,560 --> 00:03:52,600
Speaker 1: Rudy was not It's clear that as of early March,

66
00:03:52,680 --> 00:03:56,840
Speaker 1: Rudy was a subject, namely like he was involved with

67
00:03:56,960 --> 00:04:00,160
Speaker 1: some characters who were under investigation over issues that were

68
00:04:00,240 --> 00:04:03,240
Speaker 1: under investigation, but he himself was not a target. But

69
00:04:03,760 --> 00:04:06,680
Speaker 1: there's no declaration of this from the Southern District of

70
00:04:06,680 --> 00:04:08,360
Speaker 1: New York. But the fact that you'd send a bunch

71
00:04:08,360 --> 00:04:11,360
Speaker 1: of FBI agents at six am to collect all his

72
00:04:11,440 --> 00:04:15,720
Speaker 1: electronic devices suggests that, yeah, he like it certainly seems

73
00:04:15,800 --> 00:04:18,200
Speaker 1: like he's a target. They're acting like he's a target.

74
00:04:18,240 --> 00:04:20,200
Speaker 1: And in the court of public opinion, and this is

75
00:04:20,240 --> 00:04:24,360
Speaker 1: what's really angering Rudy's lawyer. In the court of public opinion,

76
00:04:24,400 --> 00:04:26,880
Speaker 1: when you see a bunch of FBI agents show up

77
00:04:26,880 --> 00:04:29,880
Speaker 1: at someone's department, the public, you know, can only construe

78
00:04:29,920 --> 00:04:33,479
Speaker 1: that as, oh, he must have done something wrong. So basically,

79
00:04:33,520 --> 00:04:36,360
Speaker 1: Rudy's lawyer and Alan Dershowitz has said the same thing

80
00:04:36,720 --> 00:04:39,240
Speaker 1: that Alan dersh wits consulting with them that you know,

81
00:04:39,279 --> 00:04:41,400
Speaker 1: there's a way to do this if you want the devices,

82
00:04:41,480 --> 00:04:43,840
Speaker 1: you can just to issue a grand jury subpoena. It's

83
00:04:43,839 --> 00:04:46,240
Speaker 1: all secret. There's no you know, leak of this to

84
00:04:46,279 --> 00:04:49,000
Speaker 1: the public, and we can negotiate as to whether or

85
00:04:49,000 --> 00:04:53,080
Speaker 1: not something is uh falls under attorney client privilege or

86
00:04:53,520 --> 00:04:56,200
Speaker 1: executive privilege in the case of Rudy's most famous client,

87
00:04:56,279 --> 00:04:59,839
Speaker 1: former President Donald Trump. So now here you have the

88
00:05:00,080 --> 00:05:03,040
Speaker 1: former U. S. Attorney from Manhattan, the former mayor of

89
00:05:03,080 --> 00:05:06,400
Speaker 1: New York. How high a bar would it be to

90
00:05:06,520 --> 00:05:10,599
Speaker 1: get a search warrant for him? Extremely high? Because yes,

91
00:05:10,839 --> 00:05:13,680
Speaker 1: the former U S. Attorney for the Southern District, a

92
00:05:13,760 --> 00:05:16,280
Speaker 1: former number three official in the Reagan Justice Department in

93
00:05:16,279 --> 00:05:18,680
Speaker 1: the nineteen eighties. Uh, not just a two term New

94
00:05:18,720 --> 00:05:21,560
Speaker 1: York City mayor, but America's mayor who was lauded for

95
00:05:21,680 --> 00:05:25,159
Speaker 1: his you know, the valiant performance that he gave after

96
00:05:25,200 --> 00:05:29,279
Speaker 1: September eleventh in going to all the firefighter's funerals. He

97
00:05:29,360 --> 00:05:32,200
Speaker 1: was indefatigable, and he became a symbol, you know, of

98
00:05:32,240 --> 00:05:34,320
Speaker 1: a resurge in New York in the wake of those

99
00:05:34,360 --> 00:05:37,800
Speaker 1: attacks and then the presidential candidate. So for Rudy to

100
00:05:37,839 --> 00:05:41,000
Speaker 1: be being treated like this, not just by the just Department,

101
00:05:41,000 --> 00:05:44,520
Speaker 1: but by the very office which he led, is pretty astonishing.

102
00:05:44,720 --> 00:05:48,360
Speaker 1: And so there's this disconnect, like what Rudy's lawyer and

103
00:05:48,480 --> 00:05:51,000
Speaker 1: seemed to know about this doesn't add up to the

104
00:05:51,240 --> 00:05:53,560
Speaker 1: It's almost as other prosecutes went nuclear to take a

105
00:05:53,600 --> 00:05:55,719
Speaker 1: step like this. It's what they did with Michael Cohen.

106
00:05:56,120 --> 00:05:59,159
Speaker 1: And look what happened to Michael Cohen. Uh, it ended

107
00:05:59,200 --> 00:06:01,680
Speaker 1: badly for Cohen. And so that's not to say it's

108
00:06:01,680 --> 00:06:03,719
Speaker 1: going to end badly for Rudy, but it's there's a

109
00:06:04,440 --> 00:06:07,560
Speaker 1: if you're in Rudy shoes, there's a disturbing parallel to

110
00:06:07,600 --> 00:06:10,640
Speaker 1: what happened to the last guy who was Trump's lawyer,

111
00:06:11,440 --> 00:06:15,800
Speaker 1: who had FBI agents come and clean out his house. Now, Um,

112
00:06:16,440 --> 00:06:20,320
Speaker 1: the fact that the raid does that indicate the beginning

113
00:06:20,320 --> 00:06:23,560
Speaker 1: of the investigation, the middle of the investigation, the end

114
00:06:23,600 --> 00:06:27,360
Speaker 1: of the investigation where you can't tell. Um, we can't tell,

115
00:06:27,400 --> 00:06:29,400
Speaker 1: but I would guess the middle. So you don't do

116
00:06:29,440 --> 00:06:31,520
Speaker 1: this unless you have enough to justify it to a

117
00:06:31,600 --> 00:06:34,560
Speaker 1: judge that we need to search warrant and we can't

118
00:06:34,600 --> 00:06:38,120
Speaker 1: give any advanced notice because things might get cleaned or wiped. Uh,

119
00:06:38,160 --> 00:06:41,360
Speaker 1: so that's something. However, it can't be near the end

120
00:06:41,600 --> 00:06:44,440
Speaker 1: because or at least I doubt it, because there's gonna

121
00:06:44,440 --> 00:06:46,760
Speaker 1: be so much material that even if you had a

122
00:06:46,800 --> 00:06:51,239
Speaker 1: well formed thesis as to you know, allegations about someone

123
00:06:51,279 --> 00:06:54,000
Speaker 1: doing something wrong, Um, you're gonna have to go through

124
00:06:54,279 --> 00:06:58,159
Speaker 1: like a massive amount of material that is contained in

125
00:06:58,160 --> 00:07:01,040
Speaker 1: those devices through a defined pure time, not up until

126
00:07:01,080 --> 00:07:03,720
Speaker 1: the present day. But I think the search warrant was

127
00:07:03,760 --> 00:07:08,440
Speaker 1: just through basically the end of So this is all

128
00:07:08,480 --> 00:07:11,360
Speaker 1: focused on Ukraine, so it's about that. But still, um,

129
00:07:11,400 --> 00:07:13,320
Speaker 1: there's so much material that the Feds are going to

130
00:07:13,400 --> 00:07:16,200
Speaker 1: have to go through that it can't be like right

131
00:07:16,240 --> 00:07:17,920
Speaker 1: at the one yard line. That has to be that

132
00:07:18,280 --> 00:07:21,080
Speaker 1: there's a bit of ways to go before whatever they're

133
00:07:21,080 --> 00:07:24,640
Speaker 1: gonna file or do they'll do. Do you know exactly

134
00:07:24,680 --> 00:07:29,360
Speaker 1: what they're investigating him about. It's it's Ukraine? But what

135
00:07:29,360 --> 00:07:34,600
Speaker 1: what about Ukraine? So the search warrant that was executed

136
00:07:35,240 --> 00:07:38,080
Speaker 1: was it I guess ten days ago, twelve days ago

137
00:07:38,440 --> 00:07:42,160
Speaker 1: on Rudy's apartment. Um, you know, in addition to Rudy's

138
00:07:42,200 --> 00:07:47,960
Speaker 1: electronic devices, it's specified communications with certain individuals. UM a

139
00:07:48,040 --> 00:07:51,640
Speaker 1: lawyer in Washington, Victoria Tenzing, who with her husband Joe Dejenev,

140
00:07:51,720 --> 00:07:55,080
Speaker 1: has been an outspoken proponent and supporter of President Trump

141
00:07:55,480 --> 00:07:58,960
Speaker 1: UH and was also involved with representations of clients in Ukraine.

142
00:07:59,440 --> 00:08:02,200
Speaker 1: And then UM a journalist named John Solomon who wrote

143
00:08:02,200 --> 00:08:07,800
Speaker 1: a number of articles that UM basically criticized or pointed out,

144
00:08:07,920 --> 00:08:12,920
Speaker 1: you know, allegedly supposed purportedly negative information about the former

145
00:08:13,000 --> 00:08:16,720
Speaker 1: US Ambassador to Ukraine, Marie Giovanovich. UM and then a

146
00:08:16,760 --> 00:08:20,880
Speaker 1: couple of Ukrainian former Ukrainian officials who are widely believed

147
00:08:21,400 --> 00:08:24,200
Speaker 1: you know, in the West to be corrupt, UM who

148
00:08:24,240 --> 00:08:28,600
Speaker 1: met with Rudy Giuliani and gave him, you know, you know,

149
00:08:28,640 --> 00:08:33,680
Speaker 1: purportedly incriminating information about either Hunter Biden or Joe Biden.

150
00:08:33,920 --> 00:08:37,480
Speaker 1: So this all seems to be swirling around the attempt

151
00:08:37,480 --> 00:08:42,600
Speaker 1: in to get rid of Marie Jovanovich as the US

152
00:08:42,640 --> 00:08:48,080
Speaker 1: ambassador in Kiev, and also UM It's coincides with an

153
00:08:48,120 --> 00:08:51,920
Speaker 1: attempt to basically, uh, you know, create some kind of

154
00:08:51,960 --> 00:08:55,320
Speaker 1: investigation surrounding the Bidens that you know, would have had

155
00:08:55,360 --> 00:09:00,080
Speaker 1: an impact probably in the election. And did Giuliani and

156
00:09:00,240 --> 00:09:04,120
Speaker 1: his lawyer did Giuliani or his lawyer go to ban

157
00:09:04,320 --> 00:09:09,240
Speaker 1: Justice to present their case or there Yes, So at

158
00:09:09,280 --> 00:09:12,960
Speaker 1: the beginning of this um after leave Partisan or Fruman

159
00:09:13,000 --> 00:09:17,559
Speaker 1: were charged in the fall with you know, campaign finance

160
00:09:17,640 --> 00:09:22,240
Speaker 1: violations UM. That was also at the time that Rudy

161
00:09:22,400 --> 00:09:25,520
Speaker 1: had developed his whole thesis about you know, corruption in

162
00:09:25,559 --> 00:09:29,720
Speaker 1: the Biden family involving Ukraine and this energy company Barisma.

163
00:09:29,840 --> 00:09:33,040
Speaker 1: And basically what it would have done if you were

164
00:09:33,080 --> 00:09:36,320
Speaker 1: to believe what Rudy's you know friends, the former and

165
00:09:36,600 --> 00:09:40,560
Speaker 1: you know allegedly corrupt Ukrainian officials told him, was that,

166
00:09:41,640 --> 00:09:44,680
Speaker 1: you know, a Ukraine was involved in the hacking of

167
00:09:44,720 --> 00:09:49,240
Speaker 1: democratic emails in not Russia, and be uh, you know,

168
00:09:49,400 --> 00:09:52,880
Speaker 1: Biden was protecting his son and blowing up an investigation

169
00:09:52,920 --> 00:09:55,800
Speaker 1: that would have exposed corruption. So it would have been

170
00:09:55,840 --> 00:09:59,280
Speaker 1: a way to undercut the Mueller investigation, which was in

171
00:09:59,360 --> 00:10:02,000
Speaker 1: full force that time and causing Trump a lot of problems,

172
00:10:02,400 --> 00:10:06,160
Speaker 1: and sort of undermine that investigation by claiming and providing,

173
00:10:06,320 --> 00:10:08,680
Speaker 1: you know, some support for the idea that you know,

174
00:10:08,760 --> 00:10:12,240
Speaker 1: Russia never got involved in interfering in the election, was

175
00:10:12,280 --> 00:10:14,679
Speaker 1: all Ukraine and it was on behalf of a cabal

176
00:10:15,120 --> 00:10:19,560
Speaker 1: of democratic officials, including you know, Joe Biden. So that's

177
00:10:19,559 --> 00:10:23,040
Speaker 1: the sort of alternative theory that Rudy was working on.

178
00:10:23,400 --> 00:10:26,200
Speaker 1: And so when he was when it became clear that

179
00:10:26,440 --> 00:10:30,920
Speaker 1: an investigation from the federal prosecutors in Manhattan was involved

180
00:10:31,040 --> 00:10:34,040
Speaker 1: him or at least a couple of his business associates,

181
00:10:34,360 --> 00:10:37,480
Speaker 1: he wanted to shop this information somewhere. He realized he

182
00:10:37,520 --> 00:10:40,160
Speaker 1: couldn't go to Manhattan with it because they had other interests.

183
00:10:40,200 --> 00:10:43,720
Speaker 1: So he went to main Justice, to Attorney General williambar

184
00:10:44,280 --> 00:10:47,000
Speaker 1: not directly, but it must have been, you know, a

185
00:10:47,040 --> 00:10:50,559
Speaker 1: decision must have been made fairly high up in UH

186
00:10:50,679 --> 00:10:55,600
Speaker 1: in late twenty to basically appoint the U S Attorney

187
00:10:55,600 --> 00:10:59,600
Speaker 1: in Pittsburgh, the Western District of Pennsylvania, to basically look

188
00:10:59,600 --> 00:11:03,600
Speaker 1: into Rudy's allegations about corruption by the Bidens in Ukraine.

189
00:11:04,000 --> 00:11:08,080
Speaker 1: And so routine is lawyer flew out to Pittsburgh in January,

190
00:11:08,480 --> 00:11:11,800
Speaker 1: spent several hours before a team of five senior prosecutors

191
00:11:11,800 --> 00:11:15,040
Speaker 1: and five senior FBI agents from that office, and outlined

192
00:11:15,080 --> 00:11:19,840
Speaker 1: the whole theory of surrounding Joe Biden basically you know,

193
00:11:19,920 --> 00:11:23,320
Speaker 1: interfering with you know, the Ukraine to protect his his

194
00:11:23,360 --> 00:11:26,160
Speaker 1: son hunter who is getting paid very well as a

195
00:11:26,840 --> 00:11:28,960
Speaker 1: to be on the board of directors of this you know,

196
00:11:29,360 --> 00:11:33,559
Speaker 1: Dodgy Energy company in Ukraine. So it's not clear that's

197
00:11:33,600 --> 00:11:36,520
Speaker 1: gone anywhere. They made that presentation. There's been some follow ups,

198
00:11:36,520 --> 00:11:39,240
Speaker 1: some of the investigators in Pittsburgh have since you know,

199
00:11:39,840 --> 00:11:41,920
Speaker 1: done an interview here or there, but there doesn't it

200
00:11:42,040 --> 00:11:44,960
Speaker 1: doesn't seem to have been and you know, the US

201
00:11:45,000 --> 00:11:47,720
Speaker 1: Attorney's office obviously won't comment on it. But if that

202
00:11:47,800 --> 00:11:50,880
Speaker 1: investigation gained any traction at all, it's not clear. There's

203
00:11:50,920 --> 00:11:53,719
Speaker 1: no evidence of that. It seems to be kind of moribund.

204
00:11:54,360 --> 00:11:59,920
Speaker 1: Has Giuliani's attorney said what his defense might be here, Yes,

205
00:12:00,080 --> 00:12:05,000
Speaker 1: actually that Bob Costello has pointed out that if this

206
00:12:05,080 --> 00:12:07,439
Speaker 1: is a phara violation, in other words, of violation, if

207
00:12:07,440 --> 00:12:11,880
Speaker 1: you're claiming that Rudi Giuliani violated the law that requires

208
00:12:12,200 --> 00:12:15,199
Speaker 1: you know, you register with the Justice Oparment if you're

209
00:12:15,240 --> 00:12:19,440
Speaker 1: representing a you know, a foreign agent or basically the

210
00:12:19,720 --> 00:12:23,559
Speaker 1: uh you're representing a foreign entity, either individuals from a

211
00:12:23,600 --> 00:12:27,319
Speaker 1: foreign country or you know, the sovereign country itself, or

212
00:12:27,600 --> 00:12:30,760
Speaker 1: some kind of a company or government, you know, entity

213
00:12:30,840 --> 00:12:33,320
Speaker 1: of a foreign company in the United States, you have

214
00:12:33,360 --> 00:12:35,920
Speaker 1: to file what's known as a PHARAH form f A

215
00:12:36,160 --> 00:12:39,040
Speaker 1: r A. So that has been you know, that was

216
00:12:39,280 --> 00:12:43,200
Speaker 1: you know, floated against Mike Flynn that he never registered

217
00:12:43,320 --> 00:12:47,200
Speaker 1: you know, under Farah for his representation of Turkey. And

218
00:12:48,120 --> 00:12:52,319
Speaker 1: basically what Juliana's lawyer has maintained is that there is

219
00:12:52,360 --> 00:12:55,480
Speaker 1: an exception to PHARAH. You don't have to you know,

220
00:12:55,880 --> 00:12:59,520
Speaker 1: file you know, uh pharah if you're acting in defense

221
00:12:59,559 --> 00:13:01,960
Speaker 1: of your client. In other words, your act really act

222
00:13:02,040 --> 00:13:04,560
Speaker 1: me as a lawyer, not a lobbyist. If you're in

223
00:13:04,559 --> 00:13:08,240
Speaker 1: in this case, Rudy, in his investigations in Ukraine, dealing

224
00:13:08,240 --> 00:13:11,040
Speaker 1: with a lot of those foreign entities, was just gathering

225
00:13:11,120 --> 00:13:14,160
Speaker 1: evidence in the defense of his client, Donald J. Trump,

226
00:13:14,200 --> 00:13:16,240
Speaker 1: who happened to be the President of the United States.

227
00:13:16,600 --> 00:13:19,720
Speaker 1: This is at a time when Trump was, in fact,

228
00:13:19,880 --> 00:13:23,760
Speaker 1: you know, the subject of Mueller's criminal investigation into Russian

229
00:13:23,800 --> 00:13:27,440
Speaker 1: interference in the election. So therefore, any effort to present

230
00:13:27,440 --> 00:13:31,320
Speaker 1: a defense for Trump would would constitute you know, the

231
00:13:31,360 --> 00:13:35,280
Speaker 1: type of you know, basically lawyer client activity that does

232
00:13:35,320 --> 00:13:39,360
Speaker 1: not require you to file for you know, a Pharaoh registration.

233
00:13:39,600 --> 00:13:43,560
Speaker 1: So that's the theory, and you know, uh, you know,

234
00:13:43,640 --> 00:13:47,920
Speaker 1: that's what Rudy's lawyer has maintained. Rudy has quite a team.

235
00:13:47,960 --> 00:13:51,280
Speaker 1: You mentioned Alan Dershowitz before, but he has a lot

236
00:13:51,320 --> 00:13:54,680
Speaker 1: of people on his legal team. Yes. So he has

237
00:13:54,920 --> 00:13:57,520
Speaker 1: Bob Costello, who is a former colleague of his from

238
00:13:57,559 --> 00:13:59,520
Speaker 1: the U. S. Sterns Officer Manhattan back in the nineteen

239
00:13:59,520 --> 00:14:02,560
Speaker 1: seventies and a longtime criminal defense lawyer in the New

240
00:14:02,600 --> 00:14:05,640
Speaker 1: York area. So Costell has been representing him for at

241
00:14:05,679 --> 00:14:08,280
Speaker 1: least a year and a half. He also just added

242
00:14:08,880 --> 00:14:11,640
Speaker 1: a team of prosecutors from a Brooklyn firm mostly known

243
00:14:11,679 --> 00:14:15,520
Speaker 1: for its local, you know, crime defenses, but it features

244
00:14:15,520 --> 00:14:19,400
Speaker 1: a couple of guys a former tired judge um uh

245
00:14:19,440 --> 00:14:23,360
Speaker 1: included among them, who are experts in search and seizure warrants,

246
00:14:23,640 --> 00:14:27,120
Speaker 1: and also Dershowitz himself. This is one of his you know,

247
00:14:27,640 --> 00:14:31,880
Speaker 1: uh you know, strong points, and it's clear from Derschwitz

248
00:14:31,960 --> 00:14:34,360
Speaker 1: is advising them, so he's not really like a lawyer

249
00:14:34,360 --> 00:14:35,640
Speaker 1: for the team. I think that's what a guy like

250
00:14:35,720 --> 00:14:40,280
Speaker 1: Dershwitz does these days is you know, uh, basically advises consults.

251
00:14:40,320 --> 00:14:42,520
Speaker 1: But the fact that Dershwitz and the new guys in

252
00:14:42,560 --> 00:14:45,440
Speaker 1: Brooklyn who have an interest in search and seizure law

253
00:14:45,800 --> 00:14:49,080
Speaker 1: are involved. It indicates that it's pretty clear that they

254
00:14:49,120 --> 00:14:53,200
Speaker 1: want to challenge not just the search warrant that was

255
00:14:53,240 --> 00:14:57,200
Speaker 1: executed in late April, but you know basically the the

256
00:14:57,280 --> 00:15:01,040
Speaker 1: eye cloud, the subpoena through which the US government a

257
00:15:01,080 --> 00:15:04,080
Speaker 1: year and a half ago got basically you know, most

258
00:15:04,080 --> 00:15:07,960
Speaker 1: of the electronic data you know, call information from Rudy's

259
00:15:07,960 --> 00:15:13,880
Speaker 1: electronic devices from Apple Inc. In uh late So that

260
00:15:13,960 --> 00:15:18,480
Speaker 1: will take a lot of money. Does Giuliani have that money? Well,

261
00:15:18,600 --> 00:15:21,000
Speaker 1: you know, I've I've read press reports about that as well.

262
00:15:21,000 --> 00:15:22,960
Speaker 1: It will take a lot of money. And that's the

263
00:15:23,000 --> 00:15:26,160
Speaker 1: problem with Rudy having represented the President Trump for free

264
00:15:26,200 --> 00:15:28,400
Speaker 1: basically for a couple of years, as he was not

265
00:15:28,480 --> 00:15:31,520
Speaker 1: making a lot of money. Um, and uh, you know

266
00:15:31,720 --> 00:15:35,320
Speaker 1: it's yeah, that's you know, I'm sure these guys are

267
00:15:35,320 --> 00:15:38,320
Speaker 1: coming on board, you know, confident that they'll get paid.

268
00:15:38,720 --> 00:15:41,160
Speaker 1: But at the same time, you know, money is an object,

269
00:15:41,240 --> 00:15:44,240
Speaker 1: it's not. And Rudy has facing like now this this

270
00:15:44,560 --> 00:15:49,080
Speaker 1: big lawsuit from the dominion. Uh. You know that that

271
00:15:49,120 --> 00:15:53,040
Speaker 1: company that does the election machines that has sued you know,

272
00:15:53,120 --> 00:15:57,880
Speaker 1: Rudy and Sidney Powell and Trump's lawyers who claimed without

273
00:15:57,880 --> 00:16:01,520
Speaker 1: any evidence that the dominion machines have been manipulated in

274
00:16:01,640 --> 00:16:04,040
Speaker 1: order to produce a victory for Joe Biden a couple

275
00:16:04,080 --> 00:16:06,800
Speaker 1: of months ago. So that's a you know, some people

276
00:16:06,880 --> 00:16:09,800
Speaker 1: might describe that lawsuit is frivolous, but you know that's

277
00:16:09,800 --> 00:16:11,640
Speaker 1: going to cost Rudy money as well. That's a different

278
00:16:11,640 --> 00:16:14,360
Speaker 1: representation with a different set of lawyers. So, yes, Rudy

279
00:16:14,760 --> 00:16:18,680
Speaker 1: has to be Rudy. Legal bills are are climbing, and

280
00:16:18,800 --> 00:16:21,800
Speaker 1: it's clear from his divorce papers, the part of it

281
00:16:21,840 --> 00:16:24,280
Speaker 1: that was public a few years ago that you know,

282
00:16:25,080 --> 00:16:28,840
Speaker 1: you know, his his his his financial resources are not infinite.

283
00:16:29,440 --> 00:16:35,080
Speaker 1: Thanks Craig. That's Bloomberg Legal reporter Greg Farrell. Derek Chauvin,

284
00:16:35,160 --> 00:16:38,600
Speaker 1: and three other former Minneapolis police officers involved in the

285
00:16:38,600 --> 00:16:41,480
Speaker 1: death of George Floyd have been indicted by a federal

286
00:16:41,520 --> 00:16:45,960
Speaker 1: grand jury for violating Floyd's constitutional rights during the arrest

287
00:16:46,000 --> 00:16:50,080
Speaker 1: that sparked nationwide protests over police violence against black people.

288
00:16:50,800 --> 00:16:53,720
Speaker 1: The indictment was unsealed Friday and comes less than three

289
00:16:53,760 --> 00:16:57,320
Speaker 1: weeks after Chauvin was found guilty on separate state charges

290
00:16:57,400 --> 00:17:00,640
Speaker 1: of murder and manslaughter for holding his knee on Floyd's

291
00:17:00,680 --> 00:17:04,119
Speaker 1: neck for more than nine minutes. Joining me is Eric

292
00:17:04,200 --> 00:17:09,360
Speaker 1: Larson Bloomberg Legal reporter. What are the charges that the

293
00:17:09,400 --> 00:17:13,560
Speaker 1: Feds have brought against Chauvin and the three other officers?

294
00:17:15,040 --> 00:17:17,960
Speaker 1: So in this case there are three charges. There are

295
00:17:17,960 --> 00:17:22,600
Speaker 1: all civil federal civil rights violations here. The first count

296
00:17:22,760 --> 00:17:27,359
Speaker 1: is against Chauvin accuses him of depriving Mr Floyd of

297
00:17:27,520 --> 00:17:30,280
Speaker 1: his civil rights is right to be free from improper

298
00:17:30,320 --> 00:17:34,080
Speaker 1: treatment by a police officer um and violating his rights

299
00:17:34,680 --> 00:17:38,639
Speaker 1: in resulting in bodily harmon at forth his death. The

300
00:17:38,720 --> 00:17:42,280
Speaker 1: second charge is against two of the assisting officers, and

301
00:17:42,359 --> 00:17:46,000
Speaker 1: they are accused of observing Mr Chauvelin with his knee

302
00:17:46,000 --> 00:17:50,960
Speaker 1: on Mr floyd neck and essentially failing to intervene uh

303
00:17:51,080 --> 00:17:54,000
Speaker 1: they could say wilfully failing to intervene and resulting in

304
00:17:54,520 --> 00:17:58,960
Speaker 1: Mr Floyd's rights being violated. A third charge is against

305
00:17:59,080 --> 00:18:04,240
Speaker 1: the is against all of the officers, including the fourth officer,

306
00:18:04,720 --> 00:18:08,159
Speaker 1: and they're accused of failing to offer medical assistance to

307
00:18:08,280 --> 00:18:12,439
Speaker 1: Mr Floyd when he clearly needed it. So we often

308
00:18:12,480 --> 00:18:17,439
Speaker 1: hear about federal charges being brought when state charges fail,

309
00:18:17,920 --> 00:18:20,639
Speaker 1: for example in the Ronney King case. But here you

310
00:18:20,680 --> 00:18:23,840
Speaker 1: have Chauvin already convicted of murder. The other officers haven't

311
00:18:23,880 --> 00:18:26,960
Speaker 1: even gone to trial yet. Is it unusual to bring

312
00:18:27,080 --> 00:18:31,440
Speaker 1: federal civil rights charges at this stage? Well, I think

313
00:18:32,040 --> 00:18:34,879
Speaker 1: we're seeing that this entire case is unique and in

314
00:18:34,920 --> 00:18:37,680
Speaker 1: a lot of different ways, just because there have been

315
00:18:37,720 --> 00:18:41,560
Speaker 1: so many instances of this kind of interaction between police

316
00:18:41,760 --> 00:18:45,240
Speaker 1: and black men not resulting in this type type of action, right, So,

317
00:18:45,359 --> 00:18:47,400
Speaker 1: just the fact that they bought the charges at all

318
00:18:47,560 --> 00:18:50,720
Speaker 1: is very different here, especially when you see these charges

319
00:18:50,840 --> 00:18:54,720
Speaker 1: being brought against officers who were not accused of, you know,

320
00:18:54,800 --> 00:18:58,240
Speaker 1: murder the way Chauvin, when they're accused of serious violation

321
00:18:58,359 --> 00:19:02,040
Speaker 1: simply by not taking any action to intervene. So that

322
00:19:02,119 --> 00:19:04,920
Speaker 1: makes it pretty unusual. And I think to your point

323
00:19:04,960 --> 00:19:09,160
Speaker 1: about a federal charges being brought on top of successfully

324
00:19:09,359 --> 00:19:13,679
Speaker 1: argued state charges, it just shows a signal really from

325
00:19:13,720 --> 00:19:16,919
Speaker 1: the Justice Department, from the Biden administration that there is

326
00:19:17,080 --> 00:19:20,000
Speaker 1: a change of tone and how these types of incidents

327
00:19:20,080 --> 00:19:23,000
Speaker 1: are going to be handled by the federal government. I

328
00:19:23,080 --> 00:19:26,400
Speaker 1: think it would have been pretty unusual, even though for

329
00:19:26,480 --> 00:19:30,120
Speaker 1: the Biden administration um in in in a case such

330
00:19:30,160 --> 00:19:33,960
Speaker 1: as this, to not do anything even after a successful

331
00:19:34,080 --> 00:19:38,120
Speaker 1: state case um, you know, as the Attorney General of Minnesota,

332
00:19:38,600 --> 00:19:41,399
Speaker 1: Keith Ellison said in a statement last week after these

333
00:19:41,480 --> 00:19:43,679
Speaker 1: charges were brought. He said, the federal government has a

334
00:19:43,720 --> 00:19:47,119
Speaker 1: responsibility to protect the civil rights as every American and

335
00:19:47,160 --> 00:19:49,960
Speaker 1: pursue justice to the fullest extent. And I think that

336
00:19:50,320 --> 00:19:52,360
Speaker 1: the point that he was sort of getting at there

337
00:19:52,359 --> 00:19:54,879
Speaker 1: the fullest extent means you bring the charges if a

338
00:19:54,960 --> 00:19:58,360
Speaker 1: violation has occurred, not just if the state charges failed.

339
00:19:59,440 --> 00:20:02,760
Speaker 1: And why is there a separate indictment of Chauvin? What

340
00:20:02,920 --> 00:20:07,240
Speaker 1: is that for? This stems from a separate incidence between

341
00:20:07,240 --> 00:20:11,000
Speaker 1: a Chauvin and a fourteen year old black boy in

342
00:20:11,080 --> 00:20:15,000
Speaker 1: two thousand seventeen. He was the responding officer to a

343
00:20:15,040 --> 00:20:19,040
Speaker 1: dispute between this boy and his mother. When the boy

344
00:20:19,040 --> 00:20:24,080
Speaker 1: did not follow his instructions, Chauvin struck him so violently

345
00:20:24,160 --> 00:20:28,480
Speaker 1: that stitches were necessary, essentially choked and strangled until they

346
00:20:28,520 --> 00:20:31,920
Speaker 1: passed out, and also had his knee on him to

347
00:20:32,040 --> 00:20:34,720
Speaker 1: hold him in place for quite some time, even longer

348
00:20:34,760 --> 00:20:38,880
Speaker 1: than what happened with Mr Floyd. So obviously it would

349
00:20:38,880 --> 00:20:40,600
Speaker 1: be a good question to find out why it has

350
00:20:40,680 --> 00:20:43,640
Speaker 1: taken so long while you had to have this much

351
00:20:43,800 --> 00:20:48,120
Speaker 1: higher profile murder take place. For this incident to come

352
00:20:48,119 --> 00:20:50,879
Speaker 1: to light, clearly, the details around it would have already

353
00:20:50,880 --> 00:20:52,879
Speaker 1: been known to a lot of people for several years

354
00:20:52,920 --> 00:20:56,800
Speaker 1: now and nothing happened. But at any rate, the charges

355
00:20:56,960 --> 00:20:59,600
Speaker 1: have been brought now, um, and he has accused of

356
00:20:59,680 --> 00:21:02,440
Speaker 1: violent in the civil rights of that boy as well.

357
00:21:03,920 --> 00:21:06,520
Speaker 1: So what does the Justice Department have to prove in

358
00:21:06,560 --> 00:21:08,879
Speaker 1: a case like this? Do they have to prove that

359
00:21:08,920 --> 00:21:11,879
Speaker 1: they that the police officers intended to violate the civil

360
00:21:12,000 --> 00:21:16,359
Speaker 1: rights of the victims? Sister department have to prove in

361
00:21:16,359 --> 00:21:18,679
Speaker 1: a case like this? Do they have to prove that

362
00:21:18,760 --> 00:21:23,360
Speaker 1: they intended to that the police officers intended to violate

363
00:21:23,480 --> 00:21:27,920
Speaker 1: the civil rights of the victims? I don't know if

364
00:21:27,600 --> 00:21:30,960
Speaker 1: it's intent would work that way in in a case

365
00:21:31,040 --> 00:21:34,560
Speaker 1: like this, because it's the charges are pretty specific in

366
00:21:34,600 --> 00:21:38,719
Speaker 1: what they say, Uh, just that they were aware of

367
00:21:38,920 --> 00:21:41,679
Speaker 1: what was happening in front of them and chose to

368
00:21:41,720 --> 00:21:45,560
Speaker 1: not take action. So UM, you know, when you're in

369
00:21:45,680 --> 00:21:49,960
Speaker 1: Chauvin's case, you know, being accused of murder, Um, you

370
00:21:50,000 --> 00:21:52,520
Speaker 1: know you've had Even even in that case, they didn't

371
00:21:52,600 --> 00:21:56,199
Speaker 1: charge him with with first degree murder, which would have required, um,

372
00:21:56,280 --> 00:22:00,080
Speaker 1: some proof of intent. So in a case like this,

373
00:22:00,440 --> 00:22:04,040
Speaker 1: it's you know, it's just going to be showing exactly

374
00:22:04,080 --> 00:22:06,639
Speaker 1: what happened. I mean, they they are on the video

375
00:22:06,720 --> 00:22:12,160
Speaker 1: observing um this, these actions and failing to intervene. Uh So,

376
00:22:12,480 --> 00:22:15,040
Speaker 1: I think what we'll see is not so much a

377
00:22:15,160 --> 00:22:19,720
Speaker 1: question of intent as as the defense lawyers possibly trying

378
00:22:19,760 --> 00:22:23,880
Speaker 1: to raise um questions about what what these other officers

379
00:22:23,880 --> 00:22:27,560
Speaker 1: were really responsible for, what they were really required to do.

380
00:22:27,600 --> 00:22:30,480
Speaker 1: They will point to some evidence that a few of

381
00:22:30,480 --> 00:22:33,440
Speaker 1: the officers who were actually training at the time their

382
00:22:33,520 --> 00:22:38,720
Speaker 1: rookies um that uh that they were just essentially doing

383
00:22:38,760 --> 00:22:41,960
Speaker 1: what Chauvin was requiring them to do, and that he

384
00:22:42,600 --> 00:22:45,040
Speaker 1: it wasn't up to them to question him beyond they

385
00:22:45,080 --> 00:22:48,520
Speaker 1: did what they did. Um. Whereas I think the prosecutors

386
00:22:48,520 --> 00:22:50,720
Speaker 1: are saying that you need to go beyond this, saying, hey,

387
00:22:50,840 --> 00:22:54,480
Speaker 1: do you think maybe we need to move this man

388
00:22:54,520 --> 00:22:58,440
Speaker 1: around so he's doesn't die. They're gonna need They're going

389
00:22:58,520 --> 00:23:01,320
Speaker 1: to show that they should should have potential physically intervened

390
00:23:01,359 --> 00:23:03,960
Speaker 1: and stopped a murder from happening in front of them.

391
00:23:04,160 --> 00:23:06,320
Speaker 1: But you can see that their defense is probably it

392
00:23:06,359 --> 00:23:09,400
Speaker 1: would make sense that they're going to blame it as

393
00:23:09,440 --> 00:23:11,560
Speaker 1: much as they can on Chauvin and say, hey, these

394
00:23:11,720 --> 00:23:16,159
Speaker 1: were rookies and they were it wasn't their place to intervene.

395
00:23:17,040 --> 00:23:21,200
Speaker 1: Do you know what what Chauvin's defense to the federal

396
00:23:21,280 --> 00:23:28,480
Speaker 1: charges would be. I don't know what it would be exactly.

397
00:23:28,600 --> 00:23:32,480
Speaker 1: I we did reach out to his lawyer or comments

398
00:23:32,520 --> 00:23:37,520
Speaker 1: after he the grandeury indictment was unfiled. Um, we didn't.

399
00:23:37,560 --> 00:23:41,920
Speaker 1: He declined to comments. UM. I mean, obviously the defense

400
00:23:42,200 --> 00:23:45,280
Speaker 1: strategy didn't work out in the state case with those

401
00:23:45,359 --> 00:23:49,320
Speaker 1: much more serious charges. Um. But you can imagine that

402
00:23:50,119 --> 00:23:53,920
Speaker 1: a lot of the defense could translate into this case

403
00:23:53,960 --> 00:23:58,320
Speaker 1: as well, you know, trying to blame Floyd for what happened, uh,

404
00:23:58,520 --> 00:24:01,600
Speaker 1: you know, blame his death us on you know, his

405
00:24:02,359 --> 00:24:04,920
Speaker 1: less health elements and things like that, like they tried

406
00:24:05,000 --> 00:24:07,880
Speaker 1: in in the federal case. When you're looking at these

407
00:24:08,440 --> 00:24:11,680
Speaker 1: less you know, serious charges. Obviously, the civil rights violations

408
00:24:11,680 --> 00:24:14,480
Speaker 1: are very serious, but they're not as as serious as

409
00:24:14,680 --> 00:24:19,240
Speaker 1: as a murder manslaughter. Um. That they might be able

410
00:24:19,280 --> 00:24:24,600
Speaker 1: to push these defenses a little further potentially, who knows.

411
00:24:24,640 --> 00:24:28,200
Speaker 1: These new federal charges are separate from the federal civil

412
00:24:28,200 --> 00:24:34,399
Speaker 1: investigation into the Minneapolis police Department and its practices. So

413
00:24:34,480 --> 00:24:39,399
Speaker 1: the Attorney General, Merrick Garland, right after the conviction of

414
00:24:39,520 --> 00:24:43,480
Speaker 1: Mr schaubin a parity, announced that the Justice Department was

415
00:24:43,520 --> 00:24:47,880
Speaker 1: opening an investigation into the policing practices in Minneapolis, UM,

416
00:24:48,080 --> 00:24:53,480
Speaker 1: specifically as a result of the George Floyd George Floyd death. UM.

417
00:24:53,480 --> 00:24:55,000
Speaker 1: He said that the d j is going to be

418
00:24:55,040 --> 00:24:58,000
Speaker 1: reaching out to community groups and members of public to

419
00:24:58,040 --> 00:25:01,840
Speaker 1: try to find out about their experience is with the police. UM.

420
00:25:02,040 --> 00:25:03,960
Speaker 1: So this is something that I think a lot of

421
00:25:04,000 --> 00:25:08,040
Speaker 1: people were expecting from the Biden administration UM, and not

422
00:25:08,160 --> 00:25:11,800
Speaker 1: just Minneapolis specifically. But you know, the Civil Rights Division

423
00:25:11,880 --> 00:25:14,280
Speaker 1: of the Justice Department is able to use these so

424
00:25:14,359 --> 00:25:19,080
Speaker 1: called pattern or practice investigations UH to investigate police forces

425
00:25:19,119 --> 00:25:21,840
Speaker 1: in various cities, and they've they've done so in the past,

426
00:25:21,920 --> 00:25:25,280
Speaker 1: and and the probes can often end with a consent

427
00:25:25,400 --> 00:25:29,000
Speaker 1: decree between the police departments and the Justice Department where

428
00:25:29,040 --> 00:25:31,720
Speaker 1: they agree to various reforms and have to stick to

429
00:25:31,720 --> 00:25:33,960
Speaker 1: those reforms, and the Justice Department will keep track of

430
00:25:34,000 --> 00:25:36,680
Speaker 1: that and make sure that they are sticking to that UM.

431
00:25:36,880 --> 00:25:40,199
Speaker 1: So that is something that that has been done before,

432
00:25:40,400 --> 00:25:44,439
Speaker 1: but it really dropped off during the Trump administration not

433
00:25:44,560 --> 00:25:48,440
Speaker 1: too surprisingly, and I think it was always expected that

434
00:25:48,760 --> 00:25:51,960
Speaker 1: Um in Biden were elected that the Civil Rights Division

435
00:25:52,280 --> 00:25:55,240
Speaker 1: would have a new focus on these types of pattern

436
00:25:55,359 --> 00:25:59,800
Speaker 1: or practice investigations. Schauman is also requesting a new trial.

437
00:26:00,080 --> 00:26:04,120
Speaker 1: Are the grounds that he is claiming for that. So.

438
00:26:04,320 --> 00:26:07,080
Speaker 1: Mr Schauman is requesting a new trial in the state

439
00:26:07,160 --> 00:26:12,240
Speaker 1: case following his conviction, arguing that, among other things, that

440
00:26:12,240 --> 00:26:15,520
Speaker 1: the trial never should have taken place in Minneapolis to

441
00:26:15,680 --> 00:26:20,000
Speaker 1: begin with. UH. He argues that the jurors couldn't possibly

442
00:26:20,080 --> 00:26:23,520
Speaker 1: have been fair just because of all of the emotion

443
00:26:23,600 --> 00:26:27,160
Speaker 1: underlying everything that happened in the city around these events,

444
00:26:27,160 --> 00:26:30,440
Speaker 1: that it should have it should have taken place elsewhere UM.

445
00:26:30,520 --> 00:26:34,160
Speaker 1: He also signaled, you know, after the verdict was read out,

446
00:26:34,600 --> 00:26:38,560
Speaker 1: his lawyers signaled that he could potentially appeal UM for,

447
00:26:38,760 --> 00:26:44,000
Speaker 1: among other things, claiming that Representative Maxine Waters had made

448
00:26:44,119 --> 00:26:48,679
Speaker 1: inappropriate comments encouraging a guilty verdict um or during a

449
00:26:48,720 --> 00:26:52,680
Speaker 1: protest and that somehow that could have tainted jurors who

450
00:26:52,680 --> 00:26:56,040
Speaker 1: were not sequestered at that time, although there's no evidence

451
00:26:56,080 --> 00:26:58,959
Speaker 1: that they necessarily heard or saw the footage of her

452
00:26:59,000 --> 00:27:01,359
Speaker 1: saying that that that would be something that could potentially

453
00:27:02,040 --> 00:27:06,200
Speaker 1: be argued on appeal, and in fact, the judge in

454
00:27:06,400 --> 00:27:10,520
Speaker 1: the state case agreed that those comments were inappropriate and

455
00:27:10,560 --> 00:27:14,040
Speaker 1: said that, you know, elected officials should not be commenting

456
00:27:14,240 --> 00:27:18,680
Speaker 1: on trials like that, which was pretty strong words. Um,

457
00:27:18,800 --> 00:27:23,080
Speaker 1: but it's far from certain that either of these arguments

458
00:27:23,080 --> 00:27:26,199
Speaker 1: would both go very far, but there's certainly something that

459
00:27:26,240 --> 00:27:30,320
Speaker 1: the courts will consider. Thanks Erk. That's Bloomberg Legal reporter

460
00:27:30,480 --> 00:27:32,960
Speaker 1: Eric Lawson, and that's it for the edition of the

461
00:27:32,960 --> 00:27:35,800
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Law Show. Remember you can always get the latest

462
00:27:35,840 --> 00:27:38,960
Speaker 1: legal news on Bloomberg Lawn podcasts. You can find them

463
00:27:38,960 --> 00:27:43,680
Speaker 1: on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or at www dot Bloomberg dot com,

464
00:27:43,760 --> 00:27:47,800
Speaker 1: slash podcast, slash Law. I'm June Grosso and you're listening

465
00:27:47,840 --> 00:27:48,480
Speaker 1: to Bloomberg