WEBVTT - Georgia Election Probe Into Trump Heats Up

0:00:03.200 --> 0:00:07.960
<v Speaker 1>This is Bloomberg Law with June Brussel from Bloomberg Radio.

0:00:09.440 --> 0:00:12.640
<v Speaker 1>So look, all I wanna do is this. I just

0:00:12.800 --> 0:00:20.919
<v Speaker 1>want to find uh thousand seven votes, which is one

0:00:20.920 --> 0:00:24.759
<v Speaker 1>more that we have because we won the state. The

0:00:24.840 --> 0:00:28.160
<v Speaker 1>phone call between former President Donald Trump and the Georgia

0:00:28.280 --> 0:00:32.320
<v Speaker 1>Secretary of State Brad Rathinsburger seems to be the centerpiece

0:00:32.320 --> 0:00:35.879
<v Speaker 1>of the criminal investigation in Georgia into whether Trump and

0:00:35.960 --> 0:00:39.840
<v Speaker 1>others broke the lawn by trying to pressure state officials

0:00:40.000 --> 0:00:43.960
<v Speaker 1>into throwing out Joe Biden's presidential election victory. And now

0:00:44.040 --> 0:00:47.680
<v Speaker 1>Fulton County District Attorney Fannie Willis has gotten the courts

0:00:47.720 --> 0:00:51.280
<v Speaker 1>permission to convene a special grand jury in the investigation,

0:00:51.800 --> 0:00:54.920
<v Speaker 1>joining me as former federal Prosecutor Robert Mintz, a partner

0:00:55.000 --> 0:00:59.160
<v Speaker 1>McCarter and English Bob. Why did the prosecutor request a

0:00:59.240 --> 0:01:03.280
<v Speaker 1>special grand The Fulton County District Attorney made that request

0:01:03.320 --> 0:01:07.120
<v Speaker 1>because she said that key witnesses and the investigation, including

0:01:07.200 --> 0:01:11.000
<v Speaker 1>for example, the Georgia's Secretary of State, would not cooperate

0:01:11.040 --> 0:01:14.600
<v Speaker 1>without being subpoena to testify. So the special grand jury

0:01:14.680 --> 0:01:18.560
<v Speaker 1>was created to give her the power to bring these

0:01:18.600 --> 0:01:23.080
<v Speaker 1>individuals before the grand jury. Interestingly, the special grand Jury

0:01:23.240 --> 0:01:25.959
<v Speaker 1>gives her the power to have a grand jury whose

0:01:25.959 --> 0:01:29.720
<v Speaker 1>sole focus is this investigation, and they're able to meet

0:01:29.720 --> 0:01:32.640
<v Speaker 1>on a more regular basis and will move this investigation

0:01:32.920 --> 0:01:35.640
<v Speaker 1>along at a much quicker pace. Of course, the big

0:01:35.760 --> 0:01:39.039
<v Speaker 1>question is whether Trump's attempts to reverse the outcome in

0:01:39.080 --> 0:01:43.560
<v Speaker 1>Georgia were criminal. What will the prosecutor be looking at?

0:01:43.600 --> 0:01:46.480
<v Speaker 1>The phone Country District Attorney is going to look at

0:01:46.760 --> 0:01:52.120
<v Speaker 1>certain key events that occurred on January See Specifically, at

0:01:52.200 --> 0:01:54.920
<v Speaker 1>three pm on Saturday, there was a phone call which

0:01:55.040 --> 0:01:58.280
<v Speaker 1>was recorded between President Trump on the Secretary of State

0:01:58.760 --> 0:02:02.800
<v Speaker 1>in which prosect shooters may alleged that President Trump tried

0:02:02.840 --> 0:02:06.680
<v Speaker 1>to push and coerce this in Secretary of State into

0:02:06.800 --> 0:02:12.200
<v Speaker 1>counting George's presidential votes in a way that favored President Trump. Specifically,

0:02:12.520 --> 0:02:17.040
<v Speaker 1>the language in the phone call includes President Trump stating

0:02:17.080 --> 0:02:19.920
<v Speaker 1>to the Secretary of State, I think it's pretty clear

0:02:20.040 --> 0:02:23.640
<v Speaker 1>that we won. We won very substantially in Georgia. And

0:02:23.680 --> 0:02:26.880
<v Speaker 1>then the President, according to the tape, went on to say,

0:02:27.000 --> 0:02:30.000
<v Speaker 1>it's more illegal for you than it is for them,

0:02:30.080 --> 0:02:32.960
<v Speaker 1>because you know what they did and you're not reporting it.

0:02:33.440 --> 0:02:36.360
<v Speaker 1>That's a criminal offense and you can't let that happen.

0:02:36.760 --> 0:02:38.960
<v Speaker 1>And then he says, what is probably the key in

0:02:39.120 --> 0:02:42.000
<v Speaker 1>that phone call, the key words in that telephone call.

0:02:42.440 --> 0:02:44.920
<v Speaker 1>All I want to do is this. I want to

0:02:45.000 --> 0:02:49.079
<v Speaker 1>find eleven thousand seven under eight votes, which is more

0:02:49.120 --> 0:02:52.440
<v Speaker 1>than we have because we won the state. That's going

0:02:52.480 --> 0:02:56.679
<v Speaker 1>to be the key fact in that investigation, and prosecutors

0:02:56.720 --> 0:02:59.480
<v Speaker 1>will try to prove that what the president was doing

0:02:59.560 --> 0:03:02.040
<v Speaker 1>was the reatening the Secretary of State that if he

0:03:02.120 --> 0:03:05.440
<v Speaker 1>did not yield to that request, that he himself could

0:03:05.480 --> 0:03:08.840
<v Speaker 1>face criminal charges. That is what the case will be about.

0:03:08.919 --> 0:03:12.680
<v Speaker 1>The particular statutes that the prosecutor in Georgia will be

0:03:12.720 --> 0:03:16.440
<v Speaker 1>looking at our two criminal solicitation to commit election fraud,

0:03:16.880 --> 0:03:21.200
<v Speaker 1>conspiracy to commit election fraud. George's conspiracy to commit election

0:03:21.200 --> 0:03:23.919
<v Speaker 1>frond statute makes it a crime when one conspires or

0:03:23.960 --> 0:03:27.799
<v Speaker 1>agrees with another to violate Georgia's election laws. And what's

0:03:27.840 --> 0:03:30.799
<v Speaker 1>important here is that that crime, as with any conspiracy law,

0:03:31.160 --> 0:03:34.400
<v Speaker 1>is complete when there's an agreement to violate the law

0:03:34.680 --> 0:03:38.520
<v Speaker 1>and one overt act is taken in further into that conspiracy.

0:03:38.760 --> 0:03:41.520
<v Speaker 1>But it is not necessary to prove that the conspiracy

0:03:41.560 --> 0:03:44.480
<v Speaker 1>was consummated In other words, the scheme does not have

0:03:44.560 --> 0:03:48.920
<v Speaker 1>to succeed to be criminal. The second statute that prosecutors

0:03:48.920 --> 0:03:53.160
<v Speaker 1>will be looking at, the Georgia criminal solicitation statute that

0:03:53.200 --> 0:03:55.480
<v Speaker 1>makes it a crime when a person commits the offense

0:03:55.840 --> 0:03:59.440
<v Speaker 1>of criminal solicitation to commit election fraud. When was that

0:03:59.520 --> 0:04:04.040
<v Speaker 1>intent another person engages in conduct that constitutes of felony. Here,

0:04:04.080 --> 0:04:08.240
<v Speaker 1>the underlying felony would essentially be tampering with the election results,

0:04:08.400 --> 0:04:11.160
<v Speaker 1>and what prosecutors would have to show was that Trump

0:04:11.400 --> 0:04:14.960
<v Speaker 1>was demanding that the Secretary of State alter the final

0:04:15.080 --> 0:04:18.159
<v Speaker 1>vote palities so that it would appear that he won

0:04:18.200 --> 0:04:21.640
<v Speaker 1>the election, when in fact he did not. As far

0:04:21.720 --> 0:04:26.320
<v Speaker 1>as the criminal solicitation charge, does it seem as if

0:04:26.320 --> 0:04:30.440
<v Speaker 1>the phone call would almost be enough. That's a great question.

0:04:30.520 --> 0:04:33.640
<v Speaker 1>It does seem like the phone call is quite damning,

0:04:33.680 --> 0:04:36.760
<v Speaker 1>but when you look closely at the words that were spoken,

0:04:36.920 --> 0:04:40.440
<v Speaker 1>it is not nearly as clear cut as it first appears.

0:04:40.760 --> 0:04:43.680
<v Speaker 1>The key language in that phone call is when President

0:04:43.680 --> 0:04:47.359
<v Speaker 1>Trump allegedly said to the Secretary of State, all I

0:04:47.440 --> 0:04:49.840
<v Speaker 1>want to do is this. I just want to find

0:04:50.080 --> 0:04:54.200
<v Speaker 1>eleven thousand, seven eight votes, which is one more than

0:04:54.320 --> 0:04:58.120
<v Speaker 1>we have because we won the state. The key to

0:04:58.200 --> 0:05:01.120
<v Speaker 1>this prosecution is that the date will have to show

0:05:01.520 --> 0:05:05.000
<v Speaker 1>that President Trump knew in fact that he lost the

0:05:05.080 --> 0:05:07.520
<v Speaker 1>election and that he was asking the Secretary of State

0:05:07.520 --> 0:05:11.560
<v Speaker 1>to quote unquote find votes that did not exist. It

0:05:11.600 --> 0:05:14.320
<v Speaker 1>would be a defense to this criminal case if President

0:05:14.360 --> 0:05:17.719
<v Speaker 1>Trump could show that he actually believed he won the

0:05:17.760 --> 0:05:20.480
<v Speaker 1>state of Georgia, even if it turns out that that's

0:05:20.520 --> 0:05:23.480
<v Speaker 1>not incorrect. But if all he was asking the Secretary

0:05:23.520 --> 0:05:26.839
<v Speaker 1>of State to do was to find real votes, was

0:05:26.920 --> 0:05:30.760
<v Speaker 1>to locate votes that actually were made legally for him

0:05:30.920 --> 0:05:33.680
<v Speaker 1>that put him over the top in Georgia, that actually

0:05:33.720 --> 0:05:36.240
<v Speaker 1>would be a defense to these criminal charges. So the

0:05:36.400 --> 0:05:40.039
<v Speaker 1>entire case turns on the intent of the president. Did

0:05:40.040 --> 0:05:43.320
<v Speaker 1>he ask the Secretary of State to find votes that

0:05:43.360 --> 0:05:46.120
<v Speaker 1>didn't exist knowing that he in fact had lost the election,

0:05:46.560 --> 0:05:50.240
<v Speaker 1>or did he have a real, genuine belief that he

0:05:50.279 --> 0:05:52.320
<v Speaker 1>won the election and that he was simply asking the

0:05:52.320 --> 0:05:55.960
<v Speaker 1>Secretary of State to find actual votes in order to

0:05:56.400 --> 0:05:59.400
<v Speaker 1>validate what he already believed that he in fact won

0:05:59.440 --> 0:06:03.239
<v Speaker 1>the election. So now it seems as if the conspiracy

0:06:03.400 --> 0:06:08.200
<v Speaker 1>to commit election fraud would be even more difficult. Who

0:06:08.240 --> 0:06:10.240
<v Speaker 1>would be in on the conspiracy would it be the

0:06:10.279 --> 0:06:14.920
<v Speaker 1>people on the phone with Trump except for Ravensburg. So

0:06:14.960 --> 0:06:17.680
<v Speaker 1>when the President made that call to the Secretary of State,

0:06:17.880 --> 0:06:20.719
<v Speaker 1>there were others on the line, including a team of

0:06:20.800 --> 0:06:24.880
<v Speaker 1>election law lawyers representing the president. If the prosecutors could

0:06:24.960 --> 0:06:28.080
<v Speaker 1>prove that the President conspired with any single one of

0:06:28.120 --> 0:06:31.320
<v Speaker 1>those individuals, then there was an agreement to perform in

0:06:31.320 --> 0:06:33.680
<v Speaker 1>a legal act, and as long as one step was

0:06:33.760 --> 0:06:36.840
<v Speaker 1>taken in further into that conspiracy. That step would be

0:06:37.040 --> 0:06:39.560
<v Speaker 1>the phone call to the Secretary of State to try

0:06:39.600 --> 0:06:42.039
<v Speaker 1>to convince him to overturn the election. That would be

0:06:42.040 --> 0:06:44.000
<v Speaker 1>what prosecutors would have to prove in order to make

0:06:44.000 --> 0:06:47.919
<v Speaker 1>those charges stick. We all know the old saying, I

0:06:47.960 --> 0:06:51.120
<v Speaker 1>think it came from a one time Court of Appeals judge,

0:06:51.200 --> 0:06:54.560
<v Speaker 1>that a prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict

0:06:54.640 --> 0:06:58.120
<v Speaker 1>a ham Sandwich. So does it seem as if this

0:06:58.200 --> 0:07:01.840
<v Speaker 1>prosecutor could bring charge is if she wants to. But

0:07:02.080 --> 0:07:04.880
<v Speaker 1>does the prosecutor consider whether or not you can actually

0:07:04.880 --> 0:07:08.080
<v Speaker 1>get a conviction? Sure? What goes on in the grand

0:07:08.160 --> 0:07:11.440
<v Speaker 1>jury is that prosecutors have to show that there is

0:07:11.560 --> 0:07:14.400
<v Speaker 1>probable cause that a crime has been committed and that

0:07:14.480 --> 0:07:17.840
<v Speaker 1>the individual named in the indictment has committed that crime.

0:07:18.200 --> 0:07:21.120
<v Speaker 1>That's the lowest standard we have in our criminal justice system.

0:07:21.280 --> 0:07:24.320
<v Speaker 1>There's probable cause in order to get the indictment. However,

0:07:24.400 --> 0:07:27.440
<v Speaker 1>in order to get the conviction, it's it's proof beyond

0:07:27.520 --> 0:07:30.120
<v Speaker 1>a reasonable doubt, which is the highest legal standard we

0:07:30.120 --> 0:07:32.880
<v Speaker 1>have in our legal system. While it's relatively easy for

0:07:32.920 --> 0:07:36.800
<v Speaker 1>prosecutors to get an indictment because of the lower criminal standard,

0:07:37.120 --> 0:07:40.040
<v Speaker 1>and because in front of the grand jury, the grand

0:07:40.120 --> 0:07:43.280
<v Speaker 1>jurors only here the prosecutor's side of the case. In

0:07:43.360 --> 0:07:46.320
<v Speaker 1>other words, they only hear the evidence to support if

0:07:46.320 --> 0:07:49.679
<v Speaker 1>finding a probable cause. They don't hear the defense side

0:07:49.680 --> 0:07:52.560
<v Speaker 1>of the case. It's relatively easy to get an indictment,

0:07:52.760 --> 0:07:55.120
<v Speaker 1>but a prosecutor never wants to get an indictment that

0:07:55.160 --> 0:07:57.840
<v Speaker 1>they don't believe they can ultimately prove in court, and

0:07:57.920 --> 0:08:00.680
<v Speaker 1>particularly in a case like this that would be enormously

0:08:01.040 --> 0:08:04.800
<v Speaker 1>high profile, with the stakes enormously high, I don't think

0:08:04.840 --> 0:08:08.160
<v Speaker 1>we're going to see the prosecutor pursue this case unless

0:08:08.200 --> 0:08:11.120
<v Speaker 1>she believes that she can ultimately get a conviction if

0:08:11.120 --> 0:08:13.720
<v Speaker 1>this case were to go to trial. It seems that

0:08:13.800 --> 0:08:18.280
<v Speaker 1>most people looking at all the possible criminal cases against Trump.

0:08:18.720 --> 0:08:23.560
<v Speaker 1>See the Georgia case as the most direct and having

0:08:23.560 --> 0:08:27.040
<v Speaker 1>the most possibilities for conviction. Do you agree with that, Well,

0:08:27.080 --> 0:08:29.480
<v Speaker 1>it is the most clear cut case in the sense

0:08:29.520 --> 0:08:33.559
<v Speaker 1>that the facts are not particularly complicated. It also has

0:08:33.559 --> 0:08:36.520
<v Speaker 1>the virtue from the prosecutor's side of the case, of

0:08:36.640 --> 0:08:40.120
<v Speaker 1>having an actual tape of President Trump speaking to the

0:08:40.160 --> 0:08:43.680
<v Speaker 1>Secretary of State. So, in other words, prosecutors would argue

0:08:44.040 --> 0:08:47.280
<v Speaker 1>that there is an actual recording of the crime in

0:08:47.400 --> 0:08:50.200
<v Speaker 1>real time. They would have to stand up before before

0:08:50.280 --> 0:08:54.440
<v Speaker 1>jurors and convince them that the president in that conversation,

0:08:54.559 --> 0:08:58.360
<v Speaker 1>in that recorded conversation, was attempting to get the Secretary

0:08:58.400 --> 0:09:02.040
<v Speaker 1>of State to find non existent votes, and that President

0:09:02.040 --> 0:09:04.320
<v Speaker 1>Trump knew at the time that he had lost the

0:09:04.360 --> 0:09:07.600
<v Speaker 1>election and was seeking to have it overturned by asking

0:09:07.840 --> 0:09:11.240
<v Speaker 1>the Secretary of State to intervene at the Tampa with

0:09:11.280 --> 0:09:14.400
<v Speaker 1>the results of that election. Let's turn out to New York,

0:09:14.640 --> 0:09:18.400
<v Speaker 1>And of course there are parallel investigations by the New

0:09:18.480 --> 0:09:22.120
<v Speaker 1>York Attorney General and the Manhattan But the Attorney General

0:09:22.200 --> 0:09:27.680
<v Speaker 1>is fighting to get testimony from the eldest Trump children,

0:09:27.760 --> 0:09:31.679
<v Speaker 1>and so she released a hundred fifty seven page court document.

0:09:32.160 --> 0:09:34.959
<v Speaker 1>What did you see that struck you there. What's important

0:09:34.960 --> 0:09:38.000
<v Speaker 1>to note here is that the New York Attorney General

0:09:38.120 --> 0:09:41.440
<v Speaker 1>filed a motion to compel the former president along with

0:09:41.480 --> 0:09:44.599
<v Speaker 1>his son Donald Trump Junior, and Ivanka Trump, the handover

0:09:44.840 --> 0:09:48.720
<v Speaker 1>documents and answer questions about the series of valuations of

0:09:48.840 --> 0:09:53.000
<v Speaker 1>key properties part of the New York based Trump organization empire.

0:09:53.600 --> 0:09:56.840
<v Speaker 1>That was meant was a motion to quash from the

0:09:56.840 --> 0:10:00.440
<v Speaker 1>Trump team, and that resulted in this filing by the

0:10:00.440 --> 0:10:03.560
<v Speaker 1>New York Attorney General in which she detailed a lot

0:10:03.600 --> 0:10:07.120
<v Speaker 1>of the evidence that they had already gathered in this investigation.

0:10:07.360 --> 0:10:10.480
<v Speaker 1>But it's important to note that the Attorney General's investigation

0:10:10.480 --> 0:10:13.720
<v Speaker 1>in New York is a civil case, which means nobody's

0:10:13.720 --> 0:10:16.920
<v Speaker 1>going to jail as a result of that investigation. All

0:10:16.960 --> 0:10:19.080
<v Speaker 1>that can result there is that there will be an

0:10:19.080 --> 0:10:21.520
<v Speaker 1>imposition of a fine at the end of that case.

0:10:22.240 --> 0:10:26.960
<v Speaker 1>So the Attorney General claims that Trump's financial filings have

0:10:27.160 --> 0:10:31.559
<v Speaker 1>misstated objective facts, that the Trump organization used fraudulent or

0:10:31.640 --> 0:10:35.880
<v Speaker 1>misleading asset valuations to obtain a host of economic benefits,

0:10:35.920 --> 0:10:40.520
<v Speaker 1>including loans, insurance coverage, and tax deductions. She's been investigating

0:10:40.600 --> 0:10:45.720
<v Speaker 1>since is the problem? How hard it is to convict

0:10:46.320 --> 0:10:50.400
<v Speaker 1>someone of fraud in a case like this. Sure well,

0:10:50.600 --> 0:10:53.560
<v Speaker 1>in the civil case, the standard of proof is merely

0:10:54.040 --> 0:10:56.839
<v Speaker 1>preponderance of the evidence. So unlike the criminal case that's

0:10:56.880 --> 0:10:59.280
<v Speaker 1>going on with the Manhattan District Attorney's office or the

0:10:59.280 --> 0:11:03.439
<v Speaker 1>criminal case that's going on in Georgia, the Attorney General

0:11:03.480 --> 0:11:06.040
<v Speaker 1>in New York only has to prove the case by

0:11:06.040 --> 0:11:09.000
<v Speaker 1>a preponderance of the evidence, which means slightly more than

0:11:09.040 --> 0:11:13.240
<v Speaker 1>fifty percent. But they're still difficulties even improving that case.

0:11:13.600 --> 0:11:17.200
<v Speaker 1>For one thing, it's a complicated financial fraud case, and

0:11:17.240 --> 0:11:21.079
<v Speaker 1>it's difficult to prove criminal intent unless the documents are

0:11:21.120 --> 0:11:24.120
<v Speaker 1>crystal clear that there was an intent to mislead into fraud,

0:11:24.280 --> 0:11:27.839
<v Speaker 1>and unless you have someone on the inside, a co conspirator,

0:11:28.040 --> 0:11:30.079
<v Speaker 1>who can take jurors by the hand through all these

0:11:30.120 --> 0:11:33.600
<v Speaker 1>complicated documents and show them that, in fact, there was

0:11:33.720 --> 0:11:36.199
<v Speaker 1>criminal intent here, there was knowledge that what was being

0:11:36.240 --> 0:11:38.480
<v Speaker 1>done was wrong, there was knowledge that the information that

0:11:38.559 --> 0:11:41.760
<v Speaker 1>was being filed was false. They don't have that here

0:11:41.800 --> 0:11:44.240
<v Speaker 1>in terms of a cooperator as far as we know.

0:11:44.640 --> 0:11:49.840
<v Speaker 1>And the documents themselves are complicated. They're complicated financial documents

0:11:49.880 --> 0:11:53.480
<v Speaker 1>that also have the added difficulty of having been reviewed

0:11:53.679 --> 0:11:57.080
<v Speaker 1>and approved by attorneys. So one of the defenses that

0:11:57.120 --> 0:12:00.120
<v Speaker 1>the Trump organization can raise is that they rely in

0:12:00.240 --> 0:12:04.280
<v Speaker 1>good faith on professional advice, that these documents were reviewed

0:12:04.280 --> 0:12:07.840
<v Speaker 1>by lawyers and by accountants, and even if ultimately they

0:12:07.840 --> 0:12:11.040
<v Speaker 1>were wrong, they were allied in good faith on those professionals,

0:12:11.040 --> 0:12:14.840
<v Speaker 1>and therefore they're not guilty of committing that offense. Another

0:12:15.000 --> 0:12:18.920
<v Speaker 1>challenge for the New York Attorney General's Office investigation is

0:12:18.920 --> 0:12:23.319
<v Speaker 1>that she is trying to prove objectively that these valuations

0:12:23.400 --> 0:12:27.600
<v Speaker 1>were incorrect. So she's trying to find discrepancies in all

0:12:27.679 --> 0:12:31.280
<v Speaker 1>these financial filings and show that at one time and

0:12:31.360 --> 0:12:34.120
<v Speaker 1>for one purpose, a certain property was valued at X,

0:12:34.400 --> 0:12:36.920
<v Speaker 1>and that the same property for at another time, for

0:12:36.960 --> 0:12:41.199
<v Speaker 1>another purpose was valued at Why. These are objective discrepancies

0:12:41.440 --> 0:12:44.000
<v Speaker 1>in the valuations, and she's trying to use that to

0:12:44.120 --> 0:12:47.040
<v Speaker 1>show that they had to note that these valuations were

0:12:47.080 --> 0:12:49.760
<v Speaker 1>not correct and that they were being manipulated for various

0:12:49.800 --> 0:12:54.320
<v Speaker 1>purposes in order to obtain economic advantages for the Trump organization.

0:12:54.559 --> 0:12:58.080
<v Speaker 1>But even that argument can be challenging because it is

0:12:58.160 --> 0:13:03.400
<v Speaker 1>perfectly permissible to value different properties at different amounts based

0:13:03.480 --> 0:13:06.280
<v Speaker 1>upon the context that the valuation is being done, so

0:13:06.480 --> 0:13:09.560
<v Speaker 1>the rules may differ if the valuation is being done,

0:13:09.600 --> 0:13:13.840
<v Speaker 1>for example, for a mortgage or loan application, as opposed

0:13:13.880 --> 0:13:18.240
<v Speaker 1>to some other circumstance. So even the discrepancies alone may

0:13:18.280 --> 0:13:20.559
<v Speaker 1>not be enough to prove that there was an intent

0:13:20.679 --> 0:13:23.640
<v Speaker 1>to defraud here. Those are additional challenges that the New

0:13:23.679 --> 0:13:26.320
<v Speaker 1>York Attorney General will have to overcome if she's ultimately

0:13:26.360 --> 0:13:28.960
<v Speaker 1>going to bring a case of fraud against President Trump

0:13:29.040 --> 0:13:32.520
<v Speaker 1>or anybody else in the Trump organization. Thanks Bob, that's

0:13:32.640 --> 0:13:37.640
<v Speaker 1>Robert mans of McCarter and English. Gun violence is on

0:13:37.679 --> 0:13:41.720
<v Speaker 1>the rise in Manhattan. Last Friday, two police officers were

0:13:41.760 --> 0:13:45.040
<v Speaker 1>shot and killed in Harlem. There have been thirteen shootings

0:13:45.080 --> 0:13:48.480
<v Speaker 1>in Manhattan so far this year, compared to seven during

0:13:48.480 --> 0:13:53.120
<v Speaker 1>the same period in according to New York Police Department statistics.

0:13:53.440 --> 0:13:56.880
<v Speaker 1>Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Brad, who has been under pressure

0:13:57.200 --> 0:14:01.200
<v Speaker 1>over a memoy issued for swearing prosecution of certain crimes,

0:14:01.559 --> 0:14:04.560
<v Speaker 1>said addressing gun violence will be a top priority for

0:14:04.640 --> 0:14:08.560
<v Speaker 1>his office. Joining me as Bloomberg Legal reporter Patricia Hurtado,

0:14:08.760 --> 0:14:12.080
<v Speaker 1>pat tell us about this memo from brag that has

0:14:12.200 --> 0:14:15.640
<v Speaker 1>gotten so much attention. Well, it was a law enforcement

0:14:15.720 --> 0:14:20.200
<v Speaker 1>memo to his staff prosecutors. They're called the system district attorneys,

0:14:20.240 --> 0:14:23.000
<v Speaker 1>and this was a memo that laid out how they

0:14:23.040 --> 0:14:26.600
<v Speaker 1>were going to pursue certain crimes and not seek certain

0:14:26.680 --> 0:14:31.800
<v Speaker 1>penalties automatically, you know, not pursue fair beating cases or

0:14:32.080 --> 0:14:36.440
<v Speaker 1>sex worker cases like aggravated unlicensed operation of a motor

0:14:36.560 --> 0:14:39.320
<v Speaker 1>vehicle can only be charged if a motorist is also

0:14:39.360 --> 0:14:42.400
<v Speaker 1>accused of being involved in the dangerous driving or crashes

0:14:42.440 --> 0:14:46.080
<v Speaker 1>that injure someone. They can't be used against people who

0:14:46.080 --> 0:14:50.119
<v Speaker 1>don't pay their fine. People who burglarize apartments or buildings

0:14:50.240 --> 0:14:53.560
<v Speaker 1>or basements of a commercial building or an apartment would

0:14:53.560 --> 0:14:57.640
<v Speaker 1>face burglary charges, but they would carry lesser punishments that

0:14:57.960 --> 0:15:03.240
<v Speaker 1>cautions that don't automatic. We seek to have someone incarcerated

0:15:03.440 --> 0:15:06.480
<v Speaker 1>when they get arrested. You know, that only pursued those

0:15:06.560 --> 0:15:10.080
<v Speaker 1>kinds of cases there's an imminent threat of harm. Resisting

0:15:10.160 --> 0:15:12.800
<v Speaker 1>arrest could only be charged if the person is arresting

0:15:12.840 --> 0:15:16.200
<v Speaker 1>for a serious crime, not just standing around when the

0:15:16.240 --> 0:15:20.280
<v Speaker 1>cops are telling them to move. And Brag's theories apparently

0:15:20.320 --> 0:15:24.680
<v Speaker 1>behind us, were that he wanted to stop police from

0:15:24.680 --> 0:15:30.080
<v Speaker 1>basically arresting black and list Latin neck and minorities that

0:15:30.360 --> 0:15:35.440
<v Speaker 1>are targeted typically under these kinds of cases. What has happened, though,

0:15:35.760 --> 0:15:38.680
<v Speaker 1>is there's been a lot of interpretation of the memo.

0:15:39.280 --> 0:15:42.920
<v Speaker 1>Miss memo. It was basically sort of suggesting a little

0:15:42.960 --> 0:15:47.480
<v Speaker 1>more leniency or giving the prosecutors more discretion and don't

0:15:47.480 --> 0:15:51.560
<v Speaker 1>automatically charge everything that gets arrested and make it a felony.

0:15:52.080 --> 0:15:55.200
<v Speaker 1>Was basically came at a time right head up into

0:15:55.800 --> 0:15:59.520
<v Speaker 1>an increase in crime. There's been a spike and recent

0:15:59.640 --> 0:16:03.920
<v Speaker 1>violence crimes including shootings and gun violence. So this policy

0:16:04.000 --> 0:16:08.480
<v Speaker 1>Day one memo came head on into shootings and the

0:16:08.640 --> 0:16:12.280
<v Speaker 1>pushing of the woman Michelle go office worker who was

0:16:12.320 --> 0:16:14.680
<v Speaker 1>shoved to her death in front of an oncoming subway

0:16:14.680 --> 0:16:18.280
<v Speaker 1>car in Manhattan. And there was a girl fatally shot.

0:16:18.360 --> 0:16:21.400
<v Speaker 1>She was a Burger King worker. She was fatally shot

0:16:21.680 --> 0:16:24.040
<v Speaker 1>at the bear robbery at the at the Burger King.

0:16:24.640 --> 0:16:27.640
<v Speaker 1>So these kinds of crimes, of course, are getting a

0:16:27.680 --> 0:16:31.920
<v Speaker 1>lot of headlines, and Bragg's policies seemed to have collided

0:16:32.040 --> 0:16:35.200
<v Speaker 1>head on with this spike. I mean, the New York

0:16:35.200 --> 0:16:38.360
<v Speaker 1>Police Commissioner, the first black woman to hold that job,

0:16:38.800 --> 0:16:42.680
<v Speaker 1>criticized his policies. They were even starting to be calls

0:16:43.240 --> 0:16:47.800
<v Speaker 1>for removing him from office. Yes, and Tom Squazzy, who's

0:16:47.880 --> 0:16:52.680
<v Speaker 1>running for governor the Republican he is called upon Kathy

0:16:52.760 --> 0:16:55.800
<v Speaker 1>Hokel to remove Brag and she apparently has the power

0:16:55.840 --> 0:16:59.760
<v Speaker 1>to do so. And she's running for re election after

0:16:59.800 --> 0:17:03.600
<v Speaker 1>she was appointed to replace Andrew Cuomo, so she's having

0:17:03.640 --> 0:17:06.439
<v Speaker 1>to deal with this issue where she's being asked to

0:17:06.600 --> 0:17:10.199
<v Speaker 1>review Bragg and possibly remove him. So she's going to

0:17:10.280 --> 0:17:14.000
<v Speaker 1>be meeting with him, it's been reported. So you know,

0:17:14.240 --> 0:17:17.399
<v Speaker 1>it's a lot happening in three weeks where you have

0:17:17.520 --> 0:17:21.080
<v Speaker 1>a new police commissioner and then you have a new

0:17:21.119 --> 0:17:24.560
<v Speaker 1>mayor who is a former cop who's dealing with this

0:17:24.680 --> 0:17:30.160
<v Speaker 1>spike in crime citywide. Mayor Adams has given his support

0:17:30.320 --> 0:17:33.640
<v Speaker 1>and says that he thinks that Bragg is a brilliant prosecutor.

0:17:33.960 --> 0:17:36.400
<v Speaker 1>But you know, there was something interesting I covered yesterday.

0:17:36.480 --> 0:17:39.600
<v Speaker 1>There was a conference with the New York State Bar

0:17:39.680 --> 0:17:45.840
<v Speaker 1>Association with four District Attorneys around the state, including the

0:17:45.920 --> 0:17:50.399
<v Speaker 1>Erie County d A. Flynn as well as Mimi Roca

0:17:50.480 --> 0:17:55.359
<v Speaker 1>of Westchester d A and Eric Gonzalis the Brooklyn d A.

0:17:55.760 --> 0:17:59.480
<v Speaker 1>And it was interesting because some of them have accomplished

0:18:00.000 --> 0:18:05.440
<v Speaker 1>into progressive policies, ameliorating you know, the harm that incarceration

0:18:05.560 --> 0:18:09.960
<v Speaker 1>does to you. They were talking about different policies they've instituted.

0:18:10.040 --> 0:18:13.360
<v Speaker 1>So for example, Alvin brad gets a lot of attention

0:18:13.560 --> 0:18:15.800
<v Speaker 1>yesterday for announcings and he was going to have like

0:18:15.840 --> 0:18:20.760
<v Speaker 1>a guns are prosecutor to handle gun cases. And Arinzale

0:18:20.800 --> 0:18:24.399
<v Speaker 1>said that last August and no one said anything, you know,

0:18:24.920 --> 0:18:28.600
<v Speaker 1>and Erik Gonzalez was talking about policies that he's enacted

0:18:28.640 --> 0:18:31.440
<v Speaker 1>because there was such a rise in crime when he

0:18:31.480 --> 0:18:35.680
<v Speaker 1>took over when Ken Thompson died in sixteen and then

0:18:35.760 --> 0:18:39.760
<v Speaker 1>ran for d a in Seen, and he said he

0:18:39.880 --> 0:18:43.920
<v Speaker 1>was managed with some policies. They've been focused on certain crimes,

0:18:43.920 --> 0:18:49.520
<v Speaker 1>certain resentivis, balons who have violent backgrounds. They basically focused

0:18:49.520 --> 0:18:53.480
<v Speaker 1>on certain gang cases and made these cases against he said,

0:18:53.520 --> 0:18:55.720
<v Speaker 1>the ones that pulled the triggers. And they've been out

0:18:55.880 --> 0:19:00.080
<v Speaker 1>actually able to bring down crime and there's been a

0:19:00.160 --> 0:19:03.320
<v Speaker 1>reduction in crime in Brooklyn and the d a in

0:19:03.760 --> 0:19:08.159
<v Speaker 1>Erie County was talking about certain alternatives to incarceration cases

0:19:08.160 --> 0:19:12.440
<v Speaker 1>where they take young people who have possibly been involved

0:19:12.440 --> 0:19:14.680
<v Speaker 1>in the shooting. They may have been victims, they were

0:19:14.680 --> 0:19:18.639
<v Speaker 1>not the defendant the person who was arrested for the

0:19:18.720 --> 0:19:22.520
<v Speaker 1>gun possession. But they target them and work with them

0:19:22.800 --> 0:19:25.000
<v Speaker 1>to get them out of the system. So they will

0:19:25.040 --> 0:19:27.200
<v Speaker 1>take them out. And you know, it could be that

0:19:27.320 --> 0:19:31.160
<v Speaker 1>this kid was the victim of a shooting and may

0:19:31.280 --> 0:19:35.560
<v Speaker 1>go get a gun, and with this program, they intervened

0:19:35.640 --> 0:19:38.760
<v Speaker 1>with the kids and to get them out of the system.

0:19:38.800 --> 0:19:42.920
<v Speaker 1>It seems like in some interviews I've seen that Bragg

0:19:42.960 --> 0:19:46.679
<v Speaker 1>has backed off a little on that memo, or tried to.

0:19:47.640 --> 0:19:51.560
<v Speaker 1>He has given It was a two hour seminar last

0:19:51.720 --> 0:19:55.720
<v Speaker 1>week at n y U Law School and where he's

0:19:55.760 --> 0:19:59.720
<v Speaker 1>an adjunct, and he was asked by a law professor

0:19:59.760 --> 0:20:02.840
<v Speaker 1>at n y U Law School that's the former federal

0:20:02.880 --> 0:20:06.840
<v Speaker 1>prosecutor in the Southern District that used to work with him.

0:20:06.880 --> 0:20:10.120
<v Speaker 1>And he has spoken that, you know, he business interpreted

0:20:10.440 --> 0:20:13.680
<v Speaker 1>and that it was a problem. He received criticism from

0:20:13.760 --> 0:20:17.720
<v Speaker 1>the his memo, his Day one memo. It was a

0:20:17.800 --> 0:20:21.560
<v Speaker 1>failure to communicate properly what the memo was really about,

0:20:21.640 --> 0:20:24.880
<v Speaker 1>and he said he called it maybe too legalistic and

0:20:25.080 --> 0:20:30.080
<v Speaker 1>confusing to to the public. Some people have said that

0:20:30.240 --> 0:20:33.040
<v Speaker 1>was the problem, or perhaps you know, it was a

0:20:33.080 --> 0:20:37.639
<v Speaker 1>little and artfully done. Other people have not had this

0:20:37.720 --> 0:20:40.680
<v Speaker 1>issue in the first three weeks of work and also

0:20:40.880 --> 0:20:46.640
<v Speaker 1>didn't at least nine Manhattan prosecutors quit after he took over. Well,

0:20:46.680 --> 0:20:50.359
<v Speaker 1>I mean one series. We had a Bloomberg meeting with

0:20:50.480 --> 0:20:53.000
<v Speaker 1>him on Friday of last week and ed board meeting,

0:20:53.280 --> 0:20:56.600
<v Speaker 1>and that, you know, he said, insisted that some of

0:20:56.640 --> 0:20:59.960
<v Speaker 1>those nine that were counted, that top people that quit

0:21:00.560 --> 0:21:04.520
<v Speaker 1>included the DA himself, Uh Divance, who was obviously going

0:21:04.560 --> 0:21:08.040
<v Speaker 1>to leave. And he said, it's always when there's a

0:21:08.119 --> 0:21:10.359
<v Speaker 1>change in regime happens, there will be a change in

0:21:10.359 --> 0:21:13.360
<v Speaker 1>the top management. And he said the same thing had

0:21:13.359 --> 0:21:16.639
<v Speaker 1>happened when he was in the New York Attorney General's Office.

0:21:16.760 --> 0:21:19.879
<v Speaker 1>All the top managers had left. However, one of the

0:21:19.960 --> 0:21:23.760
<v Speaker 1>key people that the Manhattan DA's office lost is the

0:21:23.800 --> 0:21:28.240
<v Speaker 1>spectacular prosecutor. She's a veteran and she's a fierce, fierce

0:21:28.440 --> 0:21:32.960
<v Speaker 1>child prosecutor. Her name is Jonah Lucy, and she prosecuted

0:21:33.000 --> 0:21:37.400
<v Speaker 1>Harvey Weinstein. So now they've lost her. And the Court

0:21:37.440 --> 0:21:41.919
<v Speaker 1>of Appeals was voicing some criticism of the way the

0:21:42.000 --> 0:21:46.040
<v Speaker 1>case was handled in the use of these witnesses that

0:21:46.200 --> 0:21:49.320
<v Speaker 1>are not direct victims, but they're kind of out Pride witnesses.

0:21:49.480 --> 0:21:53.800
<v Speaker 1>So the if the court appeals court reverses the conviction

0:21:53.840 --> 0:21:56.960
<v Speaker 1>of Harvey Weinstein, now one of the most senior people

0:21:57.080 --> 0:21:59.840
<v Speaker 1>in the office, who's been there for like thecover case

0:21:59.880 --> 0:22:02.560
<v Speaker 1>of where fully twenty five years, you know, she is

0:22:02.600 --> 0:22:05.359
<v Speaker 1>no longer there. He would not answer what they would do.

0:22:05.400 --> 0:22:09.120
<v Speaker 1>He said, there's many talented staffers that can that can

0:22:09.160 --> 0:22:12.480
<v Speaker 1>handle the prosecution. So what does he say he's going

0:22:12.560 --> 0:22:16.640
<v Speaker 1>to focus on. Well, he wants to do a lot

0:22:16.680 --> 0:22:19.520
<v Speaker 1>of things. He wants to focus on gun violence. He

0:22:19.600 --> 0:22:24.359
<v Speaker 1>wants to focus on you know, lowering uh, you know,

0:22:24.600 --> 0:22:28.840
<v Speaker 1>the number of youth and black and Latin Neck people

0:22:28.880 --> 0:22:33.159
<v Speaker 1>who get arrested that he thinks they've been lawfully targeted

0:22:33.240 --> 0:22:37.159
<v Speaker 1>for law enforcement and put a little more parity into

0:22:37.400 --> 0:22:41.520
<v Speaker 1>the into the system, the criminal justice system. But it's

0:22:41.560 --> 0:22:44.399
<v Speaker 1>a lot on his plate right quickly in the middle

0:22:44.520 --> 0:22:48.040
<v Speaker 1>of what many people perceive as a crime wave. And

0:22:48.119 --> 0:22:50.720
<v Speaker 1>you know, he's gotten there's been some criticism. In fact,

0:22:50.840 --> 0:22:53.320
<v Speaker 1>you know, there's been stories. I think people see if

0:22:53.359 --> 0:22:56.520
<v Speaker 1>you go to the Dwayne Read or a local drug store,

0:22:56.880 --> 0:23:00.920
<v Speaker 1>you can't buy anything on the shelves, including toothpaste because

0:23:01.000 --> 0:23:05.080
<v Speaker 1>of you know, people are shop raising shoplifters, and so

0:23:05.240 --> 0:23:07.919
<v Speaker 1>if that's happening in the Manhattan store, and then you

0:23:08.000 --> 0:23:10.679
<v Speaker 1>read a memo that says, hey, let's not arrest everyone,

0:23:10.720 --> 0:23:14.440
<v Speaker 1>let's think about maybe an alternative through this process criminal

0:23:14.480 --> 0:23:17.320
<v Speaker 1>justice system process, you can see people getting a little

0:23:17.359 --> 0:23:21.720
<v Speaker 1>frustrated that, you know, they're worried about getting mugged, or

0:23:21.880 --> 0:23:25.040
<v Speaker 1>some people say that it's not necessarily as bad in

0:23:25.200 --> 0:23:27.840
<v Speaker 1>certain crimes are not as bad as it was in

0:23:27.960 --> 0:23:32.600
<v Speaker 1>the nineteen eighties and nineties during the crack epidemic, but

0:23:33.240 --> 0:23:36.320
<v Speaker 1>it's not good. What about the prosecution of Trump, which

0:23:36.359 --> 0:23:40.879
<v Speaker 1>he inherited from civants the former d A. That was

0:23:40.920 --> 0:23:44.720
<v Speaker 1>an interesting question. My colleagues aggressively questioned him on that,

0:23:44.960 --> 0:23:47.560
<v Speaker 1>and he will not say he will not talk about it.

0:23:47.840 --> 0:23:50.520
<v Speaker 1>And I guess we have to understand that there is

0:23:50.560 --> 0:23:55.600
<v Speaker 1>a grand jury involved in this investigation, and prosecutors are

0:23:55.600 --> 0:24:00.680
<v Speaker 1>prohibited from discussing grand jury matters. But he has said

0:24:00.720 --> 0:24:03.760
<v Speaker 1>repeatedly that he has this expertise when he was on

0:24:03.800 --> 0:24:07.320
<v Speaker 1>the campaign, that he had these this expertise, and as

0:24:07.480 --> 0:24:11.480
<v Speaker 1>in the New York Attorney General's Office prosecuting Trump organization

0:24:11.560 --> 0:24:15.200
<v Speaker 1>in Trump University. So these are kinds of background cases

0:24:15.240 --> 0:24:19.639
<v Speaker 1>that he has, so he has the wherewithal and the skill.

0:24:19.760 --> 0:24:23.040
<v Speaker 1>He's also kept the same people in place that we're

0:24:23.040 --> 0:24:27.919
<v Speaker 1>doing the prosecution under his predecessors. Ivan, And what's his

0:24:27.960 --> 0:24:31.680
<v Speaker 1>relationship now with the New York Police Commissioner. When there

0:24:31.800 --> 0:24:36.199
<v Speaker 1>was this acrimony between the em police commissioner, who was

0:24:36.240 --> 0:24:39.879
<v Speaker 1>reacting to this memo she she had sent out, the

0:24:39.880 --> 0:24:42.439
<v Speaker 1>police commissioners sent out a memo to her in the

0:24:42.480 --> 0:24:46.320
<v Speaker 1>thirty six thousand members of the force saying, you know

0:24:46.440 --> 0:24:49.239
<v Speaker 1>that we need to be careful about this. And I

0:24:49.280 --> 0:24:53.119
<v Speaker 1>think Bragg realized that he had to have some meeting

0:24:53.359 --> 0:24:57.000
<v Speaker 1>with the police department because the two are partners in

0:24:57.040 --> 0:25:01.720
<v Speaker 1>this process. And so they so the police commission or

0:25:01.800 --> 0:25:05.760
<v Speaker 1>Key Chance Stool and I've met with brag Um a

0:25:05.840 --> 0:25:09.399
<v Speaker 1>week ago Friday now, so it's two weeks now after

0:25:09.520 --> 0:25:13.119
<v Speaker 1>that rocky week to agree that they were going to

0:25:13.160 --> 0:25:16.520
<v Speaker 1>work together in a more collaborative fashion. So, I mean,

0:25:16.560 --> 0:25:19.359
<v Speaker 1>I guess this is all the learning process. We haven't

0:25:19.400 --> 0:25:21.720
<v Speaker 1>had a new man at and d A, I mean

0:25:21.960 --> 0:25:26.040
<v Speaker 1>SI Vance with for eleven years and Bob Morgan thou

0:25:26.240 --> 0:25:30.959
<v Speaker 1>was for thirty some years. So in forty some years

0:25:31.160 --> 0:25:34.600
<v Speaker 1>you know, this is the fourth district attorney, so I

0:25:34.640 --> 0:25:38.400
<v Speaker 1>guess it's a learning experience for everybody involved. Thanks Pat.

0:25:38.640 --> 0:25:42.320
<v Speaker 1>That's Bloomberg Legal reporter Patricia Hurtado, and that's it for

0:25:42.320 --> 0:25:44.959
<v Speaker 1>this edition of the Bloomberg Law Show. Remember you can

0:25:45.000 --> 0:25:48.240
<v Speaker 1>always get the latest legal news on our Bloomberg Law Podcast.

0:25:48.520 --> 0:25:51.520
<v Speaker 1>You can find them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and at

0:25:51.680 --> 0:25:56.800
<v Speaker 1>www dot bloomberg dot com slash podcast Slash Law. I'm

0:25:56.920 --> 0:25:59.359
<v Speaker 1>June Grosso and you're listening to Bloomberg