1 00:00:02,920 --> 00:00:10,600 Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the 2 00:00:10,640 --> 00:00:12,719 Speaker 1: Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. 3 00:00:13,039 --> 00:00:16,279 Speaker 2: Catch Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Apocarplay and 4 00:00:16,280 --> 00:00:18,960 Speaker 2: then Proud Ato with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on 5 00:00:19,079 --> 00:00:22,280 Speaker 2: demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live 6 00:00:22,400 --> 00:00:23,600 Speaker 2: on YouTube. 7 00:00:25,720 --> 00:00:27,479 Speaker 3: There is now a chance that we don't get a 8 00:00:27,520 --> 00:00:30,760 Speaker 3: single fed rate cut before the election, and we might 9 00:00:30,800 --> 00:00:33,800 Speaker 3: not get a second Trump trial before the election either, Joe, 10 00:00:33,800 --> 00:00:36,879 Speaker 3: depending on how the Supreme Court rules after the arguments 11 00:00:36,880 --> 00:00:37,800 Speaker 3: they heard today. 12 00:00:37,640 --> 00:00:41,920 Speaker 4: A massive rerating from the economy to the political world. Yes, 13 00:00:42,000 --> 00:00:43,600 Speaker 4: and this is why you have to join us every 14 00:00:43,640 --> 00:00:46,760 Speaker 4: day here on Bloomberg, because it really is remarkable how 15 00:00:46,800 --> 00:00:49,360 Speaker 4: a narrative can shift overnight. And I think that we 16 00:00:49,400 --> 00:00:51,800 Speaker 4: can say that's already happened today in the Supreme Court, 17 00:00:51,840 --> 00:00:53,440 Speaker 4: regardless of how this turns out. 18 00:00:53,600 --> 00:00:55,160 Speaker 3: Yeah, we have to keep in mind here for our 19 00:00:55,200 --> 00:00:57,920 Speaker 3: TV and radio audiences. There were already two lower courts 20 00:00:57,960 --> 00:01:01,200 Speaker 3: that ruled Trump was not immune from prosecution. He had 21 00:01:01,200 --> 00:01:03,600 Speaker 3: appealed it to the Supreme Court, and everyone was assuming 22 00:01:03,600 --> 00:01:07,080 Speaker 3: the Supreme Court would decide on similar grounds. Some thought 23 00:01:07,120 --> 00:01:09,440 Speaker 3: the Supreme Court wouldn't even take up this case at all, which, 24 00:01:09,480 --> 00:01:11,720 Speaker 3: of course they have done. But judging the way the 25 00:01:11,840 --> 00:01:14,320 Speaker 3: arguments have gone today, maybe it's not as cut and 26 00:01:14,400 --> 00:01:18,880 Speaker 3: dry as legal analysts initially thought when they were considering 27 00:01:18,880 --> 00:01:20,920 Speaker 3: what these nine justices might do a lot of folks. 28 00:01:20,800 --> 00:01:22,760 Speaker 4: Told us the Supreme Court wouldn't even take this up 29 00:01:22,760 --> 00:01:25,840 Speaker 4: at all because the Appeals Court's case was so strong, 30 00:01:26,280 --> 00:01:28,720 Speaker 4: so well written. So let's explore some of the nuances 31 00:01:28,760 --> 00:01:32,160 Speaker 4: here with Greg's store. As we mentioned reporting for Bloomberg 32 00:01:32,520 --> 00:01:35,080 Speaker 4: on the Supreme Court, I can only imagine what your 33 00:01:35,160 --> 00:01:36,800 Speaker 4: day has been like so far. It's very kind of 34 00:01:36,840 --> 00:01:38,760 Speaker 4: you to spend some time with us. It's good to 35 00:01:38,760 --> 00:01:43,520 Speaker 4: see you. Hearing from Chief Justice Roberts criticizing the DC 36 00:01:43,680 --> 00:01:47,240 Speaker 4: Court of Appeals decision got everyone's attention today. Is it 37 00:01:47,280 --> 00:01:49,600 Speaker 4: possible they just kick it down to the court. What 38 00:01:49,720 --> 00:01:52,320 Speaker 4: kind of options are you weighing in your head as 39 00:01:52,320 --> 00:01:53,440 Speaker 4: you listen to the justices? 40 00:01:53,640 --> 00:01:58,120 Speaker 5: Yeah, the Chief Justice raised that very possibility. Maybe we 41 00:01:58,120 --> 00:02:00,120 Speaker 5: should kick it back down to the appeals court, or 42 00:02:00,160 --> 00:02:02,680 Speaker 5: at least we should tell them that reasoning is wrong 43 00:02:04,000 --> 00:02:07,360 Speaker 5: sort of. The overall sense in the courtroom was, we 44 00:02:07,440 --> 00:02:10,320 Speaker 5: want to draw a line here between what our official 45 00:02:10,360 --> 00:02:15,320 Speaker 5: presidential acts and therefore potentially off limits for prosecution, and 46 00:02:15,360 --> 00:02:19,320 Speaker 5: what are not what are private acts? And the Chief 47 00:02:19,400 --> 00:02:21,960 Speaker 5: Justices question and some other questions suggested they didn't think 48 00:02:22,000 --> 00:02:24,160 Speaker 5: the lower courts had done enough analysis to try to 49 00:02:24,360 --> 00:02:26,480 Speaker 5: separate out the you know, what's in and what's out? 50 00:02:27,000 --> 00:02:29,880 Speaker 3: Okay, So it kind of raises this question if they're 51 00:02:29,919 --> 00:02:32,399 Speaker 3: just kicking it down to a lower court to ultimately 52 00:02:32,440 --> 00:02:35,720 Speaker 3: decide if this is going to become more narrow just 53 00:02:35,800 --> 00:02:38,799 Speaker 3: considering the specific things that Trump is charged with and 54 00:02:38,880 --> 00:02:41,519 Speaker 3: what he did in office, or if I just wonder 55 00:02:41,600 --> 00:02:45,320 Speaker 3: how narrow or sweeping and broad Ultimately this decision is 56 00:02:45,400 --> 00:02:47,720 Speaker 3: whether or not it's made by the Supreme Court or 57 00:02:47,720 --> 00:02:49,520 Speaker 3: by a lower court that they've kicked it back to. 58 00:02:49,880 --> 00:02:52,880 Speaker 5: Well, in terms of the big constitutional principles, they're clearly 59 00:02:52,919 --> 00:02:56,520 Speaker 5: thinking about something sweeping. They really want to think about this, 60 00:02:56,680 --> 00:02:59,639 Speaker 5: and Justice Kavanaugh talked about, you know, I'm thinking about 61 00:02:59,680 --> 00:03:02,680 Speaker 5: future presidents and how it's going to affect them. So 62 00:03:02,840 --> 00:03:05,680 Speaker 5: in terms of the principles big, in terms of the 63 00:03:05,680 --> 00:03:09,640 Speaker 5: Trump case, it really kind of depends that Jack Smith, 64 00:03:09,720 --> 00:03:12,959 Speaker 5: special counsel, his lawyer in his office, Michael dreven was 65 00:03:13,000 --> 00:03:16,040 Speaker 5: basically arguing, look, you know, just on stuff that is 66 00:03:16,120 --> 00:03:20,160 Speaker 5: undisputably private actions by the president, we have plenty to 67 00:03:20,200 --> 00:03:23,280 Speaker 5: go to trial here. And in fact, they say, you know, 68 00:03:23,400 --> 00:03:25,560 Speaker 5: even if you think a few things are off limits, 69 00:03:25,720 --> 00:03:28,519 Speaker 5: let the trial judge sort that out. Let's go ahead 70 00:03:28,600 --> 00:03:31,639 Speaker 5: right now. So the exact impact of this Supreme Court 71 00:03:31,680 --> 00:03:34,200 Speaker 5: decision on the Donald Trump trial remains to be seen. 72 00:03:34,480 --> 00:03:38,800 Speaker 4: Is it unlikely or possible that the court completely agrees 73 00:03:38,840 --> 00:03:43,240 Speaker 4: with Donald Trump and the presidency is almost re established 74 00:03:44,040 --> 00:03:45,600 Speaker 4: or reinvented in a certain way. 75 00:03:45,680 --> 00:03:49,000 Speaker 5: Yeah, that didn't seem likely. I mean, Donald Trump's arguments 76 00:03:49,040 --> 00:03:51,600 Speaker 5: were really really broad that he was making. And even 77 00:03:51,720 --> 00:03:54,160 Speaker 5: you know, Clarence Thomas the very first question out of 78 00:03:54,200 --> 00:03:57,200 Speaker 5: the box, you know, basically saying, where is this in 79 00:03:57,240 --> 00:04:01,240 Speaker 5: the constitution, this notion of presidential immunity? You know, you know, 80 00:04:01,520 --> 00:04:05,480 Speaker 5: and he said before it's not in there. So it's 81 00:04:05,520 --> 00:04:08,120 Speaker 5: hard to see that Donald Trump, Donald Trump wins a 82 00:04:08,360 --> 00:04:12,400 Speaker 5: decision kicking out the case. That's that's not likely to happen, 83 00:04:12,760 --> 00:04:14,640 Speaker 5: but it could be enough to kick the can far 84 00:04:14,760 --> 00:04:17,040 Speaker 5: enough down the road that we get past the November election, 85 00:04:17,120 --> 00:04:19,760 Speaker 5: and then if he becomes president, it'd be incredible, but 86 00:04:19,800 --> 00:04:22,480 Speaker 5: he would have the power to say Justice Department drop 87 00:04:22,560 --> 00:04:23,040 Speaker 5: this case. 88 00:04:23,320 --> 00:04:25,479 Speaker 3: Right, So, so much of this really just comes down 89 00:04:25,480 --> 00:04:28,640 Speaker 3: to timing more than anything else. Greg, Obviously, the Supreme 90 00:04:28,680 --> 00:04:30,640 Speaker 3: Court could wait until the last day of their term 91 00:04:30,760 --> 00:04:33,159 Speaker 3: to rule on this or to issue an opinion on this, 92 00:04:33,200 --> 00:04:35,719 Speaker 3: if they so choose, which would be end of June. 93 00:04:36,160 --> 00:04:38,560 Speaker 3: If they're just going to kick it down to another court, 94 00:04:38,560 --> 00:04:41,040 Speaker 3: would they wait that long or would is that something 95 00:04:41,040 --> 00:04:42,560 Speaker 3: they typically would decide on faster? 96 00:04:43,640 --> 00:04:47,120 Speaker 5: You know, given the scope of the questions, they're clearly 97 00:04:47,160 --> 00:04:51,240 Speaker 5: thinking about big things, and it's hard to imagine they're 98 00:04:51,279 --> 00:04:53,320 Speaker 5: going to crank that out in just a matter of 99 00:04:53,360 --> 00:04:55,480 Speaker 5: a few weeks. And this is the very last argument 100 00:04:55,560 --> 00:04:58,440 Speaker 5: day of the term. And even under the best case scenario, 101 00:04:58,480 --> 00:05:00,560 Speaker 5: even if this were an a risk case or some 102 00:05:00,680 --> 00:05:04,760 Speaker 5: other kind of narrow area of law, you wouldn't expect 103 00:05:04,800 --> 00:05:08,279 Speaker 5: the decision till June. So I would be surprised, given 104 00:05:08,320 --> 00:05:10,560 Speaker 5: the way it went today, if we get a decision 105 00:05:10,600 --> 00:05:12,000 Speaker 5: before the second half of June. 106 00:05:12,360 --> 00:05:15,080 Speaker 3: All right, Greg store Bloomberg, Supreme Court reporter, one of 107 00:05:15,080 --> 00:05:17,480 Speaker 3: the best in the business. Thank you so much. And 108 00:05:17,520 --> 00:05:20,400 Speaker 3: that just gets to the point, Joe of the election timeline, 109 00:05:20,400 --> 00:05:22,600 Speaker 3: because if we're assuming June, and the judge in this 110 00:05:22,680 --> 00:05:25,040 Speaker 3: case in DC, Tanya Chutkin, has said, I will give 111 00:05:25,080 --> 00:05:28,880 Speaker 3: all parties three months to prepare at least for trial. Yes, realistically, 112 00:05:28,920 --> 00:05:31,440 Speaker 3: assuming no further delays, which we know is always the 113 00:05:31,480 --> 00:05:34,800 Speaker 3: effort of Trump's legal defense team is to delay, delay, delay. 114 00:05:35,279 --> 00:05:37,840 Speaker 3: It would be incredibly hard, if not just to begin 115 00:05:37,880 --> 00:05:40,599 Speaker 3: the trial, certainly to finish it before voters are heading tone. 116 00:05:40,640 --> 00:05:42,160 Speaker 4: So we're back in this world now where we're talking 117 00:05:42,160 --> 00:05:48,359 Speaker 4: about it. Imagine a president elect potentially on trial like 118 00:05:48,400 --> 00:05:52,120 Speaker 4: that after the election and before the inaugural. This is 119 00:05:52,600 --> 00:05:55,880 Speaker 4: a possibility, just like so many are. And I'll remind 120 00:05:55,880 --> 00:05:58,440 Speaker 4: everybody that Donald Trump is actually back in court today, 121 00:05:58,480 --> 00:06:01,840 Speaker 4: not in the Supreme Court, but New York with his 122 00:06:01,880 --> 00:06:05,480 Speaker 4: criminal trial, the hush money case, resuming testimony. David Pecker, 123 00:06:05,560 --> 00:06:08,920 Speaker 4: former National Inquirer publisher, on the stand, and we did 124 00:06:09,000 --> 00:06:12,520 Speaker 4: hear from Donald Trump outside the court room. He stopped 125 00:06:12,520 --> 00:06:14,080 Speaker 4: to talk to some workers on the side of the road. 126 00:06:14,160 --> 00:06:16,120 Speaker 4: Kaya you talked to some reporters as well. Here he is. 127 00:06:16,800 --> 00:06:19,480 Speaker 6: We have a big case today. This judge isn't allowing 128 00:06:19,520 --> 00:06:21,880 Speaker 6: me to go. We have a big case. Sendent the 129 00:06:21,920 --> 00:06:25,240 Speaker 6: Supreme Court of a presidential immunity. A president has. 130 00:06:25,160 --> 00:06:26,200 Speaker 7: To have immunity. 131 00:06:26,240 --> 00:06:29,560 Speaker 6: If you don't have immunity, you just have a ceremonial president. 132 00:06:32,120 --> 00:06:34,080 Speaker 3: So for more on this, we turn to an expert 133 00:06:34,120 --> 00:06:37,240 Speaker 3: on constitutional law. Elizabeth Widra is joining us now. She 134 00:06:37,320 --> 00:06:41,839 Speaker 3: is the Constitutional Accountability Center President Supreme Court litigator herself. 135 00:06:41,839 --> 00:06:44,880 Speaker 3: She's here with us in our Washington, DC studio. Elizabeth, 136 00:06:44,920 --> 00:06:47,279 Speaker 3: thank you so much for being with us. I wonder 137 00:06:47,279 --> 00:06:49,080 Speaker 3: if you could just first give us your take on 138 00:06:49,160 --> 00:06:51,280 Speaker 3: what you heard in the arguments today, the kind of 139 00:06:51,400 --> 00:06:55,880 Speaker 3: questions the justices were asking, the answers they elicited, and 140 00:06:55,960 --> 00:06:59,200 Speaker 3: ultimately how you think that will shape what ultimately is 141 00:06:59,240 --> 00:06:59,840 Speaker 3: decided here. 142 00:07:00,040 --> 00:07:02,280 Speaker 7: Yeah, I mean, it was really an extraordinary morning at 143 00:07:02,279 --> 00:07:05,680 Speaker 7: the Supreme Court. Here we have this unprecedented argument for 144 00:07:06,000 --> 00:07:12,840 Speaker 7: broad sweeping permanent immunity from criminal prosecutions for former presidents. 145 00:07:13,400 --> 00:07:17,280 Speaker 7: We've never heard that before. This is definitely, as many 146 00:07:17,280 --> 00:07:20,760 Speaker 7: things with Donald Trump, something that's unprecedented. And the justices 147 00:07:20,800 --> 00:07:23,560 Speaker 7: were extremely skeptical, I would say most of them, of 148 00:07:23,640 --> 00:07:28,920 Speaker 7: that broadest possible claim that Donald Trump is making. There 149 00:07:28,960 --> 00:07:31,840 Speaker 7: did see to seem to be some interest in providing 150 00:07:31,960 --> 00:07:38,280 Speaker 7: some protections for presidents for clearly official acts, keeping those 151 00:07:38,400 --> 00:07:42,720 Speaker 7: in some ways protected from criminal prosecution. But what I 152 00:07:42,760 --> 00:07:43,480 Speaker 7: heard today. 153 00:07:43,200 --> 00:07:44,480 Speaker 4: From the justices. 154 00:07:46,200 --> 00:07:50,800 Speaker 7: Was really a reaffirmation of the very important principle that 155 00:07:50,840 --> 00:07:53,120 Speaker 7: goes back to the very beginnings of our nation that 156 00:07:53,280 --> 00:07:55,840 Speaker 7: no one is above the law, including the president, perhaps 157 00:07:55,960 --> 00:07:59,200 Speaker 7: especially the president. You know, when our constitution was drafted, 158 00:07:59,600 --> 00:08:02,920 Speaker 7: it was very important that our chief executive not be 159 00:08:03,000 --> 00:08:06,080 Speaker 7: a king. An absolute immunity was something that the King 160 00:08:06,200 --> 00:08:10,160 Speaker 7: obviously would have enjoyed in Great Britain and something we 161 00:08:10,200 --> 00:08:12,640 Speaker 7: did not want to replicate here in the United States. 162 00:08:13,040 --> 00:08:15,360 Speaker 7: So the Supreme Court, of course, seemed to recognize that. 163 00:08:15,640 --> 00:08:20,520 Speaker 7: And we're troubled by the assertion from Donald Trump's lawyer 164 00:08:21,000 --> 00:08:25,160 Speaker 7: that he should be entitled this type of immunity. You know, 165 00:08:25,320 --> 00:08:29,120 Speaker 7: some of the arguments were about line drawing, you know, 166 00:08:29,320 --> 00:08:33,400 Speaker 7: what actions might be immune from criminal prosecution, and that's 167 00:08:33,600 --> 00:08:35,640 Speaker 7: very few cool speak to. 168 00:08:35,600 --> 00:08:38,400 Speaker 4: Us about that. The difference between an official and a 169 00:08:38,440 --> 00:08:41,720 Speaker 4: private act. How is that being redefined right now? 170 00:08:42,080 --> 00:08:46,120 Speaker 7: Yeah, So they were trying very hard not to redefine it, 171 00:08:46,160 --> 00:08:49,000 Speaker 7: but rather to try to draw lines based on what 172 00:08:49,040 --> 00:08:53,080 Speaker 7: we already know. So the lawyer for the United States. 173 00:08:53,080 --> 00:08:55,560 Speaker 7: Michael Dreven did a very good job of saying, you know, 174 00:08:55,600 --> 00:08:59,280 Speaker 7: there's a few core things that only the president can act, 175 00:09:00,000 --> 00:09:04,800 Speaker 7: ample recognizing foreign nations or making appointments where that's just 176 00:09:04,920 --> 00:09:09,120 Speaker 7: beyond the reach of congressional legislation, including criminal laws. But 177 00:09:09,160 --> 00:09:13,440 Speaker 7: pretty much everything else is fair game, except if there's 178 00:09:13,480 --> 00:09:16,200 Speaker 7: an as applied challenge, which was very legal ease, but 179 00:09:16,320 --> 00:09:20,400 Speaker 7: basically it means that otherwise the president can be criminally 180 00:09:20,520 --> 00:09:23,800 Speaker 7: liable if the facts suggest. One thing that I thought 181 00:09:23,880 --> 00:09:28,199 Speaker 7: was extremely interesting that came out today was several justices, 182 00:09:28,240 --> 00:09:32,360 Speaker 7: notably Amy Cony Barrett, questioned Trump's lawyers very closely about 183 00:09:32,360 --> 00:09:35,760 Speaker 7: the indictment from Jack Smith and said, okay, let's go 184 00:09:35,840 --> 00:09:38,600 Speaker 7: through some of these acts. You know what he was 185 00:09:38,720 --> 00:09:42,559 Speaker 7: trying to assuming the indictment is correct, And that was 186 00:09:42,600 --> 00:09:45,400 Speaker 7: an assumption that Trump's lawyer had to do when he 187 00:09:45,480 --> 00:09:48,080 Speaker 7: was trying to find these votes, when he was trying 188 00:09:48,120 --> 00:09:52,000 Speaker 7: to get this fake slate of electors. Was that an 189 00:09:52,040 --> 00:09:55,320 Speaker 7: official presidential act or was that a private act? And 190 00:09:55,640 --> 00:10:00,400 Speaker 7: Trump's lawyer did concede that several of these indicted actions 191 00:10:00,440 --> 00:10:04,200 Speaker 7: were private and not official even under their definition. And 192 00:10:04,280 --> 00:10:06,920 Speaker 7: what that means is that the trial could go forward 193 00:10:07,559 --> 00:10:11,040 Speaker 7: even if Trump's argument about official acts were to be accepted. 194 00:10:11,080 --> 00:10:12,720 Speaker 4: And I'm not sure it will be really important. 195 00:10:12,840 --> 00:10:15,480 Speaker 7: It's very important now that, of course the question then 196 00:10:15,520 --> 00:10:18,720 Speaker 7: gets to timing, but I thought it was really important 197 00:10:18,720 --> 00:10:20,720 Speaker 7: that there was that concession that the trial could go 198 00:10:20,760 --> 00:10:21,920 Speaker 7: forward at least in some way. 199 00:10:22,679 --> 00:10:25,160 Speaker 3: Well, and it's worth keeping in mind that while we 200 00:10:25,240 --> 00:10:28,200 Speaker 3: did see specific questioning around the case here in Washington, 201 00:10:28,240 --> 00:10:31,160 Speaker 3: he's claimed immunity from prosecution in the Document's case as 202 00:10:31,200 --> 00:10:34,080 Speaker 3: well down in Florida, which is another federal case. So 203 00:10:34,320 --> 00:10:37,520 Speaker 3: how are all of these things potentially tied together? What 204 00:10:37,559 --> 00:10:40,679 Speaker 3: implication could there be not just for the case in Washington, 205 00:10:40,720 --> 00:10:43,559 Speaker 3: but the case in Florida. And then also I'm assuming 206 00:10:43,559 --> 00:10:46,520 Speaker 3: this doesn't apply to the state cases like in Georgia 207 00:10:46,840 --> 00:10:50,959 Speaker 3: for the election subversion, because there's multiple criminal cases that 208 00:10:51,000 --> 00:10:51,720 Speaker 3: we're dealing with here. 209 00:10:51,800 --> 00:10:55,640 Speaker 7: Yes, it's a little hard to keep track, but for sure, 210 00:10:55,720 --> 00:10:59,760 Speaker 7: So he's also planning immunity exactly right in the document's 211 00:10:59,800 --> 00:11:02,959 Speaker 7: case in Florida. You know, I think one of the 212 00:11:03,000 --> 00:11:05,880 Speaker 7: things that's really important about this case, especially in terms 213 00:11:05,880 --> 00:11:12,600 Speaker 7: of the timing, is that if it isn't finished before 214 00:11:12,880 --> 00:11:16,360 Speaker 7: the election, and if Donald Trump were to win reelection, 215 00:11:16,480 --> 00:11:19,640 Speaker 7: because it's a federal case, presumably once he took o 216 00:11:19,679 --> 00:11:22,400 Speaker 7: for the Justice Department could make it go pardon. Yes, 217 00:11:22,559 --> 00:11:24,400 Speaker 7: that is not the case, of course, when it comes 218 00:11:24,400 --> 00:11:27,560 Speaker 7: to this new Arizona indictment or the New York case 219 00:11:27,640 --> 00:11:32,120 Speaker 7: that's currently underway, because those are state criminal indictment. So 220 00:11:32,120 --> 00:11:33,080 Speaker 7: that's an important distinction. 221 00:11:33,160 --> 00:11:35,480 Speaker 4: It absolutely is. As we spend time with Elizabeth Widra, 222 00:11:36,280 --> 00:11:39,440 Speaker 4: president of the Constitutional Accountability Center, Supreme Court litigator, we 223 00:11:39,480 --> 00:11:41,199 Speaker 4: have a voice of experience here at the table, and 224 00:11:41,240 --> 00:11:44,040 Speaker 4: I want to ask you about history President here. Twenty twenty, 225 00:11:44,080 --> 00:11:48,679 Speaker 4: the Supreme Court rejected Donald Trump's claim of absolute immunity. 226 00:11:48,760 --> 00:11:52,320 Speaker 4: To what extent could that lead us to a decision here? 227 00:11:52,800 --> 00:11:55,959 Speaker 7: Yeah, I mean, I think you know, the Court has 228 00:11:56,520 --> 00:12:00,920 Speaker 7: on many occasions pushed back on the most extreame legal 229 00:12:00,960 --> 00:12:04,920 Speaker 7: claims that Donald Trump has made. You know, he has 230 00:12:04,920 --> 00:12:08,680 Speaker 7: often whether it's the election fraud so called election fraud 231 00:12:08,679 --> 00:12:11,360 Speaker 7: claims that he did bring before courts over and over again, 232 00:12:11,400 --> 00:12:15,920 Speaker 7: and he was repeatedly rebuked on those, even by judges 233 00:12:15,960 --> 00:12:18,880 Speaker 7: that he himself appointed. So he's often lost on these 234 00:12:18,960 --> 00:12:20,880 Speaker 7: major legal claims that he's brought before. 235 00:12:20,960 --> 00:12:23,040 Speaker 4: They seem to be questioning that today, though, are you 236 00:12:23,520 --> 00:12:26,079 Speaker 4: Are you sensing that this is a different conversation than 237 00:12:26,800 --> 00:12:28,040 Speaker 4: we predicted or expected. 238 00:12:28,280 --> 00:12:32,480 Speaker 7: I think what they are concerned about is drawing the line. 239 00:12:32,920 --> 00:12:36,800 Speaker 7: I think in some ways the indicted actions here, the 240 00:12:36,840 --> 00:12:41,240 Speaker 7: alleged actions in this particular case, subverting of the will 241 00:12:41,280 --> 00:12:44,680 Speaker 7: of the people, trying to stop the peaceful transfer of power, 242 00:12:44,679 --> 00:12:47,959 Speaker 7: which go to the very heart of American constitutional democracy. 243 00:12:48,240 --> 00:12:50,760 Speaker 7: That seems pretty clear that it's not within you know, 244 00:12:50,800 --> 00:12:52,920 Speaker 7: the president's duty to take care of the laws to 245 00:12:53,040 --> 00:12:56,120 Speaker 7: violate them. But I think they are concerned, as they 246 00:12:56,160 --> 00:12:58,680 Speaker 7: should be the Supreme Court, about what happens in the future. 247 00:12:58,960 --> 00:13:00,320 Speaker 7: So that's what I think a lot of what we 248 00:13:00,360 --> 00:13:01,320 Speaker 7: heard today was about. 249 00:13:01,600 --> 00:13:03,200 Speaker 3: And just we have less than a minute left. But 250 00:13:03,280 --> 00:13:05,400 Speaker 3: to go back to your point about the thinking of 251 00:13:05,440 --> 00:13:08,160 Speaker 3: the founders when they were actually forming our system of 252 00:13:08,160 --> 00:13:11,160 Speaker 3: government and writing the Constitution with the separation of powers 253 00:13:11,200 --> 00:13:14,800 Speaker 3: in three different branches. If you are a strict constitutionalist, 254 00:13:15,480 --> 00:13:18,800 Speaker 3: is there any other way to read the question here 255 00:13:18,960 --> 00:13:21,360 Speaker 3: and to read the document that would suggest that there 256 00:13:21,400 --> 00:13:24,959 Speaker 3: is credibility to Trump's argument If you are a strict constitutional. 257 00:13:24,520 --> 00:13:27,640 Speaker 7: Absolutely not so there's sometimes where history is ambiguous. This 258 00:13:27,760 --> 00:13:30,520 Speaker 7: is not one of those cases. They sold the Constitution 259 00:13:30,679 --> 00:13:34,480 Speaker 7: to the people in part because this president would not 260 00:13:34,520 --> 00:13:37,000 Speaker 7: be a king, and in part because he could be 261 00:13:37,120 --> 00:13:40,000 Speaker 7: potentially criminally liable if he committed crimes, which is a 262 00:13:40,040 --> 00:13:43,559 Speaker 7: major change from the British system. So if you're an originalist, 263 00:13:43,600 --> 00:13:47,040 Speaker 7: if you're a strict constitutionalist, there's really only one outcome here, 264 00:13:47,040 --> 00:13:51,000 Speaker 7: and it's that Trump's really outrageous claim of immunity, unprecedented 265 00:13:51,040 --> 00:13:52,319 Speaker 7: claim is rejected. 266 00:13:52,440 --> 00:13:54,160 Speaker 4: We're really glad you could come talk to us today. 267 00:13:54,160 --> 00:13:55,960 Speaker 4: Thank you for being with us. Hasty day of arguments, 268 00:13:56,000 --> 00:13:59,800 Speaker 4: Elizabeth Widraw. Fascinating conversation, especially to hear this from an 269 00:13:59,800 --> 00:14:03,480 Speaker 4: act Supreme Court litigator. Keep this conversation in mind as 270 00:14:03,520 --> 00:14:06,200 Speaker 4: we wait for a ruling in this case. I'm Joe 271 00:14:06,200 --> 00:14:09,400 Speaker 4: Matthew alongside Kaylee Lines in Washington. Will assemble the panel next. 272 00:14:09,440 --> 00:14:12,120 Speaker 4: The political side of this is ahead only on Bloomberg. 273 00:14:15,240 --> 00:14:18,240 Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. 274 00:14:18,440 --> 00:14:21,600 Speaker 2: Can just live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and 275 00:14:21,760 --> 00:14:24,480 Speaker 2: Enroid Oro with a Bloomberg Business app. You can also 276 00:14:24,520 --> 00:14:28,040 Speaker 2: listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, 277 00:14:28,440 --> 00:14:32,480 Speaker 2: Just say Alexa play, Bloomberg eleven thirty. 278 00:14:33,320 --> 00:14:36,000 Speaker 4: Moving on to our panel here, Kayley, it's not just 279 00:14:36,600 --> 00:14:39,880 Speaker 4: the economic news in the market reaction today. It's a 280 00:14:40,000 --> 00:14:43,640 Speaker 4: very significant set of arguments being heard before with the 281 00:14:43,680 --> 00:14:45,920 Speaker 4: Supreme Court. They've actually wrapped their session for the day, 282 00:14:46,360 --> 00:14:50,600 Speaker 4: the arguments over Donald Trump's claim of presidential immunity. Our 283 00:14:50,640 --> 00:14:54,280 Speaker 4: signature panel is with us now, Rick Davis and Jeanie Shanzano, 284 00:14:54,320 --> 00:15:00,000 Speaker 4: Bloomberg Politics contributors. Having heard some skepticism from Swing Justice 285 00:15:00,200 --> 00:15:06,960 Speaker 4: is when it comes to Jack Smith's arguments against Genie. 286 00:15:06,960 --> 00:15:10,000 Speaker 4: I wonder your thoughts today. This could go a couple 287 00:15:10,080 --> 00:15:12,160 Speaker 4: of different ways. But based on what we heard and 288 00:15:12,200 --> 00:15:15,200 Speaker 4: I realized we're reading Tea Leave's we're trying to understand 289 00:15:15,240 --> 00:15:19,000 Speaker 4: what justices mean with their statements and their questions. This 290 00:15:19,080 --> 00:15:21,320 Speaker 4: day actually went better for Donald Trump than a lot 291 00:15:21,360 --> 00:15:22,720 Speaker 4: of people thought it did, didn't. 292 00:15:22,480 --> 00:15:26,880 Speaker 8: It It really did, you know. And I think back 293 00:15:26,880 --> 00:15:30,120 Speaker 8: to when they granted cert in this case. I think 294 00:15:30,200 --> 00:15:33,680 Speaker 8: that's when I was most surprised, because I thought, for sure, 295 00:15:34,160 --> 00:15:36,560 Speaker 8: this close to an election, they would let the Circuit 296 00:15:36,600 --> 00:15:39,800 Speaker 8: Court's decisions stand. They did not, And so that was 297 00:15:39,880 --> 00:15:42,400 Speaker 8: the biggest surprise. But once they had done that, I 298 00:15:42,400 --> 00:15:45,320 Speaker 8: think the thinking was for most of us that they 299 00:15:45,320 --> 00:15:48,400 Speaker 8: would put this to rest fairly quickly. They didn't do that, 300 00:15:48,840 --> 00:15:51,760 Speaker 8: and now, based on the oral arguments today, it looks 301 00:15:51,840 --> 00:15:54,240 Speaker 8: like they could send it to a lower court. We 302 00:15:54,320 --> 00:15:58,200 Speaker 8: certainly won't get a decision from them, you know, arguably 303 00:15:58,320 --> 00:16:02,040 Speaker 8: until late June, the term ends. And so this is 304 00:16:02,120 --> 00:16:05,760 Speaker 8: a win from Donald Trump just from the calendar perspective, 305 00:16:05,920 --> 00:16:09,360 Speaker 8: because it really won't give enough time to have the 306 00:16:09,440 --> 00:16:13,520 Speaker 8: January sixth trial before the election. And of course, even 307 00:16:13,560 --> 00:16:16,600 Speaker 8: if they have the trial, you are so dangerously close 308 00:16:16,640 --> 00:16:19,760 Speaker 8: to an election that for supporters of Trump and opponents, 309 00:16:20,200 --> 00:16:23,840 Speaker 8: that raises all kinds of questions about the political machinations 310 00:16:23,880 --> 00:16:27,200 Speaker 8: of the court in the electoral context. So I think 311 00:16:27,240 --> 00:16:29,240 Speaker 8: it was a win for him as far as the 312 00:16:29,240 --> 00:16:30,720 Speaker 8: schedule is concerned, at. 313 00:16:30,560 --> 00:16:35,440 Speaker 3: The least, well Rick, as we consider the potential political 314 00:16:35,520 --> 00:16:40,640 Speaker 3: ramifications in terms of the election cycle itself. Obviously, Trump's 315 00:16:40,640 --> 00:16:42,960 Speaker 3: base of supporters, as we know has been proven time 316 00:16:43,000 --> 00:16:45,760 Speaker 3: and again, is not likely to leave his side. Believes 317 00:16:45,800 --> 00:16:48,240 Speaker 3: that he is being targeted by this Justice Department as 318 00:16:48,280 --> 00:16:50,880 Speaker 3: being weaponized against him. This is a witch hunt, while 319 00:16:51,200 --> 00:16:54,320 Speaker 3: as whereas those who are not in Donald Trump's can't 320 00:16:54,560 --> 00:16:57,240 Speaker 3: believe that he's done things wrong, deserves to be prosecuted, 321 00:16:57,240 --> 00:16:59,760 Speaker 3: what have you. There's already two very firm sides here. 322 00:16:59,920 --> 00:17:03,320 Speaker 3: I just wonder the basket of minds were realistically thinking 323 00:17:03,360 --> 00:17:06,720 Speaker 3: about that would care whether or not he goes to trial, 324 00:17:06,760 --> 00:17:09,240 Speaker 3: that care about the outcome, that will change their vote 325 00:17:09,600 --> 00:17:10,240 Speaker 3: because of it. 326 00:17:11,720 --> 00:17:14,480 Speaker 9: Yeah, I think I'd be watching two distinct groups. One, 327 00:17:14,600 --> 00:17:18,440 Speaker 9: we know from our Bloomberg Swing state survey that anywhere, 328 00:17:18,480 --> 00:17:22,840 Speaker 9: depending upon the state, from six to fifteen percent of 329 00:17:23,040 --> 00:17:27,920 Speaker 9: Donald Trump's supporters are willing to not vote for him 330 00:17:28,800 --> 00:17:32,200 Speaker 9: if he is quote convicted of a crime. And that 331 00:17:32,240 --> 00:17:37,080 Speaker 9: goes without saying for now which court case includes. I 332 00:17:37,080 --> 00:17:39,960 Speaker 9: think it's general enough to say if he's convicted of 333 00:17:39,960 --> 00:17:44,280 Speaker 9: a criminal act, he loses support some of it amongst 334 00:17:44,280 --> 00:17:47,320 Speaker 9: that group. Then I would also say, there are the 335 00:17:47,400 --> 00:17:49,760 Speaker 9: undecided voters, and there are plenty of them in some 336 00:17:49,800 --> 00:17:53,120 Speaker 9: of these states, and the main focus of the Trump 337 00:17:53,200 --> 00:17:56,040 Speaker 9: campaign and the Biden campaign has been to how to 338 00:17:56,080 --> 00:17:59,400 Speaker 9: have a conversation with them. And these are primarily suburban 339 00:17:59,440 --> 00:18:03,119 Speaker 9: women vote and they could determine the outcome of the election, 340 00:18:03,480 --> 00:18:07,680 Speaker 9: regardless of a conviction or an acquittal. And this isn't 341 00:18:07,680 --> 00:18:11,040 Speaker 9: the kind of topic you'd want to be having six 342 00:18:11,080 --> 00:18:14,879 Speaker 9: months before a presidential election with a targeted voter like 343 00:18:14,880 --> 00:18:18,720 Speaker 9: a suburban woman. Hey I won today, I've got immunity. 344 00:18:18,840 --> 00:18:21,600 Speaker 9: I can do whatever I want to do. I don't 345 00:18:21,600 --> 00:18:23,919 Speaker 9: think that's going to be any commercials coming out of 346 00:18:24,119 --> 00:18:28,240 Speaker 9: the Trump campaign. So yeah, I think it's a problem. 347 00:18:28,800 --> 00:18:31,480 Speaker 9: I think it delays the conversation that they're trying to have, 348 00:18:31,840 --> 00:18:35,520 Speaker 9: and of course there's these ripple effects. Today, a targeted state, Arizona, 349 00:18:36,040 --> 00:18:42,399 Speaker 9: has announced eighteen defendants are indicted because of election activity, 350 00:18:42,680 --> 00:18:47,200 Speaker 9: including a unindicted co conspirator named Donald Trump, whose name 351 00:18:47,280 --> 00:18:51,240 Speaker 9: will be on the ballot in November. I would say 352 00:18:51,359 --> 00:18:55,120 Speaker 9: I'd rather have a good, clean win in Arizona than 353 00:18:55,160 --> 00:18:57,600 Speaker 9: worrying about what's going to happen in the Supreme Court today. 354 00:18:57,680 --> 00:19:00,000 Speaker 9: Today was a bad day for Donald Trump in Arizona. 355 00:19:01,440 --> 00:19:04,320 Speaker 4: Well, well, this is all super important, Genie, but you 356 00:19:04,359 --> 00:19:07,240 Speaker 4: can see this coming, right, and let's the Supreme Court 357 00:19:07,359 --> 00:19:11,440 Speaker 4: completely rules against Donald Trump. If there's any sunlight here, 358 00:19:12,080 --> 00:19:16,840 Speaker 4: you can write the truth social posts now vindicated. We 359 00:19:17,000 --> 00:19:19,800 Speaker 4: brought our claim to the Supreme Court and showed the 360 00:19:19,840 --> 00:19:24,600 Speaker 4: world that Joe Biden's weaponization of government was illegal. And 361 00:19:24,640 --> 00:19:26,320 Speaker 4: that's going to be the perception, right. 362 00:19:27,800 --> 00:19:29,840 Speaker 8: Yeah, that's going to be what Donald Trump and his 363 00:19:29,880 --> 00:19:33,679 Speaker 8: campaign team say. Quite frankly, what else can they say, 364 00:19:34,560 --> 00:19:37,000 Speaker 8: So that is what they're going to say. I don't 365 00:19:37,000 --> 00:19:39,440 Speaker 8: think we know yet how this plays out. 366 00:19:40,320 --> 00:19:42,160 Speaker 10: I am a polster, but one. 367 00:19:41,960 --> 00:19:45,320 Speaker 8: Thing we know about polling is it's very difficult to 368 00:19:45,440 --> 00:19:51,520 Speaker 8: pull people on future behavior, particularly when they don't have 369 00:19:51,600 --> 00:19:53,280 Speaker 8: a good sense of the scenario. 370 00:19:53,560 --> 00:19:54,520 Speaker 2: So, you know, we. 371 00:19:54,560 --> 00:19:57,000 Speaker 8: Always ask them who they're going to vote for, but 372 00:19:57,280 --> 00:20:01,600 Speaker 8: there who they support. But to ask voters you know, 373 00:20:02,040 --> 00:20:04,960 Speaker 8: what you would do if somebody is acquitted or if 374 00:20:05,040 --> 00:20:08,919 Speaker 8: somebody is found guilty, it's really hard to know, at 375 00:20:09,000 --> 00:20:11,080 Speaker 8: least for me as a polster, if you could trust 376 00:20:11,119 --> 00:20:13,720 Speaker 8: the data coming out of that. So we really are 377 00:20:13,840 --> 00:20:17,000 Speaker 8: truly in uncharted territory in terms of how this all 378 00:20:17,040 --> 00:20:20,560 Speaker 8: plays out. Donald Trump will surely say that this was 379 00:20:20,560 --> 00:20:23,080 Speaker 8: a witch hunt and he was vindicated by the Supreme 380 00:20:23,160 --> 00:20:25,840 Speaker 8: Court if that happens, but I'm not sure how that 381 00:20:26,000 --> 00:20:30,399 Speaker 8: lands with these voters. So we really have to wait 382 00:20:30,480 --> 00:20:32,639 Speaker 8: and see. You know, it's one of the cases in 383 00:20:32,680 --> 00:20:35,879 Speaker 8: which for me as a social scientist, there's not a 384 00:20:35,920 --> 00:20:38,320 Speaker 8: lot of research you can do to get to an answer, 385 00:20:38,359 --> 00:20:40,880 Speaker 8: and we can't look back in history because we've never 386 00:20:40,960 --> 00:20:41,760 Speaker 8: been here before. 387 00:20:43,680 --> 00:20:46,360 Speaker 3: It's a point very well taken, Genie and of course Rick. 388 00:20:46,400 --> 00:20:48,520 Speaker 3: The other side to this is that it's not just 389 00:20:48,520 --> 00:20:50,480 Speaker 3: about what people do with their vote. It's also about 390 00:20:50,480 --> 00:20:53,119 Speaker 3: what people do with their dollar. And to this point, 391 00:20:53,200 --> 00:20:56,160 Speaker 3: Donald Trump has proven an incredible ability to fundraise off 392 00:20:56,200 --> 00:20:59,560 Speaker 3: of these legal challenges, at least since his court trial 393 00:20:59,560 --> 00:21:01,840 Speaker 3: has kicked off in New York State, where he is 394 00:21:01,880 --> 00:21:04,960 Speaker 3: again today. Mind you, he's been able to raise millions 395 00:21:05,000 --> 00:21:07,119 Speaker 3: of dollars. So how should we be thinking about that 396 00:21:07,200 --> 00:21:09,800 Speaker 3: dynamic here? As well? 397 00:21:10,200 --> 00:21:16,120 Speaker 9: Everything is relative, relevant or relative. His first quarter fundraising 398 00:21:16,800 --> 00:21:21,160 Speaker 9: lagged his previous fundraising in twenty twenty three. So sure, 399 00:21:21,200 --> 00:21:23,480 Speaker 9: he is raising money today while he sits in the court, 400 00:21:23,480 --> 00:21:25,800 Speaker 9: but he's not raising as much today as he did 401 00:21:25,800 --> 00:21:29,440 Speaker 9: a year ago. Today if under the same circumstances, and 402 00:21:29,840 --> 00:21:32,560 Speaker 9: he is plowing more and more of that money into 403 00:21:32,640 --> 00:21:36,920 Speaker 9: legal fees, so the net to him keeps getting smaller, 404 00:21:37,040 --> 00:21:41,840 Speaker 9: So smaller overall base, smaller ability to spend. We even 405 00:21:41,880 --> 00:21:45,200 Speaker 9: saw data off of this report that Obama for the 406 00:21:45,240 --> 00:21:50,080 Speaker 9: first time surpassed Trump on small dollar donors. That used 407 00:21:50,119 --> 00:21:53,000 Speaker 9: to be what Donald Trump had is his special sauce. 408 00:21:53,080 --> 00:21:56,320 Speaker 9: He had more small dollard donors than anybody, and those 409 00:21:56,400 --> 00:21:58,760 Speaker 9: people would be with him no matter what thickened thin 410 00:21:59,440 --> 00:22:03,119 Speaker 9: and that money would just roll in. So those times 411 00:22:03,160 --> 00:22:04,000 Speaker 9: may be a change it. 412 00:22:05,720 --> 00:22:06,120 Speaker 5: All right. 413 00:22:06,200 --> 00:22:09,760 Speaker 3: Rick Davis and Jeanie Shanzano are Bloomberg Politics Contributor's point. 414 00:22:09,760 --> 00:22:12,360 Speaker 3: While taken from Rick on Biden pulling in those small 415 00:22:12,560 --> 00:22:15,359 Speaker 3: dollar donations as well. There's so many different facets to 416 00:22:15,359 --> 00:22:17,880 Speaker 3: this conversation, and we're keeping our eye on the court, 417 00:22:17,960 --> 00:22:20,520 Speaker 3: not just here the Supreme Court in Washington, but up 418 00:22:20,560 --> 00:22:21,359 Speaker 3: in New York as well. 419 00:22:21,440 --> 00:22:23,240 Speaker 4: Joe, Yeah, We've got a lot more to follow here 420 00:22:23,320 --> 00:22:25,359 Speaker 4: on Balance of Power. This is Bloomberg. 421 00:22:29,080 --> 00:22:32,600 Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch 422 00:22:32,680 --> 00:22:35,480 Speaker 1: Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Apple car Play 423 00:22:35,520 --> 00:22:37,800 Speaker 1: and then Roud Otto with the Bloomberg Business App. 424 00:22:37,880 --> 00:22:41,040 Speaker 2: Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch 425 00:22:41,119 --> 00:22:45,280 Speaker 2: us live on YouTube as. 426 00:22:45,160 --> 00:22:48,160 Speaker 4: We talk about politics. We've always got our eyes on 427 00:22:48,200 --> 00:22:51,080 Speaker 4: Wall Street for you, and in the case of today, 428 00:22:51,880 --> 00:22:55,040 Speaker 4: a courtroom in New York and the Supreme Court here 429 00:22:55,080 --> 00:22:57,760 Speaker 4: in Washington. This is a heck of a day for 430 00:22:57,840 --> 00:23:00,720 Speaker 4: Donald Trump. I'm not even done there. I haven't mentioned 431 00:23:00,720 --> 00:23:04,040 Speaker 4: Michigan yet. Here like a triple split screen for the 432 00:23:04,080 --> 00:23:08,439 Speaker 4: former president. Arguments are being heard today before the Supreme 433 00:23:08,440 --> 00:23:11,360 Speaker 4: Court on the presidential immunity claim. This is what will 434 00:23:11,400 --> 00:23:15,800 Speaker 4: either prevent or precede Jack Smith's January sixth trial here 435 00:23:15,800 --> 00:23:19,640 Speaker 4: in Washington, even as Donald Trump goes through the criminal 436 00:23:19,640 --> 00:23:22,840 Speaker 4: trial in New York, the hush money trial. And he 437 00:23:23,040 --> 00:23:25,320 Speaker 4: spoke from New York this morning. Remember he's got to 438 00:23:25,320 --> 00:23:27,639 Speaker 4: be in the courthouse for that, so not in Washington today, 439 00:23:27,960 --> 00:23:30,600 Speaker 4: but he spoke in advance of the arguments in the 440 00:23:30,640 --> 00:23:32,359 Speaker 4: Supreme Court. Let's listen to what he said. 441 00:23:32,880 --> 00:23:35,520 Speaker 6: We have a big case today. This judges in allowing 442 00:23:35,600 --> 00:23:37,840 Speaker 6: me to go. We have a big case today in 443 00:23:37,880 --> 00:23:41,320 Speaker 6: the Supreme Court. Or presidential immunity. A president has. 444 00:23:41,240 --> 00:23:42,240 Speaker 7: To have immunity. 445 00:23:42,000 --> 00:23:45,640 Speaker 6: If you don't have immunity, you just have a ceremonial President. 446 00:23:48,160 --> 00:23:50,879 Speaker 4: Donald Trump stopping on his way to the courthouse earlier 447 00:23:50,920 --> 00:23:53,520 Speaker 4: today to talk with workers, a lot of whom were 448 00:23:53,520 --> 00:23:56,879 Speaker 4: wearing red Maga hats, and reporters who were across the 449 00:23:56,880 --> 00:23:59,520 Speaker 4: street making a little moment there on the campaign trail. 450 00:24:00,040 --> 00:24:03,040 Speaker 4: But if you're actually paying attention, you can hear these arguments. 451 00:24:03,080 --> 00:24:04,879 Speaker 4: I realize you don't have cameras in the courtroom, but 452 00:24:04,920 --> 00:24:08,480 Speaker 4: we've been listening to the conversation inside the Supreme Court, 453 00:24:08,480 --> 00:24:10,480 Speaker 4: and we're going to talk in a moment with Robert 454 00:24:10,520 --> 00:24:13,760 Speaker 4: macwerter about this. What I read is a bad sign 455 00:24:14,840 --> 00:24:17,920 Speaker 4: for Jack Smith on the terminal. Our top live coverage 456 00:24:17,920 --> 00:24:20,119 Speaker 4: has been excellent today. If you want to follow the 457 00:24:20,119 --> 00:24:25,120 Speaker 4: bouncing ball. Here in some pretty dense material the Chief Justice, 458 00:24:25,400 --> 00:24:29,760 Speaker 4: Justice Roberts criticizing the DC Court of Appeals today it's 459 00:24:29,840 --> 00:24:33,119 Speaker 4: decision that a president can be prosecuted for his official 460 00:24:33,200 --> 00:24:36,520 Speaker 4: acts quote because the fact of the prosecution means that 461 00:24:36,600 --> 00:24:40,960 Speaker 4: the former president has allegedly acted in defiance unquote. Robert said, 462 00:24:41,040 --> 00:24:45,439 Speaker 4: such a broad statement concerns him as we read the 463 00:24:45,480 --> 00:24:50,000 Speaker 4: tea leaves. It's great to have constitutional law attorney Robert 464 00:24:50,080 --> 00:24:52,600 Speaker 4: McWherter back with us. Robert, thank you for joining. What 465 00:24:52,680 --> 00:24:55,240 Speaker 4: are you gleaning from the arguments today? 466 00:24:56,480 --> 00:24:58,720 Speaker 10: Well, I think you just said it. It's like reading 467 00:24:58,720 --> 00:25:02,520 Speaker 10: tea leaves. Often justices will say stuff in oral arguments 468 00:25:02,800 --> 00:25:05,560 Speaker 10: because they want to hear what the responses are, and 469 00:25:04,840 --> 00:25:10,040 Speaker 10: they're not always signaling where they're going to go. Look, 470 00:25:10,440 --> 00:25:12,760 Speaker 10: just in terms of this case in general, I think 471 00:25:12,800 --> 00:25:16,760 Speaker 10: it's kind of good to keep in mind. In a way, 472 00:25:16,800 --> 00:25:20,720 Speaker 10: Donald Trump is already won. His goal was to delay 473 00:25:21,200 --> 00:25:25,560 Speaker 10: Jack Smith's prosecution, and he effectively did so by getting 474 00:25:25,600 --> 00:25:28,880 Speaker 10: the Supreme Court to even take this case. I think 475 00:25:28,920 --> 00:25:31,960 Speaker 10: most people would say that Trump's legal arguments are rather weak. 476 00:25:32,560 --> 00:25:34,920 Speaker 10: The Court may modify that and give a few things, 477 00:25:34,920 --> 00:25:37,399 Speaker 10: But if you listen to Donald Trump and his claims 478 00:25:37,440 --> 00:25:40,840 Speaker 10: for absolute immunity, what he is literally saying is that 479 00:25:41,000 --> 00:25:43,680 Speaker 10: a president can do anything, so that if Joe Biden 480 00:25:43,840 --> 00:25:46,280 Speaker 10: was to order Seal Team six to kill Donald Trump 481 00:25:46,320 --> 00:25:49,280 Speaker 10: and take him out, Joe Biden could not be prosecuted, 482 00:25:49,280 --> 00:25:52,360 Speaker 10: according to Donald Trump's own arguments. Well, I don't think 483 00:25:52,400 --> 00:25:54,199 Speaker 10: most of us want to live in America where the 484 00:25:54,240 --> 00:25:57,919 Speaker 10: president with that kind of power. And it's kind of 485 00:25:57,920 --> 00:26:00,960 Speaker 10: interesting because on the campaign trail, Donald Trump keeps saying 486 00:26:01,000 --> 00:26:03,480 Speaker 10: Joe Piden needs to be criminally prosecuted for what he's 487 00:26:03,520 --> 00:26:07,080 Speaker 10: doing to me. Now, well that kind of cuts against 488 00:26:07,080 --> 00:26:10,080 Speaker 10: Trump's argument in the Supreme Court, where a president's not 489 00:26:10,119 --> 00:26:14,639 Speaker 10: supposed to be prosecuted for anything. And I just have 490 00:26:14,680 --> 00:26:16,879 Speaker 10: to say just to give a little history here. You know, 491 00:26:17,280 --> 00:26:20,480 Speaker 10: America began, of course with the Declaration of Independence. You know, 492 00:26:20,520 --> 00:26:22,679 Speaker 10: we hold these tchooths to be self evident that all 493 00:26:22,720 --> 00:26:25,320 Speaker 10: men are created equal, everyone's equal before the law. But 494 00:26:25,680 --> 00:26:28,359 Speaker 10: you know, right after that first part of the declaration, 495 00:26:28,440 --> 00:26:33,320 Speaker 10: the preamble, it's an indictment of King George the Third 496 00:26:34,080 --> 00:26:39,720 Speaker 10: for his criminal acts, which basically disqualified him from being 497 00:26:39,760 --> 00:26:41,840 Speaker 10: our sovereign. That's why we went on. Of course. Well, 498 00:26:41,840 --> 00:26:47,120 Speaker 10: one of those indictments is he has incited domestic insurrection 499 00:26:47,400 --> 00:26:50,800 Speaker 10: among us. Well, that was the indictment of King George. 500 00:26:51,320 --> 00:26:54,119 Speaker 10: You know, with that history and the charge of Donald 501 00:26:54,160 --> 00:26:57,600 Speaker 10: Trump for inciting domestic insurrection among us, which is what 502 00:26:57,760 --> 00:27:00,240 Speaker 10: he has already been found to have done with the 503 00:27:00,359 --> 00:27:04,520 Speaker 10: January sixth Commission and others, I would find it shocking 504 00:27:05,119 --> 00:27:08,119 Speaker 10: that a Supreme Court would cut out this broad immunity 505 00:27:08,160 --> 00:27:10,760 Speaker 10: for him, given our history that we didn't want to 506 00:27:10,800 --> 00:27:13,320 Speaker 10: elect King George. We got rid of King George. And 507 00:27:13,320 --> 00:27:14,560 Speaker 10: that's one of the reasons. 508 00:27:14,200 --> 00:27:19,640 Speaker 4: Why really great analysis, Robert. You mentioned the timeline here, 509 00:27:19,640 --> 00:27:21,520 Speaker 4: and I realized it's a win for Donald Trump to 510 00:27:21,560 --> 00:27:24,520 Speaker 4: delay anything at this point with November in mind, but 511 00:27:25,440 --> 00:27:27,560 Speaker 4: it wouldn't be outside of the realm for the Court 512 00:27:27,600 --> 00:27:30,320 Speaker 4: to rule on this by June, and that would leave time, 513 00:27:30,359 --> 00:27:32,359 Speaker 4: presumably for Jack Smith's trial, wouldn't it. 514 00:27:33,400 --> 00:27:35,720 Speaker 10: Well, yes, you know, in the United States versus Nixon, 515 00:27:35,760 --> 00:27:39,280 Speaker 10: they ruled in sixteen days, which, okay, if you wait 516 00:27:39,359 --> 00:27:41,560 Speaker 10: sixteen days for a haircut, that's a heck of a 517 00:27:41,600 --> 00:27:45,160 Speaker 10: long time. But that is blazingly fast to the Supreme Court. 518 00:27:45,600 --> 00:27:48,080 Speaker 10: So just to give some sense of how the Court 519 00:27:48,119 --> 00:27:51,439 Speaker 10: does its work, so if they ruled before June, it 520 00:27:51,480 --> 00:27:54,280 Speaker 10: would be considered blazingly fast. Now I hope the Court 521 00:27:54,359 --> 00:27:57,080 Speaker 10: does and I hope we get some answer to this. 522 00:27:58,200 --> 00:28:02,359 Speaker 10: But you know, again, to go back to history mentioning 523 00:28:02,440 --> 00:28:05,359 Speaker 10: Richard Nixon, I remember he had that interview with David 524 00:28:05,359 --> 00:28:08,200 Speaker 10: Frost where he said, and it was a real gaff 525 00:28:08,200 --> 00:28:09,520 Speaker 10: on his part, but he said, you know, when the 526 00:28:09,520 --> 00:28:14,080 Speaker 10: president does it, that means it's not illegal. Well, everybody 527 00:28:14,600 --> 00:28:19,359 Speaker 10: widely condemned that and legally condemned that, And so I 528 00:28:19,400 --> 00:28:23,360 Speaker 10: don't see how Donald Trump's arguments should get much more 529 00:28:23,400 --> 00:28:27,399 Speaker 10: attention or credits than Richard Nixon's arguments. Did you know 530 00:28:27,480 --> 00:28:30,560 Speaker 10: some forty years ago, fifty years ago, you. 531 00:28:30,600 --> 00:28:33,520 Speaker 4: Know, we live in an idol of Donald Trump's and 532 00:28:33,640 --> 00:28:36,639 Speaker 4: Richard Nixon told Donald Trump reportedly that he wished he 533 00:28:36,680 --> 00:28:41,080 Speaker 4: had fought harder at the time instead of resigning, just 534 00:28:41,160 --> 00:28:45,400 Speaker 4: for the sake of everyone following along on their home games. Here, Robert, 535 00:28:45,440 --> 00:28:48,360 Speaker 4: for our audience to understand, what are the options for 536 00:28:48,440 --> 00:28:50,760 Speaker 4: the court into the include just sending this back to 537 00:28:50,800 --> 00:28:51,560 Speaker 4: the appeals court? 538 00:28:52,720 --> 00:28:55,680 Speaker 10: Oh yes, they could actually keep this thing going for 539 00:28:55,720 --> 00:28:58,800 Speaker 10: a long time. The options is they could sit on 540 00:28:58,840 --> 00:29:01,440 Speaker 10: it for months and months. They could even kick it 541 00:29:01,480 --> 00:29:06,000 Speaker 10: off to the next year. The court can take has 542 00:29:06,000 --> 00:29:08,080 Speaker 10: a lot of power in terms of when this thing 543 00:29:08,240 --> 00:29:11,080 Speaker 10: and everything is on hold until they do so. They 544 00:29:11,080 --> 00:29:14,200 Speaker 10: can move quickly or they can move slowly, and historically speaking, 545 00:29:14,200 --> 00:29:17,080 Speaker 10: they have done both things in different cases. They could 546 00:29:17,120 --> 00:29:19,800 Speaker 10: send it back to the DC Court of Appeals to 547 00:29:19,960 --> 00:29:24,280 Speaker 10: modify their judgment somehow. They could create an entirely new 548 00:29:24,360 --> 00:29:28,080 Speaker 10: test about well, here's when a president might be prosecuted, 549 00:29:28,080 --> 00:29:31,400 Speaker 10: here's when the president might not be It's going to 550 00:29:31,440 --> 00:29:35,680 Speaker 10: be hard. You're going to get I would guess what's 551 00:29:35,720 --> 00:29:38,680 Speaker 10: called a plurality decision. Even if Trump wins, it would 552 00:29:38,680 --> 00:29:43,680 Speaker 10: be what's called a plurality, which means the justices won't 553 00:29:43,680 --> 00:29:47,280 Speaker 10: all agree on the same reasoning about why. And you're 554 00:29:47,280 --> 00:29:50,960 Speaker 10: going to have some very vigorous descents, and frankly, you're 555 00:29:50,960 --> 00:29:54,360 Speaker 10: going to get some interesting alignments. You know, you can 556 00:29:54,400 --> 00:29:57,160 Speaker 10: expect the so called liberal justices will go against this, 557 00:29:57,600 --> 00:29:59,200 Speaker 10: but you might get some of the others that will 558 00:29:59,280 --> 00:30:03,920 Speaker 10: join them for matters of just originalism. Outlining kind of 559 00:30:03,920 --> 00:30:06,520 Speaker 10: following some version of the argument I just gave about 560 00:30:06,520 --> 00:30:07,880 Speaker 10: what America was intended to be. 561 00:30:09,920 --> 00:30:11,600 Speaker 4: I've only got a minute left, Robert, and I don't 562 00:30:11,600 --> 00:30:13,160 Speaker 4: want to have to cut you off here, but you're 563 00:30:13,200 --> 00:30:16,920 Speaker 4: so good at framing the significance of this. Historically, this 564 00:30:17,200 --> 00:30:20,480 Speaker 4: ruling will end up applying to much more than Donald Trump. 565 00:30:20,520 --> 00:30:23,840 Speaker 4: This is going to impact the presidency as we know it, right. 566 00:30:24,600 --> 00:30:28,480 Speaker 10: Yes, And that's really the most frightening thing for me. 567 00:30:29,000 --> 00:30:32,680 Speaker 10: It's not just Donald Trump and his peccadillos. It's what 568 00:30:32,720 --> 00:30:35,200 Speaker 10: it means for us in the future going forward as 569 00:30:35,240 --> 00:30:39,000 Speaker 10: a democracy. And you know, the Constitution actually gives the 570 00:30:39,040 --> 00:30:42,840 Speaker 10: president very few direct powers. Most power president has comes 571 00:30:42,840 --> 00:30:46,959 Speaker 10: from Acts of Congress, and that was by design. We 572 00:30:47,000 --> 00:30:49,440 Speaker 10: wanted to limit that power. We didn't want a king 573 00:30:49,480 --> 00:30:53,680 Speaker 10: of the United States, and George Washington set that president 574 00:30:54,240 --> 00:30:56,880 Speaker 10: and that's something we need to keep in mind the 575 00:30:56,880 --> 00:30:58,120 Speaker 10: implications for the future. 576 00:30:58,400 --> 00:31:01,120 Speaker 4: Love talking with Robert mcwhorth. We learn a lot, as 577 00:31:01,200 --> 00:31:04,440 Speaker 4: always with your expertise, Robert, thanks for being with us 578 00:31:04,480 --> 00:31:11,160 Speaker 4: criminal and constitutional law attorney. Thanks for listening to the 579 00:31:11,200 --> 00:31:14,560 Speaker 4: Balance of Power podcast. Make sure to subscribe if you 580 00:31:14,600 --> 00:31:18,040 Speaker 4: haven't already, at Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts, 581 00:31:18,480 --> 00:31:20,959 Speaker 4: and you can find us live every weekday from Washington, 582 00:31:21,040 --> 00:31:24,120 Speaker 4: DC at noontime Eastern at Bloomberg dot com.