1 00:00:02,759 --> 00:00:07,000 Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Grossel from Bloomberg Radio. 2 00:00:09,039 --> 00:00:14,600 Speaker 2: So this is January sixth. These are the hostages, approximately 3 00:00:14,640 --> 00:00:18,640 Speaker 2: fifteen hundred for a pardon full partner. 4 00:00:19,680 --> 00:00:24,160 Speaker 1: Just hours after his inauguration, President Donald Trump signed an 5 00:00:24,280 --> 00:00:29,880 Speaker 1: order pardoning about fifteen hundred convicted January sixth rioters with 6 00:00:30,080 --> 00:00:35,080 Speaker 1: six commutations for the people who assaulted law enforcement officers 7 00:00:35,120 --> 00:00:35,520 Speaker 1: that day. 8 00:00:36,120 --> 00:00:37,760 Speaker 2: Well, I will say this, They've been in jail for 9 00:00:37,840 --> 00:00:41,640 Speaker 2: a long time already. I see murderers in this country 10 00:00:41,720 --> 00:00:44,599 Speaker 2: get two years, one year, and maybe no time, So 11 00:00:44,640 --> 00:00:45,760 Speaker 2: they've already been in jail for. 12 00:00:45,760 --> 00:00:46,400 Speaker 1: A long time. 13 00:00:46,680 --> 00:00:47,360 Speaker 2: These people have. 14 00:00:47,320 --> 00:00:51,559 Speaker 1: Been destroyed, and the clemen ce spree has not slowed 15 00:00:51,640 --> 00:00:55,600 Speaker 1: since then. Trump has liberally used the pardon power to 16 00:00:55,680 --> 00:01:00,720 Speaker 1: wipe out convictions and end prison sentences, granting clemency to 17 00:01:00,800 --> 00:01:05,520 Speaker 1: almost seventeen hundred people in the past eighteen months. That 18 00:01:05,760 --> 00:01:11,280 Speaker 1: far outpaces his predecessors, and the grants often benefit allies, 19 00:01:11,440 --> 00:01:16,080 Speaker 1: donors and loyalists, such as Republican politicians and white collared 20 00:01:16,080 --> 00:01:22,600 Speaker 1: defendants with impressive campaign donation records, people serving harsh sentences 21 00:01:22,600 --> 00:01:26,360 Speaker 1: for drug crimes, one time sports stars, and the former 22 00:01:26,440 --> 00:01:31,800 Speaker 1: president of Honduras also have been granted relief, and showcasing 23 00:01:31,880 --> 00:01:36,160 Speaker 1: Trump's willingness to blow past the boundaries of executive authority 24 00:01:36,160 --> 00:01:40,200 Speaker 1: in his second term without regard for legal norms, He's 25 00:01:40,280 --> 00:01:45,119 Speaker 1: become the first modern US president to issue pardons for companies, 26 00:01:45,480 --> 00:01:49,559 Speaker 1: from a Middle American auto supplier to a crypto platform 27 00:01:49,680 --> 00:01:53,640 Speaker 1: and a media startup. It's a step that presidents before 28 00:01:53,720 --> 00:01:57,680 Speaker 1: him have considered but never dared to take, a step 29 00:01:57,760 --> 00:02:02,480 Speaker 1: that's wiped out almost two hundred million dollars in financial penalties, 30 00:02:03,000 --> 00:02:06,880 Speaker 1: some of which were destined for victims of wrongdoing. Joining 31 00:02:06,880 --> 00:02:10,720 Speaker 1: me is Bloomberg Legal reporter Eva Benny Morrison, who's written 32 00:02:10,720 --> 00:02:14,880 Speaker 1: about Trump's pardons of companies. If us start by telling 33 00:02:14,960 --> 00:02:20,240 Speaker 1: us about Ryan Lalone, one of six people Trump said 34 00:02:20,720 --> 00:02:25,880 Speaker 1: had been persecuted by the Biden administration for fixing their car. 35 00:02:26,840 --> 00:02:29,840 Speaker 3: Yes, that's one way to put it. Ryan the Loone 36 00:02:30,160 --> 00:02:36,480 Speaker 3: is a autoparts dealer from Michigan, and he was charged 37 00:02:37,120 --> 00:02:41,280 Speaker 3: a few years ago with tampering with emissions controls devices 38 00:02:41,320 --> 00:02:45,200 Speaker 3: on vehicles. So these controls you need to have them 39 00:02:45,320 --> 00:02:49,919 Speaker 3: on trucks, especially ambulanced vehicles, school buses, and it's meant 40 00:02:49,960 --> 00:02:54,160 Speaker 3: to control the amount of emissions that go out of 41 00:02:54,160 --> 00:02:57,040 Speaker 3: the vehicle and into the air. People in the trucking 42 00:02:57,040 --> 00:03:01,399 Speaker 3: industry say that they are really come and they break 43 00:03:01,440 --> 00:03:03,440 Speaker 3: down a lot and it leads to them having to 44 00:03:03,480 --> 00:03:07,600 Speaker 3: carry out costly repairs. Of course, environmental advocates don't see 45 00:03:07,600 --> 00:03:09,359 Speaker 3: it that way, and they say, you know, when you 46 00:03:09,400 --> 00:03:12,320 Speaker 3: don't have these it leads to greater agg polution. So Ryan, 47 00:03:12,480 --> 00:03:16,000 Speaker 3: along with many other mechanics around the country, had helped 48 00:03:16,040 --> 00:03:19,760 Speaker 3: a number of heavy vehicle owners Tampa with these controls, 49 00:03:19,840 --> 00:03:23,280 Speaker 3: essentially so turning them off in a certain way. And 50 00:03:23,880 --> 00:03:27,079 Speaker 3: he was charged over this behavior a few years ago. 51 00:03:27,480 --> 00:03:31,120 Speaker 3: His business, his company, Diesel Freak, was also charged and 52 00:03:31,280 --> 00:03:34,440 Speaker 3: together they were facing a fine of about seven hundred 53 00:03:34,440 --> 00:03:35,960 Speaker 3: and fifty thousand dollars. 54 00:03:36,000 --> 00:03:37,840 Speaker 1: Been why did Trump pidon him? 55 00:03:38,440 --> 00:03:40,880 Speaker 3: So Ryan didn't do any jail time. He was sentenced 56 00:03:40,880 --> 00:03:46,200 Speaker 3: to probation and he pleaded guilty, but he always maintained 57 00:03:46,200 --> 00:03:49,000 Speaker 3: that he didn't do anything wrong. And then at the 58 00:03:49,120 --> 00:03:54,080 Speaker 3: end of last year he heard about President Donald Trump 59 00:03:54,160 --> 00:03:58,160 Speaker 3: pardoning a fellow Diedel mechanic in Wyoming. This mechanic his 60 00:03:58,320 --> 00:04:02,640 Speaker 3: namehbers Tory Lake, and like Ryan, he had a company 61 00:04:02,800 --> 00:04:07,040 Speaker 3: that worked on diesel engines, and he was also charged 62 00:04:07,280 --> 00:04:10,920 Speaker 3: for carrying out similar behavior and Trump pardoned him, and 63 00:04:11,040 --> 00:04:13,680 Speaker 3: Ryan thought, wow, you know, I might have a chance 64 00:04:13,720 --> 00:04:17,080 Speaker 3: here as well. So Ryan got in contact with Troy. 65 00:04:17,160 --> 00:04:19,680 Speaker 3: He actually went to his pardon party in Wyoming over 66 00:04:19,680 --> 00:04:22,159 Speaker 3: the winter and ended up teaming up with the same 67 00:04:22,279 --> 00:04:27,080 Speaker 3: lawyer and lobbyist who helped push for Troy's clemency. And 68 00:04:27,120 --> 00:04:31,120 Speaker 3: then a day before July four this year, Ryan, along 69 00:04:31,160 --> 00:04:35,920 Speaker 3: with five other individuals who were charged with similar conduct 70 00:04:36,160 --> 00:04:37,200 Speaker 3: or received pardons. 71 00:04:37,560 --> 00:04:43,560 Speaker 1: So Trump is the first president to issue pardons for companies. 72 00:04:43,680 --> 00:04:47,159 Speaker 3: That's right. What's particularly unusual about the most recent state 73 00:04:47,200 --> 00:04:51,599 Speaker 3: of pardons is it included pardons for companies. Each of 74 00:04:51,680 --> 00:04:57,120 Speaker 3: these mechanics or AutoPASS suppliers, their companies were prosecuted as 75 00:04:57,120 --> 00:05:00,599 Speaker 3: well for this conduct. And Trump signed a bunch of 76 00:05:00,600 --> 00:05:05,680 Speaker 3: these clemency grants which white claim the convictions against the companies, 77 00:05:05,680 --> 00:05:09,919 Speaker 3: any individuals, and any outstanding financial penalties for the companies. 78 00:05:10,320 --> 00:05:13,599 Speaker 3: And this is the first time a president, certainly in 79 00:05:13,680 --> 00:05:18,000 Speaker 3: modern times, has used the clemency authority in that way. 80 00:05:19,120 --> 00:05:23,760 Speaker 1: Is it legal? Because former President Jimmy Carter considered it 81 00:05:24,480 --> 00:05:29,440 Speaker 1: before deciding against pardoning a business that had conspired with 82 00:05:29,560 --> 00:05:33,599 Speaker 1: the mob to buy a Las Vegas casino because there 83 00:05:33,640 --> 00:05:38,080 Speaker 1: was a disagreement within his administration about whether the constitution 84 00:05:38,240 --> 00:05:38,840 Speaker 1: allowed it. 85 00:05:39,800 --> 00:05:43,119 Speaker 3: Yeah, it is legal, and the White House and told 86 00:05:43,200 --> 00:05:45,799 Speaker 3: us as part of this reporting that there is nothing 87 00:05:46,000 --> 00:05:50,599 Speaker 3: in the Constitution that says pardons can only be for people. 88 00:05:51,000 --> 00:05:53,839 Speaker 3: But I think you know, in the past presidents have 89 00:05:54,000 --> 00:05:57,680 Speaker 3: seed away from it because it's not good from an 90 00:05:57,680 --> 00:06:01,719 Speaker 3: optics perspective. I've spoken to a number of academics who've 91 00:06:01,760 --> 00:06:04,800 Speaker 3: delved into this issue, and one in particular said, there 92 00:06:04,880 --> 00:06:07,760 Speaker 3: is no way our past president would have touched this 93 00:06:07,880 --> 00:06:11,320 Speaker 3: with the barge poll. It's one thing to pardon someone 94 00:06:11,400 --> 00:06:16,280 Speaker 3: who you believe is innocent or has rehabilitated or is remorseful, 95 00:06:16,440 --> 00:06:20,279 Speaker 3: but it's another thing entirely to get rid of criminal 96 00:06:20,320 --> 00:06:24,479 Speaker 3: liability of major financial crime. So yes, other presidents in 97 00:06:24,520 --> 00:06:27,200 Speaker 3: modern times had boy with the idea, but no one's 98 00:06:27,240 --> 00:06:28,000 Speaker 3: actually done it. 99 00:06:28,520 --> 00:06:31,520 Speaker 1: So their precedent is Charles the Second of England. 100 00:06:32,040 --> 00:06:35,800 Speaker 3: Yes. One of the interesting parts of this reporting process 101 00:06:36,160 --> 00:06:40,280 Speaker 3: was looking at how this debate even started in the 102 00:06:40,320 --> 00:06:43,440 Speaker 3: White House after Trump came to power in early twenty 103 00:06:43,480 --> 00:06:46,720 Speaker 3: twenty five and we've heard that the parent company of 104 00:06:46,760 --> 00:06:50,840 Speaker 3: crypto platform BITMS was discreetly angling for a pardon from 105 00:06:51,080 --> 00:06:54,400 Speaker 3: President Trump at the time, not only for the individuals 106 00:06:54,440 --> 00:06:56,960 Speaker 3: who worked there, but for the company itself, which was 107 00:06:57,000 --> 00:06:59,960 Speaker 3: facing one hundred million dollar fine. And as they were 108 00:07:00,279 --> 00:07:04,200 Speaker 3: lobbying the administration, advisors at the White House started asking 109 00:07:04,240 --> 00:07:07,240 Speaker 3: the question, you know, can we even pardon a company? 110 00:07:07,560 --> 00:07:12,240 Speaker 3: And some advisors they were told saw precedent in King 111 00:07:12,680 --> 00:07:17,280 Speaker 3: Charles the Second of England pardoning a corporation some three 112 00:07:17,360 --> 00:07:21,360 Speaker 3: hundred years ago, and that was included in some of 113 00:07:21,360 --> 00:07:25,560 Speaker 3: the discussion and consideration that went into eventually pardoning the 114 00:07:25,600 --> 00:07:26,920 Speaker 3: parent company of bit bex. 115 00:07:28,120 --> 00:07:32,640 Speaker 1: When Trump brags about these acts of clemency, he doesn't 116 00:07:32,680 --> 00:07:37,040 Speaker 1: mention that they've wiped out almost two hundred million dollars 117 00:07:37,080 --> 00:07:40,960 Speaker 1: in financial penalties which could be going to victims. 118 00:07:41,480 --> 00:07:46,280 Speaker 3: Yes, and that's a mix of restitution, forfeiture financial penalties, 119 00:07:46,840 --> 00:07:50,240 Speaker 3: much of which would have been available through different avenues 120 00:07:50,360 --> 00:07:54,400 Speaker 3: to victims of crime, particularly the restitution and the forfeiture. 121 00:07:54,720 --> 00:08:00,320 Speaker 3: And something that's particularly unique about Trump's commutations is that 122 00:08:00,400 --> 00:08:05,200 Speaker 3: they have also wiped out outstanding financial penalties. So we 123 00:08:05,280 --> 00:08:08,920 Speaker 3: saw that in the case involving media startup Ousie Media. 124 00:08:09,360 --> 00:08:12,640 Speaker 3: That company and its founder, Carlos Watson were on the 125 00:08:12,680 --> 00:08:16,280 Speaker 3: hook for about ninety six million dollars in financial penalties, 126 00:08:16,480 --> 00:08:20,320 Speaker 3: and Trump commuted the sentence of both Watson and the 127 00:08:20,360 --> 00:08:23,680 Speaker 3: company and included in that language of that communication was 128 00:08:23,720 --> 00:08:28,000 Speaker 3: that this applies to any outstanding penalties. And we just 129 00:08:28,080 --> 00:08:30,520 Speaker 3: haven't seen that under previous presidencies. 130 00:08:31,080 --> 00:08:34,840 Speaker 1: Carlos Watson really worked this to get this before Trump. 131 00:08:35,280 --> 00:08:38,520 Speaker 3: Yes, Watson was really working the phones in the lead 132 00:08:38,640 --> 00:08:41,040 Speaker 3: up to the date that he was meant to begin 133 00:08:41,160 --> 00:08:43,800 Speaker 3: his ten year prison sentence, and he was reaching out 134 00:08:43,840 --> 00:08:47,280 Speaker 3: to anyone and everyone that he thought could help push 135 00:08:47,320 --> 00:08:50,880 Speaker 3: his case for clemency. And based on our reporting, we 136 00:08:51,000 --> 00:08:53,240 Speaker 3: know that he thought it was possible that he could 137 00:08:53,240 --> 00:08:56,000 Speaker 3: get a pardon for Ossie Media and not just himself. 138 00:08:56,320 --> 00:08:59,000 Speaker 3: And in these conversations where he's talking to people to 139 00:08:59,040 --> 00:09:01,199 Speaker 3: try and get them on board with his clemency push, 140 00:09:01,520 --> 00:09:04,599 Speaker 3: again and again he's reiterating Ossie and me, Ossie and me, 141 00:09:05,040 --> 00:09:08,520 Speaker 3: the clemency needs to be for both himself and the company. Also, 142 00:09:08,559 --> 00:09:13,439 Speaker 3: in his arguments to the administration about why he deserved clemency, 143 00:09:13,960 --> 00:09:18,520 Speaker 3: he framed the prosecution of his company as just an 144 00:09:18,559 --> 00:09:22,200 Speaker 3: extra pushed by the Justice Department to crush everything that 145 00:09:22,240 --> 00:09:26,400 Speaker 3: he believed in. Those arguments obviously resonated with the White House, 146 00:09:26,600 --> 00:09:31,240 Speaker 3: and President Trump issued a commutation for Watson and Ossie 147 00:09:31,280 --> 00:09:34,160 Speaker 3: Media on the morning he was due to report to prison. 148 00:09:34,720 --> 00:09:38,559 Speaker 1: Are the clemency applicants going through the normal process through 149 00:09:38,600 --> 00:09:43,360 Speaker 1: the Justice Department's Office of the Pardon Attorney or are 150 00:09:43,360 --> 00:09:46,439 Speaker 1: they going around the office and straight to the White House. 151 00:09:47,480 --> 00:09:51,120 Speaker 3: These company pardons in particular, it's been a bit of 152 00:09:51,160 --> 00:09:55,880 Speaker 3: a mix. We can tell from the Partner Attorney Office 153 00:09:55,920 --> 00:10:00,319 Speaker 3: website that Bitmes, for example, didn't apply through the formal 154 00:10:00,400 --> 00:10:04,640 Speaker 3: channels for a pardon, But the nine Diesel mechanics who 155 00:10:04,720 --> 00:10:07,720 Speaker 3: received pardons, their name pops up in the database, and 156 00:10:07,760 --> 00:10:10,760 Speaker 3: that shows us that they at least went through one 157 00:10:10,840 --> 00:10:14,080 Speaker 3: of the traditional channels in applying for a pardon, which 158 00:10:14,160 --> 00:10:17,280 Speaker 3: is coming out with that application and filing a bunch 159 00:10:17,320 --> 00:10:21,200 Speaker 3: of supporting material to the DOJ. So it's definitely been 160 00:10:21,200 --> 00:10:22,880 Speaker 3: a bit of a mix, which is a pattern that 161 00:10:22,880 --> 00:10:25,520 Speaker 3: we've also seen with a number of these high profile 162 00:10:25,640 --> 00:10:26,920 Speaker 3: individual clemencies. 163 00:10:27,240 --> 00:10:32,120 Speaker 1: I mean, there are lawyers that are connected that specifically 164 00:10:32,400 --> 00:10:35,079 Speaker 1: put these through or try to put these through. 165 00:10:35,640 --> 00:10:39,880 Speaker 3: Absolutely. One unique thing we've seen pop up during this 166 00:10:40,600 --> 00:10:45,000 Speaker 3: Trump administration is this industry of lawyers and lobbyists and 167 00:10:45,040 --> 00:10:50,760 Speaker 3: consultants and fixers who hold themselves out as having connections 168 00:10:50,800 --> 00:10:53,360 Speaker 3: and access to people that matter in the White House, 169 00:10:53,800 --> 00:10:57,640 Speaker 3: and they're marketing those connections to onboard clients who want 170 00:10:57,679 --> 00:11:00,560 Speaker 3: them and see saying I can get your case in 171 00:11:00,600 --> 00:11:02,840 Speaker 3: front of the decision makers, in front of the people 172 00:11:03,080 --> 00:11:08,040 Speaker 3: that matter. But that representation is coming with extraordinary fees. 173 00:11:08,160 --> 00:11:11,480 Speaker 3: You know, we've heard stories of some lawyers charging at 174 00:11:11,520 --> 00:11:14,240 Speaker 3: a base level a million dollars, and there are plenty 175 00:11:14,280 --> 00:11:17,240 Speaker 3: of rumors about the fees being much higher than that. 176 00:11:17,559 --> 00:11:20,880 Speaker 1: So explain the difference between clemency and a pardon. 177 00:11:21,480 --> 00:11:26,880 Speaker 3: Clemency is the overarching authority that the president has a 178 00:11:27,000 --> 00:11:32,719 Speaker 3: stimulated in Article two of the Constitution to forgive penalties 179 00:11:34,000 --> 00:11:38,120 Speaker 3: imposed on individuals, and in this administration they believe that 180 00:11:38,280 --> 00:11:43,080 Speaker 3: can also apply it to companies. A pardon wipes clean 181 00:11:43,400 --> 00:11:48,320 Speaker 3: the conviction and any penalty associated with that, whether it 182 00:11:48,360 --> 00:11:52,920 Speaker 3: be a prison sentence or financial penalties, whereas a commutation 183 00:11:53,960 --> 00:11:57,400 Speaker 3: will cut a prison sentence short. So often we'll see 184 00:11:57,600 --> 00:12:00,840 Speaker 3: people who are in the middle of a lengthy prison 185 00:12:00,920 --> 00:12:05,400 Speaker 3: sentence will obtain a commutation and they'll be released from 186 00:12:05,400 --> 00:12:09,320 Speaker 3: prison ten years into their thirty year prison sentence day. 187 00:12:09,800 --> 00:12:13,400 Speaker 1: And where does Trump stand compared to his predecessors as 188 00:12:13,480 --> 00:12:15,960 Speaker 1: far as these grants of clemency. 189 00:12:15,840 --> 00:12:18,880 Speaker 3: Well, we had a close look at how many clemency 190 00:12:18,880 --> 00:12:22,440 Speaker 3: grants Trump has issued in those eighteen months, and he 191 00:12:22,720 --> 00:12:27,440 Speaker 3: far outstrips any president during that same period. If we 192 00:12:27,520 --> 00:12:33,840 Speaker 3: look back at the Biden administration, President Biden issued four 193 00:12:33,920 --> 00:12:37,720 Speaker 3: thousand on clemency grants by the end of his term, 194 00:12:37,800 --> 00:12:42,120 Speaker 3: and that was certainly a record. But no president has 195 00:12:42,480 --> 00:12:46,320 Speaker 3: issued as many grants as Trump has in the first 196 00:12:46,480 --> 00:12:48,079 Speaker 3: eighteen months of their term. 197 00:12:48,320 --> 00:12:51,640 Speaker 1: And have a lot of them been I mean politically charged. 198 00:12:52,320 --> 00:12:55,320 Speaker 3: Trump certainly set the pace on the first day of 199 00:12:55,440 --> 00:12:59,840 Speaker 3: his term when he issued mass pardons to people charged 200 00:13:00,040 --> 00:13:03,800 Speaker 3: connection with the January sixth riots on Capitol Hill, So 201 00:13:03,840 --> 00:13:07,520 Speaker 3: that takes up the bulk of his climency grants. But 202 00:13:07,600 --> 00:13:11,320 Speaker 3: aside from that, we have seen him issue pardons and 203 00:13:11,360 --> 00:13:16,760 Speaker 3: commutations to a number of wealthy, well connected, well resourced 204 00:13:17,320 --> 00:13:22,000 Speaker 3: defendants for white collar crimes and also supporters of his 205 00:13:23,000 --> 00:13:27,160 Speaker 3: political allies of his and Trevor Milton, for example, donated 206 00:13:27,160 --> 00:13:30,120 Speaker 3: millions of dollars to his political action committees. 207 00:13:31,000 --> 00:13:34,280 Speaker 1: And it seems like the July fourth pardoning of the 208 00:13:34,320 --> 00:13:38,360 Speaker 1: six people who were convicted of violating the Clean Air 209 00:13:38,440 --> 00:13:42,240 Speaker 1: Act might have been connected to Trump's roll back of 210 00:13:42,480 --> 00:13:47,000 Speaker 1: Biden's environmental legacy. Did they go through the system? 211 00:13:47,160 --> 00:13:50,360 Speaker 3: It looks like they all went through the proper process. 212 00:13:51,000 --> 00:13:54,600 Speaker 3: They filed applications to the Partner Jorney's office. Some of 213 00:13:54,600 --> 00:13:57,520 Speaker 3: them had their home state senators in their corner also 214 00:13:57,559 --> 00:14:01,319 Speaker 3: lobbying for them as well, and had their own lobbyists. 215 00:14:01,320 --> 00:14:06,000 Speaker 3: But it also kind of ties in with these administrations 216 00:14:06,480 --> 00:14:11,160 Speaker 3: rolling back of certain environmental policies and rules and regulations 217 00:14:11,200 --> 00:14:15,520 Speaker 3: around admissions, so it fits in with their broader political agenda. 218 00:14:15,640 --> 00:14:20,160 Speaker 1: And also fits in with Trump's connection to crypto. So 219 00:14:20,200 --> 00:14:22,440 Speaker 1: tell us about the first company pardon. 220 00:14:22,960 --> 00:14:26,720 Speaker 3: The first company parton that Trump issued in early twenty 221 00:14:26,760 --> 00:14:30,560 Speaker 3: twenty five was to HDR Global Trading, which is the 222 00:14:30,600 --> 00:14:36,720 Speaker 3: parent company of crypto platform Bitmex and bitmes was in 223 00:14:36,800 --> 00:14:42,080 Speaker 3: strife for violating anti money laundering laws and the company 224 00:14:42,160 --> 00:14:46,000 Speaker 3: was facing a one hundred million dollar five Bitmex is 225 00:14:46,000 --> 00:14:49,720 Speaker 3: an interesting one because one of its co founders was 226 00:14:50,640 --> 00:14:56,520 Speaker 3: embracing Trump's softening stance around crypto. The platform was a 227 00:14:56,760 --> 00:15:01,120 Speaker 3: early launcher of a derivative swap associated with the Trump 228 00:15:01,200 --> 00:15:04,960 Speaker 3: Mean Coin. The Trump Mean coin has ended up earning 229 00:15:05,080 --> 00:15:07,800 Speaker 3: the president millions of dollars, as we've seen in some 230 00:15:07,880 --> 00:15:11,360 Speaker 3: recent reporting, and the co founder, Arthur Hayes, wrote a 231 00:15:12,320 --> 00:15:14,800 Speaker 3: essay that was quite widely read by those in the 232 00:15:14,800 --> 00:15:19,760 Speaker 3: industry calling Trump's embrace of mean coins, framing it as 233 00:15:19,760 --> 00:15:24,400 Speaker 3: a move towards political accountability. And he'd also in early 234 00:15:24,440 --> 00:15:26,920 Speaker 3: twenty twenty five he'd been spotted at Mara a Lago 235 00:15:27,240 --> 00:15:29,880 Speaker 3: at an event there talking about the need for crypto 236 00:15:29,960 --> 00:15:34,320 Speaker 3: deregulation and crypto the crypto industry is something that certainly 237 00:15:34,560 --> 00:15:38,120 Speaker 3: President Trump has leaned into pretty strongly in this administration. 238 00:15:38,640 --> 00:15:41,560 Speaker 1: It's a great story with a lot of research. Thanks 239 00:15:41,560 --> 00:15:44,520 Speaker 1: so much for sharing it with us. EVA. That's Bloomberg 240 00:15:44,600 --> 00:15:46,720 Speaker 1: Legal reporter Ava Benny Morrison. 241 00:15:47,360 --> 00:15:52,440 Speaker 4: Federal prosecutors went to a grand jury to seek criminal 242 00:15:52,600 --> 00:15:58,160 Speaker 4: charges against members of the United States Senate for something 243 00:15:58,840 --> 00:16:05,040 Speaker 4: we said. They tried to have us charged and thrown 244 00:16:05,160 --> 00:16:11,000 Speaker 4: into jail because we said something that they didn't like, 245 00:16:13,080 --> 00:16:17,200 Speaker 4: because we repeated what the law actually is. 246 00:16:18,360 --> 00:16:22,560 Speaker 1: Four months ago, Democratic Senator Mark Kelly spoke about the 247 00:16:22,760 --> 00:16:27,760 Speaker 1: effort by DCUs Attorney Janine Piro to get an indictment 248 00:16:27,800 --> 00:16:31,920 Speaker 1: against six members of Congress who made a video encouraging 249 00:16:32,080 --> 00:16:37,080 Speaker 1: US troops to disobey illegal orders, but a grand jury 250 00:16:37,120 --> 00:16:38,920 Speaker 1: refused to indict them. 251 00:16:39,360 --> 00:16:43,680 Speaker 4: We know the law and the Constitution is on our side. 252 00:16:43,880 --> 00:16:48,200 Speaker 4: We saw that yesterday when US citizens the members of 253 00:16:48,200 --> 00:16:52,080 Speaker 4: a grand jury, they took a stand and said no. 254 00:16:52,600 --> 00:16:57,000 Speaker 1: A grand jury refusing to indict was once an unusual occurrence, 255 00:16:57,560 --> 00:17:03,080 Speaker 1: no longer. It's happened in several high profile cases. For example, 256 00:17:03,280 --> 00:17:07,120 Speaker 1: Virginia grand jurors twice refused to indict, New York Attorney 257 00:17:07,240 --> 00:17:12,320 Speaker 1: General Letitia James and federal grand jurors in Chicago rejected 258 00:17:12,400 --> 00:17:16,320 Speaker 1: indictments against at least three people last year, all of 259 00:17:16,359 --> 00:17:20,439 Speaker 1: whom were accused of assaulting federal agents during the anti 260 00:17:20,480 --> 00:17:26,760 Speaker 1: immigration crackdown. And now a quiet institutional shift, as judges 261 00:17:26,800 --> 00:17:31,359 Speaker 1: are expressing doubts that prosecutors are bringing cases based on 262 00:17:31,480 --> 00:17:35,800 Speaker 1: the strength of the evidence. District courts in Chicago, d C. 263 00:17:35,960 --> 00:17:40,080 Speaker 1: And Boston are now moving to document the refusal of 264 00:17:40,160 --> 00:17:44,320 Speaker 1: grand juries to indict My guest is former federal prosecutor. 265 00:17:44,400 --> 00:17:48,679 Speaker 1: Sharon Filey, a professor at the University of Chicago Law School, 266 00:17:48,880 --> 00:17:55,680 Speaker 1: explain why judges in some jurisdictions are concerned about what's 267 00:17:55,720 --> 00:18:00,000 Speaker 1: happening in federal grand jury proceedings. 268 00:18:00,000 --> 00:18:02,800 Speaker 5: But the grand jury is a really important check on 269 00:18:02,960 --> 00:18:07,760 Speaker 5: the prosecutorial process. It's actually grounded in the United States 270 00:18:07,800 --> 00:18:11,480 Speaker 5: Constitution that when you're charged with the serious crime, that 271 00:18:11,560 --> 00:18:13,960 Speaker 5: you should be charged by way of an indictment that's 272 00:18:14,000 --> 00:18:16,640 Speaker 5: brought by the grand jury. The purpose of the grand 273 00:18:16,720 --> 00:18:20,280 Speaker 5: jury is to have an independent group of citizens who 274 00:18:20,520 --> 00:18:23,200 Speaker 5: look at the evidence of the case and decide if 275 00:18:23,200 --> 00:18:27,200 Speaker 5: there's sufficient evidence to believe that there's probable cause that 276 00:18:27,440 --> 00:18:30,040 Speaker 5: a crime was committed and the person that's being charged 277 00:18:30,119 --> 00:18:32,639 Speaker 5: committed the crime. And the reason why we want to 278 00:18:32,720 --> 00:18:35,919 Speaker 5: have that independent check is because being charged with a 279 00:18:35,920 --> 00:18:38,600 Speaker 5: crime is really serious. It has a lot of impact 280 00:18:38,680 --> 00:18:43,399 Speaker 5: on people's lives. It can cause public reputational harm, it 281 00:18:43,440 --> 00:18:46,919 Speaker 5: can cause someone to lose their liberty if they're held 282 00:18:47,320 --> 00:18:49,960 Speaker 5: in detention pending the trial. They could be held and 283 00:18:49,960 --> 00:18:52,880 Speaker 5: then lose their family, lose their job, lose their home. 284 00:18:53,160 --> 00:18:56,199 Speaker 5: So there's a lot of consequences for just being charged 285 00:18:56,240 --> 00:18:58,439 Speaker 5: with the crime, not even being convicted of a crime. 286 00:18:58,600 --> 00:19:00,399 Speaker 5: So when the government is going to take take that 287 00:19:00,600 --> 00:19:04,000 Speaker 5: really important step, we do want this independent check, and 288 00:19:04,040 --> 00:19:06,639 Speaker 5: that's the purpose of a grand jury. So when we 289 00:19:06,720 --> 00:19:10,919 Speaker 5: have concerned that the government's conduct in front of a 290 00:19:10,920 --> 00:19:13,800 Speaker 5: grand jury is not what it's supposed to be, and 291 00:19:13,880 --> 00:19:17,720 Speaker 5: that can be really concerning because it undermines that constitutional 292 00:19:17,800 --> 00:19:23,200 Speaker 5: right to have this protection that the grand jury provides. Now, normally, 293 00:19:23,520 --> 00:19:27,640 Speaker 5: proceedings before the grand jury are secret, and they're supposed 294 00:19:27,640 --> 00:19:30,160 Speaker 5: to be secret. And there's a reason for that too, 295 00:19:30,520 --> 00:19:34,760 Speaker 5: when you have a government that's investigating an individual that 296 00:19:34,800 --> 00:19:37,440 Speaker 5: can cause reputational harm. If that were to get out, 297 00:19:37,840 --> 00:19:41,120 Speaker 5: the person might be entirely innocent. So we don't necessarily 298 00:19:41,200 --> 00:19:44,440 Speaker 5: want the public to know everything that goes on within 299 00:19:44,480 --> 00:19:48,360 Speaker 5: the grand jury. And then, of course, also witnesses are 300 00:19:48,520 --> 00:19:52,240 Speaker 5: called to appear and testify before the grand jury, and 301 00:19:52,320 --> 00:19:55,439 Speaker 5: we want those witnesses to feel comfortable doing that, and 302 00:19:55,480 --> 00:19:58,000 Speaker 5: so we want to protect their identity. And so that's 303 00:19:58,040 --> 00:20:00,959 Speaker 5: why all the proceedings before the great injury are supposed 304 00:20:01,000 --> 00:20:04,360 Speaker 5: to be secret. Now there's evidence that's been appearing over 305 00:20:04,400 --> 00:20:07,399 Speaker 5: the last few months. That gives us concern about the 306 00:20:07,400 --> 00:20:10,879 Speaker 5: conduct of prosecutors when they're appearing before the grand jury. 307 00:20:11,080 --> 00:20:14,000 Speaker 1: So tell us what the district court in the Northern 308 00:20:14,040 --> 00:20:18,720 Speaker 1: District of Illinois, which covers Chicago, is doing to address 309 00:20:18,800 --> 00:20:22,200 Speaker 1: possible problems with grand jury proceedings. 310 00:20:22,440 --> 00:20:25,280 Speaker 5: In this case, we have the federal court in the 311 00:20:25,320 --> 00:20:28,760 Speaker 5: Northern District of Illinois, who I guess had some concerns 312 00:20:29,080 --> 00:20:32,320 Speaker 5: and made a change to their local rules, which they 313 00:20:32,359 --> 00:20:34,680 Speaker 5: have the power to do. So they created a rule 314 00:20:34,960 --> 00:20:39,119 Speaker 5: that says that when the government presents an indictment to 315 00:20:39,280 --> 00:20:43,040 Speaker 5: the grand jury in a case where the government has 316 00:20:43,080 --> 00:20:47,080 Speaker 5: already charged someone by way of a complaint or by 317 00:20:47,119 --> 00:20:49,840 Speaker 5: way of an information, and the grand jury says, no, 318 00:20:50,080 --> 00:20:53,320 Speaker 5: we don't agree that there's enough evidence here to carry 319 00:20:53,320 --> 00:20:57,080 Speaker 5: this forward to trial, they're going to make that information public. 320 00:20:57,119 --> 00:21:00,399 Speaker 5: They're going to make that decision by the grand jury public. 321 00:21:00,720 --> 00:21:03,119 Speaker 5: It's a new rule. So that was the decision that 322 00:21:03,200 --> 00:21:05,879 Speaker 5: this court made, and we're assuming that it's based on, 323 00:21:06,320 --> 00:21:09,800 Speaker 5: you know, recent events and activities that were occurring within 324 00:21:09,840 --> 00:21:10,960 Speaker 5: that particular district. 325 00:21:11,680 --> 00:21:16,080 Speaker 1: So in Chicago, there was the case where Judge Perry 326 00:21:16,160 --> 00:21:19,960 Speaker 1: found that there was misconduct at the grand jury including 327 00:21:20,040 --> 00:21:24,520 Speaker 1: that the prosecutor dismissed a grand juror who didn't agree, 328 00:21:24,600 --> 00:21:28,840 Speaker 1: they talked to a grandeur outside of the grand jury, 329 00:21:29,320 --> 00:21:34,440 Speaker 1: they improperly vouched for the evidence. Now, that kind of information, 330 00:21:34,600 --> 00:21:38,520 Speaker 1: that kind of misconduct, we're not going to learn from 331 00:21:38,680 --> 00:21:42,760 Speaker 1: just this reporting that's required now, right, We're just going 332 00:21:42,800 --> 00:21:44,520 Speaker 1: to learn the minimal information. 333 00:21:45,240 --> 00:21:49,040 Speaker 5: Yeah. So, like I said, the proceedings before the grand jury, 334 00:21:49,080 --> 00:21:53,199 Speaker 5: which would include all the testimony by the prosecutors as 335 00:21:53,200 --> 00:21:57,080 Speaker 5: well as the witnesses wilks, still remain secret. Even under 336 00:21:57,080 --> 00:22:00,800 Speaker 5: this new rule. None of that substantive stuff will come out. 337 00:22:01,320 --> 00:22:05,919 Speaker 5: This rule merely allows for the court to have a 338 00:22:05,960 --> 00:22:09,720 Speaker 5: public document that shows that an indictment was presented and 339 00:22:09,760 --> 00:22:12,199 Speaker 5: it was rejected, and that that's all the information that 340 00:22:12,280 --> 00:22:15,720 Speaker 5: this rule allows to come out about what happens before 341 00:22:15,720 --> 00:22:16,399 Speaker 5: the grand jury. 342 00:22:16,520 --> 00:22:19,000 Speaker 1: So why do you think it's important that even that 343 00:22:19,080 --> 00:22:20,439 Speaker 1: minimum comes out? 344 00:22:20,680 --> 00:22:25,159 Speaker 5: Well, for example, if you have a situation where the 345 00:22:25,200 --> 00:22:30,320 Speaker 5: government you know, is seeking to indict someone without sufficient evidence, 346 00:22:30,840 --> 00:22:34,120 Speaker 5: in a case where that the person has already been 347 00:22:34,240 --> 00:22:37,720 Speaker 5: charged publicly, I think the court is saying we want 348 00:22:38,040 --> 00:22:40,160 Speaker 5: the public to know that and just in case there's 349 00:22:40,200 --> 00:22:45,000 Speaker 5: concerns concerns around the government conduct and pursuing the case, 350 00:22:45,359 --> 00:22:47,400 Speaker 5: and so I think that's the purpose of the rule. 351 00:22:48,280 --> 00:22:52,280 Speaker 1: I was interested because you always heard that famous expression, 352 00:22:52,400 --> 00:22:54,800 Speaker 1: you know, a grand jury will indict a ham sandwich. 353 00:22:54,880 --> 00:22:58,240 Speaker 1: But according to the federal data, grand juries around the 354 00:22:58,280 --> 00:23:01,960 Speaker 1: country refused to indict fifteen times a year on average, 355 00:23:02,359 --> 00:23:05,639 Speaker 1: from two thousand and six to twenty sixteen. Is that 356 00:23:05,680 --> 00:23:07,120 Speaker 1: even a surprising number. 357 00:23:07,520 --> 00:23:10,760 Speaker 5: Well, I think the thing to understand is that, you 358 00:23:10,840 --> 00:23:14,000 Speaker 5: know the whole saying about grand juries will undet a 359 00:23:14,000 --> 00:23:16,840 Speaker 5: ham sandwich. It's important to understand the dynamics of what 360 00:23:16,960 --> 00:23:19,560 Speaker 5: happens in a grand jury. A grand jury is not 361 00:23:19,800 --> 00:23:23,360 Speaker 5: like a normal criminal trial where you have both sides 362 00:23:23,680 --> 00:23:27,919 Speaker 5: arguing about the case, where the government is presenting the 363 00:23:27,960 --> 00:23:31,280 Speaker 5: evidence saying this person is guilty and the defense counsel 364 00:23:31,560 --> 00:23:34,240 Speaker 5: is presenting evidence or arguing that he's not. The grand 365 00:23:34,320 --> 00:23:38,480 Speaker 5: jury is not an adversarial proceeding, meaning only the government 366 00:23:38,560 --> 00:23:42,000 Speaker 5: is there. So you know, the government is presenting evidence 367 00:23:42,240 --> 00:23:44,879 Speaker 5: and all they need to do is to put forth 368 00:23:45,000 --> 00:23:48,919 Speaker 5: enough evidence to prove that there's probable cause to believe 369 00:23:48,920 --> 00:23:52,080 Speaker 5: that the crime was committed by that person. That's a 370 00:23:52,119 --> 00:23:55,120 Speaker 5: much lower standard than the proof that we're normally used 371 00:23:55,160 --> 00:23:58,000 Speaker 5: to seeing in a criminal trial, which is proof beyond 372 00:23:58,080 --> 00:24:01,120 Speaker 5: a reasonable doubt. So it's not a terribly high standard. 373 00:24:01,240 --> 00:24:03,720 Speaker 5: So it's only the government there. The other side's not 374 00:24:03,920 --> 00:24:06,679 Speaker 5: there to argue against what the government is presenting, and 375 00:24:06,720 --> 00:24:09,359 Speaker 5: it's a fairly low standard, and so that's why it's 376 00:24:09,600 --> 00:24:13,679 Speaker 5: fairly rare where the government presents a case where you know, 377 00:24:13,720 --> 00:24:16,479 Speaker 5: a true bill is not authorized by the grand jury. 378 00:24:16,720 --> 00:24:20,720 Speaker 5: But the other reason why a no true bill decision 379 00:24:20,840 --> 00:24:24,679 Speaker 5: is rare is because when you're a prosecutor presenting a 380 00:24:24,720 --> 00:24:27,719 Speaker 5: case before the grand jury, as I mentioned, you know, 381 00:24:27,840 --> 00:24:30,600 Speaker 5: to get an indictment, all you have to put forth 382 00:24:30,640 --> 00:24:33,639 Speaker 5: is enough evidence to prove there was probable cause. But 383 00:24:33,760 --> 00:24:36,919 Speaker 5: you know, ultimately, if you get the indictment, that you're 384 00:24:36,960 --> 00:24:41,199 Speaker 5: going to have to try the case. And so most prosecutors, 385 00:24:41,240 --> 00:24:44,000 Speaker 5: at least most good prosecutors are not going to seek 386 00:24:44,000 --> 00:24:47,720 Speaker 5: an indictment unless they have enough proof to prove the 387 00:24:47,720 --> 00:24:50,639 Speaker 5: case ultimately, which is prooved beyond a reasonable doubt. And 388 00:24:50,680 --> 00:24:54,640 Speaker 5: that's another reason why, particularly in the federal system, usually 389 00:24:55,119 --> 00:25:00,159 Speaker 5: you know, decisions of no bill are rare because most prosecutors, 390 00:25:00,480 --> 00:25:03,560 Speaker 5: before the indictment, their case is built out, and it's strong, 391 00:25:03,640 --> 00:25:05,840 Speaker 5: and they know they've got proof beyond a reasonable doubt, 392 00:25:06,000 --> 00:25:08,720 Speaker 5: and that's why they're pursuing the indictment. And so that's 393 00:25:08,760 --> 00:25:12,040 Speaker 5: why these no bill decisions usually are somewhat rare. 394 00:25:13,720 --> 00:25:16,600 Speaker 1: A lot of the high profile cases where grand juries 395 00:25:16,720 --> 00:25:23,399 Speaker 1: refuse to indict involved political enemies of the president or 396 00:25:23,760 --> 00:25:28,440 Speaker 1: democratic lawmakers. Do you think the courts are concerned that 397 00:25:29,560 --> 00:25:33,000 Speaker 1: prosecutors are being influenced by politics? 398 00:25:33,600 --> 00:25:36,199 Speaker 5: Well, you know, I can't, you know, speak for the 399 00:25:36,240 --> 00:25:38,480 Speaker 5: court as to why they put this room to place, 400 00:25:38,760 --> 00:25:41,320 Speaker 5: So I really don't know the answers to that question. 401 00:25:41,600 --> 00:25:44,680 Speaker 5: And of course, there has been a lot of coverage of, 402 00:25:44,920 --> 00:25:47,359 Speaker 5: you know, the Department of Justice and the way it 403 00:25:47,440 --> 00:25:51,480 Speaker 5: is operating these days in a way that is reflecting 404 00:25:51,960 --> 00:25:56,520 Speaker 5: what seemed to be more politically driven prosecutions than there 405 00:25:56,560 --> 00:26:00,680 Speaker 5: were before the Trump administration. There's no question about that. 406 00:26:00,720 --> 00:26:03,840 Speaker 5: There's a lot of debate around that. But I think, 407 00:26:04,040 --> 00:26:07,000 Speaker 5: you know, what's also been discussed that sort of the 408 00:26:07,080 --> 00:26:10,600 Speaker 5: issue that's been raised by the most recent misconduct observed 409 00:26:10,600 --> 00:26:15,359 Speaker 5: here in Chicago is that prosecutors have generally been given 410 00:26:15,600 --> 00:26:19,640 Speaker 5: this presumption of regularity, right, which is the idea that 411 00:26:19,880 --> 00:26:21,879 Speaker 5: they're going to handle themselves in the way and on 412 00:26:21,960 --> 00:26:24,600 Speaker 5: the up and up, they're going to follow the rules 413 00:26:24,640 --> 00:26:26,959 Speaker 5: and they're going to conduct themselves in a way that 414 00:26:27,000 --> 00:26:30,600 Speaker 5: the court would trust them to do. And I think 415 00:26:30,720 --> 00:26:33,600 Speaker 5: what we're seeing in terms of what happened in Chicago 416 00:26:34,000 --> 00:26:37,399 Speaker 5: most recently is that you know, courts are worried about 417 00:26:37,440 --> 00:26:40,520 Speaker 5: whether or not they should be giving the prosecutors under 418 00:26:41,119 --> 00:26:45,320 Speaker 5: this particular Department of Justice's strategy, the way this particular 419 00:26:45,680 --> 00:26:49,920 Speaker 5: Department of Justice is operating, whether they deserve that presumption 420 00:26:50,000 --> 00:26:53,840 Speaker 5: of regularity, And so if they have that concern, there 421 00:26:53,880 --> 00:26:56,320 Speaker 5: are things that the court can do, like creating rules 422 00:26:56,359 --> 00:26:58,240 Speaker 5: like this to address those concerns. 423 00:26:58,440 --> 00:27:01,520 Speaker 1: Thanks so much for joining me share. That's Professor Sharon 424 00:27:01,600 --> 00:27:14,840 Speaker 1: Fairley of the University of Chicago School of Law. They 425 00:27:14,880 --> 00:27:19,720 Speaker 1: were cheering in Madrid as Spain defeated Argentina after extra 426 00:27:19,880 --> 00:27:23,800 Speaker 1: time in a tense final, giving Spain its second World 427 00:27:23,880 --> 00:27:28,520 Speaker 1: Cup crown. All in all, soccer's biggest show went off well, 428 00:27:28,920 --> 00:27:33,320 Speaker 1: with a few noted exceptions, like President Trump intervening in 429 00:27:33,400 --> 00:27:37,359 Speaker 1: the controversy over the red card given to USA player 430 00:27:37,480 --> 00:27:41,800 Speaker 1: Faller in Balligan, but behind the scenes FIFA's first forty 431 00:27:41,800 --> 00:27:46,919 Speaker 1: eighteen men's tournament, featuring one hundred four matches across three countries, 432 00:27:47,440 --> 00:27:52,160 Speaker 1: created more issues and more opportunities for legal friction than 433 00:27:52,200 --> 00:27:56,399 Speaker 1: any previous tournament. Whether it was t shirt sales or 434 00:27:56,440 --> 00:28:00,680 Speaker 1: the weather, lawyers played a part in ironing out the kinks. 435 00:28:01,000 --> 00:28:05,600 Speaker 1: Joining me is David Hellier, Bloomberg UK Business reporter. David 436 00:28:05,640 --> 00:28:09,119 Speaker 1: Let's start with the conflict over the weather. FIFA considered 437 00:28:09,200 --> 00:28:14,600 Speaker 1: moving England's match against Mexico forward by six hours because 438 00:28:14,640 --> 00:28:19,879 Speaker 1: of concerns over thunderstorms and flooding in Mexico City, and 439 00:28:20,000 --> 00:28:24,320 Speaker 1: England was stunned by the prospect of its preparations being 440 00:28:24,359 --> 00:28:27,840 Speaker 1: disrupted at short notice. So enter the lawyers. 441 00:28:28,880 --> 00:28:32,760 Speaker 6: Yeah, so the FA, the Football Association in England, went 442 00:28:32,800 --> 00:28:36,119 Speaker 6: to an external law firm called Northridge in order to 443 00:28:36,560 --> 00:28:39,840 Speaker 6: basically get them to argue their case and to give 444 00:28:39,880 --> 00:28:43,200 Speaker 6: them some extra ammunition. I guess I think there was 445 00:28:43,240 --> 00:28:46,080 Speaker 6: you know, there was huge pressure to bring the game forward. 446 00:28:46,320 --> 00:28:47,520 Speaker 6: I mean one of the things you know that the 447 00:28:47,600 --> 00:28:50,880 Speaker 6: lawyers had to consider was people who bought tickets who 448 00:28:50,880 --> 00:28:53,280 Speaker 6: were flying in to the game. You know, they would 449 00:28:53,280 --> 00:28:56,160 Speaker 6: be disadvantaged that there would have to be some sort 450 00:28:56,160 --> 00:28:59,320 Speaker 6: of compensation so they could use all these kind of arguments. 451 00:28:59,440 --> 00:29:02,200 Speaker 6: It was kind of unusual, and it seemed to us 452 00:29:02,240 --> 00:29:06,560 Speaker 6: to kind of merit a piece about the growing use 453 00:29:06,600 --> 00:29:09,600 Speaker 6: of sports lawyers. I mean, in particular, we focused on 454 00:29:09,600 --> 00:29:12,800 Speaker 6: the World Cup and football. I mean, I've been looking 455 00:29:12,800 --> 00:29:16,640 Speaker 6: at issues in English football and the Premier League over 456 00:29:16,640 --> 00:29:19,400 Speaker 6: the last two or three years, and one of the 457 00:29:19,440 --> 00:29:22,760 Speaker 6: common refrains from a number of people is this that, 458 00:29:23,160 --> 00:29:26,280 Speaker 6: you know, so many of the outcomes of matches are 459 00:29:26,360 --> 00:29:30,000 Speaker 6: now either being settled in law courts or in danger 460 00:29:30,040 --> 00:29:32,920 Speaker 6: of being settled in law courts, that the crowd only 461 00:29:32,960 --> 00:29:36,040 Speaker 6: see half the picture they're at the stadium, but really 462 00:29:36,080 --> 00:29:39,440 Speaker 6: what's going on maybe many weeks later, is kind of 463 00:29:39,680 --> 00:29:42,400 Speaker 6: more decisive, and that's going on in the law courts. 464 00:29:42,640 --> 00:29:45,880 Speaker 6: And that's because in this particular instance, because the leagues 465 00:29:46,160 --> 00:29:50,560 Speaker 6: have brought in very very stringent financial regulations to stop 466 00:29:50,640 --> 00:29:53,480 Speaker 6: teams from overspending, and you know, it has to be 467 00:29:53,560 --> 00:29:56,360 Speaker 6: monitored and it has to be regulated by the league. 468 00:29:56,400 --> 00:30:00,240 Speaker 6: And then immediately the league decides on something to the 469 00:30:00,320 --> 00:30:03,120 Speaker 6: lawyers and they're kind of arguing against it, and they're 470 00:30:03,120 --> 00:30:07,080 Speaker 6: saying no, no, no, you know this spending was absolutely legitimate. 471 00:30:07,560 --> 00:30:09,280 Speaker 6: And what you have, you know, you do have this 472 00:30:09,440 --> 00:30:13,600 Speaker 6: great shift towards you know, sporting outcomes even being decided 473 00:30:13,640 --> 00:30:14,240 Speaker 6: by lawyers. 474 00:30:15,000 --> 00:30:17,600 Speaker 1: Is there a match where the outcome of the match 475 00:30:17,840 --> 00:30:20,200 Speaker 1: was changed because of legal action. 476 00:30:20,920 --> 00:30:24,400 Speaker 6: The biggest case ever and it hasn't happened yet, is 477 00:30:24,440 --> 00:30:27,040 Speaker 6: that a top team in the Premier League, Manchester City, 478 00:30:27,080 --> 00:30:30,320 Speaker 6: which is owned by UAE interests very closely linked to 479 00:30:30,320 --> 00:30:32,960 Speaker 6: the state although it's a private company, so Manchester City 480 00:30:33,000 --> 00:30:35,080 Speaker 6: are owned by them. They are accused of one hundred 481 00:30:35,080 --> 00:30:39,320 Speaker 6: and fifteen breaches of Premier League rules. And this case 482 00:30:39,360 --> 00:30:43,320 Speaker 6: has been with the lawyers for several years now and 483 00:30:43,840 --> 00:30:46,480 Speaker 6: it's now with an independent commission that the Premier League 484 00:30:46,560 --> 00:30:50,160 Speaker 6: is appointed. Man City have paid so many lawyers, so 485 00:30:50,160 --> 00:30:54,040 Speaker 6: many barristers. It's costing fortune. The other clubs in the league. 486 00:30:54,080 --> 00:30:56,880 Speaker 6: They're having to pay part of the bill because it 487 00:30:56,920 --> 00:30:59,000 Speaker 6: goes to the league and then the league claims it 488 00:30:59,040 --> 00:31:01,640 Speaker 6: from all the other clubs and it hasn't been resolved. 489 00:31:02,120 --> 00:31:06,160 Speaker 1: Cape Verd was an underdog and became a fan favorite. 490 00:31:06,640 --> 00:31:09,719 Speaker 1: That means people are rushing to get T shirts and 491 00:31:09,920 --> 00:31:14,440 Speaker 1: other paraphernalia, and that led to a dispute over sales 492 00:31:14,560 --> 00:31:16,520 Speaker 1: rights during the World Cup. 493 00:31:16,880 --> 00:31:20,960 Speaker 6: Yeah, I mean before before the World Cup began, the 494 00:31:21,000 --> 00:31:24,680 Speaker 6: cape Verde kit, not just the jerseys, but the shorts, 495 00:31:24,720 --> 00:31:28,360 Speaker 6: the socks and everything that was being licensed to another 496 00:31:28,440 --> 00:31:33,960 Speaker 6: company called Tempo, and Tempo then lost the contract to 497 00:31:34,240 --> 00:31:38,480 Speaker 6: Capelli for the World Cup. And as soon as cape Verdi, 498 00:31:38,800 --> 00:31:42,800 Speaker 6: you know, started doing it became the kind of outsider 499 00:31:43,200 --> 00:31:45,680 Speaker 6: extraordinary of the tournament. You know. As soon as that 500 00:31:45,720 --> 00:31:49,480 Speaker 6: started happening in the demand for the kit grew exponentially. 501 00:31:49,840 --> 00:31:53,240 Speaker 6: Tempo started marketing it's it's old kit, saying, you know, 502 00:31:53,280 --> 00:31:55,320 Speaker 6: you can buy the cap Verde kit. It wasn't the 503 00:31:55,360 --> 00:31:58,560 Speaker 6: current kit, it's previous kit. But you know, people wouldn't 504 00:31:58,600 --> 00:32:01,080 Speaker 6: necessarily know that it's not the the new kit, and 505 00:32:01,480 --> 00:32:05,320 Speaker 6: it looked very similar. And so again Cape Verde had 506 00:32:05,360 --> 00:32:08,320 Speaker 6: to reach for the lawyers and issue a cease and 507 00:32:08,400 --> 00:32:12,040 Speaker 6: assist notice because the profits that they were making from 508 00:32:12,080 --> 00:32:16,480 Speaker 6: that deal were going to be spread amongst the football 509 00:32:16,480 --> 00:32:21,200 Speaker 6: association in cape Verde, and Temper were getting their share 510 00:32:21,200 --> 00:32:24,200 Speaker 6: of that potentially legitimately the one. 511 00:32:24,040 --> 00:32:26,760 Speaker 1: That everyone heard about, you know, the red card seen 512 00:32:26,800 --> 00:32:31,000 Speaker 1: around the world was the red card that US President 513 00:32:31,080 --> 00:32:34,600 Speaker 1: Trump intervened in. Now where would the lawyers fit in? 514 00:32:35,800 --> 00:32:38,320 Speaker 6: Yeah, I mean we never had evidence that they went 515 00:32:38,360 --> 00:32:42,040 Speaker 6: to outside lawyers, but the Weldon FA, all the football 516 00:32:42,120 --> 00:32:46,680 Speaker 6: associations have big in house teams. They were exasperated. They 517 00:32:46,720 --> 00:32:50,560 Speaker 6: definitely went to this appeal. It was turned down and 518 00:32:50,880 --> 00:32:53,680 Speaker 6: you know Balligan, as we know, he played when you 519 00:32:53,720 --> 00:32:56,560 Speaker 6: know ninety nine times set one hundred, he wouldn't have played. 520 00:32:56,840 --> 00:32:59,719 Speaker 6: So that was kind of a real flashpoint. And although 521 00:33:00,120 --> 00:33:02,640 Speaker 6: we don't know whether they used outside law firms, it 522 00:33:02,760 --> 00:33:04,560 Speaker 6: was something that all the law firms are kind of 523 00:33:04,880 --> 00:33:07,320 Speaker 6: using in a way because they're saying, look, you know, 524 00:33:07,400 --> 00:33:09,480 Speaker 6: this kind of thing can happen, you need to have 525 00:33:09,600 --> 00:33:13,680 Speaker 6: somebody on board. I talked to a lawyer from a 526 00:33:13,720 --> 00:33:16,560 Speaker 6: London firm, Bird and Bird, who actually went on a 527 00:33:16,640 --> 00:33:20,240 Speaker 6: tour with a rugby team with British Lions. So you know, 528 00:33:20,280 --> 00:33:24,320 Speaker 6: the British Lions rugby team would take a massive physiotherapist, 529 00:33:24,520 --> 00:33:27,920 Speaker 6: a conditioning coach and they'd also took a lawyer with them. 530 00:33:28,400 --> 00:33:30,600 Speaker 6: He said that it was a great fun but it 531 00:33:30,720 --> 00:33:33,320 Speaker 6: wasn't very productive in terms of he didn't have much 532 00:33:33,360 --> 00:33:36,720 Speaker 6: to do. He had a couple of baligant type incidents 533 00:33:36,960 --> 00:33:39,200 Speaker 6: which took him a little while to sort that, but 534 00:33:39,440 --> 00:33:41,720 Speaker 6: not really enough one in each tour, so it wasn't 535 00:33:41,800 --> 00:33:45,120 Speaker 6: enough to justify. So he was saying he wouldn't recommend 536 00:33:45,120 --> 00:33:47,800 Speaker 6: taking a lawyer with you, you know, to be with 537 00:33:47,920 --> 00:33:50,480 Speaker 6: the tour the whole time, but he would say that 538 00:33:50,760 --> 00:33:53,240 Speaker 6: you need to have a very expert person on the 539 00:33:53,240 --> 00:33:55,840 Speaker 6: ground in the places you're going to be, and probably 540 00:33:55,880 --> 00:33:59,080 Speaker 6: back at home as well, would be the ideal from 541 00:33:59,120 --> 00:33:59,840 Speaker 6: his experience. 542 00:34:00,160 --> 00:34:03,040 Speaker 1: I mean, these things happen very fast, don't they. The 543 00:34:03,080 --> 00:34:06,640 Speaker 1: red card incident seem like it started and stopped right away. 544 00:34:06,840 --> 00:34:10,480 Speaker 6: Yeah, very quick. I mean, on the whole there's something 545 00:34:10,520 --> 00:34:13,400 Speaker 6: like that will explode, and it's very unlikely they're going 546 00:34:13,400 --> 00:34:17,360 Speaker 6: to postpone the game until everybody's deliberated. So it's in 547 00:34:17,400 --> 00:34:21,799 Speaker 6: everybody's interest to basically reach a very swift conclusion so 548 00:34:21,840 --> 00:34:23,919 Speaker 6: that when the game goes ahead, you know, he's either 549 00:34:23,920 --> 00:34:26,400 Speaker 6: playing or he's not playing. You know, you can imagine 550 00:34:26,440 --> 00:34:28,960 Speaker 6: that they maybe couldn't come to a decision, but that 551 00:34:29,000 --> 00:34:34,200 Speaker 6: would have been an enormous logistical sort of consequences, you know, 552 00:34:34,320 --> 00:34:38,080 Speaker 6: people buying tickets and having to change them, broadcast arrangements, 553 00:34:38,200 --> 00:34:39,800 Speaker 6: I mean, the other thing that the lawyer's mentioned to 554 00:34:39,880 --> 00:34:42,239 Speaker 6: me a lot aside from the things we've talked about 555 00:34:42,320 --> 00:34:47,480 Speaker 6: are the broadcasting arrangements, because these are signed years in advance. 556 00:34:47,520 --> 00:34:51,480 Speaker 6: Often Fox signed the agreements I think in twenty fourteen 557 00:34:51,560 --> 00:34:55,520 Speaker 6: for this World Cup, and it basically gives them certain 558 00:34:55,640 --> 00:34:59,319 Speaker 6: rights to certain games. And you know, like if the 559 00:34:59,360 --> 00:35:02,560 Speaker 6: England makes game had been brought forward six hours or something, 560 00:35:02,880 --> 00:35:05,600 Speaker 6: I mean, they had to be consulted. Their lawyers would 561 00:35:05,640 --> 00:35:07,799 Speaker 6: have been consulted as well, because that would have made 562 00:35:07,840 --> 00:35:10,080 Speaker 6: an impact. They would to be at peak time. It 563 00:35:10,120 --> 00:35:12,880 Speaker 6: would have been twelve o'clock lunchtime instead of seven o'clock 564 00:35:12,920 --> 00:35:15,120 Speaker 6: in the evening, So that would have had a financial 565 00:35:15,120 --> 00:35:18,480 Speaker 6: impact on them. You know, there's so many broadcasters involved 566 00:35:18,480 --> 00:35:19,319 Speaker 6: in an event like this. 567 00:35:19,640 --> 00:35:24,160 Speaker 1: Let's talk about numbers. So US Soccer twenty twenty five 568 00:35:24,480 --> 00:35:27,360 Speaker 1: about twenty three million in fees. That's more than double 569 00:35:27,360 --> 00:35:32,000 Speaker 1: a year earlier. The English Premier League spent one hundred 570 00:35:32,040 --> 00:35:35,440 Speaker 1: and twenty five million dollars on legal costs over the 571 00:35:35,480 --> 00:35:38,480 Speaker 1: last two years. According to media reports. 572 00:35:38,280 --> 00:35:43,120 Speaker 6: This Manchester City case is absolutely enormous. They could end 573 00:35:43,200 --> 00:35:47,640 Speaker 6: up having some pretty consequential punishments and it's so hotly 574 00:35:47,680 --> 00:35:52,480 Speaker 6: contested that is really costing an absolute fortune. But it's 575 00:35:52,520 --> 00:35:55,120 Speaker 6: not just Manchester City. The financial rules have become in 576 00:35:55,160 --> 00:35:59,880 Speaker 6: Europe so complicated. There's rules for European competitions, there's room 577 00:36:00,360 --> 00:36:03,560 Speaker 6: rules for domestic competitions. They are really mind boggling some 578 00:36:03,600 --> 00:36:04,320 Speaker 6: of these rules. 579 00:36:04,920 --> 00:36:09,120 Speaker 1: Thanks so much, David. That's Bloomberg's David Hellier and that's 580 00:36:09,160 --> 00:36:11,760 Speaker 1: it for this edition of The Bloomberg Law Show. Remember 581 00:36:11,800 --> 00:36:13,880 Speaker 1: you can always get the latest legal news on our 582 00:36:13,920 --> 00:36:18,080 Speaker 1: Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can find them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, 583 00:36:18,239 --> 00:36:23,279 Speaker 1: and at www dot bloomberg dot com, slash podcast Slash Law, 584 00:36:23,680 --> 00:36:26,280 Speaker 1: and remember to tune into The Bloomberg Law Show every 585 00:36:26,320 --> 00:36:30,240 Speaker 1: weeknight at ten pm Wall Street Time. I'm June Grosso 586 00:36:30,360 --> 00:36:31,960 Speaker 1: and you're listening to Bloomberg