WEBVTT - Biden's Border Fixes; George Santos Under Fire

0:00:03.160 --> 0:00:07.960
<v Speaker 1>This is Bloombird Law with June Brussel from Bloomberg Radio.

0:00:11.200 --> 0:00:14.360
<v Speaker 1>My message is this, if you're trying to leave Cuba,

0:00:14.440 --> 0:00:17.840
<v Speaker 1>Nicaragua or Haiti, you have and we or have agreed

0:00:18.239 --> 0:00:22.520
<v Speaker 1>to begin a journey to America, do not do not

0:00:22.720 --> 0:00:25.800
<v Speaker 1>just show up with the border, Stay where you are

0:00:25.840 --> 0:00:29.040
<v Speaker 1>and apply legally from there starting today. If you don't

0:00:29.040 --> 0:00:31.760
<v Speaker 1>apply through the legal process, you will not be eligible

0:00:31.800 --> 0:00:35.159
<v Speaker 1>for this new parole program. Before his trip to Mexico,

0:00:35.400 --> 0:00:38.760
<v Speaker 1>President Biden announced a series of new measures that he

0:00:38.840 --> 0:00:42.400
<v Speaker 1>says will curb the influx of migrants at the southern border.

0:00:42.720 --> 0:00:46.080
<v Speaker 1>There will be new requirements for those seeking asylum. One

0:00:46.120 --> 0:00:50.040
<v Speaker 1>measure will expand a parole program to migrants seeking asylum

0:00:50.080 --> 0:00:54.880
<v Speaker 1>from nations like Haiti, Nicaragua, and Cuba. The process requires

0:00:54.920 --> 0:00:58.080
<v Speaker 1>migrants to be sponsored while also going through a vetting

0:00:58.120 --> 0:01:02.040
<v Speaker 1>and background check process. Another plan is to impose a

0:01:02.120 --> 0:01:06.120
<v Speaker 1>new regulation, a version of the Trump era policy often

0:01:06.200 --> 0:01:09.880
<v Speaker 1>call the Transit Ban. Joining me is integration law expert

0:01:09.959 --> 0:01:13.760
<v Speaker 1>Leon Fresco, a partner at Hollandon Knight. Let me start

0:01:13.840 --> 0:01:18.880
<v Speaker 1>with Biden's visit to Mexico. What is he hoping to accomplish?

0:01:18.880 --> 0:01:22.640
<v Speaker 1>What can he accomplish well. The key thing for President

0:01:22.680 --> 0:01:26.440
<v Speaker 1>Biden to accomplish in Mexico is to get Mexico's blessing

0:01:26.520 --> 0:01:30.080
<v Speaker 1>to accept as many people as possible that the United

0:01:30.120 --> 0:01:37.400
<v Speaker 1>States wants to exclude from the four countries which are Nicaragua, Cuba, Venezuela,

0:01:37.480 --> 0:01:40.920
<v Speaker 1>and Haiti under Title forty two, given that there's this

0:01:40.959 --> 0:01:44.959
<v Speaker 1>new carrot and six approach where individuals from those countries

0:01:45.000 --> 0:01:47.560
<v Speaker 1>are going to be asked to apply for a legal

0:01:48.120 --> 0:01:50.960
<v Speaker 1>entrance into the United States, such that if they try

0:01:51.000 --> 0:01:54.640
<v Speaker 1>to enter illegally, they will be pushed into Mexico. Right now,

0:01:54.680 --> 0:01:58.200
<v Speaker 1>Mexico doesn't accept people who are not from the Northern

0:01:58.200 --> 0:02:02.640
<v Speaker 1>Triangle or from Mexico proper, and so the idea would

0:02:02.640 --> 0:02:06.160
<v Speaker 1>be for Mexico to accept these people, knowing that at

0:02:06.200 --> 0:02:07.720
<v Speaker 1>the end of the rainbow or at the end of

0:02:07.760 --> 0:02:11.120
<v Speaker 1>the day, them accepting them in the short term for

0:02:11.240 --> 0:02:15.160
<v Speaker 1>now will be the consequence that's necessary to sort of

0:02:15.400 --> 0:02:19.000
<v Speaker 1>dismissed this long term problem because hopefully more people will

0:02:19.120 --> 0:02:22.600
<v Speaker 1>use the legal pathway as opposed to be illegal pathway.

0:02:22.720 --> 0:02:27.160
<v Speaker 1>Let's go back a step to that Title forty two expansion.

0:02:27.520 --> 0:02:31.280
<v Speaker 1>So the Buiding administration is fighting to end Title forty

0:02:31.320 --> 0:02:35.080
<v Speaker 1>two in the courts, but it's expanding a policy that

0:02:35.240 --> 0:02:39.960
<v Speaker 1>depends on expanding the use of Title forty two or

0:02:40.000 --> 0:02:46.600
<v Speaker 1>to rapidly expel asylum seekers from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. Correct.

0:02:46.639 --> 0:02:49.600
<v Speaker 1>There's a bit of an incongruency there in that the

0:02:49.600 --> 0:02:52.080
<v Speaker 1>Biden administration is saying, look, and the long term, we

0:02:52.080 --> 0:02:55.160
<v Speaker 1>would like to end Title forty two. But while our

0:02:55.280 --> 0:02:58.359
<v Speaker 1>hand is quote unquote being forced, although I would argue

0:02:58.680 --> 0:03:01.919
<v Speaker 1>they've made the litigation decisions that have forced their own hand.

0:03:02.600 --> 0:03:05.480
<v Speaker 1>But nevertheless, while their hand is being quote unquote force,

0:03:05.600 --> 0:03:08.440
<v Speaker 1>they will take advantage of Title forty two and use

0:03:08.520 --> 0:03:12.720
<v Speaker 1>it to the maximum extent possible to create a consequent

0:03:12.880 --> 0:03:16.800
<v Speaker 1>delivery carrots and six system where we tell the largest

0:03:16.919 --> 0:03:19.080
<v Speaker 1>group of people at the border that aren't from the

0:03:19.120 --> 0:03:24.760
<v Speaker 1>Northern triangle in Mexico, which is against Cubans, Paitians, Venezuelans,

0:03:24.760 --> 0:03:30.160
<v Speaker 1>and Nicaragua's people fleeing from political oppression, that those individuals

0:03:30.240 --> 0:03:33.359
<v Speaker 1>need to enter through the legal parole pathways that are

0:03:33.400 --> 0:03:37.040
<v Speaker 1>being created and not enter illegally in between the ports

0:03:37.080 --> 0:03:40.080
<v Speaker 1>of entry, because all that's going to do is lead

0:03:40.160 --> 0:03:43.240
<v Speaker 1>to you being excluded under Title forty two when you

0:03:43.320 --> 0:03:46.160
<v Speaker 1>had this perfectly legal pathway to it. There is. The

0:03:46.200 --> 0:03:50.320
<v Speaker 1>program has been in effect for Venezuelans, and that's been

0:03:50.360 --> 0:03:54.320
<v Speaker 1>working well. The first group that got this program under

0:03:54.360 --> 0:03:59.320
<v Speaker 1>the Biden administration were Ukrainian. So Ukrainians. Actually we're appearing

0:03:59.520 --> 0:04:03.200
<v Speaker 1>thousands and thousands of Ukrainians on the southern border after

0:04:03.440 --> 0:04:06.240
<v Speaker 1>Russia attacked Ukraine and they were trying to get in

0:04:06.280 --> 0:04:09.200
<v Speaker 1>through the southern border same way as everybody else. And

0:04:09.240 --> 0:04:12.120
<v Speaker 1>the Biden administration said, this is unstendable. We can't do this.

0:04:12.280 --> 0:04:15.400
<v Speaker 1>Let's create a program that allows Ukrainians to enter legally

0:04:15.840 --> 0:04:19.280
<v Speaker 1>to be paroled into the United States and hopefully they'll

0:04:19.320 --> 0:04:22.920
<v Speaker 1>stop using the illegal pathway up the border. And lo

0:04:23.120 --> 0:04:26.160
<v Speaker 1>and behold, that's what happened. You don't see any Ukrainians

0:04:26.160 --> 0:04:29.360
<v Speaker 1>on the southern border now. They entered through the legal pathway.

0:04:29.440 --> 0:04:31.560
<v Speaker 1>So then the Biden administration said, well, let's see what

0:04:31.600 --> 0:04:34.599
<v Speaker 1>happens if we extend it to a few thousand, twenty

0:04:34.720 --> 0:04:38.919
<v Speaker 1>something thousands Venezuelan individuals. Will this work? And you've seen

0:04:39.480 --> 0:04:42.440
<v Speaker 1>Venezuelans used this pathway, So now the idea is, well,

0:04:42.480 --> 0:04:46.680
<v Speaker 1>maybe for thirty thousand people a month. We can create

0:04:46.880 --> 0:04:53.120
<v Speaker 1>new pathways for Cubans, Venezuelans, Haitians, and Nicaragua. Now is

0:04:53.120 --> 0:04:54.960
<v Speaker 1>that going to be enough? Now, that's not gonna be

0:04:55.000 --> 0:04:58.920
<v Speaker 1>anywhere near enough. But I mean it is still, you know,

0:04:59.520 --> 0:05:02.880
<v Speaker 1>amateur mathematics, here three hundred and sixty thousand people a

0:05:02.960 --> 0:05:07.039
<v Speaker 1>year that will be paroled into the country. And I

0:05:07.080 --> 0:05:09.840
<v Speaker 1>don't know how much more reasonable it is. Might it

0:05:10.000 --> 0:05:14.000
<v Speaker 1>take more people than that? So the idea is, hey, wait,

0:05:14.760 --> 0:05:18.560
<v Speaker 1>use this pathway, and if you use this pathway, you're

0:05:18.560 --> 0:05:21.280
<v Speaker 1>gonna get in legally. So don't do it illegally because

0:05:21.279 --> 0:05:24.480
<v Speaker 1>all of what's can happen in PYT two. So the

0:05:24.520 --> 0:05:29.520
<v Speaker 1>Departments of Homeland Security and Justice also released a plan

0:05:29.640 --> 0:05:32.840
<v Speaker 1>to impose a new regulation, and it's a version of

0:05:32.880 --> 0:05:36.400
<v Speaker 1>the Trump era policy, which was often called the Transit Band,

0:05:36.880 --> 0:05:41.760
<v Speaker 1>although Secretary Majorkists denies that is not a fac simile

0:05:42.000 --> 0:05:45.520
<v Speaker 1>or an identical copy. It is a resemblance in the

0:05:45.560 --> 0:05:49.880
<v Speaker 1>sense of what it's going toward. Is this idea that

0:05:49.920 --> 0:05:53.320
<v Speaker 1>there will no longer be an acceptance of people going

0:05:53.440 --> 0:05:56.599
<v Speaker 1>in between the ports of injury on the southern border

0:05:56.640 --> 0:05:58.760
<v Speaker 1>and applying for asylum. If you want to do that,

0:05:59.080 --> 0:06:02.360
<v Speaker 1>you will be banned from getting asylum. And that's a

0:06:02.400 --> 0:06:04.800
<v Speaker 1>serious thing because if you can't get asylums, that means

0:06:04.839 --> 0:06:07.839
<v Speaker 1>you can't get a passive citizenship. You can't apply for

0:06:07.920 --> 0:06:10.680
<v Speaker 1>your spouse and your children and your family members to

0:06:10.920 --> 0:06:14.520
<v Speaker 1>enter the United States once you get American citizenship down

0:06:14.560 --> 0:06:17.080
<v Speaker 1>the line, and so all you'd be able to get

0:06:17.200 --> 0:06:20.000
<v Speaker 1>is this thing called withholding of removal, which is basically

0:06:20.040 --> 0:06:23.359
<v Speaker 1>a temporary stay on your deportation, and that's if you

0:06:23.400 --> 0:06:27.640
<v Speaker 1>win your case that you're going to be persecuted abroad. Now,

0:06:27.960 --> 0:06:31.720
<v Speaker 1>the difference is that if you can show that you

0:06:31.760 --> 0:06:34.880
<v Speaker 1>would be persecuted in Mexico where you're waiting, you'll be

0:06:34.920 --> 0:06:37.520
<v Speaker 1>able to come in. And their ideas, look, that's more

0:06:37.600 --> 0:06:41.839
<v Speaker 1>compassionists and Trump wouldn't really care for that approach, which

0:06:41.880 --> 0:06:45.360
<v Speaker 1>is he did really phenomenally did, but didn't really allow

0:06:45.440 --> 0:06:48.400
<v Speaker 1>people to show that they'd be persecuted waiting in Mexico.

0:06:48.920 --> 0:06:52.520
<v Speaker 1>But nevertheless, it is the same to the extent of

0:06:52.640 --> 0:06:55.720
<v Speaker 1>what it's doing is it's saying, look, there's no applying

0:06:55.760 --> 0:06:59.080
<v Speaker 1>for asylum in between the ports of entry. They're going

0:06:59.160 --> 0:07:02.119
<v Speaker 1>to the ports event three, or there's applying for asylum

0:07:02.240 --> 0:07:05.200
<v Speaker 1>at a country that you're passing that has a credible

0:07:05.240 --> 0:07:08.800
<v Speaker 1>asylum system. And if you don't do either of those things,

0:07:09.279 --> 0:07:11.120
<v Speaker 1>don't think you're going to cross the border in the

0:07:11.160 --> 0:07:13.960
<v Speaker 1>United States and get asylum. And so that's getting a

0:07:13.960 --> 0:07:17.200
<v Speaker 1>lot of criticism from advocates and and some of the

0:07:17.200 --> 0:07:20.840
<v Speaker 1>more liberal members of Congress. But I do think when

0:07:20.960 --> 0:07:24.400
<v Speaker 1>coupled with this parole program where if you enter legally

0:07:24.440 --> 0:07:26.960
<v Speaker 1>and you get paroles, you can apply for asylum once

0:07:27.000 --> 0:07:31.160
<v Speaker 1>you've entered legally, the idea is hopefully this character and

0:07:31.280 --> 0:07:36.440
<v Speaker 1>sixth approach will channel some large amount of people through

0:07:36.520 --> 0:07:39.600
<v Speaker 1>this program rather than through the in between the parts

0:07:39.640 --> 0:07:43.320
<v Speaker 1>of entry on the southern border. So now are there

0:07:43.360 --> 0:07:48.920
<v Speaker 1>also plans to expand Title eight border processing? Well, so

0:07:48.960 --> 0:07:52.360
<v Speaker 1>what I think is gonna happen is when Title forty

0:07:52.440 --> 0:07:55.960
<v Speaker 1>two goes away, if and when whenever that may be,

0:07:56.840 --> 0:07:59.440
<v Speaker 1>what's gonna happen is you're gonna have a lot more

0:07:59.480 --> 0:08:02.920
<v Speaker 1>people persecuted who are single adults who are coming coming

0:08:03.040 --> 0:08:05.680
<v Speaker 1>in between the ports of entry, and you're gonna have

0:08:05.800 --> 0:08:08.960
<v Speaker 1>a lot more people put into removal proceedings under side

0:08:08.960 --> 0:08:13.920
<v Speaker 1>of a expedited removal proceedings and try to really focus

0:08:13.960 --> 0:08:17.320
<v Speaker 1>on getting people out as part of those expedited removal

0:08:17.320 --> 0:08:20.560
<v Speaker 1>proceedings mean being a little upper not saying that they

0:08:20.560 --> 0:08:23.600
<v Speaker 1>have a credible fear that allows them to wait inside

0:08:23.640 --> 0:08:26.160
<v Speaker 1>the United States. But you can only do so much there.

0:08:26.240 --> 0:08:28.880
<v Speaker 1>And then again, the other thing that is focused on

0:08:29.040 --> 0:08:31.920
<v Speaker 1>is okay, and this is starting now with this new

0:08:32.240 --> 0:08:37.640
<v Speaker 1>CDD one app that they're developing is finally they're doing

0:08:37.679 --> 0:08:40.240
<v Speaker 1>what we do with visas all over the world, which is,

0:08:40.720 --> 0:08:43.600
<v Speaker 1>here's gonna be a one app that CDP will have

0:08:43.679 --> 0:08:46.640
<v Speaker 1>where you book an appointment and try to make your

0:08:46.679 --> 0:08:50.080
<v Speaker 1>initial asylum showing out a port of entry. And the

0:08:50.120 --> 0:08:53.320
<v Speaker 1>good news about that is CDP totally controls how many

0:08:53.360 --> 0:08:55.880
<v Speaker 1>people they can see, so they'll know we're gonna have

0:08:55.920 --> 0:08:59.880
<v Speaker 1>a thousand of people here, five people here, seven people there.

0:09:00.240 --> 0:09:02.320
<v Speaker 1>And it's not a surprise that you can plan your

0:09:02.400 --> 0:09:05.479
<v Speaker 1>day and have the resources you need for each day,

0:09:05.559 --> 0:09:07.960
<v Speaker 1>as opposed to when people come in between the ports

0:09:07.960 --> 0:09:10.800
<v Speaker 1>of entry, you have no idea who's coming and how

0:09:10.800 --> 0:09:13.440
<v Speaker 1>many people are coming and where they're coming. So that's

0:09:13.480 --> 0:09:16.800
<v Speaker 1>the virtual platform that's going to be sort of a

0:09:16.840 --> 0:09:21.640
<v Speaker 1>one stop shop migrants correct to find information that's what

0:09:21.720 --> 0:09:25.720
<v Speaker 1>CVP is trying to do is to basically do the

0:09:25.760 --> 0:09:28.840
<v Speaker 1>parole process for the thirty thou people a month, but

0:09:29.000 --> 0:09:31.880
<v Speaker 1>for the for the additional people above the thirty thousand,

0:09:32.280 --> 0:09:35.800
<v Speaker 1>to schedule appointments for people to make their initial asylum

0:09:35.880 --> 0:09:38.880
<v Speaker 1>claim at a port of entry instead of in between

0:09:38.920 --> 0:09:41.280
<v Speaker 1>the port of entry. But a lot of people may

0:09:41.280 --> 0:09:44.120
<v Speaker 1>not have access to the internet. Well, this is gonna

0:09:44.120 --> 0:09:46.160
<v Speaker 1>be an interesting question about what the n g O

0:09:46.200 --> 0:09:47.920
<v Speaker 1>s are going to be doing on the northern border.

0:09:48.240 --> 0:09:51.000
<v Speaker 1>Will they be able to help people, you know, for

0:09:51.080 --> 0:09:55.120
<v Speaker 1>better or for work the smuggling networks that do everything

0:09:55.160 --> 0:09:57.520
<v Speaker 1>else for people to come up obviously, will they have

0:09:57.600 --> 0:10:00.480
<v Speaker 1>access to the apps? And will they be able tell

0:10:00.520 --> 0:10:03.319
<v Speaker 1>people Okay, in addition to whatever assistance we've given you

0:10:03.800 --> 0:10:06.280
<v Speaker 1>to get you to the north part of Mexico, the

0:10:06.320 --> 0:10:09.720
<v Speaker 1>southern border here is now your app appointments. And so

0:10:09.920 --> 0:10:12.400
<v Speaker 1>just know that you have an appointment on Mark first

0:10:12.840 --> 0:10:16.280
<v Speaker 1>at twelve thirty pm. Okay, So now the person knows

0:10:16.320 --> 0:10:18.480
<v Speaker 1>they don't really need to do much more than that,

0:10:18.520 --> 0:10:21.000
<v Speaker 1>other than to show up with their appointment. It's not

0:10:21.080 --> 0:10:23.320
<v Speaker 1>unreasonable to think that the nd O s will be

0:10:23.360 --> 0:10:27.440
<v Speaker 1>able to do it, but quite frankly as sophisticated as

0:10:27.480 --> 0:10:29.600
<v Speaker 1>some of these smuggling networks are. Where they know on

0:10:29.640 --> 0:10:33.079
<v Speaker 1>a daily basis, where the CDP resources are, where the

0:10:33.160 --> 0:10:35.520
<v Speaker 1>ports are, which one is the best one to go to,

0:10:35.679 --> 0:10:38.600
<v Speaker 1>where is that? Where are they acting nights, assword people,

0:10:39.000 --> 0:10:41.360
<v Speaker 1>et cetera. That they would be able to use an

0:10:41.360 --> 0:10:45.480
<v Speaker 1>app if not so unrealistic. So there are things that

0:10:45.600 --> 0:10:50.640
<v Speaker 1>the Biden administration could have done years ago. They always say,

0:10:50.640 --> 0:10:53.800
<v Speaker 1>we need Congress to have a comprehensive plan, we need

0:10:53.840 --> 0:10:55.839
<v Speaker 1>more money, But there are things they could have done.

0:10:56.160 --> 0:10:59.200
<v Speaker 1>Why did he wait two years to take that photo

0:10:59.280 --> 0:11:01.360
<v Speaker 1>up trip I as it is to the border and

0:11:01.480 --> 0:11:06.240
<v Speaker 1>do this. I think there is a sort of reticent

0:11:06.559 --> 0:11:11.240
<v Speaker 1>to engage on immigration because there's a calibration problem currently

0:11:11.320 --> 0:11:14.560
<v Speaker 1>that exists in the Democratic Party about how liberal the

0:11:14.640 --> 0:11:18.000
<v Speaker 1>Democratic Party has to be on immigration. And I think

0:11:18.040 --> 0:11:21.240
<v Speaker 1>you're seeing this with the changing demographics of the Latino

0:11:21.360 --> 0:11:23.800
<v Speaker 1>votes and how in some states you have many more

0:11:23.880 --> 0:11:27.040
<v Speaker 1>Latinos voting for Republicans than you used to have in

0:11:27.120 --> 0:11:30.840
<v Speaker 1>the past. And the idea is, I think people in

0:11:30.920 --> 0:11:35.199
<v Speaker 1>the Democratic Party want compassion, but they don't want open

0:11:35.240 --> 0:11:38.480
<v Speaker 1>borders with large I don't think that's a position that's

0:11:38.480 --> 0:11:41.680
<v Speaker 1>the majority of Democrats polls, and I think the Democratic

0:11:41.760 --> 0:11:44.960
<v Speaker 1>leaders who thought that there was a lot more sympathy

0:11:45.000 --> 0:11:48.559
<v Speaker 1>for open borders in the base and that there actually is,

0:11:48.559 --> 0:11:52.520
<v Speaker 1>is maybe recalibrating that understanding a little bit and saying, look,

0:11:52.559 --> 0:11:55.000
<v Speaker 1>as long as we have a compassionate policy and a

0:11:55.000 --> 0:11:59.000
<v Speaker 1>fair policy, we also need a policy that doesn't permit

0:11:59.360 --> 0:12:03.560
<v Speaker 1>just since really unchecked immigration through the southern border of

0:12:03.600 --> 0:12:06.240
<v Speaker 1>the United States. Not having said that, Congress does have

0:12:06.280 --> 0:12:09.640
<v Speaker 1>a role to play is the long term in building

0:12:09.760 --> 0:12:13.960
<v Speaker 1>worker programs. The biggest problem in like immigration practice every

0:12:14.000 --> 0:12:18.319
<v Speaker 1>single day is that you have employers wanting workers and

0:12:18.360 --> 0:12:20.880
<v Speaker 1>realizing and learning for the first time, oh, there's no

0:12:20.960 --> 0:12:24.839
<v Speaker 1>actual way to apply for a worker who's not doing

0:12:24.880 --> 0:12:28.679
<v Speaker 1>a job that requires a college degree. So if you

0:12:28.720 --> 0:12:31.960
<v Speaker 1>want a plumber, or you want a construction person, or

0:12:32.000 --> 0:12:35.600
<v Speaker 1>you want waiters for your seasonal restaurant or whatever, there's

0:12:35.640 --> 0:12:39.000
<v Speaker 1>basically nothing available. There's no way to get these workers.

0:12:39.280 --> 0:12:41.640
<v Speaker 1>And so if you could create a program, and that's

0:12:41.640 --> 0:12:44.760
<v Speaker 1>what the Immigration Build did that pass the sentence but

0:12:44.840 --> 0:12:47.440
<v Speaker 1>didn't pass the House, where you would have large amounts

0:12:47.480 --> 0:12:50.319
<v Speaker 1>of these visas available during time periods like this where

0:12:50.400 --> 0:12:54.200
<v Speaker 1>unemployment is law but has very few visas available during

0:12:54.280 --> 0:12:58.120
<v Speaker 1>time periods where unemployment and by you can actually have

0:12:58.360 --> 0:13:01.120
<v Speaker 1>people all go through these eagle famiels. You wouldn't have

0:13:01.120 --> 0:13:03.559
<v Speaker 1>anybody having to claim a sylum. Most people claim a

0:13:03.600 --> 0:13:05.719
<v Speaker 1>flound because they have no alternative. There's no other way

0:13:05.760 --> 0:13:08.480
<v Speaker 1>to do this. But people wouldn't want to claim asylum,

0:13:08.520 --> 0:13:11.280
<v Speaker 1>and they could just access these worker programs. You'd have

0:13:11.360 --> 0:13:14.640
<v Speaker 1>people do these jobs and when these jobs are finished,

0:13:14.760 --> 0:13:17.480
<v Speaker 1>then they can return home with a lot of savings

0:13:17.480 --> 0:13:20.880
<v Speaker 1>for them and their family and return whenever they want

0:13:20.920 --> 0:13:24.079
<v Speaker 1>to when the times are high again. And so that's

0:13:24.120 --> 0:13:27.760
<v Speaker 1>the idea of how you build these programs in those situations.

0:13:27.760 --> 0:13:30.840
<v Speaker 1>But we don't have a program like that that exists,

0:13:31.160 --> 0:13:33.640
<v Speaker 1>and so this is what creates all of this illegality

0:13:33.679 --> 0:13:36.000
<v Speaker 1>on the southern border. So now let's move on to

0:13:36.559 --> 0:13:40.800
<v Speaker 1>Ron de Santis. First, he was flying Texas migrants to

0:13:40.880 --> 0:13:45.120
<v Speaker 1>Cape Cod. Now he's going to court to make his point.

0:13:45.240 --> 0:13:49.559
<v Speaker 1>Trial opened in federal court in Pensacola, where he's claiming

0:13:49.559 --> 0:13:53.440
<v Speaker 1>that the Biden administration allowed thousands of migrants into the

0:13:53.520 --> 0:13:57.200
<v Speaker 1>US each month by ignoring policies to detain them. Is

0:13:57.200 --> 0:14:01.240
<v Speaker 1>this a serious case? This lawsuit was bye, but it's

0:14:01.240 --> 0:14:03.599
<v Speaker 1>not a new lawsuit. It's just at the trial is

0:14:03.679 --> 0:14:06.600
<v Speaker 1>happening this week. I mean it's a serious case to

0:14:06.720 --> 0:14:10.120
<v Speaker 1>the extent that the a judge has denied emotions to

0:14:10.200 --> 0:14:13.240
<v Speaker 1>this miss twice already, and it's saying, look, we're gonna

0:14:13.240 --> 0:14:16.920
<v Speaker 1>go to trial on an Administrative Procedure Act claim that

0:14:17.040 --> 0:14:21.640
<v Speaker 1>the Biden administration has to be detaining people as the

0:14:21.680 --> 0:14:24.160
<v Speaker 1>Southern borders. That it's not true what they're saying, that

0:14:24.200 --> 0:14:27.720
<v Speaker 1>we don't have an alternative but to release people into

0:14:27.760 --> 0:14:30.920
<v Speaker 1>the United States. Now, I think the problem is people

0:14:30.920 --> 0:14:35.120
<v Speaker 1>don't realize how complicated this mosaic is. No person is

0:14:35.160 --> 0:14:37.320
<v Speaker 1>treated the same as another person. And what do I

0:14:37.360 --> 0:14:40.200
<v Speaker 1>mean by that? If you're under the age of eighteen,

0:14:40.960 --> 0:14:44.280
<v Speaker 1>the law is extremely clear that you can't be detained

0:14:44.400 --> 0:14:46.400
<v Speaker 1>or removed or anything else. You have to be let

0:14:46.400 --> 0:14:50.320
<v Speaker 1>in the country. If you appear as either an unaccompanied

0:14:50.360 --> 0:14:53.080
<v Speaker 1>minor or even if you come as a family and

0:14:53.080 --> 0:14:55.160
<v Speaker 1>the family has mom, dad and a bunch of kids

0:14:55.200 --> 0:14:57.960
<v Speaker 1>under a team, the bunch of kids under a team

0:14:58.200 --> 0:15:01.120
<v Speaker 1>cannot be detained, can't be the ordered or anything. They

0:15:01.120 --> 0:15:03.240
<v Speaker 1>have to be letting the country and allowed to make

0:15:03.520 --> 0:15:06.840
<v Speaker 1>any immigration claims that they're allowed to make. That's by sages.

0:15:07.080 --> 0:15:08.720
<v Speaker 1>Then the question is, well, what do you do with

0:15:08.880 --> 0:15:11.800
<v Speaker 1>family because the kids have to be allowed to come in?

0:15:12.240 --> 0:15:15.360
<v Speaker 1>Do you separate the parents from the children. That's what

0:15:15.480 --> 0:15:18.480
<v Speaker 1>the Trump administrates and tried, and we know what the

0:15:18.520 --> 0:15:21.320
<v Speaker 1>consequences of that were. And so I don't think the

0:15:21.400 --> 0:15:25.440
<v Speaker 1>court is gonna order the Biden administrations to separate the

0:15:25.480 --> 0:15:28.320
<v Speaker 1>parents from the children. I just don't think that's gonna happen.

0:15:28.520 --> 0:15:32.120
<v Speaker 1>So we're back now to again single adults. So when

0:15:32.160 --> 0:15:35.640
<v Speaker 1>the adults come alone with no children, you know, the

0:15:35.680 --> 0:15:38.600
<v Speaker 1>most common thing is families and children when you add

0:15:38.600 --> 0:15:40.720
<v Speaker 1>those up together, but there's still a number of people

0:15:40.880 --> 0:15:44.440
<v Speaker 1>come just as adults, not accompanied by any children. Do

0:15:44.520 --> 0:15:47.800
<v Speaker 1>you have to detain all of those people? And what

0:15:47.920 --> 0:15:50.600
<v Speaker 1>the record is probably gonna show him these cases is

0:15:50.880 --> 0:15:53.720
<v Speaker 1>most of those people currently are being detained or put

0:15:53.720 --> 0:15:57.160
<v Speaker 1>in expedited removal or put through Title forty two. And

0:15:57.240 --> 0:15:59.240
<v Speaker 1>so if you're just talking about the few people that

0:15:59.320 --> 0:16:02.040
<v Speaker 1>make it through the tracts because they have some medicals

0:16:02.400 --> 0:16:05.680
<v Speaker 1>or something else, are you really gonna force the Biden

0:16:05.760 --> 0:16:09.320
<v Speaker 1>administration's hands to say no, no, no, every single person

0:16:09.760 --> 0:16:12.640
<v Speaker 1>you have to detain. I mean, that's where this judge

0:16:12.640 --> 0:16:15.200
<v Speaker 1>is gonna I think have a hard time craft they

0:16:15.240 --> 0:16:18.760
<v Speaker 1>have decisions because in the end, the issue with the

0:16:18.840 --> 0:16:21.640
<v Speaker 1>children makes this so complicated that people don't realize that

0:16:21.640 --> 0:16:24.640
<v Speaker 1>that's why most people are getting through when they enter

0:16:24.720 --> 0:16:28.120
<v Speaker 1>the United States. And so what chance do you think

0:16:28.200 --> 0:16:33.120
<v Speaker 1>this suit has in Florida? I think, you know, given

0:16:33.280 --> 0:16:36.120
<v Speaker 1>who the judges here, and that the judges is sort

0:16:36.120 --> 0:16:39.080
<v Speaker 1>of sympathetic to these claims and has been. I do

0:16:39.160 --> 0:16:43.040
<v Speaker 1>think that some version of a decision will be issued

0:16:43.160 --> 0:16:46.800
<v Speaker 1>requiring the Biden administration to detain more people on the

0:16:46.880 --> 0:16:50.720
<v Speaker 1>southern border than they're currently detaining. But I do think

0:16:51.400 --> 0:16:54.720
<v Speaker 1>very quickly the judge, either on his own account, will

0:16:54.880 --> 0:16:59.560
<v Speaker 1>realize the problem that's happening with families and with unaccompanied children,

0:17:00.120 --> 0:17:02.760
<v Speaker 1>or that sort of buzz all will be lead to

0:17:02.800 --> 0:17:07.000
<v Speaker 1>reversal in the eleventh Circuit, especially because there's a lot

0:17:07.000 --> 0:17:11.640
<v Speaker 1>of dicta in the remain in Mexico decisions. Let's talk

0:17:11.680 --> 0:17:15.440
<v Speaker 1>about the Biden administration's ability to allow people to enter

0:17:15.480 --> 0:17:17.720
<v Speaker 1>in the United States, that the choices aren't just to

0:17:17.760 --> 0:17:22.280
<v Speaker 1>remain in Mexico or the tension that there is a

0:17:22.359 --> 0:17:25.040
<v Speaker 1>third choice and that the Biden administration has that third

0:17:25.160 --> 0:17:28.080
<v Speaker 1>choice to allow people to enter into the United States

0:17:28.119 --> 0:17:31.320
<v Speaker 1>and wait here while their claims are pending. So now

0:17:31.359 --> 0:17:35.920
<v Speaker 1>one question on on the Supreme Court case, um, the

0:17:36.200 --> 0:17:38.960
<v Speaker 1>Court's going to take that decide that case here the

0:17:39.040 --> 0:17:43.560
<v Speaker 1>arguments in February or March. Is the answer in that

0:17:43.640 --> 0:17:48.359
<v Speaker 1>case going to be Title forty two is legal or

0:17:48.400 --> 0:17:50.600
<v Speaker 1>not legal? Or is it going to be? Well, the

0:17:50.640 --> 0:17:54.919
<v Speaker 1>Republican States can sue or can't sue? Right, That's the

0:17:54.960 --> 0:17:58.439
<v Speaker 1>problem is the only thing the Court can do is

0:17:58.600 --> 0:18:00.639
<v Speaker 1>at the end of the day allowed a state to

0:18:00.920 --> 0:18:05.280
<v Speaker 1>intervene in the appeal of the case that's currently in

0:18:05.320 --> 0:18:09.960
<v Speaker 1>the DC Circuit where there is a challenge to the

0:18:10.000 --> 0:18:13.400
<v Speaker 1>ability of the Biden administration to use Title forty two.

0:18:13.520 --> 0:18:16.919
<v Speaker 1>That's it. But what will happen is if the States

0:18:16.960 --> 0:18:20.359
<v Speaker 1>are successful the Supreme Court, all they will be doing

0:18:20.840 --> 0:18:24.439
<v Speaker 1>is allowing the state to try to get a second

0:18:24.520 --> 0:18:29.440
<v Speaker 1>chance at getting This decision repeals that bans the administration

0:18:29.480 --> 0:18:32.400
<v Speaker 1>from using Title forty two. And then at the same

0:18:32.440 --> 0:18:34.639
<v Speaker 1>time there's a case coming up through the Fifth Circuit

0:18:34.680 --> 0:18:38.080
<v Speaker 1>on bad So eventually, what will happen is it will

0:18:38.200 --> 0:18:40.720
<v Speaker 1>end at the Supreme Court, where the Supreme Court will

0:18:40.760 --> 0:18:44.199
<v Speaker 1>have to decide whether the Biden administration can get rid

0:18:44.240 --> 0:18:48.480
<v Speaker 1>of Title forty two. And again, I just don't see

0:18:48.640 --> 0:18:51.639
<v Speaker 1>how a Supreme Court can say that a public health

0:18:52.000 --> 0:18:56.119
<v Speaker 1>determination that's the Biden administration or any administration wants to

0:18:56.160 --> 0:18:58.080
<v Speaker 1>get rid of based on the fact that the public

0:18:58.080 --> 0:19:01.119
<v Speaker 1>health emergency is over, as to be kept into place

0:19:01.480 --> 0:19:04.399
<v Speaker 1>once the public health emergency is over. It does seem

0:19:04.520 --> 0:19:08.040
<v Speaker 1>very strange to me. But I just don't know if

0:19:08.080 --> 0:19:10.560
<v Speaker 1>the idea is just to keep this Title forty two

0:19:11.119 --> 0:19:13.480
<v Speaker 1>in effect for as long as possible and that sort

0:19:13.520 --> 0:19:16.199
<v Speaker 1>of everybody is in on the joke, as that's all

0:19:16.280 --> 0:19:20.240
<v Speaker 1>we're trying to accomplish here. Thanks so much for your insights, Leon.

0:19:20.440 --> 0:19:24.439
<v Speaker 1>As always, that's immigration law expert Leon Fresco, a partner

0:19:24.480 --> 0:19:28.719
<v Speaker 1>at Hollandon Knight. George Santos has been a member of

0:19:28.760 --> 0:19:32.199
<v Speaker 1>Congress for less than a week, but the freshman Republican

0:19:32.240 --> 0:19:37.120
<v Speaker 1>has already been engulfed in controversy and investigations, and now

0:19:37.160 --> 0:19:41.960
<v Speaker 1>he's officially facing a Congressional ethics complaint filed on Tuesday

0:19:42.040 --> 0:19:47.640
<v Speaker 1>by two New York Democrats. Congressman Dan Goldman and Richie Torres. Mr.

0:19:47.680 --> 0:19:51.480
<v Speaker 1>Santos is conduct both as it relates to his outright

0:19:51.560 --> 0:19:56.880
<v Speaker 1>lies about his biography, about his employment, UM, about his

0:19:56.880 --> 0:20:01.040
<v Speaker 1>his entire person as being his religion. Um. All of

0:20:01.080 --> 0:20:05.000
<v Speaker 1>that is reflects on every one of us in Congress.

0:20:06.520 --> 0:20:11.080
<v Speaker 1>Even more egregious than his line is his possible love breaking.

0:20:12.000 --> 0:20:13.880
<v Speaker 1>A million dollar question has where did all the money

0:20:13.880 --> 0:20:19.960
<v Speaker 1>come from? Santos has admitted misrepresenting significant details about his religion, education,

0:20:20.040 --> 0:20:23.800
<v Speaker 1>and career, including that he graduated from college and worked

0:20:23.880 --> 0:20:29.080
<v Speaker 1>for Goldman, Sachs and City Group, but he says Santos

0:20:29.119 --> 0:20:32.879
<v Speaker 1>will be facing more than his colleagues. Federal and local

0:20:32.960 --> 0:20:37.040
<v Speaker 1>prosecutors are already investigating him, and a complaint has been

0:20:37.040 --> 0:20:40.600
<v Speaker 1>filed with the Federal Election Commission joining me his elections

0:20:40.680 --> 0:20:44.119
<v Speaker 1>law expert Richard Brafalt, a professor at Columbia Law School.

0:20:44.480 --> 0:20:48.840
<v Speaker 1>Santos has acknowledged line to reporters about his educational and

0:20:48.960 --> 0:20:53.679
<v Speaker 1>professional history, though he calls it embellishing his resume. But

0:20:53.840 --> 0:20:58.600
<v Speaker 1>is there any law, rule or regulation that makes such

0:20:58.720 --> 0:21:03.040
<v Speaker 1>misstatements illegal? It just seems like it's not something that

0:21:03.160 --> 0:21:07.840
<v Speaker 1>he can really be held accountable for, except by voters. No. No,

0:21:07.960 --> 0:21:11.280
<v Speaker 1>there's certainly no federal law prohibiting lying by a candidate

0:21:11.359 --> 0:21:14.560
<v Speaker 1>during an election. Hardly any states have anything like that.

0:21:14.920 --> 0:21:17.440
<v Speaker 1>There even some questions about whether it would be constitutional

0:21:17.760 --> 0:21:20.840
<v Speaker 1>to punish somebody for lying, as opposed to say something

0:21:20.880 --> 0:21:24.439
<v Speaker 1>like defamation, as he obviously lies about somebody in a

0:21:24.440 --> 0:21:26.520
<v Speaker 1>way that stains them, that might be the basis of

0:21:26.880 --> 0:21:31.440
<v Speaker 1>at least civil action. Uh No, there's generally no restriction

0:21:31.480 --> 0:21:35.800
<v Speaker 1>onlining other than lying on a federal form or lying

0:21:36.280 --> 0:21:39.119
<v Speaker 1>through the federal government in the course of a federal inquiry.

0:21:39.160 --> 0:21:41.840
<v Speaker 1>And that's really where the extent that there's going to

0:21:41.920 --> 0:21:44.320
<v Speaker 1>be a legal problem for Mr Santos. It's going to

0:21:44.400 --> 0:21:47.720
<v Speaker 1>be questions about whether he lied in his financial disclosure

0:21:47.760 --> 0:21:51.480
<v Speaker 1>forms and is can't take finance reporting. Federal prosecutors in

0:21:51.520 --> 0:21:54.800
<v Speaker 1>the Eastern District of New York are reportedly looking into

0:21:54.800 --> 0:21:58.480
<v Speaker 1>Santos's finances and how he was able to lend his

0:21:58.600 --> 0:22:03.280
<v Speaker 1>campaign seven hundred thousand dollars when as late as he

0:22:03.440 --> 0:22:06.960
<v Speaker 1>was declaring a salary of only fifty five thousand dollars.

0:22:07.359 --> 0:22:10.600
<v Speaker 1>That's right, and in the context of his campaign, he

0:22:10.680 --> 0:22:14.280
<v Speaker 1>claims to have loaned his campaign more than seven hundred

0:22:14.320 --> 0:22:17.640
<v Speaker 1>thousand dollars in two and yet, as you point out,

0:22:18.119 --> 0:22:20.720
<v Speaker 1>in he basically said he had an income of fifty

0:22:20.720 --> 0:22:24.920
<v Speaker 1>five dollars and little there no assets. So a good

0:22:24.920 --> 0:22:27.199
<v Speaker 1>part of the financing of his campaign came from this

0:22:27.880 --> 0:22:31.720
<v Speaker 1>loan based on resources he claims to develop from this

0:22:32.119 --> 0:22:35.720
<v Speaker 1>LLC devolder. But the year before he was basically declaring

0:22:35.800 --> 0:22:39.920
<v Speaker 1>very little income. So the issue that complaint isn't fired

0:22:39.920 --> 0:22:42.919
<v Speaker 1>with the FTC. And what I imagine the prosecutors are

0:22:42.920 --> 0:22:45.760
<v Speaker 1>looking into is was this money really being funneled to

0:22:45.880 --> 0:22:48.359
<v Speaker 1>him by other donors? Was he, in in fact a

0:22:48.400 --> 0:22:51.520
<v Speaker 1>so called straw donor, claiming to be donating his own

0:22:51.560 --> 0:22:55.359
<v Speaker 1>money but actually donating other people's money. Yeah, So let's

0:22:55.400 --> 0:22:59.800
<v Speaker 1>talk about the complaint filed with the FEC by the

0:23:00.000 --> 0:23:04.160
<v Speaker 1>Campaign Legal Center, which, as you say, accused his business

0:23:04.160 --> 0:23:08.240
<v Speaker 1>of being a front for illegal straw donors and accused

0:23:08.320 --> 0:23:12.840
<v Speaker 1>him of illegally using campaign funds for personal expenses like travel,

0:23:13.040 --> 0:23:17.520
<v Speaker 1>luxury hotels, and expensive meals. That seems like it might

0:23:17.560 --> 0:23:21.200
<v Speaker 1>be an easy thing to prove or disprove, right, they

0:23:21.200 --> 0:23:24.280
<v Speaker 1>went through his financial the report here, you're you're required

0:23:24.320 --> 0:23:27.920
<v Speaker 1>to file reports with the FEC about your campaign, both

0:23:27.960 --> 0:23:30.680
<v Speaker 1>your contributions and your expenditures. And they went through his

0:23:30.720 --> 0:23:33.560
<v Speaker 1>expenditure lists and found things that look like they might

0:23:33.560 --> 0:23:35.640
<v Speaker 1>have been paying for rent on a home. They've been

0:23:35.640 --> 0:23:37.679
<v Speaker 1>looking for kinds of meals that looked like they might

0:23:37.720 --> 0:23:40.159
<v Speaker 1>have been personal meals than campaign meals, because you know

0:23:40.200 --> 0:23:43.280
<v Speaker 1>they were part of his travels. So it is illegal

0:23:43.520 --> 0:23:45.960
<v Speaker 1>to use campaign money for what's called personal use. That

0:23:45.960 --> 0:23:47.840
<v Speaker 1>would include things like paying for rent on your own

0:23:47.840 --> 0:23:51.199
<v Speaker 1>personal residents, are paying for personal travel, personal meals not

0:23:51.200 --> 0:23:54.920
<v Speaker 1>connected to the campaign. They contended, based on the reported

0:23:54.920 --> 0:23:58.399
<v Speaker 1>information and his financial disclosure forms, likely that he was

0:23:58.480 --> 0:24:02.119
<v Speaker 1>using some campaign funds for personal use. If that's true,

0:24:02.440 --> 0:24:05.919
<v Speaker 1>that would be illegal. They said that dozens of his

0:24:06.080 --> 0:24:11.119
<v Speaker 1>campaign expanditures were recorded as costing a hundred dollars and

0:24:11.240 --> 0:24:16.120
<v Speaker 1>ninety nine cents, so a penny below the threshold under

0:24:16.200 --> 0:24:19.239
<v Speaker 1>federal Again, if your expenses there are or more, you're

0:24:19.280 --> 0:24:22.160
<v Speaker 1>supposed to itemize what you were spending them on. Anything

0:24:22.280 --> 0:24:25.560
<v Speaker 1>under that you can just put onto a broader category

0:24:25.600 --> 0:24:28.359
<v Speaker 1>without you know, providing any details. And I think they

0:24:28.400 --> 0:24:31.199
<v Speaker 1>pointed out that something like more than half of his

0:24:31.560 --> 0:24:35.200
<v Speaker 1>his expenditures something around numbers around forty either were a

0:24:35.280 --> 0:24:41.040
<v Speaker 1>hundred nine hundred, which they just seems to just wildly implausible.

0:24:41.520 --> 0:24:43.320
<v Speaker 1>And then they actually looked at some of the expenses

0:24:43.359 --> 0:24:45.760
<v Speaker 1>and then kind of compared them to we're online to

0:24:45.840 --> 0:24:49.240
<v Speaker 1>public information about what the vendor was charging, and it

0:24:49.280 --> 0:24:52.320
<v Speaker 1>seemed to be either more or less but not that amount.

0:24:52.560 --> 0:24:54.200
<v Speaker 1>So they looked at like what a cost the park

0:24:54.240 --> 0:24:59.080
<v Speaker 1>to FK airport or using the clear system for kind

0:24:59.080 --> 0:25:02.440
<v Speaker 1>of expedited treat and you know, and going through airport security,

0:25:02.600 --> 0:25:04.879
<v Speaker 1>and they actually say clear charges of a hundred and

0:25:04.880 --> 0:25:07.520
<v Speaker 1>eighty nine, but they put down a hundred ninety nine there.

0:25:07.640 --> 0:25:10.159
<v Speaker 1>I mean again, they're basically saying that, you know, if

0:25:10.200 --> 0:25:12.639
<v Speaker 1>you look at all of it, there's a huge number

0:25:13.000 --> 0:25:18.399
<v Speaker 1>of which seems to evidence in intent to basically to

0:25:18.600 --> 0:25:23.200
<v Speaker 1>file a false report. So the Campaign Legal Center filed

0:25:23.960 --> 0:25:30.480
<v Speaker 1>the complaint asking the FEC to investigate. Will the FEC investigate,

0:25:30.960 --> 0:25:33.400
<v Speaker 1>And it's really up to them. They have to look

0:25:33.400 --> 0:25:36.240
<v Speaker 1>at the complaints see whether on its face it it

0:25:36.320 --> 0:25:40.120
<v Speaker 1>makes a plausible allegation of both facts and a violation

0:25:40.119 --> 0:25:42.560
<v Speaker 1>and law, and then they have to make a decision

0:25:42.600 --> 0:25:45.800
<v Speaker 1>whether they want to undertake a formal investigation that requires

0:25:45.800 --> 0:25:48.680
<v Speaker 1>a vote of the Commission. Then they do the investigation,

0:25:49.040 --> 0:25:51.359
<v Speaker 1>and then if they conclude that kind of the fact

0:25:51.440 --> 0:25:54.840
<v Speaker 1>support the allegations that the Campaign Legal Centers making, they

0:25:54.840 --> 0:25:57.399
<v Speaker 1>can then bring a case against him. As a civil case,

0:25:57.760 --> 0:26:00.280
<v Speaker 1>they can impost fines and and enjoin them from doing

0:26:00.320 --> 0:26:04.000
<v Speaker 1>these things. Again, the FEC doesn't have a criminal enforcement power,

0:26:04.359 --> 0:26:06.520
<v Speaker 1>but they could refer that if they think that there's

0:26:06.560 --> 0:26:08.919
<v Speaker 1>a criminal matter there, they can refer to the Department

0:26:08.920 --> 0:26:10.840
<v Speaker 1>of Justice, so they can bring a civil case. They

0:26:10.840 --> 0:26:13.399
<v Speaker 1>can seek actually they can be securely hety finds that

0:26:13.520 --> 0:26:16.760
<v Speaker 1>they can seek, but its essentially civil penalties. And as

0:26:16.760 --> 0:26:19.320
<v Speaker 1>far as the criminal case, you know, the Eastern District.

0:26:19.920 --> 0:26:23.240
<v Speaker 1>Let's say that the federal prosecutors find what the Campaign

0:26:23.640 --> 0:26:29.040
<v Speaker 1>Legal Center alleged in it's complained to the FEC accusing

0:26:29.080 --> 0:26:32.240
<v Speaker 1>his business of being a front for illegal straw donors

0:26:32.280 --> 0:26:36.400
<v Speaker 1>as you mentioned, and accusing him of illegally using campaign

0:26:36.440 --> 0:26:41.320
<v Speaker 1>funds for personal expenses. What kind of charges could prosecutors bring.

0:26:41.800 --> 0:26:43.960
<v Speaker 1>Well again, I mean just I'll just focus on the

0:26:44.000 --> 0:26:46.920
<v Speaker 1>campaign financial ones. I don't know that there's any tax

0:26:47.040 --> 0:26:50.080
<v Speaker 1>problems or anything with his LLC or anything involving the

0:26:50.200 --> 0:26:54.520
<v Speaker 1>LLC itself. These campaign financial violations would become criminal if

0:26:54.520 --> 0:26:57.480
<v Speaker 1>they are what's called knowing and willful. If he knew

0:26:57.520 --> 0:27:00.560
<v Speaker 1>and intentionally violated the law, if he was part of

0:27:00.600 --> 0:27:04.919
<v Speaker 1>a scheme to take money from unknown donors and pretended

0:27:05.040 --> 0:27:07.800
<v Speaker 1>was his. And it gets more serious of some of

0:27:07.840 --> 0:27:11.400
<v Speaker 1>that money came from corporations possible. We don't know. If

0:27:11.440 --> 0:27:15.040
<v Speaker 1>some of that money came from foreigners, that's illegal, and

0:27:15.280 --> 0:27:17.960
<v Speaker 1>maybe you know, given his ties to Brazil or elsewhere,

0:27:17.960 --> 0:27:21.000
<v Speaker 1>it's conceivable that some of the money came from foreign sources.

0:27:21.040 --> 0:27:23.800
<v Speaker 1>That's illegal. And it's also quite conceivable that some of

0:27:23.840 --> 0:27:27.359
<v Speaker 1>the donations were above the statutory limit. There's a limit

0:27:27.400 --> 0:27:30.000
<v Speaker 1>of twenty nine or a dollars per election that anyone

0:27:30.119 --> 0:27:33.639
<v Speaker 1>donor can give one candidate. It's quite possible, again the

0:27:33.720 --> 0:27:35.960
<v Speaker 1>stall we don't know any of this, but it's possible

0:27:35.960 --> 0:27:39.040
<v Speaker 1>that some of those donations were well above the donor

0:27:39.080 --> 0:27:42.720
<v Speaker 1>nation limits. So it's not just the parent misreporting of

0:27:42.760 --> 0:27:45.760
<v Speaker 1>the his expenditures and being a straw donor. That that's

0:27:45.760 --> 0:27:48.600
<v Speaker 1>pretty serious in itself, and criminal cases have been based

0:27:48.640 --> 0:27:51.000
<v Speaker 1>on that. But it's possible that the reason he's the

0:27:51.000 --> 0:27:54.840
<v Speaker 1>straw donor is that's it's disguising all sorts of illegal contributions,

0:27:54.880 --> 0:27:57.680
<v Speaker 1>as I say, by corporations, by foreigners, or by people

0:27:57.720 --> 0:28:00.480
<v Speaker 1>who gave way too much money. So if this was

0:28:00.520 --> 0:28:04.080
<v Speaker 1>all intentional, knowing and WillFull is the legal language that

0:28:04.119 --> 0:28:07.080
<v Speaker 1>could be the basis officity is criminal case. Two congressmen

0:28:07.160 --> 0:28:10.760
<v Speaker 1>from New York are filing an official complaint asking the

0:28:10.760 --> 0:28:15.280
<v Speaker 1>House Committee on Ethics to investigate him and whether he

0:28:15.760 --> 0:28:19.879
<v Speaker 1>broke the law when he filed his required financial disclosures

0:28:20.040 --> 0:28:23.800
<v Speaker 1>late and without key details about his finances. Is that

0:28:23.960 --> 0:28:28.080
<v Speaker 1>separate from the federal Election Commission exactly? That's a separate issue.

0:28:28.359 --> 0:28:31.080
<v Speaker 1>The House of Representatives has rules requiring people to file

0:28:31.200 --> 0:28:35.400
<v Speaker 1>financial disposure forms, including I think candidates, because obviously he's

0:28:35.440 --> 0:28:38.520
<v Speaker 1>misreporting or misreporting this while he was a candidate. But

0:28:38.560 --> 0:28:41.280
<v Speaker 1>the House also has these filing requirements. They obviously only

0:28:41.320 --> 0:28:43.920
<v Speaker 1>have jurisdiction against somebody a person is actually member of

0:28:43.920 --> 0:28:46.640
<v Speaker 1>the House, but he now is, so they there is

0:28:46.680 --> 0:28:49.280
<v Speaker 1>a House Ethics Committee, and they can look into these things,

0:28:49.320 --> 0:28:52.080
<v Speaker 1>and they can recommend sanctions. I mean, their sanctions would

0:28:52.080 --> 0:28:56.480
<v Speaker 1>be along the lines of reprimand or more serious. But

0:28:56.640 --> 0:29:00.000
<v Speaker 1>really I mean they're largely you know, verbal like refermence

0:29:00.040 --> 0:29:03.360
<v Speaker 1>and but in the most egregious cases, they could ultimately

0:29:03.440 --> 0:29:06.520
<v Speaker 1>recommend expulsion. I mean, that's a pretty serious thing that

0:29:06.640 --> 0:29:09.000
<v Speaker 1>very rarely happens. And it's unlikely that he would be

0:29:09.040 --> 0:29:12.040
<v Speaker 1>expelled unless there actually is a federal criminal case brought

0:29:12.040 --> 0:29:14.719
<v Speaker 1>against him and and he's convicted, but that would be

0:29:14.760 --> 0:29:17.600
<v Speaker 1>the ultimate thing. More more likely they're gonna do something

0:29:17.640 --> 0:29:20.440
<v Speaker 1>like if they were to find a violation, would be

0:29:20.520 --> 0:29:23.000
<v Speaker 1>some nature of a revermand. But they don't even have

0:29:23.080 --> 0:29:25.680
<v Speaker 1>to investigate. If they don't want to write in the House,

0:29:25.840 --> 0:29:27.320
<v Speaker 1>they don't have to, and of course they can take

0:29:27.320 --> 0:29:30.840
<v Speaker 1>their time there. Uh there. It's just being reconstituted based

0:29:30.880 --> 0:29:34.040
<v Speaker 1>on the actions of the House yesterday, which imposed term

0:29:34.040 --> 0:29:36.640
<v Speaker 1>limits on on members of the Ethics Committee, which meant

0:29:36.640 --> 0:29:38.800
<v Speaker 1>that at this moment, I think all but one of

0:29:38.800 --> 0:29:41.480
<v Speaker 1>the Democrats actually have to get off the committee. So

0:29:41.720 --> 0:29:45.440
<v Speaker 1>I wouldn't expect every rapid action from the House Ethics Committee,

0:29:45.560 --> 0:29:48.480
<v Speaker 1>but it's possible that they too will get involved in this. Well.

0:29:48.480 --> 0:29:52.720
<v Speaker 1>House majority leaders Steve Scalie told reporters yesterday that the

0:29:52.800 --> 0:29:56.640
<v Speaker 1>Santos issue is being handled internally. We're going to have

0:29:56.760 --> 0:29:59.280
<v Speaker 1>to sit down and talk to him about it, Well,

0:29:59.400 --> 0:30:01.240
<v Speaker 1>that sounds more like, you know, go a visit with

0:30:01.280 --> 0:30:04.560
<v Speaker 1>the principle, or maybe you know, the parents sitting down

0:30:04.600 --> 0:30:08.320
<v Speaker 1>with a teenager who borrowed the car. But the House

0:30:08.400 --> 0:30:12.360
<v Speaker 1>can vote to expel a member. It requires a two

0:30:12.400 --> 0:30:15.880
<v Speaker 1>thirds vote, and and it really only it is constitutionally

0:30:15.920 --> 0:30:18.040
<v Speaker 1>possible they need they would need a two thirds vote.

0:30:18.400 --> 0:30:21.080
<v Speaker 1>It really only happens in the most egregious cases, and

0:30:21.560 --> 0:30:24.560
<v Speaker 1>it's hard to imagine it happening here unless he's actually

0:30:24.560 --> 0:30:27.520
<v Speaker 1>convicted of a federal crime. In some ways, the damage

0:30:27.520 --> 0:30:29.480
<v Speaker 1>has been done. Um, the fact that I mean, I mean,

0:30:29.480 --> 0:30:31.520
<v Speaker 1>if he's violently they can't pay finance law, then when

0:30:31.760 --> 0:30:34.560
<v Speaker 1>then those are serious issues and that needs to be resolved.

0:30:34.600 --> 0:30:37.000
<v Speaker 1>But in terms of the line to the public, line

0:30:37.000 --> 0:30:40.959
<v Speaker 1>to the voters, that's all out there now. Um. And

0:30:41.280 --> 0:30:44.080
<v Speaker 1>you know, if he runs again, certainly that's going to

0:30:44.120 --> 0:30:47.000
<v Speaker 1>be part of his record. Any final thoughts about this

0:30:47.080 --> 0:30:51.080
<v Speaker 1>and all the investigations going on, what helps the support

0:30:51.200 --> 0:30:53.840
<v Speaker 1>the idea that he might have committed can't pay finance violations.

0:30:54.360 --> 0:30:56.680
<v Speaker 1>That's build the case that he might very well be

0:30:56.720 --> 0:30:59.080
<v Speaker 1>a straw donor and that he may very well have

0:30:59.200 --> 0:31:04.480
<v Speaker 1>filed false um expendature reports is all the other lies

0:31:04.560 --> 0:31:07.000
<v Speaker 1>that he's already admitted to. You know, the fact that

0:31:07.040 --> 0:31:10.480
<v Speaker 1>he's kind of comes into this as uh an acknowledged

0:31:11.240 --> 0:31:16.000
<v Speaker 1>embellisher and acknowledge liar about his resume, about his ancestry,

0:31:16.040 --> 0:31:20.040
<v Speaker 1>about his education kind of um at least provide some

0:31:20.160 --> 0:31:23.480
<v Speaker 1>context for the claim that he also lied on his

0:31:23.560 --> 0:31:27.800
<v Speaker 1>campaign finance report. Thanks so much, rich I always appreciate

0:31:27.840 --> 0:31:32.560
<v Speaker 1>your analysis. That's elections law expert Richard Brafalt, a professor

0:31:32.600 --> 0:31:35.240
<v Speaker 1>at Columbia Law School. And that's it for this edition

0:31:35.240 --> 0:31:37.920
<v Speaker 1>of the Bloomberg Law Show. Remember you can always get

0:31:37.920 --> 0:31:41.239
<v Speaker 1>the latest legal news, Honor Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can

0:31:41.280 --> 0:31:45.520
<v Speaker 1>find them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and at www dot

0:31:45.560 --> 0:31:50.080
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg dot com, slash podcast, Slash Law. I'm June Grosso

0:31:50.240 --> 0:31:51.840
<v Speaker 1>and you're listening to Bloomberg