WEBVTT - Behind the Trump Georgia Indictment

0:00:03.200 --> 0:00:08.000
<v Speaker 1>This is Bloomberg Law with June Brusso from Bloomberg Radio.

0:00:09.240 --> 0:00:12.200
<v Speaker 2>So look, all I want to do is this. I

0:00:12.400 --> 0:00:13.640
<v Speaker 2>just want to find.

0:00:15.320 --> 0:00:20.680
<v Speaker 3>Eleven thousand, seven hundred and eighty votes, which is one

0:00:20.720 --> 0:00:21.560
<v Speaker 3>more that we have.

0:00:22.440 --> 0:00:26.640
<v Speaker 1>The sweeping indictment of Donald Trump and eighteen others, alleges

0:00:26.680 --> 0:00:30.400
<v Speaker 1>a vast conspiracy that stretched from the Oval office and

0:00:30.480 --> 0:00:34.520
<v Speaker 1>Trump's infamous call to Georgia's Secretary of State to find

0:00:34.600 --> 0:00:37.960
<v Speaker 1>him enough votes to win the battleground state to a

0:00:38.000 --> 0:00:41.560
<v Speaker 1>hearing in Georgia's state House where false statements were made

0:00:41.600 --> 0:00:46.519
<v Speaker 1>that Fulton County election workers illegally counted between twelve thousand

0:00:46.560 --> 0:00:50.360
<v Speaker 1>and twenty four thousand fake ballots that were unloaded off

0:00:50.400 --> 0:00:52.160
<v Speaker 1>a truck in the middle of the night.

0:00:52.479 --> 0:00:57.000
<v Speaker 3>They were ballots coming out, thousands and thousands of ballots

0:00:57.040 --> 0:01:09.240
<v Speaker 3>in paper bags, in garbage cans, in cardboard boxes, and

0:01:09.280 --> 0:01:11.360
<v Speaker 3>then they were put on a table and they were

0:01:11.400 --> 0:01:14.399
<v Speaker 3>counted for the next three hours.

0:01:14.319 --> 0:01:17.480
<v Speaker 1>To a rural county in Georgia, and the plot to

0:01:17.600 --> 0:01:21.480
<v Speaker 1>access voting machines and even includes the harassment of an

0:01:21.480 --> 0:01:25.559
<v Speaker 1>election worker. But the former president remains defiant.

0:01:25.840 --> 0:01:28.280
<v Speaker 3>We don't take flee deals because I did nothing wrong.

0:01:28.360 --> 0:01:33.040
<v Speaker 1>It's called election interference. Joining me is Michael Moore, the

0:01:33.080 --> 0:01:36.200
<v Speaker 1>former US Attorney for the Middle District of Georgia and

0:01:36.280 --> 0:01:39.679
<v Speaker 1>a partner at Moore Hall. Michael. The sheer breath of

0:01:39.760 --> 0:01:44.160
<v Speaker 1>this indictment one hundred and sixty one acts alleged, ranging

0:01:44.319 --> 0:01:50.800
<v Speaker 1>from making false statements and forgery to computer theft and perjury.

0:01:50.920 --> 0:01:54.200
<v Speaker 1>Is it almost too much even for a rico prosecution.

0:01:54.880 --> 0:01:57.760
<v Speaker 2>I think your Anaulynsis is probably right. I mean, the

0:01:57.840 --> 0:02:00.400
<v Speaker 2>problem when you cast such a big name is that

0:02:00.440 --> 0:02:03.480
<v Speaker 2>it oftentimes tangles you up too. And that's what she's done.

0:02:03.680 --> 0:02:06.720
<v Speaker 2>She's got almost one hundred page indictment, and she's laid

0:02:06.720 --> 0:02:10.200
<v Speaker 2>out all these acts and in places obviously outside of jurisdiction.

0:02:10.240 --> 0:02:12.560
<v Speaker 2>And that's why she used the Rico charges. She wanted

0:02:12.560 --> 0:02:15.320
<v Speaker 2>to be able to talk about all these other allegations

0:02:15.400 --> 0:02:17.280
<v Speaker 2>that she wouldn't have to prove beyond the reason of

0:02:17.320 --> 0:02:19.800
<v Speaker 2>that in which she typical wouldn't have jurisdiction for in

0:02:19.840 --> 0:02:22.440
<v Speaker 2>the indictment. So it's going to be a wail of

0:02:22.480 --> 0:02:25.200
<v Speaker 2>an undertaking without any question. You know, so many of

0:02:25.240 --> 0:02:28.640
<v Speaker 2>the allegations standing alone, especially when we talk about overt

0:02:28.680 --> 0:02:32.359
<v Speaker 2>act standing alone, they're just pretty vanilla and irrelevant to this,

0:02:32.720 --> 0:02:35.760
<v Speaker 2>things like setting a meeting or making a phone call

0:02:35.919 --> 0:02:38.440
<v Speaker 2>or you know, those kinds of innocuous type of things.

0:02:38.480 --> 0:02:41.000
<v Speaker 2>But she's trying to paint the picture and use the

0:02:41.040 --> 0:02:45.000
<v Speaker 2>context of all of this was this big, swirling conspiracy

0:02:45.040 --> 0:02:47.040
<v Speaker 2>at the same time. So the problem with that is that,

0:02:47.120 --> 0:02:49.520
<v Speaker 2>you know, Rico's great if you're a prosecutor, because you

0:02:49.720 --> 0:02:52.400
<v Speaker 2>can talk about all the dirty laundry that there is

0:02:52.440 --> 0:02:55.720
<v Speaker 2>as opposed to just one defendant's dirty laundry. The double

0:02:55.800 --> 0:02:58.040
<v Speaker 2>edged sword side of that is that you also then

0:02:58.080 --> 0:03:00.440
<v Speaker 2>are binding yourself to having to prove this, because a

0:03:00.440 --> 0:03:03.160
<v Speaker 2>good defense attorney will just look for that one loose

0:03:03.280 --> 0:03:05.720
<v Speaker 2>thread and start to pull it and unrivaled the case

0:03:05.960 --> 0:03:08.000
<v Speaker 2>off of just some part of it that they were

0:03:08.040 --> 0:03:10.040
<v Speaker 2>not able to prove, and you just need to cast

0:03:10.160 --> 0:03:12.400
<v Speaker 2>enough to doubt in the jury's mind to cause them

0:03:12.400 --> 0:03:15.640
<v Speaker 2>to not convict. So sometimes more is less, and that

0:03:15.800 --> 0:03:16.799
<v Speaker 2>may be the case here.

0:03:17.000 --> 0:03:20.680
<v Speaker 1>Funny Willis is seeking a March trial date and says

0:03:20.680 --> 0:03:24.200
<v Speaker 1>she wants to try all nineteen defendants together. Do you

0:03:24.240 --> 0:03:26.880
<v Speaker 1>think the judge will actually let her go to trial

0:03:26.960 --> 0:03:28.600
<v Speaker 1>with nineteen defendants?

0:03:28.840 --> 0:03:30.639
<v Speaker 2>I don't think so, And I don't think there's any

0:03:30.760 --> 0:03:32.399
<v Speaker 2>chance in the world she's going to try the case

0:03:32.560 --> 0:03:34.480
<v Speaker 2>or put it up for trial within six months. I

0:03:34.480 --> 0:03:37.280
<v Speaker 2>think that's just a good pr statement to make. But

0:03:37.360 --> 0:03:39.800
<v Speaker 2>I think anybody who watches the court system and certainly

0:03:39.920 --> 0:03:41.720
<v Speaker 2>is familiar with Forulm County, will tell you that case

0:03:41.760 --> 0:03:44.200
<v Speaker 2>isn't going to trial in six months. You'll have defendants

0:03:44.200 --> 0:03:46.800
<v Speaker 2>who ask to sever their charges. That is, they don't

0:03:46.840 --> 0:03:49.240
<v Speaker 2>want to be lucked in with everybody else. The problem

0:03:49.320 --> 0:03:51.320
<v Speaker 2>is if they're in the Rico case, that poses a

0:03:51.400 --> 0:03:54.120
<v Speaker 2>unique question for a judge. You'll have other defendants who

0:03:54.440 --> 0:03:56.720
<v Speaker 2>may end up cutting some kind of deal. They may

0:03:56.760 --> 0:03:59.240
<v Speaker 2>take a plea agreement or agree to cooperate as a

0:03:59.320 --> 0:04:02.200
<v Speaker 2>testifying which in exchange for their case being dismissed. You

0:04:02.280 --> 0:04:04.880
<v Speaker 2>never know what might happen, but you'll have some defendants

0:04:04.960 --> 0:04:07.440
<v Speaker 2>drop off like that. And that's frankly what I think

0:04:07.480 --> 0:04:09.840
<v Speaker 2>she has done by naming so many people. That is

0:04:09.880 --> 0:04:12.640
<v Speaker 2>to really put the vice scripts on some of these

0:04:12.880 --> 0:04:16.160
<v Speaker 2>defendants to get them to flip and then give testimony.

0:04:16.360 --> 0:04:18.360
<v Speaker 2>And the best way to do that is to name

0:04:18.400 --> 0:04:20.800
<v Speaker 2>them in an indictment. So I think that this is

0:04:20.839 --> 0:04:24.040
<v Speaker 2>the kind of case that is likely to not happen

0:04:24.120 --> 0:04:27.720
<v Speaker 2>in twenty twenty four, certainly not before the election. And

0:04:28.240 --> 0:04:30.320
<v Speaker 2>I don't see how there's any chance in the world

0:04:30.360 --> 0:04:32.960
<v Speaker 2>that she goes to court with nineteen defendants because at

0:04:32.960 --> 0:04:35.320
<v Speaker 2>one lawyer a peace. I mean, you can imagine the

0:04:35.400 --> 0:04:38.200
<v Speaker 2>pandemonium in the court room with that many lawyers and

0:04:38.200 --> 0:04:40.760
<v Speaker 2>that mean defendants. Every time there's an objection, every time

0:04:40.760 --> 0:04:42.760
<v Speaker 2>there's a witness, and every time there's a document to

0:04:42.760 --> 0:04:45.160
<v Speaker 2>look at it. You know that all of those almost

0:04:45.160 --> 0:04:47.960
<v Speaker 2>twenty groups would be wanting to be heard at the

0:04:47.960 --> 0:04:50.760
<v Speaker 2>same time. So it's it's so likely well.

0:04:50.760 --> 0:04:53.640
<v Speaker 1>And also Trump is known for delay, delay, delay, and

0:04:53.680 --> 0:04:57.719
<v Speaker 1>they'll be pre trial motions. Speaking of which, Trump's former

0:04:57.800 --> 0:05:01.880
<v Speaker 1>chief of staff Mark Meadows, is trying to move the

0:05:02.279 --> 0:05:06.680
<v Speaker 1>Georgia criminal case against him to federal court from state court.

0:05:07.080 --> 0:05:09.920
<v Speaker 1>Do you think he has a good chance of doing that.

0:05:10.320 --> 0:05:12.839
<v Speaker 2>I think it's a good motion. He's filing to move

0:05:12.839 --> 0:05:15.839
<v Speaker 2>it under a federal statute that allows for a state

0:05:15.920 --> 0:05:19.040
<v Speaker 2>case to be transferred to the federal court under certain

0:05:19.080 --> 0:05:23.000
<v Speaker 2>conditions when a federal official has been charged, and it's

0:05:23.040 --> 0:05:26.240
<v Speaker 2>a statue, it's a rule, then it is really centuries

0:05:26.279 --> 0:05:30.240
<v Speaker 2>old that was designed to sort of prohibit state and

0:05:30.360 --> 0:05:34.720
<v Speaker 2>partisan meddling in the business and the affairs of federal officials.

0:05:35.120 --> 0:05:38.320
<v Speaker 2>You can't likely think of much more of a federal

0:05:38.320 --> 0:05:41.200
<v Speaker 2>official than a president, a chief of staff, And the

0:05:41.320 --> 0:05:44.680
<v Speaker 2>conduct that's alleged in the indictment really focuses on the

0:05:44.720 --> 0:05:48.200
<v Speaker 2>efforts surrounding the election. And for an incumbent president with

0:05:48.360 --> 0:05:51.279
<v Speaker 2>an incumbent serving chief of staff, and then I think

0:05:51.320 --> 0:05:54.200
<v Speaker 2>that clearly would be under the scope of their work

0:05:54.440 --> 0:05:56.800
<v Speaker 2>as it related to the election. Whether or not the

0:05:56.960 --> 0:06:00.400
<v Speaker 2>claims about election integrity, whether or not the claim about

0:06:00.560 --> 0:06:02.520
<v Speaker 2>trying to steal the election, those are things that have

0:06:02.640 --> 0:06:06.000
<v Speaker 2>to be adjudicated in a trial. But the argument would

0:06:06.040 --> 0:06:07.760
<v Speaker 2>be and it has to be an argument that is

0:06:07.880 --> 0:06:11.080
<v Speaker 2>least plausible, And so the plausible argument is, if you're

0:06:11.200 --> 0:06:14.200
<v Speaker 2>Medaws or Trump, that I was doing this to make

0:06:14.200 --> 0:06:16.200
<v Speaker 2>sure that the election was accurate. We were doing this

0:06:16.279 --> 0:06:18.280
<v Speaker 2>to make sure that the election I've been stolen. We

0:06:18.279 --> 0:06:20.159
<v Speaker 2>were doing this to make sure there was integrity in

0:06:20.160 --> 0:06:22.200
<v Speaker 2>our electoral system. We were doing this to make sure

0:06:22.240 --> 0:06:24.960
<v Speaker 2>that the vice president knew that he had the ability

0:06:25.040 --> 0:06:27.840
<v Speaker 2>if there was some squirrely activity going on, we thought

0:06:27.839 --> 0:06:30.200
<v Speaker 2>he had the ability, based on the advice of our lawyers,

0:06:30.240 --> 0:06:33.120
<v Speaker 2>to pause the electoral vote count or we at least

0:06:33.120 --> 0:06:35.840
<v Speaker 2>have these discussions. So there's a plausible argument that they

0:06:35.880 --> 0:06:38.320
<v Speaker 2>could make that they were trying to do something within

0:06:38.360 --> 0:06:41.080
<v Speaker 2>the scope of federal authority. You know, whether or not

0:06:41.200 --> 0:06:43.479
<v Speaker 2>they win the motion, I think it's a different type

0:06:43.480 --> 0:06:46.560
<v Speaker 2>of motion that was heard in the payment case in

0:06:46.640 --> 0:06:49.560
<v Speaker 2>New York when they tried to transfer that case, and

0:06:49.640 --> 0:06:52.280
<v Speaker 2>the judge basically said, you know, payments of this nature

0:06:52.360 --> 0:06:55.520
<v Speaker 2>or not within the presidential authority, and it's certainly not

0:06:55.560 --> 0:06:57.720
<v Speaker 2>going to scoop their federal work. I think that there's

0:06:57.720 --> 0:07:00.640
<v Speaker 2>a different claim to be had here. So I wasn't

0:07:00.640 --> 0:07:03.080
<v Speaker 2>surprised at all to see them make the motion. I

0:07:03.080 --> 0:07:06.080
<v Speaker 2>think Trump will soon be making the same motion, and

0:07:06.279 --> 0:07:08.360
<v Speaker 2>a transfer from the state court to the federal court

0:07:08.360 --> 0:07:10.200
<v Speaker 2>obviously the nearest to his benefit.

0:07:10.440 --> 0:07:12.360
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, I mean there won't be cameras in a federal

0:07:12.440 --> 0:07:14.960
<v Speaker 1>court room, and he could get a Trump appointed judge.

0:07:15.120 --> 0:07:17.120
<v Speaker 2>He could. I will tell you that the judges in

0:07:17.160 --> 0:07:19.280
<v Speaker 2>the Northern District of Georgia, and I know most of

0:07:19.280 --> 0:07:23.000
<v Speaker 2>all of them, consider many of friends, even the Trump appointees,

0:07:23.200 --> 0:07:26.200
<v Speaker 2>I would never classify them as MAGA judges. These are

0:07:26.200 --> 0:07:29.200
<v Speaker 2>people who either were order appellate court somewhere got elevated

0:07:29.360 --> 0:07:33.400
<v Speaker 2>what I would call more centrist type individuals. The benefit

0:07:33.480 --> 0:07:36.080
<v Speaker 2>to him would be he would draw from a much

0:07:36.240 --> 0:07:40.360
<v Speaker 2>larger and much more politically palatable to him jury pool.

0:07:40.560 --> 0:07:42.920
<v Speaker 2>So you would get outside of Fulton County, where the

0:07:42.960 --> 0:07:46.160
<v Speaker 2>case is now, which was a huge win for Biden,

0:07:46.400 --> 0:07:49.560
<v Speaker 2>and you would get into an area which Tessam Counties

0:07:49.680 --> 0:07:52.000
<v Speaker 2>in the Northern District of Georgia and the Atlanta Division

0:07:52.200 --> 0:07:55.360
<v Speaker 2>that certainly leans Republican, and so it allows him to

0:07:55.480 --> 0:07:58.560
<v Speaker 2>try to expand his opportunity to have a jury that

0:07:58.680 --> 0:08:01.800
<v Speaker 2>would more likely have some people law that might identify with,

0:08:02.000 --> 0:08:04.600
<v Speaker 2>you know, Republican leanings and that type of thing. And

0:08:04.880 --> 0:08:07.600
<v Speaker 2>remember that it takes one juror in a criminal case

0:08:07.760 --> 0:08:10.040
<v Speaker 2>to hang the jury up and to prevent a conviction,

0:08:10.280 --> 0:08:12.320
<v Speaker 2>and so his lawyers are really playing to that one

0:08:12.440 --> 0:08:15.480
<v Speaker 2>or two jurors that they believe would be sympathetic to

0:08:15.600 --> 0:08:18.360
<v Speaker 2>the claim that this was legitimate. So that's why I

0:08:18.400 --> 0:08:20.680
<v Speaker 2>think the move is there. And also I'm sure that

0:08:20.920 --> 0:08:23.040
<v Speaker 2>the lawyers would like the case in federal court for

0:08:23.160 --> 0:08:26.280
<v Speaker 2>the formality of the federal courts are known for a

0:08:26.360 --> 0:08:30.400
<v Speaker 2>stronger motion practice. It obviously would be a clearer path

0:08:30.680 --> 0:08:33.640
<v Speaker 2>or appeal issues both to the federal Court's appeal and

0:08:33.720 --> 0:08:36.520
<v Speaker 2>then to the US Supreme Court of that option offso

0:08:36.640 --> 0:08:38.920
<v Speaker 2>exists in the state proceeding at some point because of

0:08:38.920 --> 0:08:41.319
<v Speaker 2>the constitution issues. But it's just a move that I

0:08:41.400 --> 0:08:43.880
<v Speaker 2>think is at least thought out. It's not a hair

0:08:43.960 --> 0:08:44.680
<v Speaker 2>brained motion.

0:08:44.880 --> 0:08:47.079
<v Speaker 1>If I said that way, do you think that it

0:08:47.200 --> 0:08:51.280
<v Speaker 1>would hamper Willis's ability to try areco case if it

0:08:51.440 --> 0:08:53.960
<v Speaker 1>was in federal court? Would she be hamstrung more?

0:08:54.360 --> 0:08:56.280
<v Speaker 2>I think she may be. I think that it gets

0:08:56.320 --> 0:08:58.360
<v Speaker 2>her off of her home turf. I think that you

0:08:58.440 --> 0:09:00.439
<v Speaker 2>played by a little bit different rules. I mean, some

0:09:00.559 --> 0:09:02.160
<v Speaker 2>lawyers don't like to be in federal court at all.

0:09:02.360 --> 0:09:04.920
<v Speaker 2>It's a more formal practice, So it would be outside

0:09:04.960 --> 0:09:06.439
<v Speaker 2>the norm for let's put it that way.

0:09:06.720 --> 0:09:10.839
<v Speaker 1>What defenses do you see Trump possibly raising in this case?

0:09:11.440 --> 0:09:13.840
<v Speaker 2>I mean, I think there will be clear First Amendment defenses.

0:09:14.040 --> 0:09:17.800
<v Speaker 2>We'll have arguments about protective political speech, I think coming up.

0:09:17.880 --> 0:09:20.360
<v Speaker 2>I think with that question, there'll be some executive privilege

0:09:20.360 --> 0:09:23.040
<v Speaker 2>issues that come up. There will be presidential immunity issues,

0:09:23.040 --> 0:09:24.959
<v Speaker 2>that come up again, things that I think the federal

0:09:25.040 --> 0:09:26.960
<v Speaker 2>court will more there may be more use to dealing

0:09:27.000 --> 0:09:29.679
<v Speaker 2>with those than you see in the state courts. He

0:09:29.800 --> 0:09:32.439
<v Speaker 2>won't likely raise, you know, advice of counsel, say I

0:09:32.559 --> 0:09:34.839
<v Speaker 2>was doing what my lawyers told me to do. He

0:09:34.960 --> 0:09:38.480
<v Speaker 2>has a notorious ability to sort of put a buffer

0:09:38.600 --> 0:09:42.520
<v Speaker 2>between him and the criminal gabble coming down on him,

0:09:42.520 --> 0:09:45.080
<v Speaker 2>as you will, and that is to have a lawyer

0:09:45.320 --> 0:09:47.679
<v Speaker 2>or an intermediary or somebody there that you can say, well,

0:09:47.720 --> 0:09:49.000
<v Speaker 2>I was you know, they didn't do exactly what I

0:09:49.080 --> 0:09:50.560
<v Speaker 2>told them to do, or I was doing what they

0:09:50.720 --> 0:09:52.520
<v Speaker 2>suggested that I do. And so in this case, I

0:09:52.559 --> 0:09:55.360
<v Speaker 2>think you'll say, look, we were meeting, the lawyers, came

0:09:55.440 --> 0:09:57.679
<v Speaker 2>up with these ideas. We were just having these creative

0:09:57.720 --> 0:10:00.719
<v Speaker 2>discussions to figure out is a possibility. I didn't know

0:10:00.920 --> 0:10:03.880
<v Speaker 2>if the vote counts had been properly done, and so

0:10:04.000 --> 0:10:06.200
<v Speaker 2>we wanted to secure the voting machines to make sure

0:10:06.200 --> 0:10:08.719
<v Speaker 2>that the tampered with our reporting was X, Y and Z.

0:10:09.040 --> 0:10:11.800
<v Speaker 2>But it was all based on the advice of my lawyers,

0:10:12.120 --> 0:10:14.679
<v Speaker 2>and so I think those will be compelling defenses to

0:10:14.760 --> 0:10:15.240
<v Speaker 2>some people.

0:10:15.520 --> 0:10:18.560
<v Speaker 1>But what about the fact that his lawyers are charged

0:10:18.679 --> 0:10:20.679
<v Speaker 1>as co conspirators.

0:10:20.000 --> 0:10:22.040
<v Speaker 2>With him, well, and I think that's going to be

0:10:22.080 --> 0:10:24.439
<v Speaker 2>a defense that they raise. It is unique in the

0:10:24.520 --> 0:10:28.040
<v Speaker 2>sense that we don't criminalize lawyers from being created. We

0:10:28.120 --> 0:10:31.720
<v Speaker 2>don't criminalize people for brainstorming, and we don't criminalize conduct

0:10:31.840 --> 0:10:35.040
<v Speaker 2>rather for really thinking outside the box. Even if at

0:10:35.080 --> 0:10:38.040
<v Speaker 2>the end of the day that box becomes just a

0:10:38.240 --> 0:10:41.640
<v Speaker 2>zany idea. We look at it and say, it's okay

0:10:41.720 --> 0:10:43.480
<v Speaker 2>to talk about, it's okay to think. Is if the

0:10:43.640 --> 0:10:45.719
<v Speaker 2>case And I think one of the issues with the

0:10:45.800 --> 0:10:50.120
<v Speaker 2>indictment is those discussions are now being considered as overt acts,

0:10:50.440 --> 0:10:53.560
<v Speaker 2>even a simple discussion or simple meeting. There's nothing unusual

0:10:53.600 --> 0:10:56.440
<v Speaker 2>about voices being raised in the old office. There's nothing

0:10:56.520 --> 0:10:59.319
<v Speaker 2>unusual about lawyers telling of the present something. There's nothing

0:10:59.400 --> 0:11:02.319
<v Speaker 2>unusually having lawyers with different views or different opinions, or

0:11:02.320 --> 0:11:05.040
<v Speaker 2>writing a memo and another person says, know that the

0:11:05.120 --> 0:11:07.360
<v Speaker 2>Pelic court is not going to do that, or no,

0:11:07.720 --> 0:11:10.480
<v Speaker 2>that's not supported by the case laws. That's not an

0:11:10.559 --> 0:11:14.559
<v Speaker 2>unusual process, especially in the arena that we're in. So

0:11:15.080 --> 0:11:18.640
<v Speaker 2>I don't know how that will play out, but I

0:11:18.720 --> 0:11:20.480
<v Speaker 2>think you will hear and I imagine you will hear

0:11:20.520 --> 0:11:23.280
<v Speaker 2>the lawyers saying, and at some point they may gain

0:11:23.360 --> 0:11:27.960
<v Speaker 2>some support, not individually, but you know, theoretically they may

0:11:28.040 --> 0:11:31.880
<v Speaker 2>gain support from some more established and respected groups saying, Look,

0:11:32.040 --> 0:11:34.960
<v Speaker 2>a lawyer has to advocate, a lawyer has to be creative.

0:11:35.040 --> 0:11:36.920
<v Speaker 2>A lawyer has to be able to give advice without

0:11:36.960 --> 0:11:39.120
<v Speaker 2>fear of being prosecuted. A lawyer has to be able

0:11:39.120 --> 0:11:42.520
<v Speaker 2>to have a discussion without fear of being prosecuted. And

0:11:42.760 --> 0:11:44.720
<v Speaker 2>they make a big deal about he's lost every case.

0:11:45.040 --> 0:11:48.120
<v Speaker 2>If we're gonna start punishing lawyers because their theory lost

0:11:48.200 --> 0:11:49.800
<v Speaker 2>in every court room, there will be a lot of

0:11:49.880 --> 0:11:52.920
<v Speaker 2>lawyers in jail. Some people may agree with that, but

0:11:53.200 --> 0:11:55.880
<v Speaker 2>as a principle, that may be something that we hear

0:11:56.000 --> 0:11:58.000
<v Speaker 2>more about. Is the case goes on, as you say,

0:11:58.080 --> 0:12:00.800
<v Speaker 2>because we do have lawyers names defendants, and I'm not

0:12:01.080 --> 0:12:03.360
<v Speaker 2>in any way justifying what they did or what they

0:12:03.480 --> 0:12:06.160
<v Speaker 2>said or they took. I mean, if they gave false

0:12:06.200 --> 0:12:08.719
<v Speaker 2>testimony and they knew it, and that's a problem. You know,

0:12:08.800 --> 0:12:11.640
<v Speaker 2>if they had this concerted effort where they had clearly,

0:12:11.720 --> 0:12:14.920
<v Speaker 2>without any doubt, proven that their numbers were wrong, and

0:12:15.120 --> 0:12:18.679
<v Speaker 2>you know, that's a different issue. But to somehow equate

0:12:19.280 --> 0:12:23.199
<v Speaker 2>having a freewheel and creative legal discussion that may have

0:12:23.280 --> 0:12:27.719
<v Speaker 2>gotten animated into criminal conduct. I think maybe something that's

0:12:27.760 --> 0:12:29.199
<v Speaker 2>distressed in a step too far.

0:12:29.520 --> 0:12:31.600
<v Speaker 1>You're talking about the overt acts. There is there anything

0:12:31.720 --> 0:12:34.199
<v Speaker 1>else in the indictment, you know, the structure of it,

0:12:34.480 --> 0:12:36.719
<v Speaker 1>or that you see a problem with.

0:12:37.240 --> 0:12:40.280
<v Speaker 2>Well, when we talk about the removal statue, you know,

0:12:40.320 --> 0:12:43.079
<v Speaker 2>when you're saying couldn't be removed to federal courts. When

0:12:43.120 --> 0:12:45.120
<v Speaker 2>I look at the indictment, there are one hundred and

0:12:45.160 --> 0:12:48.679
<v Speaker 2>sixty one overt acts alleged of the indictment, one hundred

0:12:48.679 --> 0:12:50.480
<v Speaker 2>and fifty four of those or a less to have

0:12:50.520 --> 0:12:53.240
<v Speaker 2>occurred while Trump was a sitting president of the United States.

0:12:53.640 --> 0:12:57.040
<v Speaker 2>They charged him in a number of counts, I mean

0:12:57.160 --> 0:13:00.880
<v Speaker 2>probably a dozen counts or so, and only two of

0:13:00.960 --> 0:13:02.679
<v Speaker 2>those that are a legs to acred after he was

0:13:02.760 --> 0:13:05.280
<v Speaker 2>president of the United States. And I think that's going

0:13:05.360 --> 0:13:08.960
<v Speaker 2>to cause some issues, and obviously is another support for removal.

0:13:09.520 --> 0:13:13.400
<v Speaker 2>You know, can a locally elected district attorney charges our

0:13:13.440 --> 0:13:15.959
<v Speaker 2>former president for conduct while he was an acting president

0:13:16.240 --> 0:13:18.120
<v Speaker 2>If that's the case, I mean, if that is going

0:13:18.160 --> 0:13:21.360
<v Speaker 2>to become the law, and that's the case, then I

0:13:21.440 --> 0:13:23.640
<v Speaker 2>imagine you're going to see every president from now on

0:13:24.200 --> 0:13:27.920
<v Speaker 2>indicted by some local DA who happens to be at

0:13:27.920 --> 0:13:30.760
<v Speaker 2>the opposite party for conduct that they didn't agree with

0:13:30.840 --> 0:13:32.920
<v Speaker 2>why personal was president. I mean, we're just headed down

0:13:32.960 --> 0:13:35.719
<v Speaker 2>that path. I mean, I think we're beyond headed down.

0:13:35.800 --> 0:13:38.160
<v Speaker 2>I think we're running full there's not a slippery floor,

0:13:38.679 --> 0:13:41.679
<v Speaker 2>full speed down the road into that. So I think

0:13:41.760 --> 0:13:44.440
<v Speaker 2>those will be arguments that are made. There are issues

0:13:44.520 --> 0:13:46.920
<v Speaker 2>I think with the you know, some things that come

0:13:46.960 --> 0:13:48.560
<v Speaker 2>to mind as I look at the indictment. I mean

0:13:48.960 --> 0:13:51.199
<v Speaker 2>the voting machine issue. You know, who had the authority

0:13:51.240 --> 0:13:54.080
<v Speaker 2>to look at the voting machines. Georgia laws A mended

0:13:54.120 --> 0:13:57.360
<v Speaker 2>in twenty nineteen and local officials are allowed to purchase

0:13:57.520 --> 0:14:00.760
<v Speaker 2>additional voting machines. They used to be the whole statute

0:14:00.800 --> 0:14:04.040
<v Speaker 2>that only the Secretary of State purchased those machines, and

0:14:04.360 --> 0:14:08.199
<v Speaker 2>this gave local boards of elections authority to have those machines.

0:14:08.280 --> 0:14:11.320
<v Speaker 2>Store on those kinds of things that may become an

0:14:11.320 --> 0:14:14.360
<v Speaker 2>issue on who had authority. I look at the fake

0:14:14.440 --> 0:14:18.199
<v Speaker 2>elector's scheme in the indictment, and I don't know because

0:14:18.200 --> 0:14:20.280
<v Speaker 2>I have not seen the documents, but it will be

0:14:20.320 --> 0:14:22.680
<v Speaker 2>interesting to see. Is there some notation or was there

0:14:22.800 --> 0:14:25.600
<v Speaker 2>some reference in the meeting minutes, or is there a

0:14:25.680 --> 0:14:29.520
<v Speaker 2>report or was something said and testimony or what about

0:14:29.880 --> 0:14:32.960
<v Speaker 2>whether or not this was being done to protect alternatives

0:14:33.080 --> 0:14:35.840
<v Speaker 2>or to protect the rights, and the courts ultimately decide

0:14:35.880 --> 0:14:38.280
<v Speaker 2>one way or another. You know, these are things that

0:14:38.360 --> 0:14:42.240
<v Speaker 2>I think may come up again, they being the prosecutors

0:14:42.280 --> 0:14:44.880
<v Speaker 2>having access to information we don't all have right now.

0:14:45.040 --> 0:14:48.440
<v Speaker 2>But just to read through the nearly one hundred pages

0:14:48.480 --> 0:14:51.160
<v Speaker 2>of allegation, I mean, I can see some things that

0:14:51.240 --> 0:14:54.200
<v Speaker 2>I think will become issues. And then a good lawyer

0:14:54.320 --> 0:14:57.080
<v Speaker 2>representing one of the nineteen people, I'm sure we'll grab

0:14:57.120 --> 0:14:59.480
<v Speaker 2>a hole see at least dig into it somewhat.

0:15:00.000 --> 0:15:03.360
<v Speaker 1>That's the thing that makes Willis's request for a March

0:15:03.520 --> 0:15:07.920
<v Speaker 1>trial date so curious is that she's trying rapper young

0:15:08.080 --> 0:15:12.480
<v Speaker 1>thug on Rico charges and jury selection has been going

0:15:12.520 --> 0:15:14.920
<v Speaker 1>on for seven months. I mean, I've never heard of

0:15:14.960 --> 0:15:16.960
<v Speaker 1>a jury selection going on for that long.

0:15:17.520 --> 0:15:19.640
<v Speaker 2>I don't know if it's because of the number of defendants.

0:15:19.640 --> 0:15:21.320
<v Speaker 2>I don't know what's going on, but that's a Fulton

0:15:21.360 --> 0:15:23.880
<v Speaker 2>County case where jury selection has been going on. I mean,

0:15:23.920 --> 0:15:26.960
<v Speaker 2>can you imagine having the former president and eighteen of

0:15:27.080 --> 0:15:30.640
<v Speaker 2>his closest friends sitting there selecting the jury. I mean,

0:15:31.040 --> 0:15:33.080
<v Speaker 2>there's just no way the case is going to get done.

0:15:33.400 --> 0:15:36.320
<v Speaker 2>You know, there's there's sort of this frenzy amongst the

0:15:36.960 --> 0:15:40.920
<v Speaker 2>Trump haters. There's so much excitement around the indictment, and

0:15:41.080 --> 0:15:43.800
<v Speaker 2>I worry sometimes it's statements like I'm going to try

0:15:43.800 --> 0:15:45.800
<v Speaker 2>it in six months, or we're gonna get this trial

0:15:45.880 --> 0:15:47.720
<v Speaker 2>six months, or we're gonna try everybody to get I

0:15:47.840 --> 0:15:50.200
<v Speaker 2>worry that sometimes that's like, you know, chumming the water

0:15:50.280 --> 0:15:53.000
<v Speaker 2>a little bit, because it's just not going to happen

0:15:53.560 --> 0:15:56.680
<v Speaker 2>like that, and people need to understand this is likely

0:15:56.760 --> 0:16:00.120
<v Speaker 2>a case and I would say almost certainly crazy thing

0:16:00.160 --> 0:16:02.560
<v Speaker 2>has happened. I would say almost certainly a case that

0:16:02.840 --> 0:16:05.600
<v Speaker 2>we will not see before the election, and then that

0:16:05.800 --> 0:16:07.120
<v Speaker 2>will have its all effect as well.

0:16:07.640 --> 0:16:10.400
<v Speaker 1>Thanks so much, Michael. It's great to get insights from

0:16:10.440 --> 0:16:13.600
<v Speaker 1>a lawyer who knows the Georgia courts. That's former US

0:16:13.640 --> 0:16:17.160
<v Speaker 1>Attorney for the Middle District of Georgia, Michael Moore of

0:16:17.360 --> 0:16:19.600
<v Speaker 1>Moore Hall. And that's it for this edition of The

0:16:19.600 --> 0:16:22.560
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Law Show. Remember you can always get the latest

0:16:22.600 --> 0:16:25.720
<v Speaker 1>legal news on our Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can find

0:16:25.760 --> 0:16:30.320
<v Speaker 1>them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and at www dot bloomberg

0:16:30.400 --> 0:16:34.160
<v Speaker 1>dot com, slash podcast, slash Law, and remember to tune

0:16:34.200 --> 0:16:37.360
<v Speaker 1>into The Bloomberg Law Show every weeknight at ten pm

0:16:37.480 --> 0:16:41.000
<v Speaker 1>Wall Street Time. I'm June Grosso and you're listening to

0:16:41.080 --> 0:16:41.600
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg