1
00:00:00,280 --> 00:00:04,560
Speaker 1: This case has never been about politics or personal vendetta

2
00:00:05,519 --> 00:00:09,080
Speaker 1: or about name calling. This case is about the facts

3
00:00:09,920 --> 00:00:14,640
Speaker 1: and the law, and mister Donald Trump violated the law.

4
00:00:14,840 --> 00:00:16,880
Speaker 1: At the end of the day, the point is simple,

5
00:00:17,480 --> 00:00:22,000
Speaker 1: no matter how powerful you are, no matter how rich

6
00:00:22,079 --> 00:00:26,360
Speaker 1: you are, that no one is above the law, and

7
00:00:26,400 --> 00:00:30,800
Speaker 1: that the law applies to all of us equally and fairly.

8
00:00:32,600 --> 00:00:35,839
Speaker 2: What this case appears to be about is about a

9
00:00:35,960 --> 00:00:43,120
Speaker 2: really dramatic cadence. But I'm not a legal expert. Andrew

10
00:00:43,159 --> 00:00:46,159
Speaker 2: Tcherkawski is. Andrew is a criminal defense and civil trial lawyer,

11
00:00:46,320 --> 00:00:50,440
Speaker 2: former federal prosecutor, and military veteran, and knows what he's

12
00:00:50,440 --> 00:00:51,880
Speaker 2: talking about. Andrew, how are you, sir?

13
00:00:52,560 --> 00:00:54,360
Speaker 3: I'm great, good to talk to you.

14
00:00:54,440 --> 00:00:57,320
Speaker 2: Good. We sure appreciate you spending a little time today. Hey,

15
00:00:57,440 --> 00:01:01,880
Speaker 2: can we start in your Georgia with the recent developments

16
00:01:01,920 --> 00:01:05,520
Speaker 2: with Fannie Willis and her boyfriend, the prosecutor she's hired

17
00:01:05,560 --> 00:01:09,679
Speaker 2: at high six figure you know, Fees who apparently doesn't

18
00:01:09,720 --> 00:01:11,520
Speaker 2: have a lot of experience in this What do you

19
00:01:11,560 --> 00:01:13,600
Speaker 2: make of that? How serious the development is this?

20
00:01:14,520 --> 00:01:17,280
Speaker 3: I think it's a very serious development. It is something

21
00:01:17,319 --> 00:01:21,039
Speaker 3: that borders on the idea of prosecutorial misconduct. You know,

22
00:01:21,319 --> 00:01:26,320
Speaker 3: her whole efforts against President Trump have been deeply politically motivated,

23
00:01:26,400 --> 00:01:29,720
Speaker 3: and she is coming after President Trump for something that

24
00:01:29,800 --> 00:01:33,880
Speaker 3: she claims is a blatant violation of Georgia law. He

25
00:01:34,040 --> 00:01:36,920
Speaker 3: has declared his innocence. I think that we have to

26
00:01:36,959 --> 00:01:40,120
Speaker 3: be very careful when prosecutors who are trying to charge

27
00:01:40,840 --> 00:01:44,200
Speaker 3: cases in a particularly unique way are now caught up

28
00:01:44,240 --> 00:01:47,000
Speaker 3: in their own misconduct. And it seems to be potentially

29
00:01:47,000 --> 00:01:48,160
Speaker 3: a gross misconduct.

30
00:01:49,000 --> 00:01:53,040
Speaker 2: Well, yeah, it certainly could be trayed as a project

31
00:01:53,920 --> 00:01:56,800
Speaker 2: she cooked up. I mean, obviously that's a stretch. There were,

32
00:01:57,480 --> 00:02:01,320
Speaker 2: you know, strange doings after the election, but she and

33
00:02:01,440 --> 00:02:03,800
Speaker 2: her boyfriend cooked up a scheme to make hundreds of

34
00:02:03,800 --> 00:02:06,800
Speaker 2: thousands of dollars. I mean, you could portray it that way,

35
00:02:07,400 --> 00:02:09,600
Speaker 2: and it does kind of have that look.

36
00:02:10,680 --> 00:02:13,960
Speaker 3: Well, it definitely has the look. The gentleman that she

37
00:02:14,240 --> 00:02:17,200
Speaker 3: is accused of having an affair with has been appointed

38
00:02:17,240 --> 00:02:20,720
Speaker 3: as a special prosecutor in Georgia. He has very limited

39
00:02:21,240 --> 00:02:26,160
Speaker 3: courtroom experience and prosecutorial experience. The reasons why he was

40
00:02:26,200 --> 00:02:28,919
Speaker 3: appointed with something that I was talking about many months ago,

41
00:02:29,000 --> 00:02:31,360
Speaker 3: before we knew about the idea that there was some

42
00:02:31,400 --> 00:02:35,120
Speaker 3: sort of special relationship between the two. He's gotten I believe,

43
00:02:35,160 --> 00:02:37,959
Speaker 3: over a million dollars at this point for his services.

44
00:02:38,000 --> 00:02:41,800
Speaker 3: Now he's providing legal services, no doubt through this, but

45
00:02:41,960 --> 00:02:46,119
Speaker 3: whether those legal services are connected with essentially an underlying

46
00:02:46,560 --> 00:02:50,399
Speaker 3: personal motivation to prosecute in order to rack up those

47
00:02:50,480 --> 00:02:53,679
Speaker 3: legal bills, that would certainly be on the highest order

48
00:02:53,800 --> 00:02:57,200
Speaker 3: of misconduct of an attorney and could very well be

49
00:02:57,280 --> 00:03:01,040
Speaker 3: seen as criminal. It's something that where there are genuine

50
00:03:01,080 --> 00:03:05,560
Speaker 3: questions in our country about Trump's conduct after the election

51
00:03:05,760 --> 00:03:08,560
Speaker 3: in twenty twenty, those are questions that I believe are

52
00:03:08,680 --> 00:03:13,160
Speaker 3: primarily political. They're trying to turn it into criminal allegations,

53
00:03:13,200 --> 00:03:16,160
Speaker 3: and it's a stretch. There is no good precedent for that,

54
00:03:16,240 --> 00:03:20,680
Speaker 3: and it is something that certainly taints this process for

55
00:03:20,720 --> 00:03:23,520
Speaker 3: the prosecutors to have such a scandal break out at

56
00:03:23,520 --> 00:03:24,320
Speaker 3: this point.

57
00:03:24,520 --> 00:03:26,880
Speaker 2: So not to try to make you make a prediction,

58
00:03:27,120 --> 00:03:31,480
Speaker 2: but given your experience litigating hundreds of jury trials, what

59
00:03:31,680 --> 00:03:35,800
Speaker 2: is the likelihood that it all collapses. What's the likelihood

60
00:03:35,800 --> 00:03:38,720
Speaker 2: that Fannie Willis has just dismissed and they have to

61
00:03:38,960 --> 00:03:41,680
Speaker 2: more or less restart. What do you expect to happen?

62
00:03:42,520 --> 00:03:45,360
Speaker 3: Well, I expect her to still go full steam ahead

63
00:03:45,400 --> 00:03:49,080
Speaker 3: against Trump and all of his associates that are charged here.

64
00:03:49,160 --> 00:03:51,760
Speaker 3: So she's not going to back off willingly. You know.

65
00:03:51,800 --> 00:03:54,200
Speaker 3: As a criminal defense attorney, I was kind of joking

66
00:03:54,240 --> 00:03:57,520
Speaker 3: the other day that our job is not to predict

67
00:03:57,560 --> 00:04:00,800
Speaker 3: what the issue is. It's to be ready to act

68
00:04:00,880 --> 00:04:03,480
Speaker 3: on the issues that arise. There's one hundred, maybe two

69
00:04:03,600 --> 00:04:06,760
Speaker 3: hundred ways that prosecutors can mess up a case, and

70
00:04:06,960 --> 00:04:10,080
Speaker 3: a really good defense lawyer is ready to pounce on

71
00:04:10,200 --> 00:04:13,080
Speaker 3: any one of them when they arise. If they knew

72
00:04:13,160 --> 00:04:16,640
Speaker 3: what the issue was ahead of time, the prosecutors would

73
00:04:16,680 --> 00:04:20,279
Speaker 3: likely know. So it's all about finding the prosecutor's errors

74
00:04:20,360 --> 00:04:23,720
Speaker 3: and mistakes or misconduct along the way, and then calling

75
00:04:23,760 --> 00:04:26,320
Speaker 3: it out and hoping that at that point the judge

76
00:04:26,320 --> 00:04:29,120
Speaker 3: sees it that way and will reverse the case or

77
00:04:29,120 --> 00:04:32,320
Speaker 3: dismiss the case, or issue some other major form of relief.

78
00:04:33,160 --> 00:04:35,880
Speaker 2: Before we move on to Hunter Biden, let's talk a

79
00:04:35,920 --> 00:04:39,960
Speaker 2: little bit about the business case in New York, the

80
00:04:40,720 --> 00:04:45,719
Speaker 2: real estate fraud, etc. Does that have any enduring significance

81
00:04:45,800 --> 00:04:48,719
Speaker 2: other than to Trump as a businessman, do you think?

82
00:04:49,760 --> 00:04:53,000
Speaker 3: Well? I think the enduring effect that it has primarily

83
00:04:53,200 --> 00:04:55,880
Speaker 3: is on the idea of those who do business in

84
00:04:55,920 --> 00:04:59,760
Speaker 3: the state of New York, the long term consequences of

85
00:04:59,800 --> 00:05:05,200
Speaker 3: the which Fox News report has no comparable history in

86
00:05:05,279 --> 00:05:09,839
Speaker 3: the state, and that idea being that nobody has been

87
00:05:10,320 --> 00:05:13,839
Speaker 3: essentially prosecuted where there are no complainants or victims people

88
00:05:13,839 --> 00:05:17,720
Speaker 3: who have lost any money. The idea here being that

89
00:05:17,800 --> 00:05:21,240
Speaker 3: if I go to a real estate agent and that

90
00:05:21,279 --> 00:05:23,120
Speaker 3: real estate agent tells me my house is worth a

91
00:05:23,120 --> 00:05:25,360
Speaker 3: million dollars, but I then list the house for one

92
00:05:25,440 --> 00:05:28,400
Speaker 3: point five and then it sells for two millions, how

93
00:05:28,480 --> 00:05:30,920
Speaker 3: much was that house worth in the first place. We

94
00:05:30,960 --> 00:05:33,680
Speaker 3: see corporations all the time who have never made a

95
00:05:33,839 --> 00:05:37,120
Speaker 3: penny in the history of the corporation. Think tech companies

96
00:05:37,480 --> 00:05:41,760
Speaker 3: that then sell their companies for billions of dollars. How

97
00:05:41,760 --> 00:05:45,919
Speaker 3: does that evaluated as the correct price or valuation of

98
00:05:45,960 --> 00:05:49,400
Speaker 3: the company when they haven't even made a dollar. So essentially,

99
00:05:49,440 --> 00:05:51,520
Speaker 3: the state of New York is putting itself in a

100
00:05:51,560 --> 00:05:56,640
Speaker 3: position to prosecute any business who they feel like are

101
00:05:56,800 --> 00:06:01,760
Speaker 3: overvaluing their company. And that's a very scary prospect for

102
00:06:01,839 --> 00:06:04,640
Speaker 3: those who do business. It's the nature of business. It's

103
00:06:04,680 --> 00:06:09,280
Speaker 3: also problematic because we see the immense political motivations here

104
00:06:09,320 --> 00:06:13,160
Speaker 3: with the various videos we've seen of Letitia James campaigning

105
00:06:13,440 --> 00:06:17,280
Speaker 3: to take down Donald Trump and chanting and promising that

106
00:06:17,279 --> 00:06:18,240
Speaker 3: she would take him down.

107
00:06:18,920 --> 00:06:21,520
Speaker 2: Yeah, it really is one of those things for the

108
00:06:21,560 --> 00:06:23,480
Speaker 2: record where you know, we have a fair amount of

109
00:06:23,560 --> 00:06:24,560
Speaker 2: ambivalence about Trump.

110
00:06:24,600 --> 00:06:24,720
Speaker 1: Here.

111
00:06:24,760 --> 00:06:26,840
Speaker 2: We recognize the great stuff he's done, the policies of

112
00:06:26,880 --> 00:06:30,560
Speaker 2: the judges, et cetera, et cetera, and certainly some of

113
00:06:31,360 --> 00:06:34,880
Speaker 2: some of the negatives, but this one sure seems like

114
00:06:35,160 --> 00:06:39,760
Speaker 2: another naked political prosecution to intercede in the deal that

115
00:06:39,839 --> 00:06:42,320
Speaker 2: everybody was thrilled with and say no, no, no, you

116
00:06:42,400 --> 00:06:44,839
Speaker 2: got ripped off, and all sides are looking at the

117
00:06:44,880 --> 00:06:47,240
Speaker 2: States saying I don't think we were. What are you

118
00:06:47,320 --> 00:06:50,120
Speaker 2: talking about? Seems nakedly political. So, as you point out,

119
00:06:50,120 --> 00:06:52,800
Speaker 2: I think the enduring effect is going to be political,

120
00:06:53,480 --> 00:06:55,400
Speaker 2: the idea that, yeah, there is a witch hunt for

121
00:06:55,400 --> 00:06:58,320
Speaker 2: Trump and he can't get a fair shape shake Andrew

122
00:06:58,320 --> 00:07:02,000
Speaker 2: Tcherkawski's online criminal defense and civil try lawyer. Let's talk

123
00:07:02,000 --> 00:07:05,160
Speaker 2: about Hunter Biden for a minute. He pleaded not guilty

124
00:07:05,200 --> 00:07:09,279
Speaker 2: to some tax charges, including I believe three felonies. What

125
00:07:09,320 --> 00:07:11,440
Speaker 2: does that look like to you? How much jeopardy is

126
00:07:11,480 --> 00:07:11,720
Speaker 2: he in.

127
00:07:12,640 --> 00:07:15,920
Speaker 3: Yeah, Hunter Biden is in a lot of trouble. You know.

128
00:07:16,080 --> 00:07:19,560
Speaker 3: Hunter Biden has kind of done it to himself in

129
00:07:19,600 --> 00:07:25,840
Speaker 3: his autobiography where he admits to rampant the legal activity

130
00:07:25,880 --> 00:07:28,840
Speaker 3: that he was engaged in in the late in mid

131
00:07:28,920 --> 00:07:33,640
Speaker 3: twenty teens. He is facing these tax charges and they're

132
00:07:33,680 --> 00:07:38,040
Speaker 3: certainly going to come fast and furious as this case

133
00:07:38,120 --> 00:07:40,320
Speaker 3: kind of proceeds with the evidence that will be used

134
00:07:40,320 --> 00:07:43,280
Speaker 3: against him. No doubt that's going to be particularly embarrassing

135
00:07:43,320 --> 00:07:46,480
Speaker 3: evidence to him and his father, and something that will

136
00:07:46,520 --> 00:07:53,679
Speaker 3: be I think heavily part of the campaign two prospects ahead.

137
00:07:54,160 --> 00:07:57,360
Speaker 3: I think the one very interesting point about that prosecution

138
00:07:57,560 --> 00:08:01,160
Speaker 3: is how the special prosecutor David Weiss intend to use

139
00:08:01,240 --> 00:08:05,000
Speaker 3: information about Barisma as well as Hunter Biden's connection with

140
00:08:05,080 --> 00:08:09,880
Speaker 3: a Chinese energy company. There's been lots of calls that

141
00:08:09,880 --> 00:08:13,800
Speaker 3: that is a violation of the PHARAH, the Foreign Agent

142
00:08:13,880 --> 00:08:17,680
Speaker 3: Registration Act, and that he should be prosecuted for that. Well,

143
00:08:17,880 --> 00:08:22,040
Speaker 3: Weiss has mentioned his affiliation with Bisma and the Chinese

144
00:08:22,080 --> 00:08:25,600
Speaker 3: holding company throughout the indictment, so I anticipate that Weiss

145
00:08:25,640 --> 00:08:28,600
Speaker 3: is going to use that information in the trial. Maybe

146
00:08:28,640 --> 00:08:31,120
Speaker 3: why he's not talking about it. But what we're all

147
00:08:31,160 --> 00:08:34,319
Speaker 3: asking is why isn't there a decision. It's been years

148
00:08:34,320 --> 00:08:37,079
Speaker 3: and years. Why hasn't Weis's come out and actually told

149
00:08:37,160 --> 00:08:40,360
Speaker 3: us why there's no prosecution on those allegations. Maybe that's

150
00:08:40,360 --> 00:08:42,800
Speaker 3: something that we will find out more through the court

151
00:08:42,840 --> 00:08:45,720
Speaker 3: filings that come in the following weeks and months.

152
00:08:46,240 --> 00:08:48,080
Speaker 2: Right, I was just going to say I don't trust

153
00:08:48,160 --> 00:08:51,520
Speaker 2: Weiss for a minute, and was going to ask that

154
00:08:51,520 --> 00:08:54,079
Speaker 2: that unholy to my mind plea deal a couple of

155
00:08:54,120 --> 00:08:57,440
Speaker 2: months ago that fell apart when that alert judge called

156
00:08:57,440 --> 00:09:01,520
Speaker 2: out both sides for the unprecedented and bizarre nature of it,

157
00:09:02,640 --> 00:09:08,320
Speaker 2: I believe that to be evidence of serious malfeasance behind

158
00:09:08,320 --> 00:09:10,920
Speaker 2: the scenes. Am I overreacting in my paranoid What was

159
00:09:10,920 --> 00:09:13,800
Speaker 2: your take on the plea deal malfeasans?

160
00:09:14,240 --> 00:09:17,400
Speaker 3: I think that it shows that David Weiss has compromised,

161
00:09:17,480 --> 00:09:21,600
Speaker 3: that he was engaged in reaching a plea deal that showed,

162
00:09:21,679 --> 00:09:25,960
Speaker 3: or at least demonstrated a great degree of bias towards

163
00:09:26,040 --> 00:09:29,360
Speaker 3: Hunter Biden. Now that has fallen apart, and he has

164
00:09:29,480 --> 00:09:32,760
Speaker 3: moved forward with prosecutions, and I know prosecutors and when

165
00:09:32,760 --> 00:09:35,240
Speaker 3: you read the indictment, and you have the idea of

166
00:09:35,720 --> 00:09:39,440
Speaker 3: what prosecutors really are. These are folks who really want

167
00:09:39,480 --> 00:09:43,040
Speaker 3: to get a conviction and do so convincingly so once

168
00:09:43,080 --> 00:09:46,439
Speaker 3: they think their teeth in whichould appears they have here. Generally,

169
00:09:46,520 --> 00:09:51,800
Speaker 3: prosecutors are very interested in a conviction and significant jail time.

170
00:09:52,080 --> 00:09:55,080
Speaker 3: The problem, even though that might be the case here,

171
00:09:55,120 --> 00:09:58,000
Speaker 3: even though the prosecutors behind BIS and the ones who

172
00:09:58,040 --> 00:10:02,079
Speaker 3: actually try this case may very aggressively prosecute this case,

173
00:10:02,320 --> 00:10:05,120
Speaker 3: there's not faith in the system. There's not faith in

174
00:10:05,200 --> 00:10:08,160
Speaker 3: David Weiss, and so I think he, before being appointed

175
00:10:08,240 --> 00:10:11,080
Speaker 3: to Special Prosecutors, should have been taken off the case

176
00:10:11,120 --> 00:10:13,040
Speaker 3: and another brought in. I think that would have been

177
00:10:13,040 --> 00:10:16,640
Speaker 3: a wise move by the DOJ to create the appearance

178
00:10:17,040 --> 00:10:21,360
Speaker 3: that we have a fair and neutral special prosecutor on

179
00:10:21,480 --> 00:10:24,280
Speaker 3: that case who isn't compromised.

180
00:10:24,920 --> 00:10:26,600
Speaker 2: Well, I'm glad to hear you say that, because I've

181
00:10:26,600 --> 00:10:28,920
Speaker 2: been ranting about that for months now, and you actually

182
00:10:28,920 --> 00:10:32,319
Speaker 2: know what you're talking about. But I cannot trust wise

183
00:10:33,000 --> 00:10:37,040
Speaker 2: you know your statement that they've got their teeth into

184
00:10:37,040 --> 00:10:39,240
Speaker 2: it and they're given it the old College try. Notwithstanding,

185
00:10:39,640 --> 00:10:45,040
Speaker 2: just because the inexplicable allowing of the statute of limitations

186
00:10:45,080 --> 00:10:48,880
Speaker 2: to expire on some pretty serious charges looked again like

187
00:10:48,960 --> 00:10:51,040
Speaker 2: a serious level of being compromised.

188
00:10:52,080 --> 00:10:55,480
Speaker 3: Yeah, you know, when you have these ideas of special prosecutors,

189
00:10:55,480 --> 00:10:57,600
Speaker 3: we put a lot of faith in them. I don't

190
00:10:57,960 --> 00:11:00,600
Speaker 3: I think that it is something that is very concerning

191
00:11:00,720 --> 00:11:03,559
Speaker 3: to put our nation's future in the hands of a

192
00:11:03,600 --> 00:11:07,320
Speaker 3: special prosecutor, whether that David Weiss who's prosecuting Hunter Biden,

193
00:11:07,440 --> 00:11:11,079
Speaker 3: which could have dramatic impact on Joe Biden, or whether

194
00:11:11,840 --> 00:11:17,000
Speaker 3: that is the special prosecutor over Donald Trump that essentially

195
00:11:17,040 --> 00:11:21,319
Speaker 3: puts a single person in charge of these prosecutorial decisions

196
00:11:21,480 --> 00:11:24,360
Speaker 3: that are highly political nature. And you said earlier that

197
00:11:24,640 --> 00:11:28,000
Speaker 3: you know, whether you like Trump or hate Trump, I'm

198
00:11:28,000 --> 00:11:31,160
Speaker 3: not looking at Trump's cases from the perspective of liking

199
00:11:31,320 --> 00:11:33,440
Speaker 3: or hating Donald Trump. I'm looking at it from the

200
00:11:33,720 --> 00:11:37,640
Speaker 3: constitutional perspective of what this means for presidents. And it's

201
00:11:37,679 --> 00:11:41,000
Speaker 3: really not my opinions that I'm coming with. I think

202
00:11:41,000 --> 00:11:45,160
Speaker 3: of the Federalist papers Alexander Hamilton, who addressed this very idea,

203
00:11:45,440 --> 00:11:49,240
Speaker 3: who essentially said in his writings, and it can be

204
00:11:49,280 --> 00:11:52,400
Speaker 3: interpreted in a number of ways, that the idea is

205
00:11:52,400 --> 00:11:56,240
Speaker 3: that a president should be immune from their actions while

206
00:11:56,360 --> 00:12:00,920
Speaker 3: in their presidency because of the degree of decisions they

207
00:12:00,960 --> 00:12:03,880
Speaker 3: have to make and the desire that we not have

208
00:12:04,080 --> 00:12:06,679
Speaker 3: undue pressure on them to be fearful that they will

209
00:12:06,679 --> 00:12:10,320
Speaker 3: be criminally prosecuted. So Hamilton said, a president should have

210
00:12:10,360 --> 00:12:14,000
Speaker 3: to first go through in impeachment, then be convicted by

211
00:12:14,679 --> 00:12:18,319
Speaker 3: the Senate before the idea of criminal charges, and that

212
00:12:18,440 --> 00:12:22,840
Speaker 3: waiving of the honor of immunity attaches to a president.

213
00:12:22,920 --> 00:12:24,920
Speaker 3: See that takes it out of the hand of a

214
00:12:24,960 --> 00:12:29,000
Speaker 3: single special prosecutor, and it puts it in the hand

215
00:12:29,360 --> 00:12:32,880
Speaker 3: of the people, of the representatives of the people, and

216
00:12:33,520 --> 00:12:36,400
Speaker 3: a significant portion of that. So whether we're talking about

217
00:12:36,440 --> 00:12:39,600
Speaker 3: Hunter Biden or whether we're talking about Donald Trump, we

218
00:12:39,640 --> 00:12:41,520
Speaker 3: have to be very careful to put all of our

219
00:12:41,640 --> 00:12:46,480
Speaker 3: faith in a single appointed special prosecutor who is not

220
00:12:46,600 --> 00:12:47,640
Speaker 3: elected by the people.

221
00:12:48,240 --> 00:12:50,760
Speaker 2: Amen to that, Andrew Tchurkowski. That's the way we see

222
00:12:50,800 --> 00:12:53,320
Speaker 2: it too. Really enjoyed it. Terrific job. Dreat to talk

223
00:12:53,360 --> 00:12:54,400
Speaker 2: to you. I hope we can do it again.

224
00:12:55,000 --> 00:12:56,160
Speaker 3: Yeah, fantastic, Thank you.