1
00:00:04,680 --> 00:00:08,200
Speaker 1: The mom that stormed the capital, carried Confederate flags and

2
00:00:08,280 --> 00:00:12,559
Speaker 1: white supremacist banners, wore clothing with racist language and neo

3
00:00:12,680 --> 00:00:16,280
Speaker 1: Nazi symbols, and hum the noose on a makeshift gallows.

4
00:00:16,720 --> 00:00:20,040
Speaker 1: So the N Double a CP looked back in history

5
00:00:20,040 --> 00:00:23,320
Speaker 1: one fifty years ago too, when the Ku Klux Klan

6
00:00:23,560 --> 00:00:27,360
Speaker 1: was terrorizing blacks in the South. And this week the

7
00:00:27,520 --> 00:00:30,840
Speaker 1: N Double a CP filed a suit against former President

8
00:00:30,840 --> 00:00:34,520
Speaker 1: Donald Trump, Rudy Giuliani, the Proud Boys, and the Oath

9
00:00:34,640 --> 00:00:39,080
Speaker 1: Keepers for conspiring to incite the January sixth Capital riot

10
00:00:39,200 --> 00:00:42,680
Speaker 1: in violation of the eighteen seventy one Ku Klux Klan

11
00:00:42,760 --> 00:00:47,120
Speaker 1: Act enacted to combat the KKK. The suit was filed

12
00:00:47,159 --> 00:00:51,120
Speaker 1: on behalf of Democratic Representative Bennie Thompson of Mississippi, who

13
00:00:51,120 --> 00:00:56,920
Speaker 1: spoke to MSNBC that Ku Klux Klan UH law was

14
00:00:56,960 --> 00:01:01,400
Speaker 1: basically put on the books to protect Southerners, that other

15
00:01:01,480 --> 00:01:05,319
Speaker 1: people from the clan who didn't want this great country

16
00:01:05,360 --> 00:01:08,800
Speaker 1: of ours to survive, but thank goodness and did. And

17
00:01:08,880 --> 00:01:12,600
Speaker 1: now here we come full circle, uh with this plan

18
00:01:12,760 --> 00:01:16,600
Speaker 1: like activity. Joining me is Harold Crant, professor at the

19
00:01:16,640 --> 00:01:19,679
Speaker 1: Chicago Kent College of Law. I'll tell us about the

20
00:01:19,760 --> 00:01:22,560
Speaker 1: history of this law. The Kukus Plan Acts were passed

21
00:01:22,600 --> 00:01:25,680
Speaker 1: in the wake of the reconstruction as a means of

22
00:01:25,680 --> 00:01:29,520
Speaker 1: trying to ensure the newly freed slaves their ability to

23
00:01:29,680 --> 00:01:33,119
Speaker 1: enjoy the protection rights, and particularly the right to vote.

24
00:01:33,360 --> 00:01:37,160
Speaker 1: Individuals are being intimidated from voting, and indeed federal officials

25
00:01:37,160 --> 00:01:40,360
Speaker 1: are being intimidated from trying to ensure the vote to

26
00:01:40,640 --> 00:01:44,160
Speaker 1: the newly freed slaves. So Congress stepped in to impose

27
00:01:44,200 --> 00:01:46,520
Speaker 1: both criminal penalties on those who interfere with the right

28
00:01:46,560 --> 00:01:48,880
Speaker 1: to vote, as well as a civil right of action.

29
00:01:49,400 --> 00:01:54,680
Speaker 1: So now this has been used rarely, so rarely litigated.

30
00:01:54,920 --> 00:01:58,360
Speaker 1: Are there open questions about it? They're very open questions.

31
00:01:58,400 --> 00:02:01,600
Speaker 1: I mean to look at it. Historically, the discipline of

32
00:02:01,640 --> 00:02:04,600
Speaker 1: the act was the criminal penalties, and the criminal penalties

33
00:02:04,640 --> 00:02:07,800
Speaker 1: were used thousands of times by the Grant administration in

34
00:02:07,920 --> 00:02:10,160
Speaker 1: order to break the back of the k k K

35
00:02:10,440 --> 00:02:13,600
Speaker 1: and it was remarkably successful in doing so. But the

36
00:02:13,720 --> 00:02:18,799
Speaker 1: civil aspects of the statutes lay dormant for hundred years

37
00:02:18,919 --> 00:02:22,359
Speaker 1: until they were used very successfully in the nineteen eighties

38
00:02:22,520 --> 00:02:25,240
Speaker 1: when the clan was accused of trying to disrupt an

39
00:02:25,240 --> 00:02:29,040
Speaker 1: individual's ability to vote. So the key question is can

40
00:02:29,080 --> 00:02:33,200
Speaker 1: a public official use it as a civil means to

41
00:02:33,280 --> 00:02:36,640
Speaker 1: get remedies for injuries he sustained, And that's the claim

42
00:02:36,720 --> 00:02:40,520
Speaker 1: by Representative Thompson, to my knowledge, has never been used

43
00:02:40,520 --> 00:02:44,920
Speaker 1: by a public official. Certainly, the actions are prohibited by

44
00:02:44,919 --> 00:02:47,920
Speaker 1: the statute, but the question is whether that's nearly left

45
00:02:47,919 --> 00:02:51,160
Speaker 1: over from a criminal penalty, or whether it gives a

46
00:02:51,280 --> 00:02:54,400
Speaker 1: right to a public official to sue for injuries that

47
00:02:54,440 --> 00:02:57,600
Speaker 1: he or she received. And what about the hurdle of

48
00:02:57,600 --> 00:03:00,800
Speaker 1: a president being immune from civil laws suits for acts

49
00:03:00,840 --> 00:03:05,760
Speaker 1: in his official capacity. The Supreme Court in Nixon versus

50
00:03:05,800 --> 00:03:10,480
Speaker 1: Fitzgerald held that the president is absolutely immune from civil

51
00:03:10,520 --> 00:03:14,440
Speaker 1: suits for any actions during his administration. So this lawsuit

52
00:03:14,600 --> 00:03:18,320
Speaker 1: will have to prove that Trump was acting not in

53
00:03:18,400 --> 00:03:22,160
Speaker 1: his official capacity but in his personal capacity when he

54
00:03:22,240 --> 00:03:27,239
Speaker 1: allegedly conspired in the events of January six. The plaintiest

55
00:03:27,280 --> 00:03:31,480
Speaker 1: anticipated that hurdle and alleged that Trump acted beyond the

56
00:03:31,520 --> 00:03:35,680
Speaker 1: outer perimeter of his official duties and therefore is susceptible

57
00:03:35,720 --> 00:03:39,160
Speaker 1: to suit in his personal capacity. It's going to be

58
00:03:39,200 --> 00:03:44,560
Speaker 1: extremely difficult for the lawsuit to prevail against President Trump

59
00:03:44,600 --> 00:03:47,360
Speaker 1: on that ground. A very similar argument was made in

60
00:03:47,400 --> 00:03:51,960
Speaker 1: Fitzgerald versus Nixon itself. The allegation there was that Nixon

61
00:03:52,000 --> 00:03:55,560
Speaker 1: had Fitzgerald fired. He was a management analyst for the

62
00:03:55,600 --> 00:03:58,640
Speaker 1: Air Force and he had reported on cost overruns which

63
00:03:58,640 --> 00:04:02,560
Speaker 1: embarrassed the administration. He was fired and then sued Nixon

64
00:04:02,640 --> 00:04:07,120
Speaker 1: after Nixon's term in office was over, and as in

65
00:04:07,160 --> 00:04:10,280
Speaker 1: this case, he said, look, you took personal vendet against me,

66
00:04:10,840 --> 00:04:14,920
Speaker 1: and by firing me, you acted outside your official responsibilities.

67
00:04:15,040 --> 00:04:17,240
Speaker 1: I should be able to sue you. And the Supreme

68
00:04:17,279 --> 00:04:21,800
Speaker 1: Court brushed that aside and said, if we took any

69
00:04:21,880 --> 00:04:25,400
Speaker 1: kind of allegations of unlawful behavior against the president, his

70
00:04:25,480 --> 00:04:29,720
Speaker 1: official community would be chipped away too extensively. And so

71
00:04:29,839 --> 00:04:32,440
Speaker 1: I think they'll be very demanding in terms of the

72
00:04:32,440 --> 00:04:38,720
Speaker 1: showing required to remove a president's absolute immunity from civil suits.

73
00:04:38,760 --> 00:04:42,800
Speaker 1: In the defamation lawsuit by a New York advice columnist

74
00:04:42,920 --> 00:04:47,880
Speaker 1: e Jene Carroll against Trump, the judge said that this

75
00:04:48,000 --> 00:04:50,600
Speaker 1: wasn't part of his official duty, so the lawsuit could

76
00:04:50,600 --> 00:04:54,480
Speaker 1: go on. Do you think that that was an incorrect decision? Then?

77
00:04:55,080 --> 00:04:57,200
Speaker 1: I think that is a tough decision, and I think

78
00:04:57,200 --> 00:05:01,400
Speaker 1: it may not hold up on appeal. Particularly lawsuit. The

79
00:05:01,520 --> 00:05:04,480
Speaker 1: response was an official if I read McCall correctly, at

80
00:05:04,480 --> 00:05:09,320
Speaker 1: an official press conference, and he was responding to questions

81
00:05:09,720 --> 00:05:13,920
Speaker 1: about the lawsuit and the situation. So to be difficult,

82
00:05:13,960 --> 00:05:16,760
Speaker 1: I think, to show that when you're responding to a

83
00:05:16,839 --> 00:05:20,039
Speaker 1: question at a White House press conference that you're not

84
00:05:20,160 --> 00:05:23,440
Speaker 1: acting within the outer perimeter of your job. Now, the

85
00:05:23,440 --> 00:05:26,640
Speaker 1: Supreme Court made up these rules in terms of absolute community,

86
00:05:26,960 --> 00:05:30,200
Speaker 1: so it is theoretically possible that the Supreme Court will

87
00:05:30,240 --> 00:05:35,520
Speaker 1: we consider the scope of Fitzgerald case and decide to

88
00:05:36,160 --> 00:05:40,400
Speaker 1: limit the kinds of immunities that a president may enjoy.

89
00:05:40,480 --> 00:05:43,120
Speaker 1: But I'm skeptical and I think that both of these

90
00:05:43,160 --> 00:05:46,600
Speaker 1: lawsuits will have a hard time against President Trump himself. Now,

91
00:05:46,600 --> 00:05:49,800
Speaker 1: President Trump is not immune from criminal conduct, speaking of

92
00:05:49,920 --> 00:05:55,520
Speaker 1: tough evidentially burdens. This lawsuit alleges a conspiracy that Trump

93
00:05:55,520 --> 00:05:59,880
Speaker 1: and Juliani and the Proud Boys and Oathkeepers acted in

94
00:06:00,120 --> 00:06:04,000
Speaker 1: concert to incite and then carry out the Capital insurrection.

95
00:06:04,839 --> 00:06:07,839
Speaker 1: So not only are there issues about who can be

96
00:06:07,960 --> 00:06:12,320
Speaker 1: sued and who can sue under the Ku klux Clian Act,

97
00:06:12,560 --> 00:06:15,919
Speaker 1: but the very conspiracy itself will be difficult to prove.

98
00:06:16,520 --> 00:06:19,479
Speaker 1: To show that there was an active agreement amongst the

99
00:06:19,560 --> 00:06:24,520
Speaker 1: Proud Boys, the Oathkeepers, Giuliani and Trump somewhat defied I

100
00:06:24,560 --> 00:06:27,520
Speaker 1: think credibility. But I think that one of the points

101
00:06:27,560 --> 00:06:30,159
Speaker 1: here in the lawsuit, besides the symbolism of using the

102
00:06:30,200 --> 00:06:33,520
Speaker 1: ku klux Clian Act, is to put the Proud Boys

103
00:06:33,560 --> 00:06:36,680
Speaker 1: in the Oathkeepers on the defensive. They will have to

104
00:06:36,680 --> 00:06:42,279
Speaker 1: spend money, and if this case continues, they'll be subject

105
00:06:42,320 --> 00:06:46,039
Speaker 1: to depositions and discovery, and so a great deal of

106
00:06:46,080 --> 00:06:51,040
Speaker 1: information may being covered, even if ultimately will prove too

107
00:06:51,040 --> 00:06:55,520
Speaker 1: difficult to show a conspiracy. So there's a political aspect

108
00:06:55,560 --> 00:06:59,480
Speaker 1: to this lawsuit as well as illegal. It's a very

109
00:06:59,480 --> 00:07:02,479
Speaker 1: important critical aspect. Right, we have the symbolism of using

110
00:07:02,480 --> 00:07:09,240
Speaker 1: the Act, we have the threat of financial harm imposed

111
00:07:09,320 --> 00:07:12,280
Speaker 1: upon the oath Keepers and probablys were probably not flush

112
00:07:12,360 --> 00:07:16,360
Speaker 1: with cash. Um. The same thing is true with the lawsuits.

113
00:07:16,400 --> 00:07:19,280
Speaker 1: Will be many lawsuits against Giuliani and how much money

114
00:07:19,280 --> 00:07:22,560
Speaker 1: does does he have? And at the same time we

115
00:07:22,720 --> 00:07:27,360
Speaker 1: may find out that there were discussions and maybe there

116
00:07:27,400 --> 00:07:30,480
Speaker 1: was a conspiracy, right, we don't know, um. And but

117
00:07:30,560 --> 00:07:36,200
Speaker 1: the idea of discovery is to get at phone calls, emails,

118
00:07:36,920 --> 00:07:40,200
Speaker 1: Facebook messages that may suggest that there was more co

119
00:07:40,320 --> 00:07:43,880
Speaker 1: ordination than we've been led to believe. I haven't scoured

120
00:07:43,920 --> 00:07:45,720
Speaker 1: the books, but I would think that this is really

121
00:07:46,440 --> 00:07:49,600
Speaker 1: Possibly it's to get into federal court, but possibly the

122
00:07:49,760 --> 00:07:53,240
Speaker 1: use of the Klux clan statue is really symbolic, and

123
00:07:53,360 --> 00:08:00,880
Speaker 1: that if Congressman Thompson had simply sued for toward injury

124
00:08:01,040 --> 00:08:04,800
Speaker 1: that he received, it would not be the same kind

125
00:08:04,840 --> 00:08:10,160
Speaker 1: of press not be the same kind of overarching inquiry

126
00:08:10,200 --> 00:08:12,400
Speaker 1: into what happened that day. So I think this raises

127
00:08:12,440 --> 00:08:15,320
Speaker 1: the stakes, that raises the visibility of the lawsuit as

128
00:08:15,320 --> 00:08:18,240
Speaker 1: opposed to a personal injury suit. I should say, the

129
00:08:18,360 --> 00:08:21,720
Speaker 1: leader of the Proud Boys has said that there was

130
00:08:21,920 --> 00:08:23,840
Speaker 1: no plan to go to the capital, that though there

131
00:08:23,880 --> 00:08:27,200
Speaker 1: were Proud Boys there, there was no actual plan to

132
00:08:27,240 --> 00:08:30,280
Speaker 1: go to the capital. So Trump, so when his his

133
00:08:30,320 --> 00:08:35,720
Speaker 1: spokesman responded, did not mention the immunity from civil suit. Instead,

134
00:08:35,760 --> 00:08:39,600
Speaker 1: he said that Trump did not incite or conspire to

135
00:08:39,679 --> 00:08:43,400
Speaker 1: incite any violence at the Capitol. Seems odd that they

136
00:08:43,440 --> 00:08:49,120
Speaker 1: didn't mention immunity from lawsuits. Well, I read that, and

137
00:08:49,120 --> 00:08:51,880
Speaker 1: and my take on it is simply that he wants

138
00:08:51,920 --> 00:08:58,000
Speaker 1: to repeat what the defense was before the Senate and

139
00:08:58,040 --> 00:09:01,600
Speaker 1: the impeachment trial, that he he was exercising his First

140
00:09:01,640 --> 00:09:05,360
Speaker 1: Amendment rights, was proud of the support he was receiving

141
00:09:05,440 --> 00:09:08,480
Speaker 1: from the crowd in front of the White House, and

142
00:09:08,640 --> 00:09:13,120
Speaker 1: in no way inside it any kind of violence. Um. Obviously,

143
00:09:13,480 --> 00:09:17,000
Speaker 1: when it comes down to responding to this lawsuit, I

144
00:09:17,040 --> 00:09:20,000
Speaker 1: have a strong suspicion that he will rely upon presidential

145
00:09:20,000 --> 00:09:24,760
Speaker 1: community as well. An advantage of this suit that you

146
00:09:24,840 --> 00:09:28,400
Speaker 1: don't have in a criminal case is that there's a

147
00:09:28,440 --> 00:09:32,200
Speaker 1: lower burden for the plaintiffs, So explain the burden in

148
00:09:32,240 --> 00:09:36,080
Speaker 1: a civil suit. In a civil suit, the burden is

149
00:09:36,160 --> 00:09:42,400
Speaker 1: only a little over for the plaintiff to prevail, unlike

150
00:09:42,480 --> 00:09:45,080
Speaker 1: in a criminal suit when the state has to prove

151
00:09:45,480 --> 00:09:50,680
Speaker 1: beyond a reasonable doubt that the individual committed the covered offense.

152
00:09:51,200 --> 00:09:53,680
Speaker 1: And so it may be that in a close case,

153
00:09:53,760 --> 00:09:58,319
Speaker 1: and I would think that the Georgia cases you even

154
00:09:58,360 --> 00:10:03,000
Speaker 1: more difficult or Trump than the insurrection case. But then

155
00:10:03,000 --> 00:10:06,160
Speaker 1: in a close case, uh, Trump may lose in the

156
00:10:06,200 --> 00:10:09,320
Speaker 1: civil case even if you would prevail in a criminal case.

157
00:10:10,120 --> 00:10:14,840
Speaker 1: I was wondering if there are any jurisdictional problems. I

158
00:10:14,880 --> 00:10:18,600
Speaker 1: don't think so. I mean, I think the only I mean, look,

159
00:10:19,120 --> 00:10:21,960
Speaker 1: I don't know, but I just find it odd that

160
00:10:22,080 --> 00:10:28,680
Speaker 1: the statute that criminalizes interference with government officials allows the

161
00:10:28,679 --> 00:10:32,800
Speaker 1: government officials to sue for your individual damages. It just

162
00:10:33,120 --> 00:10:36,960
Speaker 1: seems that that was intended for a criminal prohibition as

163
00:10:36,960 --> 00:10:42,280
Speaker 1: opposed to for giving the governmental official a right to

164
00:10:42,320 --> 00:10:45,240
Speaker 1: sue for personal damages. But maybe it is, and that's

165
00:10:45,240 --> 00:10:48,400
Speaker 1: going to be a very difficult historical argument. But I

166
00:10:48,400 --> 00:10:53,160
Speaker 1: think the other kinds of jurisdictional issues should be relatively clear.

167
00:10:53,280 --> 00:10:55,600
Speaker 1: There were proud boys there, there were the oath keepers,

168
00:10:56,160 --> 00:11:00,360
Speaker 1: both in the in d C. And there's no question

169
00:11:00,440 --> 00:11:02,800
Speaker 1: that at least some of them wanted to interfere with

170
00:11:02,920 --> 00:11:07,280
Speaker 1: the official tabulation of the of the votes. And that

171
00:11:07,480 --> 00:11:11,040
Speaker 1: does lie at the heart of the civil rights statute,

172
00:11:11,120 --> 00:11:13,920
Speaker 1: which are known as the Kukus clan at And so

173
00:11:14,080 --> 00:11:17,320
Speaker 1: it seems, as you refer to a big point of

174
00:11:17,400 --> 00:11:20,960
Speaker 1: this lawsuit, maybe to get more information, you know, the

175
00:11:21,000 --> 00:11:25,959
Speaker 1: house managers stopped short of having any witnesses or secupoenaing

176
00:11:26,080 --> 00:11:32,320
Speaker 1: any documents. So this might allow some discovery into what

177
00:11:32,440 --> 00:11:37,880
Speaker 1: really happened. Absolutely, even if President Trump is removed from

178
00:11:37,880 --> 00:11:41,760
Speaker 1: this case because of immunity, the case can continue and

179
00:11:41,880 --> 00:11:47,880
Speaker 1: with depositions, with discovery subpoenas of the planets may find

180
00:11:47,880 --> 00:11:51,360
Speaker 1: out a great deal more about who knew what, who

181
00:11:51,440 --> 00:11:55,800
Speaker 1: planned to do what on January six. And it seems

182
00:11:55,840 --> 00:11:59,680
Speaker 1: like the house managers have basically laid out the case

183
00:11:59,760 --> 00:12:03,760
Speaker 1: four of them. They can use all the different video

184
00:12:03,840 --> 00:12:09,800
Speaker 1: and audio and information that the house managers presented. Right,

185
00:12:09,800 --> 00:12:11,920
Speaker 1: there's a great deal of video and audio information that

186
00:12:11,960 --> 00:12:15,439
Speaker 1: are already in the public consciousness and public record because

187
00:12:15,440 --> 00:12:18,160
Speaker 1: we saw it during the impeachment trial. But we have

188
00:12:18,320 --> 00:12:23,480
Speaker 1: not seen again in terms of emails, we haven't seen

189
00:12:23,960 --> 00:12:28,080
Speaker 1: all the Facebook messages. We haven't seen um, we haven't

190
00:12:28,080 --> 00:12:31,320
Speaker 1: had depositions of some of the leaders of the both

191
00:12:31,400 --> 00:12:34,959
Speaker 1: Keepers and the Cowboys, and that information they supplement the

192
00:12:35,000 --> 00:12:37,560
Speaker 1: record and give us a different picture of what really

193
00:12:37,559 --> 00:12:41,800
Speaker 1: happened on January six. Some civil attorneys have been using

194
00:12:41,840 --> 00:12:46,280
Speaker 1: the KKK statute in recent years for defending people who

195
00:12:46,280 --> 00:12:49,000
Speaker 1: have been injured by hate groups, at least in the

196
00:12:49,080 --> 00:12:52,360
Speaker 1: lawsuit phase. So what does it say that basically the

197
00:12:52,520 --> 00:12:56,600
Speaker 1: statute that's been forgotten for so many years that it's

198
00:12:56,800 --> 00:13:01,680
Speaker 1: having to be used again. There are different avenues that

199
00:13:01,920 --> 00:13:06,240
Speaker 1: individuals can use who are injured in the riots at

200
00:13:06,280 --> 00:13:09,400
Speaker 1: the Capitol on January six. They don't have to just

201
00:13:09,520 --> 00:13:14,439
Speaker 1: rely upon the k K statute. There can be assault

202
00:13:15,360 --> 00:13:20,440
Speaker 1: and other kinds of claims for people who were um injured. Uh.

203
00:13:21,240 --> 00:13:24,120
Speaker 1: This is a powerful statute because it has attorney's feece

204
00:13:24,160 --> 00:13:29,160
Speaker 1: and other costs can be associated with it to be recovered. Um.

205
00:13:29,280 --> 00:13:34,360
Speaker 1: But I think it's again mostly being used because it

206
00:13:34,440 --> 00:13:38,600
Speaker 1: gives a federal right of action as opposed to a

207
00:13:38,679 --> 00:13:43,199
Speaker 1: state action that would otherwise be required for just a

208
00:13:43,200 --> 00:13:47,400
Speaker 1: a tort injury for instance, that happened due to the

209
00:13:47,520 --> 00:13:51,640
Speaker 1: rioters and lit the mayhem they caught. Thanks for being

210
00:13:51,640 --> 00:13:54,840
Speaker 1: on the Bloomberg Law Show. How that's Professor Harold Trent

211
00:13:55,040 --> 00:14:00,160
Speaker 1: of Chicago Kent College of Law. Former President Donald m

212
00:14:00,320 --> 00:14:03,240
Speaker 1: faces a new legal threat from a prosecutor who was

213
00:14:03,360 --> 00:14:07,160
Speaker 1: just sworn into office. Last month. Fulton County District Attorney

214
00:14:07,160 --> 00:14:10,359
Speaker 1: Fannie Willis sent a letter to Tom Georgia state officials

215
00:14:10,679 --> 00:14:14,360
Speaker 1: informing them that her office is investigating whether illegal attempts

216
00:14:14,360 --> 00:14:19,240
Speaker 1: were made to influence the state's elections. This includes Trump's

217
00:14:19,280 --> 00:14:23,560
Speaker 1: now infamous January second call to Georgia's Secretary of State

218
00:14:23,920 --> 00:14:27,040
Speaker 1: asking him to change the States certified results of the

219
00:14:27,080 --> 00:14:31,320
Speaker 1: presidential election. So look, all I want to do is this,

220
00:14:31,640 --> 00:14:39,160
Speaker 1: I just want to find uh thousand seven eight votes,

221
00:14:39,520 --> 00:14:42,440
Speaker 1: which is one more that we have. You know what

222
00:14:42,520 --> 00:14:44,800
Speaker 1: they did and you're not reporting it. That's a you know,

223
00:14:44,880 --> 00:14:48,960
Speaker 1: that's a criminal that's a criminal offense, and you know

224
00:14:49,040 --> 00:14:51,600
Speaker 1: you can't let that happen. That's that's a big risk

225
00:14:51,920 --> 00:14:55,040
Speaker 1: to you and to Ryan. Joining me is Clark Cunningham,

226
00:14:55,120 --> 00:14:58,240
Speaker 1: a law professor at Georgia State University. Clark, in her

227
00:14:58,320 --> 00:15:01,480
Speaker 1: letter Willis says she's focused on a wide range of charges,

228
00:15:01,920 --> 00:15:07,680
Speaker 1: including solicitation of election fraud, false statements, conspiracy, and racketeering.

229
00:15:08,080 --> 00:15:11,000
Speaker 1: How would you characterize her investigation. I would say it's

230
00:15:11,000 --> 00:15:13,880
Speaker 1: a sweeping investigation at this stage, and what I've seen,

231
00:15:13,920 --> 00:15:16,720
Speaker 1: she's looking at more charges than the people involved in

232
00:15:16,760 --> 00:15:19,480
Speaker 1: the phone call. What I understand is she's looking at

233
00:15:19,560 --> 00:15:23,640
Speaker 1: Trump's phone call to Governor Kemp attempting to interfere with

234
00:15:23,720 --> 00:15:27,320
Speaker 1: the election through that phone call. She's looking at the

235
00:15:27,360 --> 00:15:30,920
Speaker 1: phone call the Trump made to the Attorney General Chris Carr,

236
00:15:31,360 --> 00:15:34,880
Speaker 1: attempting to interfere with him. Defending the State of Georgia

237
00:15:35,080 --> 00:15:38,080
Speaker 1: against the completely spurious lawsuits of the State of Texas

238
00:15:38,160 --> 00:15:40,960
Speaker 1: filed in the Supreme Court. She's looking at this phone

239
00:15:40,960 --> 00:15:43,080
Speaker 1: call to the Secretary of State that I imagine She's

240
00:15:43,160 --> 00:15:46,360
Speaker 1: also looking at other attempts that Trump made to pressure

241
00:15:46,440 --> 00:15:49,200
Speaker 1: or attimidate Sector of State Rassenberger. For example, he helped

242
00:15:49,200 --> 00:15:52,080
Speaker 1: the press conference on Thanksgiving and said that the Secretary

243
00:15:52,080 --> 00:15:54,360
Speaker 1: of State was the enemy of the people. I believe

244
00:15:54,400 --> 00:15:56,960
Speaker 1: she's looking at a phone call that Trump made directly

245
00:15:57,120 --> 00:15:59,400
Speaker 1: to an official of the Georgia of your investigation, who

246
00:15:59,520 --> 00:16:02,520
Speaker 1: was conduct seem an election audit. And I believe she's

247
00:16:02,560 --> 00:16:05,560
Speaker 1: also and this is why she has sent a letter

248
00:16:05,640 --> 00:16:08,920
Speaker 1: to the Lieutenant Governor, because the Lieutenant Governor is the

249
00:16:08,960 --> 00:16:12,640
Speaker 1: presiding officer of the Georgia Senate. And she's looking at

250
00:16:12,680 --> 00:16:15,800
Speaker 1: statements that Giuliani made on behalf of Trump to this

251
00:16:15,960 --> 00:16:19,720
Speaker 1: Georgia legislature, particularly to the Senate, which have been described

252
00:16:19,760 --> 00:16:23,800
Speaker 1: as false and fraudulent statement. One charge mentioned is criminal

253
00:16:23,840 --> 00:16:28,480
Speaker 1: solicitation to commit election fraud. Describe what's required there and

254
00:16:28,600 --> 00:16:32,880
Speaker 1: how Trump's phone call might fit in. You know, Frankly,

255
00:16:33,320 --> 00:16:34,840
Speaker 1: that looks like it open and shut case to me.

256
00:16:35,240 --> 00:16:38,080
Speaker 1: We have the transcript, we have the actual recording of

257
00:16:38,160 --> 00:16:41,120
Speaker 1: the phone call. Trump has admitted that it's genuine, So

258
00:16:41,400 --> 00:16:44,640
Speaker 1: the facts are very clear. And so the crime is

259
00:16:44,720 --> 00:16:48,320
Speaker 1: that a person commits the offense when with intent that

260
00:16:48,440 --> 00:16:52,640
Speaker 1: another person engage in conduct constituting a felony under this article,

261
00:16:53,080 --> 00:16:56,240
Speaker 1: he or she solicits request commands, import tunes are otherwise

262
00:16:56,240 --> 00:16:59,240
Speaker 1: attempts to cause the other person to engage in such conduct.

263
00:16:59,560 --> 00:17:01,960
Speaker 1: So the question it is during that phone call, was

264
00:17:02,040 --> 00:17:07,160
Speaker 1: Trump trying soliciting, requesting, commanding, import tuning, or otherwise attempting

265
00:17:07,200 --> 00:17:09,639
Speaker 1: to cause the Secretary of State and his staff to

266
00:17:09,680 --> 00:17:12,119
Speaker 1: engage an election fraud? And then there are lots of

267
00:17:12,160 --> 00:17:16,399
Speaker 1: things that constitute election fraud, but altering certified vote results

268
00:17:16,400 --> 00:17:20,480
Speaker 1: would clearly be one of them. Let's discuss possible racketeering charges.

269
00:17:20,840 --> 00:17:24,480
Speaker 1: In her most famous case, Willis used Georgia's Rico law

270
00:17:24,640 --> 00:17:28,399
Speaker 1: to prosecute teachers and officials in a cheating scandal in

271
00:17:28,400 --> 00:17:31,440
Speaker 1: the Atlanta public school system, a place where you don't

272
00:17:31,520 --> 00:17:35,960
Speaker 1: usually expect racketeering charges. Yes, and I was living in

273
00:17:36,000 --> 00:17:39,560
Speaker 1: Atlanta at the time, and she secured a lot of

274
00:17:39,600 --> 00:17:43,000
Speaker 1: convictions under that theory that there was a criminal enterprise

275
00:17:43,160 --> 00:17:47,600
Speaker 1: to bribe teachers or threatened teachers to change and great.

276
00:17:47,800 --> 00:17:50,560
Speaker 1: So she's very familiar with the Georgia recetarian statutes. She

277
00:17:50,680 --> 00:17:54,040
Speaker 1: secured a lot of convictions. It was controversial. Some people

278
00:17:54,119 --> 00:17:57,120
Speaker 1: thought that the prosecution was overzealous, but that has nothing

279
00:17:57,160 --> 00:17:58,680
Speaker 1: to do with as far as I know, whether or

280
00:17:58,680 --> 00:18:03,000
Speaker 1: not racketeering was appropriate. How would Georgia's racketeering law fit

281
00:18:03,119 --> 00:18:07,040
Speaker 1: in with this case. So the key to to the

282
00:18:07,080 --> 00:18:11,240
Speaker 1: statute are the definition sections, because the elements of a

283
00:18:11,320 --> 00:18:14,640
Speaker 1: racketeering prosecution is that there has to be an enterprise,

284
00:18:14,720 --> 00:18:21,480
Speaker 1: and an enterprise can be pretty much anything that is engaged,

285
00:18:21,840 --> 00:18:25,320
Speaker 1: can be a person, a partnership, trust, the union. Certainly,

286
00:18:25,359 --> 00:18:28,800
Speaker 1: the Trump campaign is an enterprise that engages in at

287
00:18:28,840 --> 00:18:32,320
Speaker 1: least two acts of what's called racketeering activity. And if

288
00:18:32,320 --> 00:18:35,520
Speaker 1: the enterprises engages in at least two acts of racketeering

289
00:18:35,560 --> 00:18:39,440
Speaker 1: activity within the time frame, then you have a racketariing game.

290
00:18:39,600 --> 00:18:41,880
Speaker 1: So they need at least two events, not just one.

291
00:18:42,160 --> 00:18:46,119
Speaker 1: And then the definition of racketeering activity includes committing or

292
00:18:46,119 --> 00:18:49,280
Speaker 1: attempts to commit a violation of a number of Georgia statutes.

293
00:18:49,880 --> 00:18:52,400
Speaker 1: And the one that I assume that she's particularly interested

294
00:18:52,440 --> 00:18:55,800
Speaker 1: in is the false statement statute that I refer to

295
00:18:55,840 --> 00:19:00,280
Speaker 1: a moment ago um that it's a fility for person

296
00:19:00,359 --> 00:19:03,639
Speaker 1: knowingly and willfully to make a false, ffication, fictitious or

297
00:19:03,680 --> 00:19:07,639
Speaker 1: a fraudulan statement within the jurisdiction of any department, agency,

298
00:19:07,640 --> 00:19:10,919
Speaker 1: and state government. So that would apply to any false

299
00:19:10,920 --> 00:19:14,280
Speaker 1: statements at Trump or anybody who was an effect part

300
00:19:14,280 --> 00:19:18,320
Speaker 1: of his campaign at enterprise made to the governor. That's

301
00:19:18,440 --> 00:19:21,560
Speaker 1: Attorney General Lindy Graham in effect could be part of

302
00:19:21,560 --> 00:19:23,840
Speaker 1: that enterprise. So it can include any of any of

303
00:19:24,000 --> 00:19:26,760
Speaker 1: any of the statements that were made by them to

304
00:19:26,960 --> 00:19:31,000
Speaker 1: achieve the purpose of the of the rack of the enterprise,

305
00:19:31,080 --> 00:19:33,960
Speaker 1: and the purpose of the enterprise was too keith Donald

306
00:19:33,960 --> 00:19:38,120
Speaker 1: Trump in office without it. That was a possible defense

307
00:19:38,160 --> 00:19:41,720
Speaker 1: of Trump's could be I didn't have the intent to

308
00:19:41,840 --> 00:19:44,920
Speaker 1: commit a crime. Here, he could say, I didn't want

309
00:19:44,960 --> 00:19:49,320
Speaker 1: the records to be falsified. I wanted them to be corrected. Well,

310
00:19:49,520 --> 00:19:52,040
Speaker 1: you could say whatever he wants to say, but I've

311
00:19:52,080 --> 00:19:55,199
Speaker 1: read through this transcript the number of times his intent

312
00:19:55,440 --> 00:20:00,040
Speaker 1: is crystal clear, and his intent is to solicit the

313
00:20:00,080 --> 00:20:04,480
Speaker 1: Secretary of State to change the certified election results by

314
00:20:04,680 --> 00:20:08,119
Speaker 1: enough votes so the margin of victory shifts to him,

315
00:20:08,160 --> 00:20:11,720
Speaker 1: and he says that over and over and over again

316
00:20:11,800 --> 00:20:16,280
Speaker 1: in that meeting. But that's what he wants to achieve, um.

317
00:20:16,320 --> 00:20:20,840
Speaker 1: And there's no good defense for that statement that he

318
00:20:20,880 --> 00:20:23,119
Speaker 1: makes over and over and over again. First of all,

319
00:20:23,160 --> 00:20:25,159
Speaker 1: of course, the president the United States should not be

320
00:20:25,160 --> 00:20:29,280
Speaker 1: getting on the phone with the state election officials anyway. Right.

321
00:20:29,760 --> 00:20:32,000
Speaker 1: But if he got on the phone with the Secretary

322
00:20:32,000 --> 00:20:34,760
Speaker 1: of State and said, I understand you did an audit

323
00:20:34,800 --> 00:20:38,560
Speaker 1: of signature matching on absidentee ballots in Cobb County, I'm

324
00:20:38,600 --> 00:20:41,520
Speaker 1: calling to ask you to also do that in Fulton County,

325
00:20:42,240 --> 00:20:45,240
Speaker 1: all right, that would be something different, and of course

326
00:20:46,440 --> 00:20:48,520
Speaker 1: the president would have to live with whatever the result

327
00:20:48,720 --> 00:20:52,280
Speaker 1: of that audit was just like a recounts. Nothing wrong

328
00:20:52,320 --> 00:20:54,840
Speaker 1: with asking for a recount, but you can't ask for

329
00:20:54,920 --> 00:20:59,639
Speaker 1: recount and say recount until you get eleven votes from

330
00:20:59,640 --> 00:21:03,560
Speaker 1: me and then stop the recount. Um. And so that

331
00:21:03,640 --> 00:21:06,760
Speaker 1: was that was the entire strategy of this phone call.

332
00:21:06,800 --> 00:21:10,639
Speaker 1: And I've looked at it now again he's simply dealing

333
00:21:10,680 --> 00:21:13,120
Speaker 1: with it, apparently the way he deals to almost everything

334
00:21:13,720 --> 00:21:18,040
Speaker 1: UM as a kind of transactional negotiations. Right. So he

335
00:21:18,119 --> 00:21:22,119
Speaker 1: starts off with Folston inflated statements that he had hundreds

336
00:21:22,160 --> 00:21:24,320
Speaker 1: of thousand, he went by hundreds of thousands of votes,

337
00:21:24,560 --> 00:21:29,800
Speaker 1: And he makes a number of very factual statements, right. Um,

338
00:21:30,320 --> 00:21:34,960
Speaker 1: you know, he says, Um, there were four thousand, five

339
00:21:35,080 --> 00:21:38,640
Speaker 1: hundred and two voters who weren't on the voter registration role.

340
00:21:39,640 --> 00:21:44,480
Speaker 1: There were eighteen thousand and three hundred voters where their

341
00:21:44,520 --> 00:21:48,240
Speaker 1: addressed was a vacant house. There were nine hundred four

342
00:21:48,359 --> 00:21:52,040
Speaker 1: voters who only had a post office box. Um, there

343
00:21:52,080 --> 00:21:56,360
Speaker 1: were four thousand, nine hundred twenty five ballots from out

344
00:21:56,400 --> 00:22:01,200
Speaker 1: of state voters. There were two thousand, three and twenty

345
00:22:01,240 --> 00:22:04,800
Speaker 1: six ballots absently, ballots that stake of Christ. Those are

346
00:22:04,960 --> 00:22:09,159
Speaker 1: very very precise numbers. So those are factual statements. And

347
00:22:09,320 --> 00:22:12,960
Speaker 1: if they're false, then there's a statute that says that

348
00:22:13,080 --> 00:22:15,800
Speaker 1: it is a crime to willingly knowingly make a false

349
00:22:15,800 --> 00:22:21,440
Speaker 1: statement to the government agency. Now it would probably it

350
00:22:21,480 --> 00:22:24,680
Speaker 1: would be for the jury to determine whether he knew

351
00:22:24,720 --> 00:22:27,879
Speaker 1: that those statements were false. But factually, I don't think

352
00:22:27,880 --> 00:22:30,960
Speaker 1: there's any questions but their faults and he wasn't saying,

353
00:22:31,359 --> 00:22:35,080
Speaker 1: in my opinion, you know, the election was not handled well.

354
00:22:35,240 --> 00:22:39,080
Speaker 1: He's making very very specific factual statements. And then he says,

355
00:22:39,359 --> 00:22:42,399
Speaker 1: add all these facts up, add all these different facts

356
00:22:42,400 --> 00:22:45,240
Speaker 1: which I asserved to be true, and you've gotten a

357
00:22:45,320 --> 00:22:49,520
Speaker 1: lot more than eleven thousand votes that should have been

358
00:22:49,600 --> 00:22:53,159
Speaker 1: cast for me. And then it's perfectly clear. He says, Okay,

359
00:22:53,160 --> 00:22:58,960
Speaker 1: now that I've made the case that actually factually there

360
00:22:58,960 --> 00:23:02,440
Speaker 1: there are in his hundreds of thousands of votes for him.

361
00:23:02,560 --> 00:23:09,080
Speaker 1: Then he basically says, but let's make a deal, right, Um, okay,

362
00:23:09,160 --> 00:23:13,320
Speaker 1: and he says that over and over again. UM. So

363
00:23:14,800 --> 00:23:20,160
Speaker 1: he begins, here's the line that's the clearest solicitation. Um.

364
00:23:20,200 --> 00:23:23,879
Speaker 1: And it's interesting how he he blends threats with this.

365
00:23:24,440 --> 00:23:27,359
Speaker 1: So he says, we have won this election in Georgia

366
00:23:27,440 --> 00:23:30,000
Speaker 1: based on all of this, and there's nothing wrong with

367
00:23:30,040 --> 00:23:32,919
Speaker 1: saying that. Brady's referring to the Secretary of States, you know,

368
00:23:32,960 --> 00:23:35,800
Speaker 1: I mean having the correct and then he stops and

369
00:23:35,840 --> 00:23:39,200
Speaker 1: he makes a threat. The people of Georgia are angry,

370
00:23:39,440 --> 00:23:41,560
Speaker 1: and these numbers are going to be repeated on Monday night.

371
00:23:41,640 --> 00:23:44,520
Speaker 1: That's when he was coming into for big rally along

372
00:23:44,520 --> 00:23:46,400
Speaker 1: with others that we're going to have by that time,

373
00:23:46,400 --> 00:23:49,240
Speaker 1: which you're much more substantial even and the people of

374
00:23:49,280 --> 00:23:51,840
Speaker 1: Georgia are angry. The people of the country are angry.

375
00:23:52,280 --> 00:23:56,680
Speaker 1: So makes the threat. And then here's the solicitation for fraud.

376
00:23:57,200 --> 00:24:03,000
Speaker 1: And there's nothing wrong with saying, you know that you've recalculate, okay.

377
00:24:03,359 --> 00:24:05,359
Speaker 1: And then he said, even if you cut him in half,

378
00:24:05,400 --> 00:24:07,120
Speaker 1: cut him in half, and cut him in half again,

379
00:24:07,160 --> 00:24:11,200
Speaker 1: it's more votes than we need. So and then over

380
00:24:11,240 --> 00:24:14,960
Speaker 1: and over again he says, take my deal. All I

381
00:24:15,080 --> 00:24:19,440
Speaker 1: need is eleven thousand votes, right, And he says that

382
00:24:19,520 --> 00:24:22,560
Speaker 1: over and over again. The enterprise and the purpose of

383
00:24:22,600 --> 00:24:26,639
Speaker 1: the enterprise was too keith Donald Trump in office without

384
00:24:26,640 --> 00:24:29,840
Speaker 1: it that she's going to look into apparently, also the

385
00:24:29,880 --> 00:24:33,920
Speaker 1: abrupt resignation of the U. S. Attorney for Northern Georgia.

386
00:24:34,680 --> 00:24:39,359
Speaker 1: How does that fit within her her view? It seems

387
00:24:39,400 --> 00:24:42,159
Speaker 1: to me that certainly if I were and I'm not

388
00:24:42,200 --> 00:24:45,920
Speaker 1: prosecuting the case, I'm just an academic. But it's if

389
00:24:45,960 --> 00:24:50,040
Speaker 1: I were prosecuting the case, I would layout what seems

390
00:24:50,119 --> 00:24:53,560
Speaker 1: to be a pretty clear narrative um and it's it's

391
00:24:53,560 --> 00:24:57,320
Speaker 1: a it's a plan that apparently Rudy Giulietti developed for

392
00:24:57,520 --> 00:25:02,000
Speaker 1: Trump for how to uh get packed the fact that

393
00:25:02,040 --> 00:25:06,320
Speaker 1: Trump lost the popular vote um, and so plan one,

394
00:25:07,000 --> 00:25:12,200
Speaker 1: right um, was to sort directly try to change the

395
00:25:12,320 --> 00:25:15,760
Speaker 1: vote through this these kinds of political pressure. Plan two

396
00:25:16,400 --> 00:25:20,000
Speaker 1: was to prevent in in the swing states the votes

397
00:25:20,040 --> 00:25:23,440
Speaker 1: from being certified by the safe Harvard date in early December,

398
00:25:23,640 --> 00:25:27,280
Speaker 1: so that an argument could be made that because the

399
00:25:27,359 --> 00:25:31,840
Speaker 1: votes were not certified by that date, it's then reverted

400
00:25:31,880 --> 00:25:35,560
Speaker 1: to the state legislature to step in and appoint display

401
00:25:35,600 --> 00:25:38,680
Speaker 1: of elector. And of course he targeted states with Republican

402
00:25:38,720 --> 00:25:43,960
Speaker 1: dominated legislatures. So the plan was up to that point

403
00:25:44,320 --> 00:25:46,919
Speaker 1: was to try to block the certification by lawsuits by

404
00:25:46,960 --> 00:25:52,800
Speaker 1: political pressure. Whatever that failed, Okay, then the next step

405
00:25:52,840 --> 00:25:56,440
Speaker 1: in the plan was to prevent the votes from being

406
00:25:56,440 --> 00:25:59,840
Speaker 1: certified in Congress so that Biden failed to receive a

407
00:26:00,160 --> 00:26:04,240
Speaker 1: majority of the of the electoral votes in Congress, because

408
00:26:04,320 --> 00:26:07,880
Speaker 1: under the constitution, if nobody gets the majority of electoral votes,

409
00:26:08,320 --> 00:26:11,320
Speaker 1: the decision goes to the House of Representatives voting by

410
00:26:11,400 --> 00:26:15,120
Speaker 1: state delegations, which would mean that the Republicans would choose

411
00:26:15,119 --> 00:26:17,280
Speaker 1: the next president and that would be Trump. So that

412
00:26:17,359 --> 00:26:21,439
Speaker 1: was the plan, and each of these acts fits perfectly

413
00:26:21,960 --> 00:26:25,359
Speaker 1: as steps towards achieving those goals. This has gotten a

414
00:26:25,359 --> 00:26:30,200
Speaker 1: lot more attention. But the Secretary of State is also investigating.

415
00:26:30,520 --> 00:26:33,600
Speaker 1: Do you expect that to go anywhere? I think it

416
00:26:33,720 --> 00:26:36,560
Speaker 1: probably will, at a minimum take a back seat. The

417
00:26:36,560 --> 00:26:39,439
Speaker 1: Bolton County District Attorney doesn't have to wait for that process,

418
00:26:39,520 --> 00:26:41,840
Speaker 1: as I understand that there is a process where the

419
00:26:41,840 --> 00:26:45,440
Speaker 1: state Election Board can investigate violations as the Election Code,

420
00:26:45,440 --> 00:26:48,200
Speaker 1: and if they decide there is a violation that they

421
00:26:48,280 --> 00:26:51,880
Speaker 1: can request either a local district attorney or the Attorney

422
00:26:51,880 --> 00:26:56,280
Speaker 1: General too to pursue it. But District Attorney Wills doesn't

423
00:26:56,320 --> 00:26:58,760
Speaker 1: theology to wait for that process. And I think she's right.

424
00:26:59,080 --> 00:27:01,560
Speaker 1: These are crimes, they were committed in her jurisdiction. She

425
00:27:01,600 --> 00:27:04,400
Speaker 1: can proceive and I think that I think I think

426
00:27:04,400 --> 00:27:07,240
Speaker 1: that's what's going to happen. In her letters, she also

427
00:27:07,440 --> 00:27:10,560
Speaker 1: mentions that the next grand jury will be convening in

428
00:27:10,720 --> 00:27:15,240
Speaker 1: March and they'll begin requesting grand jury subpoenas if necessary

429
00:27:15,359 --> 00:27:19,000
Speaker 1: at that time. What kind of information might she be

430
00:27:19,080 --> 00:27:22,199
Speaker 1: looking for that's not already in the public record. We

431
00:27:22,240 --> 00:27:24,879
Speaker 1: don't know what we don't know doing so. Part of

432
00:27:24,880 --> 00:27:28,600
Speaker 1: the frustration about the recently completed second impeachment trial is

433
00:27:28,720 --> 00:27:31,200
Speaker 1: there were no witnesses, There was no discovery of evidence.

434
00:27:31,240 --> 00:27:33,359
Speaker 1: Everything was based on a public record, which was pretty

435
00:27:33,400 --> 00:27:36,080
Speaker 1: much true of the first impeachment, And you don't know

436
00:27:36,119 --> 00:27:38,320
Speaker 1: what kind of evidence of conspiracy you're going to find,

437
00:27:38,480 --> 00:27:42,359
Speaker 1: particularly if she served subpoenas on Giuliani and there is

438
00:27:42,359 --> 00:27:45,760
Speaker 1: a crime fraud exception to attorney client privilege that she

439
00:27:45,840 --> 00:27:49,920
Speaker 1: might succeed on that and forced Giuliani to turn over

440
00:27:50,280 --> 00:27:53,760
Speaker 1: all the information about his work on behalf of President

441
00:27:53,760 --> 00:27:57,119
Speaker 1: Trump and Georgia. That would be a treasured drove of information.

442
00:27:57,200 --> 00:28:00,399
Speaker 1: Thanks Clark. That's Clark Cunningham, a professor at the Georgia

443
00:28:00,480 --> 00:28:03,560
Speaker 1: State University. And that's it for the sedition of the

444
00:28:03,560 --> 00:28:07,200
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Law Show. I'm June Grosso. Thanks so much for listening.

445
00:28:07,520 --> 00:28:09,639
Speaker 1: Remember you can always get the latest legal news on

446
00:28:09,640 --> 00:28:14,040
Speaker 1: our Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can find them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify,

447
00:28:14,240 --> 00:28:19,200
Speaker 1: and at www dot Bloomberg dot com, slash podcast, Slash Law,

448
00:28:19,760 --> 00:28:22,040
Speaker 1: And please tune into The Bloomberg Law Show every week

449
00:28:22,119 --> 00:28:25,159
Speaker 1: then at ten pm Eastern right here on Bloomberg Radio