WEBVTT - What's Ahead for Citizen Trump

0:00:00.480 --> 0:00:05.680
<v Speaker 1>You're listening to Bloomberg Law with June Grosso from Bloomberg Radio.

0:00:06.680 --> 0:00:10.840
<v Speaker 1>Former President Donald Trump bid farewell to Washington today, the

0:00:10.920 --> 0:00:15.200
<v Speaker 1>first president in modern history to boycott his successors inauguration.

0:00:15.880 --> 0:00:18.000
<v Speaker 1>What's the road ahead for a man who has never

0:00:18.079 --> 0:00:21.639
<v Speaker 1>adhered to political norms? Joining me is Tina Davis, the

0:00:21.680 --> 0:00:25.120
<v Speaker 1>executive editor of Bloomberg Legal News. You know what's been

0:00:25.200 --> 0:00:29.640
<v Speaker 1>happening with the Trump Empire while he's been president. If

0:00:29.640 --> 0:00:31.760
<v Speaker 1>you look at kind of all of the holdings of

0:00:31.760 --> 0:00:36.600
<v Speaker 1>Trump organization, the president came into office worth about three billion.

0:00:36.880 --> 0:00:40.760
<v Speaker 1>And even though we've had a brilliant economy and excluding

0:00:40.800 --> 0:00:44.640
<v Speaker 1>the pandemic for most of the four years of his term,

0:00:44.680 --> 0:00:47.199
<v Speaker 1>and there's also a massive tax cut program that was

0:00:47.240 --> 0:00:51.040
<v Speaker 1>implemented under his administration, he's actually leaving about five million

0:00:51.080 --> 0:00:54.400
<v Speaker 1>dollars poorer than he came in. And that's most of

0:00:54.400 --> 0:00:56.920
<v Speaker 1>it because of the downturn in the real estate market

0:00:56.960 --> 0:01:00.240
<v Speaker 1>and obviously the downturn in the tourism business. The come

0:01:00.280 --> 0:01:02.319
<v Speaker 1>as a resultable pandemic. This is not a great time

0:01:02.360 --> 0:01:05.720
<v Speaker 1>to be in real estate, either commercial or residential, certainly

0:01:05.760 --> 0:01:07.479
<v Speaker 1>in New York City, and it's not a great time

0:01:07.560 --> 0:01:11.040
<v Speaker 1>to be offering things like golf trips for a lot

0:01:11.080 --> 0:01:14.560
<v Speaker 1>of populace that's still locked down, and his company carries

0:01:14.600 --> 0:01:18.360
<v Speaker 1>a billion dollars in debt. Is he personally liable for

0:01:18.400 --> 0:01:21.800
<v Speaker 1>that and can he cover it? He's not personally liable

0:01:21.959 --> 0:01:25.400
<v Speaker 1>for all of that debt. He's personally liable for about

0:01:25.400 --> 0:01:28.720
<v Speaker 1>three million dollars of that debt, and that's being held

0:01:28.800 --> 0:01:31.640
<v Speaker 1>by Deutsche Bank, which is looking to extricate itself from

0:01:31.640 --> 0:01:33.520
<v Speaker 1>its relationship with the president. So he's gonna have to

0:01:33.520 --> 0:01:35.200
<v Speaker 1>find another lender to take on that debt, or at

0:01:35.240 --> 0:01:37.360
<v Speaker 1>least Deutsche Bank is going to have to find someone

0:01:37.400 --> 0:01:39.600
<v Speaker 1>to offload that debt too. But the other thing to

0:01:39.640 --> 0:01:42.200
<v Speaker 1>think about when you're looking at the stet load, I mean,

0:01:42.200 --> 0:01:44.160
<v Speaker 1>it's not a huge stebt load in comparison to the

0:01:44.240 --> 0:01:46.479
<v Speaker 1>values of the properties. And the other thing to think

0:01:46.480 --> 0:01:48.800
<v Speaker 1>about is, you know, you don't have banks right now

0:01:48.840 --> 0:01:50.720
<v Speaker 1>that are desperate to be in the real estate business.

0:01:50.720 --> 0:01:52.680
<v Speaker 1>Nobody's desperate to be in the real estate business. So

0:01:52.720 --> 0:01:55.400
<v Speaker 1>that might also help you know, again, if if it

0:01:55.480 --> 0:01:59.480
<v Speaker 1>comes to a worsening financial situation, you know, you as

0:01:59.480 --> 0:02:01.960
<v Speaker 1>a bank necessarily want to own a hotel right now,

0:02:02.080 --> 0:02:05.279
<v Speaker 1>or want to own a huge commercial property at the moment.

0:02:05.640 --> 0:02:08.640
<v Speaker 1>That also means it's going to be difficult to sell

0:02:08.720 --> 0:02:12.960
<v Speaker 1>assets to raise money. Correct And look, I think, as

0:02:13.000 --> 0:02:15.200
<v Speaker 1>I said, this is not there's no indication at present

0:02:15.320 --> 0:02:19.560
<v Speaker 1>that there are kind of severe financial constraints facing Trump.

0:02:19.600 --> 0:02:22.840
<v Speaker 1>As he returns to Trump's word, but it is not

0:02:22.960 --> 0:02:25.400
<v Speaker 1>a great time to be in these businesses. He's in

0:02:25.639 --> 0:02:28.600
<v Speaker 1>prior years made a lot of money from licensing his name.

0:02:28.639 --> 0:02:31.640
<v Speaker 1>It's not clear exactly what that will look like going forward,

0:02:31.680 --> 0:02:34.720
<v Speaker 1>since we have seen a lot of companies distanced themselves

0:02:34.760 --> 0:02:38.760
<v Speaker 1>in the aftermath of the capital siege. So he's got

0:02:38.800 --> 0:02:41.640
<v Speaker 1>a base of of assets. Whether or not he can

0:02:41.720 --> 0:02:43.839
<v Speaker 1>build on that as is an open question, and how

0:02:43.840 --> 0:02:47.119
<v Speaker 1>he will build on that is an open question. He's

0:02:47.160 --> 0:02:51.960
<v Speaker 1>been counted out many times before and he's managed to

0:02:52.000 --> 0:02:55.000
<v Speaker 1>come back from those. Tell us a little bit about

0:02:55.000 --> 0:02:58.239
<v Speaker 1>his comebacks. Yeah, absolutely. I mean when you think of

0:02:58.320 --> 0:03:01.280
<v Speaker 1>Donald Trump, it's always everything is done in a rather

0:03:01.360 --> 0:03:05.720
<v Speaker 1>big way. So you've had the spectacle their bankruptcies after

0:03:05.720 --> 0:03:08.160
<v Speaker 1>he overextended himself. You know, there was a Trump Airline

0:03:08.200 --> 0:03:10.160
<v Speaker 1>at one point. There are a lot of businesses that

0:03:10.200 --> 0:03:13.080
<v Speaker 1>he got into and was not entirely successful with and

0:03:13.120 --> 0:03:15.120
<v Speaker 1>in fact, if you sort of think about his most

0:03:15.120 --> 0:03:18.240
<v Speaker 1>recent rise, you know, when he got the job on

0:03:18.320 --> 0:03:21.120
<v Speaker 1>The Apprentice, he was not necessarily in the best financial

0:03:21.160 --> 0:03:24.639
<v Speaker 1>position of his career. That job helped launch him into

0:03:24.800 --> 0:03:27.880
<v Speaker 1>another kind of stratosphere, both in terms of earnings and

0:03:27.919 --> 0:03:31.239
<v Speaker 1>in terms of having his face before the American public,

0:03:31.280 --> 0:03:33.440
<v Speaker 1>which I think was incredibly helpful as he began this

0:03:33.800 --> 0:03:36.720
<v Speaker 1>presidential run. And again if you think about comebacks, and

0:03:36.920 --> 0:03:39.160
<v Speaker 1>nobody thought he would win in twenty sixteen, and he

0:03:39.200 --> 0:03:42.560
<v Speaker 1>managed to overcome all the skeptics and become the first

0:03:42.680 --> 0:03:46.640
<v Speaker 1>businessman president who never held an elected office before. So

0:03:46.720 --> 0:03:49.240
<v Speaker 1>you can never really again sort of count him out.

0:03:49.280 --> 0:03:51.520
<v Speaker 1>I think that's what we've learned. It has a lot

0:03:51.840 --> 0:03:56.600
<v Speaker 1>changed since the Capital riots. For example, before the riots,

0:03:57.040 --> 0:04:02.360
<v Speaker 1>there was talk of a Trump net work. Yeah, is

0:04:02.400 --> 0:04:05.200
<v Speaker 1>that more difficult now or is it out of the question.

0:04:06.200 --> 0:04:08.640
<v Speaker 1>I think it's not entirely out of the question. And

0:04:08.920 --> 0:04:10.640
<v Speaker 1>I guess the reason I would say that is because

0:04:10.680 --> 0:04:15.640
<v Speaker 1>we've seen so many times that businesses and corporations have

0:04:16.279 --> 0:04:18.840
<v Speaker 1>distanced themselves and then come back to him. I mean,

0:04:19.000 --> 0:04:22.479
<v Speaker 1>thinking the immediate aftermath of what happened in Charlottesville. There

0:04:22.480 --> 0:04:24.839
<v Speaker 1>are a lot of people who quit from the various

0:04:25.000 --> 0:04:27.479
<v Speaker 1>sort of test force that were part of advising the

0:04:27.480 --> 0:04:30.680
<v Speaker 1>White House, and then those people eventually came back around.

0:04:30.720 --> 0:04:33.520
<v Speaker 1>So if you're talking about, I think for media and

0:04:33.600 --> 0:04:36.320
<v Speaker 1>social media specifically, that's one of the places where we

0:04:36.360 --> 0:04:40.719
<v Speaker 1>saw perhaps the greatest reaction when the President lost the

0:04:40.839 --> 0:04:44.719
<v Speaker 1>megaphone that he had in Twitter. That's a real difference,

0:04:44.800 --> 0:04:46.880
<v Speaker 1>you know, that's a very direct way that he had

0:04:47.200 --> 0:04:49.520
<v Speaker 1>of reaching out to all of his followers get eighty

0:04:49.560 --> 0:04:53.880
<v Speaker 1>eight million followers on Twitter. Losing that that microphone, that megaphone,

0:04:53.920 --> 0:04:56.880
<v Speaker 1>as you will, is a real sort of game changer

0:04:56.920 --> 0:05:00.560
<v Speaker 1>in terms of you don't really hear as much him,

0:05:00.600 --> 0:05:03.120
<v Speaker 1>and it will be very interesting going forward to see

0:05:03.120 --> 0:05:05.479
<v Speaker 1>what he uses to replace that. And perhaps that is

0:05:06.160 --> 0:05:09.159
<v Speaker 1>a media channel. He's talked before about wanting to create

0:05:09.600 --> 0:05:12.040
<v Speaker 1>some sort of network that would compete with Fox, which

0:05:12.040 --> 0:05:14.880
<v Speaker 1>he has integrated as you know, not being conservative enough

0:05:14.960 --> 0:05:18.159
<v Speaker 1>from his view. But perhaps it's also a social media channel.

0:05:18.279 --> 0:05:21.040
<v Speaker 1>You know, we've seen Parlor shut down and then ultimately

0:05:21.160 --> 0:05:24.279
<v Speaker 1>able to get back online. Maybe there's another way for

0:05:24.360 --> 0:05:27.200
<v Speaker 1>him to connect with folks. And he has a tremendous

0:05:27.240 --> 0:05:30.440
<v Speaker 1>amount of information that he's gotten just from his app.

0:05:30.880 --> 0:05:33.080
<v Speaker 1>So you know, if you are a follower of Trump

0:05:33.080 --> 0:05:35.679
<v Speaker 1>and you've downloaded his app, he has your phone number,

0:05:35.760 --> 0:05:37.919
<v Speaker 1>your email. He has a lot of great information that

0:05:38.440 --> 0:05:41.599
<v Speaker 1>if you're looking to monetize the base, you have the

0:05:41.640 --> 0:05:44.080
<v Speaker 1>potential ability to do that. You sort of think about,

0:05:44.360 --> 0:05:47.479
<v Speaker 1>how do you create potentially a new social media base,

0:05:47.640 --> 0:05:50.000
<v Speaker 1>how do you reach your followers if you're not able

0:05:50.040 --> 0:05:53.760
<v Speaker 1>to use the normal methods of Facebook or Twitter. And

0:05:53.800 --> 0:05:58.039
<v Speaker 1>has there actually been talked about a revival of The Apprentice?

0:05:58.560 --> 0:06:00.720
<v Speaker 1>There has, although he said in the asked he wouldn't

0:06:00.760 --> 0:06:02.880
<v Speaker 1>do it. But as I said before, I don't think

0:06:02.880 --> 0:06:06.000
<v Speaker 1>that you ever completely discount any possibility when it comes

0:06:06.000 --> 0:06:08.720
<v Speaker 1>to this president. He's done so many things that nobody

0:06:08.760 --> 0:06:11.280
<v Speaker 1>expected him to do over the past four years and

0:06:11.360 --> 0:06:14.480
<v Speaker 1>obviously before that as well. He will be looking for

0:06:14.600 --> 0:06:17.320
<v Speaker 1>some sort of way to connect with the people who

0:06:17.360 --> 0:06:20.479
<v Speaker 1>believe in him, and whether that's through traditional media, whether

0:06:20.520 --> 0:06:23.320
<v Speaker 1>that's through building another network, whether it's through taking a

0:06:23.360 --> 0:06:26.640
<v Speaker 1>stake maybe in one American News or Newsmax, which are

0:06:26.640 --> 0:06:30.560
<v Speaker 1>two media outlets that have really been supporting him. There's

0:06:30.600 --> 0:06:33.480
<v Speaker 1>a potential path for him in the years had Simon

0:06:33.520 --> 0:06:36.320
<v Speaker 1>and Schuster. I think it was canceled their book deal

0:06:36.400 --> 0:06:40.840
<v Speaker 1>with Senator Josh Holly after the riot. But is a

0:06:40.920 --> 0:06:44.919
<v Speaker 1>huge book deal for Trump still a possibility. Oh, I

0:06:44.960 --> 0:06:47.359
<v Speaker 1>would say so. And I think, you know, it's a

0:06:47.360 --> 0:06:50.560
<v Speaker 1>little bit different canceling a book deal for a senator,

0:06:50.600 --> 0:06:52.200
<v Speaker 1>and this is again, this is a book deal that

0:06:52.240 --> 0:06:55.640
<v Speaker 1>was about he was writing about technology companies. I think

0:06:55.680 --> 0:06:59.200
<v Speaker 1>there will be appetite, kind of regardless for a memoir

0:06:59.400 --> 0:07:01.480
<v Speaker 1>from the president, which is one of the traditional things

0:07:01.480 --> 0:07:04.680
<v Speaker 1>that presidents do, aside from playing golf and setting up

0:07:04.720 --> 0:07:07.000
<v Speaker 1>their presidential libraries. You know, the tradition is that you

0:07:07.040 --> 0:07:09.640
<v Speaker 1>write a memoir and you usually make several million dollars

0:07:09.680 --> 0:07:12.320
<v Speaker 1>off of that book deal. I would be really surprised

0:07:12.360 --> 0:07:15.119
<v Speaker 1>if no one wanted to bid for that memoir, because

0:07:15.160 --> 0:07:18.160
<v Speaker 1>there is appetite for it. Trump has written several books

0:07:18.160 --> 0:07:20.520
<v Speaker 1>in the past, including most famously The Art of the Deal.

0:07:20.840 --> 0:07:23.160
<v Speaker 1>All of those, of course written with ghost writers. But

0:07:23.480 --> 0:07:26.040
<v Speaker 1>he's shown an interest in book publishing in the past,

0:07:26.320 --> 0:07:29.360
<v Speaker 1>and I wouldn't expect publishing to turn its back on him,

0:07:29.400 --> 0:07:32.400
<v Speaker 1>because this would be an interesting book no matter who

0:07:32.440 --> 0:07:34.640
<v Speaker 1>you supported, No support. It would be an interesting book

0:07:34.720 --> 0:07:37.040
<v Speaker 1>to read his sort of take on the past four

0:07:37.120 --> 0:07:40.760
<v Speaker 1>years and talk a little bit about legal exposure. Now,

0:07:41.040 --> 0:07:43.320
<v Speaker 1>so tell us what some of the possible federal cases

0:07:43.360 --> 0:07:47.000
<v Speaker 1>against him might be. So the federal cases get more

0:07:47.040 --> 0:07:50.000
<v Speaker 1>and more interesting. Up until two weeks ago, I would

0:07:50.040 --> 0:07:52.160
<v Speaker 1>have said that was probably not a great deal of

0:07:52.160 --> 0:07:55.600
<v Speaker 1>of a chance that the Justice Department would necessarily file

0:07:55.720 --> 0:07:59.480
<v Speaker 1>charges against him. But in the aftermath of what happened

0:07:59.560 --> 0:08:03.239
<v Speaker 1>at the spital in January six, he's also potentially facing

0:08:03.440 --> 0:08:06.440
<v Speaker 1>charges of incitement if the U. S. Attorney in the

0:08:06.480 --> 0:08:09.440
<v Speaker 1>District of Columbia decides to pursue that. He is facing

0:08:09.520 --> 0:08:14.160
<v Speaker 1>potential obstruction of justice charges if the Biden administration, if

0:08:14.160 --> 0:08:16.680
<v Speaker 1>their Justice Department decides to move forward with that. So

0:08:16.720 --> 0:08:19.320
<v Speaker 1>those are some of the federal charges cases that are

0:08:19.360 --> 0:08:22.400
<v Speaker 1>outside of the federal jurisdiction. I'm thinking specifically about from

0:08:22.400 --> 0:08:24.600
<v Speaker 1>a couple of cases in New York. And he has

0:08:24.640 --> 0:08:28.280
<v Speaker 1>the New York Attorney General looking at his taxes and

0:08:28.400 --> 0:08:31.720
<v Speaker 1>what he's done there, and you have the Manhattan District

0:08:31.760 --> 0:08:34.240
<v Speaker 1>Attorney who famously went all the way to Supreme Court

0:08:34.320 --> 0:08:37.319
<v Speaker 1>to get access to his financial records. He looks into

0:08:37.679 --> 0:08:40.800
<v Speaker 1>potential fraud by the Trump organization and by Donald Trump himself.

0:08:41.320 --> 0:08:44.440
<v Speaker 1>As far as the federal cases, you know, before the

0:08:44.520 --> 0:08:49.360
<v Speaker 1>Capital riot, it was reported that Joe Biden basically wanted

0:08:49.400 --> 0:08:51.960
<v Speaker 1>to move on. He didn't want the beginning of his

0:08:52.040 --> 0:08:58.280
<v Speaker 1>presidency tarnished by federal charges against Trump. But has that

0:08:58.400 --> 0:09:02.599
<v Speaker 1>whole dynamic change since the riot, Well, I think that

0:09:03.000 --> 0:09:05.520
<v Speaker 1>remains to be seen. I mean, the constant refrain we've

0:09:05.559 --> 0:09:08.120
<v Speaker 1>gotten from the Biden administration is that they want to

0:09:08.200 --> 0:09:11.040
<v Speaker 1>try to make what they see as a deliberate break

0:09:11.320 --> 0:09:14.960
<v Speaker 1>with the policies of the prior administration and tried not

0:09:15.080 --> 0:09:18.520
<v Speaker 1>to be seen as directing the Justice Department who to

0:09:18.600 --> 0:09:22.800
<v Speaker 1>prosecute and who not to prosecute. So their approach is that,

0:09:23.000 --> 0:09:25.439
<v Speaker 1>you know, they plan on being very hands off with

0:09:25.559 --> 0:09:28.480
<v Speaker 1>the just Justice Department and allowing the Justice Partment to

0:09:28.520 --> 0:09:30.080
<v Speaker 1>do its work. But again, I think I feel like

0:09:30.240 --> 0:09:32.600
<v Speaker 1>when you're talking about again, they're not being a huge

0:09:32.600 --> 0:09:35.559
<v Speaker 1>amount of kind of lock him up chance going on

0:09:35.840 --> 0:09:40.200
<v Speaker 1>amongst the Biden administration officials. That may have changed. And

0:09:40.240 --> 0:09:42.520
<v Speaker 1>what's interesting is we heard from the U. S. Attorney

0:09:42.520 --> 0:09:45.000
<v Speaker 1>in the District of Columbia who was enacting the U

0:09:45.000 --> 0:09:49.000
<v Speaker 1>S Attorney, but is a Trump appointee that he would

0:09:49.000 --> 0:09:52.439
<v Speaker 1>not rule out the idea of possibly charging the president,

0:09:52.520 --> 0:09:55.080
<v Speaker 1>as they have hundreds of cases that are now under

0:09:55.120 --> 0:09:57.520
<v Speaker 1>their jurisdiction, and they've arrested more than a hundred people

0:09:57.640 --> 0:10:00.440
<v Speaker 1>in association with what happened on that day. The fact

0:10:00.520 --> 0:10:02.240
<v Speaker 1>that he wouldn't rule it out, I think it's a

0:10:02.360 --> 0:10:06.120
<v Speaker 1>very interesting and very telling statement. Is there a possibility

0:10:06.480 --> 0:10:10.480
<v Speaker 1>of charges from the phone calls that he made to

0:10:11.000 --> 0:10:14.640
<v Speaker 1>Georgia officials to try to change the election results in

0:10:14.679 --> 0:10:18.319
<v Speaker 1>that state? Yeah, so we've heard from uh, we've heard

0:10:18.320 --> 0:10:21.160
<v Speaker 1>at least the idea that the that a prosecutor in

0:10:21.160 --> 0:10:25.960
<v Speaker 1>Fulton County is looking into those Um, I feel like, you,

0:10:25.960 --> 0:10:28.640
<v Speaker 1>you know, you obviously need political support for those things,

0:10:28.640 --> 0:10:33.200
<v Speaker 1>and I'm not sure necessarily that there would be support.

0:10:33.320 --> 0:10:38.000
<v Speaker 1>Even though that president has attacked numerous officials in Georgia,

0:10:38.000 --> 0:10:40.600
<v Speaker 1>including the governor and the Secretary of States there, I'm

0:10:40.600 --> 0:10:42.880
<v Speaker 1>not sure that that they would have kind of the

0:10:42.960 --> 0:10:48.800
<v Speaker 1>political will to necessarily spend their prosecutors after him. But again,

0:10:49.080 --> 0:10:52.480
<v Speaker 1>in majority kind of democratic areas, and Fulton County being

0:10:52.520 --> 0:10:55.400
<v Speaker 1>one of those, you might see someone try to bring

0:10:55.400 --> 0:10:59.800
<v Speaker 1>a charge a state charge, um, looking at potential election interference.

0:11:00.080 --> 0:11:02.720
<v Speaker 1>Given what was that on that phone call you mentioned

0:11:02.720 --> 0:11:07.679
<v Speaker 1>the Manhattan prosecutors lawsuit and the grand jury investigation there

0:11:08.440 --> 0:11:11.079
<v Speaker 1>there it went to the Supreme Court and the Supreme

0:11:11.120 --> 0:11:15.600
<v Speaker 1>Court said, yes, the grand jury can get the tax records,

0:11:15.760 --> 0:11:18.520
<v Speaker 1>but it has to go back and be reviewed. Where

0:11:18.640 --> 0:11:21.360
<v Speaker 1>is that now? I haven't heard that much about that lately.

0:11:21.800 --> 0:11:24.480
<v Speaker 1>What point is it at? Yeah, I mean that's a

0:11:24.600 --> 0:11:26.920
<v Speaker 1>that's a really good question because one of the things

0:11:27.000 --> 0:11:29.080
<v Speaker 1>we've been thinking about is, you know whether or not

0:11:29.559 --> 0:11:34.559
<v Speaker 1>on January if somebody is going to go ahead and

0:11:35.000 --> 0:11:38.520
<v Speaker 1>file charges or you know, unsealing indictment against the president.

0:11:39.000 --> 0:11:41.600
<v Speaker 1>And just a reminder, the president is not immune from

0:11:41.640 --> 0:11:45.000
<v Speaker 1>any kind of charges while he's in office. Certainly he's

0:11:45.040 --> 0:11:48.880
<v Speaker 1>faced several civil cases. Um. There is just sort of

0:11:49.559 --> 0:11:53.560
<v Speaker 1>the idea or the mindset that you can't criminally charge

0:11:53.559 --> 0:11:55.920
<v Speaker 1>the US fitting presidents that has never been tested and

0:11:55.960 --> 0:11:58.960
<v Speaker 1>I don't think it will be in this administration. But yeah,

0:11:59.000 --> 0:12:01.880
<v Speaker 1>if you think about what's gone back and forth with

0:12:01.960 --> 0:12:04.839
<v Speaker 1>the Cyrus Fans case, that's actually back up for the

0:12:04.880 --> 0:12:08.640
<v Speaker 1>Supreme Court for yet another decision. And you know what

0:12:08.679 --> 0:12:11.600
<v Speaker 1>we're hearing, is that the folks in that office are

0:12:11.679 --> 0:12:15.079
<v Speaker 1>waiting or having to wait for the Supreme Court decision

0:12:15.160 --> 0:12:18.160
<v Speaker 1>before they decide you know exactly what they're gonna do

0:12:18.559 --> 0:12:20.560
<v Speaker 1>with all the information in front of them, because they

0:12:20.679 --> 0:12:23.839
<v Speaker 1>they're still waiting for a few key legal documents from

0:12:23.960 --> 0:12:29.040
<v Speaker 1>his financial records. Does he have like different law firms

0:12:29.160 --> 0:12:33.840
<v Speaker 1>handling different cases. Is some one person in charge of

0:12:33.880 --> 0:12:38.920
<v Speaker 1>all this litigation defending him? That's a good question. I

0:12:38.920 --> 0:12:41.880
<v Speaker 1>don't know that there's one single person in charge, and

0:12:41.920 --> 0:12:47.000
<v Speaker 1>in fact, his representation has been kind of an open question.

0:12:47.040 --> 0:12:51.280
<v Speaker 1>It's uh. Law firms have backed away under criticism for

0:12:51.360 --> 0:12:56.160
<v Speaker 1>work as that they've done on behalf of Trump or

0:12:56.400 --> 0:12:59.880
<v Speaker 1>on behalf of Republicans in the aftermath of the election,

0:13:00.000 --> 0:13:03.240
<v Speaker 1>if you're challenging the election results, between several white shoe

0:13:03.320 --> 0:13:05.440
<v Speaker 1>law firms that have decided that they are not going

0:13:05.480 --> 0:13:08.160
<v Speaker 1>to do business, and in one case, a lawyer who

0:13:08.160 --> 0:13:10.040
<v Speaker 1>was on the phone with him during that Georgia phone

0:13:10.040 --> 0:13:14.520
<v Speaker 1>call has parted ways with her law firm because of

0:13:14.600 --> 0:13:16.880
<v Speaker 1>what happened and because she was taking part of that.

0:13:17.480 --> 0:13:21.120
<v Speaker 1>So we also don't know exactly who will represent him

0:13:21.120 --> 0:13:24.280
<v Speaker 1>in his impeachment trial, assuming that goes forward in the Senate.

0:13:24.880 --> 0:13:27.480
<v Speaker 1>Um and probably that won't happen until after he's out

0:13:27.480 --> 0:13:30.800
<v Speaker 1>of office. Um. You know, if you sort of think

0:13:30.840 --> 0:13:32.880
<v Speaker 1>about this is a man who's been who has had

0:13:32.880 --> 0:13:37.360
<v Speaker 1>an incredibly litigious history. He's kept a lot of lawyers

0:13:38.040 --> 0:13:41.080
<v Speaker 1>busy over his time. Um, you know, you sort of

0:13:41.080 --> 0:13:43.520
<v Speaker 1>think about so it's like Mark Kasowitz, who has been

0:13:43.600 --> 0:13:47.280
<v Speaker 1>one of his um strongest you know allies. You know,

0:13:47.600 --> 0:13:49.439
<v Speaker 1>does he go back to using the people he was

0:13:49.520 --> 0:13:51.360
<v Speaker 1>using before who's in the White House. Does he have

0:13:51.440 --> 0:13:54.400
<v Speaker 1>a new round of lawyers that he turns to. Obviously

0:13:54.520 --> 0:13:57.080
<v Speaker 1>we know his close with folks like Alan dere Schwartz

0:13:57.640 --> 0:14:00.640
<v Speaker 1>and um, you know, other people that are equal pundits,

0:14:00.679 --> 0:14:03.400
<v Speaker 1>maybe more than than practicing a lot of law at

0:14:03.400 --> 0:14:06.040
<v Speaker 1>the moment. But you know, where did he turn for

0:14:06.080 --> 0:14:09.680
<v Speaker 1>his legal representation? I think that's a very open question. Also,

0:14:09.840 --> 0:14:13.440
<v Speaker 1>he has failed to pay a lot of his lawyers

0:14:13.440 --> 0:14:16.440
<v Speaker 1>in the past, so that may be another consideration in

0:14:16.520 --> 0:14:18.679
<v Speaker 1>mind when you just saw whether or not to take

0:14:18.760 --> 0:14:21.600
<v Speaker 1>him on as a client. Well, when you think about that,

0:14:21.640 --> 0:14:25.920
<v Speaker 1>you think of specifically uh Rudy Giulietti, who has been

0:14:26.200 --> 0:14:30.080
<v Speaker 1>unbelievably loyal to the President over the past four years, UM,

0:14:30.120 --> 0:14:32.440
<v Speaker 1>and it was reported that he was seeking twenty thousand

0:14:32.520 --> 0:14:37.040
<v Speaker 1>dollars a day to represent him in these election cases. UM.

0:14:37.120 --> 0:14:39.080
<v Speaker 1>And then it was also reported that the president was

0:14:39.160 --> 0:14:42.280
<v Speaker 1>not looking to pay that amount. So what I will

0:14:42.320 --> 0:14:44.280
<v Speaker 1>say is, we don't know exactly what's going on there.

0:14:44.560 --> 0:14:48.160
<v Speaker 1>We did see in the last round of UH campaign

0:14:48.240 --> 0:14:50.840
<v Speaker 1>documents that had to be officially filed with the federal

0:14:50.880 --> 0:14:55.040
<v Speaker 1>Election Campaign UM that he was still making payments to

0:14:55.200 --> 0:14:57.840
<v Speaker 1>the same lawyers that you'd expect to see. We did

0:14:57.840 --> 0:15:00.880
<v Speaker 1>not see any payments to Giuliani as we're good as

0:15:00.960 --> 0:15:04.880
<v Speaker 1>of the end of UM I believe the end of November.

0:15:05.440 --> 0:15:07.640
<v Speaker 1>So we don't know if those bilges haven't come too

0:15:07.720 --> 0:15:10.320
<v Speaker 1>yet or if we will see something that UM in

0:15:10.360 --> 0:15:13.080
<v Speaker 1>the next round of campaign documents that are due to

0:15:13.120 --> 0:15:15.560
<v Speaker 1>be published at the end of this month. We talked

0:15:15.560 --> 0:15:19.000
<v Speaker 1>about the retail brand and you know whether that's going

0:15:19.040 --> 0:15:21.000
<v Speaker 1>to take a big hit or not. What about his

0:15:21.200 --> 0:15:26.760
<v Speaker 1>MAGA merchandise and all those things. Yeah, so as part

0:15:26.880 --> 0:15:29.840
<v Speaker 1>of a lot of companies kind of walking away from

0:15:30.000 --> 0:15:34.480
<v Speaker 1>Trump and Trump related entities in the aftermath of January six,

0:15:34.840 --> 0:15:39.160
<v Speaker 1>we did see the Canadian retail giant Shopify basically say

0:15:39.160 --> 0:15:42.280
<v Speaker 1>that they would no longer support the sites that we're

0:15:42.320 --> 0:15:45.920
<v Speaker 1>selling Donald Trump merchandise and the official merchandise specifically, So

0:15:45.960 --> 0:15:49.840
<v Speaker 1>we did see that part of the website. It's becomes

0:15:49.920 --> 0:15:54.040
<v Speaker 1>not very functional after Shopify went through its support UM.

0:15:54.120 --> 0:15:57.160
<v Speaker 1>In fact, it was basically the fight was asking people

0:15:57.200 --> 0:15:59.760
<v Speaker 1>to email their orders, in which if you've ever done

0:15:59.760 --> 0:16:01.800
<v Speaker 1>on on shopping, just feels like you're working in the

0:16:02.120 --> 0:16:05.200
<v Speaker 1>you know, the medieval times. To try to do that UM.

0:16:05.200 --> 0:16:07.640
<v Speaker 1>Over the weekend, that site did get back up and running.

0:16:08.120 --> 0:16:11.400
<v Speaker 1>We're not quite sure exactly who the alternative supplier is

0:16:11.440 --> 0:16:13.720
<v Speaker 1>that they're using to sort of keep the infrastructure working

0:16:13.760 --> 0:16:18.080
<v Speaker 1>so if they can continue to process payments from that UM.

0:16:18.200 --> 0:16:20.840
<v Speaker 1>But I mean you can still buy a Maga hat

0:16:20.880 --> 0:16:23.680
<v Speaker 1>if you want to on his website UM, and and

0:16:23.720 --> 0:16:26.400
<v Speaker 1>all sorts of other merchandise. So, I mean, this is

0:16:26.400 --> 0:16:28.760
<v Speaker 1>a president who's never shied away from putting his name

0:16:28.800 --> 0:16:31.440
<v Speaker 1>on UM a lot of items. I'm thinking of Trump

0:16:31.440 --> 0:16:34.680
<v Speaker 1>Steaks and Trump Vodka in particular. UM. I would expect

0:16:34.720 --> 0:16:37.200
<v Speaker 1>that to still be a stream of revenue for him

0:16:37.200 --> 0:16:41.200
<v Speaker 1>going forward. Thanks Tina. That's Tina Davis, Executive editor of

0:16:41.240 --> 0:16:46.680
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Legal News. It was a pardon blitz. In Trump's

0:16:46.760 --> 0:16:51.040
<v Speaker 1>last twelve hours in office, the former president pardon seventy

0:16:51.080 --> 0:16:54.880
<v Speaker 1>three people and commuted the sentences of seventy more, joining

0:16:54.920 --> 0:16:57.960
<v Speaker 1>me as former federal prosecutor Robert Mints Apart in mcarter

0:16:58.080 --> 0:17:01.360
<v Speaker 1>and English, Bob, the pardon power is one of the

0:17:01.400 --> 0:17:06.200
<v Speaker 1>most unrestrained powers the president has. The pardon power comes

0:17:06.240 --> 0:17:09.280
<v Speaker 1>from the first clause of Article to Section two of

0:17:09.280 --> 0:17:13.040
<v Speaker 1>the Constitution, which provides the President shall have power to

0:17:13.080 --> 0:17:17.360
<v Speaker 1>grant reprieve and pardons for offenses against the United States,

0:17:17.359 --> 0:17:20.800
<v Speaker 1>except in cases of impeachment. So this is an extremely

0:17:20.880 --> 0:17:24.600
<v Speaker 1>broad power. It's vested by the Constitution and the president,

0:17:25.000 --> 0:17:27.679
<v Speaker 1>and there's very little the Congress can do to constrain it,

0:17:28.160 --> 0:17:30.760
<v Speaker 1>short than teaching the president is they believe it's an

0:17:30.760 --> 0:17:34.520
<v Speaker 1>abuse of power. There are some limitations on this very

0:17:34.600 --> 0:17:39.760
<v Speaker 1>broad pardon power. For example, a president cannot pardon anybody

0:17:39.920 --> 0:17:43.480
<v Speaker 1>for a state offense. His partnering power only extends the

0:17:43.560 --> 0:17:47.119
<v Speaker 1>criminal offenses that are federal, and it also does not

0:17:47.240 --> 0:17:49.800
<v Speaker 1>allow the president to pardon somebody for a civil offense.

0:17:50.080 --> 0:17:54.080
<v Speaker 1>So again it's limited only to federal criminal offenses. The

0:17:54.200 --> 0:17:58.119
<v Speaker 1>only explicitit constitutional limitation and the president's pardon power is

0:17:58.119 --> 0:18:02.680
<v Speaker 1>that a president cannot ardon himself or herself in order

0:18:02.720 --> 0:18:06.680
<v Speaker 1>to avoid impeachment. Even if that did occur, it would

0:18:06.680 --> 0:18:11.280
<v Speaker 1>not preclude the House from bringing charges against a president

0:18:11.640 --> 0:18:15.119
<v Speaker 1>for crimes and misdemeanors that would formant a bill of impeachment,

0:18:15.200 --> 0:18:19.040
<v Speaker 1>nor would it prevent a Senate ultimately trying the president.

0:18:19.680 --> 0:18:23.440
<v Speaker 1>How specific does a pardon have to be? Parties typically

0:18:23.440 --> 0:18:26.080
<v Speaker 1>are given after a person has been convicted of a crime,

0:18:26.560 --> 0:18:29.760
<v Speaker 1>and then they specifically referenced the crime. So, for example,

0:18:30.080 --> 0:18:35.359
<v Speaker 1>President Trump had part of Scooter Libby, Paul Manifort, George Papadopolis,

0:18:35.359 --> 0:18:38.399
<v Speaker 1>and Riser Stone in what is a more typical party

0:18:38.840 --> 0:18:42.800
<v Speaker 1>In each of those cases, after asserting that a full

0:18:42.880 --> 0:18:46.280
<v Speaker 1>and unconditional pardon has been given, the pardon that goes

0:18:46.320 --> 0:18:49.560
<v Speaker 1>on to specify the statutes that each of those individuals

0:18:49.760 --> 0:18:53.960
<v Speaker 1>were charged with violating that described in detail the punishments

0:18:54.000 --> 0:18:56.840
<v Speaker 1>they were given. In the case of Michael Flynn, the

0:18:56.880 --> 0:19:01.120
<v Speaker 1>president's former National Stary advisor, that was quite unusual because

0:19:01.400 --> 0:19:04.640
<v Speaker 1>it not only pardoned Flynn for a crime for which

0:19:04.680 --> 0:19:08.280
<v Speaker 1>had guilty, but it also included some very broad language

0:19:08.400 --> 0:19:11.560
<v Speaker 1>which partnered him for any and all possible offenses within

0:19:11.600 --> 0:19:15.879
<v Speaker 1>the jurisdiction of the Special Council's investigating authority or leading

0:19:15.880 --> 0:19:19.120
<v Speaker 1>in any manner to the Special Council's investigation of Russia's

0:19:19.119 --> 0:19:23.600
<v Speaker 1>attempted interference in the twenty sixteen presidential election and links

0:19:23.600 --> 0:19:28.159
<v Speaker 1>to the Trump campaign. One of the big surprises was

0:19:28.240 --> 0:19:33.800
<v Speaker 1>the partnering of Trump's former strategists Steve Bannon, And apparently

0:19:34.040 --> 0:19:36.440
<v Speaker 1>it was whether or not Trump was going to give

0:19:36.480 --> 0:19:39.680
<v Speaker 1>that pardon that kept them from announcing the list. Why

0:19:39.680 --> 0:19:43.000
<v Speaker 1>do you think that was such a controversy for Trump?

0:19:43.200 --> 0:19:45.480
<v Speaker 1>It's difficult to say what was going on in the

0:19:45.520 --> 0:19:49.160
<v Speaker 1>President's mind with regard to Steve Bannon. He's had an

0:19:49.160 --> 0:19:52.679
<v Speaker 1>on again, off again relationship with Mr Bannon over the years,

0:19:52.720 --> 0:19:55.960
<v Speaker 1>where at one point he was Mr Trump chief strategists

0:19:56.240 --> 0:19:59.919
<v Speaker 1>and architects of his twenty sixteen presidential campaign, and another

0:20:00.040 --> 0:20:02.080
<v Speaker 1>point he was on the output the White House. And

0:20:02.160 --> 0:20:05.119
<v Speaker 1>it may be that the President was trying to decide

0:20:05.400 --> 0:20:08.480
<v Speaker 1>ultimately whether he thought that a pardon was appropriate here.

0:20:08.880 --> 0:20:11.920
<v Speaker 1>In this case, Mr Bannon had been charged in August

0:20:12.200 --> 0:20:15.679
<v Speaker 1>of last year with the fraught defrauding contributors to a

0:20:15.760 --> 0:20:18.679
<v Speaker 1>privately funded effort to build Mr Trump's wall along the

0:20:18.720 --> 0:20:21.840
<v Speaker 1>Mexican border. The pardon of Mr benn in this case

0:20:22.280 --> 0:20:25.160
<v Speaker 1>was notable because among all the pardons that were issued here,

0:20:25.160 --> 0:20:27.080
<v Speaker 1>and I think there's about a hundred and forty three

0:20:27.119 --> 0:20:30.480
<v Speaker 1>that were issued today, this was the only one in

0:20:30.560 --> 0:20:33.800
<v Speaker 1>which an individual who had not yet been convicted of

0:20:33.840 --> 0:20:36.160
<v Speaker 1>an offense was given a pardon. In this case, Mr

0:20:36.200 --> 0:20:38.600
<v Speaker 1>Bennon had been charged and he was set to stand trial,

0:20:39.040 --> 0:20:41.159
<v Speaker 1>but he had not yet been convicted of any crime.

0:20:41.480 --> 0:20:44.960
<v Speaker 1>On the overwhelming majority of pardons and commutations that have

0:20:45.000 --> 0:20:48.480
<v Speaker 1>been granted by presidents happened for those individuals who have

0:20:48.520 --> 0:20:52.480
<v Speaker 1>already been convicted and sentence of criminal activity. There was

0:20:52.560 --> 0:20:57.600
<v Speaker 1>also a pardon of a Republican mega donor. It seems

0:20:57.640 --> 0:21:01.000
<v Speaker 1>as if most of the pardons he issued were for

0:21:01.359 --> 0:21:05.040
<v Speaker 1>someone related to him in some way, connected to him

0:21:05.040 --> 0:21:08.679
<v Speaker 1>in some way, not out of the blue. There have

0:21:08.880 --> 0:21:13.119
<v Speaker 1>been controversial partners issued by presidents in the past. For example,

0:21:13.640 --> 0:21:18.160
<v Speaker 1>President Clinton's pardoned Patty Hurst, the first newspaper heiress, had

0:21:18.200 --> 0:21:22.880
<v Speaker 1>been involved with a radical weather underground. Clinton also pardoned

0:21:22.880 --> 0:21:25.920
<v Speaker 1>his half brother Roger Clinton, had been convicted in that

0:21:26.800 --> 0:21:30.520
<v Speaker 1>of cocaine trafficking. Another example of a pardon that was

0:21:30.600 --> 0:21:35.320
<v Speaker 1>considered controversial was when President Obama in seen commuted the

0:21:35.320 --> 0:21:39.280
<v Speaker 1>thirty five year prison sentence of Wiki League's source Kelsey Manning,

0:21:39.400 --> 0:21:44.520
<v Speaker 1>who was arrested in for releasing information regarding the wars

0:21:44.520 --> 0:21:48.399
<v Speaker 1>in Iraq and Afghanistan to the Wiki League's website. Perhaps

0:21:48.520 --> 0:21:51.800
<v Speaker 1>President Clinton's most controversial parton was that of Mark Rich,

0:21:52.320 --> 0:21:56.359
<v Speaker 1>who was a billionaire fugitive after his ex wife Denise

0:21:56.480 --> 0:22:00.639
<v Speaker 1>Rich had given generously to Democratic sources, including more than

0:22:00.680 --> 0:22:03.280
<v Speaker 1>a hundred thousand dollars to support Hillary Clinton's New York

0:22:03.320 --> 0:22:06.320
<v Speaker 1>Senate run on four in the fifty thousands to President

0:22:06.320 --> 0:22:11.520
<v Speaker 1>Clinton's presidential library. But in this case, President Trump's pardons

0:22:11.520 --> 0:22:15.720
<v Speaker 1>has been more closely aligned with people that he knew,

0:22:15.800 --> 0:22:19.480
<v Speaker 1>either directly or indirectly than most of the other controversial

0:22:19.800 --> 0:22:23.520
<v Speaker 1>pardoners by prior presidents. For example, one of President's Trump's

0:22:23.520 --> 0:22:27.280
<v Speaker 1>pardons was of Elliott Brody, a California businessman who was

0:22:27.280 --> 0:22:32.080
<v Speaker 1>a leading fundraiser for Mr Trump's sixteen campaign and inauguration.

0:22:32.600 --> 0:22:36.040
<v Speaker 1>Mr Brodie had admitted they accepted nine million dollars in

0:22:36.160 --> 0:22:39.359
<v Speaker 1>money from a Malaysian financier and that some of that

0:22:39.480 --> 0:22:42.000
<v Speaker 1>money was paid from an associate to push the Trump

0:22:42.040 --> 0:22:45.359
<v Speaker 1>administration for the extradition of a Chinese dissident and to

0:22:45.440 --> 0:22:48.879
<v Speaker 1>drop a case related to an investlement scheme from Malaysian

0:22:49.119 --> 0:22:52.840
<v Speaker 1>Sovereign Wealth Fund at the United States had accused the

0:22:52.880 --> 0:22:56.400
<v Speaker 1>malaysiansin interier of engineering. Do a lot of the pardons

0:22:56.400 --> 0:23:01.000
<v Speaker 1>seemed to involve politicians caught in corruption. There is not

0:23:01.040 --> 0:23:05.720
<v Speaker 1>necessarily any particular scene that has run through the parties

0:23:05.720 --> 0:23:09.000
<v Speaker 1>and commutations of sentences that presidents have issued on their

0:23:09.040 --> 0:23:12.280
<v Speaker 1>way out of office. In this case, we do see

0:23:12.320 --> 0:23:17.359
<v Speaker 1>a trend for President Trump issuing pardons and commutations of

0:23:17.440 --> 0:23:21.679
<v Speaker 1>sentences related to a great number of white collar crimes.

0:23:21.720 --> 0:23:26.359
<v Speaker 1>For example, there were several former political figures among those

0:23:26.440 --> 0:23:30.680
<v Speaker 1>branded clemency by Mr. Trump. Kwamie Kilpatrick, the former mayor

0:23:30.680 --> 0:23:34.080
<v Speaker 1>of Detroit, has his sentence commuted. He was sentenced to

0:23:34.080 --> 0:23:36.520
<v Speaker 1>twenty eight years in prison after being convicted of two

0:23:36.520 --> 0:23:41.560
<v Speaker 1>dozen counts, including racketeering and extortion. President Trump also pardons

0:23:41.760 --> 0:23:46.359
<v Speaker 1>Robert Kays, a former chairman of the North Carolina Republican Party.

0:23:46.680 --> 0:23:49.879
<v Speaker 1>He had been accused in twenty nineteen of bribery and conspiracy.

0:23:50.320 --> 0:23:53.360
<v Speaker 1>The President also prod and Rick Ramzi, a former representative

0:23:53.600 --> 0:23:57.119
<v Speaker 1>of Arizona. He had been sentenced in place thirteen to

0:23:57.200 --> 0:24:00.760
<v Speaker 1>thirty six months in prison associated with a ribery scheme

0:24:00.800 --> 0:24:04.440
<v Speaker 1>involving an Arizona land swap deal. And the President also

0:24:04.920 --> 0:24:08.399
<v Speaker 1>pardoned Randall Duke Cunningham in a case that got a

0:24:08.400 --> 0:24:12.280
<v Speaker 1>lot of publicity involving a former representative of California. In

0:24:12.440 --> 0:24:14.720
<v Speaker 1>two thousand and six, he was sentenced to eight years

0:24:14.720 --> 0:24:17.280
<v Speaker 1>and four months in prison for taking two point four

0:24:17.320 --> 0:24:20.920
<v Speaker 1>million dollars in bribes for military contractors in return for

0:24:21.040 --> 0:24:24.960
<v Speaker 1>smoothing the way for government contracts. So I do think

0:24:25.000 --> 0:24:28.679
<v Speaker 1>that these pardons are unusual in that they involved so

0:24:28.840 --> 0:24:32.480
<v Speaker 1>many white collar crimes, and it does involve a large

0:24:32.560 --> 0:24:35.760
<v Speaker 1>number of people who were involved in politics, either by

0:24:35.760 --> 0:24:39.119
<v Speaker 1>holding elective office or in some way being involved in

0:24:39.160 --> 0:24:43.640
<v Speaker 1>political campaigns and involved in fundraising. I think a case

0:24:43.720 --> 0:24:48.719
<v Speaker 1>that really illustrates the process of getting the attention of

0:24:48.840 --> 0:24:54.320
<v Speaker 1>President Trump is the commutation for SHOLEM Weiss, who is

0:24:54.359 --> 0:24:57.280
<v Speaker 1>believed to be serving the largest white collar sentence in

0:24:57.400 --> 0:25:00.600
<v Speaker 1>US history, eight hundred thirty five year is for money

0:25:00.720 --> 0:25:04.480
<v Speaker 1>laundering and other charges. His nephew, Hershey Martin had a

0:25:04.560 --> 0:25:09.159
<v Speaker 1>campaign to secure the presidential commutation for his uncle. He

0:25:09.320 --> 0:25:12.600
<v Speaker 1>addressed a long string of impassion tweet to the president.

0:25:12.720 --> 0:25:16.679
<v Speaker 1>He contacted dozens of legislators urging them to write letters

0:25:16.720 --> 0:25:20.480
<v Speaker 1>to the White House. He promoted a website featuring endorsements

0:25:20.560 --> 0:25:24.919
<v Speaker 1>from people like Alan Dershowitz. It was literally a campaign,

0:25:25.119 --> 0:25:27.639
<v Speaker 1>but it worked. That's an interesting point to you. And

0:25:27.720 --> 0:25:32.880
<v Speaker 1>because President Trump has not followed the normal pardon process.

0:25:32.920 --> 0:25:36.680
<v Speaker 1>The Department of Justice has an office that evaluates all

0:25:36.720 --> 0:25:40.360
<v Speaker 1>of these parton applications, the system that's designed to impose

0:25:40.520 --> 0:25:45.679
<v Speaker 1>some fairness on a process that is otherwise potentially arbitrary.

0:25:46.040 --> 0:25:48.800
<v Speaker 1>To give you an example, they're about fourteen thousand parting

0:25:48.800 --> 0:25:52.880
<v Speaker 1>applications currently pending with the Department of Justice. In this case,

0:25:52.960 --> 0:25:56.560
<v Speaker 1>President Trump, more than any other past president, has largely

0:25:57.240 --> 0:26:00.080
<v Speaker 1>sir convented that process, which he has the right to

0:26:00.200 --> 0:26:03.240
<v Speaker 1>do and take it upon himself to review these pardon

0:26:03.280 --> 0:26:07.000
<v Speaker 1>applications and then discussed it with his assistance and the

0:26:07.000 --> 0:26:10.040
<v Speaker 1>White House Council's Office in making the ultimate decisions. But

0:26:10.119 --> 0:26:13.880
<v Speaker 1>he has not availed himself of the Department of Justices

0:26:14.040 --> 0:26:18.159
<v Speaker 1>office that tally evaluates these parties so it's difficult to

0:26:18.320 --> 0:26:23.199
<v Speaker 1>determine exactly why certain people were granted parties or commutations

0:26:23.240 --> 0:26:27.520
<v Speaker 1>and others were not. One example that you mentioned Salome White,

0:26:27.800 --> 0:26:30.720
<v Speaker 1>who was serving the longest white collar sentence in US history,

0:26:30.760 --> 0:26:34.240
<v Speaker 1>eight thirty five years for money laundering and other charges

0:26:34.280 --> 0:26:38.679
<v Speaker 1>stemming from the failure of National Heritage Life Insurance Company.

0:26:39.320 --> 0:26:43.119
<v Speaker 1>That would seem to be an unusual case for a commutation.

0:26:43.480 --> 0:26:46.640
<v Speaker 1>This is an individual who led while on vail, who

0:26:46.640 --> 0:26:51.120
<v Speaker 1>tried to evade prosecution. But with somebody who was ultimately

0:26:51.200 --> 0:26:54.719
<v Speaker 1>granted a commutational sense by President Trump. We don't know

0:26:54.840 --> 0:26:58.480
<v Speaker 1>exactly why, but we do know is that his nephew

0:26:58.840 --> 0:27:02.200
<v Speaker 1>had engaged in a massive campaign to try to obtain

0:27:02.480 --> 0:27:06.560
<v Speaker 1>a commutation for his uncle, while ultimately he was chosen

0:27:06.560 --> 0:27:09.280
<v Speaker 1>for his commutation of sense. We really don't know, but

0:27:09.359 --> 0:27:13.480
<v Speaker 1>we do know that the President did consider many commutations

0:27:13.480 --> 0:27:15.720
<v Speaker 1>and pardons on his last days in office, as most

0:27:15.720 --> 0:27:19.359
<v Speaker 1>presidents do. Some were granted pardons and commutations and the

0:27:19.400 --> 0:27:22.720
<v Speaker 1>others were not. To show the hectic nature of it

0:27:22.760 --> 0:27:26.919
<v Speaker 1>and the unstructured nature of it. After all, the pardons

0:27:26.920 --> 0:27:30.760
<v Speaker 1>were announced in about an hour before Joe Biden was

0:27:31.080 --> 0:27:36.080
<v Speaker 1>sworn in as President Trump pardoned Albert Pierro Jr. A

0:27:36.119 --> 0:27:39.119
<v Speaker 1>former business partner of his and the ex husband of

0:27:39.160 --> 0:27:42.440
<v Speaker 1>Fox News host Janine Pierrot. It was a real last

0:27:42.480 --> 0:27:46.520
<v Speaker 1>minute pardon. Well, again, the president has the absolute right

0:27:46.600 --> 0:27:50.240
<v Speaker 1>to make these decisions in any way he believes is appropriate.

0:27:50.520 --> 0:27:53.439
<v Speaker 1>It seems in this case he did not follow the

0:27:53.480 --> 0:27:56.720
<v Speaker 1>system that many other presidents have used in order to

0:27:56.800 --> 0:28:00.440
<v Speaker 1>decide who was worthy of a pardon. Um Generally, there

0:28:00.480 --> 0:28:04.399
<v Speaker 1>are factors that the Department Justice has created again in

0:28:04.520 --> 0:28:07.600
<v Speaker 1>order to provide some kind of uniformity and in order

0:28:07.640 --> 0:28:12.200
<v Speaker 1>to avoid an appearance of arbitrarily handing out these very

0:28:12.280 --> 0:28:16.240
<v Speaker 1>important decisions about whether it's the pardons or compute somebody's sentence.

0:28:17.080 --> 0:28:19.480
<v Speaker 1>In this case, we can only speculate that the how

0:28:19.560 --> 0:28:24.040
<v Speaker 1>and why President Trump decided to pardon these individuals on

0:28:24.119 --> 0:28:27.160
<v Speaker 1>his last day in office. It's interesting to point out

0:28:27.359 --> 0:28:32.160
<v Speaker 1>that although many of these pardons and commutations are controversial,

0:28:32.200 --> 0:28:36.960
<v Speaker 1>other presidents have also issued uh controversial pardons and commutations

0:28:37.040 --> 0:28:40.959
<v Speaker 1>as they left office, and comparatively speaking, President Trump has

0:28:41.040 --> 0:28:46.800
<v Speaker 1>actually handed out fewer pardons and communications than his predecessors.

0:28:46.880 --> 0:28:51.440
<v Speaker 1>For example, only George H. W. Bush, another one term president,

0:28:51.720 --> 0:28:55.800
<v Speaker 1>granted fewer pardons and commutations for a time in office. UH,

0:28:55.960 --> 0:28:59.720
<v Speaker 1>President Jimmy Carter granted many more. Even John Kennedy and

0:28:59.800 --> 0:29:02.120
<v Speaker 1>care Afford he did not serve full terms, brands with

0:29:02.240 --> 0:29:06.560
<v Speaker 1>far more petitions than President Trump. Now, what's also notable

0:29:06.880 --> 0:29:09.680
<v Speaker 1>is what names were not on the list. He did

0:29:09.720 --> 0:29:13.960
<v Speaker 1>not pardon himself or his children, and that had been

0:29:14.000 --> 0:29:17.760
<v Speaker 1>expected almost it had been reported that he was thinking

0:29:17.760 --> 0:29:21.080
<v Speaker 1>about pardoning himself or his children. A pardon of his

0:29:21.240 --> 0:29:25.280
<v Speaker 1>children for crimes that have not been charged yet. Would

0:29:25.320 --> 0:29:28.080
<v Speaker 1>that have been an admission of guilt if you accept

0:29:28.120 --> 0:29:30.680
<v Speaker 1>that kind of a pardon, And that's a great question.

0:29:31.080 --> 0:29:34.400
<v Speaker 1>A preemptive pardon for somebody who's not being charged with

0:29:34.480 --> 0:29:38.480
<v Speaker 1>a crime, it would be highly controversial, and it's highly

0:29:38.560 --> 0:29:41.920
<v Speaker 1>questionable as to whether or not that parton would ultimately

0:29:42.000 --> 0:29:45.480
<v Speaker 1>stand up. There are those who were advising the president

0:29:46.040 --> 0:29:49.480
<v Speaker 1>it's in that such a pardon would amount of an

0:29:49.520 --> 0:29:53.200
<v Speaker 1>unnecessary admission of guilt, given that none of the people

0:29:53.280 --> 0:29:56.280
<v Speaker 1>that he was considering himself or his immediate family members

0:29:56.280 --> 0:29:58.800
<v Speaker 1>had been charged with any crime or were known to

0:29:58.840 --> 0:30:03.280
<v Speaker 1>be under federal and instigation. Many lawyers also believe that

0:30:03.360 --> 0:30:06.360
<v Speaker 1>it is not approved it's a pardon people without naming

0:30:06.360 --> 0:30:09.640
<v Speaker 1>the potential crimes for which they are being pardoned. And

0:30:09.680 --> 0:30:14.800
<v Speaker 1>therefore these preemptive pardons, granting people mercy for a crime

0:30:14.840 --> 0:30:17.640
<v Speaker 1>that they had not commit, was set a very bad precedence.

0:30:18.200 --> 0:30:22.880
<v Speaker 1>Thanks Bob. That's Robert Mints, a partner McCarter and English.

0:30:23.240 --> 0:30:26.720
<v Speaker 1>President Trump is asking a federal appeals court to rule

0:30:26.760 --> 0:30:29.760
<v Speaker 1>that he qualifies under a law, the west Fall Act

0:30:29.800 --> 0:30:33.920
<v Speaker 1>of that would let him dodge a defamation suit by

0:30:34.040 --> 0:30:38.120
<v Speaker 1>ee Gene Carroll, the New York Advice columnist. Joining me

0:30:38.120 --> 0:30:42.240
<v Speaker 1>is Bloomberg Legal reporter Eric Lawson remind us what the

0:30:42.280 --> 0:30:46.880
<v Speaker 1>suit is about and what stage is that right now? Eric, So,

0:30:47.160 --> 0:30:50.160
<v Speaker 1>this is the defamation lawsuit that Egen Carol, the New

0:30:50.240 --> 0:30:54.160
<v Speaker 1>York Advice columnists, filed against President Trump in two thousand

0:30:54.280 --> 0:30:58.160
<v Speaker 1>nineteen after she went public with claims that he raped

0:30:58.200 --> 0:31:01.520
<v Speaker 1>her two decades ago in the Department George dressing room

0:31:01.520 --> 0:31:05.440
<v Speaker 1>in Manhattan, and then he called her a liar, that

0:31:05.560 --> 0:31:07.840
<v Speaker 1>she was politically motivated that sort of thing, and so

0:31:07.880 --> 0:31:11.959
<v Speaker 1>she sued him for defamation essentially over his denial of

0:31:12.000 --> 0:31:16.000
<v Speaker 1>her allegations. Now, the case was in New York State Court.

0:31:16.840 --> 0:31:20.000
<v Speaker 1>More recently, the Justice Department had the case moved to

0:31:20.080 --> 0:31:24.720
<v Speaker 1>federal court and tried to have the federal government substituted

0:31:25.240 --> 0:31:28.760
<v Speaker 1>for Trump as the defendant in the case, which a

0:31:28.800 --> 0:31:32.680
<v Speaker 1>federal law does permit federal employees to a sort of

0:31:33.040 --> 0:31:36.680
<v Speaker 1>a dodge lawsuits against the over acts that relate to

0:31:36.720 --> 0:31:40.040
<v Speaker 1>their job. So the government did try to substitute itself

0:31:40.040 --> 0:31:42.959
<v Speaker 1>with Trump in the case. A federal judge denied that,

0:31:43.080 --> 0:31:46.760
<v Speaker 1>and now that is on appeal. I was surprised to

0:31:46.880 --> 0:31:50.520
<v Speaker 1>learn some of the lawsuits that have been dismissed because

0:31:50.520 --> 0:31:52.560
<v Speaker 1>of the west Fall Act. Tell us about some of

0:31:52.560 --> 0:31:56.240
<v Speaker 1>the cases. Well, yeah, that's the thing is Trump is

0:31:56.240 --> 0:31:58.640
<v Speaker 1>not making this argument out of sinnair. There is this

0:31:58.720 --> 0:32:02.440
<v Speaker 1>west Fall Act of that you know, as I said,

0:32:02.520 --> 0:32:06.719
<v Speaker 1>is supposed to protect federal employees from being sued for

0:32:06.760 --> 0:32:09.960
<v Speaker 1>actions related to their jobs. And in some cases those

0:32:10.000 --> 0:32:14.000
<v Speaker 1>have been defamation suits. Uh, including members of Congress have

0:32:14.080 --> 0:32:18.560
<v Speaker 1>been sued for defamation um for things that they have said. Uh.

0:32:18.560 --> 0:32:21.320
<v Speaker 1>And and and in several cases, including in cases against you know,

0:32:21.360 --> 0:32:24.800
<v Speaker 1>like Senator Elizabeth Warren and things like this, they successfully

0:32:24.840 --> 0:32:28.880
<v Speaker 1>did have the government substituted as themselves in these cases,

0:32:29.040 --> 0:32:31.800
<v Speaker 1>leading to their dismissal because you can't see the government

0:32:31.840 --> 0:32:36.200
<v Speaker 1>for defication. Um. But in those cases, uh, the statements

0:32:36.240 --> 0:32:39.800
<v Speaker 1>that were made, the allegedly defamatory statements were much more

0:32:39.840 --> 0:32:43.400
<v Speaker 1>closely tied to policy issues or matters that were sort

0:32:43.440 --> 0:32:47.160
<v Speaker 1>of in the being denbated at the time, um, whether

0:32:47.280 --> 0:32:51.600
<v Speaker 1>related to terrorism or something like that. So the judges

0:32:51.680 --> 0:32:55.360
<v Speaker 1>held that they were related to their duties as federal

0:32:55.400 --> 0:32:59.640
<v Speaker 1>government employed. But in this case, uh, the words that

0:32:59.680 --> 0:33:04.560
<v Speaker 1>Trump used about aging Carroll, um, denying this sexual assault

0:33:04.760 --> 0:33:08.560
<v Speaker 1>allegation and saying things like she's not my type, never

0:33:08.640 --> 0:33:12.200
<v Speaker 1>met her, don't know, or she's politically motivated. Her lawyer

0:33:12.280 --> 0:33:14.960
<v Speaker 1>argues that, so they're not related to his presidential duty

0:33:15.000 --> 0:33:19.840
<v Speaker 1>in any way. Whereas Trump argues that the denial of

0:33:20.440 --> 0:33:24.200
<v Speaker 1>an allegation is part of its presidential duty. So is

0:33:24.200 --> 0:33:27.760
<v Speaker 1>the argument that he's making before the Federal appeals Court

0:33:27.880 --> 0:33:33.320
<v Speaker 1>the same basic argument that he made before Judge Kaplan. Yes,

0:33:33.400 --> 0:33:35.959
<v Speaker 1>that's correct. They're they're just hoping for a different outcome

0:33:36.040 --> 0:33:38.720
<v Speaker 1>of course with the Federal Spials Court here. Uh. They're

0:33:38.800 --> 0:33:41.840
<v Speaker 1>arguing that for the president to be able to do

0:33:42.040 --> 0:33:45.760
<v Speaker 1>his job and protect his his reputation in office, that's

0:33:45.760 --> 0:33:47.719
<v Speaker 1>sort of thing that he needs to be able to

0:33:48.480 --> 0:33:52.360
<v Speaker 1>uh deny allegations that are made against him. Um, so

0:33:53.400 --> 0:33:57.280
<v Speaker 1>Eating Carroll argues, no, he went too far. If he

0:33:57.360 --> 0:33:59.720
<v Speaker 1>wants to call her a liar, then he's going to

0:33:59.800 --> 0:34:04.800
<v Speaker 1>have approved that her underlying claims our fault and she

0:34:04.880 --> 0:34:08.600
<v Speaker 1>wants to go to trial and prove that they're true. So,

0:34:08.640 --> 0:34:11.959
<v Speaker 1>while it is a defamation case, Eating Carol is hoping

0:34:12.000 --> 0:34:14.320
<v Speaker 1>that it will come down to a trial over whether

0:34:14.400 --> 0:34:17.600
<v Speaker 1>or not the alleged attack actually happens. Is he being

0:34:17.640 --> 0:34:21.400
<v Speaker 1>represented by his own attorneys and the Justice Department attorneys

0:34:21.840 --> 0:34:26.040
<v Speaker 1>or just the Justice Department attorneys. Well, he still has

0:34:26.120 --> 0:34:29.480
<v Speaker 1>his lawyer in the case of Mark Catuit, lawyer that

0:34:29.520 --> 0:34:32.440
<v Speaker 1>he hasn't in a lot of his litigations. Um, he

0:34:32.480 --> 0:34:36.120
<v Speaker 1>also has the Justice Department arguing, um, you know, appealing

0:34:36.160 --> 0:34:39.239
<v Speaker 1>that denial to let the government substitute him. So right

0:34:39.239 --> 0:34:41.680
<v Speaker 1>now the Justice Department is a party in the case.

0:34:42.120 --> 0:34:44.120
<v Speaker 1>Trump is a party in the case, and they're both

0:34:44.120 --> 0:34:47.760
<v Speaker 1>on the same side arguing, uh to let the government

0:34:47.800 --> 0:34:51.040
<v Speaker 1>substitute itself for Trump so that the case can be dismissed.

0:34:51.080 --> 0:34:54.200
<v Speaker 1>So he really does have representations by both the government

0:34:54.280 --> 0:34:57.399
<v Speaker 1>still and his own personal lawyer, Mark Catuitz. When he's

0:34:57.440 --> 0:35:04.479
<v Speaker 1>no longer president, does biden Justice Department have to take over? Yes,

0:35:04.520 --> 0:35:06.800
<v Speaker 1>they will inherit this case along with the you know,

0:35:06.840 --> 0:35:11.120
<v Speaker 1>of course many others. And you know, one would maybe

0:35:11.120 --> 0:35:14.360
<v Speaker 1>suspect that, oh well, if uh, if the Justice Department

0:35:14.360 --> 0:35:16.880
<v Speaker 1>gets if Biden's Justice Department gets this, they'll just drop

0:35:16.920 --> 0:35:19.400
<v Speaker 1>it and saying we no longer want to make this argument.

0:35:19.719 --> 0:35:23.680
<v Speaker 1>But that's really not a foregone conclusion. This question that

0:35:23.760 --> 0:35:26.120
<v Speaker 1>the federal or that the appeals court is going to

0:35:26.160 --> 0:35:28.959
<v Speaker 1>have to answer is two fold. Does the west Ball

0:35:29.000 --> 0:35:34.480
<v Speaker 1>Act apply to a president? And if it does, does

0:35:34.680 --> 0:35:39.120
<v Speaker 1>were Trump's allegedly defamatory comments part of his official duties

0:35:39.200 --> 0:35:42.520
<v Speaker 1>under the west Ball Act? So it may be it's

0:35:42.760 --> 0:35:46.080
<v Speaker 1>that the government may want, even the Biden administration may

0:35:46.080 --> 0:35:49.040
<v Speaker 1>want to argue that the Westpall Acts does apply to

0:35:49.239 --> 0:35:51.960
<v Speaker 1>a president, as it has in past cases. It's never

0:35:52.000 --> 0:35:55.560
<v Speaker 1>been challenged this way before, so the Justice Deparitment may

0:35:56.440 --> 0:35:59.279
<v Speaker 1>sort of agree with half the case. They may want

0:35:59.480 --> 0:36:02.239
<v Speaker 1>Trump to be protected by the Westbell Act, but they

0:36:02.239 --> 0:36:05.359
<v Speaker 1>may then argue, no, those particular comments were not part

0:36:05.360 --> 0:36:08.279
<v Speaker 1>of his official duties. So it's unclear exactly what the

0:36:08.280 --> 0:36:13.480
<v Speaker 1>administration will do. This relates to allegations of something he

0:36:13.520 --> 0:36:18.120
<v Speaker 1>did way before he was president. In other cases, is

0:36:18.160 --> 0:36:22.480
<v Speaker 1>the connection more immediate. That's correct, and in fact, that's

0:36:22.480 --> 0:36:26.240
<v Speaker 1>why Judge Kaplan, the district judge, ruled against the government

0:36:26.280 --> 0:36:28.479
<v Speaker 1>on this question. That's one of the reasons. He said

0:36:28.520 --> 0:36:32.800
<v Speaker 1>that the underlying um sexual assault at the center of

0:36:33.120 --> 0:36:37.360
<v Speaker 1>this defamation case related to old events um and therefore

0:36:37.480 --> 0:36:41.160
<v Speaker 1>we're not related, uh, you know, to his presidential duties.

0:36:41.200 --> 0:36:43.279
<v Speaker 1>So that's going to be another factor I'm sure the

0:36:43.280 --> 0:36:46.600
<v Speaker 1>Appill's court is going to consider. But like I said before,

0:36:46.880 --> 0:36:51.759
<v Speaker 1>Trump is arguing that the denying those old allegations is

0:36:51.800 --> 0:36:57.200
<v Speaker 1>still part of his current presidential duties. Just to clarify,

0:36:57.239 --> 0:37:00.440
<v Speaker 1>if the court decides that this falls under the west

0:37:00.600 --> 0:37:05.680
<v Speaker 1>Fall Act, this case will be dead in the water.

0:37:07.320 --> 0:37:11.440
<v Speaker 1>That's correct. If they If they decide that the president

0:37:11.560 --> 0:37:13.799
<v Speaker 1>is protected by the west Fall Act and that his

0:37:13.920 --> 0:37:19.120
<v Speaker 1>comments about Egan Carol, uh, we're part of his presidential duties,

0:37:19.680 --> 0:37:23.560
<v Speaker 1>then the government would be substituted as defendants and the

0:37:23.600 --> 0:37:27.279
<v Speaker 1>case would then be essentially dismissed. Um. So there would

0:37:27.280 --> 0:37:30.720
<v Speaker 1>be there wouldn't really be any way around that ROBERTA.

0:37:30.840 --> 0:37:36.400
<v Speaker 1>Kaplan is representing Eegan Carol here and she's also involved

0:37:36.440 --> 0:37:41.000
<v Speaker 1>in some other lawsuits against Trump. Yes, she is. She

0:37:41.200 --> 0:37:45.520
<v Speaker 1>is going to have a very busy She is also

0:37:45.680 --> 0:37:50.200
<v Speaker 1>representing Mary Trump, the president's me supports who wrote a

0:37:50.280 --> 0:37:53.759
<v Speaker 1>damning book about Donald Trump UM and was embroiled in

0:37:53.840 --> 0:37:57.759
<v Speaker 1>litigation over that book, which she won UM and then

0:37:57.760 --> 0:38:01.359
<v Speaker 1>she went on to sue the President and UM and

0:38:01.440 --> 0:38:05.760
<v Speaker 1>her aunt uncle for fraud, alleging a massive fraud related

0:38:05.800 --> 0:38:10.840
<v Speaker 1>to the wills of their parents, her grandparents. So that

0:38:11.000 --> 0:38:13.480
<v Speaker 1>case is is still in its early stages. Revert to

0:38:13.520 --> 0:38:17.319
<v Speaker 1>Kaplan is representing Mary Trump's there and she's also representing

0:38:17.520 --> 0:38:21.719
<v Speaker 1>UM some old investors in a company called a c

0:38:21.960 --> 0:38:26.600
<v Speaker 1>N that did a multi level marketing promotion on Trump's

0:38:26.760 --> 0:38:30.399
<v Speaker 1>reality TV shows that they claim he ripped them off

0:38:30.400 --> 0:38:34.840
<v Speaker 1>by falsely telling praising this company without revealing that he

0:38:34.920 --> 0:38:38.000
<v Speaker 1>was being paid to do so. And is the civil

0:38:38.080 --> 0:38:43.480
<v Speaker 1>lawsuit against Trump by Summer Zervo still pending. It is

0:38:43.880 --> 0:38:48.720
<v Speaker 1>UM that is UM on appeal in New York State Court. UH.

0:38:48.760 --> 0:38:52.359
<v Speaker 1>There should be a hearing at some point later this year.

0:38:52.360 --> 0:38:55.800
<v Speaker 1>It hasn't been scheduled yet. It's been sort of stalled

0:38:55.880 --> 0:38:59.120
<v Speaker 1>for a while now after some RESERVO has won the

0:38:59.120 --> 0:39:02.799
<v Speaker 1>most recent argument that case. So it was the dismissal

0:39:03.320 --> 0:39:07.360
<v Speaker 1>motion to dismiss that Trump lost and that's now on appeal.

0:39:08.160 --> 0:39:12.600
<v Speaker 1>Which case is closest to having Trump having to do

0:39:12.680 --> 0:39:16.759
<v Speaker 1>a deposition, having to swear under oath and answer questions.

0:39:17.600 --> 0:39:19.840
<v Speaker 1>That's a very good question. I really wouldn't know. I

0:39:19.840 --> 0:39:23.479
<v Speaker 1>mean eating Carroll's case and some reserves. They both want

0:39:23.520 --> 0:39:27.640
<v Speaker 1>to depose Trump. Um. Theoretically that could happen in either

0:39:27.719 --> 0:39:32.080
<v Speaker 1>one of those cases. UM this year. And Aegean Carroll

0:39:32.160 --> 0:39:35.680
<v Speaker 1>is also looking for a DNA test. Yeah, she wants

0:39:35.719 --> 0:39:38.919
<v Speaker 1>to get a DNA sample from the president. Um. She

0:39:39.440 --> 0:39:42.800
<v Speaker 1>has had the dress that she wore in the shoes

0:39:42.840 --> 0:39:45.040
<v Speaker 1>that she was wearing at the time of the alleged attacks.

0:39:45.080 --> 0:39:48.160
<v Speaker 1>She saved them and hasn't touched them since then. Um.

0:39:48.280 --> 0:39:53.279
<v Speaker 1>She had them tested to pull various DNA samples off

0:39:53.320 --> 0:39:58.799
<v Speaker 1>of them. UM, there was DNA from one unidentified male. UM.

0:39:58.960 --> 0:40:02.239
<v Speaker 1>And they want to tell Trump's DNA to see if

0:40:02.400 --> 0:40:05.320
<v Speaker 1>it's his. I want to talk a little bit about

0:40:05.480 --> 0:40:09.400
<v Speaker 1>the New York prosecutors who are investigating Trump's company for

0:40:09.480 --> 0:40:13.840
<v Speaker 1>possible tax bank and insurance fraud and why they've broadened

0:40:13.840 --> 0:40:18.520
<v Speaker 1>their investigation to include a property in Westchester County called

0:40:18.640 --> 0:40:23.759
<v Speaker 1>Seven Springs. Yes, Seven Springs is a development north of

0:40:23.800 --> 0:40:28.600
<v Speaker 1>New York City that the Trump organization what tried to

0:40:28.880 --> 0:40:33.880
<v Speaker 1>develop UM years ago around I think around two thousand twelve. UM.

0:40:33.880 --> 0:40:38.880
<v Speaker 1>It didn't work out, so they ended up essentially donating

0:40:39.000 --> 0:40:42.360
<v Speaker 1>part of it, and they called it a conservation easement

0:40:42.840 --> 0:40:46.480
<v Speaker 1>and he got quite a large tax benefit for that

0:40:46.520 --> 0:40:50.720
<v Speaker 1>based on a very specific, large appraisal of this property

0:40:50.719 --> 0:40:52.799
<v Speaker 1>which was much more than what they had paid for it.

0:40:53.520 --> 0:40:58.000
<v Speaker 1>And the New York Attorney General has been investigating that. UM.

0:40:58.080 --> 0:41:01.759
<v Speaker 1>It's it's part of it's part of larger investigation into

0:41:01.760 --> 0:41:06.200
<v Speaker 1>Trump's valuations and whether or not in any bank, broad

0:41:06.280 --> 0:41:09.120
<v Speaker 1>or insurance squad might be involved in how they valued

0:41:09.200 --> 0:41:13.000
<v Speaker 1>various assets. These are things that Michael Cohen, Trump's former lawyer,

0:41:13.280 --> 0:41:16.840
<v Speaker 1>sort of stilled the beans on during his life congressional testimony.

0:41:17.280 --> 0:41:21.279
<v Speaker 1>That's what triggered the New York Attorney Generals investigation, which

0:41:21.480 --> 0:41:23.840
<v Speaker 1>technically we only know about because she had to sue

0:41:24.320 --> 0:41:28.440
<v Speaker 1>to force Trump organization and various other people too uh

0:41:28.480 --> 0:41:31.239
<v Speaker 1>to comply with the subpoenas that she'd spent out that

0:41:31.400 --> 0:41:36.120
<v Speaker 1>civil investigation still ongoing, and was that the investigation where

0:41:36.280 --> 0:41:40.719
<v Speaker 1>Eric Trump was forced to testify. That's correct, The one

0:41:40.719 --> 0:41:45.359
<v Speaker 1>of the subpoenas was for Eric Trump's deposition UM. He

0:41:45.520 --> 0:41:49.279
<v Speaker 1>ultimately lost on his effort to delay it until after

0:41:49.320 --> 0:41:52.439
<v Speaker 1>the presidential election, and he has since been to post

0:41:52.560 --> 0:41:54.960
<v Speaker 1>no idea. Of course what was said. That's all a

0:41:55.080 --> 0:41:59.520
<v Speaker 1>secret information. But eventually we may find out if a

0:41:59.600 --> 0:42:03.520
<v Speaker 1>lawsuit is ever filed, if any alleged wrongdoing is actually

0:42:03.680 --> 0:42:06.840
<v Speaker 1>spelled out in court. But it's too early to know

0:42:06.960 --> 0:42:09.920
<v Speaker 1>for sure if that will happen. If it's the a G. Suing,

0:42:10.440 --> 0:42:12.880
<v Speaker 1>does that mean it's only civil or can it also

0:42:12.920 --> 0:42:16.440
<v Speaker 1>be criminal? Well, right now, it's just a civil investigation.

0:42:17.000 --> 0:42:21.400
<v Speaker 1>My understanding is that if they find criminal activity that

0:42:21.520 --> 0:42:23.520
<v Speaker 1>they would have to refer that out and sort of

0:42:23.560 --> 0:42:27.480
<v Speaker 1>get um an approval to do a criminal case. So

0:42:27.520 --> 0:42:29.200
<v Speaker 1>it's not something that they can that the A G.

0:42:29.360 --> 0:42:31.879
<v Speaker 1>S Office can automatically do on its own, and that's

0:42:31.960 --> 0:42:36.920
<v Speaker 1>separate from the Manhattan District Attorney's investigation. That's correct, that

0:42:37.040 --> 0:42:40.760
<v Speaker 1>they're they're obviously looking out at the same underlying UM

0:42:41.000 --> 0:42:44.320
<v Speaker 1>questions here about seven springs, but as you sell reports

0:42:44.440 --> 0:42:49.560
<v Speaker 1>Um on Friday, they the d AS Office are also investigating.

0:42:50.120 --> 0:42:53.320
<v Speaker 1>Thanks for being the Bloomberg Law Show, Eric. That's Bloomberg

0:42:53.360 --> 0:42:56.600
<v Speaker 1>Legal reporter Eric Larson. And that's it for the edition

0:42:56.600 --> 0:42:59.680
<v Speaker 1>of the Bloomberg Lawn Podcast. I'm June Grass. Thanks so

0:42:59.760 --> 0:43:02.279
<v Speaker 1>much for a listening, and remember you can always get

0:43:02.280 --> 0:43:05.360
<v Speaker 1>the latest legal news on our Bloomberg Laump podcast. You

0:43:05.400 --> 0:43:08.840
<v Speaker 1>can find them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify and wherever you

0:43:08.880 --> 0:43:12.239
<v Speaker 1>get your favorite podcasts. You're listening to Bloomberg