1
00:00:01,000 --> 00:00:03,760
Speaker 1: Today, a judge put on a gag order. I'll be

2
00:00:03,800 --> 00:00:06,880
Speaker 1: the only politician in the history that runs with a

3
00:00:06,920 --> 00:00:10,720
Speaker 1: gag order where I'm not allowed to criticize people. It's

4
00:00:10,840 --> 00:00:13,520
Speaker 1: been a little while since we checked in on Donald

5
00:00:13,520 --> 00:00:18,759
Speaker 1: Trump's multiplying legal troubles, and a lot is happening. Judges

6
00:00:18,840 --> 00:00:22,080
Speaker 1: presiding over two of his trials are struggling to contain

7
00:00:22,200 --> 00:00:25,560
Speaker 1: his frequent public outbursts like the one you just heard there.

8
00:00:26,440 --> 00:00:29,120
Speaker 1: Some of his former lawyers and his former chief of

9
00:00:29,200 --> 00:00:33,320
Speaker 1: staff are now talking to prosecutors, and in at least

10
00:00:33,360 --> 00:00:36,479
Speaker 1: two states there are legal challenges aimed at trying to

11
00:00:36,600 --> 00:00:44,639
Speaker 1: keep Trump off the ballot in twenty twenty four. I'm

12
00:00:44,680 --> 00:00:48,280
Speaker 1: west Kosova today on the Big Take Bloomberg. Zoe Tillman

13
00:00:48,360 --> 00:00:51,319
Speaker 1: and Sarah Fordon are back to help us sort through

14
00:00:51,320 --> 00:00:59,880
Speaker 1: the latest from inside and outside the courtrooms. Zoe maybe

15
00:01:00,160 --> 00:01:04,040
Speaker 1: should start with the various attempts by judges to control

16
00:01:04,080 --> 00:01:06,720
Speaker 1: what Donald Trump is saying about the cases inside the

17
00:01:06,760 --> 00:01:08,120
Speaker 1: courtroom and outside.

18
00:01:08,440 --> 00:01:11,760
Speaker 2: So right now, there are two court orders in place

19
00:01:12,080 --> 00:01:16,000
Speaker 2: that restrict what Donald Trump is allowed to say, post

20
00:01:16,319 --> 00:01:20,600
Speaker 2: do whatever publicly. The first is in Washington in the

21
00:01:20,640 --> 00:01:22,640
Speaker 2: federal election obstruction case.

22
00:01:22,480 --> 00:01:25,959
Speaker 3: One of former President Donald Trump's legal battles, continues today

23
00:01:26,040 --> 00:01:29,600
Speaker 3: in the district. Federal prosecutors and lawyers for mister Trump

24
00:01:29,600 --> 00:01:32,080
Speaker 3: will be back in court to argue over a potential

25
00:01:32,160 --> 00:01:33,840
Speaker 3: gag order in the case.

26
00:01:34,240 --> 00:01:38,280
Speaker 2: And that prohibits him from any comments That target is

27
00:01:38,360 --> 00:01:42,840
Speaker 2: the keyword. Prosecutors in the case, potential witnesses in their testimony,

28
00:01:42,880 --> 00:01:47,040
Speaker 2: and court staff. And that was a result of prosecutors

29
00:01:47,040 --> 00:01:50,120
Speaker 2: going to the judge in DC, Judge Tanya Chutkin, and saying,

30
00:01:50,400 --> 00:01:51,960
Speaker 2: you know, we had a couple of weeks, a couple

31
00:01:52,080 --> 00:01:55,160
Speaker 2: months of this case after he was indicted. We did

32
00:01:55,200 --> 00:01:58,520
Speaker 2: not ask for this initially, but he has shown that

33
00:01:58,560 --> 00:02:02,920
Speaker 2: he cannot be trusted to not say inflammatory things that

34
00:02:03,040 --> 00:02:09,440
Speaker 2: could put witnesses at risk of intimidation, potentially threaten personnel, prosecutors.

35
00:02:08,840 --> 00:02:10,320
Speaker 4: You know, government servants.

36
00:02:11,040 --> 00:02:14,480
Speaker 2: Where things stand now is you know, we expect Trump's

37
00:02:14,560 --> 00:02:17,000
Speaker 2: legal team to continue pushing to get this.

38
00:02:17,000 --> 00:02:18,000
Speaker 4: Gag order lifted.

39
00:02:18,440 --> 00:02:20,880
Speaker 2: They had asked Judge Chutkin to do that, she had

40
00:02:20,960 --> 00:02:25,320
Speaker 2: paused it temporarily. During that time, he managed to post

41
00:02:25,360 --> 00:02:28,080
Speaker 2: about a witness in the case, his former chief of staff,

42
00:02:28,120 --> 00:02:30,760
Speaker 2: Mark Meadows, and the judge said, you know I'm not

43
00:02:30,840 --> 00:02:33,639
Speaker 2: gonna keep this on hold, and so now he can

44
00:02:33,680 --> 00:02:36,000
Speaker 2: go to an appeals court to try and fight it there,

45
00:02:36,040 --> 00:02:39,320
Speaker 2: and that's what we expect to happen next. The second

46
00:02:39,440 --> 00:02:41,880
Speaker 2: order is from a state judge in New York where

47
00:02:41,880 --> 00:02:44,160
Speaker 2: he's on trial on civil fraud allegations.

48
00:02:44,200 --> 00:02:46,400
Speaker 3: Back here at home, there was a bit of drama

49
00:02:46,440 --> 00:02:49,600
Speaker 3: today at the civil fraud trial of former President Donald

50
00:02:49,600 --> 00:02:52,520
Speaker 3: Trump in New York when a judge find Trump again

51
00:02:52,680 --> 00:02:56,720
Speaker 3: for violating a gag order against criticizing the judge's stat.

52
00:02:57,160 --> 00:03:01,920
Speaker 2: And that's a narrower order after he posted a message

53
00:03:02,080 --> 00:03:06,160
Speaker 2: that disparaged the judge in that case as clerk promoted

54
00:03:06,200 --> 00:03:09,960
Speaker 2: her photo. He later took it down, but judges are

55
00:03:10,120 --> 00:03:13,200
Speaker 2: extraordinarily sensitive when it comes to their staff, and that

56
00:03:13,320 --> 00:03:17,120
Speaker 2: was sort of a wrong bear to poke and prompted

57
00:03:17,160 --> 00:03:20,520
Speaker 2: an immediate reaction, and since then has actually been fined

58
00:03:21,080 --> 00:03:22,400
Speaker 2: for violating that order.

59
00:03:23,200 --> 00:03:24,760
Speaker 4: But you know, as of now.

60
00:03:24,919 --> 00:03:28,760
Speaker 2: Someone who is used to being able to say whatever

61
00:03:28,800 --> 00:03:31,520
Speaker 2: he wants and to use the platforms that he has

62
00:03:32,080 --> 00:03:35,760
Speaker 2: to go after attack what he sees as his enemies,

63
00:03:36,520 --> 00:03:39,520
Speaker 2: is really for the first time under legal constraints to

64
00:03:39,600 --> 00:03:41,920
Speaker 2: not do so. And whether he can comply with that

65
00:03:42,000 --> 00:03:43,960
Speaker 2: long term is a very big open question.

66
00:03:44,480 --> 00:03:47,720
Speaker 5: And it was very interesting in Chutkins's reasoning on when

67
00:03:47,720 --> 00:03:50,480
Speaker 5: she imposed the gag order. She basically said, no, you

68
00:03:50,600 --> 00:03:54,360
Speaker 5: do not have unlimited First Amendment rights, because of course

69
00:03:54,360 --> 00:03:57,320
Speaker 5: this is the defense position that they're trying to silence

70
00:03:57,400 --> 00:03:59,920
Speaker 5: him and muzzle him. And she says, no, you cannot

71
00:04:00,160 --> 00:04:03,920
Speaker 5: criticize and go after court staff or potential witnesses. And

72
00:04:03,960 --> 00:04:07,040
Speaker 5: she's also concerned about tainting the views of the jury

73
00:04:07,440 --> 00:04:08,640
Speaker 5: when the case goes to trial.

74
00:04:09,360 --> 00:04:13,520
Speaker 1: Now, initially the judge suspended her own gag order while

75
00:04:13,840 --> 00:04:16,479
Speaker 1: the Trump legal team argued against it, but then she

76
00:04:16,720 --> 00:04:20,680
Speaker 1: decided over the weekend to reimpose it. Why did she

77
00:04:20,760 --> 00:04:21,080
Speaker 1: do that?

78
00:04:21,680 --> 00:04:25,400
Speaker 5: I mean, she basically ruled that their defense arguments were

79
00:04:25,440 --> 00:04:29,719
Speaker 5: not legitimate and that she correctly had imposed the gag order,

80
00:04:29,880 --> 00:04:32,080
Speaker 5: and that then clears the way for them to take

81
00:04:32,080 --> 00:04:32,920
Speaker 5: it up on appeal.

82
00:04:33,520 --> 00:04:34,960
Speaker 2: You know, I think it's important to take a step

83
00:04:34,960 --> 00:04:39,159
Speaker 2: back and say that in all cases, it is not

84
00:04:39,400 --> 00:04:42,080
Speaker 2: sort of free reign for everyone to say whatever they want.

85
00:04:42,320 --> 00:04:45,360
Speaker 2: That when you are allowed to go free pending trial,

86
00:04:45,960 --> 00:04:48,520
Speaker 2: you are under a microscope and you're under the jurisdiction

87
00:04:48,640 --> 00:04:50,839
Speaker 2: of the court and things that you say, or do

88
00:04:51,920 --> 00:04:54,800
Speaker 2: you know the phrase goes can't be held against you.

89
00:04:55,440 --> 00:04:57,119
Speaker 5: Just to jump in here, I mean, this is all

90
00:04:57,160 --> 00:05:00,320
Speaker 5: in a political context, right, So he is saying that

91
00:05:00,360 --> 00:05:03,159
Speaker 5: these cases are part of a political witch hunt. In

92
00:05:03,200 --> 00:05:05,320
Speaker 5: the New York case, he was calling out the judge's

93
00:05:05,320 --> 00:05:09,640
Speaker 5: clerk as being partisan and being affiliated with Democratic lawmakers,

94
00:05:10,120 --> 00:05:12,560
Speaker 5: and he kept on doing it even after the judge

95
00:05:12,560 --> 00:05:13,520
Speaker 5: had put him unnoticed.

96
00:05:13,680 --> 00:05:17,679
Speaker 3: We're being railroaded here, very partisan judge with a person

97
00:05:17,680 --> 00:05:19,360
Speaker 3: who's very partisan sitting.

98
00:05:19,040 --> 00:05:23,080
Speaker 4: Alongside amount, perhaps even much more partisan than he is.

99
00:05:23,520 --> 00:05:25,880
Speaker 5: So now what we're seeing is judges are not taking

100
00:05:25,920 --> 00:05:28,160
Speaker 5: this and then putting him on notice. They're telling him

101
00:05:28,160 --> 00:05:30,440
Speaker 5: to stop. Then they're finding him. So we're now on

102
00:05:30,520 --> 00:05:33,920
Speaker 5: the second violation in New York where the judges has

103
00:05:33,960 --> 00:05:36,279
Speaker 5: hauled him and even put him on a stand. Last

104
00:05:36,320 --> 00:05:40,080
Speaker 5: week in a eye popping moment where he stopped the proceeding,

105
00:05:40,120 --> 00:05:42,760
Speaker 5: which is about the New York Org trial where he's

106
00:05:42,800 --> 00:05:46,600
Speaker 5: being accused of artificially inflating the value of his businesses.

107
00:05:47,080 --> 00:05:49,760
Speaker 5: The judge stopped that proceeding, put him on the stand

108
00:05:49,800 --> 00:05:52,320
Speaker 5: and asked him to clarify who he was talking about

109
00:05:52,320 --> 00:05:55,600
Speaker 5: when he described that person sitting next to the judge.

110
00:05:55,279 --> 00:05:57,039
Speaker 1: And of course Trump said that he was talking about

111
00:05:57,120 --> 00:06:00,320
Speaker 1: his former lawyer, Michael Cohen, and the judge said that

112
00:06:00,440 --> 00:06:01,200
Speaker 1: is not credible.

113
00:06:01,400 --> 00:06:02,200
Speaker 5: I don't believe it.

114
00:06:03,880 --> 00:06:06,800
Speaker 1: Now the judge in that case find him five thousand

115
00:06:06,880 --> 00:06:10,120
Speaker 1: dollars the first time, ten thousand dollars the second time.

116
00:06:10,440 --> 00:06:13,320
Speaker 1: But is a fine ever going to be effective against

117
00:06:13,320 --> 00:06:15,080
Speaker 1: someone like Trump, who has a lot of money and

118
00:06:15,360 --> 00:06:18,800
Speaker 1: probably thinks that the political attention he gets whor it

119
00:06:18,880 --> 00:06:19,559
Speaker 1: is worth the money.

120
00:06:19,680 --> 00:06:21,680
Speaker 5: Well, I mean, the fine for him is a drop

121
00:06:21,720 --> 00:06:24,000
Speaker 5: in the bucket. The point is if he keeps going,

122
00:06:24,040 --> 00:06:26,560
Speaker 5: what will the judge do next? And he's even said,

123
00:06:26,600 --> 00:06:29,599
Speaker 5: you know, this could include prison time if he doesn't stop.

124
00:06:30,000 --> 00:06:33,200
Speaker 1: And Zoe, That of course is the big question and

125
00:06:33,360 --> 00:06:37,360
Speaker 1: why everything involving these cases and Donald Trump is extraordinary.

126
00:06:37,720 --> 00:06:41,400
Speaker 1: Another defendant might be put in jail for violating a

127
00:06:41,520 --> 00:06:45,719
Speaker 1: judge's gag order. But does anyone think that a judge

128
00:06:45,760 --> 00:06:48,799
Speaker 1: would actually confine Donald Trump to jail.

129
00:06:49,680 --> 00:06:53,279
Speaker 2: I think that he is counting on pushing that line

130
00:06:53,400 --> 00:06:57,400
Speaker 2: as far as he possibly can and forcing a judge

131
00:06:57,520 --> 00:07:00,680
Speaker 2: to potentially do something really uncomfortable. You know, this is

132
00:07:00,880 --> 00:07:04,080
Speaker 2: like an ultimate game of chicken. But these are the

133
00:07:04,120 --> 00:07:07,240
Speaker 2: tools that are available to judges, and there are different

134
00:07:07,240 --> 00:07:10,200
Speaker 2: types of sanctions. They have, you know, a good amount

135
00:07:10,280 --> 00:07:13,640
Speaker 2: of discretion to get creative. But at the end of

136
00:07:13,720 --> 00:07:17,200
Speaker 2: the day, if the judge in DC determines that there

137
00:07:17,280 --> 00:07:20,520
Speaker 2: is nothing she can do to stop what she sees

138
00:07:20,680 --> 00:07:24,600
Speaker 2: as you know, direct interference with the case, the consequence

139
00:07:24,760 --> 00:07:27,840
Speaker 2: is a revocation of bond. It is to say you

140
00:07:27,920 --> 00:07:31,400
Speaker 2: cannot be trusted to be on pre trial release without

141
00:07:31,560 --> 00:07:34,840
Speaker 2: compromising the integrity of this trial. It's not just about

142
00:07:34,840 --> 00:07:37,320
Speaker 2: your rights as a defendant. It's about the public's right

143
00:07:38,160 --> 00:07:41,200
Speaker 2: to have this trial administered fairly, and that's what she

144
00:07:41,360 --> 00:07:45,440
Speaker 2: is saying she has to protect. The question of jailing

145
00:07:45,600 --> 00:07:49,880
Speaker 2: a former president a current presidential candidate is obviously extraordinary.

146
00:07:50,400 --> 00:07:52,440
Speaker 2: A few of us have been reaching out to different

147
00:07:52,480 --> 00:07:55,840
Speaker 2: agencies just kind of asking, you know, has this ever happened?

148
00:07:55,840 --> 00:07:59,040
Speaker 2: Have you ever had to the Secret Service a protectee.

149
00:07:58,400 --> 00:08:01,920
Speaker 4: Go into custody what happened? And they've been a little cagy.

150
00:08:02,360 --> 00:08:05,560
Speaker 2: They don't want to disclose, obviously, the extent of how

151
00:08:05,560 --> 00:08:09,920
Speaker 2: they protect people, but the general senses it's really never happened,

152
00:08:10,240 --> 00:08:13,320
Speaker 2: and no one's really sure how they would handle it.

153
00:08:15,080 --> 00:08:18,600
Speaker 1: Sarah Zoe mentioned that Donald Trump is appealing here. What

154
00:08:18,800 --> 00:08:21,080
Speaker 1: is the path? Could this ultimately go up to the

155
00:08:21,080 --> 00:08:23,280
Speaker 1: Supreme Court where they're going to have to make decisions

156
00:08:23,320 --> 00:08:26,720
Speaker 1: about what a court can tell the former president, what

157
00:08:26,840 --> 00:08:28,080
Speaker 1: he can say and not say.

158
00:08:28,200 --> 00:08:31,360
Speaker 5: Well, actually yes in a short answer. So the next

159
00:08:31,360 --> 00:08:34,600
Speaker 5: step would be to you peel to the DC Circuit

160
00:08:35,080 --> 00:08:37,400
Speaker 5: and then depending on how that goes, it could easily

161
00:08:37,520 --> 00:08:39,800
Speaker 5: land in front of the Supreme Court at a time

162
00:08:39,840 --> 00:08:41,800
Speaker 5: where the Supreme Court has been trying to stay out

163
00:08:41,840 --> 00:08:44,319
Speaker 5: of the political pray, or at least they say they

164
00:08:44,320 --> 00:08:45,800
Speaker 5: want to stay out of it, but they may be,

165
00:08:46,160 --> 00:08:48,680
Speaker 5: you know, right on the board having to make these

166
00:08:48,800 --> 00:08:51,160
Speaker 5: very difficult and conflicting decisions.

167
00:08:52,600 --> 00:09:05,760
Speaker 1: After the break, Trump's former lawyers talk to prosecutors Zoe.

168
00:09:05,920 --> 00:09:08,400
Speaker 1: As all of this drama has been playing out over

169
00:09:08,440 --> 00:09:12,360
Speaker 1: the gag orders, there has been even more drama as

170
00:09:12,400 --> 00:09:17,000
Speaker 1: some of Donald Trump's former lawyers to help push the

171
00:09:17,360 --> 00:09:21,720
Speaker 1: case that the twenty twenty election should be overturned, have

172
00:09:22,000 --> 00:09:26,640
Speaker 1: now turned against Donald Trump and are cooperating with prosecutors.

173
00:09:27,240 --> 00:09:28,199
Speaker 4: That's right, you.

174
00:09:28,160 --> 00:09:31,920
Speaker 2: Know, as we geographically shift our attention from New York

175
00:09:31,960 --> 00:09:37,640
Speaker 2: and Washington down south to Atlanta, where the sprawling state

176
00:09:37,800 --> 00:09:41,680
Speaker 2: racketeering case is unfolding against not just Donald Trump but

177
00:09:41,840 --> 00:09:46,240
Speaker 2: eighteen other defendants who include some of his closest allies

178
00:09:46,559 --> 00:09:50,760
Speaker 2: and supporters in the post election period. So what's happened

179
00:09:51,040 --> 00:09:53,960
Speaker 2: recently in the past few weeks is that four of

180
00:09:54,120 --> 00:09:58,040
Speaker 2: Donald Trump's co defendants in that Georgia case have cut

181
00:09:58,080 --> 00:10:02,960
Speaker 2: deals with prosecutors to plead to criminal activity after the

182
00:10:02,960 --> 00:10:07,520
Speaker 2: twenty twenty election, and three of those guilty pleas came from.

183
00:10:07,640 --> 00:10:11,040
Speaker 4: Lawyers who played a key role.

184
00:10:10,920 --> 00:10:15,640
Speaker 2: In developing the legal theories that underpinned the whole attempt

185
00:10:15,720 --> 00:10:19,440
Speaker 2: to overturn the results of the election, who were public

186
00:10:19,480 --> 00:10:23,880
Speaker 2: faces of conspiracy theories and trying to get Georgia lawmakers

187
00:10:24,000 --> 00:10:27,680
Speaker 2: to intervene so ahead of a trial that was supposed

188
00:10:27,720 --> 00:10:30,760
Speaker 2: to start against two of the lawyers, Kenneth Chesbrow and

189
00:10:30,880 --> 00:10:35,040
Speaker 2: Sidney Powell, who had asked to expedite their hearing of

190
00:10:35,080 --> 00:10:37,880
Speaker 2: the case and to go to trial fast and gotten

191
00:10:37,920 --> 00:10:40,280
Speaker 2: their case severed from everyone else. But right on the

192
00:10:40,320 --> 00:10:43,520
Speaker 2: eve of that they both cut deals. And they were

193
00:10:43,559 --> 00:10:46,200
Speaker 2: not the first to do so. There was another defendant

194
00:10:46,640 --> 00:10:49,720
Speaker 2: Scott Hall, who was a Georgia bail bobsman involved in

195
00:10:49,800 --> 00:10:54,360
Speaker 2: sort of another part of the post election conduct that

196
00:10:54,440 --> 00:10:59,360
Speaker 2: involved accessing election equipment in rural Coffee County, Georgia. He

197
00:10:59,400 --> 00:11:02,720
Speaker 2: pled for We would not put them sort of in

198
00:11:02,800 --> 00:11:07,960
Speaker 2: the innermost circle of Donald Trump's advisors necessarily, But our

199
00:11:08,559 --> 00:11:11,960
Speaker 2: key figure is to the point that what this seems

200
00:11:11,960 --> 00:11:15,360
Speaker 2: to signal is, you know, the traditional building up of

201
00:11:15,400 --> 00:11:19,040
Speaker 2: a case and the flipping of folks a bit farther

202
00:11:19,160 --> 00:11:21,880
Speaker 2: down the ladder to try and get at the big

203
00:11:21,920 --> 00:11:25,760
Speaker 2: fish on top, who for the Fulton County District Attorney's

204
00:11:25,760 --> 00:11:27,319
Speaker 2: Office has always been Donald.

205
00:11:27,080 --> 00:11:32,360
Speaker 1: Trump and Sarah Do we know what they're telling prosecutors

206
00:11:32,400 --> 00:11:33,960
Speaker 1: as part of their deal.

207
00:11:34,400 --> 00:11:37,680
Speaker 5: Well, we know what their alleged conduct that they're being

208
00:11:37,760 --> 00:11:41,800
Speaker 5: charged with is. We don't actually have transcripts or access

209
00:11:41,800 --> 00:11:45,559
Speaker 5: to their testimony. But the reason these deals are significant

210
00:11:45,600 --> 00:11:48,720
Speaker 5: is that when it raises the leverage by the DA

211
00:11:48,840 --> 00:11:52,280
Speaker 5: in Atlanta Fulton County, Fannie willis to try to flip

212
00:11:52,320 --> 00:11:55,840
Speaker 5: more people, as Zoe was saying. And two, it also

213
00:11:56,040 --> 00:11:59,560
Speaker 5: makes them the witnesses in her case who are going

214
00:11:59,600 --> 00:12:02,240
Speaker 5: to test them against Trump. So to the extent that

215
00:12:02,360 --> 00:12:06,120
Speaker 5: they have knowledge about behavior that will directly implicate him

216
00:12:06,200 --> 00:12:09,720
Speaker 5: and his higher level allies. I mean, we've got, you know,

217
00:12:09,840 --> 00:12:14,120
Speaker 5: boldface names in that case, former chief of Staff Mark Meadows,

218
00:12:14,559 --> 00:12:19,680
Speaker 5: former lawyer Rudy Giuliani, senior Justice Department official under Trump,

219
00:12:19,720 --> 00:12:23,359
Speaker 5: Jeffrey Clark, and others. So there's a lot at stake here.

220
00:12:23,960 --> 00:12:28,200
Speaker 1: And Zoe, if others do decide to follow these lawyers' lead,

221
00:12:28,679 --> 00:12:30,679
Speaker 1: do they get the same kind of deal or is

222
00:12:30,720 --> 00:12:33,000
Speaker 1: it better to be the first one to give a deal?

223
00:12:33,000 --> 00:12:36,360
Speaker 1: And there's an additional incentive to not hold that too long.

224
00:12:37,120 --> 00:12:40,240
Speaker 2: As a general principle, it is always better to go first.

225
00:12:40,800 --> 00:12:44,080
Speaker 2: You tend to get rewarded when you reach an agreement

226
00:12:44,160 --> 00:12:47,480
Speaker 2: early on to testify. You tend to have the most

227
00:12:47,559 --> 00:12:50,520
Speaker 2: leverage at that point because if you're the first, you know,

228
00:12:50,600 --> 00:12:54,720
Speaker 2: prosecutors don't know what you have or what anyone else has,

229
00:12:55,080 --> 00:12:58,040
Speaker 2: so you're in a stronger position to say you know

230
00:12:58,080 --> 00:13:01,400
Speaker 2: you have nothing right now, so you need me. The

231
00:13:01,400 --> 00:13:06,079
Speaker 2: fact that Sidney Powell, who was a very prominent proponent

232
00:13:06,120 --> 00:13:09,200
Speaker 2: of conspiracy theory, this was not someone who was really

233
00:13:09,240 --> 00:13:10,160
Speaker 2: behind the scenes.

234
00:13:10,200 --> 00:13:11,880
Speaker 4: This was a public face of this case.

235
00:13:12,440 --> 00:13:16,600
Speaker 2: She ended up getting a deal that included misdemeanor guilty

236
00:13:16,640 --> 00:13:20,720
Speaker 2: plea and no jail time. You could really not ask

237
00:13:20,800 --> 00:13:24,599
Speaker 2: for much better in this situation. I think Kenneth Chesbrow

238
00:13:25,160 --> 00:13:28,320
Speaker 2: and Jenna Ellis the other two lawyers who pleaded guilty,

239
00:13:28,800 --> 00:13:30,720
Speaker 2: they had to take felony guilty.

240
00:13:30,760 --> 00:13:33,760
Speaker 4: Please not so good. They're still not going.

241
00:13:33,559 --> 00:13:37,120
Speaker 2: To jail very good. That's sort of the big thing.

242
00:13:37,320 --> 00:13:39,760
Speaker 2: But you know, for lawyers who are looking at their

243
00:13:39,760 --> 00:13:43,480
Speaker 2: bar licenses, for instance, a felony on your record is

244
00:13:43,520 --> 00:13:45,880
Speaker 2: a lot worse than a misdemeanor. So, you know, we

245
00:13:46,200 --> 00:13:50,080
Speaker 2: already see a bit of an escalation. There are degrees

246
00:13:50,240 --> 00:13:54,280
Speaker 2: of discretion that prosecutors have in terms of what they

247
00:13:54,320 --> 00:13:58,520
Speaker 2: put on the table, and the deals just typically tend

248
00:13:58,559 --> 00:13:59,120
Speaker 2: to get worse.

249
00:14:00,200 --> 00:14:02,760
Speaker 1: You hold out, and do we think that these lures

250
00:14:02,840 --> 00:14:05,880
Speaker 1: will be called to the stand to testify against Trump

251
00:14:05,920 --> 00:14:06,320
Speaker 1: in court?

252
00:14:07,000 --> 00:14:09,120
Speaker 5: That's what she's slaying the groundwork for.

253
00:14:09,280 --> 00:14:12,360
Speaker 2: Absolutely, it seems really likely, you know, that is the

254
00:14:12,480 --> 00:14:15,560
Speaker 2: value that they bring. At this point, all of this

255
00:14:15,679 --> 00:14:19,520
Speaker 2: unfolded so publicly, there's a sense, really, you know, talking

256
00:14:19,520 --> 00:14:21,640
Speaker 2: to sources on all sides of this, that there is

257
00:14:21,720 --> 00:14:27,320
Speaker 2: not much new that could necessarily come out about key events.

258
00:14:27,400 --> 00:14:30,040
Speaker 2: What happened, Who was where, who was talking to whom?

259
00:14:30,400 --> 00:14:31,400
Speaker 4: But the power of.

260
00:14:31,320 --> 00:14:34,800
Speaker 2: Having someone who was in that room saying this is

261
00:14:34,840 --> 00:14:38,080
Speaker 2: what happened to the jury is a lot more effective

262
00:14:38,400 --> 00:14:41,840
Speaker 2: than more of a hearsay secondhand accounting of that.

263
00:14:43,760 --> 00:14:46,880
Speaker 1: We mentioned Trump's former chief of staff, Mark Meadows, and

264
00:14:46,960 --> 00:14:50,680
Speaker 1: he too has now testified. Can you tell us about

265
00:14:50,720 --> 00:14:51,720
Speaker 1: that case, Zoe.

266
00:14:52,160 --> 00:14:55,200
Speaker 2: That's right, So that's shifting gears back now to the

267
00:14:55,240 --> 00:15:00,760
Speaker 2: federal criminal investigation into the twenty twenty election. Mark Meadows

268
00:15:00,960 --> 00:15:04,200
Speaker 2: was not charged in that indictment. He is not one

269
00:15:04,240 --> 00:15:09,000
Speaker 2: of the unnamed, unindicted co conspirators referenced in that indictment.

270
00:15:09,560 --> 00:15:10,560
Speaker 4: And there had.

271
00:15:10,400 --> 00:15:14,880
Speaker 2: Been a fight earlier in the year that was under seal,

272
00:15:15,040 --> 00:15:17,880
Speaker 2: but that we and others had reported on where Trump

273
00:15:18,000 --> 00:15:23,000
Speaker 2: was trying to stop Mark Meadows from complying with a

274
00:15:23,040 --> 00:15:26,560
Speaker 2: subpoena to go testify before the grand jury on executive

275
00:15:26,600 --> 00:15:30,360
Speaker 2: privilege grounds. And Trump lost that fight, and then things

276
00:15:30,400 --> 00:15:33,880
Speaker 2: went very quiet, and there was some reporting that perhaps

277
00:15:33,920 --> 00:15:36,640
Speaker 2: Mark Meadows had in fact gone to the grand jury

278
00:15:36,640 --> 00:15:40,640
Speaker 2: to testify, but wasn't quite confirmed or sure what had happened.

279
00:15:41,240 --> 00:15:45,640
Speaker 2: And now recently my colleague Chris Strom has confirmed along

280
00:15:45,640 --> 00:15:49,480
Speaker 2: with others that yes, Mark Meadows did go before the

281
00:15:49,520 --> 00:15:53,200
Speaker 2: grand jury to testify, and that he was granted immunity

282
00:15:53,320 --> 00:15:56,080
Speaker 2: to do so and was compelled to do so by

283
00:15:56,080 --> 00:15:59,160
Speaker 2: a court order. We know that there has been an

284
00:15:59,200 --> 00:16:04,400
Speaker 2: appearance and that he has provided testimony to prosecutors to

285
00:16:04,520 --> 00:16:07,640
Speaker 2: the grand jury in that case, but the substance of

286
00:16:07,680 --> 00:16:08,520
Speaker 2: that is not public.

287
00:16:09,440 --> 00:16:13,560
Speaker 1: And how, if at all, does that affect Meta's circumstance

288
00:16:13,680 --> 00:16:14,800
Speaker 1: in the Georgia case.

289
00:16:15,720 --> 00:16:19,360
Speaker 5: I mean, there's no direct correlation between the two cases.

290
00:16:19,480 --> 00:16:23,560
Speaker 5: The two prosecutors are working independently, but certainly it does

291
00:16:23,920 --> 00:16:28,040
Speaker 5: raise the question whether he would be open to some

292
00:16:28,120 --> 00:16:31,400
Speaker 5: kind of agreement in Georgia and whether the prosecutor would

293
00:16:31,440 --> 00:16:34,640
Speaker 5: take one. But it's important to you know, as Zoe said,

294
00:16:34,800 --> 00:16:37,480
Speaker 5: he was not a cooperating witness. He did not strike

295
00:16:37,520 --> 00:16:41,080
Speaker 5: a deal. He's not trying to help out prosecutors unlike

296
00:16:41,160 --> 00:16:44,560
Speaker 5: the others. Unlike the others. Exactly, he was compelled to testify.

297
00:16:44,920 --> 00:16:48,000
Speaker 5: Special Counsel Jack Smith and DC got a court order

298
00:16:48,320 --> 00:16:51,040
Speaker 5: put him on the stand, said he was going to

299
00:16:51,040 --> 00:16:54,160
Speaker 5: be granted immunity, which meant that he could not take

300
00:16:54,200 --> 00:16:56,400
Speaker 5: the fifth So he did have to say what he knew.

301
00:16:56,560 --> 00:16:59,240
Speaker 5: In response to questions, I would.

302
00:16:59,080 --> 00:17:02,720
Speaker 2: Say there is an open question of if he is

303
00:17:03,800 --> 00:17:07,399
Speaker 2: called as a witness at trial in the federal case

304
00:17:07,560 --> 00:17:11,840
Speaker 2: against Donald Trump. Former prosecutors say that as a general rule,

305
00:17:12,440 --> 00:17:16,560
Speaker 2: what he says on the stand there can't necessarily be

306
00:17:16,640 --> 00:17:20,280
Speaker 2: used against him in the Georgia case, But it also

307
00:17:20,560 --> 00:17:23,800
Speaker 2: could in some ways still be fair game for Georgia

308
00:17:23,880 --> 00:17:27,800
Speaker 2: prosecutors to I mean, they don't have to like.

309
00:17:27,760 --> 00:17:30,400
Speaker 4: Close their ears off. If he took the.

310
00:17:30,400 --> 00:17:35,119
Speaker 2: Stand, it sort of would be yet another extraordinary situation

311
00:17:35,320 --> 00:17:39,679
Speaker 2: that would pose very rarely tested questions of the interplay

312
00:17:39,720 --> 00:17:42,760
Speaker 2: of these state and federal prosecutions. It doesn't stop him

313
00:17:42,760 --> 00:17:46,000
Speaker 2: from being called, but it does raise a lot more

314
00:17:46,080 --> 00:17:50,240
Speaker 2: questions about the relationship between these two cases proceeding on,

315
00:17:50,520 --> 00:17:52,440
Speaker 2: you know, generally very separate tracks.

316
00:17:54,440 --> 00:17:56,919
Speaker 5: I would see mini minimum, you know, in openings and

317
00:17:56,960 --> 00:18:01,000
Speaker 5: closings they could always reference public testimony by Meadows in

318
00:18:01,080 --> 00:18:04,080
Speaker 5: the DC case. And here we have a timing question

319
00:18:04,200 --> 00:18:06,800
Speaker 5: just to sort of put the schedule back and focus.

320
00:18:07,240 --> 00:18:10,440
Speaker 5: The DC case right now is scheduled to start March fourth,

321
00:18:11,119 --> 00:18:14,520
Speaker 5: whereas there's still no trial date for the remaining defendants

322
00:18:14,520 --> 00:18:17,360
Speaker 5: in the Georgia case. So there's potential for the DC

323
00:18:17,520 --> 00:18:20,000
Speaker 5: case to be well on its way before we get

324
00:18:20,080 --> 00:18:21,840
Speaker 5: a trial moving in Georgia.

325
00:18:21,920 --> 00:18:23,720
Speaker 1: And even though there's a lot we don't know about

326
00:18:23,760 --> 00:18:28,080
Speaker 1: what Meadows has told prosecutors, what these lawyers have told prosecutors,

327
00:18:28,280 --> 00:18:31,560
Speaker 1: Donald Trump certainly appears very concerned about what they might

328
00:18:31,680 --> 00:18:32,119
Speaker 1: have said.

329
00:18:32,480 --> 00:18:34,760
Speaker 5: And you know, Meadows in particular, was you know, he

330
00:18:34,920 --> 00:18:37,840
Speaker 5: was the man in the room. And Meadows, let's remember,

331
00:18:37,960 --> 00:18:40,320
Speaker 5: was the one who actually set up the quote perfect

332
00:18:40,359 --> 00:18:44,080
Speaker 5: phone call with Georgia's former Secretary of State Brad Raffensberger

333
00:18:44,680 --> 00:18:47,760
Speaker 5: to find those eleven thousand plus votes that he needed

334
00:18:47,800 --> 00:18:48,679
Speaker 5: to flip the election.

335
00:18:49,960 --> 00:18:53,080
Speaker 1: When we come back, can states kick Trump off the

336
00:18:53,119 --> 00:19:05,240
Speaker 1: ballot in twenty twenty four? Sarah? While all this is

337
00:19:05,280 --> 00:19:08,800
Speaker 1: going on in courtrooms in DC, in New York, and Georgia,

338
00:19:08,880 --> 00:19:14,400
Speaker 1: there's an entirely separate question also involving Donald Trump in Minnesota,

339
00:19:14,600 --> 00:19:18,639
Speaker 1: in Colorado, where these states are exploring the question of

340
00:19:18,680 --> 00:19:23,000
Speaker 1: whether to disqualify Donald Trump from the twenty twenty four ballot.

341
00:19:23,280 --> 00:19:25,840
Speaker 1: Exactly what is that and how is that proceeding?

342
00:19:26,359 --> 00:19:29,200
Speaker 5: Well, this is very interesting. So there is a provision

343
00:19:29,200 --> 00:19:32,920
Speaker 5: in the Fourteenth amendment which would prevent an official from

344
00:19:32,960 --> 00:19:36,400
Speaker 5: being on the ballot if that person has been involved

345
00:19:36,440 --> 00:19:39,840
Speaker 5: in an insurrection. And so we have state election officials

346
00:19:39,880 --> 00:19:43,080
Speaker 5: across the country actually, and also you know, advocates and

347
00:19:43,080 --> 00:19:45,720
Speaker 5: defendants on both sides who are trying to press this question.

348
00:19:45,840 --> 00:19:50,240
Speaker 5: So does Donald Trump's involvement in the events of January

349
00:19:50,280 --> 00:19:53,080
Speaker 5: sixth and the assault in the Capitol preclude him from

350
00:19:53,080 --> 00:19:56,200
Speaker 5: being on the ballot. And the two cases that right

351
00:19:56,240 --> 00:19:59,040
Speaker 5: now seem to have the strongest potential the most legs

352
00:19:59,080 --> 00:20:03,359
Speaker 5: are in Colorado, where hearing started this week on this question,

353
00:20:03,800 --> 00:20:06,160
Speaker 5: and in Minnesota. We we're going to have a hearing

354
00:20:06,200 --> 00:20:08,520
Speaker 5: coming up, I believe it's on the second of November.

355
00:20:09,000 --> 00:20:12,800
Speaker 2: The section of the Constitution that we're now engaging with

356
00:20:13,240 --> 00:20:16,480
Speaker 2: has its origins in the post Civil War period, and

357
00:20:16,520 --> 00:20:19,560
Speaker 2: it was intended to sort of address this question of,

358
00:20:20,240 --> 00:20:22,359
Speaker 2: you know, the Civil War has ended, and there are

359
00:20:22,400 --> 00:20:27,280
Speaker 2: these ex Confederates who you know, either were serving in

360
00:20:27,000 --> 00:20:29,639
Speaker 2: the Federal Congress at the time and then join the

361
00:20:29,680 --> 00:20:34,280
Speaker 2: Confederacy and now want back in on politics, or just

362
00:20:34,320 --> 00:20:37,520
Speaker 2: you know, former active members of the Confederacy who want

363
00:20:37,560 --> 00:20:41,359
Speaker 2: to be part of the US government again. And that

364
00:20:41,560 --> 00:20:44,760
Speaker 2: was the genesis of this language was trying to say no,

365
00:20:45,400 --> 00:20:47,240
Speaker 2: there are going to be limits on your ability to

366
00:20:47,240 --> 00:20:50,679
Speaker 2: participate in the process because of what you did. And

367
00:20:50,720 --> 00:20:54,639
Speaker 2: then it really went dormant for a long time, and

368
00:20:54,680 --> 00:20:59,720
Speaker 2: then suddenly January sixth happened, and the constitutional scholars went

369
00:20:59,760 --> 00:21:02,199
Speaker 2: back to the books and said, you know, there is

370
00:21:02,280 --> 00:21:05,960
Speaker 2: this language that is still here that says that if

371
00:21:06,000 --> 00:21:10,000
Speaker 2: you committed it insurrection, there are consequences and are there

372
00:21:10,040 --> 00:21:13,639
Speaker 2: situations out of January sixth where this becomes relevant? And

373
00:21:13,680 --> 00:21:17,520
Speaker 2: there were a handful of cases, most that really went nowhere,

374
00:21:17,800 --> 00:21:22,000
Speaker 2: mostly for procedural reasons, but one did in New Mexico

375
00:21:22,240 --> 00:21:26,720
Speaker 2: against a county official who was charged and convicted for

376
00:21:26,800 --> 00:21:30,560
Speaker 2: participating in the riot. So now you have this ruling

377
00:21:30,600 --> 00:21:34,359
Speaker 2: on the books that says there is some context where

378
00:21:34,400 --> 00:21:38,320
Speaker 2: maybe this could apply to January sixth. And so we've

379
00:21:38,359 --> 00:21:41,480
Speaker 2: now had lawsuits all over the country, many of them

380
00:21:41,560 --> 00:21:46,439
Speaker 2: tossed out for being procedurally deficient and not serious trying

381
00:21:46,440 --> 00:21:49,240
Speaker 2: to stop Donald Trump from appearing on ballots.

382
00:21:49,760 --> 00:21:52,400
Speaker 4: But there are two cases, really three, and the two

383
00:21:52,440 --> 00:21:54,119
Speaker 4: main ones are in Colorado.

384
00:21:53,640 --> 00:21:56,560
Speaker 2: And Minnesota, one of which was brought by the group

385
00:21:56,600 --> 00:22:00,639
Speaker 2: that got this New Mexico County official kicked out of office,

386
00:22:01,040 --> 00:22:05,560
Speaker 2: saying Donald Trump incided them up and supported it and

387
00:22:06,040 --> 00:22:08,480
Speaker 2: pushed them and then didn't.

388
00:22:08,280 --> 00:22:10,480
Speaker 4: Use the resources at his disposal.

389
00:22:10,040 --> 00:22:12,800
Speaker 2: As president to stop them when it happened, and that

390
00:22:12,920 --> 00:22:16,240
Speaker 2: all of this meant that he engaged in an insurrection

391
00:22:16,560 --> 00:22:18,840
Speaker 2: and should be barred from.

392
00:22:18,760 --> 00:22:19,720
Speaker 4: Holding office again.

393
00:22:20,240 --> 00:22:24,320
Speaker 2: And you know, secretaries of state have largely said, even

394
00:22:24,359 --> 00:22:25,159
Speaker 2: those that are sort.

395
00:22:25,000 --> 00:22:27,679
Speaker 4: Of Democrat aligned, I'm not going to make.

396
00:22:27,520 --> 00:22:32,280
Speaker 2: This call, but judge, you make the call, and I

397
00:22:32,359 --> 00:22:34,719
Speaker 2: will follow what you tell me to do.

398
00:22:36,400 --> 00:22:39,639
Speaker 5: And one of the big questions here is does this

399
00:22:39,760 --> 00:22:44,639
Speaker 5: amendment apply to the office of the presidency? Okay, because

400
00:22:44,640 --> 00:22:46,639
Speaker 5: back in the Civil War era it wasn't, you know,

401
00:22:46,720 --> 00:22:50,600
Speaker 5: involving a president or former president or a presidential candidate.

402
00:22:50,920 --> 00:22:53,080
Speaker 5: So this is one of the big questions that these

403
00:22:53,119 --> 00:22:54,560
Speaker 5: cases are going to need to address.

404
00:22:55,160 --> 00:22:58,240
Speaker 1: As a practical matter, if one or more states who

405
00:22:58,240 --> 00:23:02,320
Speaker 1: were disqualified down Trump on these grounds, how would that

406
00:23:02,359 --> 00:23:06,240
Speaker 1: actually work? How can you have a presidential election where

407
00:23:06,359 --> 00:23:09,560
Speaker 1: the nominee of one of the two major parties is

408
00:23:09,600 --> 00:23:10,359
Speaker 1: not on the ballot.

409
00:23:10,520 --> 00:23:11,840
Speaker 4: It would be absolute chaos.

410
00:23:12,119 --> 00:23:16,840
Speaker 2: We're back in like constitutional crisis mode where I don't

411
00:23:16,840 --> 00:23:22,160
Speaker 2: think anyone really knows what would happen the state Republican

412
00:23:22,240 --> 00:23:26,720
Speaker 2: parties have intervened in these cases to sort of advocate

413
00:23:26,760 --> 00:23:30,719
Speaker 2: specifically for that component of it, to say, you know,

414
00:23:30,760 --> 00:23:33,760
Speaker 2: we have a right to say who's a bona fide candidate,

415
00:23:33,880 --> 00:23:37,439
Speaker 2: and it's not for other outside entities to make that

416
00:23:37,560 --> 00:23:41,119
Speaker 2: kind of call. It's really just not clear how it

417
00:23:41,160 --> 00:23:43,760
Speaker 2: works if, for instance, he's not on the ballot in

418
00:23:43,840 --> 00:23:48,080
Speaker 2: Colorado or Minnesota, but if he still ends up winning

419
00:23:48,119 --> 00:23:52,320
Speaker 2: the Republican nomination via other states and then the general

420
00:23:52,359 --> 00:23:56,240
Speaker 2: election is not on the ballot in Colorado and Minnesota,

421
00:23:56,280 --> 00:24:00,080
Speaker 2: it's really just not clear how that shakes out. But

422
00:24:00,440 --> 00:24:02,920
Speaker 2: you know, for now, at least there are these threshold

423
00:24:03,000 --> 00:24:08,080
Speaker 2: questions that the Constitution has this language, and parties are

424
00:24:08,320 --> 00:24:11,480
Speaker 2: going to court and saying this is your problem, judiciary

425
00:24:11,760 --> 00:24:12,359
Speaker 2: to sort out.

426
00:24:13,000 --> 00:24:16,000
Speaker 5: And this is important because these cases are actually the

427
00:24:16,040 --> 00:24:19,280
Speaker 5: ones that have the most direct bearing on Trump's ability

428
00:24:19,320 --> 00:24:21,879
Speaker 5: to run for office. And we've talked about this in

429
00:24:21,960 --> 00:24:25,720
Speaker 5: one of our previous chats. The actual cases that he's

430
00:24:25,800 --> 00:24:29,000
Speaker 5: charged with, the four cases, none of them involve a

431
00:24:29,000 --> 00:24:32,320
Speaker 5: potential conviction that would prevent Trump from either running or

432
00:24:32,320 --> 00:24:33,280
Speaker 5: holding office.

433
00:24:33,680 --> 00:24:37,680
Speaker 1: So these started as kind of an interesting academic constitutional question.

434
00:24:37,720 --> 00:24:40,520
Speaker 1: Now they're actually live in the courts. But do we

435
00:24:40,560 --> 00:24:43,720
Speaker 1: think that these have a chance of actually prevailing, that

436
00:24:43,920 --> 00:24:48,080
Speaker 1: Donald Trump could possibly truly be barred from the ballot

437
00:24:48,119 --> 00:24:48,840
Speaker 1: in any states.

438
00:24:49,480 --> 00:24:51,800
Speaker 5: Well, that's why we're watching these two in particular. As

439
00:24:51,840 --> 00:24:54,479
Speaker 5: always said, most of them, you know, don't have legs,

440
00:24:54,520 --> 00:24:57,840
Speaker 5: but these potentially seem to be able to do that.

441
00:24:58,400 --> 00:25:02,000
Speaker 2: This is another situation where the Supreme Court, like it

442
00:25:02,119 --> 00:25:06,520
Speaker 2: or not, could be asked to make really big decisions

443
00:25:06,560 --> 00:25:08,560
Speaker 2: about the election pretty quickly.

444
00:25:09,119 --> 00:25:11,240
Speaker 4: The courts in both of these cases, it's.

445
00:25:11,080 --> 00:25:14,440
Speaker 2: A trial level judge in Denver and then the Minnesota

446
00:25:14,440 --> 00:25:18,120
Speaker 2: Supreme Court that we'll hear arguments later. They've all acknowledged

447
00:25:18,320 --> 00:25:21,119
Speaker 2: that whoever loses is going to try to take this

448
00:25:21,359 --> 00:25:24,840
Speaker 2: up the chain as quickly as possible, and everyone has

449
00:25:24,920 --> 00:25:28,679
Speaker 2: eyes on getting it to the Supreme Court as quickly

450
00:25:28,680 --> 00:25:33,480
Speaker 2: as possible before ballots start, you know, becoming official early

451
00:25:33,520 --> 00:25:36,640
Speaker 2: in twenty twenty four, ahead of primary contests.

452
00:25:36,720 --> 00:25:39,520
Speaker 4: You know, the judges have set schedules with.

453
00:25:39,600 --> 00:25:42,920
Speaker 2: That in mind and understanding that they are probably very

454
00:25:43,000 --> 00:25:46,359
Speaker 2: likely not the final arbiters of this question. And even

455
00:25:46,359 --> 00:25:50,439
Speaker 2: if the Supreme Court doesn't do anything if you know,

456
00:25:50,560 --> 00:25:54,640
Speaker 2: there's a ruling and they decline to act on it,

457
00:25:55,080 --> 00:25:58,400
Speaker 2: That in and of itself is becoming involved in the election,

458
00:25:59,000 --> 00:26:00,479
Speaker 2: and quite early on in the cycle.

459
00:26:01,080 --> 00:26:05,120
Speaker 1: So, Zoe, you do think that ultimately this question will

460
00:26:05,160 --> 00:26:06,480
Speaker 1: come before the Supreme Court.

461
00:26:06,720 --> 00:26:08,920
Speaker 2: As of now, you know, the sources that I've talked

462
00:26:08,960 --> 00:26:12,440
Speaker 2: to on this on both sides have indicated that they're

463
00:26:12,440 --> 00:26:16,560
Speaker 2: in it to win it and whoever loses. You know, Trump, certainly,

464
00:26:16,840 --> 00:26:19,240
Speaker 2: I think his side has been quite clear about that

465
00:26:19,359 --> 00:26:19,840
Speaker 2: in court.

466
00:26:20,160 --> 00:26:20,760
Speaker 4: But there's an.

467
00:26:20,680 --> 00:26:24,640
Speaker 2: Expectation that the advocacy groups that brought these cases, they

468
00:26:24,680 --> 00:26:27,600
Speaker 2: have been laying this groundwork, you know, for months, if

469
00:26:27,640 --> 00:26:31,520
Speaker 2: not years, to try and pursue this issue as far

470
00:26:31,560 --> 00:26:32,479
Speaker 2: as they can take it.

471
00:26:32,880 --> 00:26:35,959
Speaker 5: And of course, Donald Trump and his lawyers completely refute

472
00:26:36,000 --> 00:26:40,440
Speaker 5: any idea that he was responsible for inciting this assault

473
00:26:40,480 --> 00:26:41,160
Speaker 5: on the Capitol.

474
00:26:43,560 --> 00:26:45,760
Speaker 1: There's never a shortage of things to talk about with

475
00:26:45,800 --> 00:26:49,280
Speaker 1: Donald Trump, and certainly this conversation shows that's true. What

476
00:26:49,320 --> 00:26:52,800
Speaker 1: are you watching for next in all of these various cases?

477
00:26:53,200 --> 00:26:55,520
Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean what's fascinating is we haven't even talked

478
00:26:55,560 --> 00:26:58,560
Speaker 2: about the case in Florida and where things stand with

479
00:26:58,880 --> 00:27:02,040
Speaker 2: the alligation making mishandled classified documents.

480
00:27:02,440 --> 00:27:04,120
Speaker 4: And we haven't even talked about the other New.

481
00:27:04,119 --> 00:27:07,440
Speaker 2: York criminal trial that's scheduled to happen early next year

482
00:27:07,600 --> 00:27:10,960
Speaker 2: on you know, did he falsify business records? There is

483
00:27:11,119 --> 00:27:16,360
Speaker 2: constantly now a flow of filings and hearings and deadlines

484
00:27:16,680 --> 00:27:19,320
Speaker 2: that he and all of us watching this have to

485
00:27:19,320 --> 00:27:23,240
Speaker 2: contend with this week, against the backdrop of everything else

486
00:27:23,280 --> 00:27:26,160
Speaker 2: we've already talked about, the judge in the Florida case

487
00:27:26,280 --> 00:27:29,320
Speaker 2: is going to hear arguments on Trump's request to kick

488
00:27:29,400 --> 00:27:32,840
Speaker 2: that trial down the road right now. It's scheduled for May.

489
00:27:33,320 --> 00:27:37,760
Speaker 2: They've been arguing that, you know, prosecutors are slow rolling

490
00:27:37,800 --> 00:27:40,880
Speaker 2: evidence and they just need more time. Prosecutors say that

491
00:27:40,880 --> 00:27:44,600
Speaker 2: that's totally bunk and they're just looking for excuses for

492
00:27:44,680 --> 00:27:48,320
Speaker 2: delay so we could get you know, sleeper ruling. That's

493
00:27:48,359 --> 00:27:51,320
Speaker 2: big news of a new trial date in Florida. So

494
00:27:51,359 --> 00:27:54,000
Speaker 2: I'm sort of continuing just to watch all of the

495
00:27:54,040 --> 00:27:55,440
Speaker 2: dockets as much as possible.

496
00:27:55,800 --> 00:27:58,520
Speaker 5: In addition to the Florida hearing this week that Zoe mentioned,

497
00:27:58,520 --> 00:28:02,960
Speaker 5: we're also watching a prod of Donald Trump's children testifying

498
00:28:03,080 --> 00:28:05,880
Speaker 5: in the New York trial This is the Letitia James,

499
00:28:05,920 --> 00:28:08,760
Speaker 5: the New York Attorney General in the Trump Org trial.

500
00:28:09,080 --> 00:28:12,679
Speaker 5: So they're testifying this week Don Junior, Eric and Ivanka

501
00:28:12,720 --> 00:28:15,720
Speaker 5: and then Trump himself is taking the stand in that

502
00:28:15,800 --> 00:28:19,520
Speaker 5: case on Monday, and at stake there are the charges

503
00:28:19,560 --> 00:28:23,000
Speaker 5: that he has falsely inflated the value of his businesses

504
00:28:23,000 --> 00:28:25,520
Speaker 5: to get loans and other business opportunities.

505
00:28:26,600 --> 00:28:29,480
Speaker 1: Sarah Zoe always great to talk to you. Thanks so

506
00:28:29,560 --> 00:28:31,960
Speaker 1: much for taking the time, Thanks for having.

507
00:28:31,760 --> 00:28:34,280
Speaker 4: Us, Thanks for having us. I'm sure we'll be back.

508
00:28:35,240 --> 00:28:37,080
Speaker 1: Thanks for listening to us here at The Big Take.

509
00:28:37,240 --> 00:28:40,320
Speaker 1: It's a daily podcast from Bloomberg and iHeartRadio. For more

510
00:28:40,320 --> 00:28:44,360
Speaker 1: shows from iHeartRadio, visit the iHeartRadio app, Apple Podcasts, or

511
00:28:44,400 --> 00:28:47,000
Speaker 1: wherever you listen, and we'd love to hear from you.

512
00:28:47,360 --> 00:28:50,640
Speaker 1: Email us questions or comments at Big Take at Bloomberg

513
00:28:50,680 --> 00:28:53,920
Speaker 1: dot net. The supervising producer of The Big Take is

514
00:28:54,000 --> 00:28:57,880
Speaker 1: Vicky Vergalina. Our senior producer is Catherine Fink, and she

515
00:28:58,040 --> 00:29:02,160
Speaker 1: produced this episode Rail m Seely as our engineer. Our

516
00:29:02,200 --> 00:29:06,160
Speaker 1: original music was composed by Leo Sidrin. I'm Westkasova. We'll

517
00:29:06,200 --> 00:29:08,200
Speaker 1: be back tomorrow with another Big Tag