1
00:00:03,480 --> 00:00:07,560
Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. I'm June Grosso. Every

2
00:00:07,640 --> 00:00:10,440
Speaker 1: day we bring you insight and analysis into the most

3
00:00:10,480 --> 00:00:13,399
Speaker 1: important legal news of the day. You can find more

4
00:00:13,480 --> 00:00:18,040
Speaker 1: episodes of the Bloomberg Law Podcast on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud

5
00:00:18,320 --> 00:00:22,200
Speaker 1: and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcasts. The right to

6
00:00:22,200 --> 00:00:25,639
Speaker 1: be forgotten is a distinctly European right, and Google wants

7
00:00:25,640 --> 00:00:28,240
Speaker 1: to keep it that way. Four years ago, the European

8
00:00:28,280 --> 00:00:31,080
Speaker 1: Union's top court rule that Google has to remove links

9
00:00:31,080 --> 00:00:33,840
Speaker 1: to information about a person on request if it's outdated

10
00:00:33,920 --> 00:00:37,200
Speaker 1: or irrelevant. Now Google is heading back to that court

11
00:00:37,200 --> 00:00:40,479
Speaker 1: again in a case that could have worldwide implications because

12
00:00:40,840 --> 00:00:45,320
Speaker 1: France's data privacy watchdog wants Google to remove links worldwide

13
00:00:45,520 --> 00:00:48,519
Speaker 1: rather than justin the EU. Joining me from London is

14
00:00:48,560 --> 00:00:52,879
Speaker 1: Ian Wilson, managing partner at Brett Wilson. Ian describe what

15
00:00:53,040 --> 00:00:58,640
Speaker 1: the right to be forgotten is? Um, Well, it's unhelpful

16
00:00:58,760 --> 00:01:02,720
Speaker 1: peraps because there's no absolute right to be forgotten. UM.

17
00:01:03,600 --> 00:01:09,559
Speaker 1: What it is is essentially a um request that individuals

18
00:01:09,600 --> 00:01:12,880
Speaker 1: can make and only related to individuals, not companies under

19
00:01:13,319 --> 00:01:18,480
Speaker 1: European data protection law, that search results for their name

20
00:01:18,560 --> 00:01:22,520
Speaker 1: and for their name only are delisted from Google search

21
00:01:22,600 --> 00:01:27,200
Speaker 1: results or indeed any other company search results UM for

22
00:01:27,400 --> 00:01:30,319
Speaker 1: specific U O L s. So it may be that

23
00:01:30,760 --> 00:01:36,360
Speaker 1: someone was involved in a drink driving inctance or something

24
00:01:36,400 --> 00:01:38,679
Speaker 1: like that, and it's coming up number one on Google

25
00:01:38,720 --> 00:01:41,880
Speaker 1: searches for their name. It's called it's something of disproportionate

26
00:01:41,920 --> 00:01:45,399
Speaker 1: effects on their career and all their personal life, and

27
00:01:45,440 --> 00:01:49,160
Speaker 1: so they can ask Google to delist it from the

28
00:01:49,200 --> 00:01:52,480
Speaker 1: results so it doesn't come up anymore, and Google will

29
00:01:52,840 --> 00:01:55,600
Speaker 1: have to sort of play a judge and jury and

30
00:01:55,720 --> 00:02:01,200
Speaker 1: just and balance that individual data protection rights against the

31
00:02:01,240 --> 00:02:05,360
Speaker 1: wider public interests of people looking for information on someone

32
00:02:06,840 --> 00:02:09,880
Speaker 1: on the public interest and then being able to find information.

33
00:02:10,400 --> 00:02:15,280
Speaker 1: So now France's watchdog not only find Google hundred and

34
00:02:15,320 --> 00:02:18,560
Speaker 1: sixteen thousand dollars or a hundred thousand euros for failing

35
00:02:18,560 --> 00:02:22,800
Speaker 1: to remove links from its global websites as well as

36
00:02:22,919 --> 00:02:26,560
Speaker 1: its websites in the EU. What is France's argument before

37
00:02:26,639 --> 00:02:33,520
Speaker 1: the EUSE Top Court. Well, it's it's essentially that Google

38
00:02:33,680 --> 00:02:39,359
Speaker 1: is processing the personal data and by that I mean

39
00:02:39,560 --> 00:02:44,480
Speaker 1: any any information is biographical UM of those based in

40
00:02:44,560 --> 00:02:50,399
Speaker 1: the EU, and by doing that, Google is UM falling

41
00:02:50,480 --> 00:02:54,760
Speaker 1: under the under the definition of a data controller for

42
00:02:54,800 --> 00:02:59,040
Speaker 1: the purpose of EU data law. That means the affect

43
00:02:59,160 --> 00:03:03,520
Speaker 1: Google effective a giant database. Um and you're putting someone's

44
00:03:03,600 --> 00:03:06,519
Speaker 1: name into and it's crunching it and spitting out results.

45
00:03:06,520 --> 00:03:08,400
Speaker 1: And that if it wants to do that in the

46
00:03:08,520 --> 00:03:13,640
Speaker 1: EU or in respective citizens individuals living in the EU,

47
00:03:13,800 --> 00:03:16,760
Speaker 1: it's got to compile with data protection law. Uh and

48
00:03:17,400 --> 00:03:21,280
Speaker 1: and and it's not simply good enough to um defense

49
00:03:21,360 --> 00:03:25,280
Speaker 1: it offenses around European results. It's it's it's it's global

50
00:03:25,320 --> 00:03:31,240
Speaker 1: search results. That's essentially the French arguments. So apparently a

51
00:03:31,280 --> 00:03:34,359
Speaker 1: collection of press, freedom, free speech, and civil rights groups

52
00:03:34,360 --> 00:03:41,720
Speaker 1: side with Google. What is Google's argument? Google's argument is

53
00:03:41,960 --> 00:03:46,000
Speaker 1: that and then there is some logic to Google's argument

54
00:03:46,080 --> 00:03:51,120
Speaker 1: that that it's not for one state, effectively one jurisdiction,

55
00:03:51,280 --> 00:03:56,960
Speaker 1: to dictate what happens in another legal jurisdiction. UM. It

56
00:03:57,080 --> 00:03:59,560
Speaker 1: goes a bit further this than this and says that

57
00:04:00,080 --> 00:04:07,280
Speaker 1: if if if we start, um start censoring access from

58
00:04:07,280 --> 00:04:10,360
Speaker 1: one country on the on the request of another country,

59
00:04:10,520 --> 00:04:14,280
Speaker 1: this could be abused by despotic regimes around the world

60
00:04:14,960 --> 00:04:18,680
Speaker 1: that don't have the same democratic values. To say, the

61
00:04:18,760 --> 00:04:22,280
Speaker 1: United Kingdom and the United States so it seems like,

62
00:04:22,440 --> 00:04:25,960
Speaker 1: you know, privacy and free speech rights are clashing here

63
00:04:26,600 --> 00:04:30,000
Speaker 1: and might that be might a court in a different

64
00:04:30,000 --> 00:04:34,560
Speaker 1: country like the US rule differently and maybe prior prioritize

65
00:04:34,600 --> 00:04:38,039
Speaker 1: free speech rather than privacy. So does that cause a

66
00:04:38,080 --> 00:04:40,640
Speaker 1: problem here? Absolutely? Yes, you know, I mean, I think

67
00:04:40,640 --> 00:04:44,480
Speaker 1: at the heart of this is a clash of cultures

68
00:04:44,600 --> 00:04:48,599
Speaker 1: that that we've um you know, working in media law,

69
00:04:49,160 --> 00:04:54,560
Speaker 1: we've been waiting to see expects expecting some time since

70
00:04:54,600 --> 00:04:57,599
Speaker 1: the interception of the Internet or certainly the Internet becoming

71
00:04:57,680 --> 00:05:01,520
Speaker 1: very popular. There's a lot of things that the British

72
00:05:01,520 --> 00:05:04,640
Speaker 1: and the Americans having in common and common law background,

73
00:05:04,960 --> 00:05:10,200
Speaker 1: but there's a stark digression when it comes to speech

74
00:05:10,279 --> 00:05:15,120
Speaker 1: and freedom expression, free speech causing free In the US

75
00:05:15,200 --> 00:05:20,640
Speaker 1: the First Amendment free speech is constitutionally protected. Um. In England,

76
00:05:20,680 --> 00:05:27,320
Speaker 1: it's it's there is there is a framework where we're

77
00:05:27,320 --> 00:05:31,360
Speaker 1: subjects to the European Conventional Human rights that provide that

78
00:05:31,480 --> 00:05:34,880
Speaker 1: has two competing rights, the rights freedom of expression, which

79
00:05:34,960 --> 00:05:38,239
Speaker 1: unlike in America, isn't an absolute right and various things

80
00:05:38,480 --> 00:05:41,920
Speaker 1: hate speech are actually criminalized in the UK, whereas there

81
00:05:42,120 --> 00:05:47,599
Speaker 1: sometimes constitutionally protected in US. So we have that sorry, gone. Well,

82
00:05:47,760 --> 00:05:50,640
Speaker 1: so where do you think this will end up? I mean,

83
00:05:50,720 --> 00:05:54,160
Speaker 1: you do have the General Data Protection Regulation which it's

84
00:05:54,200 --> 00:05:58,679
Speaker 1: forcing companies around the world to follow EU laws because

85
00:05:58,800 --> 00:06:01,120
Speaker 1: they want to do business there. What do you think

86
00:06:01,160 --> 00:06:05,680
Speaker 1: will happen here? Well, I think ultimately, I mean the

87
00:06:05,760 --> 00:06:07,839
Speaker 1: I mean it's going to go on to say that

88
00:06:07,920 --> 00:06:11,720
Speaker 1: what we have a strong uh sort of developing concepts

89
00:06:11,720 --> 00:06:14,240
Speaker 1: in the in Europe, the privacy law which has to

90
00:06:14,279 --> 00:06:19,160
Speaker 1: be balanced against um freedom expression, free speech, and that's

91
00:06:19,160 --> 00:06:22,279
Speaker 1: not going to go away in the EU. And I

92
00:06:22,320 --> 00:06:24,920
Speaker 1: mean what the EU a quite sort of we're busted.

93
00:06:24,920 --> 00:06:27,560
Speaker 1: And we've seen it before when they've taken on Microsoft

94
00:06:27,560 --> 00:06:32,520
Speaker 1: and other companies, whether it's been market dominant and ultimately,

95
00:06:33,080 --> 00:06:35,599
Speaker 1: you know, the way forward in the Europe and beyond,

96
00:06:35,640 --> 00:06:39,480
Speaker 1: it's been copied in other countries is is greater protection

97
00:06:39,640 --> 00:06:43,599
Speaker 1: for for personal data and as you say, different countries

98
00:06:43,640 --> 00:06:47,159
Speaker 1: trading with one another. Um, it's ultimately I think Google

99
00:06:47,240 --> 00:06:49,760
Speaker 1: aren't if they want to trade in Europe, they are

100
00:06:49,839 --> 00:06:55,839
Speaker 1: going to have to comply with EU rulings. Now we

101
00:06:55,880 --> 00:06:58,279
Speaker 1: won't know what happened, you know, the outcome of today's

102
00:06:58,279 --> 00:07:02,200
Speaker 1: hearing until the new New year. Probably the judgment will

103
00:07:02,240 --> 00:07:07,279
Speaker 1: be reserved. And there's two hearings sort of effectively two applications,

104
00:07:07,320 --> 00:07:10,600
Speaker 1: one today, one which is much broader, which is probably

105
00:07:10,600 --> 00:07:13,760
Speaker 1: not going to work. It's it doesn't take into account

106
00:07:13,760 --> 00:07:17,120
Speaker 1: the Balancing Act. It suggests that any sensitive Burstal days

107
00:07:17,160 --> 00:07:21,080
Speaker 1: to should be delisted. Um, that's not quite how it works.

108
00:07:21,280 --> 00:07:23,640
Speaker 1: You know. For instance, if you were a sex offender,

109
00:07:24,000 --> 00:07:27,040
Speaker 1: you couldn't just demand the Google removed material. There would

110
00:07:27,040 --> 00:07:31,600
Speaker 1: probably refuse quite rightly, not quite rightly to delist that

111
00:07:31,680 --> 00:07:35,000
Speaker 1: where there's a public interest in people being aware that

112
00:07:35,080 --> 00:07:39,960
Speaker 1: someone has a serious conviction like that. But the jurisdictional one,

113
00:07:40,160 --> 00:07:42,560
Speaker 1: I don't think it's one that's going to go away.

114
00:07:42,640 --> 00:07:46,320
Speaker 1: Today's decision is actually based on old law which is

115
00:07:46,360 --> 00:07:49,760
Speaker 1: no longer enforced. Oddly, we've got the gdp R. Now

116
00:07:49,840 --> 00:07:52,840
Speaker 1: as you say that that that codifies the right to

117
00:07:52,840 --> 00:07:57,560
Speaker 1: be forgotten, the fact goes service. So um, yeah, I

118
00:07:57,600 --> 00:08:00,920
Speaker 1: think we shall see. Thank you how much. Ian. That's

119
00:08:00,960 --> 00:08:09,920
Speaker 1: Ian Wilson. He's a managing partner at Brett Wilson. Over

120
00:08:09,960 --> 00:08:12,520
Speaker 1: the past week, both President Donald Trump and his former

121
00:08:12,600 --> 00:08:15,559
Speaker 1: lawyer Michael Cohen have filed court papers saying they would

122
00:08:15,560 --> 00:08:18,960
Speaker 1: not try to enforce the deal for Stormy Daniels to

123
00:08:19,000 --> 00:08:22,480
Speaker 1: remain quiet about a sexual encounter with Trump in exchange

124
00:08:22,480 --> 00:08:27,400
Speaker 1: for dollars. However, daniels lawyer Michael Avenati says the adult

125
00:08:27,440 --> 00:08:30,000
Speaker 1: film star will not give up on her legal case.

126
00:08:31,000 --> 00:08:33,320
Speaker 1: We're gonna continue to prosecute this case, and we're going

127
00:08:33,360 --> 00:08:36,080
Speaker 1: to continue to try to seek the truth and disclose

128
00:08:36,160 --> 00:08:38,320
Speaker 1: the truth to what happened here. Relating to the cover

129
00:08:38,440 --> 00:08:42,080
Speaker 1: up to the American people. Joining me is Eric Larson,

130
00:08:42,080 --> 00:08:45,800
Speaker 1: Bloomberg News Legal reporter. Eric, this started with the demand

131
00:08:45,840 --> 00:08:48,760
Speaker 1: for something like more than twenty million dollars and damages,

132
00:08:48,920 --> 00:08:52,480
Speaker 1: months of attack by Trump against Daniels and her attorney.

133
00:08:52,880 --> 00:08:58,080
Speaker 1: Tell us why this complete turnaround, Well, it depends on

134
00:08:58,120 --> 00:09:02,480
Speaker 1: who you ask. Um. Mr Albanati believes that the turnaround

135
00:09:02,640 --> 00:09:05,840
Speaker 1: is an attempt by Trump and his former lawyer Michael

136
00:09:05,840 --> 00:09:09,360
Speaker 1: Cohen to avoid being deposed under oath in the case,

137
00:09:09,400 --> 00:09:11,880
Speaker 1: which is really one of the ultimate goals that Aubanati

138
00:09:11,920 --> 00:09:15,840
Speaker 1: has been aiming toward here. Um, that would would be

139
00:09:15,840 --> 00:09:20,800
Speaker 1: problematic essentially for any president in any case, and it's

140
00:09:20,960 --> 00:09:24,480
Speaker 1: it's something that Albanati has said would be would reveal

141
00:09:24,600 --> 00:09:28,400
Speaker 1: a lot of information about this dispute. Well, Albanati, as

142
00:09:28,440 --> 00:09:31,480
Speaker 1: we know, has gotten a very public profile from this case.

143
00:09:31,520 --> 00:09:36,880
Speaker 1: He's even exploring a run for president in Sorry, but

144
00:09:37,000 --> 00:09:39,920
Speaker 1: can he stop the judge from throwing out the case

145
00:09:40,160 --> 00:09:44,280
Speaker 1: if there's no controversy? You know it's Uh, it's a

146
00:09:44,280 --> 00:09:47,120
Speaker 1: really good question. And there's going to be a hearing

147
00:09:47,280 --> 00:09:50,880
Speaker 1: on the four in Los Angeles Federal Court. UM, I'll

148
00:09:50,880 --> 00:09:53,040
Speaker 1: be there. We're gonna find out what the judge has

149
00:09:53,120 --> 00:09:56,840
Speaker 1: to say. Um. Aubanati has urged the judge to treat

150
00:09:57,240 --> 00:10:00,480
Speaker 1: h this statement from Trump and from Cohen about not

151
00:10:00,640 --> 00:10:04,679
Speaker 1: defending uh the agreement as essentially an emotion to dismiss

152
00:10:04,720 --> 00:10:07,000
Speaker 1: the case, and he's urging the judge to not do that.

153
00:10:07,280 --> 00:10:11,000
Speaker 1: He says that if if it's a settlement that Trump wants,

154
00:10:11,440 --> 00:10:13,400
Speaker 1: then he's going to have to go bits further in

155
00:10:13,559 --> 00:10:18,880
Speaker 1: terms of offering a settlement of sorts, including admitting he

156
00:10:18,920 --> 00:10:21,120
Speaker 1: does what Auvnandi wants is for Trump and going to

157
00:10:21,200 --> 00:10:25,280
Speaker 1: admit that that payment violated campaign finance laws by trying

158
00:10:25,320 --> 00:10:29,280
Speaker 1: to essentially influence the election. Uh. The agreement was from

159
00:10:29,360 --> 00:10:31,920
Speaker 1: just a month before the election, So that's one of

160
00:10:31,920 --> 00:10:35,560
Speaker 1: the overwriting desires in the case. Also they want their attorneys.

161
00:10:35,600 --> 00:10:38,240
Speaker 1: He's paid, and they want and an acknowledgement that the

162
00:10:38,720 --> 00:10:43,000
Speaker 1: agreement was invalid and the illegal, not just a statement

163
00:10:43,040 --> 00:10:47,440
Speaker 1: that they won't defend it. Well, is Trump saying that

164
00:10:47,960 --> 00:10:51,880
Speaker 1: he made illegal campaign finance charges? Which seems unlikely? But

165
00:10:52,200 --> 00:10:55,800
Speaker 1: is is that part of the suit, that is part

166
00:10:55,880 --> 00:10:58,560
Speaker 1: of the lawsuit. That's one of the claims, uh that

167
00:10:58,720 --> 00:11:04,280
Speaker 1: Stormy Daniels has made, is that the the agreement was

168
00:11:04,679 --> 00:11:08,800
Speaker 1: unenforceable and and void because for various reasons, because but

169
00:11:08,880 --> 00:11:11,400
Speaker 1: also because it was illegal because there was a campaign

170
00:11:11,480 --> 00:11:13,839
Speaker 1: finance violation. That's been one of their claims from Marks.

171
00:11:14,200 --> 00:11:17,560
Speaker 1: But the judge could throw it out without requiring that

172
00:11:17,679 --> 00:11:21,320
Speaker 1: from Trump or Cohen. I'd take it theoretically, Yes, Yeah,

173
00:11:21,400 --> 00:11:24,600
Speaker 1: that's I assume that that is what Trump and Cohen

174
00:11:24,840 --> 00:11:28,720
Speaker 1: are are aiming for here. And um, the judge in

175
00:11:28,720 --> 00:11:32,640
Speaker 1: this case, how has how how has the judge acted

176
00:11:32,800 --> 00:11:39,640
Speaker 1: in prior uh points that Avnati has brought up in Cohen, Well,

177
00:11:39,679 --> 00:11:41,840
Speaker 1: it's it's always hard to tell exactly what it uh

178
00:11:42,200 --> 00:11:44,320
Speaker 1: which way judge is leaning in a case. They tend

179
00:11:44,360 --> 00:11:48,800
Speaker 1: to uh give deference to whichever side is making sort

180
00:11:48,840 --> 00:11:51,640
Speaker 1: of the most urgent case. Sometimes the early early in

181
00:11:51,679 --> 00:11:55,720
Speaker 1: the litigation, Trump was able to get in order against

182
00:11:56,240 --> 00:12:01,679
Speaker 1: uh Stormy Daniels, preventing her from speaking about the case. Um.

183
00:12:01,760 --> 00:12:03,480
Speaker 1: And for example, you know, that was a ruling in

184
00:12:03,520 --> 00:12:06,880
Speaker 1: favor of Trump. But now Manati is claiming that that

185
00:12:07,480 --> 00:12:09,600
Speaker 1: motion when it was originally filed, as well as the

186
00:12:09,640 --> 00:12:13,640
Speaker 1: motion to stay the case, we're both based on essentially

187
00:12:13,640 --> 00:12:16,679
Speaker 1: false information and that the Trump and Cohn were misleading

188
00:12:16,720 --> 00:12:20,520
Speaker 1: the court by insisting that the agreement was valid in

189
00:12:20,600 --> 00:12:23,240
Speaker 1: order to get those rulings in their favor. So it's

190
00:12:23,240 --> 00:12:25,240
Speaker 1: hard to say what the judge will think now that

191
00:12:25,240 --> 00:12:28,480
Speaker 1: that President Trump and Cohen are both walking away from

192
00:12:28,480 --> 00:12:32,120
Speaker 1: this deal that they were defending. Now they want to

193
00:12:32,160 --> 00:12:35,480
Speaker 1: return of the hundred thirty thousand dollars. Is that based

194
00:12:35,559 --> 00:12:40,439
Speaker 1: on state law? Uh? You know, that's a good question.

195
00:12:40,480 --> 00:12:42,880
Speaker 1: Not sure exactly which law that that is based on,

196
00:12:43,000 --> 00:12:45,400
Speaker 1: but they they are saying that they want that money back,

197
00:12:45,840 --> 00:12:48,040
Speaker 1: and I'm glad you mentioned that, because Abnati says they're

198
00:12:48,040 --> 00:12:50,960
Speaker 1: not going to So that will be another matter for

199
00:12:51,000 --> 00:12:53,959
Speaker 1: the judge. True, right. So there's still the defamation case

200
00:12:54,040 --> 00:12:57,280
Speaker 1: in New York Federal Court against Trump for his statements

201
00:12:57,320 --> 00:13:00,920
Speaker 1: against Daniels, and Avanati told CNN way back when that

202
00:13:01,000 --> 00:13:04,240
Speaker 1: it wasn't by accident that they decided to file a

203
00:13:04,320 --> 00:13:09,640
Speaker 1: separate defamation suit. Does that face more legal barriers than

204
00:13:09,679 --> 00:13:14,400
Speaker 1: this suit? Uh, that case was Actually it was transferred

205
00:13:14,760 --> 00:13:18,120
Speaker 1: somewhat recently to the same federal court in Los Angeles

206
00:13:18,559 --> 00:13:21,640
Speaker 1: where the lawsuit over the confidentiality agreement is being heard.

207
00:13:21,720 --> 00:13:24,480
Speaker 1: And actually that that same case is before the same

208
00:13:24,559 --> 00:13:27,880
Speaker 1: judge and will be discussed at that hearing. I mentioned

209
00:13:28,000 --> 00:13:33,839
Speaker 1: on September, President Trump has filed emotion to strike that

210
00:13:33,920 --> 00:13:38,240
Speaker 1: complaint um, saying you know, it's a completely invalid and

211
00:13:38,400 --> 00:13:40,680
Speaker 1: wants to get it thrown out before they even do

212
00:13:40,760 --> 00:13:44,199
Speaker 1: any discovery uh in the case, So that that will

213
00:13:44,240 --> 00:13:46,880
Speaker 1: be coming up as well. Um. And obviously that that

214
00:13:46,960 --> 00:13:49,720
Speaker 1: case was filed by Stormy Daniels against Trump after he

215
00:13:49,800 --> 00:13:53,520
Speaker 1: tweeted that she was a total con job when she

216
00:13:53,600 --> 00:13:56,360
Speaker 1: said that she had been threatened in two thousand eleven

217
00:13:56,360 --> 00:13:59,360
Speaker 1: to keep quiet about that that alleged affair. Yeah, he's

218
00:13:59,480 --> 00:14:04,439
Speaker 1: also tweeted other things about her. Now we often hear

219
00:14:04,480 --> 00:14:09,120
Speaker 1: Avanatti on different television shows, radio shows talking about how

220
00:14:09,160 --> 00:14:13,400
Speaker 1: he wants he's going to get to depose Trump. Why

221
00:14:13,440 --> 00:14:16,360
Speaker 1: does he think that he'll get to depose Trump before

222
00:14:16,840 --> 00:14:21,640
Speaker 1: or if the Special Council cannot depose him? Well, these

223
00:14:21,680 --> 00:14:24,760
Speaker 1: are you know, the Special Council's investigation is on a

224
00:14:24,800 --> 00:14:29,280
Speaker 1: totally different track this. You know, his civil lawsuits being

225
00:14:29,320 --> 00:14:34,200
Speaker 1: brought by a private individual. Um, there's there's no reason

226
00:14:34,280 --> 00:14:40,720
Speaker 1: to assume that involved in uh, this big investigation involving

227
00:14:40,800 --> 00:14:44,960
Speaker 1: Russia election meddling, that he would be in some way

228
00:14:45,080 --> 00:14:48,280
Speaker 1: from from being deposed in the separate lawsuit. And I

229
00:14:48,320 --> 00:14:50,960
Speaker 1: know that at extent that he doesn't certainly doesn't think

230
00:14:50,960 --> 00:14:53,920
Speaker 1: that Mueller's investigation is on the impediments um, and that

231
00:14:54,080 --> 00:14:56,800
Speaker 1: in fact, she believes that his litigation is a better

232
00:14:56,880 --> 00:14:58,920
Speaker 1: route to try to get some of the answers out here.

233
00:14:59,200 --> 00:15:03,360
Speaker 1: He's probably looking at Paula Jones, the Paula Jones subpoena

234
00:15:03,440 --> 00:15:06,360
Speaker 1: of President Clinton. Thanks so much, Eric, That's Eric Larson,

235
00:15:06,400 --> 00:15:09,560
Speaker 1: Bloomberg News Legal reporter. Thanks for listening to the Bloomberg

236
00:15:09,680 --> 00:15:12,760
Speaker 1: Law Podcast. You can subscribe and listen to the show

237
00:15:12,800 --> 00:15:17,480
Speaker 1: on Apple podcast, SoundCloud and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcast.

238
00:15:17,880 --> 00:15:20,640
Speaker 1: I'm June Basso. This is Bloomberg