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 --> 00:00:22,040
Speaker 1: and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcasts. The Tesla Go

6
00:00:22,239 --> 00:00:25,360
Speaker 1: Private saga is now in its tenth day, and investors

7
00:00:25,400 --> 00:00:28,840
Speaker 1: aren't much closer to clarity about whether CEO Elon Musk

8
00:00:28,920 --> 00:00:32,320
Speaker 1: broke the rules by tweeting about secured funding for the deals.

9
00:00:32,880 --> 00:00:36,519
Speaker 1: Speaking with Bloomberg yesterday, former SEC Director of Corporate Finance

10
00:00:36,640 --> 00:00:40,440
Speaker 1: Keith Higgins said the SEC is likely working quickly to

11
00:00:40,479 --> 00:00:43,479
Speaker 1: resolve the issue soon. It's not going to be a

12
00:00:43,600 --> 00:00:46,800
Speaker 1: complex investigation, so I would think they would be able

13
00:00:46,800 --> 00:00:48,760
Speaker 1: to wrap it up quickly, and quite frankly, I think

14
00:00:48,760 --> 00:00:50,440
Speaker 1: it would be in the SEC sentest to wrap it

15
00:00:50,520 --> 00:00:53,960
Speaker 1: up quickly as obviously, as well as Mr Musk joining

16
00:00:54,000 --> 00:00:57,880
Speaker 1: me is John Coffee, professor at Columbia Law School. Jack,

17
00:00:58,000 --> 00:01:01,280
Speaker 1: do you agree with Higgins that an SEC investigation is

18
00:01:01,280 --> 00:01:04,080
Speaker 1: going to be wrapped up quickly? Well, I think that

19
00:01:04,319 --> 00:01:07,200
Speaker 1: is possible. What you really want to focus on is

20
00:01:07,240 --> 00:01:10,600
Speaker 1: whether the Board of Directors can confirm Mr Must's story

21
00:01:10,640 --> 00:01:14,000
Speaker 1: about his prior conversations and whether the people in Saudi

22
00:01:14,000 --> 00:01:18,440
Speaker 1: Arabia will confirm that they did indicate a very strong

23
00:01:18,560 --> 00:01:22,120
Speaker 1: interest in a possible willingness to finance a going private bid.

24
00:01:22,640 --> 00:01:26,319
Speaker 1: If those stories start turning out inconsistent, or the distance

25
00:01:26,360 --> 00:01:29,840
Speaker 1: between must view and Saudi Arabia's view seems quite far,

26
00:01:30,280 --> 00:01:33,399
Speaker 1: then it looks again like he is materially overstated, and

27
00:01:33,560 --> 00:01:37,479
Speaker 1: that can support liability. Jack looking at the deal now,

28
00:01:37,560 --> 00:01:40,920
Speaker 1: what he's tweeted and what you know about it right now,

29
00:01:41,000 --> 00:01:43,080
Speaker 1: does it look as if he crossed a line with

30
00:01:43,200 --> 00:01:46,880
Speaker 1: social media? Well, it's not so much whether he used

31
00:01:46,920 --> 00:01:49,640
Speaker 1: social media. That's that's an issue that concerns the SEC

32
00:01:49,760 --> 00:01:52,720
Speaker 1: and might be part of his settlement. Twitter only as

33
00:01:52,720 --> 00:01:55,400
Speaker 1: a hundred and fourteen characters and you really can't give

34
00:01:55,440 --> 00:01:58,440
Speaker 1: full disclosure in that smaller space. But I think the

35
00:01:58,560 --> 00:02:02,280
Speaker 1: SEC is more concerned about whether this was a material

36
00:02:02,400 --> 00:02:06,560
Speaker 1: overstatement that inflated the market price. And some believe there

37
00:02:06,600 --> 00:02:09,080
Speaker 1: may have been a desire to inflate the market price

38
00:02:09,360 --> 00:02:12,040
Speaker 1: in order to punish the shorts, and that would sound

39
00:02:12,120 --> 00:02:15,400
Speaker 1: like manipulation. But for the short run, the SEC has

40
00:02:15,480 --> 00:02:17,560
Speaker 1: first got to get the facts down and do the

41
00:02:17,600 --> 00:02:20,880
Speaker 1: facts that must hold job and get confirmed by the

42
00:02:21,040 --> 00:02:23,360
Speaker 1: facts that they can get from Saudi Arabia, and that'll

43
00:02:23,400 --> 00:02:25,920
Speaker 1: take a little bit longer. That's going to require that

44
00:02:26,000 --> 00:02:29,560
Speaker 1: the SEC convinced the Saudi Arabia Sovereign Wealth Fund that

45
00:02:29,639 --> 00:02:32,480
Speaker 1: it should respond to their request. There probably is an

46
00:02:32,520 --> 00:02:35,960
Speaker 1: information sharing treaty between Saudi Arabia and the United States,

47
00:02:36,200 --> 00:02:38,040
Speaker 1: but that doesn't mean that they will be quick to

48
00:02:38,080 --> 00:02:43,160
Speaker 1: respond with financing from Saudi Arabia involved will Tesla or

49
00:02:43,280 --> 00:02:46,280
Speaker 1: must need clearance from SIPHY as the Committee on Foreign

50
00:02:46,280 --> 00:02:48,840
Speaker 1: Investment in the US. That's going to be one of

51
00:02:48,880 --> 00:02:53,080
Speaker 1: the issues. Uh. New legislation was just passed. They do

52
00:02:53,200 --> 00:02:56,320
Speaker 1: have jurisdiction. Uh, you could say that there is a

53
00:02:56,480 --> 00:02:59,840
Speaker 1: national security interest here, although this is a startup company

54
00:03:00,200 --> 00:03:02,960
Speaker 1: who is not like our steel or aluminum industries where

55
00:03:02,960 --> 00:03:06,440
Speaker 1: thousands are employed in it or millions are employed in it. Here,

56
00:03:06,800 --> 00:03:08,920
Speaker 1: I'd be harder to make that claim that there was

57
00:03:09,080 --> 00:03:14,160
Speaker 1: national security interests that precluded this acquisition of Tesla, But

58
00:03:14,800 --> 00:03:17,960
Speaker 1: we've seen other claims made recently under this standard of

59
00:03:18,000 --> 00:03:21,320
Speaker 1: foreign acquisitions. I think the bigger problem is going to

60
00:03:21,400 --> 00:03:25,040
Speaker 1: be coming up with a specific plan and a specific number.

61
00:03:25,720 --> 00:03:29,680
Speaker 1: He originally offered four and twenty dollars. That was about

62
00:03:29,520 --> 00:03:34,280
Speaker 1: a premium. That's pretty cheap most going private transactions. You

63
00:03:34,400 --> 00:03:37,280
Speaker 1: offer those who are being cashed out something like a

64
00:03:37,360 --> 00:03:40,200
Speaker 1: thirty percent premium, and we're going to see whether the

65
00:03:40,240 --> 00:03:42,800
Speaker 1: independent committee of the Board of directors is going to

66
00:03:42,880 --> 00:03:45,680
Speaker 1: be satisfied with that price or whether they'll hold out

67
00:03:45,800 --> 00:03:50,360
Speaker 1: for more like most independent committees usually do. Would an

68
00:03:50,400 --> 00:03:54,880
Speaker 1: SEC investigation have an impact on the timing or on

69
00:03:55,240 --> 00:03:58,720
Speaker 1: Musque taking the company private? Well, I would think that's

70
00:03:58,760 --> 00:04:02,480
Speaker 1: one of the reasons why Mr Musk and his side lawyers,

71
00:04:02,480 --> 00:04:04,880
Speaker 1: both for the company and for Musk, would want to

72
00:04:04,920 --> 00:04:07,720
Speaker 1: reach a quick settlement. No one wants to be sued

73
00:04:07,760 --> 00:04:10,600
Speaker 1: by the SEC because courts respond a little bit more

74
00:04:10,640 --> 00:04:14,360
Speaker 1: favorably to the SEC than to private plaintiffs, And if

75
00:04:14,360 --> 00:04:17,000
Speaker 1: the SEC really had to go to court and established

76
00:04:17,040 --> 00:04:20,680
Speaker 1: liability to judgment, that judgment would also be binding on Musk.

77
00:04:20,760 --> 00:04:23,440
Speaker 1: When the private plantiffs sued and the private planetfs are

78
00:04:23,440 --> 00:04:27,000
Speaker 1: suiting for real damages, the SEC is probably suing only

79
00:04:27,040 --> 00:04:30,640
Speaker 1: for a penalty and an injunction and possibly some understanding

80
00:04:30,760 --> 00:04:34,920
Speaker 1: some negotiated protocol for how he will get future social

81
00:04:34,960 --> 00:04:39,479
Speaker 1: media messages seen by, approved by, and in effect vetted

82
00:04:39,680 --> 00:04:41,919
Speaker 1: by the company and its lawyers. I think the SEC

83
00:04:42,040 --> 00:04:45,159
Speaker 1: wants something like that also, because Twitter is not the

84
00:04:45,160 --> 00:04:48,320
Speaker 1: best way to communicate information to a small portion of

85
00:04:48,360 --> 00:04:52,480
Speaker 1: your total industrial audience. You brought up the private plaintiff lawsuits.

86
00:04:53,160 --> 00:04:56,080
Speaker 1: A lot of times those lawsuits are nothing more than,

87
00:04:56,160 --> 00:05:00,800
Speaker 1: you know, nuisance value. Kind of are these more serious? Well,

88
00:05:00,839 --> 00:05:04,039
Speaker 1: I think the claim that the short sellers will make

89
00:05:04,360 --> 00:05:07,760
Speaker 1: that they really did lose money, uh and that he

90
00:05:07,880 --> 00:05:10,680
Speaker 1: had a bad motive trying to punish them, I think

91
00:05:10,720 --> 00:05:14,479
Speaker 1: they will push that intensively the other private suits. The

92
00:05:14,560 --> 00:05:17,880
Speaker 1: problem is the market price has basically gone down to

93
00:05:17,920 --> 00:05:21,479
Speaker 1: where it was before that original tweet announcing that funding

94
00:05:21,560 --> 00:05:25,440
Speaker 1: was secured. There aren't great damages, and by his tweet

95
00:05:25,480 --> 00:05:28,559
Speaker 1: earlier this week, he gave what he thought was all

96
00:05:28,680 --> 00:05:32,159
Speaker 1: the full disclosure necessary that will be seen as corrective

97
00:05:32,200 --> 00:05:35,480
Speaker 1: disclosure that cuts off any future damages. So I don't

98
00:05:35,480 --> 00:05:38,960
Speaker 1: think there is a huge payday here for the private planets,

99
00:05:39,040 --> 00:05:42,039
Speaker 1: other than possibly for the short sellers who claimed to

100
00:05:42,080 --> 00:05:45,200
Speaker 1: have lost over a billion dollars and UH definitely want

101
00:05:45,200 --> 00:05:47,400
Speaker 1: to get some of that back. I think he has

102
00:05:47,440 --> 00:05:49,960
Speaker 1: to worry first about the SEC suit and see if

103
00:05:50,000 --> 00:05:52,560
Speaker 1: he reached understanding with them, and then he's got to

104
00:05:52,600 --> 00:05:55,240
Speaker 1: work about coming forward with the transaction that the board

105
00:05:55,279 --> 00:05:57,880
Speaker 1: will buy. The other factor. I think you should be

106
00:05:57,920 --> 00:06:01,680
Speaker 1: aware of Tesla right now something like one thousand, one

107
00:06:01,760 --> 00:06:05,280
Speaker 1: hundred and fifty shareholders in order to go private, in

108
00:06:05,400 --> 00:06:09,760
Speaker 1: order to escape the SEC's continuous disclosure system with his

109
00:06:09,880 --> 00:06:12,800
Speaker 1: quarterly earnings report, he has to get that number of

110
00:06:12,800 --> 00:06:16,760
Speaker 1: shareholders of record down below three. That's going to take

111
00:06:16,800 --> 00:06:18,719
Speaker 1: a lot of work. It's not quite clear to me

112
00:06:18,839 --> 00:06:21,960
Speaker 1: how he plans to do it. He can't. He could

113
00:06:22,000 --> 00:06:24,520
Speaker 1: buy out all the shareholders, but that's expensive. He doesn't

114
00:06:24,520 --> 00:06:26,839
Speaker 1: want to do that. He's going to need to buy out,

115
00:06:26,880 --> 00:06:30,680
Speaker 1: principally the small retail shareholders, and they may want more

116
00:06:30,720 --> 00:06:34,040
Speaker 1: money than he's offering. He's talked about setting up a

117
00:06:34,160 --> 00:06:37,599
Speaker 1: special purpose vehicle to which they would contribute their Tesla shares,

118
00:06:37,960 --> 00:06:42,360
Speaker 1: but that's complicated. That's the equivalent of a private placement there.

119
00:06:42,440 --> 00:06:44,520
Speaker 1: It's always a great pleasure to have you on. That's

120
00:06:44,600 --> 00:06:50,680
Speaker 1: John Coffee, professor at Columbia Law School. The jury is

121
00:06:50,720 --> 00:06:53,640
Speaker 1: now deliberating in the Tax and bankropt trial of former

122
00:06:53,680 --> 00:06:57,880
Speaker 1: Trump campaign chairman Paul Manifort. As he left the courthouse yesterday,

123
00:06:57,920 --> 00:07:02,040
Speaker 1: Manafort's attorney, Kevin Downing's that his client is feeling confident.

124
00:07:03,040 --> 00:07:05,520
Speaker 1: Mr Mantafar is very happy with how things went today.

125
00:07:06,000 --> 00:07:09,200
Speaker 1: His defense team got to address the jury, point out

126
00:07:09,320 --> 00:07:12,240
Speaker 1: the shortcomings in the government's case and explained as a

127
00:07:12,280 --> 00:07:15,680
Speaker 1: government has not met their burden approof. My guess is

128
00:07:15,720 --> 00:07:19,040
Speaker 1: Jimmy Garoule, professor at Notre Dame Law School. Jimmy, the

129
00:07:19,120 --> 00:07:22,400
Speaker 1: prosecutors inclosing yesterday had to get around the fact that

130
00:07:22,840 --> 00:07:25,960
Speaker 1: their star witness, Rick gates credibility took some hits on

131
00:07:26,040 --> 00:07:30,880
Speaker 1: cross examination, and prosecutors here told jurors that Gates was

132
00:07:30,920 --> 00:07:33,680
Speaker 1: not a boy scout. I've heard so many different versions

133
00:07:33,680 --> 00:07:35,880
Speaker 1: of that over the years. Not a boy scout, not

134
00:07:35,960 --> 00:07:41,400
Speaker 1: a choir boy, etcetera. Does it work? It's I think

135
00:07:41,440 --> 00:07:44,520
Speaker 1: what works here is the fact that the government is

136
00:07:44,520 --> 00:07:47,240
Speaker 1: not asking the jury to return to guilty where it

137
00:07:47,320 --> 00:07:51,600
Speaker 1: based solely on Gates's testimony. In addition to Gates's testimony,

138
00:07:51,640 --> 00:07:57,240
Speaker 1: the government has introduced a mountain of evidence of documentary evidence,

139
00:07:57,280 --> 00:08:03,880
Speaker 1: including bank records, tax records, emails, texts um So, I

140
00:08:03,920 --> 00:08:07,800
Speaker 1: think that there is uh compelling evidence to return a

141
00:08:07,840 --> 00:08:11,680
Speaker 1: guilty work against Maniples despite the problems with the credibility

142
00:08:11,680 --> 00:08:15,720
Speaker 1: of Rick Cage. Yes, the prosecutor said, the star witness

143
00:08:15,720 --> 00:08:18,840
Speaker 1: in this case is the documents. Now turning to the

144
00:08:18,880 --> 00:08:22,720
Speaker 1: defense closing. Closing argument, as you know, is supposed to

145
00:08:22,720 --> 00:08:25,880
Speaker 1: be a marshaling of the evidence and not contain new

146
00:08:25,920 --> 00:08:29,440
Speaker 1: information that's not supported by the evidence. But the defense

147
00:08:29,760 --> 00:08:34,040
Speaker 1: seems to have done that once suggesting that Maniford signatures

148
00:08:34,040 --> 00:08:38,359
Speaker 1: on foreign bank records were forged. What does the prosecution

149
00:08:38,400 --> 00:08:41,520
Speaker 1: do at that point? Well, I think that that that

150
00:08:41,559 --> 00:08:44,280
Speaker 1: I think at the issue was addressed by Judge Ellis

151
00:08:44,280 --> 00:08:46,920
Speaker 1: and his jury in his instructions to the jury. The

152
00:08:47,000 --> 00:08:52,800
Speaker 1: jury has been instructed that they are only to consider evidence, facts, documents,

153
00:08:52,880 --> 00:08:57,839
Speaker 1: testimony that's been received in evidence in the case. So

154
00:08:58,280 --> 00:09:02,440
Speaker 1: these sides of statements that extraneous, that that are outside

155
00:09:02,440 --> 00:09:05,479
Speaker 1: of the evidence has been received, are to be discarded

156
00:09:05,520 --> 00:09:07,800
Speaker 1: by by the evidence by the jury and not considered

157
00:09:07,840 --> 00:09:11,080
Speaker 1: at all. The defense during the trial has made you know,

158
00:09:11,280 --> 00:09:14,120
Speaker 1: they call the prosecutor, they referred him as the special

159
00:09:14,160 --> 00:09:18,920
Speaker 1: prosecutor Mueller Mueller, and during the closings, They suggested that

160
00:09:18,960 --> 00:09:22,240
Speaker 1: the Special Council had charge Mantifort in order to get

161
00:09:22,320 --> 00:09:26,640
Speaker 1: him to flip on Trump. Do these insinuations might they

162
00:09:26,679 --> 00:09:30,760
Speaker 1: work on a jury? I don't think so. I think

163
00:09:30,800 --> 00:09:32,840
Speaker 1: the jury is too smart for this. At the end

164
00:09:32,880 --> 00:09:36,640
Speaker 1: of the day, the real difficulty that that the defense

165
00:09:36,720 --> 00:09:39,280
Speaker 1: has is dealing with a documentary evidence. I mean, there

166
00:09:39,280 --> 00:09:43,200
Speaker 1: there is evidence in an FBI forensic accountant introduced that

167
00:09:43,760 --> 00:09:46,760
Speaker 1: there were thirty one foreign bank accouncil we're tied to

168
00:09:46,880 --> 00:09:50,800
Speaker 1: to Manaphort Accouncil located in Cyprus, St. Vincent and the

169
00:09:50,840 --> 00:09:55,120
Speaker 1: Grenadines and in the UK, and those accounts contain millions

170
00:09:55,160 --> 00:09:59,120
Speaker 1: of dollars I think at least sixty million dollars of

171
00:09:59,160 --> 00:10:01,640
Speaker 1: which it was not with ported as taxable income. So

172
00:10:01,720 --> 00:10:03,960
Speaker 1: I think this is a kind of a bait and switch.

173
00:10:04,240 --> 00:10:06,800
Speaker 1: This is the defense trying to shift the tension away

174
00:10:06,800 --> 00:10:10,080
Speaker 1: from the real issue, the real evidence, on some on

175
00:10:10,200 --> 00:10:12,800
Speaker 1: some tangential point, and I don't think it's gonna be effective.

176
00:10:13,880 --> 00:10:18,080
Speaker 1: When the case first started, everyone, most legal experts were

177
00:10:18,120 --> 00:10:21,640
Speaker 1: saying the evidence is overwhelming here, you know, and sort

178
00:10:21,640 --> 00:10:24,080
Speaker 1: of saying this is this is almost a slam dunk

179
00:10:24,120 --> 00:10:27,320
Speaker 1: but as the case progressed and there are more problems

180
00:10:27,360 --> 00:10:31,120
Speaker 1: with the judge, and you had a really tough cross

181
00:10:31,200 --> 00:10:35,320
Speaker 1: examination of Rick Gates by the defense, it seems as

182
00:10:35,320 --> 00:10:38,680
Speaker 1: if that open and shut cases is not so much

183
00:10:38,760 --> 00:10:43,560
Speaker 1: so anymore? Are you? Would you be surprised shocked if

184
00:10:43,880 --> 00:10:48,160
Speaker 1: if there was not an acquittal, but perhaps but hung jury,

185
00:10:48,760 --> 00:10:51,120
Speaker 1: I would be. I would be shocked because I think

186
00:10:51,160 --> 00:10:55,520
Speaker 1: that the documentary evidences is overwhelming in this particular case.

187
00:10:55,800 --> 00:10:59,640
Speaker 1: I might not be shocked if the jury returned perhaps

188
00:10:59,640 --> 00:11:02,520
Speaker 1: a not guilty verdict on a couple of counts, but

189
00:11:02,679 --> 00:11:04,800
Speaker 1: I'm I'm confident the jury is going to return in

190
00:11:04,800 --> 00:11:08,160
Speaker 1: guilty verdict, if not on all eighteen counts against maniphor

191
00:11:08,640 --> 00:11:13,559
Speaker 1: on a supermajority of those counts. This this is, as

192
00:11:13,600 --> 00:11:16,800
Speaker 1: everyone has been saying, this is a test, the first

193
00:11:16,920 --> 00:11:21,800
Speaker 1: courtroom test of the Special Council. And I felt I

194
00:11:21,840 --> 00:11:25,560
Speaker 1: thought that the the cross examination of of Gates as

195
00:11:25,600 --> 00:11:28,679
Speaker 1: I as I mentioned was was really tough and exposed

196
00:11:28,840 --> 00:11:32,720
Speaker 1: some lies on his part. And it seems surprising that

197
00:11:32,720 --> 00:11:36,400
Speaker 1: that the prosecution didn't prepare him better as a witness.

198
00:11:37,520 --> 00:11:39,640
Speaker 1: I don't think so. I would tend to disagree with

199
00:11:39,679 --> 00:11:42,880
Speaker 1: that I mean, remember, Gates quite guilty to lying to

200
00:11:42,960 --> 00:11:47,520
Speaker 1: the FBI. I mean, he admitted that he is going

201
00:11:47,600 --> 00:11:50,480
Speaker 1: to be sent and it's likely to spend some some

202
00:11:50,559 --> 00:11:53,880
Speaker 1: time in jail for that. So the prosecution never presented

203
00:11:53,960 --> 00:11:57,680
Speaker 1: him as a as an honest person. I think clearly

204
00:11:58,080 --> 00:12:00,319
Speaker 1: he is a thief. He is a liar, and the

205
00:12:00,440 --> 00:12:04,560
Speaker 1: question is whether he whether Manaphort is a bigger liar

206
00:12:04,600 --> 00:12:07,240
Speaker 1: and bigger thief than than Gates. And let's not forget

207
00:12:07,520 --> 00:12:12,280
Speaker 1: Gates work for Manaphort. Gates was taking constructions and directions

208
00:12:12,320 --> 00:12:16,800
Speaker 1: for Manaphorts, so he wasn't some independent after in this

209
00:12:17,040 --> 00:12:19,720
Speaker 1: uh in this scandal were they able to make inroads

210
00:12:19,760 --> 00:12:22,840
Speaker 1: though for for example, he admitted to one affair on

211
00:12:23,040 --> 00:12:25,920
Speaker 1: direct and then on cross it turns out there we're

212
00:12:25,960 --> 00:12:30,680
Speaker 1: probably more than one. The fact that the Gates had

213
00:12:30,760 --> 00:12:35,600
Speaker 1: had conceded to committing one affair or five affairs, that

214
00:12:35,640 --> 00:12:39,800
Speaker 1: doesn't mean that Manaphort is innocent of bank fraud and

215
00:12:39,920 --> 00:12:43,000
Speaker 1: tax fraud. Again, I think it's an attempt to shift,

216
00:12:43,160 --> 00:12:46,120
Speaker 1: attempt to shift the jury's attention away from the real

217
00:12:46,200 --> 00:12:49,320
Speaker 1: level and to make Manaphorts a bad guy. But again

218
00:12:49,640 --> 00:12:52,000
Speaker 1: it's Menaphort is going to be convicted. All right, we

219
00:12:52,080 --> 00:12:55,160
Speaker 1: are going to see if you are correct. That's Jimmy Garoule,

220
00:12:55,160 --> 00:12:58,400
Speaker 1: a professor Notre Dame Law School. Thanks for listening to

221
00:12:58,440 --> 00:13:01,720
Speaker 1: the Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can subscribe and listen to

222
00:13:01,760 --> 00:13:05,480
Speaker 1: the show on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, and on bloomberg dot

223
00:13:05,520 --> 00:13:10,040
Speaker 1: com slash podcast. I am June Brosso. This is Bloomberg