WEBVTT - Blanche AG Nomination Moves Forward & Betting on Maduro Raid 

0:00:02.759 --> 0:00:07.520
<v Speaker 1>This is Bloomberg Law with June Grossel from Bloomberg Radio.

0:00:08.680 --> 0:00:11.959
<v Speaker 2>The problem with confirming Todd Blanche is that he has

0:00:12.119 --> 0:00:16.400
<v Speaker 2>never been able to shed his role as criminal defense

0:00:16.480 --> 0:00:21.200
<v Speaker 2>lawyer for Donald Trump. He just can't do it. He

0:00:21.239 --> 0:00:24.560
<v Speaker 2>does not represent the American people now. He will never

0:00:24.640 --> 0:00:27.560
<v Speaker 2>represent the American people. He will never do what's best

0:00:27.600 --> 0:00:30.720
<v Speaker 2>for the American people. He will only do its best

0:00:30.880 --> 0:00:32.200
<v Speaker 2>for Donald Trump.

0:00:33.000 --> 0:00:36.320
<v Speaker 3>When he has sworn in as Attorney General, he will

0:00:36.560 --> 0:00:41.640
<v Speaker 3>have to swear to uphold, support and defend the Constitution,

0:00:42.200 --> 0:00:45.479
<v Speaker 3>but we know that oath will take a back seat

0:00:45.880 --> 0:00:48.320
<v Speaker 3>to his loyalty to the president.

0:00:48.760 --> 0:00:53.040
<v Speaker 4>It was a consistent criticism from Democratic senators like Adam

0:00:53.120 --> 0:00:57.120
<v Speaker 4>Schiff and Masie Herono to the nomination of Todd Blanche

0:00:57.120 --> 0:01:00.800
<v Speaker 4>to be the next Attorney General. He's apparent willingness to

0:01:00.920 --> 0:01:05.759
<v Speaker 4>aggressively push to meet all of President Trump's demands, eroding

0:01:05.800 --> 0:01:09.399
<v Speaker 4>the traditional independence of the Department of Justice. It had

0:01:09.440 --> 0:01:13.640
<v Speaker 4>looked like Blanche's nomination was in jeopardy under pressure from

0:01:13.680 --> 0:01:18.559
<v Speaker 4>two Republicans over the controversial deal settling Trump's lawsuit against

0:01:18.600 --> 0:01:22.319
<v Speaker 4>the IRS with a one point eight billion dollar so

0:01:22.440 --> 0:01:27.760
<v Speaker 4>called anti Weaponization fund to compensate his allies, but Republican

0:01:27.840 --> 0:01:32.200
<v Speaker 4>Senators John Cornyn and Tom Tillis dropped their opposition after

0:01:32.280 --> 0:01:36.319
<v Speaker 4>Blanche posted an order rescinding the fund late Sunday night.

0:01:36.880 --> 0:01:39.840
<v Speaker 5>I've never liked this seventeen seventy six fund. It made

0:01:39.840 --> 0:01:41.240
<v Speaker 5>no sense to me, and I thought it was an

0:01:41.280 --> 0:01:44.320
<v Speaker 5>insult to the police officers of the people that defended

0:01:44.400 --> 0:01:48.720
<v Speaker 5>us on January sixth. It's done, it's been rescinded, and

0:01:48.880 --> 0:01:49.960
<v Speaker 5>I am satisfied.

0:01:50.400 --> 0:01:54.840
<v Speaker 4>Tillis may be satisfied, but Democratic senators like Corey Booker

0:01:55.120 --> 0:01:59.200
<v Speaker 4>say the papers attached to Blanche's post have no legal

0:01:59.280 --> 0:02:01.280
<v Speaker 4>significance at all.

0:02:01.520 --> 0:02:07.840
<v Speaker 6>This is ridiculous. We got nothing, no guarantees whatsoever that

0:02:07.920 --> 0:02:11.360
<v Speaker 6>this slush one still can't go forward. We got nothing

0:02:12.040 --> 0:02:14.960
<v Speaker 6>that the president of the United States can't cheat on

0:02:15.040 --> 0:02:17.120
<v Speaker 6>his taxes and have no accountability.

0:02:17.560 --> 0:02:21.399
<v Speaker 4>The vote to advance Blanche's nomination was twelve to ten,

0:02:21.760 --> 0:02:25.960
<v Speaker 4>along party lines. Joining me is an expert in constitutional law,

0:02:26.240 --> 0:02:30.320
<v Speaker 4>David super, a professor at Georgetown Law. David so tell

0:02:30.400 --> 0:02:34.720
<v Speaker 4>us about the two pages Blanche posted, an order signed

0:02:34.720 --> 0:02:38.480
<v Speaker 4>by him, and an unsigned memo from the Justice Department.

0:02:39.400 --> 0:02:42.320
<v Speaker 7>He basically typed up what he said at the hearing

0:02:42.400 --> 0:02:47.480
<v Speaker 7>and posted it. There's literally nothing new there, and indeed

0:02:47.520 --> 0:02:49.480
<v Speaker 7>he said there was nothing new there. He's telling the

0:02:49.560 --> 0:02:53.280
<v Speaker 7>truth on that. I'm sure he prepared his talking points

0:02:53.320 --> 0:02:56.320
<v Speaker 7>for the hearing very very carefully, that those words were

0:02:56.800 --> 0:03:02.880
<v Speaker 7>not extemporaneous, and these are the same. He says, looking

0:03:03.160 --> 0:03:10.640
<v Speaker 7>entirely retrospectively, that the so called weaponization fund did not

0:03:10.880 --> 0:03:13.920
<v Speaker 7>get off the ground. He does not make any promises

0:03:13.960 --> 0:03:17.320
<v Speaker 7>that they won't do something like that tomorrow, but he says,

0:03:17.440 --> 0:03:20.720
<v Speaker 7>and I think this is historically actuate, it did not start.

0:03:21.040 --> 0:03:25.400
<v Speaker 7>And then he says that the immunity for Trump is

0:03:25.560 --> 0:03:29.640
<v Speaker 7>limited to Trump, his family, and his organization, which were

0:03:29.680 --> 0:03:33.480
<v Speaker 7>the parties the case. We always knew them. So he

0:03:33.680 --> 0:03:38.720
<v Speaker 7>is setting to rest the fears of people who can't read,

0:03:39.400 --> 0:03:43.040
<v Speaker 7>but he is leaving the rest of us just as

0:03:43.080 --> 0:03:44.840
<v Speaker 7>nervous as we were before.

0:03:44.560 --> 0:03:48.520
<v Speaker 4>The settlement agreement. Says, this settlement agreement may be modified

0:03:48.680 --> 0:03:52.920
<v Speaker 4>only with the written agreement of the parties. And President

0:03:52.920 --> 0:03:56.640
<v Speaker 4>Trump didn't sign anything, and he told reporters on Wednesday

0:03:56.640 --> 0:03:57.920
<v Speaker 4>that he didn't even look at this.

0:03:59.000 --> 0:04:04.440
<v Speaker 7>Yeah, there's many holes here, it's hard to count them.

0:04:04.920 --> 0:04:09.360
<v Speaker 7>Blanche says, the agreement didn't go forward, but as you note,

0:04:10.120 --> 0:04:12.720
<v Speaker 7>they don't modify it, and he doesn't have authority to

0:04:12.800 --> 0:04:17.080
<v Speaker 7>modify it, unless you say, well, actually, he's Trump's lawyer

0:04:17.160 --> 0:04:20.280
<v Speaker 7>in all respects, so he can modify it on behalf

0:04:20.320 --> 0:04:23.080
<v Speaker 7>of both the plaintiffs and the defendants, which I don't

0:04:23.120 --> 0:04:25.800
<v Speaker 7>think is quite the case. But he has no authority

0:04:25.839 --> 0:04:29.240
<v Speaker 7>to modify it because it requires the agreement of the

0:04:29.279 --> 0:04:32.920
<v Speaker 7>plaintiff's council. So he didn't modify it. He just said

0:04:32.960 --> 0:04:35.800
<v Speaker 7>they didn't act on it, which is true, but doesn't

0:04:35.800 --> 0:04:38.560
<v Speaker 7>mean they won't act on it in the immediate future

0:04:38.560 --> 0:04:43.839
<v Speaker 7>as soon as he's confirmed. And he says that they

0:04:43.920 --> 0:04:46.440
<v Speaker 7>haven't put the money out there, but he doesn't promise

0:04:46.600 --> 0:04:49.800
<v Speaker 7>not to raid the Justice Fund for payoffs for more

0:04:50.120 --> 0:04:54.279
<v Speaker 7>Trump affiliated law breakers. The judgment Fund is still there,

0:04:54.960 --> 0:05:00.400
<v Speaker 7>and if Senator Cornyin really was concerned about this, he

0:05:00.480 --> 0:05:04.359
<v Speaker 7>should have asked mister blanche for the administration's agreement to

0:05:04.440 --> 0:05:07.720
<v Speaker 7>an amendment to the Justice Fund, a quick unanimous consent

0:05:07.839 --> 0:05:11.760
<v Speaker 7>bill amending the Justice Fund to make it unavailable to

0:05:11.839 --> 0:05:15.480
<v Speaker 7>pay for settlements with anyone affiliated with the president. That

0:05:15.520 --> 0:05:17.920
<v Speaker 7>would be an easy fix to make sure this never

0:05:17.960 --> 0:05:20.680
<v Speaker 7>happens again, as far as we can tell, that was

0:05:20.800 --> 0:05:22.799
<v Speaker 7>even requested, much less done.

0:05:23.080 --> 0:05:27.560
<v Speaker 4>Cornyn admitted that the written assurances Blanche gave could later

0:05:27.600 --> 0:05:32.240
<v Speaker 4>be reversed, but said despite that, he believed the commitments

0:05:32.279 --> 0:05:35.000
<v Speaker 4>that Blanche had given him in recent days. I mean,

0:05:35.040 --> 0:05:39.080
<v Speaker 4>this reminds me of Susan Collins saying she believed Brett

0:05:39.160 --> 0:05:42.360
<v Speaker 4>Kavanaugh when he said that, you know, roe versus Wade

0:05:42.560 --> 0:05:43.280
<v Speaker 4>was safe.

0:05:43.640 --> 0:05:46.080
<v Speaker 7>And then when we looked at it, it turned out

0:05:46.160 --> 0:05:51.280
<v Speaker 7>that Senator Collins had accepted as an assurance something that

0:05:51.320 --> 0:05:56.279
<v Speaker 7>Shirley wasn't Justice Kavanaugh and did the justice as Alito

0:05:56.440 --> 0:06:01.000
<v Speaker 7>and Roberts before him had said that Roe v. Wade

0:06:01.120 --> 0:06:05.200
<v Speaker 7>was settled law, which is obviously true, but he also

0:06:05.600 --> 0:06:08.159
<v Speaker 7>was seeking a job where he would have the authority

0:06:08.240 --> 0:06:12.280
<v Speaker 7>to unsettle it, which he did. And so they describe

0:06:12.360 --> 0:06:16.799
<v Speaker 7>the present willout making any promises for the future, and

0:06:17.040 --> 0:06:21.960
<v Speaker 7>the senators that vote for their confirmation then pretend to

0:06:22.000 --> 0:06:27.040
<v Speaker 7>be surprised when they act on powers that they clearly

0:06:27.120 --> 0:06:32.680
<v Speaker 7>had clearly retained and never swore off. I can absolutely

0:06:32.760 --> 0:06:38.680
<v Speaker 7>believe that if all Todd Blanche said in private to

0:06:38.720 --> 0:06:40.960
<v Speaker 7>Senator Cornyn was more or less what he said in

0:06:41.040 --> 0:06:43.599
<v Speaker 7>public at the hearing that he will adhere to that

0:06:43.800 --> 0:06:46.720
<v Speaker 7>the old settlement fund won't go forward. There will be

0:06:46.760 --> 0:06:50.839
<v Speaker 7>a new settlement fund that you and I and anybody

0:06:50.839 --> 0:06:53.480
<v Speaker 7>else who doesn't have an electron microscope won't be able

0:06:53.480 --> 0:06:56.119
<v Speaker 7>to tell from the old one, but it'll be new.

0:06:56.279 --> 0:06:58.520
<v Speaker 7>So he will have nominally kept his word.

0:07:00.200 --> 0:07:03.880
<v Speaker 4>Also, a federal judge in Florida had issued a ruling

0:07:04.040 --> 0:07:08.880
<v Speaker 4>preventing Trump from enforcing the settlements, saying that the lawsuit

0:07:08.960 --> 0:07:12.720
<v Speaker 4>was brought for an improper purpose to gain the imprimature

0:07:12.880 --> 0:07:16.080
<v Speaker 4>of judicial legitimacy for a settlement that had no viable

0:07:16.120 --> 0:07:20.320
<v Speaker 4>basis in law or fact. Trump on July thirty first

0:07:20.680 --> 0:07:23.720
<v Speaker 4>filed notice with the court that he's going to appeal

0:07:23.800 --> 0:07:26.040
<v Speaker 4>that ruling. What does that tell you?

0:07:26.600 --> 0:07:29.679
<v Speaker 7>It tells you that the weaponization Fund is not dead,

0:07:30.160 --> 0:07:35.680
<v Speaker 7>that the tax community is not gone, and that this

0:07:35.960 --> 0:07:40.720
<v Speaker 7>is just a second saga in the collusive litigation. Because

0:07:40.720 --> 0:07:44.760
<v Speaker 7>of course Trump appeals that decision, and then he orders

0:07:44.760 --> 0:07:48.920
<v Speaker 7>the Justice Department not to fight the appeal, so it

0:07:48.960 --> 0:07:53.240
<v Speaker 7>will be uncontested in the appellate court. I hope the

0:07:53.280 --> 0:07:58.600
<v Speaker 7>Eleventh Circuit has the integrity to appoint someone to participate

0:07:58.640 --> 0:08:00.880
<v Speaker 7>as a friend of the court to make the arguments

0:08:00.920 --> 0:08:05.120
<v Speaker 7>for affirming what the district court did. But saying we're

0:08:05.160 --> 0:08:08.720
<v Speaker 7>going through more judicial proceedings where we control both sides

0:08:08.760 --> 0:08:12.320
<v Speaker 7>of the case should give nobody any reassurance. The whole

0:08:12.400 --> 0:08:15.320
<v Speaker 7>point of our system is that is an adversary system,

0:08:15.720 --> 0:08:18.480
<v Speaker 7>and it only works well, it only purports to work

0:08:18.520 --> 0:08:22.160
<v Speaker 7>well when there are serious advocates on both sides. There's

0:08:22.200 --> 0:08:23.679
<v Speaker 7>never been that in this case.

0:08:24.200 --> 0:08:28.640
<v Speaker 4>Democratic centers voice their opposition to Blanche for other reasons,

0:08:29.120 --> 0:08:32.960
<v Speaker 4>the departure of thousands of attorneys and staff at the

0:08:33.080 --> 0:08:37.240
<v Speaker 4>Justice Department, the weaponization of the department to pursue Trump's

0:08:37.240 --> 0:08:41.600
<v Speaker 4>political enemies. He's protecting Trump in the bungle release of

0:08:41.640 --> 0:08:45.080
<v Speaker 4>the Epstein files, to name a few. How do you

0:08:45.240 --> 0:08:48.319
<v Speaker 4>judge his performance as acting Attorney General?

0:08:49.360 --> 0:08:57.160
<v Speaker 7>Mister Blanche has taken more than two hundred years of careful,

0:08:57.960 --> 0:09:03.280
<v Speaker 7>mostly nonpartisan professionalism at the Justice Department and thrown it

0:09:03.320 --> 0:09:07.440
<v Speaker 7>in the trash. And he has shown everybody just how

0:09:07.559 --> 0:09:14.559
<v Speaker 7>politicized the Department could be. When someone single handedly destroys

0:09:15.040 --> 0:09:18.319
<v Speaker 7>the tradition of an agency, he should not be continued

0:09:18.360 --> 0:09:23.000
<v Speaker 7>in a position of leading that agency. And if mister

0:09:23.040 --> 0:09:26.280
<v Speaker 7>Trump is determined to have Todd Blanche there. He should

0:09:26.280 --> 0:09:29.800
<v Speaker 7>be serving in an unconfirmed capacity. What he will now

0:09:29.920 --> 0:09:33.720
<v Speaker 7>have is the blessing of the United States Senate, which

0:09:33.840 --> 0:09:36.040
<v Speaker 7>was well aware of all the things that he did.

0:09:36.720 --> 0:09:41.440
<v Speaker 7>This will, of course become enormously controversial next time we

0:09:41.520 --> 0:09:46.120
<v Speaker 7>have a democratic administration and a democratic Attorney general tries

0:09:46.160 --> 0:09:49.920
<v Speaker 7>to follow some of the presidents that mister Blanche set.

0:09:50.040 --> 0:09:53.520
<v Speaker 7>I hope a democratic attorney general won't follow these precedents

0:09:53.880 --> 0:09:57.120
<v Speaker 7>because they're just bad for the country. Whatever side of

0:09:57.120 --> 0:10:01.560
<v Speaker 7>the artisan eil you're on. But he is completely reconceived

0:10:01.760 --> 0:10:07.400
<v Speaker 7>the Justice Department. Mister Trump has famously complained that he

0:10:07.520 --> 0:10:11.920
<v Speaker 7>needed a roy Cohne, he needed a dirty lawyer to

0:10:11.960 --> 0:10:14.839
<v Speaker 7>push the limits and get him what he wants, and

0:10:15.080 --> 0:10:16.079
<v Speaker 7>I think he's found one.

0:10:17.040 --> 0:10:21.880
<v Speaker 4>I was surprised that the Epstein victim's opposition to Blench

0:10:22.040 --> 0:10:26.320
<v Speaker 4>and all that went on there didn't cause more Republicans

0:10:26.360 --> 0:10:30.800
<v Speaker 4>to hesitate about Blench, because that's been an issue that

0:10:30.960 --> 0:10:34.480
<v Speaker 4>President Trump has been unable to put behind him.

0:10:34.840 --> 0:10:37.640
<v Speaker 7>I think the word must have gone out that they've

0:10:37.679 --> 0:10:41.720
<v Speaker 7>released pretty much everything they have that doesn't terribly incriminate

0:10:41.760 --> 0:10:45.480
<v Speaker 7>the president or perhaps some members of Congress as well,

0:10:46.880 --> 0:10:50.080
<v Speaker 7>and that the word is that they don't dare push

0:10:50.160 --> 0:10:54.439
<v Speaker 7>any farther because the results will be catastrophic. I think

0:10:54.480 --> 0:10:57.800
<v Speaker 7>a great many people who voted for the president, and

0:10:57.840 --> 0:11:00.840
<v Speaker 7>who voted for Republican members of Congress to support the

0:11:00.840 --> 0:11:06.200
<v Speaker 7>president would be shocked, appalled, and deeply disillusioned if they

0:11:06.360 --> 0:11:10.440
<v Speaker 7>found out that the President was as closely involved in

0:11:10.520 --> 0:11:16.120
<v Speaker 7>mister Epstein's criminal activities as we keep being told. And

0:11:16.559 --> 0:11:21.640
<v Speaker 7>the presence in these files of references to documents that

0:11:21.679 --> 0:11:25.760
<v Speaker 7>have not been released is an ongoing problem. I think

0:11:26.000 --> 0:11:29.000
<v Speaker 7>the decision has been made by Republicans and that they're

0:11:29.080 --> 0:11:32.839
<v Speaker 7>largely following the party line to not press further on

0:11:32.880 --> 0:11:35.760
<v Speaker 7>this because there's nothing else that could be done that

0:11:35.760 --> 0:11:36.839
<v Speaker 7>wouldn't be destructive.

0:11:37.080 --> 0:11:39.840
<v Speaker 4>Stay with me, David. Coming up next, I'll continue this

0:11:39.960 --> 0:11:44.280
<v Speaker 4>conversation with Georgetown law professor David Super. What's likely to

0:11:44.320 --> 0:11:47.480
<v Speaker 4>happen when the full Senate votes on the confirmation of

0:11:47.559 --> 0:11:49.640
<v Speaker 4>Blanche This is Bloomberg.

0:11:53.520 --> 0:11:56.800
<v Speaker 2>I know I'm on that list. The President reiterated just

0:11:56.840 --> 0:11:59.560
<v Speaker 2>the other night that he hates me, which I could

0:11:59.559 --> 0:12:04.560
<v Speaker 2>tell you wounds me deeply. He's entitled to his own

0:12:05.480 --> 0:12:08.400
<v Speaker 2>views about me or anybody else. He is not entitled, however,

0:12:08.800 --> 0:12:11.640
<v Speaker 2>to use the Department of Justice to go after his

0:12:11.720 --> 0:12:15.200
<v Speaker 2>political opponents. And the day we say that's okay, and

0:12:15.240 --> 0:12:18.240
<v Speaker 2>the day we confirm an attorney general who says that's okay,

0:12:19.520 --> 0:12:23.120
<v Speaker 2>is the day that the rule of law becomes merely

0:12:23.400 --> 0:12:26.079
<v Speaker 2>an unenforceable idea.

0:12:26.880 --> 0:12:29.880
<v Speaker 4>Senator Adam Schiff was one of the Democrats on the

0:12:29.920 --> 0:12:34.359
<v Speaker 4>Senate Judiciary Committee who voiced their opposition to the nomination

0:12:34.480 --> 0:12:38.240
<v Speaker 4>of President Trump's former criminal defense lawyer to be the

0:12:38.280 --> 0:12:42.679
<v Speaker 4>next Attorney General of the United States. But Blanche cleared

0:12:42.720 --> 0:12:45.920
<v Speaker 4>that first Senate hurdle after he struck a deal with

0:12:46.040 --> 0:12:51.000
<v Speaker 4>two outgoing Republican members about President Trump's one point eight

0:12:51.120 --> 0:12:56.520
<v Speaker 4>billion dollar so called Anti Weaponization Fund. But Senator Dick Durbin,

0:12:56.720 --> 0:13:01.840
<v Speaker 4>the ranking Democrat on the committee, accused Blood of perjuring himself,

0:13:02.280 --> 0:13:05.679
<v Speaker 4>saying Blanche told him creating the fund was a mistake

0:13:05.920 --> 0:13:08.840
<v Speaker 4>in front of witnesses during a private meeting in his

0:13:08.960 --> 0:13:13.320
<v Speaker 4>office and then lied by denying that during his confirmation hearing.

0:13:14.040 --> 0:13:17.000
<v Speaker 8>Prior to this hearing, mister Blanche told me the quote

0:13:17.240 --> 0:13:21.440
<v Speaker 8>made a mistake close quote. By creating the January sixth

0:13:21.480 --> 0:13:24.360
<v Speaker 8>slush fund? Where did he say it? In my office

0:13:24.880 --> 0:13:29.280
<v Speaker 8>with witnesses myself to what I'm about to say. When

0:13:29.400 --> 0:13:32.840
<v Speaker 8>asking me about this under oath, mister Blanche falsely claimed

0:13:33.000 --> 0:13:37.360
<v Speaker 8>that he never made this statement. That's not true. Mister

0:13:37.400 --> 0:13:41.240
<v Speaker 8>Blanche's willingness to casually lie under oath about a statement

0:13:41.280 --> 0:13:43.800
<v Speaker 8>he made in a room full of witnesses shows the

0:13:43.880 --> 0:13:47.160
<v Speaker 8>links he will go to to avoid offending President Trump.

0:13:47.800 --> 0:13:53.520
<v Speaker 4>Almost every Democratic senator expressed concerns about Blanche's weaponization of

0:13:53.559 --> 0:13:57.600
<v Speaker 4>the Justice Department to pursue Trump's agenda and go after

0:13:57.720 --> 0:14:01.400
<v Speaker 4>his political enemies. I've been talking to Georgetown law professor

0:14:01.520 --> 0:14:04.880
<v Speaker 4>David Super. Do you think Durbin was setting up a

0:14:04.920 --> 0:14:10.960
<v Speaker 4>possible impeachment action against Blanche? If the Democrats retake Congress?

0:14:12.080 --> 0:14:16.360
<v Speaker 7>Even if every single Republican seat turns over in the

0:14:16.440 --> 0:14:19.840
<v Speaker 7>election this fall, which it obviously won't, Democrats would not

0:14:19.920 --> 0:14:24.840
<v Speaker 7>have enough votes to convict on impeachment anybody. And Dick

0:14:24.920 --> 0:14:27.760
<v Speaker 7>Durbins a smart man who knows how to count, so

0:14:28.560 --> 0:14:32.360
<v Speaker 7>I don't think he's seriously thinking about impeachment. I think

0:14:32.400 --> 0:14:37.400
<v Speaker 7>impeachment serves no useful purpose under these circumstances. But I

0:14:37.440 --> 0:14:40.400
<v Speaker 7>do think that he is trying to lay down a

0:14:40.440 --> 0:14:45.120
<v Speaker 7>marker for some of these trumped up perjury cases that

0:14:45.200 --> 0:14:50.480
<v Speaker 7>the Justice Department is bringing, the suggestion that mister Comy

0:14:50.560 --> 0:14:54.640
<v Speaker 7>perjured himself by saying something that was allegedly a little

0:14:54.680 --> 0:14:59.640
<v Speaker 7>bit unclear at hearing the assertions that doctor Fauci perjured himself.

0:15:00.080 --> 0:15:02.600
<v Speaker 7>I think that mister Drmann is trying to show that

0:15:02.640 --> 0:15:04.040
<v Speaker 7>two can play at that game.

0:15:04.480 --> 0:15:08.400
<v Speaker 4>So now the nomination advances to the full Senate, where

0:15:08.400 --> 0:15:12.520
<v Speaker 4>the Republicans hold fifty three seats. All the Democrats will

0:15:12.600 --> 0:15:16.000
<v Speaker 4>vote against Blanche. Is there any Republican in the Senate

0:15:16.000 --> 0:15:17.360
<v Speaker 4>who might vote against him?

0:15:17.800 --> 0:15:20.280
<v Speaker 7>Susan Collins will vote no because she's in a tough

0:15:20.280 --> 0:15:24.280
<v Speaker 7>reelection fight, and they always let Susan Collins vote in

0:15:24.360 --> 0:15:28.880
<v Speaker 7>the liberal way when she's up for reelection. Social vote no.

0:15:30.080 --> 0:15:32.560
<v Speaker 7>I think Lisa Markowski will vote no because I think

0:15:32.600 --> 0:15:37.080
<v Speaker 7>she has integrity and recognizes that mister Blanche is weak

0:15:37.120 --> 0:15:39.640
<v Speaker 7>in that area. But I don't think you get a third.

0:15:40.320 --> 0:15:42.320
<v Speaker 7>Your two best bets for a third vote would be

0:15:42.360 --> 0:15:44.720
<v Speaker 7>corn in Antillis, and they've now declared themselves.

0:15:45.480 --> 0:15:49.200
<v Speaker 4>A few of the Democrats, in particular Sheldon Whitehouse and

0:15:49.320 --> 0:15:54.560
<v Speaker 4>Corey Booker mention that this was an embarrassment for the

0:15:54.680 --> 0:15:58.320
<v Speaker 4>Judiciary Committee that's supposed to be sort of a check

0:15:58.480 --> 0:16:04.040
<v Speaker 4>on the other branches of government and especially protective of

0:16:04.120 --> 0:16:05.560
<v Speaker 4>the justice system.

0:16:06.240 --> 0:16:10.800
<v Speaker 6>We are this is the Judiciary Committee. We're supposed to

0:16:10.880 --> 0:16:16.120
<v Speaker 6>be checking and balancing this nation. Why have people on

0:16:16.200 --> 0:16:18.920
<v Speaker 6>both sides of the aisle given up on any trust

0:16:18.960 --> 0:16:23.920
<v Speaker 6>in government is because we're surrendering any shred of integrity left.

0:16:24.920 --> 0:16:29.040
<v Speaker 6>And now we're letting an attorney general become the highest

0:16:29.120 --> 0:16:34.720
<v Speaker 6>law enforcement officer in the land and putting no holds whatsoever.

0:16:35.480 --> 0:16:39.880
<v Speaker 4>I mean, the Judiciary Committee has yet to reject a

0:16:39.960 --> 0:16:44.760
<v Speaker 4>nomination that came to them during Trump's second term. I mean,

0:16:45.040 --> 0:16:47.600
<v Speaker 4>what does that say about the Judiciary Committee.

0:16:48.120 --> 0:16:51.760
<v Speaker 7>Well, it says the institutional identity is dead, that the

0:16:51.840 --> 0:16:55.720
<v Speaker 7>time when members of Congress felt that they were members

0:16:55.720 --> 0:16:59.080
<v Speaker 7>of Congress first and Democrats are Republicans second is over,

0:16:59.400 --> 0:17:03.760
<v Speaker 7>and that they have taken orders from the administration in

0:17:03.800 --> 0:17:08.200
<v Speaker 7>a way that their predecessors not that long ago would

0:17:08.320 --> 0:17:11.240
<v Speaker 7>become very angry if they were asked to vote for

0:17:11.440 --> 0:17:14.359
<v Speaker 7>someone embarrassing like this, and they are now just falling

0:17:14.400 --> 0:17:18.680
<v Speaker 7>into line. The argument that was floated over the weekend,

0:17:18.920 --> 0:17:22.520
<v Speaker 7>is we won't get a better nominee from the president.

0:17:23.000 --> 0:17:26.720
<v Speaker 7>I'm not sure they would, But getting someone who has

0:17:26.880 --> 0:17:31.520
<v Speaker 7>not committed the gross violations of public trusts that mister

0:17:31.560 --> 0:17:36.359
<v Speaker 7>Blanche already has is better than waiving someone through who

0:17:36.400 --> 0:17:37.720
<v Speaker 7>has committed those acts.

0:17:37.880 --> 0:17:40.000
<v Speaker 4>What kind of an attorney general do you think he'll be?

0:17:40.359 --> 0:17:45.080
<v Speaker 4>Sometimes when people go into positions like that, they change

0:17:45.640 --> 0:17:46.280
<v Speaker 4>for the better.

0:17:46.400 --> 0:17:49.240
<v Speaker 7>Sometimes, Oh, I think this is what you see is

0:17:49.240 --> 0:17:53.440
<v Speaker 7>what you get, situation. He by all accounts, was a

0:17:53.600 --> 0:17:58.160
<v Speaker 7>competent and not particularly ideological prosecutor when he started out

0:17:58.200 --> 0:17:59.800
<v Speaker 7>as a lawyer, so he knows how to be a

0:17:59.800 --> 0:18:03.000
<v Speaker 7>good lawyer. But he's made a decision in his life

0:18:03.080 --> 0:18:06.080
<v Speaker 7>and there's no reason to think he would change, particularly

0:18:06.160 --> 0:18:08.959
<v Speaker 7>since he can be dismissed at any time. So I

0:18:08.960 --> 0:18:12.880
<v Speaker 7>would not expect him to stand up to the president now.

0:18:12.960 --> 0:18:15.400
<v Speaker 7>I would not expect him to say no to the president.

0:18:15.960 --> 0:18:20.160
<v Speaker 7>I would not expect any scintilla of moderation out of him.

0:18:20.680 --> 0:18:24.639
<v Speaker 7>The Justice Department is just a great, big Trump law firm. Now. Obviously,

0:18:24.680 --> 0:18:31.560
<v Speaker 7>Pam Bondi looked like a complete Trump acolyte coming in,

0:18:31.640 --> 0:18:34.639
<v Speaker 7>and she served as Attorney General in exactly that way.

0:18:35.480 --> 0:18:41.240
<v Speaker 7>She was fired basically for doing something that she had

0:18:41.280 --> 0:18:45.159
<v Speaker 7>promised to do with Trump's blessing that blew up in

0:18:45.240 --> 0:18:48.879
<v Speaker 7>his face. Concerning the Epstein files, I think that Todd

0:18:48.920 --> 0:18:54.320
<v Speaker 7>Blanche has seen how even complete loyalty like hers was

0:18:54.359 --> 0:18:56.640
<v Speaker 7>not good enough to save her job. So he's not

0:18:56.680 --> 0:18:59.200
<v Speaker 7>going to be under any illusions that he can show

0:18:59.240 --> 0:19:03.040
<v Speaker 7>any independence at all and keep his job. And he

0:19:03.119 --> 0:19:05.159
<v Speaker 7>has made very clear he is not the sort of

0:19:05.240 --> 0:19:09.560
<v Speaker 7>person who will resign on principle, because just about any

0:19:10.240 --> 0:19:14.240
<v Speaker 7>principle that is relevant to serving as Attorney General he's

0:19:14.240 --> 0:19:17.159
<v Speaker 7>been asked to violate already. The only thing that may

0:19:17.280 --> 0:19:19.120
<v Speaker 7>keep him in his job is that he's a man,

0:19:19.160 --> 0:19:21.520
<v Speaker 7>and Trump seems to be more inclined to file women.

0:19:21.960 --> 0:19:25.600
<v Speaker 4>I believe you're right there. So far, Trump has only

0:19:25.640 --> 0:19:30.240
<v Speaker 4>fired women from his cabinet. There was Attorney General Pam Bondi,

0:19:30.920 --> 0:19:36.560
<v Speaker 4>DHS Secretary Christy Nome, and the Director of National Intelligence

0:19:36.920 --> 0:19:40.239
<v Speaker 4>Chelsea Gabbard. Those are the only three I can think of.

0:19:41.160 --> 0:19:43.680
<v Speaker 4>Back to Blench, he could have stayed in the job

0:19:43.720 --> 0:19:47.920
<v Speaker 4>as acting Attorney General the same power, So is there

0:19:47.920 --> 0:19:52.120
<v Speaker 4>any real difference in him being confirmed as Attorney General.

0:19:52.800 --> 0:19:56.879
<v Speaker 7>I think there's a lot of difference in prestige. It

0:19:57.000 --> 0:19:59.520
<v Speaker 7>makes it all so much easier to bring someone of

0:19:59.680 --> 0:20:04.679
<v Speaker 7>some or temperament in as deputy Attorney General his current

0:20:04.880 --> 0:20:09.000
<v Speaker 7>soon to be former job, and he does then get

0:20:09.240 --> 0:20:13.879
<v Speaker 7>the blessing of the United States Senate for everything he's done,

0:20:14.520 --> 0:20:17.200
<v Speaker 7>and he will very reasonably be able to say, when

0:20:17.240 --> 0:20:21.040
<v Speaker 7>he's criticized for new things, he does, you saw me

0:20:21.119 --> 0:20:25.000
<v Speaker 7>do similar things and confirm to me, so don't go

0:20:25.200 --> 0:20:30.119
<v Speaker 7>pointing fingers. When he revives the Weaponization Fund or raids

0:20:30.160 --> 0:20:36.240
<v Speaker 7>the Judgment Fund for other Trump personal expenditures, he will say,

0:20:36.320 --> 0:20:38.359
<v Speaker 7>I never promised I wouldn't do it in the future.

0:20:38.400 --> 0:20:41.679
<v Speaker 7>I just said that that particular thing had not gone forward,

0:20:41.720 --> 0:20:45.640
<v Speaker 7>which it happened. The Senators are leaving themselves wide open

0:20:46.240 --> 0:20:50.400
<v Speaker 7>to his doing exactly what he wants to do and

0:20:50.760 --> 0:20:54.159
<v Speaker 7>blaming their lack of thoroughness for it, and apparently they

0:20:54.160 --> 0:20:54.560
<v Speaker 7>don't care.

0:20:54.760 --> 0:20:57.360
<v Speaker 4>Can you think of another Attorney general in history who

0:20:57.560 --> 0:21:01.480
<v Speaker 4>was as willing to do the president's big as Blanche

0:21:01.480 --> 0:21:05.480
<v Speaker 4>appears to be, and you know BONDI was before him.

0:21:05.960 --> 0:21:08.119
<v Speaker 7>Well, the only name that comes to mind, of course,

0:21:08.200 --> 0:21:13.600
<v Speaker 7>is John Mitchell. Nixon's attorney general and Nixon's attorney general,

0:21:13.760 --> 0:21:16.240
<v Speaker 7>was a frequent visitor to the White House, but he

0:21:16.400 --> 0:21:17.760
<v Speaker 7>ended up in the Big House.

0:21:18.400 --> 0:21:23.439
<v Speaker 4>Yep. Mitchell was convicted of conspiracy, perjury, and obstruction of

0:21:23.760 --> 0:21:27.280
<v Speaker 4>justice for his role in the Watergate scandal and the

0:21:27.320 --> 0:21:30.720
<v Speaker 4>cover up. And by the way, David, to your earlier point,

0:21:31.240 --> 0:21:34.359
<v Speaker 4>now you have another woman whose job maybe in jeopardy,

0:21:34.760 --> 0:21:39.800
<v Speaker 4>and that's the DCUs attorney Janine Piro. Trump is very

0:21:39.880 --> 0:21:45.879
<v Speaker 4>unhappy that she dismissed the charges against former Olympic rower

0:21:46.320 --> 0:21:50.439
<v Speaker 4>David Hearn, charges of vandalizing the reflecting pool.

0:21:51.000 --> 0:21:53.640
<v Speaker 7>Indeed, I mean the news reports today or that her

0:21:53.720 --> 0:21:56.840
<v Speaker 7>job seems to be safe, but we read that about

0:21:56.920 --> 0:22:01.080
<v Speaker 7>Christine Home and Pam Bondy and others, so it's a

0:22:01.119 --> 0:22:04.880
<v Speaker 7>little hard to tell. But the problem with her position

0:22:05.280 --> 0:22:08.640
<v Speaker 7>is that if what she's saying is true, then their

0:22:09.119 --> 0:22:13.639
<v Speaker 7>corrupt no bid contract to get the reflecting pool done

0:22:13.920 --> 0:22:17.320
<v Speaker 7>by a contractor with no experience doing this kind of

0:22:17.400 --> 0:22:22.359
<v Speaker 7>work looks like a payoff to a political donor, which

0:22:22.400 --> 0:22:23.520
<v Speaker 7>is surely what it is.

0:22:23.800 --> 0:22:26.320
<v Speaker 4>It's always great to talk to you, David, thanks so much.

0:22:26.920 --> 0:22:31.119
<v Speaker 4>That's Professor David super of Georgetown Law coming up. Next,

0:22:31.680 --> 0:22:36.480
<v Speaker 4>a US Army soldier charged with making winning polymarket predictions

0:22:36.560 --> 0:22:40.760
<v Speaker 4>based on classified information about the raid to capture then

0:22:40.880 --> 0:22:46.280
<v Speaker 4>Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro, says the alleged bets aren't a crime,

0:22:46.359 --> 0:22:48.879
<v Speaker 4>and he's asking a judge to throw out the case.

0:22:49.280 --> 0:22:54.160
<v Speaker 4>I'm June Grosso, and you're listening to Bloomberg. A US

0:22:54.320 --> 0:22:59.479
<v Speaker 4>Army soldier charged with making winning polymarket predictions based on

0:22:59.560 --> 0:23:04.000
<v Speaker 4>class fight information about the raid to capture then Venezuelan

0:23:04.119 --> 0:23:08.360
<v Speaker 4>president Nicolas Maduro, is asking a judge to throw out

0:23:08.400 --> 0:23:12.840
<v Speaker 4>the case. Lawyers for gannon Ken Vandyke, a Special Forces

0:23:12.920 --> 0:23:16.679
<v Speaker 4>soldier who prosecutors said was involved in the planning and

0:23:16.760 --> 0:23:21.840
<v Speaker 4>execution of the raid, called the prosecution over zealous and

0:23:21.920 --> 0:23:25.240
<v Speaker 4>said the alleged bets are in a crime. Van Dyke

0:23:25.359 --> 0:23:28.560
<v Speaker 4>faces a maximum of twenty years behind bars on the

0:23:28.600 --> 0:23:32.800
<v Speaker 4>most serious charge, wire fraud. Joining me is Columbia Law

0:23:32.800 --> 0:23:37.600
<v Speaker 4>School professor Eric Tally, an expert in business law. Eric,

0:23:37.640 --> 0:23:41.280
<v Speaker 4>will you explain what he did what he's charged with doing?

0:23:41.960 --> 0:23:47.440
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, Mister van Dyke was charged with illegally making a

0:23:47.480 --> 0:23:51.639
<v Speaker 1>prediction market bet on poly market having to do with

0:23:51.920 --> 0:23:56.680
<v Speaker 1>whether Nicholas Maduro was going to continue being the president

0:23:57.160 --> 0:24:00.439
<v Speaker 1>of Venezuela or continue to be in power. Mister van

0:24:00.520 --> 0:24:04.520
<v Speaker 1>Dyke knew about the plans for the operation to go

0:24:04.560 --> 0:24:10.000
<v Speaker 1>into Venezuela and capture Maduro, and based on that information,

0:24:10.560 --> 0:24:13.399
<v Speaker 1>he ended up opening up a poly market account and

0:24:13.480 --> 0:24:17.320
<v Speaker 1>making several bets in favor of Madureau no longer being

0:24:17.359 --> 0:24:20.160
<v Speaker 1>in power, and made a fair amount of money off

0:24:20.200 --> 0:24:23.000
<v Speaker 1>of that process. And that's what gave rise to the

0:24:23.119 --> 0:24:25.560
<v Speaker 1>charges that are being brought now against him.

0:24:25.880 --> 0:24:29.800
<v Speaker 4>So they're saying he used classified information. Exactly what does

0:24:29.840 --> 0:24:30.480
<v Speaker 4>he charged with?

0:24:30.960 --> 0:24:34.240
<v Speaker 1>Yeah, this kind of looks almost like a securities fraud

0:24:34.280 --> 0:24:37.520
<v Speaker 1>insider trading type of case, but he was not buying

0:24:37.560 --> 0:24:40.280
<v Speaker 1>and selling stocks or bonds or the things that we

0:24:40.440 --> 0:24:44.919
<v Speaker 1>usually think of as being securities. He was purchasing this

0:24:45.080 --> 0:24:49.280
<v Speaker 1>event driven contract, which is effectively a bet. And so

0:24:49.320 --> 0:24:53.720
<v Speaker 1>as a result, standard insider trading approaches don't work as well.

0:24:53.720 --> 0:24:57.720
<v Speaker 1>But what does is just another section of federal law

0:24:57.800 --> 0:25:01.959
<v Speaker 1>called the Commodities Exchange Act. And there there is a

0:25:02.320 --> 0:25:04.760
<v Speaker 1>kind of an interesting debate that's going to be going

0:25:04.800 --> 0:25:09.360
<v Speaker 1>on in court as to whether event driven contracts prediction

0:25:09.480 --> 0:25:14.040
<v Speaker 1>market contracts fall under the Commodities Exchange Act, and particularly

0:25:14.080 --> 0:25:18.240
<v Speaker 1>a specific definition of a contract that the Exchange Act

0:25:18.440 --> 0:25:22.520
<v Speaker 1>has involving something known as a swap. Now that sounds

0:25:22.600 --> 0:25:24.919
<v Speaker 1>kind of like very Wall Street speak, but what it

0:25:24.960 --> 0:25:27.639
<v Speaker 1>really is is just a contract agreeing that you and

0:25:27.720 --> 0:25:31.760
<v Speaker 1>I are going to swap piles of money under some circumstances.

0:25:31.800 --> 0:25:35.280
<v Speaker 1>And so this can be any contract in which the

0:25:35.320 --> 0:25:37.440
<v Speaker 1>decision of whether I pay you or you pay me

0:25:38.040 --> 0:25:40.919
<v Speaker 1>is dependent on the occurrence or the non occurrence of

0:25:41.000 --> 0:25:45.320
<v Speaker 1>some event that has economic, financial, or commercial consequences. That's

0:25:45.320 --> 0:25:49.760
<v Speaker 1>effectively the definition. And to the extent that that definition

0:25:49.880 --> 0:25:52.680
<v Speaker 1>fits event driven contracts, and there's been at least one

0:25:52.800 --> 0:25:56.520
<v Speaker 1>case that holds that they do, then these types of

0:25:56.560 --> 0:26:01.080
<v Speaker 1>contracts would fall under federal law. If that's what happens,

0:26:01.160 --> 0:26:04.680
<v Speaker 1>then mister Van Dyke's chances look pretty grim. There are

0:26:04.920 --> 0:26:09.680
<v Speaker 1>direct statutes in the US federal law that prohibit informed

0:26:09.800 --> 0:26:15.680
<v Speaker 1>trading related to government informations done done by federal employees, officers,

0:26:15.840 --> 0:26:19.360
<v Speaker 1>members of the armed forces, and so forth. They generally

0:26:19.440 --> 0:26:25.280
<v Speaker 1>predict that anyone or they generally prohibit anyone who has

0:26:25.480 --> 0:26:31.200
<v Speaker 1>a financial information or relevant information about some upcoming international

0:26:31.280 --> 0:26:35.440
<v Speaker 1>event from entering into a swap contract to favor their

0:26:35.480 --> 0:26:39.280
<v Speaker 1>situation or to skew the odds of the contract paying off.

0:26:39.800 --> 0:26:43.720
<v Speaker 4>His lawyers say, the alleged bets aren't a crime, how

0:26:43.800 --> 0:26:45.199
<v Speaker 4>so what's their argument.

0:26:45.520 --> 0:26:47.480
<v Speaker 1>The first argument that they're going to make is that

0:26:48.040 --> 0:26:52.560
<v Speaker 1>these contracts just aren't swaps, that they are ordinary gambling

0:26:52.960 --> 0:26:57.400
<v Speaker 1>contracts under state law that shouldn't even be regulated by

0:26:57.440 --> 0:27:00.560
<v Speaker 1>federal law. Now, if they can convince the court that

0:27:00.560 --> 0:27:03.560
<v Speaker 1>that is the case, then a bunch of these statutes

0:27:03.600 --> 0:27:07.000
<v Speaker 1>that prohibit insider trading, specifically with respect.

0:27:06.560 --> 0:27:08.680
<v Speaker 9>To swaps, they're going to fall away.

0:27:09.080 --> 0:27:11.480
<v Speaker 1>The defense isn't completely out of the woods, but it

0:27:11.520 --> 0:27:15.880
<v Speaker 1>would eliminate what seems like the most direct form of

0:27:15.960 --> 0:27:20.760
<v Speaker 1>liability through these informed trading prohibitions related to swaps. The

0:27:20.880 --> 0:27:24.800
<v Speaker 1>problem is that just this past April, there was another

0:27:24.920 --> 0:27:29.119
<v Speaker 1>federal court in the Third Circuit that basically held in

0:27:29.160 --> 0:27:33.800
<v Speaker 1>a case that involved Calshi Polymarkets, big competitor that sports

0:27:33.880 --> 0:27:37.320
<v Speaker 1>event contracts they look a lot like betting, but they

0:27:37.440 --> 0:27:43.680
<v Speaker 1>also qualify as swaps because their payoffs are associated with economic, financial,

0:27:43.680 --> 0:27:47.199
<v Speaker 1>commercial consequences, and so forth. And so the court in

0:27:47.280 --> 0:27:49.560
<v Speaker 1>that case basically said, we're going to have a pretty

0:27:49.600 --> 0:27:54.880
<v Speaker 1>open ended and pretty forgiving definition of what constitutes a swap,

0:27:54.920 --> 0:27:58.000
<v Speaker 1>and so mister van Dyke's going to have to somehow

0:27:58.200 --> 0:28:01.920
<v Speaker 1>convince the court to distinctuish that case or to disagree

0:28:01.960 --> 0:28:05.120
<v Speaker 1>with it. It is only a sister jurisdiction, so there's

0:28:05.119 --> 0:28:07.679
<v Speaker 1>a chance that he could do it, and if he

0:28:07.760 --> 0:28:10.800
<v Speaker 1>does end up doing it, then his road is going

0:28:10.840 --> 0:28:13.719
<v Speaker 1>to be much cleaner. Not completely out of the woods,

0:28:13.720 --> 0:28:16.879
<v Speaker 1>but much cleaner. And you know, even if these contracts

0:28:16.920 --> 0:28:22.600
<v Speaker 1>do constitute swaps and therefore these prohibitions absolutely applied, mister

0:28:22.680 --> 0:28:25.879
<v Speaker 1>Vandyke may be able to make a couple of other arguments,

0:28:26.000 --> 0:28:27.879
<v Speaker 1>many of them having to do with the newness of

0:28:27.960 --> 0:28:32.040
<v Speaker 1>prediction markets and event driven contracts. Is a general matter,

0:28:32.760 --> 0:28:36.160
<v Speaker 1>there's a kind of an interpretive approach to criminal prohibitions

0:28:36.160 --> 0:28:39.520
<v Speaker 1>that says, let's not be overly expansive and determining or

0:28:39.600 --> 0:28:43.240
<v Speaker 1>defining what constitutes a crime, particularly if an ordinary person

0:28:43.800 --> 0:28:47.800
<v Speaker 1>wouldn't have reasonably thought that, you know, some offshore prediction

0:28:47.920 --> 0:28:53.080
<v Speaker 1>market wager was actually a federally regulated swap. And so

0:28:53.160 --> 0:28:56.120
<v Speaker 1>there are cases where COURTZ has said, look, formally, this

0:28:56.200 --> 0:28:59.600
<v Speaker 1>looks like it's a violation, but there just wasn't enough

0:28:59.680 --> 0:29:03.160
<v Speaker 1>notice to people in mister Van Dyke's position to know

0:29:03.240 --> 0:29:06.000
<v Speaker 1>that this was we're going to give him leniency, even

0:29:06.040 --> 0:29:08.680
<v Speaker 1>though someone that comes next in a year or two

0:29:09.280 --> 0:29:13.840
<v Speaker 1>isn't going to get the same type of leniency. Now,

0:29:14.000 --> 0:29:17.200
<v Speaker 1>there is another kind of route that the government has

0:29:17.680 --> 0:29:20.920
<v Speaker 1>if they lose on this question of whether these events

0:29:20.960 --> 0:29:26.560
<v Speaker 1>driven contracts are quote unquote swaps, and that's that there's

0:29:26.680 --> 0:29:30.040
<v Speaker 1>a very well known kind of secret tool that a

0:29:30.080 --> 0:29:33.800
<v Speaker 1>lot of prosecutors use, called the mail and wirefraud statutes

0:29:34.120 --> 0:29:37.959
<v Speaker 1>that basically say, if you do something naughty, even if

0:29:38.000 --> 0:29:41.800
<v Speaker 1>it's not, you know, like a serious, serious felony, but

0:29:41.920 --> 0:29:44.520
<v Speaker 1>if you do something that you know clearly is a

0:29:44.640 --> 0:29:45.280
<v Speaker 1>violation of.

0:29:45.320 --> 0:29:48.840
<v Speaker 9>Law, and you use a cell phone or the telephone or.

0:29:49.480 --> 0:29:53.080
<v Speaker 1>Email to do it, you can be convicted of wirefraud,

0:29:53.120 --> 0:29:57.040
<v Speaker 1>which has fairly significant criminal consequences.

0:29:56.440 --> 0:29:57.280
<v Speaker 9>Associated with it.

0:29:57.400 --> 0:30:00.720
<v Speaker 1>Now, in that situation, the US might be able to say, look,

0:30:00.760 --> 0:30:04.280
<v Speaker 1>even if these weren't swaps, what mister Van Dyke was

0:30:04.320 --> 0:30:07.920
<v Speaker 1>doing was engaging in some form of common law fraud.

0:30:07.960 --> 0:30:12.000
<v Speaker 1>He was misusing the information that the government entrusted with

0:30:12.120 --> 0:30:15.880
<v Speaker 1>him and trusted him to keep confidential, and he blew

0:30:15.920 --> 0:30:19.400
<v Speaker 1>that confidential out of a way used email or a

0:30:19.400 --> 0:30:22.920
<v Speaker 1>cell phone to do it and therefore committed wirefraud. And

0:30:23.040 --> 0:30:25.960
<v Speaker 1>that is an alternative approach that the government has tried

0:30:26.000 --> 0:30:28.400
<v Speaker 1>out in its indictment. That one is going to be

0:30:28.640 --> 0:30:31.880
<v Speaker 1>a steeper hill for the government to climb, in large

0:30:31.920 --> 0:30:34.520
<v Speaker 1>part because of the United States Supreme Court, which just

0:30:34.560 --> 0:30:37.440
<v Speaker 1>a couple of years ago really narrowed what.

0:30:37.320 --> 0:30:40.160
<v Speaker 9>It meant to misuse government information.

0:30:40.400 --> 0:30:44.560
<v Speaker 1>There was a case that involved regulatory information at the

0:30:44.680 --> 0:30:47.720
<v Speaker 1>FDA and the Department of Health and whether various types

0:30:47.760 --> 0:30:51.680
<v Speaker 1>of benefits were going to be liberalized or changed and

0:30:51.680 --> 0:30:55.320
<v Speaker 1>that would have a big effect on companies, and the

0:30:55.400 --> 0:30:59.040
<v Speaker 1>Supreme Court basically held that regulatory.

0:30:58.280 --> 0:31:00.200
<v Speaker 9>Information about what the government is.

0:31:00.200 --> 0:31:02.840
<v Speaker 1>Going to do, that's not really property that the government

0:31:02.880 --> 0:31:06.480
<v Speaker 1>can entrust you with. And that case, mister Van Dyke

0:31:06.560 --> 0:31:09.480
<v Speaker 1>may be able to use as well, to say, hey,

0:31:09.560 --> 0:31:14.440
<v Speaker 1>information about a potential raid into Venezuela kind of fits

0:31:14.520 --> 0:31:18.520
<v Speaker 1>that same definition. This particular type of information, you know,

0:31:18.600 --> 0:31:21.960
<v Speaker 1>this is a much more important and sensitive type of

0:31:22.000 --> 0:31:23.760
<v Speaker 1>information involving.

0:31:23.320 --> 0:31:24.320
<v Speaker 9>A military action.

0:31:24.560 --> 0:31:28.040
<v Speaker 1>So the government probably has a little bit better of

0:31:28.080 --> 0:31:31.440
<v Speaker 1>a chance to say, yeah, that regulatory case at the

0:31:31.440 --> 0:31:36.719
<v Speaker 1>Supreme Court that's different than this particular situation, because you know,

0:31:37.160 --> 0:31:39.480
<v Speaker 1>here we're really dealing with things that are of the

0:31:39.600 --> 0:31:43.440
<v Speaker 1>utmost importance for the safety and welfare of our armed forces.

0:31:44.120 --> 0:31:46.840
<v Speaker 4>Eric, this you know it's a swap? Is it sort

0:31:46.880 --> 0:31:50.280
<v Speaker 4>of a legal fiction? Because most people who are betting

0:31:50.360 --> 0:31:54.000
<v Speaker 4>on calci or polymarket think they're gambling, don't they.

0:31:54.520 --> 0:31:56.720
<v Speaker 1>One of the things that I like to ask my

0:31:56.840 --> 0:31:59.480
<v Speaker 1>students when I teach this topic June, is what is

0:31:59.520 --> 0:32:05.719
<v Speaker 1>the difference between securities and derivatives, trading, insurance and gambling?

0:32:06.040 --> 0:32:09.240
<v Speaker 1>And when you start thinking about the very structure of

0:32:09.280 --> 0:32:11.920
<v Speaker 1>this type of a contract, every single one of these

0:32:11.960 --> 0:32:16.760
<v Speaker 1>contracts involve one person having to basically you pay money

0:32:16.840 --> 0:32:21.480
<v Speaker 1>or transfer value to another if certain facts happen, if certain.

0:32:21.640 --> 0:32:23.160
<v Speaker 9>Events come about.

0:32:23.520 --> 0:32:27.200
<v Speaker 1>And so the distinction between those three things is, in

0:32:27.280 --> 0:32:31.080
<v Speaker 1>many ways only a regulatory distinction. Where did the various

0:32:31.200 --> 0:32:36.560
<v Speaker 1>markers or guardrails hold out? And it isn't even necessarily

0:32:36.600 --> 0:32:40.640
<v Speaker 1>the case that these three or more categories can't overlap

0:32:40.680 --> 0:32:43.280
<v Speaker 1>with one another. It's perfectly possible for something to be

0:32:43.320 --> 0:32:47.920
<v Speaker 1>considered gambling and a swap at the same time. And clearly,

0:32:47.960 --> 0:32:50.040
<v Speaker 1>mister Vandyke in this case is going to say, well,

0:32:50.080 --> 0:32:53.000
<v Speaker 1>I knew this was gambling, but I had no idea

0:32:53.000 --> 0:32:53.880
<v Speaker 1>it was a swap.

0:32:54.320 --> 0:32:56.440
<v Speaker 9>And that is actually a.

0:32:56.480 --> 0:33:00.400
<v Speaker 1>Legal determination that we're only now discovering in real time time.

0:33:00.840 --> 0:33:04.280
<v Speaker 1>You shouldn't hold me accountable to a criminal prohibition that

0:33:04.640 --> 0:33:07.960
<v Speaker 1>has remained unclear and is only going to get clarified

0:33:08.240 --> 0:33:11.360
<v Speaker 1>by this case. And so this idea that this was

0:33:11.400 --> 0:33:13.840
<v Speaker 1>only gambling, and it looks a lot more like a

0:33:13.880 --> 0:33:16.080
<v Speaker 1>you know, a football bent on the San Francisco forty

0:33:16.160 --> 0:33:19.400
<v Speaker 1>nine ers than it does a conventional Wall Street type

0:33:19.400 --> 0:33:22.680
<v Speaker 1>of swap as an argument, I'm certain mister.

0:33:22.560 --> 0:33:25.160
<v Speaker 9>Van Dyke's lawyers are going to try to impress upon

0:33:25.240 --> 0:33:27.480
<v Speaker 9>the court, and you know, they at least.

0:33:27.360 --> 0:33:29.800
<v Speaker 1>Stand a chance of convincing a court to be leaning

0:33:29.880 --> 0:33:32.640
<v Speaker 1>in this case, even as they send a message to

0:33:32.760 --> 0:33:36.040
<v Speaker 1>future traders on polymarket and Calci that you better watch

0:33:36.120 --> 0:33:39.400
<v Speaker 1>out that what you're doing could also involve the purchase

0:33:39.400 --> 0:33:40.959
<v Speaker 1>and sale of swap contracts.

0:33:41.320 --> 0:33:44.600
<v Speaker 4>So, I mean, do you think that the CFTC is

0:33:44.640 --> 0:33:47.520
<v Speaker 4>going to win this fight about you know, we're the

0:33:47.560 --> 0:33:50.720
<v Speaker 4>ones that are going to regulate these markets, or you know,

0:33:50.800 --> 0:33:52.880
<v Speaker 4>the states that want to regulate.

0:33:54.320 --> 0:33:56.480
<v Speaker 9>This is the big battle that's happening.

0:33:56.640 --> 0:34:00.160
<v Speaker 1>You know barely off stage with this case, right that

0:34:00.320 --> 0:34:05.800
<v Speaker 1>proponents of event driven contracts Calshi, Polymarket, others, Robinhood, they

0:34:06.080 --> 0:34:09.920
<v Speaker 1>very much want the designation of swaps for these types

0:34:09.960 --> 0:34:12.960
<v Speaker 1>of contracts because what that means that they can then

0:34:13.080 --> 0:34:18.680
<v Speaker 1>be traded on national exchanges and international exchanges. It also

0:34:19.280 --> 0:34:22.320
<v Speaker 1>means that federal law may, at least to some extent,

0:34:22.800 --> 0:34:28.160
<v Speaker 1>preempt what state gambling commissioners and governors and legislatures can

0:34:28.239 --> 0:34:31.560
<v Speaker 1>do if something is a you know, essentially a federally

0:34:31.680 --> 0:34:35.680
<v Speaker 1>recognized contract that can be traded on markets. That having

0:34:35.719 --> 0:34:39.560
<v Speaker 1>been said, there still may be some interesting battles to

0:34:39.640 --> 0:34:43.399
<v Speaker 1>fight about a whether these things ultimately are going to.

0:34:43.520 --> 0:34:46.120
<v Speaker 9>Be deemed to be swaps. Certainly, if we.

0:34:46.120 --> 0:34:49.440
<v Speaker 1>Got a conflicting opinion out of the Second Circuit in

0:34:49.480 --> 0:34:52.200
<v Speaker 1>this case, then that's setting itself up for a.

0:34:52.160 --> 0:34:53.760
<v Speaker 9>Supreme Court review of the question.

0:34:54.120 --> 0:34:58.040
<v Speaker 1>But in addition, there is still an open question about

0:34:58.160 --> 0:35:02.279
<v Speaker 1>whether if the you know, federal authorities say we think

0:35:02.280 --> 0:35:03.680
<v Speaker 1>of this as a swap and we're going.

0:35:03.680 --> 0:35:06.719
<v Speaker 9>To allow it, does that preclude state.

0:35:06.480 --> 0:35:09.200
<v Speaker 1>Regulators from saying, well, it may be a swap, but

0:35:09.239 --> 0:35:13.279
<v Speaker 1>we also think it is gambling, and therefore our jurisdiction

0:35:13.360 --> 0:35:16.839
<v Speaker 1>over gambling contracts gets applied as well, and we can

0:35:16.880 --> 0:35:20.840
<v Speaker 1>prohibit certain types of contracts regardless of whether there're swaps

0:35:20.960 --> 0:35:21.200
<v Speaker 1>or not.

0:35:21.719 --> 0:35:23.920
<v Speaker 9>That's going to be an interesting question as well.

0:35:24.120 --> 0:35:26.880
<v Speaker 1>The states have taken the position that they have fairly

0:35:26.960 --> 0:35:32.400
<v Speaker 1>broad abilities to enforce their gambling prohibitions regardless of what

0:35:32.680 --> 0:35:36.520
<v Speaker 1>the CFTC or the federal government thinks they can do

0:35:36.760 --> 0:35:41.200
<v Speaker 1>on securities markets or derivative markets fronts. So this is

0:35:41.239 --> 0:35:44.600
<v Speaker 1>a battle that in some ways probably should have happened

0:35:44.680 --> 0:35:49.600
<v Speaker 1>before this criminal indictment got litigated. But the criminal indictment

0:35:49.640 --> 0:35:52.600
<v Speaker 1>is in some ways, you know, driving the bus, or

0:35:52.640 --> 0:35:54.680
<v Speaker 1>at least a portion of the route that the bus

0:35:54.719 --> 0:35:59.080
<v Speaker 1>is taking. In determining exactly how event driven contracts are

0:35:59.080 --> 0:36:01.560
<v Speaker 1>going to be regulated for years to come.

0:36:01.800 --> 0:36:04.719
<v Speaker 4>I would bet. I would bet that there are a

0:36:04.800 --> 0:36:08.960
<v Speaker 4>lot of people who have used classified information to make

0:36:09.040 --> 0:36:13.640
<v Speaker 4>bets on Calshi, particularly in this administration. But why this

0:36:13.760 --> 0:36:17.680
<v Speaker 4>focus on this one guy? Was there a reason why

0:36:17.719 --> 0:36:18.600
<v Speaker 4>his came up?

0:36:18.960 --> 0:36:22.319
<v Speaker 1>It's an interesting observation. You know, the Trump administration has

0:36:22.400 --> 0:36:26.040
<v Speaker 1>recently said it's going to you know, offer for sale

0:36:26.760 --> 0:36:31.920
<v Speaker 1>early access to mister Trump's truth social posts.

0:36:31.640 --> 0:36:33.240
<v Speaker 9>Presumably so people who.

0:36:33.000 --> 0:36:35.120
<v Speaker 1>Have bought that early access can pay up and then

0:36:35.160 --> 0:36:38.439
<v Speaker 1>can try to make money trading on markets. So there's

0:36:38.680 --> 0:36:41.480
<v Speaker 1>there's almost a sense in which that, you know, entire

0:36:41.600 --> 0:36:46.000
<v Speaker 1>enterprise is sort of a winking invitation to trade on

0:36:46.040 --> 0:36:50.719
<v Speaker 1>the basis of information that has not been broadly disseminated. Now,

0:36:51.160 --> 0:36:52.839
<v Speaker 1>you know, there's a question of whether you can even

0:36:52.920 --> 0:36:55.680
<v Speaker 1>do that, even if you're the president, whether you're allowed

0:36:56.120 --> 0:36:58.080
<v Speaker 1>to do that, and that's a legal question that's.

0:36:57.960 --> 0:36:59.000
<v Speaker 9>Going to have to be answered.

0:36:59.239 --> 0:37:01.680
<v Speaker 1>But it does sort of create a question about, well, why,

0:37:01.920 --> 0:37:04.040
<v Speaker 1>you know, why is it the case that the administration

0:37:04.160 --> 0:37:06.080
<v Speaker 1>can sort of say, hey, we're going to just buy

0:37:06.080 --> 0:37:09.200
<v Speaker 1>and sell this information at top levels, but our foot

0:37:09.239 --> 0:37:10.759
<v Speaker 1>soldiers aren't allowed to.

0:37:10.719 --> 0:37:11.920
<v Speaker 9>Trade on the information.

0:37:12.440 --> 0:37:12.640
<v Speaker 7>You know.

0:37:12.719 --> 0:37:14.120
<v Speaker 9>I guess the part of.

0:37:14.040 --> 0:37:16.440
<v Speaker 1>The rationale is that, on some level, I guess it

0:37:16.480 --> 0:37:18.920
<v Speaker 1>is up to the federal government on how classified they

0:37:18.960 --> 0:37:22.560
<v Speaker 1>want to treat various pieces of information, and foot soldiers

0:37:22.600 --> 0:37:24.400
<v Speaker 1>probably aren't in a position where they're going to be

0:37:24.440 --> 0:37:25.960
<v Speaker 1>able to make those determinations.

0:37:26.560 --> 0:37:26.759
<v Speaker 9>You know.

0:37:26.800 --> 0:37:29.279
<v Speaker 1>Another one, I think probably is much more about the

0:37:29.280 --> 0:37:33.080
<v Speaker 1>real politic of it. As much as President Trump would

0:37:33.120 --> 0:37:36.440
<v Speaker 1>love to monetize access to his own tweets. He is

0:37:36.560 --> 0:37:42.520
<v Speaker 1>also continually rankled about various types of leaks in his administration,

0:37:43.400 --> 0:37:47.200
<v Speaker 1>in which someone inside the room called someone and the

0:37:47.239 --> 0:37:51.560
<v Speaker 1>information got out. The possibility of leaks finding their way

0:37:51.600 --> 0:37:55.840
<v Speaker 1>into prediction market prices much more quickly than you know,

0:37:55.880 --> 0:37:58.480
<v Speaker 1>a chain of phone calls, I think maybe another thing

0:37:58.520 --> 0:38:02.040
<v Speaker 1>that is worrying both the Truck administration and federal prosecutors.

0:38:02.280 --> 0:38:04.480
<v Speaker 1>You know, there is generally, you know, kind of a

0:38:04.640 --> 0:38:08.839
<v Speaker 1>sense that around, particularly the Venezuela operation, mister van Dyke

0:38:09.000 --> 0:38:13.160
<v Speaker 1>was not the only person trading in prediction market securities.

0:38:13.200 --> 0:38:16.600
<v Speaker 1>He seems to be the poster child, but there are

0:38:16.640 --> 0:38:22.000
<v Speaker 1>other potential prosecutions coming as well. I've generally been supportive

0:38:22.000 --> 0:38:24.920
<v Speaker 1>of the idea of prediction markets because they do allow

0:38:24.960 --> 0:38:28.960
<v Speaker 1>people to price out various types of contingencies that are

0:38:28.960 --> 0:38:32.920
<v Speaker 1>really helpful for purposes of writing insurance contracts, for understanding

0:38:32.920 --> 0:38:35.160
<v Speaker 1>whether they should be hedging risks, or understanding what their

0:38:35.200 --> 0:38:38.799
<v Speaker 1>risks are, and so forth. The nature of you know

0:38:38.880 --> 0:38:41.600
<v Speaker 1>where a lot of these prediction markets are going, however,

0:38:42.000 --> 0:38:45.760
<v Speaker 1>can both help that market but can also undermine that market.

0:38:46.040 --> 0:38:49.560
<v Speaker 1>If you know something about an event that's coming up

0:38:49.640 --> 0:38:52.279
<v Speaker 1>solely because you were lucky enough to overhear it in

0:38:52.360 --> 0:38:55.560
<v Speaker 1>a room that the conversation was expected to be private,

0:38:55.960 --> 0:38:58.120
<v Speaker 1>or even more so, if you're one of the actors

0:38:58.160 --> 0:39:01.359
<v Speaker 1>that can either cause this event to about or not

0:39:01.560 --> 0:39:05.040
<v Speaker 1>cause this event to come about, even at the margins,

0:39:05.480 --> 0:39:08.239
<v Speaker 1>and you are allowed openly to trade on that information,

0:39:08.640 --> 0:39:12.040
<v Speaker 1>that not only is not going to help the market

0:39:12.160 --> 0:39:14.680
<v Speaker 1>to kind of kind of reflect real risks that are

0:39:14.680 --> 0:39:18.399
<v Speaker 1>going on, it can undermine the very activity of the market.

0:39:18.480 --> 0:39:21.480
<v Speaker 1>Who wants to play a game that everyone knows is rigged,

0:39:21.880 --> 0:39:25.120
<v Speaker 1>and if you are playing that game with insiders who

0:39:25.120 --> 0:39:27.560
<v Speaker 1>are going to beat you at every turn, you were

0:39:27.640 --> 0:39:30.160
<v Speaker 1>destined to lose money. So there really is you know,

0:39:30.160 --> 0:39:32.640
<v Speaker 1>for the purposes of these markets. I think there is

0:39:33.040 --> 0:39:36.960
<v Speaker 1>a very strong social and private incentive of these markets

0:39:37.239 --> 0:39:40.000
<v Speaker 1>to try to make sure that informed trading isn't running

0:39:40.160 --> 0:39:42.480
<v Speaker 1>rampant around these markets or no one's going to want

0:39:42.520 --> 0:39:42.799
<v Speaker 1>to play.

0:39:43.320 --> 0:39:46.520
<v Speaker 4>I can see these legal fights playing out for years

0:39:46.560 --> 0:39:50.320
<v Speaker 4>to come. Thanks so much, Eric. That's Columbia Law School

0:39:50.400 --> 0:39:53.200
<v Speaker 4>professor Eric Tally, And that's it for this edition of

0:39:53.200 --> 0:39:55.880
<v Speaker 4>The Bloomberg Law Show. Remember you can always get the

0:39:55.960 --> 0:39:59.160
<v Speaker 4>latest legal news on our Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can

0:39:59.200 --> 0:40:03.439
<v Speaker 4>find them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and at www dot

0:40:03.440 --> 0:40:07.640
<v Speaker 4>bloomberg dot com slash podcast, slash Law, and remember to

0:40:07.680 --> 0:40:10.719
<v Speaker 4>tune into The Bloomberg Law Show every weeknight at ten

0:40:10.760 --> 0:40:14.520
<v Speaker 4>pm Wall Street Time. I'm June Grosso and you're listening

0:40:14.640 --> 0:40:15.320
<v Speaker 4>to Bloomberg