WEBVTT - Third Criminal Indictment of Trump

0:00:03.080 --> 0:00:07.880
<v Speaker 1>This is Bloomberg Law with June Brusso from Bloomberg Radio.

0:00:11.240 --> 0:00:16.840
<v Speaker 2>Before this year, no American president had ever been criminally charged. Now,

0:00:16.920 --> 0:00:20.200
<v Speaker 2>in the last four months, Donald Trump has been indicted

0:00:20.360 --> 0:00:24.079
<v Speaker 2>three times, once by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg in

0:00:24.200 --> 0:00:28.200
<v Speaker 2>New York and twice federally by Special Council Jack Smith.

0:00:29.000 --> 0:00:32.479
<v Speaker 3>The attack on our nation's capital on January sixth, twenty

0:00:32.600 --> 0:00:36.800
<v Speaker 3>twenty one, was an unprecedented assault on the seat of

0:00:36.800 --> 0:00:41.120
<v Speaker 3>American democracy. It is described in the indictment it was

0:00:41.120 --> 0:00:46.920
<v Speaker 3>fueled by lies, lies by the defendant targeted at obstructing

0:00:46.960 --> 0:00:51.040
<v Speaker 3>a bedrock function of the US government, the nation's process

0:00:51.040 --> 0:00:56.000
<v Speaker 3>of collecting, counting, and certifying the results of the presidential election.

0:00:56.960 --> 0:01:00.880
<v Speaker 2>The latest indictment is the most serious. Is charged with

0:01:01.000 --> 0:01:04.960
<v Speaker 2>conspiring to defraud the United States government that he once led,

0:01:05.240 --> 0:01:08.480
<v Speaker 2>and conspiring to deprive American voters of the right to

0:01:08.520 --> 0:01:12.200
<v Speaker 2>have their votes counted. The indictment alleges that for months

0:01:12.240 --> 0:01:16.039
<v Speaker 2>Trump knowingly spread lies about the election being rigged in

0:01:16.120 --> 0:01:20.800
<v Speaker 2>an unprecedented effort to block the peaceful transfer of presidential power.

0:01:21.080 --> 0:01:25.360
<v Speaker 2>Trump's pressure campaign against former Vice President Mike Pence is

0:01:25.400 --> 0:01:28.720
<v Speaker 2>painted as the lynchpin of the scheme to defraud America.

0:01:29.319 --> 0:01:33.039
<v Speaker 1>I really do believe that anyone who puts himself over

0:01:33.040 --> 0:01:35.600
<v Speaker 1>the constitution should never be president of the United States,

0:01:36.640 --> 0:01:39.240
<v Speaker 1>and anyone who asks someone else to put themselves over

0:01:39.240 --> 0:01:42.120
<v Speaker 1>the constitutions should never be President of the United States.

0:01:42.160 --> 0:01:45.520
<v Speaker 2>At GEA joining me is former federal prosecutor Jessica Roth,

0:01:45.640 --> 0:01:49.400
<v Speaker 2>a professor at Cardozo Law School. Jessica, what stands out

0:01:49.440 --> 0:01:51.240
<v Speaker 2>to you in this indictment?

0:01:51.800 --> 0:01:54.640
<v Speaker 4>These are the most serious charges that have been filed

0:01:54.680 --> 0:01:58.440
<v Speaker 4>to date against the former president. They allege a vast

0:01:58.560 --> 0:02:02.840
<v Speaker 4>conspiracy to overturn the results of the twenty twenty presidential

0:02:02.920 --> 0:02:06.880
<v Speaker 4>election and to prevent the lawful transfer of power and

0:02:06.960 --> 0:02:11.200
<v Speaker 4>to deprive the American citizenry of the lawful counting of

0:02:11.360 --> 0:02:15.960
<v Speaker 4>their votes. These are charges that allege conduct that really

0:02:16.040 --> 0:02:20.040
<v Speaker 4>threatens the heart of our democracy, and if proven beyond

0:02:20.040 --> 0:02:24.720
<v Speaker 4>a reasonable Nett trial, will ensure that the former president

0:02:24.800 --> 0:02:28.560
<v Speaker 4>goes down in history as having tried, through a concerted

0:02:28.680 --> 0:02:33.160
<v Speaker 4>effort and conspiracy with others, to prevent the lawful transfer

0:02:33.200 --> 0:02:37.040
<v Speaker 4>of power and to hold on to power through illegal means.

0:02:37.600 --> 0:02:40.960
<v Speaker 2>Those who watched the January sixth Committee hearings are familiar

0:02:40.960 --> 0:02:43.680
<v Speaker 2>with a lot of the facts and the people here,

0:02:44.080 --> 0:02:47.760
<v Speaker 2>but the details on this attempt to leverage the Justice Department.

0:02:48.000 --> 0:02:50.720
<v Speaker 2>When the acting Attorney General told Trump that the Justice

0:02:50.760 --> 0:02:53.519
<v Speaker 2>Department could not and would not change the asthma of

0:02:53.560 --> 0:02:57.680
<v Speaker 2>the election, Trump responded, quote, just say that the election

0:02:57.919 --> 0:03:00.320
<v Speaker 2>was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the

0:03:00.360 --> 0:03:04.480
<v Speaker 2>Republican Congressman. What is your take on this attempt to

0:03:04.560 --> 0:03:06.119
<v Speaker 2>leverage the Justice Department?

0:03:06.760 --> 0:03:11.239
<v Speaker 4>The allegations about Trump's efforts to use the Justice Department

0:03:11.360 --> 0:03:15.200
<v Speaker 4>in furtherance of his scheme to submit false slates of

0:03:15.240 --> 0:03:20.120
<v Speaker 4>electors to Congress that was known before there had previously

0:03:20.160 --> 0:03:22.520
<v Speaker 4>been testimony by the former members of the Justice Department

0:03:22.919 --> 0:03:26.679
<v Speaker 4>about those conversations and communications with Trump. I agreed that

0:03:26.760 --> 0:03:30.120
<v Speaker 4>the statement that is contained in the indictments and attributed

0:03:30.120 --> 0:03:33.320
<v Speaker 4>to the former president, in which he says, just say

0:03:33.320 --> 0:03:35.640
<v Speaker 4>there was fraud, essentially, and leave the rest to me

0:03:35.760 --> 0:03:39.520
<v Speaker 4>and the Republican members of Congress, is chilling, and it

0:03:39.640 --> 0:03:44.040
<v Speaker 4>demonstrates the former president's intent, his knowledge that he was

0:03:44.160 --> 0:03:48.800
<v Speaker 4>using illegal means in order to stay in power. And

0:03:48.840 --> 0:03:53.240
<v Speaker 4>that's really critical because the former president likely will argue

0:03:53.280 --> 0:03:57.680
<v Speaker 4>at trial that he honestly believed that he had won

0:03:57.800 --> 0:04:00.680
<v Speaker 4>the election, and that therefore he is not guilty of

0:04:00.720 --> 0:04:04.080
<v Speaker 4>any crime in connection with trying to stay in power.

0:04:04.600 --> 0:04:08.360
<v Speaker 4>But you can't use illegal means in order to stay

0:04:08.360 --> 0:04:11.320
<v Speaker 4>in power even if you think that you actually won

0:04:11.520 --> 0:04:15.360
<v Speaker 4>the election. So those statements in the indictment, such as

0:04:15.680 --> 0:04:18.200
<v Speaker 4>just leave it to me and the Republican members of

0:04:18.240 --> 0:04:22.479
<v Speaker 4>Congress to me, are very demonstrative of his criminal intent.

0:04:22.720 --> 0:04:25.920
<v Speaker 2>Going to that, the indictment repeatedly says that Trump knew

0:04:25.960 --> 0:04:29.839
<v Speaker 2>his fraud claims were false. Starting on page one, it says,

0:04:29.960 --> 0:04:33.159
<v Speaker 2>the defendants spread lies that there had been outcome determinative

0:04:33.200 --> 0:04:36.160
<v Speaker 2>fraud in the election, that he had actually won. These

0:04:36.160 --> 0:04:39.080
<v Speaker 2>claims were false, and the defendant knew that they were false,

0:04:39.640 --> 0:04:42.760
<v Speaker 2>And it recites how he was told by campaign staff,

0:04:42.800 --> 0:04:46.120
<v Speaker 2>white House official, state government representative that there was no

0:04:46.160 --> 0:04:50.479
<v Speaker 2>evidence of fraud, and in various things he said, for example,

0:04:50.560 --> 0:04:53.920
<v Speaker 2>that in Pennsylvania there had been two hundred five thousand

0:04:54.000 --> 0:04:57.960
<v Speaker 2>more votes than voters, and that five thousand dead people

0:04:58.040 --> 0:05:01.920
<v Speaker 2>voted in Georgia. Is it emphasize so much because it's

0:05:01.960 --> 0:05:04.520
<v Speaker 2>part of what the prosecutor has to prove at trial

0:05:05.040 --> 0:05:07.880
<v Speaker 2>or in anticipation of what Trump's defense might be.

0:05:08.880 --> 0:05:13.320
<v Speaker 4>I think it's both. The indictment says that Trump knew

0:05:13.320 --> 0:05:16.840
<v Speaker 4>that his claims were false, and it says so repeatedly

0:05:16.920 --> 0:05:20.520
<v Speaker 4>in the allegations, and in effect, it's a refrain throughout

0:05:20.560 --> 0:05:24.159
<v Speaker 4>the indictment that Trump made a statement claiming that there

0:05:24.200 --> 0:05:27.040
<v Speaker 4>had been fraud in the election in a state, and

0:05:27.080 --> 0:05:30.720
<v Speaker 4>then was told by his top officials and by officials

0:05:30.800 --> 0:05:33.359
<v Speaker 4>in that state that there had been no such fraud

0:05:33.440 --> 0:05:37.520
<v Speaker 4>or irregularity, and that he nevertheless continued to perpetuate the

0:05:37.600 --> 0:05:41.600
<v Speaker 4>lie that there had been fraud. That's part of the

0:05:41.720 --> 0:05:45.680
<v Speaker 4>narrative of this indictment is showing that the former president

0:05:46.240 --> 0:05:51.680
<v Speaker 4>continued to repeat lies that sewed distrust and people's concerns

0:05:51.839 --> 0:05:55.760
<v Speaker 4>about the legitimacy of the election, particularly his followers, and

0:05:55.800 --> 0:05:59.640
<v Speaker 4>then he capitalized on that sense of distrust in order

0:05:59.720 --> 0:06:04.400
<v Speaker 4>to further his scheme to substitute false electors for the

0:06:04.520 --> 0:06:10.000
<v Speaker 4>legitimately elected electors for Joe Biden. It is not necessary

0:06:10.200 --> 0:06:14.000
<v Speaker 4>legally to succeed on these charges to show that the

0:06:14.040 --> 0:06:17.599
<v Speaker 4>former president knew that all of his statements were false,

0:06:18.040 --> 0:06:21.400
<v Speaker 4>but it is a far more compelling story, and I

0:06:21.400 --> 0:06:24.800
<v Speaker 4>think more comprehensible to a jury. If the jury is

0:06:24.839 --> 0:06:28.480
<v Speaker 4>persuaded that the former president did know that his claims

0:06:28.480 --> 0:06:30.160
<v Speaker 4>were false, and you.

0:06:30.120 --> 0:06:32.920
<v Speaker 2>Mentioned the fake electors, it seems like there was fraud

0:06:33.000 --> 0:06:36.640
<v Speaker 2>on top of fraud because Trump and his co conspirators

0:06:36.920 --> 0:06:39.960
<v Speaker 2>lied to some of the fake electors and assure them

0:06:40.040 --> 0:06:44.000
<v Speaker 2>that their certificates would be used only if Trump succeeded

0:06:44.040 --> 0:06:47.279
<v Speaker 2>in litigation in the States. So it was lie on

0:06:47.320 --> 0:06:48.280
<v Speaker 2>top of lie.

0:06:48.680 --> 0:06:52.080
<v Speaker 4>Yes, there were multiple levels to the lies and the

0:06:52.120 --> 0:06:57.040
<v Speaker 4>fraud that is alleged in the indictment. The scheme to

0:06:57.160 --> 0:07:01.000
<v Speaker 4>create these false plates of electors in the states that

0:07:01.040 --> 0:07:06.000
<v Speaker 4>Trump wanted to contest involved, in some cases, lying to

0:07:06.279 --> 0:07:10.160
<v Speaker 4>those electors who had been pledged for Trump, telling them

0:07:10.680 --> 0:07:15.080
<v Speaker 4>that this alternative slate of electors would only be used

0:07:15.120 --> 0:07:18.960
<v Speaker 4>and submitted to Congress if there were a court ruling

0:07:19.080 --> 0:07:22.200
<v Speaker 4>in Trump's favor finding that in fact he had won.

0:07:22.560 --> 0:07:25.880
<v Speaker 4>And the reason why Trump and his co conspirators had

0:07:25.920 --> 0:07:28.640
<v Speaker 4>to lie to these electors was because some of them

0:07:28.720 --> 0:07:32.160
<v Speaker 4>raised concerns that, in fact, they would be acting unlawfully

0:07:32.520 --> 0:07:37.200
<v Speaker 4>if they presented themselves as of the legitimately elected electors

0:07:37.240 --> 0:07:39.920
<v Speaker 4>in their states, and so in order to get them

0:07:39.960 --> 0:07:43.080
<v Speaker 4>to actually go along with the scheme of creating the

0:07:43.120 --> 0:07:45.840
<v Speaker 4>false flate of electors to be submitted to Congress. They

0:07:45.880 --> 0:07:50.000
<v Speaker 4>had to be reassured falsely that those alternative slates that

0:07:50.080 --> 0:07:53.640
<v Speaker 4>included them would only be used in the event of

0:07:53.680 --> 0:07:56.560
<v Speaker 4>a court ruling in Trump's favor, but of course there

0:07:56.600 --> 0:08:00.480
<v Speaker 4>were no such court rulings in Trump's favor law in

0:08:00.600 --> 0:08:04.239
<v Speaker 4>state after state after state where he contested the results

0:08:04.240 --> 0:08:07.760
<v Speaker 4>of the election, which is important also because it shows

0:08:07.760 --> 0:08:10.760
<v Speaker 4>again that he was getting feedback in real time, not

0:08:10.800 --> 0:08:13.400
<v Speaker 4>only from his top officials and from officials in the states,

0:08:13.480 --> 0:08:16.840
<v Speaker 4>but from state courts that there had been no fraud

0:08:16.840 --> 0:08:19.680
<v Speaker 4>that would have changed the result in any of those states.

0:08:19.720 --> 0:08:21.840
<v Speaker 4>And again that goes to his criminal intents.

0:08:22.000 --> 0:08:24.840
<v Speaker 2>The indictment refers to Vice President Mike Pence or the

0:08:24.920 --> 0:08:28.400
<v Speaker 2>office of the Vice President more than one hundred times.

0:08:28.800 --> 0:08:31.200
<v Speaker 2>Will Pennce be the star witness.

0:08:31.360 --> 0:08:33.840
<v Speaker 4>It is hard to imagine this case going to trial

0:08:33.960 --> 0:08:37.000
<v Speaker 4>without Mike Pence's testimony. I don't know if he will

0:08:37.040 --> 0:08:39.520
<v Speaker 4>be the star witness, but he will certainly be among

0:08:39.679 --> 0:08:43.640
<v Speaker 4>the most important witnesses in the case. The indictment refers

0:08:43.679 --> 0:08:47.280
<v Speaker 4>to numerous communications that the former vice president had with

0:08:47.360 --> 0:08:51.240
<v Speaker 4>the President refers to contemporaneous notes that the former vice

0:08:51.280 --> 0:08:55.360
<v Speaker 4>president took regarding those conversations, And it's really in those

0:08:55.400 --> 0:08:59.840
<v Speaker 4>communications with the former vice president that we see really

0:09:00.040 --> 0:09:04.120
<v Speaker 4>significant portion of the pressure campaign that Trump brought to bear,

0:09:04.559 --> 0:09:08.480
<v Speaker 4>particularly at the end stages of the alleged conspiracy, to

0:09:08.600 --> 0:09:12.079
<v Speaker 4>try to get the vice president to stop the certification

0:09:12.240 --> 0:09:15.600
<v Speaker 4>of the legitimate electors, to send the matter back to

0:09:15.679 --> 0:09:18.960
<v Speaker 4>the States, or to accept the false plates of electors,

0:09:19.040 --> 0:09:20.439
<v Speaker 4>so he will be a key with it.

0:09:20.920 --> 0:09:24.560
<v Speaker 2>So there are six unnamed co conspirators, and it's fairly

0:09:24.640 --> 0:09:27.160
<v Speaker 2>obvious who five of them are. Why do you think

0:09:27.160 --> 0:09:31.040
<v Speaker 2>the Special Council decided not to charge them along with Trump?

0:09:31.200 --> 0:09:33.640
<v Speaker 2>Is it to move the case faster to trial? Are

0:09:33.720 --> 0:09:34.600
<v Speaker 2>there other reasons?

0:09:35.160 --> 0:09:38.400
<v Speaker 4>I think the most likely explanation is having to do

0:09:38.559 --> 0:09:40.400
<v Speaker 4>with an effort to try to get this case to

0:09:40.520 --> 0:09:44.640
<v Speaker 4>trial as soon as possible. The more defendants there are

0:09:44.679 --> 0:09:48.080
<v Speaker 4>included in an indictment, the more lawyer schedules need to

0:09:48.120 --> 0:09:51.840
<v Speaker 4>be taken into account in scheduling any matter, including the trial,

0:09:52.040 --> 0:09:54.920
<v Speaker 4>the more motions there will be to be decided. So

0:09:55.040 --> 0:09:58.440
<v Speaker 4>I think the most significant factor here is likely the

0:09:58.480 --> 0:10:01.480
<v Speaker 4>Special Council sense of urgent see in trying to get

0:10:01.480 --> 0:10:04.600
<v Speaker 4>this matter scheduled for trial as soon as possible and

0:10:04.720 --> 0:10:08.480
<v Speaker 4>before the election. There may be other reasons as well.

0:10:08.800 --> 0:10:11.160
<v Speaker 4>I imagine that some of the motions that might be

0:10:11.240 --> 0:10:14.400
<v Speaker 4>filed had there been other defendants names here, would include

0:10:14.400 --> 0:10:16.960
<v Speaker 4>those for severance, the argument that they couldn't get a

0:10:16.960 --> 0:10:20.360
<v Speaker 4>fair trial if tried alongside the former president, about whom

0:10:20.520 --> 0:10:23.200
<v Speaker 4>so many people have such strong feelings. They may have

0:10:23.240 --> 0:10:27.160
<v Speaker 4>had inconsistent defenses pointing the singers at one another, and

0:10:27.240 --> 0:10:30.640
<v Speaker 4>so I think, anticipating those motions as being among the

0:10:30.679 --> 0:10:32.679
<v Speaker 4>issues that would have to be decided by a trial

0:10:32.720 --> 0:10:36.000
<v Speaker 4>court before trial, it was likely wise of the Special

0:10:36.000 --> 0:10:39.559
<v Speaker 4>Counselor to bring this indictment against the single defendant, mister Trump,

0:10:39.559 --> 0:10:42.720
<v Speaker 4>who clearly is his priority, so that those other issues

0:10:42.760 --> 0:10:44.959
<v Speaker 4>wouldn't drag down the timeline of the case.

0:10:45.320 --> 0:10:49.080
<v Speaker 2>The Special Council said, the investigations continuing, and I'm wondering

0:10:49.160 --> 0:10:53.520
<v Speaker 2>if these six co conspirators, you know, aren't sleeping too

0:10:53.520 --> 0:10:55.240
<v Speaker 2>well thinking that they will be charged.

0:10:56.000 --> 0:10:59.600
<v Speaker 4>I imagine that they will be charged, or at least

0:10:59.600 --> 0:11:02.480
<v Speaker 4>most of them. The fact that they were included in

0:11:02.559 --> 0:11:05.800
<v Speaker 4>this indictment as co conspirators with their roles in the

0:11:05.840 --> 0:11:10.760
<v Speaker 4>conspiracy described means that the Special Council presented evidence to

0:11:10.920 --> 0:11:14.840
<v Speaker 4>the Grand Jury about the involvement of those individuals and

0:11:15.000 --> 0:11:18.480
<v Speaker 4>clearly must feel that he has enough evidence to indict them.

0:11:18.880 --> 0:11:22.080
<v Speaker 4>So I think it was a strategic decision based mostly

0:11:22.240 --> 0:11:25.360
<v Speaker 4>in concerns about timing that explains why they were not

0:11:25.400 --> 0:11:29.959
<v Speaker 4>included in this indictment. I imagine that those individuals are

0:11:29.960 --> 0:11:33.760
<v Speaker 4>not sleeping well and are considering their options, including whether

0:11:33.800 --> 0:11:37.360
<v Speaker 4>to pursue a plea agreement with the prosecutor's perhaps its

0:11:37.400 --> 0:11:41.720
<v Speaker 4>even one that includes cooperation against the former president or others.

0:11:42.200 --> 0:11:44.520
<v Speaker 4>So I think it's too soon to say exactly what's

0:11:44.559 --> 0:11:47.000
<v Speaker 4>going to happen with respect to those other individuals, but

0:11:47.080 --> 0:11:50.800
<v Speaker 4>I would anticipate that they will be charged in some form.

0:11:51.080 --> 0:11:55.720
<v Speaker 2>There's no charge of insurrection or sedition, and it seems like,

0:11:56.040 --> 0:11:58.160
<v Speaker 2>you know, the facts are there, why do you think

0:11:58.200 --> 0:12:00.679
<v Speaker 2>he didn't charge insurrection or addition.

0:12:01.520 --> 0:12:06.079
<v Speaker 4>The Special Council's decision not to include charges of insurrection

0:12:06.720 --> 0:12:10.680
<v Speaker 4>or seditious conspiracy, I think reflects an effort to keep

0:12:10.720 --> 0:12:14.560
<v Speaker 4>the case as simple and strong as possible and to

0:12:14.720 --> 0:12:19.440
<v Speaker 4>avoid getting bogged down in litigations about the viability of

0:12:19.559 --> 0:12:22.440
<v Speaker 4>those other charges, and so I think it was a

0:12:22.559 --> 0:12:26.680
<v Speaker 4>strategically sound decision. The charges are set forth and misindictment

0:12:26.760 --> 0:12:29.840
<v Speaker 4>appear to be supported by very strong evidence and a

0:12:29.920 --> 0:12:33.880
<v Speaker 4>clear narrative, and they don't raise the issues, including those

0:12:33.960 --> 0:12:36.560
<v Speaker 4>grounded in the First Amendment, that some of those other

0:12:36.679 --> 0:12:40.400
<v Speaker 4>charges might raise. So I think that even though the

0:12:40.480 --> 0:12:44.680
<v Speaker 4>facts do lend themselves to an interpretation that might have

0:12:44.720 --> 0:12:48.880
<v Speaker 4>supported such charges, by not including those charges in this indictment,

0:12:48.920 --> 0:12:51.920
<v Speaker 4>a special council of boys having to litigate those questions

0:12:51.920 --> 0:12:55.880
<v Speaker 4>that are difficult ones. And instead, the way these charges

0:12:55.920 --> 0:12:59.880
<v Speaker 4>are framed as broad conspiracies will allow much of that

0:13:00.240 --> 0:13:03.840
<v Speaker 4>evidence to come in in any event to explain the

0:13:03.880 --> 0:13:07.960
<v Speaker 4>conspiracy because they are relevant to it, without bogging the

0:13:08.040 --> 0:13:11.640
<v Speaker 4>case down in litigation about the legal issues that would

0:13:11.640 --> 0:13:13.200
<v Speaker 4>arise with respect to those charges.

0:13:13.559 --> 0:13:15.520
<v Speaker 2>So I want to talk about some of the defenses

0:13:15.559 --> 0:13:20.360
<v Speaker 2>we heard from Trump's attorney John Lorow last night. First,

0:13:20.440 --> 0:13:23.920
<v Speaker 2>political interference in the election, something Trump has been saying

0:13:23.960 --> 0:13:27.199
<v Speaker 2>over and over in his rallies and interviews that might

0:13:27.240 --> 0:13:29.600
<v Speaker 2>work in the public But would that even be allowed

0:13:29.600 --> 0:13:30.800
<v Speaker 2>as a defense at trial?

0:13:31.720 --> 0:13:35.600
<v Speaker 4>No, that is not a defense one could raise at trial.

0:13:36.320 --> 0:13:39.960
<v Speaker 4>There is a claim that is sometimes pursued by defendants

0:13:40.320 --> 0:13:44.959
<v Speaker 4>of selective prosecution, including that the prosecution is politically motivated.

0:13:45.240 --> 0:13:48.000
<v Speaker 4>That is a very very difficult claim to establish, and

0:13:48.120 --> 0:13:51.800
<v Speaker 4>judges usually do not entertain that without any evidence to

0:13:51.960 --> 0:13:54.280
<v Speaker 4>support it. And I don't imagine that the judge in

0:13:54.280 --> 0:13:57.280
<v Speaker 4>this case would entertain that argument here either. So I

0:13:57.320 --> 0:13:59.520
<v Speaker 4>think that the fact that mister trumpayers are making those

0:13:59.520 --> 0:14:04.240
<v Speaker 4>claims in the court of public opinion advance his political interests,

0:14:04.280 --> 0:14:07.560
<v Speaker 4>but they don't give rise to a valid legal defense.

0:14:07.679 --> 0:14:11.400
<v Speaker 2>Another thing was a free speech defense. Loro said, an

0:14:11.400 --> 0:14:15.800
<v Speaker 2>administration has criminalized the free speech and advocacy of another administration,

0:14:16.080 --> 0:14:20.120
<v Speaker 2>and Rudy Giuliani also said, you know, this is against

0:14:20.160 --> 0:14:20.800
<v Speaker 2>free speech.

0:14:21.600 --> 0:14:25.400
<v Speaker 4>So this is a really important point. The indictment alleges

0:14:25.720 --> 0:14:31.080
<v Speaker 4>conspiracies to obstruct the certification of the electors and the

0:14:31.120 --> 0:14:36.000
<v Speaker 4>electoral process, and does not rely solely on statements by

0:14:36.240 --> 0:14:39.040
<v Speaker 4>the former president and his associates, who are alleged to

0:14:39.120 --> 0:14:42.440
<v Speaker 4>be co conspirators. Here, this is not the criminalization or

0:14:42.440 --> 0:14:47.320
<v Speaker 4>attempted criminalization of speech alone. Instead, what is charged are

0:14:47.400 --> 0:14:52.800
<v Speaker 4>conspiracies that involve action, conduct, conduct, including the recruitment of

0:14:52.880 --> 0:14:57.040
<v Speaker 4>these stake electors conduct, including efforts to pressure the members

0:14:57.040 --> 0:15:00.160
<v Speaker 4>of Congress and the former vice president to accept the

0:15:00.240 --> 0:15:04.640
<v Speaker 4>sake electors and to stop the certification process. So it

0:15:04.720 --> 0:15:08.520
<v Speaker 4>is just wrong to claim that this is an effort

0:15:08.560 --> 0:15:13.080
<v Speaker 4>to prosecute someone for their speech. This is a prosecution

0:15:13.360 --> 0:15:17.920
<v Speaker 4>for conduct and a criminal conspiracy in which speech was used,

0:15:17.960 --> 0:15:20.960
<v Speaker 4>of course, because that is how people communicate with one

0:15:21.000 --> 0:15:26.240
<v Speaker 4>another to conduct the conspiracy. And also, the former president's false,

0:15:26.440 --> 0:15:29.760
<v Speaker 4>repeated claims that he had won the election were part

0:15:30.000 --> 0:15:33.920
<v Speaker 4>of the scheme that is alleged because they helped answer

0:15:34.080 --> 0:15:38.160
<v Speaker 4>so distrust among his followers in the results of the election,

0:15:38.960 --> 0:15:41.800
<v Speaker 4>to sort of lay the groundwork for them to accept

0:15:41.840 --> 0:15:44.400
<v Speaker 4>the proposition that there had been fraud and to accept

0:15:44.480 --> 0:15:48.320
<v Speaker 4>these fake electors. But he is not being prosecuted simply

0:15:48.360 --> 0:15:52.720
<v Speaker 4>for lying about the election, and that's really important to remember.

0:15:53.160 --> 0:15:57.280
<v Speaker 2>Finally, adviceive counsel on this. I've heard before that Trump

0:15:57.400 --> 0:15:59.960
<v Speaker 2>was just relying on what his attorneys told him.

0:16:00.200 --> 0:16:02.760
<v Speaker 4>So there is a defense that can be raised as

0:16:02.960 --> 0:16:06.400
<v Speaker 4>advice a council, but it does not apply here. It

0:16:06.560 --> 0:16:10.440
<v Speaker 4>requires that a person rely in good faith on the

0:16:10.480 --> 0:16:14.400
<v Speaker 4>advice of council to establish that they did not believe

0:16:14.440 --> 0:16:17.640
<v Speaker 4>that what they were doing was unlawful. The facts that

0:16:17.720 --> 0:16:22.160
<v Speaker 4>are alleged in this indictment are inconsistence, with that being

0:16:22.200 --> 0:16:27.360
<v Speaker 4>a valid defense here. This indictment lays out all of

0:16:27.400 --> 0:16:31.960
<v Speaker 4>the advice, including legal advice, that mister Trump got from

0:16:32.080 --> 0:16:36.360
<v Speaker 4>his attorneys, the attorneys in the White House Council's office,

0:16:36.760 --> 0:16:40.120
<v Speaker 4>attorneys at the very top of the Department of Justice,

0:16:40.160 --> 0:16:44.880
<v Speaker 4>all of whom told him that the scheme to use

0:16:44.960 --> 0:16:48.440
<v Speaker 4>false electors who had voted for Trump and to substitute

0:16:48.480 --> 0:16:53.000
<v Speaker 4>them for the Biden legitimately elected electors was meritless and

0:16:53.040 --> 0:16:56.200
<v Speaker 4>had no grounding in law. So the legal advice that

0:16:56.320 --> 0:17:00.720
<v Speaker 4>he got was that he couldn't do what he did. Instead,

0:17:01.200 --> 0:17:05.800
<v Speaker 4>he chose to rely on counsel he got from outside advisors,

0:17:06.000 --> 0:17:10.320
<v Speaker 4>lawyers among them who are now among the unnamed co conspirators.

0:17:10.440 --> 0:17:14.320
<v Speaker 4>But even those lawyers, at various points acknowledge that what

0:17:14.359 --> 0:17:18.080
<v Speaker 4>they were saying was severely flawed and that there was

0:17:18.440 --> 0:17:21.800
<v Speaker 4>not a good legal basis for it, And the very

0:17:21.840 --> 0:17:25.520
<v Speaker 4>fact that they are charged as co conspirators shows that

0:17:25.600 --> 0:17:30.320
<v Speaker 4>they were or allegens that they were part of the conspiracy.

0:17:30.760 --> 0:17:34.840
<v Speaker 4>As opposed to lawyers providing advice in good faith on

0:17:34.880 --> 0:17:38.520
<v Speaker 4>which the former president relied in good faith. So merely

0:17:38.560 --> 0:17:41.960
<v Speaker 4>the fact that somebody who is a lawyer gave you

0:17:42.040 --> 0:17:44.359
<v Speaker 4>a theory that you could pursue that you liked, and

0:17:44.440 --> 0:17:47.199
<v Speaker 4>you chose that rather than the legal advice you were

0:17:47.200 --> 0:17:50.720
<v Speaker 4>getting from the lawyers who are in official positions, who

0:17:50.840 --> 0:17:54.040
<v Speaker 4>worked in the government, and who you had appointed to

0:17:54.080 --> 0:17:56.960
<v Speaker 4>their positions because you thought they were of good judgment.

0:17:57.560 --> 0:17:59.720
<v Speaker 4>Just because you chose one set of lawyers over the

0:17:59.720 --> 0:18:02.720
<v Speaker 4>other does not give you automatically an advice of council

0:18:02.760 --> 0:18:04.000
<v Speaker 4>defense timing.

0:18:04.560 --> 0:18:07.760
<v Speaker 2>Trump has four trials already scheduled between October of this

0:18:07.840 --> 0:18:10.480
<v Speaker 2>year and May of next year, two of them criminal.

0:18:11.000 --> 0:18:13.399
<v Speaker 2>Is there any way this case could be tried before

0:18:13.440 --> 0:18:13.960
<v Speaker 2>the election.

0:18:14.520 --> 0:18:17.200
<v Speaker 4>It will be very difficult to get this case tried

0:18:17.240 --> 0:18:19.960
<v Speaker 4>before the election, but I think it is possible. It

0:18:19.960 --> 0:18:25.960
<v Speaker 4>would require several things to happen, including the March twenty

0:18:26.000 --> 0:18:29.159
<v Speaker 4>twenty fourth trial of the case brought by to Manhattan

0:18:29.160 --> 0:18:33.840
<v Speaker 4>District Attorney Alvin Bragg, to be moved. District Attorney Bragg

0:18:33.920 --> 0:18:37.480
<v Speaker 4>has indicated in public remarks that he may be open

0:18:37.960 --> 0:18:41.159
<v Speaker 4>to moving his trial date in the interests of advancing

0:18:41.240 --> 0:18:44.240
<v Speaker 4>to the federal cases, and so if that were to happen,

0:18:44.359 --> 0:18:47.960
<v Speaker 4>that would open up a window in early twenty twenty

0:18:48.000 --> 0:18:51.640
<v Speaker 4>four before the May twenty twenty four dates in the

0:18:51.680 --> 0:18:55.919
<v Speaker 4>Florida case. So that's one necessary thing that has to

0:18:55.920 --> 0:18:58.639
<v Speaker 4>happen is the movement of that trial date. Another would

0:18:58.640 --> 0:19:01.080
<v Speaker 4>be that the judge presided over this case in the

0:19:01.119 --> 0:19:04.679
<v Speaker 4>District of Columbia would have to decide that it is

0:19:04.720 --> 0:19:07.439
<v Speaker 4>important to get this case on the calendar before the

0:19:07.480 --> 0:19:11.280
<v Speaker 4>election and schedule it accordingly, and to move the case

0:19:11.320 --> 0:19:12.720
<v Speaker 4>along expeditiously.

0:19:13.560 --> 0:19:16.720
<v Speaker 2>This looks like a more complicated prosecution than the classified

0:19:16.760 --> 0:19:20.960
<v Speaker 2>documents case. What are the main obstacles for the prosecution

0:19:21.240 --> 0:19:23.280
<v Speaker 2>getting in the way of a guilty verdict here?

0:19:24.000 --> 0:19:28.320
<v Speaker 4>This is more complicated than the Florida document's case in

0:19:28.520 --> 0:19:31.480
<v Speaker 4>the sense that it is a broad set of conspiracy

0:19:31.560 --> 0:19:37.879
<v Speaker 4>charges encompassing a good deal more conduct and involving more individuals,

0:19:37.960 --> 0:19:40.280
<v Speaker 4>and it will involve I believe, more witnesses than the

0:19:40.280 --> 0:19:43.560
<v Speaker 4>Florida case would. That said, it does not appear to

0:19:43.760 --> 0:19:48.320
<v Speaker 4>include classified information, and so for that reason I think

0:19:48.359 --> 0:19:51.000
<v Speaker 4>that it will be easier to move it forward more

0:19:51.040 --> 0:19:55.360
<v Speaker 4>expeditiously than the Florida case, which does involve the classified

0:19:55.520 --> 0:19:58.640
<v Speaker 4>information about which there will likely be litigation in terms

0:19:58.640 --> 0:20:01.000
<v Speaker 4>of what can be shown to the jury and use

0:20:01.160 --> 0:20:04.040
<v Speaker 4>in court. So as a practical matter, I think that

0:20:04.359 --> 0:20:08.200
<v Speaker 4>the challenges will be just getting all of the discovery

0:20:08.240 --> 0:20:11.480
<v Speaker 4>to the defense in time, litigating any pretrial motions that

0:20:11.560 --> 0:20:14.639
<v Speaker 4>are necessary, and then presenting the case, which, like we

0:20:14.680 --> 0:20:18.800
<v Speaker 4>will involve quite a few witnesses and documentary evidence in

0:20:18.840 --> 0:20:23.680
<v Speaker 4>an expedition's manner. In terms of actually getting a guilty verdict,

0:20:23.880 --> 0:20:26.120
<v Speaker 4>there's the challenge that I think is present in any

0:20:26.160 --> 0:20:30.000
<v Speaker 4>case involving the former president of finding a jury that

0:20:30.040 --> 0:20:34.159
<v Speaker 4>can unanimously agree on a verdict, given how polarizing a

0:20:34.280 --> 0:20:37.800
<v Speaker 4>figure he is. And then, because the prosecution will have

0:20:37.840 --> 0:20:41.879
<v Speaker 4>to prove criminal intent, that will be a challenge, because

0:20:42.320 --> 0:20:45.000
<v Speaker 4>even though the evidence is set forth in the indictment

0:20:45.480 --> 0:20:50.840
<v Speaker 4>is very strong, Nevertheless, Trump will likely argue first that

0:20:50.920 --> 0:20:54.000
<v Speaker 4>he thought that he had won the election and because

0:20:54.000 --> 0:20:56.199
<v Speaker 4>of that he can't be guilty of any crime, and

0:20:56.240 --> 0:20:59.919
<v Speaker 4>at least one juror may buy that argument. And second,

0:21:00.119 --> 0:21:03.840
<v Speaker 4>he may persuade at least one juror whether he thought

0:21:03.880 --> 0:21:07.520
<v Speaker 4>he had lost the election or not, that he nevertheless

0:21:07.520 --> 0:21:11.480
<v Speaker 4>still lacked criminal intent with respect to using these other

0:21:11.600 --> 0:21:15.480
<v Speaker 4>means of trying to stay in power. And the former

0:21:15.520 --> 0:21:18.200
<v Speaker 4>president is somebody as to whom it is challenging to

0:21:18.400 --> 0:21:22.760
<v Speaker 4>him down his intent. So I think that those will

0:21:22.800 --> 0:21:24.840
<v Speaker 4>be the biggest challenges at this trial.

0:21:25.200 --> 0:21:27.199
<v Speaker 2>Thanks so much for taking the time to be on

0:21:27.280 --> 0:21:30.280
<v Speaker 2>the show, Jessica and to lend us your insights. That's

0:21:30.359 --> 0:21:34.000
<v Speaker 2>Jessica Rob, a professor at Cardozo Law School, And that's

0:21:34.040 --> 0:21:36.680
<v Speaker 2>it for this edition of The Bloomberg Law Show. Remember

0:21:36.680 --> 0:21:38.800
<v Speaker 2>you can always get the latest legal news on our

0:21:38.800 --> 0:21:42.959
<v Speaker 2>Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can find them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify,

0:21:43.160 --> 0:21:48.200
<v Speaker 2>and at www dot Bloomberg dot com, slash podcast slash Law,

0:21:48.600 --> 0:21:51.159
<v Speaker 2>and remember to tune into The Bloomberg Law Show every

0:21:51.240 --> 0:21:55.120
<v Speaker 2>weeknight at ten pm Wall Street Time. I'm June Grosso,

0:21:55.280 --> 0:21:56.879
<v Speaker 2>and you're listening to Bloomberg