WEBVTT - Amid Comey Crisis, Sessions Revises Sentencing Rules (Audio)

0:00:00.240 --> 0:00:04.400
<v Speaker 1>President Trump's abrupt firing of FBI dresser James Comey has

0:00:04.400 --> 0:00:08.600
<v Speaker 1>plunged the White House into another political crisis, as Democrats

0:00:08.640 --> 0:00:12.360
<v Speaker 1>call for a special prosecutor to lead the continuing investigation

0:00:12.400 --> 0:00:16.599
<v Speaker 1>into Russian interference in the presidential election. Today, a coalition

0:00:16.600 --> 0:00:19.279
<v Speaker 1>of twenty state attorneys general sent a letter to the

0:00:19.320 --> 0:00:23.880
<v Speaker 1>Justice Department's Deputy A. G. Rod Rosenstein and call for

0:00:23.920 --> 0:00:27.720
<v Speaker 1>the immediate appointment of an independent special counsel to continue

0:00:27.760 --> 0:00:31.800
<v Speaker 1>the investigation. At a Senate Intelligence Committee hearing this morning,

0:00:32.000 --> 0:00:36.000
<v Speaker 1>the acting Director of the FBI, Andrew McCabe, testified that

0:00:36.120 --> 0:00:39.400
<v Speaker 1>to date, there has been no effort to impede any

0:00:39.520 --> 0:00:44.839
<v Speaker 1>FBI investigation since Comby's firing. Simply put sir, you cannot

0:00:44.960 --> 0:00:48.680
<v Speaker 1>stop the men and women of the FBI from doing

0:00:48.680 --> 0:00:52.200
<v Speaker 1>the right thing, protecting the American people and upholding a constitution.

0:00:53.000 --> 0:00:56.400
<v Speaker 1>Joining us are Philip Bobbitt, Professor at Columbia Law School,

0:00:56.440 --> 0:01:00.520
<v Speaker 1>and Sanford Levinson, professor at the University of Texas Law School.

0:01:01.040 --> 0:01:04.360
<v Speaker 1>Phil As you heard, the acting FBI director said, there's

0:01:04.440 --> 0:01:09.000
<v Speaker 1>been no effort to impede any investigation to date. Could

0:01:09.040 --> 0:01:12.560
<v Speaker 1>that change with a new FBI director or with an

0:01:12.720 --> 0:01:17.160
<v Speaker 1>order from the A G. Of course that could change

0:01:17.240 --> 0:01:19.280
<v Speaker 1>and and uh, and there are many people who would

0:01:19.319 --> 0:01:22.160
<v Speaker 1>say that the firing of Jim Comey was an effort

0:01:22.200 --> 0:01:28.520
<v Speaker 1>to impede such an investigation. Sandy, how reassured for those

0:01:28.520 --> 0:01:30.919
<v Speaker 1>people who are concerned about the firing of Jim Comey,

0:01:31.160 --> 0:01:34.760
<v Speaker 1>how reassured should they be because of the things that

0:01:34.880 --> 0:01:38.880
<v Speaker 1>Andrew McCabe said. He also talked about how he talked

0:01:38.880 --> 0:01:41.520
<v Speaker 1>about how there's no effort to impede the investigation. The

0:01:41.560 --> 0:01:44.520
<v Speaker 1>men and women of the FBI won't be deterred. Um

0:01:44.600 --> 0:01:51.680
<v Speaker 1>is that reassuring? Um? I can jump in here. Um,

0:01:51.720 --> 0:01:56.560
<v Speaker 1>it is from one perspective that I actually do believe

0:01:56.960 --> 0:02:01.480
<v Speaker 1>that the FBI will be diligent in seeking out evidence

0:02:01.800 --> 0:02:05.240
<v Speaker 1>wherever it leads. But the point is, and this is

0:02:05.280 --> 0:02:08.240
<v Speaker 1>what got Comy into some trouble in the first place.

0:02:08.760 --> 0:02:12.720
<v Speaker 1>It's not the FBI decides whether or not to prosecute. Uh.

0:02:12.800 --> 0:02:17.639
<v Speaker 1>That's a subject for the Justice Department. And to put

0:02:17.639 --> 0:02:20.440
<v Speaker 1>it mildly, I think there is a lot of concern

0:02:21.080 --> 0:02:26.320
<v Speaker 1>about whether the Justice Department will be sufficiently independent to

0:02:26.480 --> 0:02:32.079
<v Speaker 1>make the decision to prosecute or not to prosecute. Unprofessional

0:02:32.320 --> 0:02:36.200
<v Speaker 1>rather than low Ley political grounds. Phil There have been

0:02:36.240 --> 0:02:41.960
<v Speaker 1>calls for an independent council, and Senator Richard Blumenthal, among others,

0:02:42.000 --> 0:02:46.040
<v Speaker 1>has said that he'll introduce legislation to re establish an

0:02:46.040 --> 0:02:51.800
<v Speaker 1>independent council if a special prosecutor isn't appointed one that existed,

0:02:52.560 --> 0:02:55.000
<v Speaker 1>similar to the one in the wake of Watergate. Another

0:02:55.040 --> 0:02:59.560
<v Speaker 1>option is an independent commission. How likely are any of

0:02:59.600 --> 0:03:05.040
<v Speaker 1>the to get through? My guess is at the likeliest

0:03:05.880 --> 0:03:09.040
<v Speaker 1>parent would be a Senate Select Committee. The next likely

0:03:09.120 --> 0:03:14.160
<v Speaker 1>would be an independent commission who's whose members were selected

0:03:14.160 --> 0:03:17.919
<v Speaker 1>in some kind of negotiations between the White House and

0:03:18.080 --> 0:03:22.280
<v Speaker 1>the Congress. That the least likely is a new statute

0:03:22.320 --> 0:03:25.280
<v Speaker 1>authorizing and independent council. And the reason for that is

0:03:25.320 --> 0:03:29.799
<v Speaker 1>because we've been there before. Not only are their doubts

0:03:29.800 --> 0:03:33.480
<v Speaker 1>about the constitutionality of such a statute, our experience with

0:03:33.560 --> 0:03:36.600
<v Speaker 1>it has not been a very wholesome one. Do you remember,

0:03:36.640 --> 0:03:43.280
<v Speaker 1>perhaps Judge starrs uh investigations of President Clinton. It's a

0:03:44.400 --> 0:03:48.160
<v Speaker 1>it's an unusual constitutional animal, sort of not really in

0:03:49.400 --> 0:03:55.080
<v Speaker 1>Article to or Article one or Article three. And it

0:03:55.080 --> 0:03:57.800
<v Speaker 1>seems to have a sort of an inertial force to

0:03:57.880 --> 0:04:02.119
<v Speaker 1>take on a scope that I think the Conress would

0:04:02.120 --> 0:04:07.240
<v Speaker 1>be unelikely to reauthorize Sandy. One other thing that Andrew

0:04:07.320 --> 0:04:10.440
<v Speaker 1>McCabe said today was something that seemed to contradict a

0:04:10.480 --> 0:04:14.040
<v Speaker 1>White House characterization. He described the Russia probe as quote

0:04:14.400 --> 0:04:18.200
<v Speaker 1>highly significant. Um, should we take those words to to

0:04:18.520 --> 0:04:22.920
<v Speaker 1>mean a whole lot? Are? Are those words themselves pretty significant? Well?

0:04:23.200 --> 0:04:25.200
<v Speaker 1>I mean it seems to me that any time the

0:04:25.240 --> 0:04:30.960
<v Speaker 1>acting director, who one has to assume is extraordinarily careful

0:04:31.560 --> 0:04:35.680
<v Speaker 1>about words used in the public hearing, uses the term

0:04:35.760 --> 0:04:40.400
<v Speaker 1>highly significant. Um, one has to take that seriously. I mean,

0:04:40.480 --> 0:04:47.400
<v Speaker 1>why why wouldn't you? And Phil Something else that contradicted

0:04:47.520 --> 0:04:52.240
<v Speaker 1>what's been said by the Trump administration. Andrew McCabe said

0:04:52.279 --> 0:04:55.800
<v Speaker 1>that working for Jim Comey was the greatest experience of

0:04:55.920 --> 0:04:59.799
<v Speaker 1>his life and the FBI, everyone in the FBI really,

0:05:00.240 --> 0:05:03.240
<v Speaker 1>you know, respected him, which is contrary with the White House.

0:05:03.279 --> 0:05:05.320
<v Speaker 1>He said, So, what's the impact of that we have

0:05:05.360 --> 0:05:09.080
<v Speaker 1>at thirty seconds? I think it's pretty unlikely that the

0:05:09.160 --> 0:05:15.120
<v Speaker 1>acting direct the FBI will be promoted. Excuse me said

0:05:15.120 --> 0:05:18.520
<v Speaker 1>that again, You're it's unlikely that I think your statement

0:05:18.800 --> 0:05:21.960
<v Speaker 1>just finished his promotion as the permanent director. He's gonna

0:05:22.200 --> 0:05:24.920
<v Speaker 1>he may be the acting only for a few more hours.

0:05:25.400 --> 0:05:28.800
<v Speaker 1>That's a something that enrages the White House. They were

0:05:30.000 --> 0:05:33.520
<v Speaker 1>pretty upset by Jim Comeby's refusal to give public reassurance

0:05:33.560 --> 0:05:37.240
<v Speaker 1>to the President and his concerns. They didn't like the

0:05:37.279 --> 0:05:40.040
<v Speaker 1>idea that called me undercut the White House on the

0:05:40.120 --> 0:05:46.680
<v Speaker 1>Obama wire tapping charges. Uh. I would imagine that Acting

0:05:46.680 --> 0:05:50.920
<v Speaker 1>Director McCay was already planning his upcoming vacation. We're talking

0:05:50.920 --> 0:05:54.640
<v Speaker 1>with Philip Bobbitt, Professor Columbia Law School and Sanford Levinson,

0:05:54.680 --> 0:05:58.560
<v Speaker 1>Professor at the University of Texas Law School about President

0:05:58.560 --> 0:06:03.560
<v Speaker 1>Trump's abrupt firing of FBI Director James Comey and the fallout.

0:06:05.000 --> 0:06:07.760
<v Speaker 1>Phil let me ask you this question. We know today

0:06:07.839 --> 0:06:12.160
<v Speaker 1>that the Deputy Attorney General Rod rosen Stein went to

0:06:12.200 --> 0:06:16.920
<v Speaker 1>meet with the heads of the Senate Intelligence Committee during

0:06:17.240 --> 0:06:22.839
<v Speaker 1>the hearing today. What do you make of that? Well,

0:06:22.880 --> 0:06:28.480
<v Speaker 1>it was a private meeting. I'm sure will will learn

0:06:28.520 --> 0:06:31.560
<v Speaker 1>more when rosen Stein goes up there next week. I

0:06:32.480 --> 0:06:37.480
<v Speaker 1>my guess is that he was asked by the by

0:06:37.520 --> 0:06:42.640
<v Speaker 1>Senator Warner in Senator burr Uh, do one agree he

0:06:42.680 --> 0:06:46.120
<v Speaker 1>would be able to cooperate with the investigations of the

0:06:46.160 --> 0:06:50.080
<v Speaker 1>Senate Committee. I think It's unlikely that they would have

0:06:50.440 --> 0:06:53.280
<v Speaker 1>expected him to say much about his private conversations with

0:06:53.360 --> 0:06:55.800
<v Speaker 1>the president. What they want to know is whether or

0:06:55.839 --> 0:07:02.080
<v Speaker 1>not the FBI can provide investigator assets to the committee.

0:07:02.080 --> 0:07:04.320
<v Speaker 1>The committee is a small staff. They can't possibly do

0:07:04.360 --> 0:07:07.559
<v Speaker 1>this investigation themselves, and that, by the way, is another

0:07:07.600 --> 0:07:11.640
<v Speaker 1>good reason for a select committee. Imagine that rot Stone

0:07:11.640 --> 0:07:17.560
<v Speaker 1>would reassure them. Sandy Levinson, there's been some talk that

0:07:18.240 --> 0:07:23.239
<v Speaker 1>Director former Director Comy might testify in the coming weeks.

0:07:24.040 --> 0:07:27.160
<v Speaker 1>If he did testify before Congress, what would he be

0:07:27.280 --> 0:07:31.600
<v Speaker 1>able to say about this investigation and the circumstances of

0:07:31.960 --> 0:07:38.040
<v Speaker 1>his firing? The honest answers, I really don't know that

0:07:38.920 --> 0:07:41.840
<v Speaker 1>that is say, I don't know how much he would

0:07:42.440 --> 0:07:47.360
<v Speaker 1>believe that, say, his conversations with the President of privileged UM.

0:07:47.600 --> 0:07:52.800
<v Speaker 1>Though inasmuch as the President in fact opened up the

0:07:52.880 --> 0:07:55.840
<v Speaker 1>inquiry by saying that he had been assured three times

0:07:55.800 --> 0:07:58.720
<v Speaker 1>said he wasn't a target, it would seem to me

0:07:59.000 --> 0:08:03.640
<v Speaker 1>that at the very least, uh former Director Comy could

0:08:03.680 --> 0:08:08.600
<v Speaker 1>say whether that's true or not without going to further details. UM.

0:08:08.640 --> 0:08:12.480
<v Speaker 1>But I would certainly expect him to be scrupulous, if

0:08:12.560 --> 0:08:18.800
<v Speaker 1>for no other reason than given this administration and this

0:08:19.000 --> 0:08:22.960
<v Speaker 1>Justice Department, including Jeff Sessions. Let's not forget the Jeff

0:08:22.960 --> 0:08:26.920
<v Speaker 1>Sessions is the attorney in general. Not Rosenstein um that

0:08:27.000 --> 0:08:29.720
<v Speaker 1>I would not put it past the Trump administration to

0:08:29.760 --> 0:08:33.560
<v Speaker 1>try to prosecute Comy if they believed that he was

0:08:33.679 --> 0:08:39.920
<v Speaker 1>leaking confidential information that was protected, and so Senate Majority

0:08:40.000 --> 0:08:44.120
<v Speaker 1>Leader go ahead. The presidents just just within the last

0:08:44.120 --> 0:08:47.000
<v Speaker 1>few minutes at least on CNN has come out and

0:08:47.040 --> 0:08:52.400
<v Speaker 1>said that call Me requested a meeting with him, they

0:08:52.400 --> 0:08:56.839
<v Speaker 1>had dinner together, that Camy asked to be reappointed, and

0:08:57.000 --> 0:08:59.600
<v Speaker 1>that in that context he assured the President that he

0:08:59.679 --> 0:09:03.400
<v Speaker 1>was not under investigation. President further said that they had

0:09:03.440 --> 0:09:08.400
<v Speaker 1>two subs telephone calls, one initiated by Comy, one initiated

0:09:08.440 --> 0:09:11.600
<v Speaker 1>by the President, but at least one of those, the

0:09:11.640 --> 0:09:14.320
<v Speaker 1>President asked him directly whether or not the President was

0:09:14.360 --> 0:09:18.560
<v Speaker 1>subject to investigation, and they Calmy said no. So I

0:09:18.600 --> 0:09:21.959
<v Speaker 1>think it's Sandy suggesting if there was a problem with

0:09:22.120 --> 0:09:25.000
<v Speaker 1>the privilege of these conversations, as I think they probably

0:09:25.120 --> 0:09:28.200
<v Speaker 1>would have been, that's out the window. The President has

0:09:28.280 --> 0:09:31.760
<v Speaker 1>totally waived his privilege now by making these claims about

0:09:32.000 --> 0:09:36.880
<v Speaker 1>about Callmey's statements, and let's go to a Senate Majority leader,

0:09:36.960 --> 0:09:39.800
<v Speaker 1>Mitch McConnell, who we know wields a lot of power.

0:09:40.280 --> 0:09:43.719
<v Speaker 1>He said that a new investigation by a special prosecutor

0:09:43.760 --> 0:09:47.280
<v Speaker 1>would impede the current work being done by the FBI

0:09:47.480 --> 0:09:51.720
<v Speaker 1>and the Senate Intelligence Committee. Do you find phil any

0:09:52.000 --> 0:09:56.000
<v Speaker 1>uh any uh, let's say veracity in that. Do you

0:09:56.000 --> 0:09:59.400
<v Speaker 1>think there's anything to that? Yeah, I don't think that's

0:09:59.440 --> 0:10:03.640
<v Speaker 1>that's uh, I don't think that's crazy. Uh. You've immediately

0:10:03.720 --> 0:10:09.000
<v Speaker 1>run into special counsel questioning witnesses, and you have a

0:10:09.040 --> 0:10:12.600
<v Speaker 1>set staff or uh, selective staff doing the same thing.

0:10:12.920 --> 0:10:16.679
<v Speaker 1>We had problems like this with the Iran Contra investigation. Now,

0:10:16.720 --> 0:10:19.880
<v Speaker 1>whether or not that's the real basis for his decision

0:10:20.080 --> 0:10:24.320
<v Speaker 1>maybe uh more controversial, but as a reason that I

0:10:24.320 --> 0:10:28.080
<v Speaker 1>think there's something to that, Sandy. Senator Mike Lee made

0:10:28.160 --> 0:10:32.559
<v Speaker 1>an interesting suggestion today. He suggested the possibility of Merrick

0:10:32.640 --> 0:10:36.800
<v Speaker 1>Garland as the new FBI director, and apparently Senator Klobuchar

0:10:37.200 --> 0:10:39.960
<v Speaker 1>uh suggested a Democrat suggested she thought that was a

0:10:39.960 --> 0:10:42.920
<v Speaker 1>good idea. I confess I'm I don't see that as

0:10:43.040 --> 0:10:45.079
<v Speaker 1>very likely, but I'm wondering if you think it might

0:10:45.080 --> 0:10:47.079
<v Speaker 1>have more merit as an idea than than I do.

0:10:48.320 --> 0:10:52.120
<v Speaker 1>Oh sure, you know. I think that once we've entered

0:10:52.320 --> 0:11:00.000
<v Speaker 1>into this era of truly surrealistic politics, why not Merritt Garland. Uh.

0:11:00.240 --> 0:11:05.839
<v Speaker 1>He would certainly be reassuring that everybody, at least prior

0:11:05.880 --> 0:11:08.520
<v Speaker 1>to his nomination agreed that he was a person of

0:11:08.559 --> 0:11:15.320
<v Speaker 1>unimpeachable integrity. He's a former prosecutor, um, so I would

0:11:15.360 --> 0:11:19.439
<v Speaker 1>have great trust in Merrick Garland. I find it very

0:11:19.480 --> 0:11:25.280
<v Speaker 1>hard to believe that Donald Trump would find Garland to

0:11:25.400 --> 0:11:30.560
<v Speaker 1>be an attractive nominee. But who knows, well, Phil would

0:11:30.840 --> 0:11:34.760
<v Speaker 1>Merrick Garland, who is the chief judge of the court

0:11:34.880 --> 0:11:38.560
<v Speaker 1>that is considered just below the Supreme Court, I want

0:11:38.600 --> 0:11:42.280
<v Speaker 1>to do that kind of a job. I don't know

0:11:42.320 --> 0:11:44.080
<v Speaker 1>what he'd want to do it, but I agree with

0:11:44.160 --> 0:11:48.280
<v Speaker 1>Santa help be a a superb choice. And my experience

0:11:48.320 --> 0:11:50.720
<v Speaker 1>with Judge Garland is that he is above all a

0:11:50.760 --> 0:11:55.800
<v Speaker 1>public servant, a very patriotic, a total of person totally

0:11:55.800 --> 0:11:58.960
<v Speaker 1>devoted to the public interest. So if he were asked,

0:11:59.320 --> 0:12:01.319
<v Speaker 1>I think he might welcome up the chief judy ship

0:12:01.440 --> 0:12:04.280
<v Speaker 1>if he felt it would contribute to the welfare of

0:12:04.280 --> 0:12:07.960
<v Speaker 1>the country. Well, that's something that we will see in

0:12:08.000 --> 0:12:14.480
<v Speaker 1>the future to two different uh uh positions, certainly, Um,

0:12:14.480 --> 0:12:17.960
<v Speaker 1>thank you both for being on Bloomberg Law. That's Sanford Levinson,

0:12:18.000 --> 0:12:20.560
<v Speaker 1>he's a professor at the University of Texas Law School.

0:12:20.559 --> 0:12:23.760
<v Speaker 1>And Philip Bobb and he's a professor at Columbia Law School.

0:12:24.160 --> 0:12:27.559
<v Speaker 1>Coming up on Bloomberg Law. A win for environmentalist. The

0:12:27.640 --> 0:12:32.600
<v Speaker 1>Senate unexpectedly keeps an Obama error rule to regulate methane

0:12:32.640 --> 0:12:37.800
<v Speaker 1>emissions from drilling, and it was a very close vote.

0:12:38.080 --> 0:12:41.480
<v Speaker 1>That's coming up on Bloomberg Law. I'm June Grosser with

0:12:41.480 --> 0:12:43.439
<v Speaker 1>Greg Store. This is Bloomberg