WEBVTT - Trump Sued Over Auto-Delete Messaging Services (Audio)

0:00:00.080 --> 0:00:03.680
<v Speaker 1>President Trump has ended weeks of speculation about whether he

0:00:03.800 --> 0:00:08.840
<v Speaker 1>has recordings of his conversations with former FBI director James Comey.

0:00:08.880 --> 0:00:12.440
<v Speaker 1>About five minutes ago, the President treated tweeted that he

0:00:12.480 --> 0:00:15.560
<v Speaker 1>had no idea whether there are tapes or recordings of

0:00:15.560 --> 0:00:19.800
<v Speaker 1>my conversations with James Comey, but quote but I did

0:00:19.800 --> 0:00:23.480
<v Speaker 1>not make and do not have any such recordings. Again,

0:00:23.600 --> 0:00:26.760
<v Speaker 1>President Trump tweeting that he has no idea if there

0:00:26.760 --> 0:00:30.160
<v Speaker 1>are Comy tapes or recordings, but he did not make any.

0:00:30.320 --> 0:00:32.879
<v Speaker 1>There's a new lawsuit against Trump over his staff not

0:00:33.040 --> 0:00:36.599
<v Speaker 1>saving other kinds of records. A watchdog group says that

0:00:36.640 --> 0:00:40.640
<v Speaker 1>Trump and his staff are using messaging applications that automatically

0:00:40.680 --> 0:00:43.440
<v Speaker 1>delete the contents as soon as they're read, and the

0:00:43.479 --> 0:00:47.320
<v Speaker 1>Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics or Crew want a court

0:00:47.320 --> 0:00:50.639
<v Speaker 1>to order the administration to comply with federal record retention

0:00:50.720 --> 0:00:53.880
<v Speaker 1>laws and save those joining me as Bloomberg News reporter

0:00:54.040 --> 0:00:58.200
<v Speaker 1>Andrew Harris, Andrew, what does federal law require as far

0:00:58.280 --> 0:01:02.040
<v Speaker 1>as emails and texts? So the presidents Well, this is

0:01:02.160 --> 0:01:05.080
<v Speaker 1>in part an outgrowth of Watergate. We've heard Watergate talked

0:01:05.080 --> 0:01:08.360
<v Speaker 1>about a lot in the context of the Trump presidency,

0:01:08.520 --> 0:01:10.520
<v Speaker 1>but one of the things that it gave birth to

0:01:10.959 --> 0:01:14.360
<v Speaker 1>is the Presidential Records Act, which requires retention to records

0:01:14.360 --> 0:01:18.440
<v Speaker 1>at least as long as the president deems that they're necessary.

0:01:18.520 --> 0:01:20.400
<v Speaker 1>But before they can be the leaded, they have to

0:01:20.440 --> 0:01:24.520
<v Speaker 1>ask an archivist if they can be deleted. Um. So

0:01:25.640 --> 0:01:28.440
<v Speaker 1>the use of an email app or an email like

0:01:28.600 --> 0:01:32.360
<v Speaker 1>app that automatically erases messages after they've been read, uh,

0:01:32.480 --> 0:01:37.319
<v Speaker 1>if true, would fly in the face of those rules. Now,

0:01:37.480 --> 0:01:43.119
<v Speaker 1>how does Crew know or suspect that these are being deleted? Well,

0:01:43.160 --> 0:01:46.520
<v Speaker 1>that's a fair question, and even Crew concedes that they

0:01:46.560 --> 0:01:49.760
<v Speaker 1>are going off of press reports from the Washington Post

0:01:50.320 --> 0:01:53.840
<v Speaker 1>and the Wall Street Journal asserting uh that sources say

0:01:53.880 --> 0:01:58.120
<v Speaker 1>that White House staffers are using these apps. Which apps

0:01:58.160 --> 0:02:01.760
<v Speaker 1>are they allegedly using? One of them is called Confide,

0:02:01.800 --> 0:02:05.880
<v Speaker 1>which apparently boasts that if you wave your finger across

0:02:05.920 --> 0:02:09.079
<v Speaker 1>the text, it magically evaporates, and another one that's more

0:02:09.120 --> 0:02:13.280
<v Speaker 1>commonly known called signal uh, for which you can set

0:02:13.320 --> 0:02:16.840
<v Speaker 1>a time after which the message will in good morning,

0:02:16.919 --> 0:02:21.720
<v Speaker 1>Mr Phelps fashion self destruct. Has a White House responded

0:02:21.760 --> 0:02:25.800
<v Speaker 1>to this not officially no, which is um? You know,

0:02:25.880 --> 0:02:28.280
<v Speaker 1>for those of us in the covering the courts in

0:02:28.320 --> 0:02:31.040
<v Speaker 1>the White House business a little bit enervating, but no,

0:02:31.320 --> 0:02:33.960
<v Speaker 1>we haven't gotten an answer yet. Now we cannot ignore

0:02:34.040 --> 0:02:38.440
<v Speaker 1>Trump's use of Twitter and crew makes claims about his

0:02:38.560 --> 0:02:43.160
<v Speaker 1>deleting posts on his personal Twitter account. Does that count

0:02:43.480 --> 0:02:46.880
<v Speaker 1>for the record retention? Well, they say it does, and

0:02:47.080 --> 0:02:49.919
<v Speaker 1>for you know, the president, this is his preferred way

0:02:49.919 --> 0:02:52.680
<v Speaker 1>of communicating with the masses. He goes, you know, not

0:02:52.760 --> 0:02:56.680
<v Speaker 1>only over our heads, but over the heads of media generally,

0:02:56.800 --> 0:03:00.440
<v Speaker 1>and talks right to the people. But apparently on a occasion,

0:03:00.760 --> 0:03:05.959
<v Speaker 1>um cor feffi aside, he will delete one of his messages.

0:03:06.000 --> 0:03:08.160
<v Speaker 1>It's things that we all do from time to time,

0:03:08.160 --> 0:03:10.040
<v Speaker 1>but we're not all subject to the same rules and

0:03:10.080 --> 0:03:15.400
<v Speaker 1>regulations about presidential communicators as the president. What does the

0:03:15.639 --> 0:03:19.240
<v Speaker 1>archivists do? I mean, is the archivists taking down all

0:03:19.240 --> 0:03:22.200
<v Speaker 1>the tweets as they come in? That that that is

0:03:22.240 --> 0:03:24.880
<v Speaker 1>a good question that I apologize is beyond my camp.

0:03:25.000 --> 0:03:28.840
<v Speaker 1>I don't know. So, um, let's talk a little bit

0:03:28.840 --> 0:03:32.840
<v Speaker 1>more about the kinds of recordings that are covered by

0:03:32.880 --> 0:03:37.520
<v Speaker 1>this law. Is it anything that happens in uh in

0:03:37.600 --> 0:03:40.720
<v Speaker 1>the White House? Can it possibly be all those records,

0:03:40.840 --> 0:03:45.840
<v Speaker 1>all those The notion behind this is that for future

0:03:45.920 --> 0:03:51.280
<v Speaker 1>historians and for the record, public records generally that presidential

0:03:52.160 --> 0:03:57.119
<v Speaker 1>record keeping, deliberations, certainly emails about which we have spoken

0:03:57.200 --> 0:04:02.280
<v Speaker 1>a lot over the years, UM, are evidence of presidential

0:04:02.320 --> 0:04:05.880
<v Speaker 1>decision making and policymaking, and that even though the president

0:04:06.000 --> 0:04:10.680
<v Speaker 1>isn't covered by the Freedom of Information Act UH, after

0:04:10.720 --> 0:04:13.720
<v Speaker 1>a time, those records do become public records and they

0:04:13.720 --> 0:04:16.760
<v Speaker 1>are accessible, or at least they're supposed to be, but

0:04:16.880 --> 0:04:20.040
<v Speaker 1>they can't be accessed if they don't exist. Well, while

0:04:20.120 --> 0:04:23.640
<v Speaker 1>you're on, I have to ask your reaction to this

0:04:23.800 --> 0:04:28.200
<v Speaker 1>latest tweet, which is, UM, I have no idea whether

0:04:28.240 --> 0:04:32.719
<v Speaker 1>there are tapes or recordings of my conversations with James Comey,

0:04:32.720 --> 0:04:35.520
<v Speaker 1>but I did not make and do not have any

0:04:35.640 --> 0:04:39.800
<v Speaker 1>such recordings. What do you make of that? I I

0:04:40.360 --> 0:04:43.400
<v Speaker 1>make of that that that is a very carefully worded

0:04:43.839 --> 0:04:46.480
<v Speaker 1>UH thing that some people in the legal field were

0:04:46.520 --> 0:04:49.880
<v Speaker 1>call a non denial denial. I don't know if they

0:04:49.880 --> 0:04:52.000
<v Speaker 1>are records, but if there are records, I didn't make

0:04:52.040 --> 0:04:55.360
<v Speaker 1>them and I don't have them, which certainly doesn't say

0:04:55.360 --> 0:04:58.599
<v Speaker 1>that they don't exist. I know you're a lawyer, and

0:04:58.600 --> 0:05:01.000
<v Speaker 1>you can go back to that at anytime, because you

0:05:01.080 --> 0:05:03.719
<v Speaker 1>have in Washington, d C. At least because you have

0:05:04.000 --> 0:05:07.440
<v Speaker 1>all the legal speak down. So what's the next step

0:05:07.480 --> 0:05:09.919
<v Speaker 1>on this, on this, are we going to hear a

0:05:10.000 --> 0:05:13.719
<v Speaker 1>legal uh return from the White House? Yeah, at some

0:05:13.839 --> 0:05:19.120
<v Speaker 1>point the administration's attorneys will respond to the complaint. It

0:05:19.200 --> 0:05:22.520
<v Speaker 1>was only filed earlier this morning, really really at the

0:05:22.640 --> 0:05:26.560
<v Speaker 1>very break of the business day, and the administration has

0:05:26.560 --> 0:05:29.760
<v Speaker 1>time to respond to it. Uh. That will probably be

0:05:29.800 --> 0:05:32.920
<v Speaker 1>in the form of emotion to dismiss the lawsuit, and

0:05:32.960 --> 0:05:35.480
<v Speaker 1>failing that they'll be compelled to file an answer or

0:05:35.520 --> 0:05:38.159
<v Speaker 1>a tweet. Andrew, you never know. Thanks so much for

0:05:38.320 --> 0:05:42.160
<v Speaker 1>joining us on Bloomberg Law. That's Bloomberg News reporter Andrew Harris,

0:05:42.200 --> 0:05:46.120
<v Speaker 1>and he has a story out on this, this latest

0:05:46.160 --> 0:05:48.839
<v Speaker 1>actually legal suit by Crew