WEBVTT - E. Jean Carroll's Rape Case Against Trump

0:00:03.200 --> 0:00:08.000
<v Speaker 1>This is Bloomberg Law with June Brusso from Bloomberg Radio.

0:00:09.760 --> 0:00:12.119
<v Speaker 1>You know I'm automatically attracted to beautiful I just started

0:00:12.160 --> 0:00:16.800
<v Speaker 1>kissing them. It's like a magnet. When you're a start,

0:00:16.880 --> 0:00:19.119
<v Speaker 1>they let you do it. You can do anything. That

0:00:19.280 --> 0:00:23.520
<v Speaker 1>infamous access Hollywood videotape of Donald Trump will be part

0:00:23.560 --> 0:00:27.360
<v Speaker 1>of the evidence that New York author Egene Carroll presents

0:00:27.560 --> 0:00:31.760
<v Speaker 1>in her civil defamation and battery case against Trump overclaims

0:00:31.760 --> 0:00:34.080
<v Speaker 1>that he raped her in a dressing room of Bergdoff

0:00:34.120 --> 0:00:37.959
<v Speaker 1>Goodman back in the nineties. Trump denies the allegations and

0:00:38.040 --> 0:00:41.560
<v Speaker 1>called it a made up scam on his truth social platform,

0:00:41.880 --> 0:00:43.920
<v Speaker 1>but he has not been in the courtroom where a

0:00:44.000 --> 0:00:47.600
<v Speaker 1>jury of six men and three women will decide whether

0:00:47.640 --> 0:00:52.600
<v Speaker 1>he's libel for sexually assaulting Carol decades ago and defaming

0:00:52.640 --> 0:00:56.160
<v Speaker 1>her last year by claiming on social media that she

0:00:56.360 --> 0:00:59.480
<v Speaker 1>fabricated the attack to sell a book. Joining Me is

0:00:59.560 --> 0:01:04.160
<v Speaker 1>Judy's litigation partner of ASK LP, where she leads the

0:01:04.240 --> 0:01:08.120
<v Speaker 1>Sexual abuse practice. This trials about an event that allegedly

0:01:08.240 --> 0:01:11.480
<v Speaker 1>happened thirty years ago. Tell us about the New York

0:01:11.520 --> 0:01:15.679
<v Speaker 1>Adult Survivors Act, which allows Carol to bring this case,

0:01:15.760 --> 0:01:17.920
<v Speaker 1>despite the statute of limitations.

0:01:18.720 --> 0:01:22.399
<v Speaker 2>So the New York's Adult Survirus Act addresses just that issue,

0:01:22.760 --> 0:01:27.759
<v Speaker 2>that being if there was a sexual assault sexual violence

0:01:28.040 --> 0:01:31.480
<v Speaker 2>that occurred against an individual who was eighteen years or older.

0:01:31.840 --> 0:01:34.920
<v Speaker 2>What it does is that it finally brings the law

0:01:35.160 --> 0:01:38.440
<v Speaker 2>to be more consistent with what studies and what science

0:01:38.440 --> 0:01:42.399
<v Speaker 2>has shown, and that is that typically individuals do not

0:01:42.600 --> 0:01:45.880
<v Speaker 2>fully disclose. They may even have partial disclosure, but they

0:01:45.920 --> 0:01:48.880
<v Speaker 2>don't do that until much later in life, average age

0:01:48.920 --> 0:01:52.240
<v Speaker 2>fifty two to fifty three. So this Adult Survivors Act

0:01:52.360 --> 0:01:55.320
<v Speaker 2>allows now for this one year what we call revival

0:01:55.360 --> 0:01:58.640
<v Speaker 2>window for claims to be brought. The window closes in

0:01:58.720 --> 0:02:01.640
<v Speaker 2>November of this year, so this would fall within that

0:02:01.720 --> 0:02:04.639
<v Speaker 2>Act and would be appropriate for her attorneys to file.

0:02:05.320 --> 0:02:09.559
<v Speaker 1>Carol's testimony is going to be bolstered by the testimony

0:02:09.600 --> 0:02:13.959
<v Speaker 1>of two women who publicly claimed that Trump sexually assaulted

0:02:14.000 --> 0:02:17.640
<v Speaker 1>them before the twenty sixteen election, as well as that

0:02:17.840 --> 0:02:22.600
<v Speaker 1>infamous Hollywood Access tape where Trump brags about how easy

0:02:22.639 --> 0:02:27.680
<v Speaker 1>it is for famous men to grope women. Explain why

0:02:27.720 --> 0:02:32.080
<v Speaker 1>the judge is allowing that evidence in which is not

0:02:32.200 --> 0:02:34.160
<v Speaker 1>specifically about this case.

0:02:34.960 --> 0:02:37.360
<v Speaker 2>What I believe that the judge basing is ruling on

0:02:37.800 --> 0:02:42.200
<v Speaker 2>is what we call modus operandi. Typically, Trump's attorney would

0:02:42.320 --> 0:02:46.960
<v Speaker 2>argue that that type of evidence would be prejudicial. However,

0:02:47.000 --> 0:02:49.959
<v Speaker 2>there's exceptions to that rule, and what the judge is

0:02:50.000 --> 0:02:53.120
<v Speaker 2>allowing is showing that this is a practice, this is

0:02:53.160 --> 0:02:57.040
<v Speaker 2>a pattern by this individual to engage in this type

0:02:57.040 --> 0:03:01.480
<v Speaker 2>of behavior, so it's not prejudiced the accused, but more

0:03:01.560 --> 0:03:04.480
<v Speaker 2>so to show that this is part and practice, that

0:03:04.600 --> 0:03:08.079
<v Speaker 2>this is the mode in which this individual carries out

0:03:08.120 --> 0:03:09.280
<v Speaker 2>these violent crimes.

0:03:09.680 --> 0:03:13.079
<v Speaker 1>Usually in civil cases, the plaintiff calls the defendant as

0:03:13.120 --> 0:03:15.720
<v Speaker 1>a witness. Why isn't the plaintiff calling Trump here?

0:03:16.400 --> 0:03:22.080
<v Speaker 2>Well, it's my understanding that missus Carroll's attorneys they have

0:03:22.400 --> 0:03:28.120
<v Speaker 2>a very damaging and very compelling recorded deposition, videotape deposition

0:03:28.600 --> 0:03:32.360
<v Speaker 2>of mister Trump. They were very wise during the discovery

0:03:32.400 --> 0:03:37.200
<v Speaker 2>process to make it videotape depositions. Not every deposition is videotaped,

0:03:37.520 --> 0:03:41.120
<v Speaker 2>but that deposition will be presented and show the jury

0:03:41.560 --> 0:03:45.920
<v Speaker 2>exactly what they need to corroborate and also as evidence

0:03:45.960 --> 0:03:49.520
<v Speaker 2>standing alone on itself, to show the culpability and to

0:03:49.600 --> 0:03:53.800
<v Speaker 2>show that Trump should be liable for the rape of

0:03:53.880 --> 0:03:57.640
<v Speaker 2>miss Carroll, and that's why it's not essential that they

0:03:57.680 --> 0:03:58.880
<v Speaker 2>call him.

0:03:59.200 --> 0:04:02.600
<v Speaker 1>Trump decided not to show up in person for the openings,

0:04:02.640 --> 0:04:05.640
<v Speaker 1>and he may not even attend the trial. Is that

0:04:05.720 --> 0:04:09.119
<v Speaker 1>a mistake on his part? The jury seeing that he's

0:04:09.160 --> 0:04:09.680
<v Speaker 1>not even.

0:04:09.520 --> 0:04:14.240
<v Speaker 2>There, well, you know, I think that speaks to two things.

0:04:14.320 --> 0:04:17.120
<v Speaker 2>I think that that speaks to the way that he

0:04:17.320 --> 0:04:21.640
<v Speaker 2>views these accusations. And it also I know that there

0:04:21.640 --> 0:04:25.240
<v Speaker 2>were certain arguments or applications made to the court by

0:04:25.320 --> 0:04:29.480
<v Speaker 2>mister Takapino, Trump's attorney to state that it would be

0:04:29.920 --> 0:04:35.240
<v Speaker 2>a logistical inconvenience for mister Trump to show up, and

0:04:35.279 --> 0:04:37.320
<v Speaker 2>that was the reason. Why do I think that that's

0:04:37.320 --> 0:04:41.200
<v Speaker 2>a disadvantage. Absolutely, if you know you have someone you're

0:04:41.240 --> 0:04:46.279
<v Speaker 2>being accused of raping another individual, of ruining their life,

0:04:46.839 --> 0:04:49.520
<v Speaker 2>you would expect that one would show up to show

0:04:49.880 --> 0:04:53.440
<v Speaker 2>the jury how serious you take these charges, and that

0:04:53.520 --> 0:04:58.240
<v Speaker 2>you were there to defend against these accusations. So I

0:04:58.279 --> 0:05:01.599
<v Speaker 2>think that the absence of mister Trump during this trial

0:05:01.720 --> 0:05:05.400
<v Speaker 2>speaks volumes to how he feels about the case, how

0:05:05.440 --> 0:05:09.279
<v Speaker 2>he feels about you know, women in general. But this

0:05:09.440 --> 0:05:12.280
<v Speaker 2>type of attitude I have seen through my work is

0:05:12.320 --> 0:05:17.599
<v Speaker 2>nothing new. You have individuals who act out, who believe

0:05:17.839 --> 0:05:21.920
<v Speaker 2>that the accusations of a woman, a man, an individual

0:05:22.000 --> 0:05:26.920
<v Speaker 2>who's alleging sexual violence against them, it's not taken seriously. Unfortunately,

0:05:26.920 --> 0:05:30.480
<v Speaker 2>that's still the attitude. So you know, it speaks volumes

0:05:30.520 --> 0:05:32.760
<v Speaker 2>to me, and it's not something that I would ever

0:05:32.839 --> 0:05:34.120
<v Speaker 2>recommend a client.

0:05:33.800 --> 0:05:39.040
<v Speaker 1>To Trump's lawyer Joe Tekapina during his opening, besides casting

0:05:39.120 --> 0:05:44.279
<v Speaker 1>Dad on nearly every detail of Carol's story, he followed

0:05:44.279 --> 0:05:48.120
<v Speaker 1>with an aggressive attack on her, accusing her of exploiting

0:05:48.120 --> 0:05:51.880
<v Speaker 1>her story for personal gain. Quote she became a celebrity

0:05:51.880 --> 0:05:55.159
<v Speaker 1>and loved every minute of it. Is it dangerous in

0:05:55.200 --> 0:05:57.920
<v Speaker 1>a case like this to attack the victim?

0:05:58.200 --> 0:06:02.960
<v Speaker 2>This defense that mister Trump's attorney Joe Tagapina is engaging

0:06:03.000 --> 0:06:07.480
<v Speaker 2>in is unfortunately common, and I think that the trend

0:06:07.920 --> 0:06:11.760
<v Speaker 2>is showing that it is unsuccessful. It is the oldest

0:06:12.160 --> 0:06:17.039
<v Speaker 2>tool in a litigator's book during the course of sexual

0:06:17.040 --> 0:06:21.760
<v Speaker 2>abuse litigation to try to cast the victim, to try

0:06:21.760 --> 0:06:26.160
<v Speaker 2>to cast the survivor miss Carroll an unfavorable light. We

0:06:26.320 --> 0:06:30.320
<v Speaker 2>know that Miss Carroll had risen to prominence, was an

0:06:30.360 --> 0:06:36.200
<v Speaker 2>accomplished career woman professional prior to meeting mister Trump, so

0:06:36.320 --> 0:06:40.239
<v Speaker 2>I think that he'll fail on that. And moreover, mister

0:06:40.279 --> 0:06:45.000
<v Speaker 2>Tagapina is engaging in a code that we know has

0:06:45.080 --> 0:06:49.080
<v Speaker 2>been practiced by individuals that have been accused and by

0:06:49.160 --> 0:06:53.440
<v Speaker 2>culture in general. And here's the code. One blame the victim.

0:06:53.800 --> 0:06:56.120
<v Speaker 2>The second part of that code is to not believe

0:06:56.160 --> 0:07:00.359
<v Speaker 2>the victim that Miss Carroll, it's my understanding. And also

0:07:00.520 --> 0:07:03.560
<v Speaker 2>her attorneys will present other individuals. We talked about this

0:07:03.640 --> 0:07:07.640
<v Speaker 2>just a moment ago, other individuals that also accused mister

0:07:07.720 --> 0:07:10.640
<v Speaker 2>Trump of sexual abuse. So also part of this code,

0:07:11.200 --> 0:07:14.239
<v Speaker 2>in addition to blaming the victim, is that you can't

0:07:14.320 --> 0:07:18.320
<v Speaker 2>have just one survivor say they were raped. You have

0:07:18.360 --> 0:07:22.080
<v Speaker 2>to have a cluster of individuals, more than one woman.

0:07:22.160 --> 0:07:25.840
<v Speaker 2>It's not enough to just move forward on the testimony

0:07:25.880 --> 0:07:30.520
<v Speaker 2>of just one individual. The code also includes retaliating against victims,

0:07:30.680 --> 0:07:33.440
<v Speaker 2>So blaming the victim is a form, it's a degree

0:07:33.480 --> 0:07:38.600
<v Speaker 2>of retaliation. So what he's doing, I think is very dangerous.

0:07:39.120 --> 0:07:43.920
<v Speaker 2>I think that this accomplished very successful professional woman. I

0:07:44.000 --> 0:07:46.040
<v Speaker 2>don't think that it will sit well with the jury.

0:07:46.320 --> 0:07:50.679
<v Speaker 2>And I think that individuals that believe that the way

0:07:50.920 --> 0:07:55.840
<v Speaker 2>to defend a claim to abuse a victim again and

0:07:55.880 --> 0:07:59.920
<v Speaker 2>retraumatize them through this sense of she's doing it for

0:08:00.600 --> 0:08:06.120
<v Speaker 2>There are plenty other ways for individuals to acquire fame

0:08:06.760 --> 0:08:11.000
<v Speaker 2>or notoriety. And I'm sure that missus Carroll would have

0:08:11.120 --> 0:08:15.360
<v Speaker 2>been smart enough, more skilled enough than to accuse mister

0:08:15.440 --> 0:08:18.960
<v Speaker 2>Trump of this heinous crime. And you know, it should

0:08:19.000 --> 0:08:23.320
<v Speaker 2>be noted that she had filed a separate lawsuit based

0:08:23.360 --> 0:08:28.120
<v Speaker 2>on defamation, and to me, that's a very powerful piece

0:08:28.600 --> 0:08:29.440
<v Speaker 2>of evidence.

0:08:30.080 --> 0:08:34.920
<v Speaker 1>Trump's lawyers were planning to show the jury excerpts of

0:08:35.400 --> 0:08:40.240
<v Speaker 1>Egen Carroll's deposition to show evidence of her past sex life,

0:08:40.480 --> 0:08:43.080
<v Speaker 1>and the judge barred.

0:08:42.760 --> 0:08:47.839
<v Speaker 2>That absolutely absolutely. You know, I'm a little shocked when

0:08:47.880 --> 0:08:50.439
<v Speaker 2>you've been accused of something like this and you're desperate

0:08:50.480 --> 0:08:53.520
<v Speaker 2>and you're looking for any type of defense. To me,

0:08:53.720 --> 0:08:58.000
<v Speaker 2>they are looking and searching in the bottom of the

0:08:58.000 --> 0:09:02.640
<v Speaker 2>barrel for a defense. So to try to bring in

0:09:03.120 --> 0:09:10.440
<v Speaker 2>a survivor's past sex life absolutely the most archaic tactic

0:09:10.559 --> 0:09:15.160
<v Speaker 2>they could have used. And it's actually quite embarrassing that

0:09:15.200 --> 0:09:20.120
<v Speaker 2>a survivor would have to even speak to her sex life,

0:09:20.320 --> 0:09:23.400
<v Speaker 2>whatever it is or lack thereof, So to me, that

0:09:23.800 --> 0:09:27.760
<v Speaker 2>is a very weak attempt and again scraping at the

0:09:27.800 --> 0:09:30.880
<v Speaker 2>bottom of the barrel, looking for anything and just trying

0:09:30.960 --> 0:09:33.920
<v Speaker 2>to distract the juror as to the issues.

0:09:34.679 --> 0:09:39.280
<v Speaker 1>How important is Egene Carrol's testimony when she does have

0:09:39.559 --> 0:09:43.120
<v Speaker 1>as we talked about before, she does have corroboration, So

0:09:43.160 --> 0:09:45.120
<v Speaker 1>how important is her testimony itself?

0:09:45.920 --> 0:09:50.160
<v Speaker 2>Absolutely very important. It's something that the jury. What we

0:09:50.240 --> 0:09:54.360
<v Speaker 2>call on our jurors to do is to evaluate the

0:09:54.400 --> 0:09:58.880
<v Speaker 2>credibility to look at the witness as they're testifying. And also,

0:09:59.360 --> 0:10:02.480
<v Speaker 2>because this was brought by her, they have to they

0:10:02.640 --> 0:10:06.360
<v Speaker 2>meeting her team. The plaintiff has to go forward with

0:10:06.679 --> 0:10:11.680
<v Speaker 2>presenting evidence to the jury through her testimony. So it's crucial.

0:10:11.720 --> 0:10:16.120
<v Speaker 2>It's crucial procedurally, and it's also crucial for the jury

0:10:16.160 --> 0:10:20.120
<v Speaker 2>to assess what she's talking about and also to assess

0:10:20.200 --> 0:10:22.839
<v Speaker 2>the different elements of the claims that she's making, the

0:10:22.880 --> 0:10:27.040
<v Speaker 2>allegations she's making. So it's very important, and you know,

0:10:27.120 --> 0:10:29.760
<v Speaker 2>the jury needs to hear what happened.

0:10:30.120 --> 0:10:33.400
<v Speaker 1>I'm trying to figure out what defense the Trump team

0:10:33.480 --> 0:10:38.000
<v Speaker 1>is going to put up besides attacking Carol's story. I mean,

0:10:38.120 --> 0:10:40.400
<v Speaker 1>especially if Trump isn't going to take the stand.

0:10:41.040 --> 0:10:43.360
<v Speaker 2>I agree with you on that point. What is the

0:10:43.400 --> 0:10:47.360
<v Speaker 2>defense and in my opinion, there is no defense. You know,

0:10:47.440 --> 0:10:50.880
<v Speaker 2>from what we know and what has been reported, it's

0:10:51.080 --> 0:10:53.800
<v Speaker 2>two things. And it goes back to that code that

0:10:53.880 --> 0:10:57.800
<v Speaker 2>I was referring to that many times being followed by

0:10:57.800 --> 0:11:02.079
<v Speaker 2>individuals accused of sexual abuse, sexual crimes, and what we

0:11:02.120 --> 0:11:06.600
<v Speaker 2>see in culture blame one defense, blame the victim. So

0:11:06.679 --> 0:11:11.199
<v Speaker 2>first you engage in these types of defenses. First, if

0:11:11.240 --> 0:11:14.080
<v Speaker 2>you can't call it a lie, which I think that

0:11:14.240 --> 0:11:17.640
<v Speaker 2>was one thing early on that mister Trump and his team,

0:11:17.720 --> 0:11:19.520
<v Speaker 2>they just tried to point the finger and say that's

0:11:19.520 --> 0:11:22.120
<v Speaker 2>a lie, didn't happen. Well, in response to that, what

0:11:22.200 --> 0:11:24.880
<v Speaker 2>do we see. We see Miss Carroll's team bring in

0:11:25.080 --> 0:11:29.840
<v Speaker 2>witnesses her what we call outcry witnesses or disclosure witnesses,

0:11:30.320 --> 0:11:33.680
<v Speaker 2>very compelling piece of evidence that she did disclose to

0:11:33.800 --> 0:11:37.200
<v Speaker 2>individuals what happened. And then if that doesn't work, and

0:11:37.240 --> 0:11:40.320
<v Speaker 2>then you say, well, they're making these accusations for some

0:11:40.440 --> 0:11:44.720
<v Speaker 2>type of alternative motives or reasons other than the truth.

0:11:44.880 --> 0:11:46.600
<v Speaker 2>And in this case, what do you have you have

0:11:47.000 --> 0:11:50.719
<v Speaker 2>mister Trump saying that it's because she's seeking notoriety, Well,

0:11:50.760 --> 0:11:54.400
<v Speaker 2>that will be defeated because miss Carroll's team will show

0:11:54.679 --> 0:11:58.120
<v Speaker 2>that she was already an accomplished career woman, and that

0:11:58.200 --> 0:12:01.280
<v Speaker 2>to me, in general, is a very weak defense. So,

0:12:01.720 --> 0:12:03.560
<v Speaker 2>you know, the sum of this, of what I'm saying

0:12:03.600 --> 0:12:06.960
<v Speaker 2>is that they are going to be hard pressed in

0:12:07.000 --> 0:12:11.720
<v Speaker 2>this case to mount a real, true and viable defense.

0:12:11.920 --> 0:12:15.920
<v Speaker 2>The evidence is compelling. The word of one woman, of

0:12:15.920 --> 0:12:19.640
<v Speaker 2>one survivor should be enough in general, and I believe

0:12:19.679 --> 0:12:21.040
<v Speaker 2>it will be enough in this trial.

0:12:22.080 --> 0:12:25.320
<v Speaker 1>The jury is composed of six men and three women.

0:12:25.920 --> 0:12:28.400
<v Speaker 1>Does the plaintiff in a case like this normally want

0:12:28.440 --> 0:12:32.359
<v Speaker 1>more women on the jury who might understand the story better.

0:12:32.600 --> 0:12:37.000
<v Speaker 2>You know, not necessarily the six men. They can have sisters,

0:12:37.240 --> 0:12:41.880
<v Speaker 2>maybe they have partners that are women. So today's jurors

0:12:41.920 --> 0:12:47.080
<v Speaker 2>are sophisticated enough to understand the issues and understand sexual violence,

0:12:47.280 --> 0:12:50.959
<v Speaker 2>and sexual violence doesn't just happen to women. It happens,

0:12:50.960 --> 0:12:55.880
<v Speaker 2>we know, to individuals of any sexual orientation or gender identity.

0:12:56.000 --> 0:13:00.520
<v Speaker 2>So you don't necessarily need to have sick x women

0:13:00.679 --> 0:13:04.199
<v Speaker 2>or a full women jury. Just similarly, you don't need

0:13:04.240 --> 0:13:06.920
<v Speaker 2>to have, you know, a jury of all one race

0:13:07.040 --> 0:13:11.600
<v Speaker 2>to understand the complexities of the issues. So that doesn't necessarily,

0:13:12.120 --> 0:13:15.880
<v Speaker 2>you know, cause concern. I have worked with and I

0:13:15.960 --> 0:13:19.720
<v Speaker 2>have clients that I've represented that have been survivors of

0:13:19.880 --> 0:13:24.000
<v Speaker 2>sexual abuse that are men themselves. So you know, individuals

0:13:24.040 --> 0:13:29.120
<v Speaker 2>today are sophisticated enough to understand violence and sexual violence.

0:13:29.360 --> 0:13:33.720
<v Speaker 1>Thanks Judy. That's Judy Saunders, litigation partner of ask LP

0:13:52.320 --> 0:13:56.400
<v Speaker 1>Rammy winning rapper Pras Michelle, who reinvented himself as a

0:13:56.400 --> 0:13:59.600
<v Speaker 1>political influencer, is at the center of a case about

0:13:59.600 --> 0:14:06.120
<v Speaker 1>an international, multimillion dollar conspiracy across two presidencies. Prosecutors contend

0:14:06.160 --> 0:14:09.920
<v Speaker 1>that Michelle funneled money from a Malaysian billionaire through straw

0:14:10.040 --> 0:14:14.480
<v Speaker 1>donors to Barack Obama's twenty twelve reelection campaign and tried

0:14:14.520 --> 0:14:19.120
<v Speaker 1>to squelch a Justice Department investigation and influence an extradition

0:14:19.280 --> 0:14:23.120
<v Speaker 1>case on behalf of China Under the Trump administration, That

0:14:23.280 --> 0:14:27.640
<v Speaker 1>billionaire Jolo is now a fugitive and Michelle, who made

0:14:27.640 --> 0:14:30.680
<v Speaker 1>at least eighty eight million dollars in the deals, is

0:14:30.760 --> 0:14:34.560
<v Speaker 1>on trial in federal court in Washington, d c. Joining

0:14:34.560 --> 0:14:39.360
<v Speaker 1>me is Bloomberg legal reporter David Voriakis. Michelle was paid

0:14:39.600 --> 0:14:43.840
<v Speaker 1>twenty million dollars to get Jolo a photo with President

0:14:43.880 --> 0:14:47.600
<v Speaker 1>Barack Obama in twenty twelve. Tell us about that.

0:14:48.280 --> 0:14:51.760
<v Speaker 3>Well, this trial is about pros Michelle, who was a

0:14:51.800 --> 0:14:55.760
<v Speaker 3>Grammy winning rapper from the nineteen nineties hip hop group

0:14:55.800 --> 0:14:58.200
<v Speaker 3>with Fujis. He made a lot of money that way,

0:14:58.400 --> 0:15:03.600
<v Speaker 3>and then about a or soa go, he became friends

0:15:03.720 --> 0:15:09.120
<v Speaker 3>with Jolo, who's a Malaysian tycoon who is suspected of

0:15:09.160 --> 0:15:14.120
<v Speaker 3>stealing literally billions of dollars from the Malaysian development from

0:15:14.440 --> 0:15:19.000
<v Speaker 3>one MDB, and that scandal has been investigated by the

0:15:19.120 --> 0:15:25.000
<v Speaker 3>United States and several other nations. Jolo in twenty twelve

0:15:25.320 --> 0:15:29.040
<v Speaker 3>wanted to get close to President Obama during his re

0:15:29.160 --> 0:15:35.040
<v Speaker 3>election campaign, and he really wanted a photograph with President Obama.

0:15:35.280 --> 0:15:40.840
<v Speaker 3>And Jolo had become friends with pros Michelle and had

0:15:40.880 --> 0:15:44.600
<v Speaker 3>partied with Praz and Praz traveled around the world for

0:15:44.680 --> 0:15:48.200
<v Speaker 3>a period with as Jolo did with other celebrities like

0:15:48.320 --> 0:15:54.640
<v Speaker 3>Leonardo DiCaprio. So in twenty twelve, Jolo paid almost twenty

0:15:54.680 --> 0:15:59.720
<v Speaker 3>one million to pros Michelle to help facilitate him getting

0:15:59.720 --> 0:16:04.640
<v Speaker 3>a photograph with President Obama. And this is one of

0:16:04.800 --> 0:16:08.800
<v Speaker 3>three conspiracies that pros Michelle is charged with at his

0:16:08.840 --> 0:16:11.280
<v Speaker 3>federal trial in Washington for.

0:16:11.320 --> 0:16:14.920
<v Speaker 1>Twenty million dollars couldn't Jolo have donated that and gotten

0:16:14.920 --> 0:16:15.840
<v Speaker 1>a photo that way.

0:16:16.520 --> 0:16:19.280
<v Speaker 3>Well, it's not easy to get close to the president,

0:16:19.560 --> 0:16:22.480
<v Speaker 3>and typically political donors who give a lot of money

0:16:22.600 --> 0:16:25.600
<v Speaker 3>can get close to the president and get a photograph

0:16:26.280 --> 0:16:30.600
<v Speaker 3>or get some FaceTime with the president. But in this case, Jolo,

0:16:30.880 --> 0:16:35.600
<v Speaker 3>as a Malaysian national, was not able to give political

0:16:35.680 --> 0:16:40.560
<v Speaker 3>donations to the Obama campaign. And he also had been

0:16:40.640 --> 0:16:43.840
<v Speaker 3>vetted by the Obama campaign and they were uncomfortable with

0:16:43.920 --> 0:16:46.720
<v Speaker 3>his playboy image and so they did not want him

0:16:46.720 --> 0:16:50.800
<v Speaker 3>in campaign events. Pros Michelle had promised that he would

0:16:50.840 --> 0:16:53.720
<v Speaker 3>do his best. He initially took a million dollars to

0:16:53.760 --> 0:16:57.360
<v Speaker 3>try to think about how to get a photograph or Jolo,

0:16:57.680 --> 0:17:01.000
<v Speaker 3>and then he tried to arrange so that Jolo could

0:17:01.000 --> 0:17:05.000
<v Speaker 3>get into two different campaign events in twenty twelve, and

0:17:05.080 --> 0:17:09.320
<v Speaker 3>in both cases the campaign would not allow Jolo in. Ultimately,

0:17:09.400 --> 0:17:14.000
<v Speaker 3>Jolo got his photograph with Barack and Michelle Obama at

0:17:14.119 --> 0:17:17.400
<v Speaker 3>the holiday party in twenty twelve, and there's a picture

0:17:17.840 --> 0:17:20.200
<v Speaker 3>of the three of them standing by a White House

0:17:20.280 --> 0:17:21.160
<v Speaker 3>Christmas tree.

0:17:21.720 --> 0:17:26.280
<v Speaker 1>Besides using straw donors to funnel illegal donations from low

0:17:26.359 --> 0:17:29.280
<v Speaker 1>into Obama's campaign, what else is he accused of here.

0:17:30.160 --> 0:17:35.000
<v Speaker 3>He's also accused of trying to get the Justice Department

0:17:35.160 --> 0:17:40.639
<v Speaker 3>to drop a pending civil forfeiture case against Jolo. What

0:17:40.760 --> 0:17:44.679
<v Speaker 3>happened in twenty sixteen is the Justice Department to Jolo

0:17:45.320 --> 0:17:50.840
<v Speaker 3>as the US investigations picked up and other investigations around

0:17:50.840 --> 0:17:54.120
<v Speaker 3>the world into whether Jolo stole these billions of dollars

0:17:54.160 --> 0:17:58.320
<v Speaker 3>and then laundered them. And so Jolo was very concerned

0:17:58.359 --> 0:18:00.879
<v Speaker 3>and he wanted to try to to see if he

0:18:00.920 --> 0:18:04.920
<v Speaker 3>could get those charges dropped. And so what he did

0:18:05.280 --> 0:18:09.520
<v Speaker 3>was Hey ultimately one hundred million dollars to a group

0:18:09.680 --> 0:18:14.320
<v Speaker 3>that included pros Michelle, and there were several other people

0:18:14.840 --> 0:18:18.840
<v Speaker 3>who pleaded guilty. There was a former Trump fundraiser, Elliott Broydy,

0:18:19.080 --> 0:18:22.920
<v Speaker 3>there was a former Justice Department attorney, George Higginbotham, whom

0:18:22.960 --> 0:18:26.639
<v Speaker 3>moon lighted as Michelle's lawyer. And there was Nicky Lum Davis,

0:18:26.680 --> 0:18:30.560
<v Speaker 3>who was a Hawaiian businessman. All three of them pleaded guilty,

0:18:30.600 --> 0:18:34.160
<v Speaker 3>but Trump pardoned Broidy, and at the trial, jurors heard

0:18:34.200 --> 0:18:39.080
<v Speaker 3>the testimony from Higginbotham and Broidy were government witnesses testifying

0:18:39.680 --> 0:18:43.960
<v Speaker 3>about how they tried to use Broidy's access to Donald

0:18:44.000 --> 0:18:47.919
<v Speaker 3>Trump and key figures in the Trump administration to get

0:18:48.000 --> 0:18:53.800
<v Speaker 3>the case against Jolo dropped. That was ultimately unsuccessful, and

0:18:54.480 --> 0:18:59.000
<v Speaker 3>later on Jolo was indicted twice by the Justice Department,

0:18:59.080 --> 0:19:02.640
<v Speaker 3>once in Washington and once in Brooklyn, New York.

0:19:03.000 --> 0:19:05.640
<v Speaker 1>Did the prosecutors offer Michelle a deal?

0:19:06.240 --> 0:19:08.919
<v Speaker 3>I believe that the prosecutors did try to negotiate a

0:19:08.960 --> 0:19:13.359
<v Speaker 3>free deal with Michelle, but ultimately was unsuccessful. He chose

0:19:13.440 --> 0:19:16.560
<v Speaker 3>to go to trial. He testified in his own defense,

0:19:17.200 --> 0:19:21.960
<v Speaker 3>and he denied that he was trying to funnel Jolo's

0:19:21.960 --> 0:19:25.679
<v Speaker 3>money into the Obama campaign. He denied that he knew

0:19:25.720 --> 0:19:29.119
<v Speaker 3>that he was supposed to register as a foreign agent

0:19:29.280 --> 0:19:33.400
<v Speaker 3>under the Foreign Agent's Registration Act to reflect his work

0:19:33.440 --> 0:19:37.359
<v Speaker 3>for Jolo in trying to convince the Trump administration to

0:19:37.440 --> 0:19:41.879
<v Speaker 3>drop their investigation of Jolo. And then there's a third

0:19:42.119 --> 0:19:46.879
<v Speaker 3>aspect to the trial, a third conspiracy, which is several

0:19:46.920 --> 0:19:51.960
<v Speaker 3>of the same players pros Michelle, Elliott, Roydy, Nicki, Lum Davis,

0:19:52.000 --> 0:19:55.360
<v Speaker 3>and a couple of others tried to get the US

0:19:55.480 --> 0:20:00.440
<v Speaker 3>government to extradite a Chinese billionaire, Guo Wanghwa, Guy who

0:20:00.560 --> 0:20:02.840
<v Speaker 3>was in the United States living in New York City

0:20:03.440 --> 0:20:07.679
<v Speaker 3>and was a friend of Steve Bannon. He was wanting

0:20:08.080 --> 0:20:11.000
<v Speaker 3>he acted as a dissident in the United States and

0:20:11.480 --> 0:20:18.360
<v Speaker 3>repeatedly criticize the Chinese government and Chinese officials quite explicitly.

0:20:18.880 --> 0:20:21.600
<v Speaker 3>The Chinese didn't like that, and they had charged him

0:20:21.640 --> 0:20:26.439
<v Speaker 3>with crimes in China. They wanted the Trump administration to

0:20:26.520 --> 0:20:29.240
<v Speaker 3>extradite him back so that they could put him on

0:20:29.400 --> 0:20:34.520
<v Speaker 3>trial in China. And so at the same time that

0:20:34.680 --> 0:20:37.760
<v Speaker 3>Cross Michelle was trying to get the US to draw

0:20:37.880 --> 0:20:43.320
<v Speaker 3>this investigation of Jolo, he was also trying to get

0:20:43.320 --> 0:20:46.720
<v Speaker 3>the US to extradite Kuo Wan Guai as Chinese billionaire

0:20:46.720 --> 0:20:50.280
<v Speaker 3>dissidents back to China, and there was a lot of

0:20:50.480 --> 0:20:54.840
<v Speaker 3>intrigue involved in those efforts. At one point he met

0:20:54.880 --> 0:21:00.160
<v Speaker 3>a high ranking security official from China, both in China

0:21:00.200 --> 0:21:03.720
<v Speaker 3>and at the Four Seasons Hotel in Manhattan, to talk

0:21:03.760 --> 0:21:07.840
<v Speaker 3>about the progress in trying to convince the Trump administration

0:21:07.960 --> 0:21:12.600
<v Speaker 3>to extradite Whoa and Guhy. At another point, George Higginbotham,

0:21:12.720 --> 0:21:16.120
<v Speaker 3>who was pros Michelle's personal attorney even though he worked

0:21:16.119 --> 0:21:20.200
<v Speaker 3>for the Justice Department, he went into the Chinese embassy

0:21:20.240 --> 0:21:24.600
<v Speaker 3>on a Sunday morning in Washington to talk about trying

0:21:24.600 --> 0:21:29.080
<v Speaker 3>to extradite Whoawan. Why that effort failed, as did the

0:21:29.160 --> 0:21:33.280
<v Speaker 3>effort to drop the Jolo investigations by the United States.

0:21:33.520 --> 0:21:37.439
<v Speaker 3>But pros Michelle got his money. He made eighteen or

0:21:37.480 --> 0:21:41.440
<v Speaker 3>nineteen million dollars from the twenty twelve effort to get

0:21:41.600 --> 0:21:46.120
<v Speaker 3>Jolo close to President Obama, and he made more than

0:21:46.240 --> 0:21:50.560
<v Speaker 3>seventy million dollars in the later efforts in twenty seventeen

0:21:51.080 --> 0:21:55.400
<v Speaker 3>to extradite Guoha and Guy and get the Jolo case dropped.

0:21:55.760 --> 0:21:57.399
<v Speaker 1>Did he have to give any of that money back.

0:21:57.800 --> 0:22:01.240
<v Speaker 3>It's not part of this trial, but previously the Justice

0:22:01.280 --> 0:22:05.879
<v Speaker 3>Department filed a civil forfeiture suit and feesed a number

0:22:05.920 --> 0:22:10.359
<v Speaker 3>of his accounts. That case is currently on hold, pending

0:22:10.359 --> 0:22:11.840
<v Speaker 3>the outcome of the criminal trial.

0:22:12.359 --> 0:22:14.480
<v Speaker 1>So tell us how was he on the stand? Was

0:22:14.520 --> 0:22:16.320
<v Speaker 1>he a good witness on his own behalf?

0:22:17.040 --> 0:22:20.760
<v Speaker 3>He came across at the end as a sympathetic figure.

0:22:21.280 --> 0:22:25.600
<v Speaker 3>I think it was clear that people understood him better beforehand.

0:22:26.160 --> 0:22:30.480
<v Speaker 3>The question is whether the jury will believe his explanations

0:22:30.520 --> 0:22:33.800
<v Speaker 3>about how he handled the tens of millions of dollars

0:22:33.840 --> 0:22:39.360
<v Speaker 3>he got from Jolo. The prosecutors say that Jolo essentially

0:22:39.520 --> 0:22:44.320
<v Speaker 3>was wandering his money through pros Michelle. And pros Michelle's

0:22:44.359 --> 0:22:48.760
<v Speaker 3>position is that once Jolo paid him the money, it

0:22:48.880 --> 0:22:51.480
<v Speaker 3>was his money and he was free to decide what

0:22:51.520 --> 0:22:54.399
<v Speaker 3>to do with it, That it was no longer Jolo's money,

0:22:54.800 --> 0:22:58.199
<v Speaker 3>and that he saw that money as an investment in

0:22:58.440 --> 0:22:59.760
<v Speaker 3>entertainment ventures.

0:23:00.280 --> 0:23:04.600
<v Speaker 1>So did the prosecutor make any inroads on cross examination

0:23:04.920 --> 0:23:05.679
<v Speaker 1>or did.

0:23:05.560 --> 0:23:09.440
<v Speaker 3>He hold up the prosecutors I thought scored a number

0:23:09.480 --> 0:23:13.399
<v Speaker 3>of points on cross examination, and you know, there's a

0:23:13.440 --> 0:23:18.840
<v Speaker 3>great deal of evidence against pros Michelle, and prose held

0:23:18.920 --> 0:23:22.639
<v Speaker 3>his ground on his central points that it was his money,

0:23:22.720 --> 0:23:27.040
<v Speaker 3>not Jolo's money, once he received it, that he was

0:23:27.320 --> 0:23:32.439
<v Speaker 3>not funneling Low's donations into the Obama campaign, and that

0:23:32.800 --> 0:23:37.320
<v Speaker 3>he was trying to you know, build entertainment business. But

0:23:37.800 --> 0:23:41.359
<v Speaker 3>there was a great deal of testimony against him. There

0:23:41.400 --> 0:23:45.520
<v Speaker 3>was a lot of documentary evidence, and there's his failure

0:23:45.600 --> 0:23:49.960
<v Speaker 3>to register under the Foreign Agent's Registration Act or you know,

0:23:50.200 --> 0:23:54.800
<v Speaker 3>as the agent of China, and so there's a considerable

0:23:54.800 --> 0:23:57.880
<v Speaker 3>amount of evidence that the government has a raid. We'll

0:23:57.960 --> 0:24:00.359
<v Speaker 3>just have to see how the jury is that.

0:24:01.000 --> 0:24:03.119
<v Speaker 1>So this has been a long trial and there have

0:24:03.200 --> 0:24:09.080
<v Speaker 1>been some high profile witness. Is why did Leo DiCaprio testify.

0:24:10.280 --> 0:24:13.359
<v Speaker 3>Well, DiCaprio essentially gave a lot of background on the

0:24:13.400 --> 0:24:18.720
<v Speaker 3>relationship between him and Jolo and Jolo's lifestyle about how

0:24:18.760 --> 0:24:21.880
<v Speaker 3>he spent millions of dollars, you know, living the high

0:24:21.960 --> 0:24:25.240
<v Speaker 3>life in clubs and the bars and on yachts. And

0:24:25.400 --> 0:24:28.919
<v Speaker 3>Dicaprios gave a critical piece of evidence that helped the

0:24:28.960 --> 0:24:32.520
<v Speaker 3>government's case, which is that he said he told DiCaprio

0:24:32.960 --> 0:24:37.119
<v Speaker 3>in twenty twelve that he wanted to put twenty to

0:24:37.240 --> 0:24:43.040
<v Speaker 3>thirty million dollars into the Democratic Party during the election cycle,

0:24:43.240 --> 0:24:47.080
<v Speaker 3>and DiCaprio said, wow, that's a lot of money. And

0:24:47.119 --> 0:24:52.119
<v Speaker 3>so that supports the government's contention that Jolo put twenty

0:24:52.160 --> 0:24:56.680
<v Speaker 3>million dollars toward getting a photograph with President Obama.

0:24:57.280 --> 0:24:59.800
<v Speaker 1>So what is the jury composition of the jury?

0:25:00.440 --> 0:25:05.600
<v Speaker 3>Seven women and five men and who We've been listening

0:25:05.840 --> 0:25:09.840
<v Speaker 3>closely for a month. This could take some time before

0:25:09.840 --> 0:25:10.639
<v Speaker 3>we get a verdict.

0:25:10.880 --> 0:25:13.080
<v Speaker 1>Well, I know you are going to be waiting for

0:25:13.119 --> 0:25:15.080
<v Speaker 1>the verdict, Dan, You'll let us know as soon as

0:25:15.119 --> 0:25:18.119
<v Speaker 1>it happens. Thanks so much, David. That's Bloomberg Legal reporter

0:25:18.280 --> 0:25:21.000
<v Speaker 1>David Voriakis, and that's it for this edition of The

0:25:21.000 --> 0:25:23.960
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg Law Show. Remember you can always get the latest

0:25:24.000 --> 0:25:27.120
<v Speaker 1>legal news on our Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can find

0:25:27.160 --> 0:25:31.720
<v Speaker 1>them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and at www dot bloomberg

0:25:31.760 --> 0:25:35.560
<v Speaker 1>dot com slash podcast Slash Law, And remember to tune

0:25:35.600 --> 0:25:38.800
<v Speaker 1>into The Bloomberg Law Show every weeknight at ten pm

0:25:38.880 --> 0:25:42.439
<v Speaker 1>Wall Street Time. I'm June Grosso and you're listening to

0:25:42.480 --> 0:25:43.040
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg