WEBVTT - Complaint Offers Roadmap For Trump Impeachment Probe

0:00:03.480 --> 0:00:07.560
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. I'm June Grosso. Every

0:00:07.640 --> 0:00:10.440
<v Speaker 1>day we bring you insight and analysis into the most

0:00:10.480 --> 0:00:13.399
<v Speaker 1>important legal news of the day. You can find more

0:00:13.480 --> 0:00:18.040
<v Speaker 1>episodes of the Bloomberg Law Podcast on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud,

0:00:18.320 --> 0:00:22.440
<v Speaker 1>and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcasts. The complaint by

0:00:22.480 --> 0:00:26.680
<v Speaker 1>a CIA whistleblower alleging that multiple government officials were alarmed

0:00:26.720 --> 0:00:30.600
<v Speaker 1>about President Trump's conversation with Ukraine's leader in the efforts

0:00:30.600 --> 0:00:33.720
<v Speaker 1>at the White House to lockdown records of the call,

0:00:34.080 --> 0:00:38.440
<v Speaker 1>offers a roadmap to impeachment. How Speaker Nancy Pelosi explained

0:00:38.440 --> 0:00:42.720
<v Speaker 1>the process ahead on MSNBC's Morning Joe Today, Just up

0:00:42.720 --> 0:00:44.880
<v Speaker 1>to the committee. They will do the work that they're

0:00:44.920 --> 0:00:48.480
<v Speaker 1>set out to do, following the facts and the time

0:00:48.520 --> 0:00:51.879
<v Speaker 1>that it takes to find the facts. As you know,

0:00:52.159 --> 0:00:54.520
<v Speaker 1>you never know where we're going next. Now I think

0:00:54.520 --> 0:00:56.720
<v Speaker 1>we're getting involved in the cover up of the cover up,

0:00:56.800 --> 0:00:59.320
<v Speaker 1>and that may be something that will take some time

0:00:59.360 --> 0:01:03.480
<v Speaker 1>to investigating. Joining me is Michael Gerhard, a professor of

0:01:03.560 --> 0:01:06.600
<v Speaker 1>constitutional law at the University of North Carolina School of

0:01:06.680 --> 0:01:10.120
<v Speaker 1>Law who has written extensively on the impeachment process, including

0:01:10.120 --> 0:01:13.120
<v Speaker 1>a sort of primer impeachment what everyone needs to know.

0:01:13.280 --> 0:01:16.720
<v Speaker 1>Thanks for joining us, Michael, thanks for having me so.

0:01:16.880 --> 0:01:22.039
<v Speaker 1>According to a senior administration official who corroborated the whistleblowers complaint,

0:01:22.200 --> 0:01:25.560
<v Speaker 1>it was National Security Council lawyers who directed that the

0:01:25.640 --> 0:01:30.319
<v Speaker 1>record of Trump's conversation with Zelensky be stored on a special,

0:01:30.440 --> 0:01:34.320
<v Speaker 1>highly classified server. So far, there's no evidence that President

0:01:34.360 --> 0:01:37.600
<v Speaker 1>Trump was directly involved in this. So how would those

0:01:37.640 --> 0:01:42.479
<v Speaker 1>facts play into an impeachment inquiry. Well, it's a very

0:01:42.480 --> 0:01:45.759
<v Speaker 1>good question. Um, I think we'll have to do certainly

0:01:46.040 --> 0:01:49.920
<v Speaker 1>going to need more fact finding and determine who essentially

0:01:50.760 --> 0:01:54.760
<v Speaker 1>told the national security lawyers to do that. Um, it's

0:01:54.840 --> 0:01:58.000
<v Speaker 1>highly a usual thing. It's almost I've never done it. Certainly,

0:01:58.400 --> 0:02:00.880
<v Speaker 1>it makes no sense under the current circle substances for

0:02:00.960 --> 0:02:03.280
<v Speaker 1>it to be done for any reason other than to

0:02:03.400 --> 0:02:05.560
<v Speaker 1>cover up. So I think we've got to kind of

0:02:05.560 --> 0:02:10.680
<v Speaker 1>follow the evidence we're going to have and and figure

0:02:10.680 --> 0:02:15.000
<v Speaker 1>out who was directing them and who that person reported to. Uh,

0:02:15.080 --> 0:02:17.559
<v Speaker 1>it may well be that the president creating the atmosphere

0:02:17.560 --> 0:02:20.720
<v Speaker 1>in which people felt the need to protect him from himself.

0:02:21.560 --> 0:02:25.520
<v Speaker 1>Some Democrats are saying that the articles of impeachment could

0:02:25.600 --> 0:02:28.280
<v Speaker 1>be drawn up by the end of the month. How

0:02:28.360 --> 0:02:31.800
<v Speaker 1>is how important is it the way that the articles

0:02:31.840 --> 0:02:37.520
<v Speaker 1>are drafted? Are they moving too fast? They could be? Um?

0:02:38.000 --> 0:02:41.440
<v Speaker 1>You typically you House, you want the House Senior Share

0:02:41.440 --> 0:02:45.000
<v Speaker 1>Committee to do its own fact finding and to be deliberate,

0:02:45.600 --> 0:02:49.480
<v Speaker 1>um as it goes along. Um. In contrast with the

0:02:49.639 --> 0:02:53.160
<v Speaker 1>peating of Bill Clinton, there was extremely fast rush to judgment,

0:02:53.200 --> 0:02:56.760
<v Speaker 1>as you might recall, and both the proceedings went very

0:02:56.840 --> 0:02:59.520
<v Speaker 1>very fast, and there was no fact funding. So um.

0:02:59.760 --> 0:03:03.320
<v Speaker 1>How in fact finding, I think it's important to help

0:03:04.000 --> 0:03:06.760
<v Speaker 1>maintain the legit legitimacy of what the House is doing.

0:03:08.280 --> 0:03:11.200
<v Speaker 1>You mentioned the Judiciary Committee. There seems to be a

0:03:11.200 --> 0:03:14.919
<v Speaker 1>shift in focus from the Judiciary Committee being the lead

0:03:14.960 --> 0:03:19.240
<v Speaker 1>committee to the Intelligence Committee. Does that raise any concerns

0:03:19.320 --> 0:03:23.160
<v Speaker 1>because of the legal expertise on the Judiciary Committee, which

0:03:23.320 --> 0:03:27.799
<v Speaker 1>usually moves impeachment processes. I don't think so. I think

0:03:27.800 --> 0:03:30.639
<v Speaker 1>there's a good deal of legal expertise on the Intelligence Committee.

0:03:31.040 --> 0:03:35.080
<v Speaker 1>It's not uncommon for other committees to be helping with

0:03:35.240 --> 0:03:37.400
<v Speaker 1>or during the fact finding and then share that with

0:03:37.440 --> 0:03:41.080
<v Speaker 1>the House Judiciary Committee. But Richard Nixon, the critical fact

0:03:41.080 --> 0:03:44.800
<v Speaker 1>finding was done by committees other than Judiciary and eventually

0:03:45.200 --> 0:03:48.000
<v Speaker 1>a judiciary took control of it. So it's it's a

0:03:48.080 --> 0:03:51.040
<v Speaker 1>very sort of organic process and it's not at all surprising.

0:03:51.080 --> 0:03:53.560
<v Speaker 1>Intelligence would be the first to deal with this because

0:03:53.600 --> 0:03:59.360
<v Speaker 1>this situation deals with NASSA national security step taking in

0:03:59.400 --> 0:04:04.040
<v Speaker 1>the impeach proceedings against both President Nixon and Clinton was

0:04:04.120 --> 0:04:08.320
<v Speaker 1>that House leaders had a floor vote authorizing the Judiciary

0:04:08.320 --> 0:04:12.920
<v Speaker 1>Committee to conduct an impeachment investigation. That hasn't happened yet.

0:04:13.360 --> 0:04:17.599
<v Speaker 1>Does that have to happen? Is that a missing element? No,

0:04:17.720 --> 0:04:20.040
<v Speaker 1>it does not at all have to happen. Um. What's

0:04:20.040 --> 0:04:23.320
<v Speaker 1>critical is what are the House rules that are given moment?

0:04:23.520 --> 0:04:26.599
<v Speaker 1>And House rules and the statutes are different now than

0:04:26.600 --> 0:04:29.560
<v Speaker 1>they were in those prior cases, and so there's really

0:04:29.680 --> 0:04:34.040
<v Speaker 1>the procedures are different with right now the House leadership

0:04:34.040 --> 0:04:36.560
<v Speaker 1>as well as the House Judiciary Committee are following the

0:04:36.600 --> 0:04:40.560
<v Speaker 1>House rules as well as applicable statutes and there and uh,

0:04:40.640 --> 0:04:43.719
<v Speaker 1>and that's appropriate. The Constitution doesn't spill out a specific

0:04:43.800 --> 0:04:47.160
<v Speaker 1>process in an impeachment proceeding. Instead, it leads it to

0:04:47.200 --> 0:04:50.640
<v Speaker 1>the House Houses discretion. I want to just talk a

0:04:50.680 --> 0:04:54.680
<v Speaker 1>little bit about the articles of impeachment specifically explained to

0:04:54.800 --> 0:05:00.240
<v Speaker 1>us what they have to contain well, the they have

0:05:00.279 --> 0:05:02.880
<v Speaker 1>a pretty broad the House is pretty broad discretion ast

0:05:02.960 --> 0:05:07.160
<v Speaker 1>to what it might choose to put into impeachment articles.

0:05:07.320 --> 0:05:11.000
<v Speaker 1>They do not have to be literal crimes or felonies

0:05:11.040 --> 0:05:14.599
<v Speaker 1>that have to be traced and and the facts have

0:05:14.680 --> 0:05:17.039
<v Speaker 1>to be shown how they fit those Because in future

0:05:17.120 --> 0:05:20.120
<v Speaker 1>offenses are not limited to actual crimes, but to serious

0:05:20.160 --> 0:05:24.360
<v Speaker 1>abuses of power, these articles could be relatively broad. They

0:05:24.600 --> 0:05:27.360
<v Speaker 1>will relate to things far more broadly than what the

0:05:27.400 --> 0:05:33.000
<v Speaker 1>criminal law forbids. So then is it a bad strategy

0:05:33.240 --> 0:05:36.680
<v Speaker 1>if they go forward and just focus on the incident

0:05:36.920 --> 0:05:41.440
<v Speaker 1>involving Ukraine and don't include elements of the Mala report.

0:05:43.120 --> 0:05:45.040
<v Speaker 1>I wouldn't say it's a bad strategy. You've got to

0:05:45.080 --> 0:05:47.559
<v Speaker 1>take the evidence you've got and see where it leads.

0:05:47.920 --> 0:05:50.400
<v Speaker 1>The Ukraine situation might be what we might refer to

0:05:50.480 --> 0:05:52.839
<v Speaker 1>as sort of the easy case, the clearer case, the

0:05:52.880 --> 0:05:56.400
<v Speaker 1>obvious case. It almost sort of makes just the facts

0:05:56.400 --> 0:06:00.600
<v Speaker 1>alone are easy to follow, at least so far, and

0:06:00.880 --> 0:06:04.080
<v Speaker 1>uh they seem to set up a classic compeatful offense.

0:06:04.560 --> 0:06:07.680
<v Speaker 1>There are other situations the House Judiciary and other communities

0:06:07.680 --> 0:06:12.720
<v Speaker 1>of investigating, ranging from tax returns, the fairy to produce them,

0:06:12.760 --> 0:06:15.719
<v Speaker 1>as well as to the president's defiance of a number

0:06:15.760 --> 0:06:18.720
<v Speaker 1>of Congressional subpoenas. There was a peach article Againstritch and

0:06:18.800 --> 0:06:21.040
<v Speaker 1>Nixon based on his failure to comply with the legislatives.

0:06:21.160 --> 0:06:24.960
<v Speaker 1>You know, President Trumps sales comply with a number of them.

0:06:25.000 --> 0:06:28.520
<v Speaker 1>And as far as the stone walling of Congress being

0:06:28.520 --> 0:06:31.839
<v Speaker 1>done by the Trump administration are there as the court,

0:06:31.880 --> 0:06:34.599
<v Speaker 1>are the court cases likely to move any faster or

0:06:34.640 --> 0:06:40.640
<v Speaker 1>have any more impetus because of the impeachment inquiry. Not necessarily.

0:06:40.720 --> 0:06:42.840
<v Speaker 1>It could be that House lawyers may ask for some

0:06:42.920 --> 0:06:48.640
<v Speaker 1>expodited decisions and perhaps those judges in those cases might agree. Um,

0:06:48.720 --> 0:06:51.360
<v Speaker 1>But if we don't know what those judges will rule

0:06:51.480 --> 0:06:56.039
<v Speaker 1>or whether they will experiting anything, impeachment might, as I said,

0:06:56.520 --> 0:07:02.479
<v Speaker 1>justified trying effort to move faster, But typically court cases

0:07:02.800 --> 0:07:06.719
<v Speaker 1>and impeachment proceedings just moved on different timelines. Listen a

0:07:06.720 --> 0:07:09.000
<v Speaker 1>minute here. But there's been a lot of publicity about

0:07:09.040 --> 0:07:12.120
<v Speaker 1>President Trump's statement that the whistle blower was almost a

0:07:12.200 --> 0:07:16.200
<v Speaker 1>spy and wanting to know identities of the of the sources.

0:07:17.200 --> 0:07:21.000
<v Speaker 1>Can that be part of impeachment? It might well be.

0:07:21.160 --> 0:07:24.560
<v Speaker 1>He's clearly trying to intimidate a critical witness. The fact

0:07:24.640 --> 0:07:28.160
<v Speaker 1>that's whoever the whistle blower is um is somebody who's

0:07:28.200 --> 0:07:30.880
<v Speaker 1>trying to follow the rule of law, and the fact

0:07:30.880 --> 0:07:33.520
<v Speaker 1>that the president's response to the situations to go after

0:07:33.520 --> 0:07:37.720
<v Speaker 1>the whistle blower my show a disregard for the law

0:07:37.960 --> 0:07:41.760
<v Speaker 1>as well as the basic boundaries within a present within

0:07:41.800 --> 0:07:44.080
<v Speaker 1>which a president should operate. Thanks so much for joining

0:07:44.160 --> 0:07:47.320
<v Speaker 1>us today. That's Michael Gerhard. He's a professor of constitutional

0:07:47.400 --> 0:07:51.200
<v Speaker 1>law at the University of North Carolina School of Law.

0:07:54.520 --> 0:07:57.480
<v Speaker 1>Thanks for listening to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can

0:07:57.520 --> 0:08:01.240
<v Speaker 1>subscribe and listen to the show on Apple po podcast, SoundCloud,

0:08:01.320 --> 0:08:05.200
<v Speaker 1>and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcast. I'm June Brosso.

0:08:05.680 --> 0:08:12.760
<v Speaker 1>This is Bloomberg h