WEBVTT - Rosenstein, Trump Set Thursday Meeting at White House

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 --> 0:00:22.520
<v Speaker 1>and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcasts. There are conflicting

0:00:22.560 --> 0:00:26.680
<v Speaker 1>reports today about whether Deputy Attorney General Rod rosen Stein

0:00:26.960 --> 0:00:30.720
<v Speaker 1>is considering resigning his post. Now. White House spokeswoman Sarah

0:00:30.720 --> 0:00:34.360
<v Speaker 1>Sanders says that President Trump will meet with Rosenstein on

0:00:34.400 --> 0:00:36.760
<v Speaker 1>Thursday when he returns to d C from the U

0:00:36.880 --> 0:00:39.919
<v Speaker 1>n General Assembly meeting in New York, joining us as

0:00:39.920 --> 0:00:44.000
<v Speaker 1>William Banks, professor at Syracuse University Law School. Bill Sanders

0:00:44.040 --> 0:00:47.160
<v Speaker 1>also said that Rosenstein and Trump had had an extended

0:00:47.240 --> 0:00:51.479
<v Speaker 1>conversation to discuss the recent news stories. I'd like to

0:00:51.479 --> 0:00:56.240
<v Speaker 1>have heard that conversation. What's your reaction. Well, this is,

0:00:56.760 --> 0:01:00.440
<v Speaker 1>you know, the the newsday is quite powerful. I can't

0:01:00.480 --> 0:01:03.040
<v Speaker 1>we can't really well have a Saturday night massacre on

0:01:03.080 --> 0:01:06.480
<v Speaker 1>a Monday morning. So maybe that's why it was it

0:01:06.560 --> 0:01:09.720
<v Speaker 1>was put off. But it's a it's a series of

0:01:09.840 --> 0:01:14.160
<v Speaker 1>dramatic events. It's certainly uh, you know, the what was

0:01:14.200 --> 0:01:17.919
<v Speaker 1>revealed by the New York Times on the weekend about

0:01:17.959 --> 0:01:21.160
<v Speaker 1>what Rosenstein had done more than a year ago. It

0:01:21.280 --> 0:01:24.920
<v Speaker 1>was a real bombshell, and I think it it's certainly

0:01:25.400 --> 0:01:29.680
<v Speaker 1>helped the president, at least optically. It helped the president

0:01:30.560 --> 0:01:34.440
<v Speaker 1>distract from other things that are going on, and also

0:01:35.240 --> 0:01:40.240
<v Speaker 1>to lend some credibility to his longstanding beef that the

0:01:40.520 --> 0:01:44.920
<v Speaker 1>investigation is painted or politically biased. Whether there's more to

0:01:45.040 --> 0:01:49.080
<v Speaker 1>it or whether he actually fires Rosenstein, you know, remains

0:01:49.160 --> 0:01:52.400
<v Speaker 1>to be seen. All right, Let's let's just uh go

0:01:52.520 --> 0:01:57.760
<v Speaker 1>behind the behind the story here. Rosenstein allegedly, according to

0:01:57.760 --> 0:02:02.800
<v Speaker 1>The New York Times, discussed in the spring of either

0:02:03.280 --> 0:02:07.440
<v Speaker 1>wire tapping Trump in a conversation or removing him from

0:02:07.480 --> 0:02:10.760
<v Speaker 1>office via amendment. And then, of course he denied that,

0:02:11.240 --> 0:02:14.440
<v Speaker 1>categorically denied that, and some people there had said that

0:02:14.480 --> 0:02:17.520
<v Speaker 1>it was sarcastically meant. But let's do this as a hypothetical.

0:02:17.680 --> 0:02:21.919
<v Speaker 1>If the allegations were true, Suppose Rosenstein sees a White

0:02:21.960 --> 0:02:24.960
<v Speaker 1>House in disarray or another deputy Attorney general does, and

0:02:25.000 --> 0:02:28.080
<v Speaker 1>there's danger to the country. Is it a derogation of

0:02:28.160 --> 0:02:32.760
<v Speaker 1>his duty to talk about the amendment? I would not,

0:02:33.000 --> 0:02:35.239
<v Speaker 1>you know, I don't think if the derogation was duty,

0:02:35.280 --> 0:02:39.200
<v Speaker 1>but of course the amendments and can vote by the

0:02:39.240 --> 0:02:42.560
<v Speaker 1>deputy Attorney general. It's been vote by majority of a

0:02:42.680 --> 0:02:45.919
<v Speaker 1>cabinet and with the ascent of the Vice Press the

0:02:46.040 --> 0:02:48.640
<v Speaker 1>United States, and none of whom, of course were in

0:02:48.680 --> 0:02:54.440
<v Speaker 1>the room when one Rosenstein allegendly was talking about that possibility.

0:02:54.639 --> 0:03:00.799
<v Speaker 1>So now, um, what happens if Rosenstein resigns as opposed

0:03:00.840 --> 0:03:03.880
<v Speaker 1>to is fired, because we know that a lot of

0:03:03.919 --> 0:03:06.680
<v Speaker 1>Senators have put a line in the sand as far

0:03:06.760 --> 0:03:09.679
<v Speaker 1>as if Trump fires him, that will send us into

0:03:09.720 --> 0:03:12.520
<v Speaker 1>a constitutional crisis and something might be done. But what

0:03:12.600 --> 0:03:17.880
<v Speaker 1>happens if he resigns, Well, it does avert that situation,

0:03:18.000 --> 0:03:22.560
<v Speaker 1>and again it greatly strengthens the hand of the president.

0:03:23.080 --> 0:03:27.880
<v Speaker 1>It certainly it doesn't directly impact Mr Mueller or investigation.

0:03:28.000 --> 0:03:30.519
<v Speaker 1>I suppose that's an important thing to keep in mind.

0:03:31.360 --> 0:03:35.360
<v Speaker 1>You know, the Attorney General is supervising the Mueller investigation

0:03:35.600 --> 0:03:40.080
<v Speaker 1>because of the recusal of the Attorney General, but the

0:03:40.120 --> 0:03:43.400
<v Speaker 1>investigation goes on. Of course Mr Moller can't be directly

0:03:43.520 --> 0:03:47.760
<v Speaker 1>fired but president, so it would be up to whoever

0:03:47.800 --> 0:03:52.760
<v Speaker 1>the next deputy Attorney General is to supervise the investigation,

0:03:52.840 --> 0:03:56.000
<v Speaker 1>and that he or she would have to decide what

0:03:56.160 --> 0:03:59.880
<v Speaker 1>kind of supervisor he or she's going to be. In

0:04:00.080 --> 0:04:04.120
<v Speaker 1>the meantime, No, Francisco, the Solicitor General, is in line,

0:04:04.200 --> 0:04:07.280
<v Speaker 1>but there are some indications that he might be conflicted

0:04:07.360 --> 0:04:12.120
<v Speaker 1>because of his law firms relationship, having done Trump work

0:04:12.160 --> 0:04:16.280
<v Speaker 1>on Trump matters. That seems kind of the same thing. Yeah,

0:04:16.320 --> 0:04:18.520
<v Speaker 1>that is a conflict that could stand in the way,

0:04:18.600 --> 0:04:22.000
<v Speaker 1>although it could be disavowed. You know, there could be

0:04:22.520 --> 0:04:26.279
<v Speaker 1>you know, clarifications spelled out by the firm or uh,

0:04:26.520 --> 0:04:31.920
<v Speaker 1>Francisco acknowledging it, but suggesting that he was never involved

0:04:31.920 --> 0:04:34.960
<v Speaker 1>in any of those matters and hasn't hasn't any interest

0:04:35.000 --> 0:04:39.000
<v Speaker 1>in Who would be next in line. I believe it's

0:04:39.040 --> 0:04:43.720
<v Speaker 1>the head of the Office of Legal Council next, who

0:04:43.760 --> 0:04:46.640
<v Speaker 1>was a man in Myers. I don't know him. Uh,

0:04:46.800 --> 0:04:49.040
<v Speaker 1>there is a chain. But of course it would also

0:04:49.080 --> 0:04:52.880
<v Speaker 1>be possible for the president quickly to a point someone

0:04:53.320 --> 0:04:56.760
<v Speaker 1>and have that person go through the Senate proceeding. All

0:04:56.800 --> 0:04:59.080
<v Speaker 1>of this is you know, as you know, just a

0:04:59.080 --> 0:05:03.880
<v Speaker 1>few weeks from the term elections, and presumably at in

0:05:03.920 --> 0:05:08.200
<v Speaker 1>the eleventh hour of the Mueller investigation. So there's a

0:05:08.240 --> 0:05:12.680
<v Speaker 1>tremendous amount of momentum towards allowing things to play out

0:05:12.720 --> 0:05:17.520
<v Speaker 1>as they are. Former Acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe, and

0:05:17.560 --> 0:05:22.000
<v Speaker 1>of course it was his notes supposedly that were viewed

0:05:22.080 --> 0:05:23.880
<v Speaker 1>in the New York Times article. He says that if

0:05:24.040 --> 0:05:27.680
<v Speaker 1>Rod Rosenstein leaves his post, it puts the Special Counsel's

0:05:27.720 --> 0:05:32.520
<v Speaker 1>Russia investigation at risk. Do you agree with that? Well,

0:05:32.560 --> 0:05:35.120
<v Speaker 1>only at risk in the same sense that it has

0:05:35.279 --> 0:05:38.240
<v Speaker 1>been from the beginning. If the Trump were Mr Trump

0:05:38.240 --> 0:05:41.080
<v Speaker 1>were to try something like the Saturday Night massacred to

0:05:41.640 --> 0:05:45.640
<v Speaker 1>continued to dismiss people until he found one who was

0:05:45.680 --> 0:05:49.400
<v Speaker 1>willing to take on Mr Muller, you know, something cataclysmic

0:05:49.440 --> 0:05:52.520
<v Speaker 1>of that nature could have happened again. You know, I think,

0:05:52.640 --> 0:05:57.560
<v Speaker 1>because the investigation is probably nearly at its end, because

0:05:57.600 --> 0:06:01.520
<v Speaker 1>the elections are so also just around the band, I

0:06:01.560 --> 0:06:05.200
<v Speaker 1>think there's going to be a lot of momentum toward

0:06:05.240 --> 0:06:09.360
<v Speaker 1>allowing the process to be completed. And then, you know,

0:06:09.440 --> 0:06:12.320
<v Speaker 1>the critical question then will be what happens with the report.

0:06:12.880 --> 0:06:15.480
<v Speaker 1>One of the risks is that a new Deputy Attorney

0:06:15.520 --> 0:06:18.440
<v Speaker 1>General could decide simply to sit on the report that

0:06:18.839 --> 0:06:22.719
<v Speaker 1>not make it public in any case, and uh leave

0:06:22.800 --> 0:06:25.600
<v Speaker 1>us all wondering what Mr Mueller found. Yeah, I know

0:06:25.680 --> 0:06:29.640
<v Speaker 1>that some of the attorneys who worked on the one

0:06:29.640 --> 0:06:33.240
<v Speaker 1>of the other investigations suggested that the grand jury could

0:06:33.440 --> 0:06:36.720
<v Speaker 1>could do something in that respect and request that the

0:06:36.800 --> 0:06:39.680
<v Speaker 1>judge to the judge that it makes it public. But

0:06:39.760 --> 0:06:44.160
<v Speaker 1>it will be another down another avenue there that will

0:06:44.200 --> 0:06:47.440
<v Speaker 1>have to be questioning over and over again. Thanks so much, Bill,

0:06:47.480 --> 0:06:55.920
<v Speaker 1>It's always playful to have you on Jealous. As a

0:06:55.960 --> 0:06:59.200
<v Speaker 1>Senate Judiciary committee prepares to hear testimony from a woman

0:06:59.240 --> 0:07:04.880
<v Speaker 1>accusing Kavanaugh of sexual misconduct, Democrats are investigating another incident

0:07:04.960 --> 0:07:09.000
<v Speaker 1>involving Kavanaugh, this time during his time at Yale University.

0:07:09.400 --> 0:07:12.680
<v Speaker 1>Speaking on Fox News Sunday, Senator Lindsey Graham said he

0:07:12.680 --> 0:07:16.840
<v Speaker 1>wouldn't ruin Kavanaugh's life based on accusations. I don't know

0:07:16.920 --> 0:07:19.320
<v Speaker 1>when it happened, I don't know where it happened, and

0:07:19.400 --> 0:07:23.280
<v Speaker 1>everybody named in regard to being there said it didn't happen.

0:07:23.360 --> 0:07:27.120
<v Speaker 1>I'm just being honest unless there's something more. No, I'm

0:07:27.120 --> 0:07:30.120
<v Speaker 1>not going to ruin uh Judge Kavanaugh's life over this,

0:07:30.560 --> 0:07:33.320
<v Speaker 1>but she should come forward, she should have her say

0:07:33.640 --> 0:07:37.320
<v Speaker 1>she will be respectfully treated. Joining me is Steve Sanders,

0:07:37.320 --> 0:07:41.280
<v Speaker 1>a professor at Indiana University Marish School of Law. So, Steve,

0:07:41.320 --> 0:07:45.040
<v Speaker 1>what's your reaction to Senator Graham's statement. Let her come forward,

0:07:45.160 --> 0:07:49.120
<v Speaker 1>but unless there's something else, I'm not going to consider it. Well.

0:07:49.200 --> 0:07:53.280
<v Speaker 1>I think Senator Graham's um uh characterization points up the

0:07:53.360 --> 0:07:56.240
<v Speaker 1>real difficulty in the way this hearing is apparently going

0:07:56.280 --> 0:07:58.760
<v Speaker 1>to play out, which is essentially it's going to be

0:07:58.800 --> 0:08:02.400
<v Speaker 1>a matter off he said. She said, Um. Dr Blazie

0:08:02.480 --> 0:08:06.240
<v Speaker 1>will give her recollection and answer questions and make her allegations.

0:08:06.360 --> 0:08:11.720
<v Speaker 1>Judge Kavanaugh will respond to those. Um. Neither apparently has anything,

0:08:12.160 --> 0:08:14.680
<v Speaker 1>you know, that would normally be considered sort of hard

0:08:14.760 --> 0:08:17.280
<v Speaker 1>evidence to support them. And so in the end, it's

0:08:17.280 --> 0:08:19.320
<v Speaker 1>going to come down to who the senators and the

0:08:19.360 --> 0:08:22.960
<v Speaker 1>rest of the country watching the proceedings believe, and and

0:08:23.000 --> 0:08:26.320
<v Speaker 1>that makes it difficult. UM. I think the one thing

0:08:26.440 --> 0:08:30.360
<v Speaker 1>where one thing I would note in response to Senator

0:08:30.440 --> 0:08:32.719
<v Speaker 1>Graham is one way to avoid that would be to

0:08:33.360 --> 0:08:38.160
<v Speaker 1>subpoena additional witnesses, to subpoena other people who were allegedly

0:08:38.200 --> 0:08:42.079
<v Speaker 1>at the party, including Judge Kavanaugh's friend UM, Mr Judge

0:08:42.120 --> 0:08:46.080
<v Speaker 1>who Um has written about his high school exploits and

0:08:46.520 --> 0:08:49.560
<v Speaker 1>drinking and so forth. Um. You know, now these people

0:08:49.600 --> 0:08:53.160
<v Speaker 1>have said in statements that they have no recollection, but

0:08:53.240 --> 0:08:56.680
<v Speaker 1>that's not the same thing as either answering questions to

0:08:56.760 --> 0:09:01.000
<v Speaker 1>an FBI agent um, which the Senate has decided not

0:09:01.080 --> 0:09:04.880
<v Speaker 1>to go forward with, or answering questions under oath in

0:09:04.920 --> 0:09:08.960
<v Speaker 1>a Senate committee proceeding. If we if we had those

0:09:09.000 --> 0:09:14.880
<v Speaker 1>additional data points, that additional information questions, UH, scrutiny of

0:09:14.880 --> 0:09:18.840
<v Speaker 1>their credibility, um, it might help tip the balance as

0:09:18.880 --> 0:09:22.000
<v Speaker 1>to who's really telling the truth in this case, Steve,

0:09:22.120 --> 0:09:25.960
<v Speaker 1>the Anita Hill hearings have been criticized over the years,

0:09:26.080 --> 0:09:29.040
<v Speaker 1>and they were four days long, and they included four

0:09:29.080 --> 0:09:34.400
<v Speaker 1>corroborating witnesses plus an FBI investigation. So is there really

0:09:34.440 --> 0:09:37.480
<v Speaker 1>any point in having this kind of a he said,

0:09:37.600 --> 0:09:43.400
<v Speaker 1>She said hearing, Well, I think there isn't There is

0:09:43.440 --> 0:09:46.760
<v Speaker 1>a point if you believe in the principle that the

0:09:47.080 --> 0:09:51.160
<v Speaker 1>senators here aren't the only audience. That's a reasonable conclusion

0:09:51.280 --> 0:09:54.720
<v Speaker 1>that most of the senators have have had their minds

0:09:54.720 --> 0:09:57.240
<v Speaker 1>made up, and probably nothing that happens that the hearing

0:09:57.320 --> 0:09:59.320
<v Speaker 1>is going to change that. I think there may be

0:09:59.400 --> 0:10:04.080
<v Speaker 1>some exception to that with uh, say, especially Senator Susan

0:10:04.080 --> 0:10:06.600
<v Speaker 1>Collins of Maine. And and there are other Senators who

0:10:06.640 --> 0:10:08.319
<v Speaker 1>are going to have to vote for this who may

0:10:08.360 --> 0:10:11.280
<v Speaker 1>not have their minds entirely made up yet, such as

0:10:11.640 --> 0:10:14.520
<v Speaker 1>Lisa Murkowski of Alaska who serve in the larger Senate.

0:10:14.559 --> 0:10:17.240
<v Speaker 1>But I think this is the Supreme Court, this is

0:10:17.360 --> 0:10:20.840
<v Speaker 1>public business, and so the audience here is also for

0:10:20.880 --> 0:10:25.240
<v Speaker 1>the American people, and those who watch the hearings will

0:10:25.360 --> 0:10:30.199
<v Speaker 1>decide for themselves who is credible, who they believe, and

0:10:30.360 --> 0:10:33.280
<v Speaker 1>if they do their duty as citizens, they will act

0:10:33.320 --> 0:10:36.440
<v Speaker 1>accordingly in the way they choose to be involved in

0:10:36.520 --> 0:10:39.600
<v Speaker 1>politics and ultimately how they cast their votes in future

0:10:39.600 --> 0:10:43.360
<v Speaker 1>elections if they believe or not that the Senate is

0:10:43.440 --> 0:10:47.440
<v Speaker 1>doing its job in adequately vetting a nominee for a

0:10:47.480 --> 0:10:52.880
<v Speaker 1>lifetime appointment to the Supreme Court. Steve, you handle constitutional law.

0:10:52.920 --> 0:10:56.240
<v Speaker 1>You're an expert in that area. So let me ask

0:10:56.320 --> 0:11:00.840
<v Speaker 1>you about Clarence Thomas. Has there been a shadow over

0:11:00.920 --> 0:11:06.160
<v Speaker 1>Clarence Thomas because of the accusations of Anita Hill and

0:11:06.240 --> 0:11:10.760
<v Speaker 1>would the same be true of Kavanaugh. You know, I

0:11:11.080 --> 0:11:16.839
<v Speaker 1>don't think that it has in any meaningful or detectable way. Um,

0:11:16.960 --> 0:11:20.840
<v Speaker 1>affected the way Justice Thomas does his job, or the

0:11:20.880 --> 0:11:24.680
<v Speaker 1>way litigants present arguments that they know Justice Thomas is

0:11:24.720 --> 0:11:28.520
<v Speaker 1>going to hear. Um. You know, it's that has been

0:11:28.520 --> 0:11:32.000
<v Speaker 1>sort of overshadowed by other, let's say, quirks that Justice

0:11:32.040 --> 0:11:35.600
<v Speaker 1>Thomas has. It is virtually never speaking at oral argument,

0:11:35.679 --> 0:11:39.480
<v Speaker 1>for example, and clinging to a sort of jurisprudential style

0:11:39.720 --> 0:11:42.720
<v Speaker 1>that most of the other court doesn't believe with and

0:11:42.760 --> 0:11:46.960
<v Speaker 1>doesn't go along with. I think the potential ramifications for

0:11:47.160 --> 0:11:50.319
<v Speaker 1>Brett Kavanaugh if he is confirmed to the Supreme Court

0:11:50.920 --> 0:11:53.320
<v Speaker 1>might be greater because of the time we're in a

0:11:53.400 --> 0:11:58.040
<v Speaker 1>combination of the me too movement, some indications that the Democrats,

0:11:58.120 --> 0:12:00.920
<v Speaker 1>at least one prominent Democrats shall than white House has

0:12:00.960 --> 0:12:04.520
<v Speaker 1>indicated that um there this may not be the end

0:12:04.520 --> 0:12:06.959
<v Speaker 1>of it, that if the Democrats retake the Senate, they

0:12:07.000 --> 0:12:10.079
<v Speaker 1>may reopen the matter and do what they think is

0:12:10.080 --> 0:12:14.439
<v Speaker 1>a more thorough investigation. Um, we'll see. There's talk this

0:12:14.520 --> 0:12:17.360
<v Speaker 1>morning of the possibility, although they seem a bit thin

0:12:17.440 --> 0:12:21.040
<v Speaker 1>at this point of other women coming forward with similar

0:12:21.080 --> 0:12:25.559
<v Speaker 1>allegations against Mr Kavanaugh. So I think it's hard to predict.

0:12:26.120 --> 0:12:28.840
<v Speaker 1>In the short term. I think there are plenty. There

0:12:28.840 --> 0:12:32.440
<v Speaker 1>will be plenty of people in our politicized environment where

0:12:32.440 --> 0:12:35.840
<v Speaker 1>the Supreme Court seems to be more salient in people's minds,

0:12:36.559 --> 0:12:40.280
<v Speaker 1>who will be eager not to let people forget um

0:12:40.320 --> 0:12:43.880
<v Speaker 1>the cloud that has over Judge Kavanaugh if these allegations

0:12:43.880 --> 0:12:48.160
<v Speaker 1>are not thoroughly disposed of or thoroughly discredited. Thank you

0:12:48.240 --> 0:12:50.520
<v Speaker 1>so much, as always, Steve. That's Steve Standers. He's a

0:12:50.520 --> 0:12:54.560
<v Speaker 1>professor at Indiana University maur School of Law. Thanks for

0:12:54.600 --> 0:12:57.880
<v Speaker 1>listening to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can subscribe and

0:12:57.920 --> 0:13:01.120
<v Speaker 1>listen to the show on Apple podcast, SoundCloud, and on

0:13:01.240 --> 0:13:05.959
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg dot com slash podcast. I'm June Brosso. This is

0:13:06.000 --> 0:13:12.079
<v Speaker 1>Bloomberg m