WEBVTT - Trump to Sign Executive Order on Immigration Practices

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 --> 0:00:22.560
<v Speaker 1>and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcasts. President Trump says

0:00:22.600 --> 0:00:25.520
<v Speaker 1>he'll sign an executive order to stomp the separation of

0:00:25.600 --> 0:00:29.000
<v Speaker 1>children from parents who are caught illegally crossing the US

0:00:29.080 --> 0:00:32.800
<v Speaker 1>border with Mexico. We're going to be signing an executive order.

0:00:32.880 --> 0:00:35.520
<v Speaker 1>We're gonna also count on Congress, obviously, but we are

0:00:36.040 --> 0:00:38.320
<v Speaker 1>signing an executive order in a little while. We're gonna

0:00:38.400 --> 0:00:41.760
<v Speaker 1>keep families together. But we still have to maintain toughness

0:00:41.880 --> 0:00:46.320
<v Speaker 1>or our country will be over run. That's a reversal

0:00:46.360 --> 0:00:49.639
<v Speaker 1>of Trump's insistence that only Congress could end his policy

0:00:49.880 --> 0:00:53.680
<v Speaker 1>of separating families at the border. Joining me as David Beer,

0:00:53.720 --> 0:00:59.040
<v Speaker 1>an immigration policy analyst at the Cato Institute, David immigration

0:00:59.160 --> 0:01:01.920
<v Speaker 1>was key in Trump's rise to power, and it's central

0:01:01.960 --> 0:01:04.360
<v Speaker 1>to his image. So can he just back down from

0:01:04.400 --> 0:01:09.920
<v Speaker 1>the zero tolerance policy without losing credibility with his base? Look,

0:01:09.959 --> 0:01:13.080
<v Speaker 1>what's really losing him credibility with the American people on

0:01:13.120 --> 0:01:16.559
<v Speaker 1>this is that he has been saying for weeks, the

0:01:16.640 --> 0:01:20.200
<v Speaker 1>only reason I'm doing this is because the law requires

0:01:20.200 --> 0:01:23.880
<v Speaker 1>me to do this. I cannot back down from this.

0:01:23.880 --> 0:01:26.679
<v Speaker 1>This is the requirements of the law. I have to

0:01:26.760 --> 0:01:30.920
<v Speaker 1>separate these families, have to take away these children. And

0:01:31.000 --> 0:01:35.679
<v Speaker 1>now he's saying, well, actually, we can make changes in

0:01:35.760 --> 0:01:39.080
<v Speaker 1>order to prevent this from happening. So that's what's really

0:01:39.080 --> 0:01:42.160
<v Speaker 1>going to cost him credibility. I don't think his base

0:01:43.280 --> 0:01:46.600
<v Speaker 1>is is that concerned one way or the other about

0:01:46.640 --> 0:01:51.760
<v Speaker 1>whether the children are separated or not. What concerns those

0:01:52.080 --> 0:01:56.960
<v Speaker 1>individuals is whether or not these um people are eligible

0:01:57.040 --> 0:02:00.520
<v Speaker 1>for asylum and can apply through the legal process as

0:02:00.520 --> 0:02:03.480
<v Speaker 1>to stay in the United States. They want them removed

0:02:03.480 --> 0:02:08.200
<v Speaker 1>immediately and uh, you know, without without a process for

0:02:08.240 --> 0:02:11.400
<v Speaker 1>them to apply to stay in the country. Trump said

0:02:11.440 --> 0:02:15.200
<v Speaker 1>that he's going to sign something that's somewhat prep preemptive

0:02:15.280 --> 0:02:18.400
<v Speaker 1>and ultimately will be matched by legislation. Any ideas what

0:02:18.480 --> 0:02:23.320
<v Speaker 1>he might be signing well, reports are that he's considering, uh,

0:02:23.919 --> 0:02:27.960
<v Speaker 1>requiring the Department of Homeland Security to detain all children

0:02:28.200 --> 0:02:31.359
<v Speaker 1>with their parents while at the same time they are

0:02:31.400 --> 0:02:37.160
<v Speaker 1>being prosecuted by the Department of Justice, and UM, it

0:02:37.240 --> 0:02:41.760
<v Speaker 1>doesn't really address the problem fully because if any of

0:02:41.800 --> 0:02:47.640
<v Speaker 1>those parents are sentenced to prison time, they would uh

0:02:48.360 --> 0:02:51.880
<v Speaker 1>be separated from their children of course, and those children

0:02:51.919 --> 0:02:53.880
<v Speaker 1>would have to go into foster care. We would take

0:02:53.919 --> 0:02:59.040
<v Speaker 1>back to the exact same situation that we're at right now. Um.

0:02:59.160 --> 0:03:02.560
<v Speaker 1>The other problem with it is that there is a

0:03:02.639 --> 0:03:07.800
<v Speaker 1>court order that requires them to release children after twenty days.

0:03:07.800 --> 0:03:12.600
<v Speaker 1>They cannot hold children in jails for more than three weeks.

0:03:12.639 --> 0:03:15.840
<v Speaker 1>And we have said this before. It's a it's a

0:03:15.880 --> 0:03:19.359
<v Speaker 1>court requirement, and so there is not an opportunity for

0:03:19.440 --> 0:03:24.480
<v Speaker 1>him to ultimately detain them long enough to go through

0:03:24.480 --> 0:03:27.960
<v Speaker 1>this entire process. So his executive order won't work. I

0:03:28.000 --> 0:03:30.960
<v Speaker 1>think he's trying to portray himself as fixing this problem

0:03:31.040 --> 0:03:34.760
<v Speaker 1>that he created, but it's really not going to resolve

0:03:34.800 --> 0:03:38.720
<v Speaker 1>the issue. We have news from our Bloomberg DC team

0:03:38.800 --> 0:03:41.680
<v Speaker 1>that about House members are heading to the White House,

0:03:41.680 --> 0:03:43.920
<v Speaker 1>so there can be some type of perhaps public event

0:03:44.440 --> 0:03:47.800
<v Speaker 1>there are the House Republicans said earlier today that they

0:03:47.800 --> 0:03:51.640
<v Speaker 1>were going to go ahead with some immigration bills. Tell

0:03:51.720 --> 0:03:56.240
<v Speaker 1>us about the various immigration bills and their chance of passage.

0:03:57.040 --> 0:04:01.560
<v Speaker 1>There's really two bills that are being voted on probably tomorrow,

0:04:02.360 --> 0:04:07.120
<v Speaker 1>and one is a extreme hard right bill that would

0:04:07.160 --> 0:04:14.160
<v Speaker 1>slash legal immigration. That's legal immigration by about um overnight.

0:04:14.400 --> 0:04:18.240
<v Speaker 1>It would kick millions of people who have been waiting

0:04:18.240 --> 0:04:21.239
<v Speaker 1>in line for the opportunity to come to this country

0:04:21.360 --> 0:04:27.839
<v Speaker 1>legally out of line and eliminate their applications entirely. Uh.

0:04:27.920 --> 0:04:31.880
<v Speaker 1>It would provide some very limited temporary work status to

0:04:32.839 --> 0:04:36.559
<v Speaker 1>the dreamers. Uh. The alternative on the other side, UH

0:04:36.680 --> 0:04:41.480
<v Speaker 1>is this compromise bill that was a compromise between moderates

0:04:41.480 --> 0:04:46.520
<v Speaker 1>and the Republican Party and conservatives, and that bill would

0:04:46.520 --> 0:04:48.520
<v Speaker 1>do a lot of the same things. It would cut

0:04:49.320 --> 0:04:53.279
<v Speaker 1>legal immigration by more than a million over the next

0:04:53.560 --> 0:04:59.000
<v Speaker 1>two decades. It would provide some legalization for for mostly

0:04:59.080 --> 0:05:02.640
<v Speaker 1>people who are in akka. Uh, those who were too

0:05:02.720 --> 0:05:06.279
<v Speaker 1>old or uh you know, uh couldn't afford to apply

0:05:06.400 --> 0:05:10.320
<v Speaker 1>for doctor will probably being left out of this legislation.

0:05:10.960 --> 0:05:13.480
<v Speaker 1>And um, at the end of the day, you're talking

0:05:13.520 --> 0:05:17.640
<v Speaker 1>about again banning nearly three million people who have waited

0:05:17.640 --> 0:05:21.240
<v Speaker 1>in line for legal visas to come to the United

0:05:21.240 --> 0:05:24.960
<v Speaker 1>States legally. All of those people's applications would be canceled.

0:05:25.160 --> 0:05:29.960
<v Speaker 1>So it's really a compromise between the hard right and conservatives.

0:05:30.200 --> 0:05:34.200
<v Speaker 1>But it's still a partisan bill and it's not something

0:05:34.279 --> 0:05:37.080
<v Speaker 1>that is likely to make its way through the Senate.

0:05:37.960 --> 0:05:39.719
<v Speaker 1>We have about a minute and a half year. David,

0:05:40.360 --> 0:05:44.000
<v Speaker 1>now explain what what the position of the Senate is,

0:05:44.040 --> 0:05:46.800
<v Speaker 1>the Republican and democratic position of the Senate if any

0:05:46.839 --> 0:05:50.440
<v Speaker 1>of those bills happens to get to it. Well, the

0:05:50.440 --> 0:05:55.640
<v Speaker 1>Senate already debated this issue, and they had their own proposals.

0:05:55.760 --> 0:05:59.720
<v Speaker 1>Many of them were similar to the ones that we're

0:06:00.000 --> 0:06:03.240
<v Speaker 1>adjusted right now that are coming up for a vote

0:06:03.240 --> 0:06:06.840
<v Speaker 1>in the House. Uh. The one that's most similar to

0:06:06.920 --> 0:06:10.440
<v Speaker 1>the hard right proposal only got forty votes. It needed

0:06:10.560 --> 0:06:14.360
<v Speaker 1>sixty votes in order to make it through the Senate.

0:06:14.720 --> 0:06:17.480
<v Speaker 1>It only got forty votes. Um. Some of the other

0:06:17.560 --> 0:06:22.960
<v Speaker 1>bipartisan bills in the Senate received a majority of the senators,

0:06:22.960 --> 0:06:27.480
<v Speaker 1>so more than fifty, but didn't get the threshold. So

0:06:27.800 --> 0:06:30.520
<v Speaker 1>the Senate, as far as their concerned, tried to do

0:06:30.600 --> 0:06:33.320
<v Speaker 1>something on this, they weren't able to do it. It's

0:06:33.440 --> 0:06:37.679
<v Speaker 1>unlikely that they will do anything with these bills. Uh

0:06:37.720 --> 0:06:41.960
<v Speaker 1>if they make it through UM the House. Well, thanks David.

0:06:42.000 --> 0:06:44.440
<v Speaker 1>We will keep up to date with you on on

0:06:44.560 --> 0:06:47.360
<v Speaker 1>what's happening in this issue that seems to be changing

0:06:47.440 --> 0:06:52.000
<v Speaker 1>but doesn't look like there's any definite proposal in the

0:06:52.080 --> 0:06:55.200
<v Speaker 1>off thing. That's David Beer. He's an immigration policy analyst

0:06:55.200 --> 0:07:02.920
<v Speaker 1>at the Cato Institute. FBI Director Christopher Ray stood by

0:07:02.960 --> 0:07:05.960
<v Speaker 1>Special Counsel Robert Mueller on Monday, as Republicans on the

0:07:06.000 --> 0:07:10.040
<v Speaker 1>Senate Judiciary Committee asserted the Muller investigation was tainted by

0:07:10.160 --> 0:07:13.760
<v Speaker 1>anti Trump bias from the start. Senator, as I said

0:07:13.760 --> 0:07:15.680
<v Speaker 1>to you last month, and as I said before, I

0:07:15.720 --> 0:07:18.440
<v Speaker 1>did not believe Special Counsel Mueller is on a witch hunt.

0:07:18.880 --> 0:07:22.240
<v Speaker 1>Inspector General Michael Horowitz also testified at the hearings, which

0:07:22.280 --> 0:07:24.880
<v Speaker 1>were focused on his report that was critical of former

0:07:24.960 --> 0:07:30.200
<v Speaker 1>FBI Director James Comey's investigation into Hillary Clinton's email joining

0:07:30.200 --> 0:07:34.000
<v Speaker 1>me as Jimmy Garula, a professor at Notre Dame Law School, Jimmy,

0:07:34.120 --> 0:07:37.680
<v Speaker 1>how did Ray do in defending the FBI against the

0:07:37.720 --> 0:07:42.160
<v Speaker 1>findings of the Inspector General's report? I think he was

0:07:42.520 --> 0:07:46.160
<v Speaker 1>It was very straightforward. He was unequivocal in his support

0:07:46.480 --> 0:07:49.960
<v Speaker 1>of A. Bob Moore, and I think in large part

0:07:50.080 --> 0:07:53.160
<v Speaker 1>because he knows, he knows more, he's worked with him

0:07:53.280 --> 0:07:56.679
<v Speaker 1>in the past. I think, uh, he is well aware

0:07:56.680 --> 0:08:00.640
<v Speaker 1>of his integrity and his honesty, and he believes that

0:08:00.640 --> 0:08:05.200
<v Speaker 1>that he's conducting this investigation in a proper manner. There's

0:08:05.240 --> 0:08:07.800
<v Speaker 1>been an extraordinary amount of attention paid to about a

0:08:07.880 --> 0:08:12.760
<v Speaker 1>dozen anti Trump text messages exchanged between an FBI agent

0:08:13.240 --> 0:08:16.560
<v Speaker 1>an FBI lawyer who were having an affair, perhaps because

0:08:16.600 --> 0:08:20.800
<v Speaker 1>the texts are so concrete in a massive ambiguity is

0:08:20.960 --> 0:08:23.160
<v Speaker 1>has there been too much attention paid to this or

0:08:23.320 --> 0:08:27.880
<v Speaker 1>are these really troubling? Well, they certainly create an appearance

0:08:28.040 --> 0:08:32.920
<v Speaker 1>of impropriety. They create an appearance here of of unfairness

0:08:32.920 --> 0:08:36.040
<v Speaker 1>because of the anti Trump sentiments that are included in

0:08:36.080 --> 0:08:38.839
<v Speaker 1>these text messages. But at the same time, the d

0:08:38.960 --> 0:08:42.719
<v Speaker 1>o J Department of Justice Inspector General Michael Horowitz concluded

0:08:42.840 --> 0:08:47.200
<v Speaker 1>that there was no evidence, absolutely not that this bias

0:08:47.240 --> 0:08:52.520
<v Speaker 1>affected the decision making in either the Hillary Clinton email

0:08:53.120 --> 0:08:58.160
<v Speaker 1>scandal investigation or the investigation into possible collusion between the

0:08:58.240 --> 0:09:02.559
<v Speaker 1>Russians and the Trump campaign. The Inspector General also testified

0:09:02.600 --> 0:09:05.720
<v Speaker 1>on Tuesday at a joint hearing of the House Judiciary

0:09:05.720 --> 0:09:09.080
<v Speaker 1>and Oversight Committees, where the rhetorics seem to be ramping

0:09:09.160 --> 0:09:13.160
<v Speaker 1>up a bit. Do you think that he answered questions,

0:09:13.200 --> 0:09:17.079
<v Speaker 1>particularly those raised by Republican Trey Gaudy who said that

0:09:17.080 --> 0:09:22.400
<v Speaker 1>that anti Trump bias in the FBI couldn't be put aside. Well,

0:09:22.400 --> 0:09:24.960
<v Speaker 1>it's interesting with the with the House Republicans. On the

0:09:24.960 --> 0:09:29.319
<v Speaker 1>one hand, they praise the Inspector General in his report

0:09:29.360 --> 0:09:33.680
<v Speaker 1>and findings regarding the anti Trump bias. On the other hand,

0:09:33.840 --> 0:09:37.000
<v Speaker 1>they criticize an attack the same Inspector General in the

0:09:37.040 --> 0:09:40.000
<v Speaker 1>same report with respect to his findings, and that that

0:09:40.000 --> 0:09:42.840
<v Speaker 1>that that there's no evidence that the this bias had

0:09:42.880 --> 0:09:46.880
<v Speaker 1>any effect in either the the Clinton investigation or the

0:09:46.920 --> 0:09:50.160
<v Speaker 1>Trump campaign investigations. So it seems to me that the

0:09:50.200 --> 0:09:52.560
<v Speaker 1>House Republicans can't have it both ways. I mean, either

0:09:52.840 --> 0:09:57.400
<v Speaker 1>the Inspector General did a good job, these were findings

0:09:57.400 --> 0:10:00.679
<v Speaker 1>that were based on concrete evidence, or not. I don't

0:10:00.679 --> 0:10:03.160
<v Speaker 1>think you can have it both ways. Do you see

0:10:03.200 --> 0:10:06.920
<v Speaker 1>any long term effects on the Mueller investigation of the

0:10:06.920 --> 0:10:09.560
<v Speaker 1>I G. S Report or the testimony we heard. Oh,

0:10:09.640 --> 0:10:12.120
<v Speaker 1>there's there's no question about it. And I think the

0:10:12.320 --> 0:10:17.760
<v Speaker 1>hearings here, how the hearing cell before the House Oversight

0:10:17.800 --> 0:10:21.000
<v Speaker 1>Committee and the House Judiciary Committee, they're political in nature.

0:10:21.280 --> 0:10:24.200
<v Speaker 1>I think the objective is quite clear. This is an

0:10:24.200 --> 0:10:29.319
<v Speaker 1>attempt to to taint, to undermine the credibility of the

0:10:29.400 --> 0:10:34.160
<v Speaker 1>Muller investigations. So therefore, once the investigation is concluded, whatever

0:10:34.200 --> 0:10:37.800
<v Speaker 1>the findings are, if they again are are negative, they

0:10:37.960 --> 0:10:42.199
<v Speaker 1>they shed shed bad light or look badly on on

0:10:42.440 --> 0:10:46.920
<v Speaker 1>on Trump or members of the Trump administration, that the

0:10:46.920 --> 0:10:49.560
<v Speaker 1>Republics can conflain, well, it was ricked, you know, this

0:10:49.679 --> 0:10:51.959
<v Speaker 1>was corrupt, it was there was biased. So so I

0:10:52.040 --> 0:10:55.960
<v Speaker 1>think there's a long term objective here that the Houses

0:10:56.640 --> 0:11:01.040
<v Speaker 1>is trying to to achieve and move towards and what

0:11:02.240 --> 0:11:05.240
<v Speaker 1>But what we've seen in the past, which with everything

0:11:05.280 --> 0:11:08.199
<v Speaker 1>that's come out, every new allegation, is that you have

0:11:08.559 --> 0:11:11.520
<v Speaker 1>the Republicans on one side and the Democrats another. It's

0:11:11.760 --> 0:11:15.920
<v Speaker 1>very very part is in doesn't would anything change that

0:11:16.520 --> 0:11:21.480
<v Speaker 1>in the future. Well, I think perhaps depending upon the

0:11:21.559 --> 0:11:25.840
<v Speaker 1>findings of the of the Oler investigation and the strength

0:11:25.960 --> 0:11:28.480
<v Speaker 1>of the evidence to support those findings. I mean, if

0:11:28.520 --> 0:11:31.360
<v Speaker 1>there if there's a smoking gun, you know, if there

0:11:31.360 --> 0:11:37.400
<v Speaker 1>are are refuted regarding their credibility or or text messages

0:11:37.480 --> 0:11:41.080
<v Speaker 1>or phone conversations, then it may be difficult for for

0:11:41.200 --> 0:11:43.840
<v Speaker 1>the Republicans to to claim that this is a witch

0:11:43.880 --> 0:11:46.479
<v Speaker 1>h to claim that this is a tain an investigation.

0:11:47.360 --> 0:11:49.960
<v Speaker 1>Now we have it's about a week almost a week

0:11:50.000 --> 0:11:54.240
<v Speaker 1>since Paul Manafort was sent to prison. There's been no

0:11:54.400 --> 0:11:57.600
<v Speaker 1>movement there. Did do you think that it was expected

0:11:57.640 --> 0:12:02.280
<v Speaker 1>that something would happen quickly after he was put behind bars. Well,

0:12:02.280 --> 0:12:05.560
<v Speaker 1>it's hard to say. Clearly, he has not been willing

0:12:05.600 --> 0:12:08.199
<v Speaker 1>to cooperate up to this point. And again he hasn't

0:12:08.200 --> 0:12:12.160
<v Speaker 1>been in jail, and so perhaps the longer he's he

0:12:12.320 --> 0:12:17.240
<v Speaker 1>spends in jail, I mean, that could influence his decision. H.

0:12:17.400 --> 0:12:19.640
<v Speaker 1>The other importance event to keep in mind is that

0:12:20.000 --> 0:12:24.040
<v Speaker 1>the trial is scheduled for his jury trial. Manforts jury

0:12:24.040 --> 0:12:26.600
<v Speaker 1>trial is scheduled for September of two thousand and eighteen.

0:12:26.679 --> 0:12:29.280
<v Speaker 1>So that's not that that far off. And so if

0:12:29.320 --> 0:12:31.440
<v Speaker 1>he's going to agree to cooperate, he's gonna have to

0:12:31.440 --> 0:12:34.480
<v Speaker 1>make a decision relatively soon. He's only got a few

0:12:34.520 --> 0:12:37.839
<v Speaker 1>months left too before the trial begins. Jimmy explain how

0:12:37.920 --> 0:12:41.840
<v Speaker 1>it's harder to prepare for trial when your client is

0:12:41.880 --> 0:12:44.160
<v Speaker 1>in prison and you have to go see him all

0:12:44.200 --> 0:12:47.839
<v Speaker 1>the time. Well, it does create some obstacles. I mean,

0:12:48.840 --> 0:12:51.640
<v Speaker 1>with respect that you've got to take you know, the lawyer,

0:12:51.679 --> 0:12:54.280
<v Speaker 1>the defense lawyer has to has to take the time

0:12:54.840 --> 0:12:58.840
<v Speaker 1>and to travel to the attention facility, has to bring

0:12:58.960 --> 0:13:01.680
<v Speaker 1>all of the relevant aisles and documents and so on

0:13:02.040 --> 0:13:05.400
<v Speaker 1>along with him or her to to brief and to

0:13:05.520 --> 0:13:10.560
<v Speaker 1>discuss the trial and trial strategy with the client. And

0:13:10.559 --> 0:13:14.680
<v Speaker 1>and certainly that's much more cumbersome than than if Manaphort

0:13:14.880 --> 0:13:17.719
<v Speaker 1>was was at his home and they could meet in

0:13:17.960 --> 0:13:20.880
<v Speaker 1>a much more informal setting, kind of at their leisure.

0:13:21.280 --> 0:13:24.920
<v Speaker 1>And that's clearly not the case. Now. Um, we are

0:13:25.200 --> 0:13:27.680
<v Speaker 1>we are always happy to have you on the show,

0:13:27.840 --> 0:13:30.560
<v Speaker 1>and thanks so much. That's Jimmy Grula. He is a

0:13:30.559 --> 0:13:33.760
<v Speaker 1>professor at Notre Dame Law School. Thanks for listening to

0:13:33.760 --> 0:13:37.080
<v Speaker 1>the Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can subscribe and listen to

0:13:37.120 --> 0:13:40.800
<v Speaker 1>the show on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, and on Bloomberg dot

0:13:40.880 --> 0:13:45.360
<v Speaker 1>com slash podcast. I'm June Brosso. This is Bloomberg