WEBVTT - Trump Says He Wants to Hear From Kavanagh Accuser

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 --> 0:00:22.640
<v Speaker 1>and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcasts. The Senate Judiciary

0:00:22.640 --> 0:00:25.680
<v Speaker 1>Committee is refusing to delay a hearing next week as

0:00:25.760 --> 0:00:30.240
<v Speaker 1>Christine Blasi Ford asked that the FBI investigate accusations of

0:00:30.280 --> 0:00:34.400
<v Speaker 1>sexual assault against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. Speaking at

0:00:34.440 --> 0:00:37.640
<v Speaker 1>the White House earlier today, President Trump commented on the matter,

0:00:38.880 --> 0:00:40.960
<v Speaker 1>we want to get it over with. At the same time,

0:00:41.400 --> 0:00:44.960
<v Speaker 1>we want to give tremendous amounts of time. If she

0:00:45.080 --> 0:00:48.519
<v Speaker 1>shows up, that would be wonderful. If she doesn't show up,

0:00:49.640 --> 0:00:53.040
<v Speaker 1>that would be unfortunate. Joining me is Greg Store, Bloomberg

0:00:53.040 --> 0:00:56.080
<v Speaker 1>News Supreme Court reporter. So, Greg, the story seems to

0:00:56.160 --> 0:01:00.200
<v Speaker 1>change by the hour. What's the latest? It sure does well.

0:01:00.200 --> 0:01:02.600
<v Speaker 1>As you heard the President this morning, uh said he

0:01:02.640 --> 0:01:06.440
<v Speaker 1>wants to hear from from professor Ford. Uh. He's also

0:01:06.480 --> 0:01:10.240
<v Speaker 1>again saying he a short delay is is okay with him,

0:01:10.280 --> 0:01:13.320
<v Speaker 1>But he's reiterating his support for Brett Kavanaugh. In terms

0:01:13.400 --> 0:01:17.199
<v Speaker 1>of UH. Folks in the Senate Republicans are also saying

0:01:17.200 --> 0:01:20.080
<v Speaker 1>we'd like to hear from her UM and they have,

0:01:20.200 --> 0:01:24.319
<v Speaker 1>and Chuck Grassley, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee UH,

0:01:24.440 --> 0:01:27.000
<v Speaker 1>is signaling he will move ahead one we or another

0:01:27.600 --> 0:01:31.320
<v Speaker 1>if she does not agree to testify in this hearing

0:01:31.319 --> 0:01:33.920
<v Speaker 1>that is scheduled for Monday, or in talk to the

0:01:33.920 --> 0:01:36.399
<v Speaker 1>committee in some other fashion. Well, let's clear up the

0:01:36.440 --> 0:01:40.119
<v Speaker 1>FBI part of this, because I've heard conflicting reports. If

0:01:40.160 --> 0:01:44.520
<v Speaker 1>the committee asked the FBI to investigate, will it investigate?

0:01:45.480 --> 0:01:48.560
<v Speaker 1>As a general matter, the FBI is acting at the

0:01:48.600 --> 0:01:51.120
<v Speaker 1>behest of the White House, That at least has traditionally

0:01:51.160 --> 0:01:53.880
<v Speaker 1>been how things have worked. If the White House asked

0:01:53.880 --> 0:01:57.120
<v Speaker 1>the FBI to look into these allegations, it certainly would.

0:01:57.440 --> 0:01:59.440
<v Speaker 1>I don't know that it's clear what would happen if

0:01:59.480 --> 0:02:02.920
<v Speaker 1>it were just a Senate committee that we're asking the FBI.

0:02:03.080 --> 0:02:05.200
<v Speaker 1>Certainly they don't have the power to order the FBI

0:02:05.360 --> 0:02:08.640
<v Speaker 1>to do something. UH. That that may be some uncharted waters.

0:02:08.919 --> 0:02:12.320
<v Speaker 1>Republicans want to handle this in one hearing with just

0:02:12.600 --> 0:02:16.359
<v Speaker 1>the two witnesses, not even with the third person who

0:02:16.560 --> 0:02:20.840
<v Speaker 1>Ford claims was in the room. That night. Explain how

0:02:20.880 --> 0:02:24.720
<v Speaker 1>this differs from what happened at Anita Hills testimony and

0:02:24.800 --> 0:02:29.160
<v Speaker 1>how many people testified there. Well, in some ways it's

0:02:29.320 --> 0:02:31.880
<v Speaker 1>similar in the sense that that was a he said,

0:02:31.960 --> 0:02:35.840
<v Speaker 1>she said situation with Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas. There

0:02:35.880 --> 0:02:41.120
<v Speaker 1>were other women, women who we now understand UH had

0:02:41.240 --> 0:02:45.840
<v Speaker 1>had levied UH similar allegations about Clarence Thomas, who might

0:02:45.840 --> 0:02:51.600
<v Speaker 1>have been willing to testify. They didn't testify. Um. The

0:02:51.639 --> 0:02:55.040
<v Speaker 1>Republicans seem as though they want to keep this very

0:02:55.200 --> 0:02:59.520
<v Speaker 1>narrowly focused, not bring in a whole lot of additional

0:02:59.560 --> 0:03:01.800
<v Speaker 1>complication aations, But they have the same sort of thing

0:03:01.840 --> 0:03:04.400
<v Speaker 1>where it's just the two people talking. Where do those

0:03:04.440 --> 0:03:10.000
<v Speaker 1>two critical votes Republican Senators Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski

0:03:10.160 --> 0:03:13.640
<v Speaker 1>stand right now? Well, that's the sixty four million dollar question.

0:03:14.080 --> 0:03:17.520
<v Speaker 1>They have not said how they will will vote. Uh.

0:03:17.680 --> 0:03:22.040
<v Speaker 1>Senator Collins did uh clearly say she wanted to hear

0:03:22.200 --> 0:03:27.919
<v Speaker 1>from Professor Ford. Um. It's not clear what would happen

0:03:28.240 --> 0:03:31.960
<v Speaker 1>if the Republicans moved ahead with a committee vote not

0:03:32.080 --> 0:03:37.720
<v Speaker 1>having heard from her, because she hadn't agreed to publicly testify. Um. Uh,

0:03:37.760 --> 0:03:39.200
<v Speaker 1>you know this is one of these things that we're

0:03:39.240 --> 0:03:41.200
<v Speaker 1>gonna have to watch them very closely, but for now

0:03:41.240 --> 0:03:44.480
<v Speaker 1>they haven't tipped their hands. Let's turn to another issue.

0:03:45.240 --> 0:03:50.440
<v Speaker 1>President Trump has demanded the immediate declassification of sensitive materials

0:03:50.520 --> 0:03:57.240
<v Speaker 1>about the Russia investigation. So here's another what's happening now question? Yeah, so,

0:03:57.480 --> 0:04:02.360
<v Speaker 1>um uh, these are materials. This is is um uh,

0:04:02.400 --> 0:04:07.600
<v Speaker 1>perhaps an unprecedented move move. These are materials that Republicans

0:04:07.600 --> 0:04:10.640
<v Speaker 1>had been clamoring for for quite a long time. As

0:04:10.640 --> 0:04:16.960
<v Speaker 1>a general matter, the president and the executive branch doesn't

0:04:17.600 --> 0:04:21.200
<v Speaker 1>reveal these sorts of materials while an investigation is going on.

0:04:21.920 --> 0:04:25.960
<v Speaker 1>Um uh It. We're gonna be very interesting to see

0:04:25.960 --> 0:04:30.719
<v Speaker 1>what ultimately happens here. Um Yet another issue. Trump has,

0:04:30.760 --> 0:04:33.680
<v Speaker 1>as we have discussed many times, been very critical of

0:04:33.720 --> 0:04:38.160
<v Speaker 1>Attorney General Jeff Sessions, and his latest is perhaps one

0:04:38.200 --> 0:04:41.440
<v Speaker 1>of the most severe. When he spoke to hill To

0:04:41.800 --> 0:04:45.880
<v Speaker 1>TV yesterday, tell us how he has sort of ratcheted

0:04:46.000 --> 0:04:51.960
<v Speaker 1>up this his problems with Sessions. Yeah. He his words were,

0:04:52.600 --> 0:04:57.240
<v Speaker 1>I don't have an attorney general. It's very sad. Uh,

0:04:57.400 --> 0:05:01.440
<v Speaker 1>you know the the um. He has frequently said that

0:05:01.480 --> 0:05:03.960
<v Speaker 1>he is disappointed in the way that Jeff Sessions has

0:05:04.080 --> 0:05:07.040
<v Speaker 1>has handled this job. Um. You know what is striking

0:05:07.080 --> 0:05:11.400
<v Speaker 1>about the comments that he made was that, Um, you know,

0:05:11.440 --> 0:05:13.680
<v Speaker 1>the attorney general is not just somebody who works for

0:05:13.720 --> 0:05:16.039
<v Speaker 1>the president. It is somebody who is the attorney general

0:05:16.360 --> 0:05:21.160
<v Speaker 1>of the country. Um. You know, Jeff Sessions is is,

0:05:21.240 --> 0:05:24.440
<v Speaker 1>by all appearances, you know, performing that job. And the

0:05:24.480 --> 0:05:27.080
<v Speaker 1>way he thinks is is appropriate. It is not the

0:05:27.080 --> 0:05:30.880
<v Speaker 1>way that Donald Trump thinks is appropriate. Um. But but

0:05:30.960 --> 0:05:33.960
<v Speaker 1>Trump uh seems as though he wants somebody who will

0:05:34.080 --> 0:05:38.520
<v Speaker 1>show more loyalty to him. And he was even critical

0:05:38.839 --> 0:05:44.560
<v Speaker 1>of Jeff sessions moves in as far as immigration are concerned.

0:05:44.560 --> 0:05:46.560
<v Speaker 1>In that is an area where it seems as if

0:05:46.560 --> 0:05:50.960
<v Speaker 1>Sessions was in lock step with what Trump wants. Yeah.

0:05:51.000 --> 0:05:54.000
<v Speaker 1>One of the great ironies of of Trump's criticisms of

0:05:54.160 --> 0:05:57.840
<v Speaker 1>Sessions is that putting aside the Russia investigation, where Sessions

0:05:57.839 --> 0:06:01.760
<v Speaker 1>has recused himself. Um, Sessions has been one of the

0:06:01.800 --> 0:06:06.239
<v Speaker 1>most active and some would say successful, of Trump's cabinet

0:06:06.240 --> 0:06:10.640
<v Speaker 1>members and promoting policies, and certainly he has been a

0:06:10.720 --> 0:06:16.880
<v Speaker 1>staunch advocate for the President's crackdown on illegal immigration. But

0:06:17.640 --> 0:06:20.680
<v Speaker 1>even there, the president is now saying that that Sessions

0:06:20.760 --> 0:06:23.120
<v Speaker 1>is not doing enough. And what do you make of

0:06:23.279 --> 0:06:28.520
<v Speaker 1>his critique now two years later of Sessions hearings for

0:06:28.600 --> 0:06:33.080
<v Speaker 1>confirmation as a g Yeah, Um, June, I'm gonna duck

0:06:33.120 --> 0:06:36.239
<v Speaker 1>that question because I missed that part of the interview

0:06:36.240 --> 0:06:38.800
<v Speaker 1>and I I don't know exactly what he said. A

0:06:39.120 --> 0:06:41.520
<v Speaker 1>sorry about that. That that's all right? Well, do we

0:06:41.600 --> 0:06:45.440
<v Speaker 1>see Sessions pushing back in any way? He's done that before.

0:06:46.200 --> 0:06:50.280
<v Speaker 1>He has done that before. Um. Uh, you know, we

0:06:50.360 --> 0:06:52.520
<v Speaker 1>may see it again in a sense. You know, Sessions

0:06:52.560 --> 0:06:56.680
<v Speaker 1>pushes back every day he stays on the job. Every

0:06:56.720 --> 0:07:00.000
<v Speaker 1>day he stays on the job as a day that Uh,

0:07:00.040 --> 0:07:03.000
<v Speaker 1>it makes it much more difficult for Trump to squash

0:07:03.320 --> 0:07:06.640
<v Speaker 1>the Robert Mueller investigation. Um. It may be after the election.

0:07:06.720 --> 0:07:09.520
<v Speaker 1>There there have been some signals from the President, including

0:07:09.520 --> 0:07:12.520
<v Speaker 1>in an interview with Bloomberg, uh, that he might make

0:07:12.520 --> 0:07:16.040
<v Speaker 1>a change after the election. But for now, Uh, Sessions

0:07:16.080 --> 0:07:20.400
<v Speaker 1>is still Attorney general. He has recused from the Muller investigation,

0:07:20.960 --> 0:07:24.160
<v Speaker 1>and that that one's going forward. And what it has

0:07:24.240 --> 0:07:26.440
<v Speaker 1>changed though, is that it seems as if there are

0:07:26.520 --> 0:07:31.000
<v Speaker 1>several senators on the Republican side who are willing to

0:07:31.040 --> 0:07:35.840
<v Speaker 1>talk about and think about having Sessions stepped down. Yeah,

0:07:35.560 --> 0:07:38.480
<v Speaker 1>M Lindsay Graham is perhaps the most prominent name because

0:07:38.520 --> 0:07:41.560
<v Speaker 1>he has been somebody who has been both a supporter

0:07:41.600 --> 0:07:45.640
<v Speaker 1>of Jeff Sessions and somebody uh willing to push back

0:07:45.680 --> 0:07:49.280
<v Speaker 1>against the president and and Senator Graham has said that

0:07:49.800 --> 0:07:54.440
<v Speaker 1>um uh recently that the president is entitled to an

0:07:54.440 --> 0:07:58.000
<v Speaker 1>attorney general. He has confidence in um and it's clear

0:07:58.040 --> 0:08:00.600
<v Speaker 1>he doesn't have confidence in Jeff Sessions right now. All right,

0:08:00.800 --> 0:08:03.400
<v Speaker 1>thanks so much, Greg. That's Gregg's store. He's a climber

0:08:03.520 --> 0:08:13.160
<v Speaker 1>news Supreme Court reporter. That funding secured tweet by Chairman

0:08:13.240 --> 0:08:17.160
<v Speaker 1>Elon Muskin August continues to haunt him and Tesla. The

0:08:17.280 --> 0:08:21.120
<v Speaker 1>Justice Department has now opened a criminal investigation into Tesla.

0:08:21.520 --> 0:08:24.440
<v Speaker 1>Joining me is Robert Hockett, professor at Cornell Law School.

0:08:24.920 --> 0:08:29.000
<v Speaker 1>Bob the sec was already investigating Mosque. Explain how a

0:08:29.160 --> 0:08:34.800
<v Speaker 1>Justice Department investigation is different? So it really I guess

0:08:34.800 --> 0:08:36.880
<v Speaker 1>there's some key things to say. The first is the

0:08:36.880 --> 0:08:38.880
<v Speaker 1>sense in which it would be different is that if

0:08:38.920 --> 0:08:41.640
<v Speaker 1>it were actually to pan out into something, there would

0:08:41.640 --> 0:08:45.160
<v Speaker 1>be the prospect of criminal penalties, including even jail time,

0:08:45.559 --> 0:08:49.560
<v Speaker 1>that could be uh brought against Mr Muskin. Perhaps others

0:08:49.840 --> 0:08:53.240
<v Speaker 1>as well. That being said, however, I hastened to add

0:08:53.240 --> 0:08:55.360
<v Speaker 1>the second thing, which is that this is sort of

0:08:55.360 --> 0:08:58.720
<v Speaker 1>a routine matter. Right. There haven't been subpoenas issued by

0:08:58.760 --> 0:09:01.480
<v Speaker 1>the d o J so far as far as we know. Um,

0:09:01.520 --> 0:09:04.040
<v Speaker 1>this is just kind of kind of looking around, sifting

0:09:04.040 --> 0:09:06.240
<v Speaker 1>through the through the data a bit um. And it

0:09:06.520 --> 0:09:08.559
<v Speaker 1>would have been actually quite surprising that the o' day

0:09:08.679 --> 0:09:11.480
<v Speaker 1>didn't do at least that, given the degree to which

0:09:11.520 --> 0:09:14.439
<v Speaker 1>the SEC has moved forward. The investigation, as you say,

0:09:14.520 --> 0:09:17.040
<v Speaker 1>is in its early stages. But where could it lead?

0:09:17.120 --> 0:09:22.800
<v Speaker 1>Are there any restrictions on where prosecutors take this nothing?

0:09:22.920 --> 0:09:27.040
<v Speaker 1>I mean generally, you know, in order to issue particular subpoenas,

0:09:27.080 --> 0:09:29.360
<v Speaker 1>which would be sort of the next stage, you would

0:09:29.400 --> 0:09:32.120
<v Speaker 1>have to sort of explain precisely what you're looking for

0:09:32.240 --> 0:09:35.080
<v Speaker 1>and precisely why. Right, it can't just be kind of

0:09:35.120 --> 0:09:39.080
<v Speaker 1>gratuitous across the board fishing expedition. That being said, it's

0:09:39.120 --> 0:09:42.080
<v Speaker 1>not difficult at all to sort of articulate, um, that

0:09:42.160 --> 0:09:45.000
<v Speaker 1>which you're looking for or that which you know that

0:09:45.040 --> 0:09:48.079
<v Speaker 1>the sort of concern in relation to which you're seeking

0:09:48.120 --> 0:09:50.920
<v Speaker 1>documents fairly broadly, and there do seem to be a

0:09:51.040 --> 0:09:55.040
<v Speaker 1>number of uh, what are arguably our problems that have

0:09:55.720 --> 0:09:58.120
<v Speaker 1>afflicted you might say, Tesla of late over the last

0:09:58.120 --> 0:10:00.360
<v Speaker 1>couple of months. And you could imagine at least the

0:10:00.400 --> 0:10:02.880
<v Speaker 1>d r J wanted to conduct an inquiry uh in

0:10:02.960 --> 0:10:04.840
<v Speaker 1>connection with each of those, or maybe a kind of

0:10:04.840 --> 0:10:07.960
<v Speaker 1>a plenary inquiry that embraces all of those. Well, explain

0:10:08.000 --> 0:10:11.920
<v Speaker 1>a little further what they'll be looking into, what areas?

0:10:11.960 --> 0:10:14.400
<v Speaker 1>So you know, there was this tweet ill advised. We

0:10:14.480 --> 0:10:18.680
<v Speaker 1>know what happened. What's the criminal aspect of that? Yeah,

0:10:18.720 --> 0:10:22.839
<v Speaker 1>so the criminal the criminal aspect is is exactly the same.

0:10:22.880 --> 0:10:25.120
<v Speaker 1>It's the same aspect the sec would be looking at,

0:10:25.160 --> 0:10:28.280
<v Speaker 1>and it's it's it's just that um, it would just uh,

0:10:28.400 --> 0:10:31.040
<v Speaker 1>the question would really be whether the offense was sort

0:10:31.080 --> 0:10:34.319
<v Speaker 1>of serious enough as to warrant actual criminal penalties, including

0:10:34.360 --> 0:10:37.280
<v Speaker 1>possible jiltum. So remember as we talked about this last time,

0:10:37.320 --> 0:10:39.640
<v Speaker 1>that we we found that the problem was or at

0:10:39.679 --> 0:10:42.000
<v Speaker 1>least that the possibilities were a that there was a

0:10:42.080 --> 0:10:45.440
<v Speaker 1>kind of a reckless use of language on the part

0:10:45.440 --> 0:10:48.880
<v Speaker 1>of Mr musk uh that really wasn't designed to manipulate

0:10:48.920 --> 0:10:50.880
<v Speaker 1>the market, but that really you know, where he should

0:10:50.880 --> 0:10:54.160
<v Speaker 1>have been more careful in light of the um obviousness

0:10:54.559 --> 0:10:56.800
<v Speaker 1>of the fact that this would probably lead to some

0:10:56.840 --> 0:10:59.240
<v Speaker 1>sort of market changes in the price of the stock.

0:10:59.600 --> 0:11:01.199
<v Speaker 1>But in a possibility, was that he you know, it

0:11:01.240 --> 0:11:03.320
<v Speaker 1>was intentional, right, he was sort of trying to sort

0:11:03.360 --> 0:11:06.760
<v Speaker 1>of reduce the price of the stock before you know,

0:11:06.800 --> 0:11:09.000
<v Speaker 1>tipping after tipping off friends that he was going to

0:11:09.040 --> 0:11:12.480
<v Speaker 1>do this, um thereby enabling people to earn money on

0:11:12.520 --> 0:11:15.280
<v Speaker 1>trade they would otherwise people to do. So far, you know,

0:11:15.320 --> 0:11:17.440
<v Speaker 1>as far as we know, there's no allegation that anything

0:11:17.480 --> 0:11:19.880
<v Speaker 1>like that has happened. But but the SEC and the

0:11:19.920 --> 0:11:22.440
<v Speaker 1>d o J are both interested in whether something like

0:11:22.480 --> 0:11:24.600
<v Speaker 1>that might have happened, basically what the motive of the

0:11:24.600 --> 0:11:27.920
<v Speaker 1>tweet was, because you know, depending on the motive, the

0:11:27.960 --> 0:11:30.960
<v Speaker 1>sanctions could be more or less severe, and indeed they

0:11:30.960 --> 0:11:32.240
<v Speaker 1>could turn out to be none at all. Right, it

0:11:32.280 --> 0:11:34.800
<v Speaker 1>might be viewed as a sort of innocent error in

0:11:34.880 --> 0:11:36.319
<v Speaker 1>the end, and we just don't We have no way

0:11:36.320 --> 0:11:39.680
<v Speaker 1>of knowing until things go kind of further. We've talked

0:11:39.679 --> 0:11:45.080
<v Speaker 1>before about Musque's frustrations with short sellers. Does that have

0:11:45.160 --> 0:11:48.800
<v Speaker 1>anything to do with the criminal probe? It certainly could, right,

0:11:48.840 --> 0:11:50.800
<v Speaker 1>I mean, because if this was a design. If if

0:11:50.800 --> 0:11:53.000
<v Speaker 1>the aim was sort of get back at the short

0:11:53.040 --> 0:11:59.000
<v Speaker 1>sellers um by trying to in effect influence the behavior

0:11:59.040 --> 0:12:02.880
<v Speaker 1>of the shares in the markets, by you know, conveying

0:12:02.920 --> 0:12:04.599
<v Speaker 1>information that he knew to be false or that he

0:12:04.640 --> 0:12:07.360
<v Speaker 1>knew that he was a sort of exaggerating, that would

0:12:07.360 --> 0:12:09.240
<v Speaker 1>be an offense in its own right, right. It wouldn't

0:12:09.240 --> 0:12:12.600
<v Speaker 1>be It wouldn't be quite the same thing as insider trading,

0:12:12.880 --> 0:12:14.360
<v Speaker 1>but it would be sort of on the same level

0:12:14.360 --> 0:12:16.040
<v Speaker 1>as it were. It would be the same kind of

0:12:16.040 --> 0:12:20.320
<v Speaker 1>offense in the sense that he would be misusing information

0:12:20.920 --> 0:12:24.320
<v Speaker 1>with a view to manipulating a share price, in this case,

0:12:24.360 --> 0:12:26.520
<v Speaker 1>not necessarily to profit himself or his friends, but in

0:12:26.600 --> 0:12:29.200
<v Speaker 1>order to harm the shaft somebody like the short sellers.

0:12:29.200 --> 0:12:31.599
<v Speaker 1>And that's not permissible either because it's still been it

0:12:31.600 --> 0:12:34.560
<v Speaker 1>would still be manipulous behavior if that's in fact what

0:12:34.640 --> 0:12:38.800
<v Speaker 1>he was doing. Bob, does his recent conduct play any

0:12:38.880 --> 0:12:42.960
<v Speaker 1>part in this? You know, this this smoking marijuana on

0:12:43.000 --> 0:12:46.920
<v Speaker 1>a podcast show, and also the you know, the two

0:12:46.960 --> 0:12:51.079
<v Speaker 1>people in his organization who have left after a brief time.

0:12:51.920 --> 0:12:54.080
<v Speaker 1>M hmm. I think I think this is very much

0:12:54.160 --> 0:12:56.240
<v Speaker 1>front and center here. This is the real core story

0:12:56.320 --> 0:12:57.959
<v Speaker 1>in my book. And remember we talked about this a

0:12:58.000 --> 0:13:00.000
<v Speaker 1>little bit before the last time we chatted about Mr

0:13:00.040 --> 0:13:01.719
<v Speaker 1>must But I think you know, he's a little he

0:13:01.720 --> 0:13:04.400
<v Speaker 1>seems to be a little bit overextended. He wears multiple

0:13:04.440 --> 0:13:07.240
<v Speaker 1>hats at Tesla itself, but then in addition, he wears

0:13:07.320 --> 0:13:09.680
<v Speaker 1>multiple hats in so far as he is involved with

0:13:09.720 --> 0:13:13.000
<v Speaker 1>lots of firms in addition to Tesla, and he seems

0:13:13.040 --> 0:13:14.920
<v Speaker 1>to have in a way bitten off more than he

0:13:14.960 --> 0:13:17.679
<v Speaker 1>can chew. Right, he's sort of got too many irons

0:13:17.679 --> 0:13:19.800
<v Speaker 1>in the fire, as they say, are too many ponds spoiling.

0:13:20.040 --> 0:13:21.560
<v Speaker 1>He seems to be having a little bit of trouble

0:13:21.640 --> 0:13:24.920
<v Speaker 1>keeping up with it all. Seems to be chronically sleep

0:13:24.960 --> 0:13:29.000
<v Speaker 1>deprived and overstressed. That often leads to sort of erratic

0:13:29.120 --> 0:13:32.800
<v Speaker 1>or irrational behavior. And uh there in a sense, right,

0:13:33.120 --> 0:13:34.760
<v Speaker 1>this is coming back to sort of fight him. I mean,

0:13:34.800 --> 0:13:37.240
<v Speaker 1>many people seem to be leaving Tesla now to go

0:13:37.320 --> 0:13:39.600
<v Speaker 1>back to the tech firms that they originally abandoned in

0:13:39.720 --> 0:13:42.160
<v Speaker 1>order to go to Tesla. Uh. In the first place,

0:13:42.160 --> 0:13:45.160
<v Speaker 1>there's this strange lawsuit that's now I shouldn't say, there's

0:13:45.160 --> 0:13:47.319
<v Speaker 1>this libel suit of course, that's just been filed against

0:13:47.360 --> 0:13:51.880
<v Speaker 1>him for his strange behavior referring to a British man

0:13:52.400 --> 0:13:55.160
<v Speaker 1>uh in connection with the Thaie flood last year as

0:13:55.160 --> 0:13:58.960
<v Speaker 1>a pedophile with apparently no no ground. Um. So he's

0:13:58.960 --> 0:14:02.120
<v Speaker 1>now brought you know, potential liability against himself on that ground. Um.

0:14:02.160 --> 0:14:04.720
<v Speaker 1>There's of course, you know, the cannabis smoking on the

0:14:04.800 --> 0:14:07.679
<v Speaker 1>on the podcast. There's also of course rumors about similar

0:14:07.720 --> 0:14:10.719
<v Speaker 1>behavior actually at Tesla itself. Who knows the truth or

0:14:10.760 --> 0:14:13.560
<v Speaker 1>otherwise of these rumors, but there's a general feeling then

0:14:13.679 --> 0:14:15.840
<v Speaker 1>of kind of chaos, of things kind of spinning out

0:14:15.840 --> 0:14:18.200
<v Speaker 1>of control. Uh. And it might, as we talked about

0:14:18.320 --> 0:14:19.880
<v Speaker 1>last time, it might be a good idea I think

0:14:19.920 --> 0:14:24.840
<v Speaker 1>even for mr Mr Tesla, Mr Tesla, maybe to take

0:14:24.880 --> 0:14:26.960
<v Speaker 1>a time out, you know, take a little time out

0:14:26.960 --> 0:14:28.840
<v Speaker 1>and step back, maybe a trim back a little bit

0:14:28.840 --> 0:14:31.320
<v Speaker 1>on what he does, um, and maybe also divide the

0:14:31.440 --> 0:14:33.800
<v Speaker 1>role of CEO and UH and chairman of the board

0:14:33.800 --> 0:14:35.400
<v Speaker 1>at Tesla and so that he's not having to do

0:14:35.440 --> 0:14:37.640
<v Speaker 1>so many things at the same time. All right, thanks

0:14:37.680 --> 0:14:40.160
<v Speaker 1>so much, Bob, I'm sure we'll be talking about this again.

0:14:40.640 --> 0:14:43.920
<v Speaker 1>That's Robert Hocket. He's a professor at Cornell Law School

0:14:44.440 --> 0:14:48.840
<v Speaker 1>and The SEC already was investigating whether Musk's vehicle production

0:14:48.920 --> 0:14:54.440
<v Speaker 1>production forecast misled investors before the SEC started scrutinizing whether

0:14:54.480 --> 0:14:58.080
<v Speaker 1>he had secured funding for a Tesla buyout. Thanks for

0:14:58.120 --> 0:15:01.360
<v Speaker 1>listening to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can subscribe and

0:15:01.440 --> 0:15:04.680
<v Speaker 1>listen to the show on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, and on

0:15:04.760 --> 0:15:09.040
<v Speaker 1>bloomberg dot com slash podcast. I am June Brosso. This

0:15:09.440 --> 0:15:10.160
<v Speaker 1>is Bloomberg