Latest / DEEP INSIGHT / Georgia election interference case against Trump and allies will carry on

Transcript

Georgia election interference case against Trump and allies will carry on · DEEP INSIGHT

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: And Visky's CNN Breaking news. There's breaking news just coming
• 0:04
  Speaker 1: into the situation room right now. The Georgia election interference
• 0:07
  Speaker 1: case against President Trump and others in their effort overturn
• 0:11
  Speaker 1: the twenty twenty presidential election results will continue, but with
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: a new prosecutor. This comes after Fulton County Attorney Fannie
• 0:19
  Speaker 1: Willis was previously removed from the case. Let's go live
• 0:23
  Speaker 1: right now to see in a Crime and Justice correspondent
• 0:25
  Speaker 1: Caitlin Poleetz She's got all the breaking details.
• 0:28
  Speaker 2: Caitlin Wolf.
• 0:29
  Speaker 3: A criminal case against President Donald Trump is alive again
• 0:34
  Speaker 3: with a new prosecutor. This is the case in the
• 0:37
  Speaker 3: state of Georgia in Fulton County around the twenty twenty election.
• 0:41
  Speaker 3: Donald Trump's efforts there and an alleged conspiracy that he
• 0:45
  Speaker 3: led or is alleged to have led, with top officials,
• 0:49
  Speaker 3: including Rudy Giuliani, advisors on his campaign, as well as
• 0:53
  Speaker 3: many people in that state who acted as fake electors.
• 0:57
  Speaker 3: This is a case that had been charged to years
• 1:00
  Speaker 3: ago and had been essentially on ice in limbo. It
• 1:04
  Speaker 3: was not moving forward because the prosecutor, Fani Willis, she
• 1:07
  Speaker 3: had been removed from it earlier by a state court. However,
• 1:13
  Speaker 3: there was a deadline given by a judge to find
• 1:16
  Speaker 3: another prosecutor, and indeed one has shown up. It is
• 1:20
  Speaker 3: the person that was charged with trying to figure out
• 1:22
  Speaker 3: who was going to prosecute this case. I want to
• 1:25
  Speaker 3: read a little about that prosecutor now what he is thinking.
• 1:29
  Speaker 3: His name is Peter Scandalacus. He says the decision to
• 1:34
  Speaker 3: assume responsibility for this matter was reached only after careful
• 1:38
  Speaker 3: and deliberate consideration. While it would have been simple to
• 1:41
  Speaker 3: allow the prior judge's deadline to lapse, or to inform
• 1:45
  Speaker 3: the court that no conflict prosecutor could be secured, there
• 1:47
  Speaker 3: by allowing the case to be dismissed for want of prosecution,
• 1:51
  Speaker 3: I did not believe that to be the right course
• 1:54
  Speaker 3: of action. The public has a legitimate interest in the
• 1:57
  Speaker 3: outcome of this case. Accordingly, it is it's important that
• 2:00
  Speaker 3: someone make an informed and transparent determination about how best
• 2:04
  Speaker 3: to proceed. I made the decision to assign the case
• 2:08
  Speaker 3: to myself. So Peter Scandalocus saying he's going to decide
• 2:12
  Speaker 3: what to do with this indictment of Donald Trump and
• 2:15
  Speaker 3: others in the state of Georgia, whether to push it
• 2:18
  Speaker 3: forward he says, already he's looked at many of the
• 2:21
  Speaker 3: documents in this case, witness statements, bankers box's worth of
• 2:26
  Speaker 3: evidence that had already been collected by prosecutors, and he
• 2:29
  Speaker 3: is going to determine what else to do here and
• 2:31
  Speaker 3: what proceedings might be going forward. However, Wolf, Donald Trump's
• 2:36
  Speaker 3: attorney in this case, the defense counsel, Stephen Sadau, he says,
• 2:40
  Speaker 3: this politically charged prosecution has to come to an end.
• 2:44
  Speaker 3: We remain confident that a fair and impartial review will
• 2:47
  Speaker 3: lead to a dismissal of the case against President Trump.
• 2:52
  Speaker 4: Wolf.
• 2:52
  Speaker 1: All right, Caitlyn Polan's with the breaking news. Thank you
• 2:55
  Speaker 1: very very much.
• 2:56
  Speaker 3: All right, joining us now as stand in legal analyst
• 2:58
  Speaker 3: and former federal prosecutor Elliota Mills.
• 3:01
  Speaker 2: How significant is this? It is significant in that, you know,
• 3:03
  Speaker 2: we have to put our hats back on to a
• 3:05
  Speaker 2: couple of years ago. Remember, there were a series of
• 3:07
  Speaker 2: prosecutions against a president then forign president now current President Trump,
• 3:12
  Speaker 2: both at the state and federal level. One of them
• 3:15
  Speaker 2: was in Georgia, and as Caitlin had talked about, the
• 3:17
  Speaker 2: prosecutor Fani will Us had been removed from the case. Well,
• 3:19
  Speaker 2: the judge had said the case or the appeals Corking said,
• 3:22
  Speaker 2: the case can be revived if a new prosecutor comes on.
• 3:26
  Speaker 2: That case has now revived. And so once again we
• 3:28
  Speaker 2: heard in the world of some percolating prosecution being brought
• 3:32
  Speaker 2: against President Trump.
• 3:33
  Speaker 1: And Elliott reminder of viewers, wife, Fannie Willis is no
• 3:36
  Speaker 1: longer prosecuting this case.
• 3:38
  Speaker 2: She was prosecuted the case because of a relationship she
• 3:41
  Speaker 2: had had with a lead investigator, a prosecutor on the case. Now,
• 3:46
  Speaker 2: the trial judge who'd looked at the matter had said
• 3:48
  Speaker 2: that while the relationship itself was not improper, there was
• 3:52
  Speaker 2: at least an appearance of what's call it impartiality or
• 3:57
  Speaker 2: impropriety that at least cast enough doubt on the case.
• 4:00
  Speaker 2: It could still proceed. But look, there's a cloud over it.
• 4:02
  Speaker 2: The appeals court then looked at it and said, no,
• 4:06
  Speaker 2: just to restore and maintain faith in the system, she
• 4:09
  Speaker 2: should not prosecute this case. But again, it can proceed
• 4:12
  Speaker 2: if someone else takes the case on. And that's where
• 4:14
  Speaker 2: we are today.
• 4:15
  Speaker 3: But the bottom line is, just to take a step back,
• 4:17
  Speaker 3: you have the President of the United States as a
• 4:18
  Speaker 3: criminal defendant.
• 4:19
  Speaker 2: Yes, in this.
• 4:20
  Speaker 4: Case, I mean no.
• 4:21
  Speaker 2: And there's a really important thing here, which is that
• 4:23
  Speaker 2: this is an investigation or prosecution at this state level.
• 4:27
  Speaker 2: All the stuff that people have heard about pardons for
• 4:29
  Speaker 2: people connected with January sixth or Supreme Court rulings with
• 4:33
  Speaker 2: respect to the president may not apply at the state level.
• 4:36
  Speaker 2: I say may. That is a very important word, because
• 4:39
  Speaker 2: any time you were talking about the investigation or prosecution
• 4:43
  Speaker 2: of the president of the United States, it's an uncharted
• 4:45
  Speaker 2: world and we just don't know quite what will happen.
• 4:47
  Speaker 2: But again, state prosecutions aren't touched by federal pardons, and
• 4:51
  Speaker 2: that's sort of what we're seeing here.
• 4:52
  Speaker 1: Do we know anything about this new prosecutor taking over
• 4:55
  Speaker 1: for Willis?
• 4:56
  Speaker 2: I do not, And this is all breaking very quickly,
• 4:59
  Speaker 2: and I have looked at into his background. Other than
• 5:01
  Speaker 2: the fact he's a Georgia prosecutor.
• 5:02
  Speaker 1: That's all we know.
• 5:03
  Speaker 3: Is how do you expect the Trump administration, sorry well,
• 5:06
  Speaker 3: to proceed now.
• 5:07
  Speaker 2: I would think they would still revive the arguments that
• 5:10
  Speaker 2: came up over the course of the last several years,
• 5:14
  Speaker 2: which is that he is the president of the United States. Presidents,
• 5:17
  Speaker 2: as the Supreme Court has said, are immune from prosecution
• 5:20
  Speaker 2: for a host of conduct related to their work in office,
• 5:23
  Speaker 2: even when sometimes that conduct is personal. They will, i
• 5:25
  Speaker 2: would think, make the argument that, look, this is once
• 5:28
  Speaker 2: again reviving another investigation into the president of the United
• 5:31
  Speaker 2: States and his conduct before that might that you know,
• 5:36
  Speaker 2: should not proceed. Also the fact that he's a sitting
• 5:39
  Speaker 2: president now being prosecuted, They would say, look, maybe you
• 5:43
  Speaker 2: could make an argument for prosecuting him in twenty twenty nine,
• 5:45
  Speaker 2: but there's no reason why a president should be should
• 5:49
  Speaker 2: be sitting for interviews and depositions and providing evidence while
• 5:53
  Speaker 2: he's trying to run the country. That's their argument. I'm
• 5:55
  Speaker 2: not weighing in on it. That's just what I think
• 5:56
  Speaker 2: they'll say.
• 5:57
  Speaker 1: So on that point, realistically, will the Trump administration or
• 6:00
  Speaker 1: the President himself for that matter, view any prosecutor as
• 6:03
  Speaker 1: fair and impersonal in the self?
• 6:05
  Speaker 2: Think so not in this case when he is being prosecuted.
• 6:08
  Speaker 2: And again, a lot of this comes out of the Constitution.
• 6:10
  Speaker 2: The president is the one role in the United States
• 6:13
  Speaker 2: that only one person can hold at a time. It's
• 6:15
  Speaker 2: not like even the Supreme Court, where if you take
• 6:19
  Speaker 2: somebody out, there's still eight of them that can still
• 6:20
  Speaker 2: do it. The argument will be that no president can
• 6:23
  Speaker 2: ever sit for investigation or prosecution because he has a
• 6:26
  Speaker 2: unique job. That you're going to hear that again, probably
• 6:29
  Speaker 2: very soon, when they move to either dismiss or take
• 6:31
  Speaker 2: some actives with respect to this case.
• 6:33
  Speaker 4: And Julie, I want your reaction to this latest news.
• 6:36
  Speaker 4: New prosecutor pointed to this case piece of Scandalakis well
• 6:40
  Speaker 4: more a touched on it. And I think this is
• 6:42
  Speaker 4: actually the most salient part of this whole discussion, which
• 6:45
  Speaker 4: is that we are now living in a country where
• 6:48
  Speaker 4: prosecutors and law enforcement officials are afraid to actually prosecute
• 6:53
  Speaker 4: cases because they're worried about the president in the United
• 6:56
  Speaker 4: States using his office in his power to go after this.
• 7:00
  Speaker 4: That is a banana republic. That is not a democracy.
• 7:03
  Speaker 4: It certainly not the world's oldest and greatest democracy. And
• 7:07
  Speaker 4: so I would just go on to say that the
• 7:10
  Speaker 4: saddest part of everything that we just heard now is
• 7:13
  Speaker 4: that Peter's candillac has felt the need to take this
• 7:16
  Speaker 4: case on himself because nobody else would do it, despite
• 7:19
  Speaker 4: the fact that these people are sworn law enforcement officers
• 7:22
  Speaker 4: who have sworn to pursue justice irrespective of who it
• 7:28
  Speaker 4: might compromise. And so I think from that perspective, this
• 7:31
  Speaker 4: is something for us to all think about. We now
• 7:33
  Speaker 4: not only have a Justice Department at the federal level
• 7:35
  Speaker 4: that is using its power to go after the president's
• 7:39
  Speaker 4: enemies and to shield his friends. We also now have
• 7:42
  Speaker 4: prosecutors at the state level who are so terrified of
• 7:45
  Speaker 4: the president that despite the terror bites that they apparently
• 7:48
  Speaker 4: have in evidence, despite the fact that we have recordings
• 7:51
  Speaker 4: of the president demanding that the Secretary of State find
• 7:55
  Speaker 4: votes for him that did not exist, That despite all
• 7:58
  Speaker 4: of that evidence that any one of us would have
• 8:00
  Speaker 4: been indicted on long ago, this president has been able
• 8:03
  Speaker 4: to scare people out of prosecuting him and his allies.