Latest / Bloomberg Intelligence / Instant Reaction: Trump Special Counsel New Indictment

Transcript

Instant Reaction: Trump Special Counsel New Indictment · Bloomberg Intelligence

• 0:02
  Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news.
• 0:07
  Speaker 2: The US Special Council appointed to investigate claims of interference
• 0:10
  Speaker 2: in the twenty twenty election filed updated charges against Donald
• 0:13
  Speaker 2: Trump on Tuesday. With more, we've got Bloomberg News US
• 0:17
  Speaker 2: legal reporter Eric Larson. He's here in our Bloomberg Interactive
• 0:20
  Speaker 2: Brokers studio talk about a surprise fall of filing.
• 0:25
  Speaker 3: Come as it really did come as a surprise, and
• 0:27
  Speaker 3: of it, we were expecting there to be additional court
• 0:30
  Speaker 3: hearings in the case in Washington to see what was
• 0:32
  Speaker 3: going to happen next, whether or not the judge there
• 0:35
  Speaker 3: would just sort of decide on her own what charges
• 0:39
  Speaker 3: in the in the case could go forward given that
• 0:41
  Speaker 3: Supreme Court landmark ruling that presidents have some immunity from
• 0:46
  Speaker 3: criminal charges. So it was just a wait and see
• 0:48
  Speaker 3: what was going to happen with the case. And now
• 0:49
  Speaker 3: we know there's a so called superseding indictment, a brand
• 0:53
  Speaker 3: new indictment by Jack Smith. They've put in here that
• 0:56
  Speaker 3: according like this is their view of how the case
• 0:59
  Speaker 3: needed to given that landmark Supreme Court ruling in Trump's
• 1:04
  Speaker 3: favor largely, So now we'll sort of restart the case
• 1:08
  Speaker 3: a little bit as it moves forward here.
• 1:11
  Speaker 1: Yeah, from what I understand, the new indictment cutting certain
• 1:14
  Speaker 1: allegations related to Trump's communications with government officials, including the
• 1:18
  Speaker 1: section related to his alleged efforts to involve the Justice Department,
• 1:23
  Speaker 1: But still those same for charges accusing him of conspiring
• 1:25
  Speaker 1: to overturn the results of the twenty twenty election still there.
• 1:28
  Speaker 1: So is it the whole idea is to make it
• 1:31
  Speaker 1: a stronger case for Jacksmith.
• 1:33
  Speaker 3: I think the idea is to make it a case that,
• 1:36
  Speaker 3: if when it returns to the Supreme Court, will survive
• 1:40
  Speaker 3: the new scrutiny that they've put up there. So it's
• 1:43
  Speaker 3: all going to boil down to whether or not everything
• 1:45
  Speaker 3: in the indictment can be viewed as an official act
• 1:48
  Speaker 3: or on the outer boundaries of an official act, or
• 1:50
  Speaker 3: whether it's private conduct. So Jack Smith's team is, you know,
• 1:55
  Speaker 3: clearly that they've gone through they had another grand jury.
• 1:57
  Speaker 3: You know, look at this, and I'm this is the
• 2:00
  Speaker 3: case that they think will survive the Supreme Court ruling
• 2:03
  Speaker 3: if it goes back to the Supreme Court.
• 2:05
  Speaker 1: So go ahead, Well, so what happens next?
• 2:07
  Speaker 3: So what happens next? I don't know exactly for sure.
• 2:10
  Speaker 3: But if I had to excuse yeah, well, there's no
• 2:15
  Speaker 3: chance of a trial happening before the election at this point.
• 2:19
  Speaker 3: Even before this superseding indictment was filed, that seemed like
• 2:23
  Speaker 3: it was off not going to happen. So what will
• 2:27
  Speaker 3: happen is the case will potentially have a new arguments
• 2:31
  Speaker 3: where Trump's lawyers will argue to dismiss this superseding indictment.
• 2:35
  Speaker 3: You can be sure they'll be disagreement over whether or
• 2:38
  Speaker 3: not this has been narrowed enough to fit the Supreme
• 2:40
  Speaker 3: Court ruling. Trump's lawyers may seek to narrow it further,
• 2:45
  Speaker 3: or to have the whole thing tossed out again is
• 2:47
  Speaker 3: another possibility. So it really remains to be seen if
• 2:52
  Speaker 3: this ever does go to trial. Of course, plenty of
• 2:54
  Speaker 3: people say if Trump wins, he'll just have this case
• 2:56
  Speaker 3: thrown out. If he loses, of course, then this case
• 3:00
  Speaker 3: we'll proceed.
• 3:02
  Speaker 2: Just reminder, this is completely separate from the Manhattan jury
• 3:05
  Speaker 2: on May thirtieth finding Trump guilty on thirty four counts
• 3:07
  Speaker 2: of falsifying business records.
• 3:09
  Speaker 3: Right right, that's a separate case. He was convicted in
• 3:13
  Speaker 3: that case that did go to trial, obviously.
• 3:15
  Speaker 2: And he'll be sentenced or the Dutch judge he's supposed
• 3:17
  Speaker 2: to be sentenced on September eighteenth.
• 3:19
  Speaker 3: That is correct, and we are waiting for a decision
• 3:21
  Speaker 3: from that judge, Juan Marshan here in Manhattan, on whether
• 3:25
  Speaker 3: or not to delay that sentencing until after the election.
• 3:28
  Speaker 3: Trump made sort of a last ditch motion saying that
• 3:31
  Speaker 3: it would be election interference for him to be sentenced
• 3:34
  Speaker 3: with the election so near, and some other arguments as well.
• 3:38
  Speaker 2: If back to the filing from today, if Trump does
• 3:43
  Speaker 2: win the election in November, can he make all of
• 3:45
  Speaker 2: this go away?
• 3:47
  Speaker 3: That is our understanding is that the Justice Department is
• 3:50
  Speaker 3: part of the executive branch, of course, and the president
• 3:53
  Speaker 3: has a lot of authority to pressure or direct the
• 3:56
  Speaker 3: Justice Department on cases. That's idly expected that that is
• 4:01
  Speaker 3: what Trump would do. It's less clear exactly what steps
• 4:04
  Speaker 3: he would have to go through to get there. For example,
• 4:06
  Speaker 3: if an Attorney general could theoretically challenge him on that.
• 4:10
  Speaker 3: But again, this is a lot of hypotheticals. But certainly
• 4:14
  Speaker 3: the legal experts that we've been speaking to for months
• 4:17
  Speaker 3: now theorized that if Trump is elected, he would have
• 4:20
  Speaker 3: this case tossed out.
• 4:21
  Speaker 1: Sure about the Jack Smith. Yes, I mean, this is
• 4:24
  Speaker 1: so remind us of kind of where we are on
• 4:27
  Speaker 1: the case the white Board cases against former President Donald Trump.
• 4:31
  Speaker 3: Sure, so the one that we know he's already lost.
• 4:34
  Speaker 3: He faces up to four years in prison on thirty
• 4:37
  Speaker 3: four counts of falsifying business records to hide that hush
• 4:40
  Speaker 3: money payment to Stormy Daniels before the twenty sixteen elections.
• 4:44
  Speaker 3: So it seems like so long, so long ago he
• 4:46
  Speaker 3: was in president when he wasn't president. But he argues,
• 4:50
  Speaker 3: actually that this immunity ruling from the Supreme Court affects
• 4:53
  Speaker 3: that trial as well, even though it had nothing to
• 4:56
  Speaker 3: do theoretically with being president. He said that the trial
• 4:59
  Speaker 3: that we have here in New York that we covered
• 5:02
  Speaker 3: was tainted by testimony and other evidence that wouldn't have
• 5:05
  Speaker 3: been allowed under this Supreme Court standard, because even though
• 5:09
  Speaker 3: the hush money was paid to Stormy Daniels before the
• 5:11
  Speaker 3: twenty sixteen election, some of the witnesses were his White
• 5:15
  Speaker 3: House officials. The payments that he made, for example, were made,
• 5:19
  Speaker 3: you know, while he was president, repaying Michael Cohen his.
• 5:22
  Speaker 2: How does that work though, Well.
• 5:26
  Speaker 1: What he's saying is that some of the payments were
• 5:28
  Speaker 1: when he was once in the White House, but initially
• 5:32
  Speaker 1: the hush money was happened before he was even there.
• 5:34
  Speaker 3: It was made by Michael Cohen one hundred and thirty
• 5:36
  Speaker 3: thousand dollars and then he Cohen was and definitely before the.
• 5:39
  Speaker 1: Supreme Court ruling on immunity, right.
• 5:42
  Speaker 3: I mean it potentially is it is a long shot.
• 5:44
  Speaker 3: The Manhattan dishest attorney says, there's no way this has
• 5:47
  Speaker 3: an effect, and the case should the verdict should not
• 5:49
  Speaker 3: be thrown out. So we'll wait to see what happens
• 5:51
  Speaker 3: with that. Of course, the other Jack Smith case, the
• 5:54
  Speaker 3: other federal case that was brought over Trump's taking of
• 5:58
  Speaker 3: classified documents from the White House and his alleged obstruction
• 6:03
  Speaker 3: of efforts to get them back, that was dismissed by
• 6:05
  Speaker 3: Judge Eileen Cannon and Florida and the Special Counsel is
• 6:08
  Speaker 3: going to be appealing to try to get that case revived.
• 6:11
  Speaker 2: Wasn't there. And there's also the Georgia case.
• 6:13
  Speaker 3: There's the Georgia case. Yes, a lot of drama from
• 6:17
  Speaker 3: that one. It's sort of been on hold because of
• 6:21
  Speaker 3: the dispute over Fannie Willis. The Fulton County District attorney
• 6:25
  Speaker 3: there and the relationship that she had with the lead
• 6:29
  Speaker 3: her lead prosecutor, and so there's been an effort to
• 6:33
  Speaker 3: have her thrown out of the case. And I think
• 6:35
  Speaker 3: we're just waiting for something to happen on that. So
• 6:38
  Speaker 3: they have to straighten out the whole issue with that
• 6:40
  Speaker 3: prosecutor before anything can happen again in that case.
• 6:45
  Speaker 1: Unbelievable.
• 6:45
  Speaker 3: Thank you so much, You're welcome.
• 6:47
  Speaker 1: Thank you so much. That really puts it all in
• 6:49
  Speaker 1: perspective and gets us up to date.
• 6:51
  Speaker 3: I know, yeah, it's like, thank you.
• 6:53
  Speaker 2: That's Bloomberg News US legal reporter Eric Larson, who wasn't
• 6:57
  Speaker 2: scheduled to be on with us today, but so much.
• 6:59
  Speaker 1: First, he's always to stay in August.
• 7:01
  Speaker 3: He's always be happy to be here.