MetroFocus

METROFOCUS: January 14, 2021
Former federal prosecutor and Lecturer-In-Law at Columbia Law School Jennifer Rodgers and investigative journalist and “American Oligarchs” author Andrea Bernstein discuss Donald Trump’s legacy, foreboding future and additional charges he now stands to face.
TRANSCRIPT
>>> THIS IS "METROFOCUS" WITH
RAFAEL PI ROMAN, JACK FORD, AND
JENNA FLANAGAN.
"METROFOCUS" IS MADE POSSIBLE BY
SUE AND EDGAR WACHENHEIM III,
SYLVIA A. AND SIMON B. POYTA
PROGRAMING ENDOWMENT TO FIGHT
ANTI-SEMITISM.
BERNARD AND DENISE SCHWARTZ,
BARBARA HOPE ZUCKERBERG, JANET
PRINDLE SEIDLER, JODY AND JOHN
ARNHOLD, CHERYL AND PHILIP
MILSTEIN FAMILY, JUDY AND JOSH
WESTON, DR. ROBERT C. AND TINA
SOHN FOUNDATION.
>>> GOOD EVENING, AND WELCOME TO
"METROFOCUS."
I'M JENNA FLANAGAN.
24 HOURS AFTER PRESIDENT TRUMP'S
EXTRAORDINARY SECOND IMPEACHMENT
FOR INCITING THE CAPITOL RIOT,
THERE ARE STILL SO MANY
QUESTIONS LEFT TO BE ANSWERED,
SPECIFICALLY WHAT HAPPENS NEXT.
HOW WILL THE SENATE HANDLE THE
TRIAL OF A PRESIDENT NO LONGER
IN OFFICE?
IS WHAT POLITICAL CALCULATIONS
CAN BE HAPPENING BEHIND THE
SCENES?
WHAT IS THE PRESIDENT'S LEGAL
EXPOSURE, AND HOW DOES THAT
DETERMINE TRUMP'S FUTURE?
THOSE ARE JUST SOME OF THE
PRESSING QUESTIONS WE'LL TRY TO
TACKLE WITH OUR TWO GUESTS
TONIGHT.
FIRST WE HAVE WNYC'S ANDREA
BERNSTEIN.
SHE'S AN AWARD-WINNING
JOURNALISM INVESTIGATOR AND
AUTHOR OF "AMERICAN OLIGARCH:
THE KUSHNERS, THE TRUMP AND THE
MARRIAGE OF MONEY AND POWER."
ANDREA, WELCOME TO "METROFOCUS."
>> SO GREAT TO BE HERE, JENNA.
>> JOINING US AGAIN WE HAVE
JENNIFER ROGERS.
IN ADDITION TO BEING A FORMAL
FEDERAL PROSECUTOR, SHE'S
CURRENTLY A LECTURER IN LAW AT
COLUMBIA LAW SCHOOL.
WELCOME, JENNIFER.
>> THANKS, JENNA.
GOOD TO BE WITH YOU.
>> FIRST I JUST WANT TO START
WITH GETTING A READ FROM BOTH OF
YOU.
SO MANY AMERICANS WATCHED THOSE
IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS BUT,
JENNIFER, I'LL START WITH YOU,
WHAT'S YOUR BIG TAKEAWAY?
WHAT STRUCK YOU ABOUT THE WAY
THOSE IMPEACHMENT PROCEEDINGS
WERE CONDUCTED?
>> IT'S REALLY INTERESTING,
JENNA, BECAUSE SOME WAYS IT WAS
THE REVERSE OF WHAT WE SAW WITH
THE FIRST IMPEACHMENT, WHICH WAS
A VERY THOROUGH HEARING IN THE
HOUSE WITH WITNESSES AND EXPERTS
AND ALL SORTS OF EVIDENCE COMING
IN.
AND, OF COURSE, WHEN WE GOT TO
THE SENATE TRIAL AROUND THEY
PROCEEDED WITHOUT ANY WITNESSES
OR EVIDENCE AT ALL.
THIS TIMES IT'S GOING TO BE THE
REVERSE.
YESTERDAY WHAT WE SAW WAS A
FAIRLY RUSHED SINGLE-COUNT
HEARING ON THE IMPEACHMENT BUT
ONLY WITH NO WITNESSES, WITH NO
EVIDENCE, WITH JUST TWO HOURS
WORTH OF SPEECHES AND THEN A
VOTE.
SO IT WAS VERY QUICK BECAUSE OF
THE TIMING.
THE PRESIDENT, OF COURSE, IS
LEAVING OFFICE IN A WEEK.
SO I THINK WE CAN EXPECT WHEN WE
GET TO THE SENATE TRIAL TO SEE A
MUCH MORE THOROUGH AND LENGTHY
PROCESS WHERE THERE WILL BE
EVIDENCE AND MORE DELIBERATION
THAT WE'VE SEEN SO FAR.
>> ANDREA, WAS THERE ANYTHING
THAT STUCK OUT TO YOU ABOUT THE
WAY THE IMPEACHMENT HEARINGS
WENT?
>> ITYES, A COUPLE OF THINGS
STRUCK ME.
ONE IS UNLIKE LAST YEAR WHEN
THEY WERE DISCUSSING A
TRANSCRIPT OF A PHONE CALL MADE
TO THE PRESIDENT OF UKRAINE,
WHICH IS A PLACE WHERE PEOPLE
SORT OF PROBABLY HAVE NO
CONCEPTION OF, MOST OF THEM IN
CONGRESS, THIS WAS A SITUATION
IN WHICH ALL OF THEM WERE
WITNESSES THEMSELVES.
SO THEY DIDN'T NEED A LOT OF
EVIDENCE BECAUSE THEY LIVED
THROUGH IT.
OBVIOUSLY, THERE WAS DEBATE
ABOUT WHAT THE SORT OF FACTS
WERE BUT THIS WAS AN EVENT THAT
WAS VERY VIVID FOR ALL OF THE
HUNDREDS OF MEMBERS OF CONGRESS
WHO VOTED YESTERDAY.
SO I THINK THAT WAS QUITE
STRIKING THAT THEY WERE SORT OF
THE INTENDED TARGET OF SOME OF
THE PEOPLE WHO WERE VIOLATING
THE CAPITOL LAST WEEK.
AND THEN ALSO, I DO REALLY THINK
IT IS VERY HISTORICALLY
SIGNIFICANT THAT TEN REPUBLICANS
VOTED FOR IMPEACHMENT.
ON THE ONE HAND, IT SEEMS LIKE A
VERY SMALL NUMBER.
BUT ON THE OTHER HAND IT IS A
SIGNIFICANT BREAK WITH THE
PARTY.
I THINK WHAT WE'VE SEEN GLOBALLY
WITH REGIMES THAT HAVE
AUTHORITARIAN TENDENCIES IS THEY
HAVE THIS VERY TIGHT SET OF
PEOPLE WHO KEEP GIVING THE
LEADER PERMISSION TO DO THINGS.
ONCE YOU HAVE SOME PEOPLE SAYING
NO, YOU DO CREATE A SPACE WHERE
PEOPLE FEEL LIKE THEY CAN SAY
NO.
AND WE'RE ALREADY SEEING THAT
WITH McCONNELL.
McCONNELL IS SAYING I MIGHT VOTE
FOR IMPEACHMENT.
AND THAT IS REALLY SOMETHING
WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT WHERE WE
WERE JUST A YEAR AGO TODAY.
>> AND, OF COURSE, SPEAKING OF
THAT SMALL MINORITY, OR MINORITY
IF YOU WILL, ONE PERSON THAT
SEEMED TO BE BROUGHT UP MORE
WITH REFERENCES TO ABRAHAM
LINCOLN WAS, OF COURSE, LIZ
CHENEY, THE CONGRESSPERSON FROM
WYOMING.
AND THAT SEEMED TO BE SO UNIQUE
BUT AT THE SAME TIME SHE DIDN'T
MAKE A SPEECH, SHE SIMPLY
RELEASED A STATEMENT THAT
DEMOCRATS KEPT READING OVER AND
OVER AND OVER.
SO, JENNIFER, FROM YOUR
PERSPECTIVE, DOES THAT ALSO SHOW
A CRACK WITHIN THE STRONGHOLD OR
THE GRIP THAT THE PRESIDENT
SEEMED TO HAVE ON THE GOP?
>> WELL, THERE'S NO QUESTION AS
ANDREA SAID THERE NOW ARE TWO
SIDES IN THE REPUBLICAN PARTY,
WHERE BEFORE THERE WAS ONLY ONE.
IT WAS ALL ABOUT TRUMP AND
SUPPORTING HIM.
SO NOW THERE ARE THESE TWO
DIVISIONS AND WE DON'T KNOW YET
WHICH ONE OF THOSE DIVISIONS
WILL EMERGE VICTORIOUS IN THE
POST-TRUMP ERA BUT THERE IS NOW
SPACE FOR PEOPLE WHO WANT TO
BREAK WITH TRUMP TO DO SO.
AND LIZ CHENEY IS LEADING THAT
CHARGE.
McCONNELL IS AT LEAST BEHIND THE
SCENES SEEMING TO SUPPORT THAT
SIDE OF THINGS.
McCARTHY'S STILL SORT OF ON THE
FENCE ALTHOUGH POSSIBLY LEANING
THAT DIRECTION.
I DO THINK WE WILL SEE MORE AND
MORE PEOPLE COMING OUT AGAINST
THE PRESIDENT.
OF COURSE, YOU COULD SAY IT'S
NOT NECESSARILY PROFILE IN
COURAGE AS HIS TERM IS ENDING IN
DAYS NOW BUT AT LEAST WE ARE
SEEING FOR THE POST-TRUMP ERA
SOME MOVEMENT AWAY FROM HIM AND
TOWARDS A DIFFERENT TYPE OF
LEADERSHIP FOR THAT PARTY.
>> BEFORE WE GET TOO DEEP INTO
THE IMPACT THIS MIGHT BE HAVING
ON THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF,
JENNIFER, I DO WANT TO ASK ONE
OF THE THINGS WE SAW SEVERAL
DEMOCRATS SAY ON THE HOUSE FLOOR
WAS THAT IF WE DON'T IMPEACH FOR
THIS, THEN WHAT IS THE PURPOSE
OF IMPEACHMENT PERIOD?
I'M JUST WONDERING IF YOU COULD
GIVE US A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT,
IS THIS -- IT SEEMS TO A LOT OF
PEOPLE THIS IS A VERY OBVIOUS
THING TO DO.
DO DEMOCRATS HAVE A SOLID POINT
WITH THAT?
SECONDLY, DOES THAT GIVE US ANY
INSIGHT INTO WHAT KIND OF A
SENATE TRIAL WE WITH MIGHT BE
SEEING?
>> IT'S INTERESTING BECAUSE
SUBSTANTIVELY I THINK THEY'RE
RIGHT, THIS CONDUCT ESSENTIALLY
WHIPPING UP A VIOLENT MOB TO
STOP A CONSTITUTIONAL PROCESS
THAT THE GOVERNMENT IS
UNDERTAKING FROM PROCEEDING IS
ABOUT AS BAD AS IT GETS.
MAYBE YOU CAN SAY TRUE TREASON,
ACTUALLY BANDING TOGETHER WITH A
FOREIGN POWER TO OVERTHROW A
GOVERNMENT MIGHT BE WORSE, BUT
THEY'RE ABOUT ON PAR.
SUBSTANTIVELY, I THINK THEY'RE
RIGHT.
WHERE SOME REPUBLICANS ARE
TRYING TO MAKE A POINT IS
PROCEDURALLY IT'S NOT THE WAY TO
GO BECAUSE HIS TERM IS ENDING.
SO IMPEACHMENT USUALLY IS FOR
REMOVING THAT PERSON FOR OFFICE
SO THEY CAN NO LONGER CONTINUE
TO DAMAGE THE COUNTRY.
HE'S LEAVING IN SIX DAYS, AND HE
WILL NOT BE REMOVED BEFORE THAT
TIME.
SO ONE OF THE THINGS REPUBLICANS
ARE SAYING IS EVEN IF THE
CONDUCT IS BAD, THIS ISN'T THE
WAY TO GO ABOUT IT.
LET'S JUST LET HIS TERM END.
THERE'S NO POINT IN ALL OF THIS.
SO IT KIND OF GOES BOTH WAYS
WHETHER YOU'RE THINKING ABOUT
THE SUBSTANCE OF THE ACTION OR
THE PROCESS IS GOING TO HAPPEN.
>> NOW, ANDREA, THIS IS
SPECIFICALLY WHY I WAS REALLY
LOOKING FORWARD TO SPEAKING WITH
YOU, AND THAT IS, OF COURSE, THE
ISSUE OF CONSEQUENCES.
WE ALSO HEARD A LOT OF DEMOCRATS
REALLY STRESS THAT WE CAN'T
BEGIN TO MOVE FORWARD AS A
COUNTRY WITHOUT PEOPLE BEING
HELD TO ACCOUNT AND PERHAPS
NECESSARY CONSEQUENCES BEING
ENFORCED.
YOU BEING SUCH A STUDENT OF, I
GUESS, ALL THINGS TRUMP FOR A
WHILE NOW, I'M WONDERING WHAT
WOULD YOU SAY IS THE PRESIDENT'S
EXPERIENCE WITH THE IDEA OR THE
NOTION OF EVER PAYING
CONSEQUENCES?
>> YEAH, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT
GOES WAY BACK IN THE TRUMP
FAMILY TO DONALD TRUMP'S FATHER
FRED TRUMP.
FRED TRUMP AT ONE POINT WAS
CALLED BEFORE THE U.S. SENATE TO
EXPLAIN WHY HE USED CERTAIN
FEDERAL HOUSING MONEY IN THE WAY
HE HAD.
THE SENATORS WERE VERY
DISPLEASED WITH THE WAY FRED
TRUMP AND HIS FAMILY USED THESE
BENEFITS, BUT THEY SAID IT WAS
BAD, AND FRED TRUMP WENT ON TO
DO IT AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN.
AND THAT WAS THE SORT OF HISTORY
OF THE TRUMP FAMILY.
DONALD TRUMP IN HIS FIRST MAJOR
MANHATTAN PROJECT, THE THING
THAT MADE HIM A MANHATTAN MEDIA
MOGUL, LIED TO THE BANK, LIED TO
THE STATE AND THEN BRAGGED ABOUT
THE WHOLE THING IN HIS BOOK "THE
ART OF THE DEAL."
THE SENSE WAS WITH TRUMP, YOU
COULD ALWAYS GET AWAY WITH IT.
YOU COULD ALWAYS FIND AWAY TO
AVOID RESPONSIBILITY FOR IT.
WHETHER IT WAS CAJOLING, AS HE
ONCE DID WHEN AN FBI AGENT CAME
TO INTERVIEW HIM AND HE DID IT
IN HIS FATHER'S OFFICE IN
BROOKLYN WITH HIS THEN WIFE AND
HIS TODDLER SON DON JR. IN
ATTENDANCE DURING AN INTERVIEW,
WHETHER IT WAS THROUGH
INTIMIDATION, WHETHER IT WAS
THROUGH DONATING TO LOCAL
PROSECUTORS, TAKING THEM FOR
LUNCH, FOR HELICOPTER RIDES,
THERE WAS ALWAYS A SENSE THAT
YOU COULD GET LAW ENFORCEMENT TO
GO EASY ON YOU.
AND THAT WAS DONALD TRUMP'S
HISTORY AS A BUSINESSMAN.
HE'S BEEN INVOLVED IN THOUSANDS
OF LAWSUITS, BUT NEVER BEEN
CRIMINALLY CHARGED.
NEVER BEEN SERIOUSLY TOLD WHAT
YOU HAVE DONE CROSSES A LINE
THAT SHOULD NOT BE CROSSED.
AND LAST YEAR WHEN HE WAS
ACQUITTED BY THE SENATE, THERE
WERE A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT SAID
WELL, NOW, WHAT'S THE CHECK ON
HIM?
THE ONLY CHECK IS THE ELECTION,
AND THE ELECTION, THE VOTERS
CHOSE NOT TO RE-ELECT DONALD
TRUMP.
SO THE VOTERS WERE A CHECK BUT
THEN DONALD TRUMP REJECTED THAT
AND WHAT WE SAW, THE CULMINATION
OF THAT, IS WHAT WE SAW LAST
WEEK WAS THE INTERACTION AT THE
CAPITOL.
SO WHEN DEMOCRATS SAY IF THERE
ARE NO CONSEQUENCES FOR TRUMP,
IF HE DOESN'T GET TOLD HE CANNOT
DO SOMETHING, HE WILL DO
SOMETHING EVEN BIGGER AND MORE
OUTRAGEOUS THE NEXT TIME, THERE
IS HISTORICAL PRECEDENT FOR THEM
TO BELIEVE THAT.
>> JENNIFER, IS THAT SOMETHING
YOU THINK CAN BE BROUGHT INTO A
SENATE TRIAL?
AGAIN, I ASK, IS THIS GOING TO
BE SOMETHING WHERE THEY FOCUS
SPECIFICALLY ON THE PRESIDENT'S
BEHAVIOR SINCE THE ELECTION, OR
IS THERE POSSIBLY A CHANCE TO
MAKE A CASE THAT THIS IS AN
ONGOING PATTERN THAT, AS ANDREW
POINTED OUT, HAS BEEN GOING ON
FOR YEARS?
>> I DO THINK THEY WILL TRY TO
MAKE A POINT OF HIS LACK OF
ACCEPTING CONSEQUENCES AND
REPEATED PATTERNS OF OF BEING
EMBOLDENED BY WHAT'S HAPPENING
AND CONTINUING TO PROCEED.
SO IT WON'T NECESSARILY BE PART
OF THE EVIDENCE AND PROOF PER SE
BUT AS PART OF THEIR ARGUMENT,
CERTAINLY, I THINK THEY WILL
BRING UP THE FACT HE HAS THIS
PATTERN BREAKING NORMS, GOING
AGAINST TRADITIONS AND BREAKING
THE LAW IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES
AND WITHOUT HAVING TO BE HELD IN
CONSEQUENCES, WE SEE THAT AGAIN
AND AGAIN.
BUT MOST OF THE EVIDENCE I DO
THINK WILL BE FOCUSED ON HIS
PATTERN OF DENYING WHAT HAPPENED
IN THE ELECTION, PREPPING AND
GROOMING HIS SUPPORTERS TO FIGHT
THE ELECTION RESULTS AND
OVERTURN THE ELECTION RESULTS,
WHICH CULMINATED IN LAST WEEK'S
EVENTS.
>> JENNA, IF I COULD JUST JUMP
IN --
>> ABSOLUTELY.
>> I THINK WE SAW WITH THE
MAJORITY OF THE MEMBERS OF THE
CONGRESS JOINED A LAWSUIT THAT
WENT TO THE U.S. SUPREME COURT
IN WHICH THE STATE OF TEXAS IS
SAYING WE SHOULD OVERTURN THE
RESULTS IN ALL OF THESE OTHER
STATES.
A MAJORITY OF THE CONGRESS OF
THE UNITED STATES.
SO WHEN TRUMP GOES OUT IN FRONT
OF WHAT IS ABOUT TO BECOME AN
ANGRY MOB AND SAYS THE ELECTION
SHOULD BE OVERTURNED, WELL, HE
JUST HAD HUNDREDS OF MEMBERS OF
CONGRESS SAY THAT WAS OKAY.
SO WE SEE RIGHT THERE THE
PERMISSION STRUCTURE THAT WAS
CREATED FOR TRUMP TO DO WHAT HE
DID, AND LED HIM TO BELIEVE THAT
HIS ACTIONS THAT DAY WERE FINE.
>> OF COURSE, NOTHING HAPPENS IN
A VACUUM, AND I THINK SOMETHING
ANDREA JUST SAID,I JENNIFER SAI
TO YOU, ANDREA, AND THAT WAS
JUST TELLING IN THE WAY THE
PRESIDENT PREPS AND GROOMS
PEOPLE TO DO THINGS.
I'M WONDERING IF YOU CAN JUST
TOUCH ON THAT, HOW THIS FITS
INTO A PATTERN OF BEHAVIOR, HOW
HE'S ABLE TO GET PEOPLE TO BEND
HIS WILL.
>> YEAH, I HAVE TALKED TO SCORES
OF PEOPLE OVER THE YEARS,
HIGH-LEVEL EXECUTIVES IN THE
TRUMP ORGANIZATION, BUSINESS
PARTNERS, LENDERS, ALL KINDS OF
PEOPLE WHO BASICALLY SAID,
AGAINST MY BETTER JUDGMENT, I
WENT WITH TRUMP.
I GOT UP THERE TO THE 26th FLOOR
OF TRUMP TOWER AND I SAW THE
BEAUTIFUL VIEW, AND I THOUGHT
THIS IS GOING TO BE INCREDIBLY
EXCITING.
AND I THINK THAT IS SOMETHING
TRUMP HAS MANAGED TO OFFER
PEOPLE, YOU'RE GOING TO GO ON AN
EXCITING RIDE IF YOU GO WITH
HIM.
PEOPLE FEEL LIKE OKAY, MIGHT AS
WELL TRY IT AND SEE WHAT
HAPPENS.
WHAT CAN GO WRONG?
MICHAEL COHEN IN HIS PUBLIC
TESTIMONY TALKED ABOUT EXACTLY
WHAT COULD GO WRONG, WHICH IS
TRUMP ASKS YOU TO DO SOMETHING
THAT CROSSES A LINE, AND YOU DO
IT.
AND THEN YOU DO SOMETHING ELSE,
AND THEN YOU DO ANOTHER THING
AND SUDDENLY YOU'RE AT A POINT
WHERE YOU CANNOT GO BACK BECAUSE
YOU'RE ENTIRELY COMPLICIT WITH
HIM.
HE'S DONE THIS OVER AND OVER
WITH PEOPLE WHO WORK FOR HIM,
WITH OTHER POLITICAL LEADERS,
WITH HIS WIVES, WHERE HE CREATES
A CONDITION WHERE THEY FEEL THEY
CAN'T SAY NO UNTIL HE HAS NO USE
FOR THEM ANYMORE.
WE'RE NOW SEEING REPORTS HE HAS
NO USE FOR RUDY GIULIANI.
HE IS DENYING THAT BUT THIS IS
HIS BEST LEGAL FRIEND, HIS MOST
STAUNCH ALLY WHO HE'S NOW
TURNING AGAINST.
HE EVEN TURNED AGAINST ROY COHN,
HIS ORIGINAL LAWYER.
SO THERE'S A SENSE WITH TRUMP
THAT HE'S ALWAYS MANAGED TO GET
SOMEBODY ELSE.
AND I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS WE
SEE HIM FACING NOW IS A
SITUATION WHERE SO MANY PEOPLE
KNOW WHAT HE HAS DONE THAT IT IS
VERY, VERY HARD FOR HIM TO FIND
PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO SAY, OH,
YEAH, I'LL DO THAT.
WHAT COULD GO WRONG?
>> JENNIFER, THAT DOES BRING UP
A VERY IMPORTANT POINT, AND THAT
IS WHO IS GOING TO BE HIS
DEFENSE TEAM?
WE HEARD SOME RUMORS, AS ANDREA
MENTIONED, RUDY GIULIANI.
MAYBE THEY'RE ON THE OUTS, MAYBE
THEY'RE NOT.
WHAT EXACTLY IS THESTHE PRESIDE
LEGAL EXPOSURE GOING INTO THIS?
HOW MUCH DOES HE STAND TO LOSE?
>> IT'S INTERESTING BECAUSE
THERE HAVE BEEN SUGGESTIONS HE
WON'T REALLY HAVE A DEFENSE AT
ALL THIS TIME AROUND.
WE'LL HAVE TO SEE WHAT HE DOES.
HE CERTAINLY FACES EXPOSURE
OUTSIDE OF THE IMPEACHMENT
PROCESS.
WE KNOW HE FACES A POTENTIAL
CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION.
WE KNOW HE FACES CIVIL LAWSUITS.
SO HE'S GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF
LEGAL TROUBLES GOING FORWARD.
IN TERMS OF IMPEACHMENT, I DON'T
KNOW WHO'S GOING TO SHOW UP TO
DEFEND HIM THIS TIME AROUND.
ALAN DERSHOWITZ APPARENTLY HAS
REPORTED HE'S ON BOARD.
AND I'M SURE HE WILL BE ABLE
TO -- TO SCROUNGE UP A COUPLE OF
PEOPLE TO DO IT.
THE PROBLEM IS, HE HASN'T HAD
THE BEST OF THE BEST IN A LONG
TIME.
SO HE'S GOING TO HAVE TROUBLE
ATTRACTING TRUE LEGAL TALENT
HERE.
BUT THE CONSEQUENCES ARE
UNCLEAR.
HE ALREADY WILL BE GONE SO HE
CAN'T TECHNICALLY BE REMOVED.
REALLY THE ONLY PENALTY IS IF
HE'S CONVICTED OF THE
IMPEACHMENT PROCESS IS THEY CAN
VOTE BY MAJORITY VOTE AFTER
CONVICTING HIM BY TWO-THIRDS TO
BAR HIM FROM EVER HOLDING
FEDERAL OFFICE AGAIN.
OF COURSE, WE KNOW HE'S FLOATED
THE IDEA OF RUNNING IN 2024.
SO THAT WOULD BE THE ONE PENALTY
THAT COULD COME OUT OF THESE
PROCEEDINGS, ALTHOUGH I WOULD
SUGGEST KNOWING TRUMP AS WE DO
THAT HE MAY EVEN TRY TO FIGHT
THAT IN LITIGATION IF HE DECIDES
TO DO SO AFTER THE FACT.
>> AND I DO WANT TO COME BACK TO
THAT POINT, BUT, ANDREA, I
WANTED TO ASK YOU, SO JENNIFER
DID MENTION THAT THERE ARE OTHER
LEGAL EXPOSURES THAT THE
PRESIDENT IS MOST LIKELY GOING
TO FACE, AND WHAT ARE THEY JUST
SO THAT WE ALL UNDERSTAND?
WE KNOW HE HAS DEALINGS WITH
DEUTSCHE BANK, THAT THERE'S A
LOT OF MONEY OWED.
THOSE PAYMENTS ARE GOING TO
START COMING UP SOON.
AND THERE'S OTHER LEGAL EXPOSURE
THAT HE HAS AND HE DOESN'T
NECESSARILY HAVE THE INCOME
STREAM HE HAD BEFORE AND SO MANY
BUSINESSES HAVE BEEN CUTTING
TIES.
>> YEAH, I MEAN, THERE ARE A
NUMBER OF INVESTIGATIONS WHICH
ARE PRETTY FAR ADVANCED.
THERE IS ONE BY THE DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA ATTORNEY GENERAL
TONIGHT INAUGURAL COMMITTEE THE
LAST TIME AROUND.
THE NEW YORK ATTORNEY GENERAL IS
LOOKING INTO WHETHER THE TRUMP
ORGANIZATION VIOLATED CIVIL TAX
LAWS.
BUT THE MOST SERIOUS IS THE
MANHATTAN DISTRICT ATTORNEY IS
ENGAGED IN A FAIRLY ADVANCED
CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION OF THE
TRUMP ORGANIZATION, WHICH WE
ONLY KNOW ABOUT BECAUSE TRUMP
SUED TO PREVENT THE DISTRICT
ATTORNEY FROM GETTING HIS TAX
RETURNS.
BUT BECAUSE OF THAT SUIT, THERE
HAVE BEEN ALL OF THESE LEGAL
PAPERS FILED.
SO WE KNOW THAT AMONGST THE
CHARGES THAT THE D.A. IS LOOKING
AT IS VARIOUS FRAUD STATUTES,
WHICH COULD BE FOUNDED.
IT'S A VERY SERIOUS FELONY IN
NEW YORK.
ONCE TRUMP IS NO LONGER
PRESIDENT ON JANUARY 20th,
THERE'S AN EXPECTATION THE
SUPREME COURT WILL BASICALLY
ALLOW THE D.A. TO GET THOSE TAX
RETURNS.
AND HE WILL PROCEED WITH HIS
CRIMINAL INVESTIGATION QUITE
QUICKLY.
AND IT LOOKS TO BE A VERY
SERIOUS, VERY THOROUGH
INVESTIGATION FROM WHAT WE CAN
TELL FROM THE COURT FILINGS THAT
ARE ALREADY IN THE PUBLIC.
SO THAT IS A SERIOUS MATTER AND
THE D.A. HAS ALREADY SAID HE'S
LOOKING AT TRUMP, HIS ASSOCIATES
AND HIS BUSINESS.
SO TRUMP MAY BE FACING THAT
INVESTIGATION.
THERE IS ALSO TALK THAT THE
FULTON COUNTY MAY BE LOOKING
INTO WHETHER TRUMP VIOLATED
CIVIL STATUTES IN GEORGIA WHEN
HE CALLED ELECTION OFFICIALS
THERE TO TRY TO HAVE THE RESULTS
OVERTURNED.
AND THEN THERE ARE SO MANY CIVIL
SUITS.
THERE IS HIS NIECE, MARY TRUMP,
WHO SUED HIM FOR FRAUD.
THERE'S E. JEAN CARROLL, THE
FORMER ADVICE COLUMNIST, WHO
SUED HIM FOR DEFAMATION.
THERE'S A FORMER CONTESTANT.
AND JENNIFER, MAYBE YOU HAVE
SOME IDEAS, WHO WILL REPRESENT
HIM?
WE SEE WHOLESALE BUSINESSES
RUNNING AWAY FROM TRUMP FLEEING
AND A LOT OF LAW FIRMS, I WOULD
IMAGINE, WOULD BE FEELING A LOT
OF PRESSURE IF THEY GO AHEAD AND
REPRESENT DONALD TRUMP.
SO I THINK HE'S IN A BIT OF A
SQUEEZE THERE.
>> JENNIFER, DOES THAT MAKE
SENSE TO YOU, THAT HE MIGHT
REALLY HAVE TROUBLE FINDING
LEGAL REPRESENTATION?
>> I THINK SO.
THERE'S NO SHORTAGE OF LAWYERS
WILLING TO TAKE A HIGH-PROFILE
MATTER BUT THE PROBLEM WITH
DONALD TRUMP IS NOT JUST HE
TAKES POSITIONS THAT HAVE NO
MERIT AND HE'S ABUSIVE TO THE
PEOPLE WHO WORK FOR HIM AND HE
DOESN'T LISTEN TO HIS LAWYERS,
BUT HE DOESN'T PAY HIS BILLS.
THE ONE THING THAT LAWYERS WANT
IS TO BE PAID.
SO I DO THINK THAT HE IS GOING
TO HAVE TROUBLE FINDING GOOD
COUNSEL FOR THESE SUITS.
SOME OF SUITS, OBVIOUSLY,
ALREADY HAVE COUNSEL.
THAT SAID, THERE ARE A LOT OF
LAWYERS IN THE WORLD.
SO UNQUESTIONABLY HE WILL BE
ABLE TO FIND SOMEONE.
WE'LL JUST HAVE TO SEE WHETHER
THESE PEOPLE ARE MAGICALLY ABLE
TO PUT UP A GREAT DEFENSE.
>> ANDREA, SO MUCH OBVIOUSLY
WHAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IS
VERY SPECIFICALLY DONALD TRUMP.
HOWEVER, TRUMP, INC., IS HIS
WHOLE FAMILY.
FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, THEY
DEFINITELY SEE THEMSELVES AS A
DYNASTY AND NOW REAND BBRANDING
HOPEFULLY A POLITICAL DYNASTY.
WHICH TRUMP DO YOU EXPECT TO
TAKE UP THE BANNER AND GO
FORWARD WITH THE TRUMP BRAND?
>> I THINK THE QUESTION IS DOING
WHAT?
IVANKA TRUMP AS WHITE HOUSE
ADVISER WAS THE PERSON WHO WAS
ACTING THE MOST AS IF SHE HAD A
POLITICAL FUTURE.
BY THAT I MEAN SHE WAS VERY
DISCIPLINED IN HER MESSAGING FOR
THE MOST PART, UNLIKE DON JR.
AND EVEN ERIC, SHE WASN'T
INVOLVE ED REALLY, FOR THE MOST
PART, BETWEEN TWEETING CONSPIRA
THEORIES, BEING OPPOSITIONAL,
FUJLEISTIC, SHE OFTEN HAD
PICTURES OF HERSELF IN AFRICA
WITH WOMEN AND CHILDREN, FOR
EXAMPLE, OR THE MILITARY.
THE KINDS OF IMAGES PEOPLE WHO
WANT A FUTURE IN POLITICS
PROJECT.
I DO THINK THE LAST WEEK REALLY
COMPLICATES THAT FOR IVANKA
TRUMP.
THERE IS NO INDICATION SHE WANTS
TO GO BACK SELLING HANDBAGS AND
SHOES, THAT SHE LEFT THAT
BUSINESS BEHIND.
NOR IS THERE AN INDICATION SHE
PARTICULARLY WANTS TO GO BACK TO
THE REAL ESTATE BUSINESS.
SO I THINK IT IS A REAL QUESTION
MARK WHAT SHE DOES NEXT.
AND ERIC TRUMP, I IMAGINE, WILL
SORT OF CONTINUE TO HAVE SOME
SORT OF ROLE IN THE FAMILY
COMPANY, WHICH IS IN DEEP, DEEP
TROUBLE.
ITS BANKERS ARE FLEEING.
ITS BROKERS ARE FLEEING.
ITS CUSTOMER BASE IS FLEEING
BECAUSE IF YOU'RE A PRIVATE
GOLFER AND A MEMBER OF A PRIVATE
CLUB, THE LAST THING YOU WANT IS
TO SEE YOUR PICTURE ASSOCIATED
WITH TRUMP CONTROVERSY.
SO DONALD TRUMP'S CUSTOMERS ARE
NOT HIS POLITICAL BASE AND
THERE'S ABOUT TO BE, I BELIEVE,
A RECKONING IN THE TRUMP
ORGANIZATION ABOUT HOW TO
STRADDLE THAT DIFFERENCE.
>> WELL, ONE THING PEOPLE OFTEN
SAY ABOUT DONALD TRUMP IS TO
NEVER COUNT HIM OUT.
SO, JENNIFER, I UNDERSTAND THAT
THERE IS A LEGAL THEORY ABOUT
THE PRESIDENT THAT MIGHT BRING
HIM BACK TO POLITICAL LIFE.
>> WELL, LEGAL SCHOLARS DIFFER
ABOUT WHETHER A FORMER OFFICIAL
CAN BE IMPEACHED AND REMOVED.
WE KNOW THAT BY THE TIME THE
SENATE HEARS THE TRIAL AND
VOTES, HE WILL BE GONE.
SO THE QUESTION BECOMES, IS IT
LEGITIMATE TO CONVICT DONALD
TRUMP AFTER HIS TERM ENDS?
IS IT LEGITIMATE TO VOTE TO BAR
HIM FROM FURTHER FEDERAL SERVICE
AFTER HIS TERM ENDS?
A DISTINGUISHED FORMER APPELLATE
JUDGE, MICHAEL LUD IG, WROTE AN
OP-ED SAYING HE THOUGHT THE
ANSWER WAS NO.
ANOTHER LEGAL SCHOLAR SAID YES.
BUT WE DON'T KNOW BECAUSE IT'S
NEVER BEEN LITIGATED.
BUT SENATE COULD CONVICT, VOTE
TO BAR HIM FROM FURTHER FEDERAL
OFFICE AND THEN THE PRESIDENT
CAN FILE PAPERS TO BE ON THE
BALLOT SOMEWHERE, PRESUMABLY HE
WOULD BE BANNED FROM THAT AND
FILE A LAWSUIT SAYING THIS WHOLE
THING WAS CONSTITUTIONALLY
IMPERMISSIBLE AND I DEMAND TO BE
ON THE BALLOT.
SO AS LITIGIOUS AS HE IS, I
WOULD NOT BE THAT SHOCKED TO SEE
HIM CHALLENGE THIS IN COURT.
HE COULD EVEN FRANKLY CHALLENGE
THE FACT HIS PENSION AND OTHER
BENEFITS WOULD BE TAKEN AWAY
POST PRESIDENCY WITH THE
CONVICTION.
SO HE MAY GO TO COURT TO TRY TO
STOP THIS.
I DON'T KNOW IF HE WILL, BUT
IT'S CERTAINLY SOMETHING TO KEEP
AN EYE ON GIVEN HIS PAST
HISTORY.
>> ANDREA, DOES THAT TRACK WITH
THE MAN YOU'VE BEEN FOLLOWING
FOR ALL OF THESE YEARS?
>> YES.
HE'S NOT SOMEONE WHO SLINKS
SILENTLY INTO THE WIND OR TO
TRUMP BEDMINSTER PLAY A FEW
ROUNDS OF GOLF NEVER TO BE HEARD
OF AGAIN.
HIS INSTINCT IS TO SUE AND HIS
INSTINCT IS TO LITIGATE AND HIS
INSTINCT, AS WE SAW LAST WEEK,
IS TO FIGHT AND I ASSUME HE WILL
TRY TO DO SO.
THE QUESTION BEFORE US IS HOW
MANY PEOPLE WILL GO ALONG WITH
THAT KNOWING WHAT WE NOW KNOW
ABOUT THE POSSIBLE OUTCOME OF
THOSE TENDENCIES?
>> WELL, THEN, KEEPING THAT VERY
IMPORTANT POSSIBILITY OF LEGAL
LITIGATION IN MIND, MY FINAL
QUESTION TO BOTH OF YOU IS GOING
FORWARD, ESPECIALLY ONCE THE
SENATE TRIAL GYPS, IS THERE
ANYTHING SPECIFICALLY THAT YOU
WOULD BE KEEPING AN EYE OUT FOR?
IS IT A TYPE OF DEFENSE THAT
GETS MOUNTED, PERHAPS EVEN WHO
SHOWS UP AS HIS LAWYER?
WHAT IS IT YOU WOULD BE LOOKING
FOR GOING FORWARD?
JENNIFER, I'LL START WITH YOU.
>> I'M REALLY LOOKING FOR A
COMPREHENSIVE STORY TO EMERGE
FROM THE TRIAL, WHICH IS IT HAS
TO START LONG BEFORE JANUARY
6th.
THEY REALLY HAVE TO ESTABLISH
THAT THIS WHOLE, BIG LIE THAT
THE PRESIDENT HAS BEEN TELLING
AND HE SET UP FOR EVEN BEFORE
THE ELECTION, THAT HE REALLY WON
THE ELECTION AND PEOPLE NEED TO
FIGHT FOR HIM TO OVERTURN IT, IS
SOMETHING THAT WAS PLANNED, IT
WAS DELIBERATE, IT WAS
METHODICAL, AND THAT'S WHAT LED
US KIND OF BUILDING BLOCK BY
BUILDING BLOCK TO GET TO WHERE
WE WERE.
HE USED PERFECTLY LEGAL MEANS,
FILING MORE THAN 60 LAWSUITS,
AND ARGUABLY ILLEGAL MEANS TO
FORCE THE GEORGIA OFFICIALS TO
"FIND VOTES."
SO THERE ARE A LOT OF PIECES OF
EVIDENCE THERE, INCLUDING A LOT
OF EVIDENCE WE HAVE NOT SEEP.
THERE'S EVIDENCE COMING OUT NOW
HOW DIFFERENT GROUPS PLANNED IN
ADVANCE TO GO WITH VIOLENT
INTENTIONS AND WEAPONS AND SO
ON.
THERE'S A LOT OF INFORMATION TO
COME OUT.
I'M LOOKING FOR THEM TO PUT
TOGETHER A STORY OF ALL OF THOSE
EVENTS, NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT
THE LEAD UP TO THE JANUARY 6th.
AND IT'S INTERESTING WHAT
DEFENSE THERE WILL BE.
I WONDER IF THE PRESIDENT OR HIS
LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES WILL
CHANGE COURSE AND ULTIMATELY
ADMIT THIS WAS A BIG LIE, THAT
HE DIDN'T WIN, THAT HE LOST.
I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO
HAPPEN BUT THAT REALLY WOULD BE
THE ONE THING THAT HE COULD DO
THAT COULD BRING THE COUNTRY
BACK TOGETHER IS ADMIT THAT BIG
LIE, AND ONLY THEN, I THINK, CAN
WE MOVE FORWARD.
>> ANDREA, WE HAVE A FEW MOMENTS
LEFT, I'M SORRY, BUT WHAT WOULD
YOU BE LOOKING FORWARD TO?
>> I AM LOOKING FORWARD TO THE
LEGAL RECKONING.
I DO THINK WE NEED TO TELL THIS
WHOLE STORY IN THE FULLNESS THAT
IT NEEDS, THAT IT'S VERY, VERY
IMPORTANT TO THE HEALING OF THIS
COUNTRY, AND WE REALLY CAN'T
MOVE ON AND BECOME A MORE
UNIFIED DEMOCRACY UNTIL WE
UNDERSTAND WHAT WENT SO BADLY
WRONG.
>> LADIES, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE
TO LEAVE IT THERE.
I WANT TO THANK YOU BOTH SO MUCH
FOR JOINING ME.
WNYC'S ANDREA BERNSTEIN AND
LECTURER-IN-LAW AT COLUMBIA LAW
SCHOOL, JENNIFER ROGERS, THANK
YOU BOTH FOR JOINING ME.
>> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
>> "METROFOCUS" IS MADE POSSIBLE
BY --
SUE AND EDGAR WACHENHEIM III,
SYLVIA A. AND SIMON B. POYTA
PROGRAMING ENDOWMENT TO FIGHT
ANTI-SEMITISM.
BERNARD AND DENISE SCHWARTZ,
BARBARA HOPE ZUCKERBERG, JANET
PRINDLE SEIDLER, JODY AND JOHN
ARNHOLD, CHERYL AND PHILIP
MILSTEIN FAMILY, JUDY AND JOSH
WESTON, DR. ROBERT C. AND TINA
SOHN FOUNDATION.