Podcast Summary
The Republican Party's unwillingness to address issues and focus on divisive topics: The GOP's persistent loyalty to Trump and unwillingness to tackle issues like election fraud and power imbalances may hinder its ability to adapt and move forward in the political landscape.
The Republican Party, despite the numerous setbacks and controversies over the past six years, appears unwilling to change course or confront issues such as election fraud theories and the continued influence of former President Donald Trump. Instead, the party seems content to continue focusing on divisive issues like abortion and maintaining its loyalty to Trump. This was highlighted in a recent RNC report and Trump's escalating attacks on potential rivals like Ron DeSantis. Elie Hoenig, a former federal prosecutor and author of the new book "Untouchable," shared similarities between Trump's tactics and those of mob bosses, emphasizing the importance of accountability and confronting power imbalances. The Republican Party's refusal to address these issues may hinder its ability to move forward and adapt to changing political landscapes.
Power and Fear Prevent Witnesses from Testifying: Powerful individuals can intimidate witnesses, hindering justice, as seen with Trump and McCarthy, and in mob cases.
Power and fear can prevent key witnesses from testifying against those in power, even in cases where they hold crucial information. This was highlighted in the discussion about Donald Trump and his ability to intimidate witnesses, including Kevin McCarthy, who initially spoke out against him but later refused to testify. This phenomenon was compared to a mob case involving a carpet salesman who backed out of testifying due to fear of the powerful mob captain. The justice system's ability to hold the powerful accountable for their actions is a persistent concern, as it often seems that there is one law for the average person and another for the wealthy and powerful. The author, a former prosecutor, acknowledges this issue and calls for greater accountability and fairness in the application of justice.
Justice system favors the powerful: The justice system's extra layer of review for high-profile cases can protect the office's reputation but also allows the powerful to receive preferential treatment
The justice system favors the powerful and famous, as shown in the book through the lens of Donald Trump's investigations. Prosecutors must follow strict guidelines, including seeking higher-level approval for cases involving public figures likely to draw significant media coverage. This extra layer of review can protect the reputation of the office but also provides an additional protection for the powerful. The recent case of Trump and the hush money payments to Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal is a prime example of this, as only Trump's former fixer, Michael Cohen, was charged in the scheme, despite the involvement of many others. This is a significant injustice, as those with power and resources often receive preferential treatment in the legal system.
SDNY Prepared to Indict Trump in 2018, but DOJ Intervened: The DOJ prevented Trump's indictment in 2018 due to him being a sitting president, but the Manhattan DA is considering indicting him in 2023 for a hush money scheme.
During the height of the Mueller investigation in 2018, the Southern District of New York (SDNY) was prepared to indict Donald Trump for his involvement in a hush money scheme, but the Justice Department (DOJ) intervened and removed all references to Trump in the indictment against Michael Cohen. This decision was made due to the DOJ's longstanding policy against indicting a sitting president. However, when Trump left office in early 2021, the SDNY considered indicting him but ultimately decided against it. Now, in 2023, the Manhattan DA is reviving the case, potentially leading to an indictment of Trump for the hush money scheme. The SDNY is no longer involved in the case. Jeffrey Berman was a key figure in the SDNY during this time.
Jeffrey Berman's role in Trump investigations and his attempts to reposition himself: Former US Attorney Jeffrey Berman recused himself from Trump investigations due to ethical concerns but later tried to position himself as a 'resistance hero'. Meanwhile, allegations of favoritism in Manhattan DA's office raised questions about dropped investigations against Ivanka Trump and Donald Trump Jr.
The role of former US Attorney for the Southern District of New York, Jeffrey Berman, in investigations involving Trump and his associates is a subject of controversy. Berman recused himself from these investigations due to ethical concerns, as he was a Trump appointee and had donated to Trump. However, he has since tried to position himself as a "resistance hero." Meanwhile, there have been allegations of favoritism in the Manhattan DA's office, with investigations against Ivanka Trump and Donald Trump Jr. being dropped after campaign contributions were made. These cases involved allegations of fraud, and the Manhattan DA, Cyrus Vance, has faced criticism for his handling of them. The author is a strong critic of Vance, citing the botched Harvey Weinstein case and the dropping of the investigations against Trump's children as examples of his questionable decisions.
The Intersection of Electoral Politics and Prosecution: Powerful figures can use subtle communication methods to create the appearance of favoritism, raising concerns about credibility and trust in institutions.
The intersection of electoral politics and prosecution can raise serious concerns about credibility and trust. In the case of Cy Vance and Donald Trump Sr, while there may not have been a clear-cut bribery scheme, the appearance of favoritism was damaging. The use of language and subtle communication methods by powerful figures like Trump and mob bosses can make it difficult to distinguish between implicit instructions and innocent conversations. This was evident in the case of the Gambino leader who ordered the murder of his nephew, and the way Trump communicated his desires to Michael Cohen and the crowd before the Capitol storming. These examples underscore the importance of transparency and clear communication in maintaining public trust in our institutions.
Trump's manipulation and silence tactics: Despite ongoing investigations, Trump's fear tactics continue to deter critics and obstruct justice, creating uncertainty about potential indictments and the future of his political career.
Donald Trump's ability to manipulate and silence people, whether through threats or promises, has been a significant factor in his political career and legal battles. His success in obstructing justice and silencing witnesses, as seen in the January 6th Capitol riots and his handling of pardons, has created a culture of fear among potential opponents. This fear extends into the political sphere, making it unlikely that prominent Republicans will openly criticize him during the upcoming primary. The uncertainty surrounding the Fulton County Georgia investigation stems from the complexities of the case and the potential implications it could have for Trump's political future. While many believe an indictment is inevitable, others are not so sure due to the legal nuances and potential political ramifications.
Indictment of Trump just the beginning of a long legal process: Convicting Trump of any wrongdoing would be a major uphill battle despite evidence and public statements
An indictment of Donald Trump, should it happen, would be just the beginning of a long and complex legal process. While an indictment may be likely based on the evidence and public statements, turning it into a conviction would be a major uphill battle. The delay in bringing charges against Trump, as well as the complexity of the case and the polarizing nature of the figure involved, make securing a conviction a formidable challenge. As former prosecutor Glenn Kirschner explains, the lengthy phone call transcript from which the controversial "find 11,780 votes" line comes from, is just one piece of the puzzle. Trump's defense team could argue that his messages in the call were ambiguous and open to interpretation, making it difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he was directly asking for illegal actions. The case against Trump is not a "slam dunk," as even respected Democratic figures like Doug Jones have acknowledged.
Challenges in prosecuting Trump for presidency crimes: Constitutional issues and AG's approach create uncertainty about Trump's accountability for potential presidency crimes
The potential prosecution of Donald Trump for crimes committed during his presidency faces significant challenges. Constitutional concerns exist regarding the role of local, partisan prosecutors in indicting former federal officials, which could lead to a never-ending cycle of retribution. Merrick Garland, the current Attorney General, has been praised for restoring the core values of the Justice Department and standing firm against political interference. However, critics argue that he has not been assertive enough in pursuing investigations and indictments, particularly in the case of Trump. The constitutional hurdles and Garland's approach create uncertainty about whether Trump will be held accountable for any potential crimes committed while in office.
Justice Delayed for Trump Capitol Case: The opportunity to charge Trump for the Capitol attack may have been missed due to late DOJ actions. High-level figures were not interviewed or indicted, contrasting past cases like Watergate. The complexity and need for a unanimous jury make the prosecution challenging, and pressure should have been put on Trump's inner circle to cooperate.
The opportunity to charge former President Trump for his role in the January 6th Capitol attack may have been missed due to delayed actions by the Department of Justice. The speaker expresses disappointment that key figures like Cassidy Hutchinson and Mark Short were not interviewed or indicted earlier, and that no one in a position of power has been charged yet. They argue that the contrast with past cases like Watergate, where high-level officials faced legal consequences, is stark. The speaker believes that Merrick Garland and his team could have started investigations and indictments in late 2021, but instead waited too long. Now, with Trump potentially being a major party nominee in 2024, the complexity of the case and the need for a unanimous jury verdict make the prosecution even more challenging. The speaker urges a more aggressive approach, suggesting that pressure should have been put on Trump's inner circle to cooperate and that charges like obstruction, sedition, and defrauding the United States could have been considered.
Waiting for State Prosecutor to Make a Move: Experts believe DOJ won't indict Trump before elections, might wait for state prosecutor to ease political pressure, uncertain impact on campaign if indicted.
While there have been discussions about potential indictments against former President Donald Trump, especially regarding the Mar-a-Lago documents and the January 6th Capitol riots, it is unlikely that Merrick Garland and the Department of Justice will bring charges before the upcoming elections. The experts believe that Garland might be waiting for Fonnie Willis, the Fulton County District Attorney, to make a move first, as an indictment from a state prosecutor could ease the political pressure. However, even if Trump is indicted, it remains uncertain whether it would help or harm his campaign, as some supporters might rally behind him, while others could view it as a sign of too much baggage. Ultimately, the consensus is that Trump will likely remain "untouchable" in the political sense, and the outcome of the indictment, if it comes, could be a significant factor in the 2024 primary season.
The role of legal actions in shaping political theories: Legal actions alone may not determine political outcomes, as figures like Trump and Barr have shown the ability to turn potential setbacks into political advantages. The politicization of the Department of Justice remains a significant issue.
Relying too heavily on specific legal actions, such as the Fannie Willis indictment against Donald Trump, to shape political theories may be overly naive. Trump has a history of turning potential legal setbacks into political advantages. Additionally, Bill Barr's reputation rehabilitation project, following his tenure as Attorney General, has faced challenges due to his past actions, particularly his involvement in the Durham investigation and his handling of election fraud allegations. Despite his attempts to distance himself from the past, Barr's history of politicizing the Department of Justice remains a significant issue. Merrick Garland, who came into office aiming to undo some of the damage caused by Bill Barr, has instead found himself at the center of Republican criticism for supposedly weaponizing the Justice Department. This situation highlights the complex and often politically charged nature of legal proceedings and their impact on public perception.
Maintaining prosecutorial independence: Prosecutors should act when right and necessary, even with political consequences, for effective accountability.
Learning from the conversation with Elie Honig, author of "Untouchable: How Powerful People Get Away With It," is the importance of prosecutors maintaining their independence and making necessary moves, even if they come with political consequences. Honig argues that while it's essential for prosecutors to be nonpolitical, they should not be paralyzed and unwilling to act when right and necessary. He criticizes current Attorney General Merrick Garland for not charging any powerful public officials during his tenure, raising questions about the effectiveness of the DOJ under his leadership. Honig, a former federal and state prosecutor, believes that Garland has gone beyond nonpoliticization to simply not doing his job if it might be deemed political. The conversation underscores the importance of a strong and effective DOJ in holding those in power accountable for their actions.
