Well, you have got to weigh, you have got to do all this to the indictment we are familiar with indictments lets do it lets go. Lets get it on air. 6 million pages of discovery . Come on. Lets go. Tv people thank you, my friend, as always. Thanks to you at home for joining us this hour. The article starts with this quote. The woman cannot believe it. She is in the same elevator with Rudolph Giuliani. Oh, this is a thrill. This is not someone in a maga hat at cpac last year. It is a random new yorker in the year 1985. 1985 was the year that Rudolph Giuliani made a name for himself. It was the year that giuliani pioneer the same prosecutorial tactics that now very much look like they could be his downfall. But let me back up just a little bit. This is carmine, the cigar gilante. He was allegedly the boss of one of new yorks most powerful Crime Families. And in the 70s, gilante shot point blank at an italian allegedly the motivation of his assassins ways that galante decided he should be
and there are a wide range of people who are not household names who may decide that this is not something they are willing to bear and put their family through. but joyce, what about the household names? because we know as tonight, there is reporting rudy giuliani is in dire financial straits. his apartment is up for sale. there are mounting legal bills which are not going away anytime. soon is that the kind of leverage prosecutors need to suggest that someone in trump s inner circle you would think that is who prosecutors would want to go for in particular could be turned to be a cooperating witness? tell me how it works, joyce. right. so, the people that you want most as your cooperating witnesses are the people who bring you the most value in terms of what they can testify to. and that may or may not be rudy giuliani in this situation. but something that s interesting with these folks with these whose names we recognizes that many of them are lawyers. they appreciate what i
pressure on state officials he is saying that those are not per se criminal. of course, prosecutors would disagree with him. soliciting someone to violate their oath of office they would say that is criminal. again, it would be up to the judge. but i think this is going to be a closer one then, perhaps, someone else like rudy giuliani might right. and we are going to talk about giuliani in, ii joyce. to laura jarrett s point we will talk about the merits of this is criminal behavior on the part of mark meadows. but moving this case the federal court has, i guess, the advantage of a different and presumably more sympathetic jury pool. how meaningful do you think that that will be for someone like mark meadows? so, i think sometimes we get too comfortable talking about juries as though they are a voting pools. we think about juries how does that county vote? in my experience as a prosecutor, peoples political beliefs really don t impact their jury service.
19 defendants the idea that this is six months in the making is just not realistic. yeah, joyce, i should mention that rudy giuliani, who we spent some time talking about at the start of this program, is also suggesting they should be moved to federal court. is it a foregone conclusion that trump and everyone else involved in this is going to try to move it to federal court? to set aside the jury piece of it, how meaningfully could that delay this thing? so, laura is dead on the money. motions practiced here will be all about delay. and it won t just be motions to remove. we will see a lot of them. they will be individual. they will have to be decided on their individual merits. because these defendants will have different sort of status as to whether or not they can claim that they were a federal official or acting under the orders of a federal official, which is necessary to trigger removal. they will have different defenses. it will be a mess. and that will only be about one
cheating scam on grading exams, she actually indicted 35 defendants. by the time she got to trial, there were only 12 of them left. and that is this sort of winnowing procedure that you are hinting at, alex, where some of these folks will decide to plead guilty, maybe without a deal. others will want to deal and they may plead and cooperate and strengthen her case. but it is likely that, by the time that williscroft trial, she would no longer have all 19 of these defendants on her hands. rico cases, and the big conspiracy case, is messy. you have got if you ve got ten defendants, you ve got ten people making opening statements and cross examining witnesses and jumping up and saying, your honor, i object. so, it is a little bit different than the normal trial. but it s nothing that a prosecutor, and particularly when like will, as you has a number of these rico cases under her belt, isn t well equipped to handle. joyce, let me ask a follow-up on that. in terms of the penalties these