>>> SO IT WAS JUST LAST WEEK WE
LEARNED THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY
CONVENED A GRAND JURY TO HEAR
EVIDENCE OF A POTENTIAL CHARGES
IN THE CRIMINAL PROBE INTO
DISGRACED FORMER PRESIDENT TRUMP
OR HIS SUBORDINATES OR TRUMP
ORGANIZATION.
THAT FOLLOWED A REPORT THAT A
CRIMINALLY CHIEF -- A KEY FIGURE
IN THE ORGANIZATION.
TONIGHT NEW REPORTING SHOWS THE
GRAND JURY MAY ALREADY BE A
PROBLEM FOR BOTH TRUMP AND WEISS
EL BERGOGLIOURG.
HERES WHY.
ONE OF THE SENIOR OFFICIALS OF
THE ORGANIZATION ALREADY
TESTIFIED.
ACCORDING TO TO THE REPORT, JEFF
McCONNY.
A SENIOR VICE PRESIDENT AND
CONTROLLER FOR THE TRUMP
ORGANIZATION IS THE FIRST
EMPLOYEE OF THE FORMER PRESIDENT
CALLED TO TESTIFY.
THE TESTIMONY IS A SIGN THAT
PROSECUTORS HAVE BURROED DEEP
INTO THE COMPANIES FINANCES.
HOW MUCH DOES HE KNOW?
WHO HAS WORKED FOR TRUMP 35
YEARS.
KNOW ABOUT HIS BUSINESS.
CONGRESSIONAL TESTIMONY IN 2019
FORMER TRUMP LAWYER COHEN WAS
ASKED ABOUT THE TRUMP
ORGANIZATION ACCOUNTING
PRACTICES.
RESPONDING QUOTE THERE ARE THREE
PEOPLE THAT ACTUALLY FOUR,
APPROXIMATELY FOUR PEOPLE THAT
KNOW.
TRUMP, WEISS EL BURG.
McCONNY AND ANOTHER ONE.
HE SPELLED IT FOR THE RECORD.
A FORMER ASSISTANT DISTRICT
ATTORNEY IN MANHATTAN.
WHO WORKS IN THE OFFICE THAT
CONVENED THE GRAND JURY.
A PROFESSOR AT NEW YORK LAW AND
JOINS ME NOW.
OKAY, I STILL AM UNCLEAR ABOUT
THE PROCEDURE HERE.
SO, THEY HAVE CONVENED THIS
GRAND JURY AND BRINGING
WITNESSES IN FRONT OF IT.
WHAT DOES THAT MEAN AND HOW DOES
IT WORK?
>> YOU ALREADY HAD A GRAND JURY
THAT HAD DONE THE INVESTIGATION
AND WAS ESSENTIALLY SENDING OUT
SUBPOENAS AND GATHERING
DOCUMENTS EVIDENCE.
THEY REACHED THE STAGE THEY ARE
READY TO PRESENT IT TO THE
JURORS WHO COULD ULTIMATELY
DECIDE WHETHER CHARGES ARE
WARRANTED OR NOT.
THEY MOVED ONTO THIS SPECIAL
GRAND JURY AND PRESENT IT TO THE
JURORS WHO SEE THE EVIDENCE AND
DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT THERE IS
ENOUGH EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT
CHARGES AGAINST SOMEBODY OR
SOMETHING.
>> SO WHEN SOMEONE TESTIFIES,
BEFORE A GRAND JURY, THAT PERSON
IS CALLED BY THE DISTRICT
ATTORNEY.
THERES ONLY ONE SIPD PUTTING ON
A CASE.
THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY.
>> EXACTLY.
THIS IS NOT LIKE A REGULAR
TRIAL.
YOU HAVE AN ADVERSARY PROCESS
AND THE PROSECUTOR LEADING THE
GRAND JURY THROUGH THE
PROCEDURE.
AND THE PROSECUTOR SHOULDNT
ETHICALLY DO SO OR PRESENT
CHARGES UNLESS THAT PROSECUTOR
IS CONVINCED THAT THOSE CHARGES
ARE WARRANTED.
AND THE ASKS THE JURORS TO
RETURN THOSE CHARGES.
AND OCCASIONALLY, A GRAND JURY
WILL SAY NO.
WE DONT AGREE.
FOR THE MOST PART THE GRAND JURY
IS IT FOLLOWS THE LEAD OF THE
PROSECUTOR.
THE PROSECUTOR IS THE ADVISER
THERE.
ETHICALLY BOUND TO DO THIS IF
THE PROSECUTOR IS SURE THIS IS
THE RIGHT THING TO DO.
>> MY UNDERSTANDING THE ACTUAL
REPORTING IS FAIRLY SHORT.
IN TERMS OF WHATS BROKEN.
IT REVOL WAS AROUND THE FACT
THIS INDIVIDUAL HAS TESTIFIED
BEFORE THE GRAND JURY.
THE NATURAL AND LOGICAL
INFERENCE TO DRAW IS THAT THE
DISTRICT ATTORNEY OFFICE IS
TALKING TO THIS GUY.
HES THERE BECAUSE THEY WANT HIM
TO BE THERE AND AT SOME LEVEL
COOPERATING.
>> YEAH.
THATS THE RIGHT INFERENCE TO
DRAW.
ANOTHER THING TO BE AWARE OF THE
NEW YORK GRAND JURY UNLIKE
FEDERAL, WHEN A WITNESS IS
CALLED IN THAT WITNESS GETS
WHATS CALLED TRANSACTIONAL
IMMUNITY.
THE PROSECUTOR COULD NEVER
PROSECUTE HIM.
FOR ANYTHING THAT HE TESTIFIES
ABOUT.
THEYRE NOT GOING TO DO THAT
UNLESS THEY HAVE A PLAN.
AND THE PLAN IS TO INVOLVE THAT
PERSON USUALLY AS A WITNESS, NOT
AS THE ULTIMATE TARGET.
THAT DOES TELL US SOMETHING.
ITS NOT THAT WE HADNT ALREADY
HAD A WILL THE OF CLUES.
WE HAVE A SENSE THIS IS A
SERIOUS INVESTIGATION.
AS YOU SAID INTO THE FINANCES OF
THE COMPANY.
AND LOOKING AT SOMETHING OTHER
THAN THIS CONTROLLER.
IT COULD REALLY BE ALLEN WEISS
EL BURG IN THE HOT SEAT.
THIS PERSON WORKS CLOSE WITH HIM
AND REPORTS TO HIM AND HAS A LOT
TO SAY ABOUT HIS INVOLVEMENT IN
TERMS OF THE ACCOUNTING IN THE
COMPANY.
>> MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE
REPORTING ON THIS, AND SOME OF
THE REPORTING WE HAVE DONE.
THIS IS IN THE CHART.
THE DIRECT REPORT.
McCONNY REPORTS TO ALLEN.
HES A SUPERVISOR.
AND AGAIN, INDEPENDENT OF THIS
INVESTIGATION.
TALKING IN A MORE GENERAL SENSE
ABOUT HOW ONE WOULD GO ABOUT
THIS.
MY UNDERSTANDING IS PROSECUTORS
WORK FROM THE BOTTOM UP OF AN
ORGANIZATION.
AND WORK UP TO THE TOP.
THIS SEEMS LIKE APP EXAMPLE.
>> DEFINITELY.
EVEN MORE SO IF YOU ARE GIVING
WITNESSES IMMUNITY.
YOU DONT WANT TO GIVE IMMUNITY
IF THATS THE PERSON ACTUALLY
RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL THE CRIMINAL
CONDUCT.
THATS WHY ITS A REASONABLE
INFERENCE TO DRAW IN ANY GRAND
JURY AND ESPECIALLY IN THIS ONE,
IT MEANS THAT THEY HAVE THEY ARE
WORKING THEIR WAY UP AND LOOKING
FOR SOMETHING THAT IS ABOVE HIM.
YOU CAN GUESS THE ORGANIZATION
ITSELF.
POSSIBLE TRUMP.
IF THEY BRING WEISSLE BURG IN.
ITS SPECULATIVE.
THEY ARE LOOKING AT SOMETHING
MORE SERIOUS.
ANOTHER THING TO REALIZE, THE
THE CONTROLLER IN A NORMAL
ORGANIZATION OR COMPANY THE
CONTROLLER IS THE NERD ACCOUNT
PERSON.
THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO FUNCTION AS
A BREAK.
ON THE BUSINESS SIDE.
LIKE ANY ACCOUNT.
YOU CANT DO THAT.
YOU HAVE TO DO THIS OR THAT.
TRUMP, M.O. IS -- WE HAVE SEEN
IN IN PUBLIC REPORTING.
HE MIXES PERSONAL AND POLITICAL,
BUSINESS AND CHARITY.
IT GETS MIXED UP.
ITS A RED FLAG TO PEOPLE
LOOKING INTO THIS STUFF.
YOU REALLY WANT YOUR
CONTROLLER -- THIS IS A
LISTENINGLONG
TIME EMPLOYEE.
HES OBVIOUSLY NOT SOMEBODY WHO
WILL SAY NO, YOU CANT DO THAT.
HE KNOWS ALL ABOUT THAT.
AND HAS BEEN IN SOME WAYS
INVOLVED IN IT.
HE CAN DO TWO THINGS.
HE CAN EXPLAIN WHATHS GOING ON.
AND GIVE US BACKGROUND.
THATS SOMETHING HE CAN EXPLAIN
THE DOCUMENTS AND GIVE US THE
KEY THING IN A CRIMINAL CASE.
WHICH IS WHO DID WHAT?
WHO INTENDED AND WHO KNEW WHAT
AT WHAT POINT.
THOSE ARE BACKGROUND
CONVERSATIONS THAT MIGHT NOT BE
CONTAINED IN AN E-MAIL.
OR SOME KIND OF WRITTEN DOWN
EXCHANGE.
THAT IS WHY THESE KINDS OF
WITNESSES ARE SO CRITICAL.
IN THESE INVESTIGATIONS.
THEY BOTH EXPLAIN THINGS TO THE
GRAND JURY.
AND ALSO CAN GIVE SOME