FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY AND SENIOR
FBI OFFICIAL, JOYCE VANCE, ALSO
FORMER U.S. ATTORNEY.
CHUCK, THIS IS WHAT STOOD OUT TO
ME.
WE ARE USED TO PEOPLE BEING
CHARGED, NOT ORGANIZATIONS.
I DONT REMEMBER ENRON THE
CORPORATION BEING CHARGED BUT I
REMEMBER ITS CEO, CFO AND
OTHERS.
HOW DOES THIS WORK THAT IT IS AN
ORGANIZATION AND HOW BIG A DEAL.
SEEMS WEIRD.
>> SURE.
IT IS NOT THAT UNUSUAL,
STEPHANIE, IT IS A LITTLE ODD.
OUR PREFERENCE IS ALWAYS TO
CHARGE INDIVIDUALS, TO ASCRIBE
CRIMINAL LIABILITY TO PEOPLE,
NOT TO ORGANIZATIONS, BUT
SOMETIMES WE DO CHARGE
ORGANIZATIONS.
IF A CORPORATION OR COMPANY, AN
ORGANIZATION IS RIFE WITH FRAUD
OR YOU NEED TO CHANGE THE
CORPORATE CULTURE OR THEY HAVE A
CHECKERED PAST OF ABIDING THE
LAW, YOU MENTIONED ENRON, AND
YOURE RIGHT.
IT WAS THE PRESIDENT AND CEO
CHARGED.
IF YOU RECALL DURING THE ENRON
SCANDAL, THE GIANT ACCOUNTING
FIRM ARTHUR ANDERSON WAS
CHARGED.
USED TO HAVE BIG FIVE ACCOUNTING
FIRMS, NOW WE HAVE FOUR, ARTHUR
ANDERSON WENT OUT OF BUSINESS AS
A RESULT OF BEING CHARGED.
THAT SAID, AND I KNOW JOYCE WILL
AGREE WITH THIS, WE ALWAYS
PREFER TO CHARGE INDIVIDUALS
WHEN WE CAN.
SOMETIMES WE CANT.
SOMETIMES IF A COMPANY OR
ORGANIZATION REALLY DOES HAVE A
CHECKERED HISTORY OF ABIDING
WITH THE LAW, IT IS APPROPRIATE
TO CHARGE THE COMPANY.
IT DOESNT MEAN THAT WE WONT
ALSO CHARGE INDIVIDUALS DOWN THE
ROAD.
>> JOYCE.
THESE POTENTIAL INDIVIDUALS
ARENT JUST SOME NAMELESS
FACELESS SUITS.
WERE TALKING ABOUT TRUMP
HIMSELF, THE FOUNDER, HIS SONS,
THEYRE THE EXECUTIVE VICE
PRESIDENTS, AND IVANKA TRUMP.
WHAT HAPPENS TO ALL OF THEM
HERE?
>> AS CHUCK POINTS OUT, THE FACT
THAT THE CORPORATION GETS
INDICTED OR REPORTEDLY WILL BE
INDICTED DOESNT RULE OUT
ADDITIONAL INDICTMENTS DOWN THE
ROAD FOR INDIVIDUALS AND THERE IS ALWAYS THIS STRONG PREFERENCE
IS ALWAYS THIS STRONG PREFERENCE
FOR TRYING TO HOLD PEOPLE
PERSONALLY ACCOUNTABLE FOR
CRIMINAL MISCONDUCT.
THE CORPORATION CAN BE FINED,
CAN EVEN GO OUT OF BUSINESS, BUT
CANT GO INTO CUSTODY.
CORPORATIONS DONT GO TO PRISON.
ONE WOULD EXPECT TWO YEARS INTO
THE INVESTIGATION THERE WILL BE
A STRONG PUSH IF EVIDENCE IS
THERE TO GO AHEAD AND INDICT
INDIVIDUALS TO MAKE SURE THAT
THE PEOPLE WHO ARE RESPONSIBLE
FOR MISCONDUCT ALLEGEDLY HERE
FOR FRAUD DO END UP BEING HELD
ACCOUNTABLE.
THAT SENDS A STRONG MESSAGE TO
THE REMAINDER OF THE BUSINESS
COMMUNITY IN NEW YORK THAT THIS
KIND OF CONDUCT WONT BE
TOLERATED, AND THAT THEYRE
PERSONALLY AT RISK NO MATTER WHO
THEY ARE IF THEYRE INVOLVED IN
THIS SORT OF CRIMINAL ACTIVITY.
>> CHUCK, HERES THE OTHER THING
I DO NOT GET.
THAT PROSECUTORS ARE GIVING
TRUMPS ATTORNEYS ONE MORE
CHANCE TO CONVINCE THEM NOT TO
FILE CHARGES.
I AM A MERE CIVILIAN.
THIS SEEMS WACKY TO ME.
IT IS NORMAL?
>> WELL, YOURE MORE THAN A MERE
CIVILIAN, STEPHANIE, YOURE A
PRETTY ASTUTE OBSERVER.
IT IS NORMAL.
IN WHITE COLLAR CASES IN
PARTICULAR THERES OFTEN A GREAT
DEAL OF BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN
PROSECUTORS AND DEFENSE
ATTORNEYS.
WHEN I WAS A FEDERAL PROSECUTOR
AND PROSECUTING WHITE COLLAR
CASES, I WOULD INVITE DEFENSE
ATTORNEYS IN TO GIVE ME A
PRESENTATION, TELL ME WHY I
OUGHT NOT CHARGE THE CASE, WHY
MY THEORY OF PRODUCTION WAS
WRONG.
RARELY DID IT DISSUADE ME, IF
THEY HAD A COMPELLING ORGT,ARGUM
I WOULD WANT TO KNOW BEFORE
CHARGING.
THIS MAY STRIKE LAY OBSERVERS AS
ODD, BUT IT HAPPENS ALL THE
TIME, IT IS NOT NEFARIOUS, OFTEN
PROSECUTORS USE IT TO STRENGTHEN
THEIR CASE, BELIEVE IT OR NOT.
>> JOYCE, LASTLY, ADDING TO THE
LIST OF THINGS I DONT GET, OVER
THE WEEKEND ABCS JONATHAN CARL
PUT OUT AN EXCERPT FROM HIS NEW
BOOK IN THE ATLANTIC.
IN IT, FORMER ATTORNEY GENERAL
BILL BARR, TRUMPS GUY, TALKED
ABOUT TRUMPS ALLEGATIONS OF
VOTER FRAUD OR ELECTION FRAUD
AND SAID, QUOTE, IT WAS MY
SUSPICION ALL THE WAY ALONG
THERE WAS NOTHING THERE.
IT WAS ALL BS.
THATS HUGE, MASSIVE.
EXCEPT HERES THE THING, HOW
MASSIVE WAS IT.
IT WAS NOT AN OFFICIAL
STATEMENT, HE DIDNT SAY IT AT
THE TIME, HE SAID IT TO ANNA
AUTHORIZE
ANNA AUTHORIZE.
IT WILL NOT SAVE TAXPAYER MONEY
AROUND AUDITS.
WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE
THAT BILL BARR SAYS IT NOW.
THE DAMAGE IS DONE.
ALL THE PEOPLE PUSHING FOR
AUDITS, THEY DONT I AM GUESSING
READ "THE ATLANTIC."
>> I THINK YOURE RIGHT.
THIS SHOULD BE THE FINAL NAIL IN
THE COFFIN OF BILL BARRS
REPUTATION.
IF HE BELIEVED THIS AND KNEW
THIS IN DECEMBER, THAT MEANS HE
COULD HAVE SPARED THE COUNTRY
MUCH OF THE ENORMOUS TRAUMA WE
WENT THROUGH JANUARY 6th, WITH
THE BIG LIE.
BILL BARR AS THE ATTORNEY
GENERAL EVEN AS FORMER ATTORNEY
GENERAL COULD HAVE STOOD UP AND
EXPLAINED TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE
THAT THE ELECTION WAS UNTAINTED
BY FRAUD.
THE FACT THAT HE CHOSE TO REMAIN
SILENT AND ONLY TO LET THIS
FILTER OUT NOW MONTHS LATER WHEN
A BOOK IS RELEASED IS ABSOLUTELY