[music]

Brian Lehrer: Brian Lehrer on WNYC. Now, let's keep trying to understand the January 6th and big lie indictment of Donald Trump. We'll assume you know some of the basics by now. It was a 45-page indictment, four counts, six unindicted co-conspirators widely believed to include Rudy Giuliani and others. The basic charges include three conspiracies to defraud the United States, to corruptly obstruct the January 6th proceedings in Congress, and perhaps most interestingly and most importantly, a conspiracy against the right to vote and to have one's vote counted. Those words are actually in the indictment.

With us now, Catherine Christian, these days a partner in the law firm Liston Abramson here in New York, and an MSNBC legal analyst, and a longtime Manhattan District Attorney, where Ms. Christian also supervised investigations and prosecutions of financial fraud, conducted long-term wiretap investigations of multi-defendant international criminalizations, and more. Catherine, so nice of you to join us. Welcome back to WNYC.

Catherine Christian: Happy to be here, Brian.

Brian Lehrer: Well, let me start on a big-picture question. Was this more or less the indictment of Trump you were expecting or did Special Counsel Jack Smith surprise you in any way?

Catherine Christian: This is actually what many of us were expecting. I would have been surprised because some people thought that maybe he would add an insurrection or seditious conspiracy count. I'm not saying that that wouldn't be appropriate, but I think if you want to, they say keep it simple stupid and you don't want to insert any unnecessary issues like, for instance, free speech, you don't add that. Because the reality is if you read the indictment and 45 pages is long, but it really is a quick read because they did keep it simple.

All of the violence is in there, meaning what happened on January 6. In fact, the basis it leads up to when you read the indictment, all of the acts that were committed in the seven states, the false electors, the false statements, the lies, and then culminating into what happened on the actual day of January 6. All of that is in there. The charge of conspiracy to obstruct an official proceeding, which is the disruption of the Congressional session, that disruption and that conspiracy includes what happened on that day.

What jumped out at me about this indictment were two things. One, probably because I'm a New Yorker, how Rudy Giuliani, who is co-conspirator number one, and he's acknowledged that he is had his hands all over this, meaning all over what happened in the seven states. He was enlisted according to the indictment and of course, Mr. Trump is innocent until proven guilty, as are the co-conspirators. He was enlisted by Mr. Trump to take the lead on this alleged scheme. He's listed Rudy Giuliani not by name but as co-conspirator number one, 49 times in the indictment.

Brian Lehrer: Wow.

Catherine Christian: What people remember, and of course you and I are people of a certain age, not only was Giuliani the mayor of New York, this was a high-ranking DOJ official. He also was the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York. That US Attorney's office is considered by many, and especially by the people who work there or have worked there, as being the premier US Attorney's office in the United States. That former US Attorney is listed as a co-conspirator number 1 and is listed 49 times in this indictment.

Brian Lehrer: Let me ask you to drill down on Giuliani a little further, which I'm sure our listeners are going to be very interested in, especially those in New York and who remember him as mayor and other things, US Attorney. Co-conspirator number one is the way he's cited as you say, he's not charged at least as of now, he's an unindicted co-conspirator, but these 49 references--

Catherine Christian: 46, let me correct myself. [crosstalk]

Brian Lehrer: 46, I'm sorry. By the way, listeners, on Friday we're planning to read on the air, me and some guest readers, so you don't have to listen to me for 2 hours, the entire 45-page indictment, or as much of it as we can fit into our two-hour program if it goes over that. That'll be on Friday show and you'll hear those 46 references and everything else that's in there. Would you expect that eventually Giuliani will be charged with the same things or perhaps some different things than former President Trump has been charged with?

Catherine Christian: I expect probably each co-conspirator, especially the ones who allegedly did the most heinous things, would be charged. The reason why I believe that the six co-conspirators were not charged is because then you'd have a seven-defendant conspiracy indictment, and there's just no way that would be tried before November of 2024. The special counsel kept it simple. Many people have said, "Well, they're listed out there, even though their names aren't there, as a way to see if they can cooperate."

I don't know how useful, particularly Rudy Giuliani would be. The New York State Appellate Division suspended him from the practice of law in New York and the basis of that suspension was primarily for what he did in Pennsylvania, the false statements he made in Pennsylvania as he was part of that litigation for the presidential election. The DC Bar, a committee of the DC Bar has recommended that he be disbarred. Why? Because of the false statements for the frivolous, they call it frivolous contentions he made in litigation in Pennsylvania related to the election and that they had no basis in law and fact.

He's probably never going to practice law again and won't be able to because of what he allegedly did for Donald Trump and for this election. I don't really think it's about who's going to cooperate. It might be, "This is what we have. You might as well plead guilty and we'll work out what your sentence will be," but I could be wrong. Because you should also note that not every fact and detail of evidence that the special prosecutor has is going to be listed in indictment. He had to put enough in there so the public can read it, so you know what's going on.

I anticipate probably each one of them, they probably should have lawyers. I think John Eastman, who was the alleged architect of the scheme, his lawyer has spoke out and he's said he did nothing wrong. It's interesting. Mr. Trump's lawyer, John Lauro, he's been making the rounds, as he should. That's what a good defense attorney should do. Get your client's defense out there and his defense is free speech. You can't blame my client. You can't criminalize my client for free speech. He's also throwing the co-conspirators under the bus.

He said he-- Mr. Trump's lawyer said that his client relied on the advice of a, he called him an imminent legal scholar, John Eastman. He's doing, "Don't blame me, blame my lawyer's excuse." I don't think that will work but, you never know what a jury is going to be because it's clear when you read the indictment that Donald Trump's hands was all over everything. There was a back and forth with him and his co-conspirators throughout from as it said, the scheme began right after the day after election and was launched and continued through January 6.

You have to have a defense. His lawyer, I thought, put up a good defense as he was making his rounds, though, it's going to be hard to separate Donald Trump for these false electors because First Amendment does not shield fraud. It does not protect it. It protects speech, not fraud.

Brian Lehrer: That's interesting that Trump might be using a defense that says he was just following the advice of counsel. We should say that Donald Trump, like any defendant, is innocent until proven guilty.

Catherine Christian: Exactly.

Brian Lehrer: Presumably, there will be a contentious trial in court at some point. It seems to me that to prove any of these conspiracies, the government will have to prove that Trump knew he lost the election rather than he was deluding himself into thinking he actually won or in any way believed that there was all this fraud and he actually won the election. Do you think that's a key to any convictions here? Does this indictment explicitly set out to show that?

Catherine Christian: Yes. The special counsel made a point throughout the indictment to list all of the people, credible people lawyers, who told Mr. Trump, you've lost. The Vice President of the United States, his senior people in the Department of Justice, including the Attorney General, Bill Barr, the Director of National Intelligence, the Department of Homeland Security Cyber Security Director, who, by the way, was fired by Mr. Trump after he told them, "Look, there's been no election fraud."

Senior White House attorneys, staffers on his campaign, his re-election campaign. The state legislators, in the seven states that he went to, they told him. You had the Michigan House of Representatives speaker and the leader of the Senate tell him, "No, you're wrong." You had the Nevada Secretary of State and tell him, "You're wrong." The Nevada Supreme Court issued a decision, "No, you're wrong." The Arizona, his campaign manager, and the speaker of the Arizona House said, "No, you're wrong."

For him to say, "I willfully ignored them and listened to the crazies," [chuckles] that look at trials, a defense attorney, you say, "I just want one juror," and you're looking for nullification. He is going to spend the next months, not campaigning for president. He's campaigning for jury nullification and that's the way you do it. He is obviously innocent until proven guilty. There's going to be a trial that there's going to be a lot of witnesses.

You can read from this indictment that a lot of witnesses gave information to the special counsel testified in the grand jury, including the Vice President of the United States who took contemporaneous notes of his conversations with the President of the United States.

Brian Lehrer: All these people who were telling him that there was no fraud that would've flipped the election. It's really out there in a very compelling list, should say, it's in there in a very compelling list-

Catherine Christian: Yes, it's in the indictment.

Brian Lehrer: -in the indictment. Seven people listed as Exhibits A through H. This can be a preview of our reading of the indictment on Friday, but I'll just read the highlights of this. I said seven, it's eight-point list. The defendant's vice president, the senior leaders of the Justice Department, appointed by the defendant, the Director of National Intelligence, the defendant's principal advisor on intelligence matters related to National security, the Department of Homeland Security, cybersecurity, and Infrastructure Security Agency, whose existence the defendant Trump signed into law.

Senior White House attorneys, selected by the defendant to provide him candid advice. Senior staffers on the defendant's 2020 reelection campaign. State legislators and officials, many of whom were the defendant's political allies, had voted for him and wanted him reelected and state and federal courts, the neutral arbiters responsible for ensuring the fair and even-handed administration of election laws. That's just a little bit of the language from the indictment, making the case that all these credible people who were his allies or his actual appointees told him that there wasn't enough fraud out there to flip the election and yet he pursued this line.

Catherine Christian: He's also, you should know, referred throughout the indictment, he meaning Donald Trump as the defendant.

Brian Lehrer: Yes.

Catherine Christian: They quote him on Page 28 in paragraph 74, the acting attorney general told him, "Look, we can't change the outcome of the election." Donald Trump's response was just say the election was corrupt and leave the rest to me and the Republican congressman. That sounds like someone who knew he lost and just decided, "Well, we're just going to do it anyway. We're just going to steal." There's also, in the indictment on Page 31, he had a meeting, he, Donald Trump with the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and this was about January 3rd and it was about a national security issue.

They don't mention what the national security issue is. The joint Chief of Staff said, "You know what? This should be delayed until after inauguration day." What did Donald Trump say? Yes, the other guy will have to deal with this. The next guy. He said, "You're right, it's too late for us. We're going to have to give that to the next guy." That's the exact quote on Page 31. He knew he lost from that. I don't know whether this was a game to him or it's like, "I call it a career thief." It's not your property, but you're going to steal it anyway because you want it. They have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

One other little point I want to make is that not even little, when you read this indictment, and I'm sure a lot of this came from Mike Pence's notes. It's shocking how-- When you read this indictment, how the President of the United States endangered the life of the Vice President of the United States. There is detailed narrative from Page 33 to 38 about how he had the pressure, Trump kept putting on Mike Pence. Mike Pence would say, "No, I can't do this." Then what would Trump do? He then tweets at him. He had a nasty tweet about Mike Pence, and he stare up his crowd saying, "Pence is going to do this. I believe he's going to do this."

Brian Lehrer: He'll say, "First Amendment on that one." We just have 20 seconds left, but he'll say," I can criticize Pence if I want, that's not a crime."

Catherine Christian: Yes, exactly. It's chilling because even the vice president's chief of staff, felt the need to get the secret service to protect the vice president after Mr. Trump said, "Look, I'm going to have to publicly target you, Mike." I'll leave that there. [chuckles]

Brian Lehrer: There we leave it with Catherine Christian, partner in the Law Firm, Liston Abramson, these days here in New York and a long-time Manhattan assistant district attorney. Thank you so much, Catherine, for your insights. We always appreciate them.

Catherine Christian: Well, you're welcome.

Brian Lehrer: That's The Brain Lehrer Show for today. Produced by Mary Croke, Lisa Allison, Amina Srna, Carl Boisrond, and Esperanza Rosenbaum. Zack Gottehrer-Cohen is going to get to work now producing our Daily Politics Podcast. Megan Ryan is the head of live radio. We had Juliana Fonda at the audio controls. Stay tuned for all of it.

[music]

Copyright © 2023 New York Public Radio. All rights reserved. Visit our website terms of use at www.wnyc.org for further information.

New York Public Radio transcripts are created on a rush deadline, often by contractors. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of New York Public Radio’s programming is the audio record.