# Fauci Takes the Fifth & Blanche Confirmation in Jeopardy

An episode of [Bloomberg Law](https://invisiblenetwork.ai/podcast/277975394), 30 Jul 2026, 21 min.

Audio: https://podtrac.com/pts/redirect.mp3/traffic.omny.fm/d/clips/e73c998e-6e60-432f-8610-ae210140c5b1/7c892d84-801f-4c0b-b0e9-ae2b0012ff5f/eed118eb-9676-494b-9e1f-b4970042b9b9/audio.mp3?utm_source=Podcast&in_playlist=91224201-26a6-429d-ac3c-ae2b0012ff6d

Dave Aronberg, former Palm Beach County State Attorney, discusses Dr. Anthony Fauci’s testimony before a Senate committee and possible problems with the nomination of Todd Blanche to be Attorney General. June Grasso hosts. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

## Transcript

[0:02] Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg Law with June Grossel from Bloomberg Radio.
[0:08] Speaker 2: Under the advice of my attorneys, I will invoke my
[0:12] Speaker 2: right under the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution to refrain
[0:17] Speaker 2: from answering your questions.
[0:19] Speaker 3: Doctor Anthony Fauci invoked the Fifth Amendment more than one
[0:23] Speaker 3: hundred times and declined to answer dozens of questions from
[0:27] Speaker 3: senators in a tense committee hearing about his handling of
[0:30] Speaker 3: the COVID nineteen pandemic. The scientist to help lead the
[0:34] Speaker 3: nation's COVID nineteen response was subpoenaed to testify under oath
[0:39] Speaker 3: by Republican Senator Ran Paul of Kentucky, whose long had
[0:44] Speaker 3: an antagonistic relationship with Fauci and his pledged to put
[0:48] Speaker 3: him in jail. In his opening statement, Fauci explained why
[0:52] Speaker 3: he wouldn't answer the committee's questions.
[0:55] Speaker 2: The sole reason he is calling me before this committee
[1:00] Speaker 2: is to get me to say something, anything that could
[1:04] Speaker 2: vindicate his repeated public pledges that I end up in
[1:10] Speaker 2: his words quote behind bars unquote.
[1:14] Speaker 3: Fauci has become a polarizing figure, even receiving death threats
[1:20] Speaker 3: and the partisan divines that have festered for years about
[1:23] Speaker 3: the origins and handling of the pandemic. My guest is
[1:27] Speaker 3: Dave Ahrenberg, former Palm Beach County State Attorney. Dave Fauci
[1:33] Speaker 3: got a pardon in early twenty twenty five from President
[1:37] Speaker 3: Joe Biden. Explain why despite that, he didn't want to testify.
[1:42] Speaker 1: So, Anthony Fauci is eighty five years old and he
[1:46] Speaker 1: wants to live the rest of his life in peace
[1:49] Speaker 1: and in freedom. And he saw what happened to Jim Comi,
[1:53] Speaker 1: who made some comments in front of Congress that were
[1:58] Speaker 1: not lies, was not perjury, but the Department of Justice
[2:01] Speaker 1: prosecuted him. Anyways, he was on Trump's target list. Is
[2:04] Speaker 1: there anyone else on Trump's target list higher than Anthony Fauci,
[2:07] Speaker 1: Well maybe Jack Smith. And Jack Smith too is being
[2:10] Speaker 1: referred to the DOJ for allegedly making a false statement
[2:13] Speaker 1: before Congress, even though and I've read the statement, it
[2:16] Speaker 1: is in no way a false statement. But this is
[2:18] Speaker 1: the new weaponization of the DOJ, and members of Congress
[2:22] Speaker 1: are leading the way here, and so it would be
[2:26] Speaker 1: a badge of honor for members of Congress to put
[2:29] Speaker 1: Fauci scalp on their wall. And so Fauci sees this,
[2:32] Speaker 1: and his lawyers said, do not say anything. You're covered
[2:36] Speaker 1: by the Fifth because although you were pardoned for crimes
[2:39] Speaker 1: in the past, and there were no crimes, but Biden
[2:42] Speaker 1: wanted to make sure he wasn't prosecuted. The pardon does
[2:45] Speaker 1: not cover perjury at this hearing. And if you speak
[2:49] Speaker 1: up and you have a mistaken statement or a wrong
[2:54] Speaker 1: train of thought, after all, your eighty five years old,
[2:56] Speaker 1: or you don't quite get the one hundred thousand thousand
[3:00] Speaker 1: documents that have been dropped, but just before the hearing,
[3:03] Speaker 1: you don't specifically match your testimony to what's in the documents,
[3:07] Speaker 1: then you could be wearing a pair of handcuffs. Is
[3:09] Speaker 1: it worth it? So Fauci decided to take the pr
[3:13] Speaker 1: hit to look bad in front of the country and
[3:15] Speaker 1: say the Fifth to every question. But at least he
[3:17] Speaker 1: takes the pr hit with his freedom intact.
[3:20] Speaker 3: Listen to Republican Senator Josh Holly questioning Fauci, what colors
[3:25] Speaker 3: of kyle you're wearing.
[3:27] Speaker 2: On the Advisive Council? I respectfully declined to and sebbased
[3:31] Speaker 2: upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution.
[3:34] Speaker 3: What colors the carpet in front of you.
[3:39] Speaker 2: On the Advisive Council, I respectfully decline to and sebased
[3:43] Speaker 2: upon my rights under the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution.
[3:46] Speaker 2: Let's just get one thing straight.
[3:47] Speaker 1: You don't have any rights under the Fifth Amendment because
[3:49] Speaker 1: you've been pardoned.
[3:50] Speaker 3: Holly was the Attorney General of Missouri. Shouldn't he know better?
[3:55] Speaker 1: Well, Supreme Court, there's a there's a case that says
[4:00] Speaker 1: you can't have the selective use of the Fifth Amendment. Like,
[4:04] Speaker 1: for example, if you say something and then you try
[4:07] Speaker 1: to invoke the Fifth in the same subject matter, then
[4:10] Speaker 1: you can't do it. You can't pick and choose on
[4:12] Speaker 1: the same subject matter. Now, what does the color of
[4:16] Speaker 1: Fauci's tie have with what research in a lab? Well,
[4:20] Speaker 1: an aggressive prosecutor could say, all right, you had an
[4:23] Speaker 1: interpretation of what color your tie is. That shows your
[4:27] Speaker 1: state of mind, and that opens the door to everything
[4:30] Speaker 1: else involving your state of mind. You see where they're going.
[4:32] Speaker 1: So his lawyers are good lawyers, and they just said no,
[4:36] Speaker 1: just take the Fifth on everything.
[4:38] Speaker 3: Just talk a little bit about how difficult perjury prosecutions are, well.
[4:45] Speaker 1: Really hard. Now it's easier to prove making a false
[4:47] Speaker 1: statement to Congress slightly easier. I mean, you still have
[4:49] Speaker 1: to prove that you intentionally lied. So even if Fauci
[4:53] Speaker 1: was brought up on criminal charges for making a false statement,
[4:57] Speaker 1: they would never be able to prosecute him because it
[4:59] Speaker 1: would likely be be based on something he says that
[5:02] Speaker 1: is an answer to an ambiguous question, like James Comey's answer,
[5:07] Speaker 1: or it'd be something taken out of context like Jack
[5:09] Speaker 1: Smith's answer, And so they're never going to convict him.
[5:12] Speaker 1: But that's not what it's about. There's an old saying,
[5:15] Speaker 1: you can beat the rat, but you can't beat the ride,
[5:17] Speaker 1: and that's what members of Congress like Rand Paul and
[5:22] Speaker 1: Holly what they are trying to do here. They want
[5:25] Speaker 1: to have the visual of Anthony Fauci being let out
[5:29] Speaker 1: in handcuffs, even though he'll never serve a day behind bars.
[5:32] Speaker 3: This testimony was so heated and at one point Rand
[5:36] Speaker 3: Paul kicked Fauci's lawyer out of the room.
[5:41] Speaker 1: Yeah. Now, I was watching that, and the lawyer was
[5:44] Speaker 1: told repeatedly not to speak. And the lawyer is not
[5:48] Speaker 1: supposed to speak because it's the individual that speaks. The
[5:51] Speaker 1: lawyer's supposed to advise. And so I understand why he
[5:55] Speaker 1: was kicked out, but it tells you more that there
[5:58] Speaker 1: was a round of applause from the gallery. He shows
[6:00] Speaker 1: how political this is. See, the reason why this is
[6:03] Speaker 1: happening is that you have the midterms coming up, and
[6:07] Speaker 1: the Republican base has been demoralized, and you've got the
[6:10] Speaker 1: Iran warts not going well, You've got prices up, you've
[6:14] Speaker 1: got Epstein still the ghost of Epstein floating around, and
[6:17] Speaker 1: so this is something that still motivates them. It's Anthony Fauci,
[6:21] Speaker 1: who they likened to a devil, to someone who is
[6:24] Speaker 1: like should be prosecuted, head on a pike. And because
[6:27] Speaker 1: of Biden's pardons, that was all shut down. But here's
[6:31] Speaker 1: a way for Rand Paul to get his licks in
[6:33] Speaker 1: because there's been a battle between the two of them
[6:35] Speaker 1: for years, and for the base to get ginned up.
[6:38] Speaker 1: And I was on Twitter looking at some of the
[6:40] Speaker 1: tweets from Concerns and they love this. They're the ones
[6:44] Speaker 1: who are cheering when the lawyer for Fautu was kicked
[6:47] Speaker 1: out of the room, and they're the ones cheering the
[6:49] Speaker 1: Faucti looks bad as a result of his repeated invocations
[6:52] Speaker 1: of the Fifth Amendment.
[6:54] Speaker 3: Rand Paul concluded the nearly three hour hearing by saying,
[6:58] Speaker 3: the committee is planning a vote next week on whether
[7:02] Speaker 3: to hold Fauci in contempt of Congress.
[7:05] Speaker 1: And what happens is you have the committee vote, and
[7:07] Speaker 1: then it goes to the full Senate, and then it
[7:09] Speaker 1: gets referred to the DOJ, and then the DJ can
[7:12] Speaker 1: or cannot for ale the charges are seeking indictment, and
[7:16] Speaker 1: then ultimately it's up to a judge. But judges are
[7:19] Speaker 1: really protective of the Fifth Amendment. If there is the
[7:22] Speaker 1: possibility that you could be prosecuted for a crime, you
[7:26] Speaker 1: can take the Fifth Amendment. Now, Rampaul saying, you your pardoned,
[7:29] Speaker 1: so you have no right against self incrimination. But that's
[7:31] Speaker 1: only partially true because that only applies to pass conduct.
[7:35] Speaker 1: You can still be prosecuted for perjury, for making a
[7:38] Speaker 1: false statement to Congress. You can still be prosecuted for that,
[7:41] Speaker 1: even if you were pardoned for everything else. So that's
[7:44] Speaker 1: why it again is a visual. It's the visual of
[7:48] Speaker 1: the Republicans taking action against someone that the base of
[7:51] Speaker 1: the Republican Party hates, despises, So yeah, they'll do the referral. Ultimately,
[7:56] Speaker 1: it will never lead to any day in jail for
[8:00] Speaker 1: Anthony fauci.
[8:01] Speaker 3: Let's turn out to a committee hearing that is supposed
[8:04] Speaker 3: to take place tomorrow, a planned vote to move forward
[8:08] Speaker 3: with Todd Blanche's nomination for Attorney General.
[8:12] Speaker 1: The selling Fund's just not moving forward. There's no modification.
[8:16] Speaker 1: It's just never started. No money went from the Treasury
[8:19] Speaker 1: to any other account, there's no commissioners.
[8:21] Speaker 2: It's not moving forward.
[8:23] Speaker 3: At his confirmation hearings, Blanche had testified that the one
[8:27] Speaker 3: point eight billion dollar anti Weaponization Fund was dead, but
[8:32] Speaker 3: that has not assured Republican Senator John Cornyn. He's raised
[8:37] Speaker 3: concerns that the fund could be resurrected without a commitment
[8:41] Speaker 3: in writing from the Trump administration that it is dead,
[8:44] Speaker 3: especially since President Trump has expressed continued support for the deal.
[8:49] Speaker 3: For the nomination to go through the Senate Judiciary Committee,
[8:53] Speaker 3: Blanche needs the votes of every Republican Senator Dave During
[8:57] Speaker 3: his confirmation hearing, Blanche admitted that the settlement agreement can
[9:02] Speaker 3: be resurrected, and Cornyn wants the Justice Department to put
[9:06] Speaker 3: it in writing that the Weaponization Fund is dead. He said,
[9:11] Speaker 3: they know what they need to do, but they simply
[9:14] Speaker 3: refuse to do it well.
[9:17] Speaker 1: Todd Blanche in private admitted to Senator Dick Durbin that
[9:22] Speaker 1: the one point seven to seven six billion dollar so
[9:25] Speaker 1: called anti Weaponization fund was a mistake. But it's one
[9:29] Speaker 1: thing to say that in private. It's another thing to
[9:32] Speaker 1: say it in public. It's one thing to say in
[9:34] Speaker 1: public that you are not moving forward with this slush fund.
[9:39] Speaker 1: It's another thing to put in writing. It's one thing
[9:41] Speaker 1: to say that you're not going to create this fund,
[9:44] Speaker 1: but it's another thing to also leave open the possibility
[9:48] Speaker 1: of giving financial settlements to claims made by January six ers,
[9:54] Speaker 1: and he has refused to shut that door, and that's
[9:57] Speaker 1: a problem, just like how the DOJ had has given
[10:00] Speaker 1: hundreds of millions of dollars to the state of Alaska
[10:03] Speaker 1: to settle lawsuits there and that helps Lisa Murkowski. Well,
[10:07] Speaker 1: he can do the same thing to please Trump. For
[10:09] Speaker 1: the January six ers, there have been a lot of
[10:10] Speaker 1: claims filed and it's up to him how to settle that. Remember,
[10:14] Speaker 1: he's given already a lot of my General Flynn, they
[10:16] Speaker 1: can pay off people who they like and stop payments
[10:20] Speaker 1: to people they don't, so they have that power, and
[10:23] Speaker 1: that's something that I would like to see Todd Blanche
[10:26] Speaker 1: go further and say, not only will I put in
[10:28] Speaker 1: writing that we are not doing this slush fund, but
[10:31] Speaker 1: we are also putting in writing that we are not
[10:33] Speaker 1: going to reimburse anyone who makes a claim being part
[10:37] Speaker 1: of the January sixth insurrection. He will not do that,
[10:40] Speaker 1: and I think that's a problem.
[10:42] Speaker 3: They can still give January six people money through regular
[10:45] Speaker 3: process and they don't need this slush fund.
[10:47] Speaker 1: That's right, No, that's it. But remember Trump wanted the
[10:50] Speaker 1: slush one because it was a way to signal that
[10:53] Speaker 1: he supports people who supported him. That's why I was
[10:56] Speaker 1: created as one point seventy seven six billion dollars at
[10:59] Speaker 1: seventeen seventy six. Also, it was a substitute for the
[11:04] Speaker 1: settlement that they originally wanted, which was to give Trump
[11:07] Speaker 1: the money. This was to settle Trump's claims against the IRS.
[11:12] Speaker 1: And it's interesting because Trump has a legitimate claim against ars.
[11:15] Speaker 1: They did leak his information. They also leaked Ken Griffin's
[11:18] Speaker 1: information and others, but Ken Griffin others accepted an apology
[11:22] Speaker 1: and no financial settlement. But Trump wanted the money, and
[11:25] Speaker 1: when that looked bad because with self dealing, they settled
[11:27] Speaker 1: on this slush fund for their January sixth and other supporters,
[11:32] Speaker 1: but that too looks so bad. So what they could
[11:35] Speaker 1: still do, though, is settle lawsuits. And that's where Todd
[11:39] Speaker 1: Blanche has not committed. One way or another.
[11:41] Speaker 3: This is Bloomberg. Social media influencers Andrew and Tristan Tate
[11:48] Speaker 3: are accused of rape and sex trafficking in the United Kingdom.
[11:52] Speaker 3: They've become among the world's most polarizing Internet personalities with
[11:56] Speaker 3: their promotion of wealth, male dominance, and massiley through their
[12:01] Speaker 3: social media empire. The new allegations are the latest in
[12:05] Speaker 3: a long running international legal scandal involving the Tates that
[12:09] Speaker 3: has spanned the US, Britain and Romania. Their attorney, Joseph McBride,
[12:14] Speaker 3: has slammed the new criminal charges unveiled against them.
[12:18] Speaker 2: We think these charges are selationists and defamatory charges. Andrew
[12:22] Speaker 2: and Tristan Tate have been accused of the most heinous
[12:26] Speaker 2: acts that two men could be accused of.
[12:28] Speaker 3: The Tates say they're innocent of the charges and they'll
[12:31] Speaker 3: fight their extradition to the UK. They'll remain in jail
[12:34] Speaker 3: in Miami until at least and August thirteenth detention hearing,
[12:39] Speaker 3: where a judge will determine whether they'll be released on
[12:42] Speaker 3: bail as the extradition process plays out. I've been talking
[12:46] Speaker 3: to former Palm Beach County State Attorney Dave Ehrenberg. Dave, so,
[12:50] Speaker 3: right now, the Tates are fighting extradition, right.
[12:55] Speaker 1: So you have the Tate brothers that are detained and
[13:00] Speaker 1: waiting extradition and they're in solitary confinement. They're in solitary
[13:03] Speaker 1: confinement not because they're being punished, but because they're high
[13:05] Speaker 1: profile figures because of their own outrageous words that have
[13:08] Speaker 1: made him into targets. And they're going to fight it,
[13:10] Speaker 1: but it could take one to two years to fight it. Ultimately, though,
[13:14] Speaker 1: it goes to the courts, and it's a low burden
[13:16] Speaker 1: for the government to extradize people because you have a
[13:20] Speaker 1: legitimate charge from Great Britain, from the UK where it's
[13:24] Speaker 1: serious felonies that's number one. Are they serious crimes yes,
[13:27] Speaker 1: and has a probable cause yes, unless they want to
[13:31] Speaker 1: say that it's mistaken identity, which is not the case.
[13:34] Speaker 1: So they're going to lose in the courts. What they're
[13:36] Speaker 1: trying is to get the Trump administration to block it,
[13:39] Speaker 1: and after it goes to the courts, then it's up
[13:41] Speaker 1: to the Secretary of State Marco Rubio to sign off
[13:44] Speaker 1: on it, and by all on occasions he will. Why
[13:46] Speaker 1: is he going to die in a hill for the
[13:47] Speaker 1: Tape Brothers. I know Marco Rubio, he's a religious guy.
[13:50] Speaker 1: I'm sure he finds the Tape Brothers conduct discussing and repulsive.
[13:54] Speaker 3: Rubio told report was he was in Manila on July
[13:56] Speaker 3: twenty second, that he didn't expect to intervene in the
[13:59] Speaker 3: case for now. There's no role for us to play
[14:02] Speaker 3: at this moment or maybe ever. But there is a role.
[14:05] Speaker 1: Well, yeah, he has to sign off on it. They
[14:07] Speaker 1: can't get extradited unless the Secretary of State signs off
[14:10] Speaker 1: on it. But it's pretty rote. I think there's only
[14:12] Speaker 1: been one example since the treaty between the US and
[14:16] Speaker 1: UK has been signed on extraditions, only one example of
[14:19] Speaker 1: someone who has not been extradited over to the UK,
[14:24] Speaker 1: and that was because the person was related to a
[14:27] Speaker 1: diplomatic official with potential diplomatic community situation like this, Why
[14:31] Speaker 1: why wouldn't you extradite them? This is we're talking about
[14:33] Speaker 1: alleged rape and child pornography. I mean, with the ghosts
[14:36] Speaker 1: of Jeffrey Epstein flying above, why or below? Why would
[14:40] Speaker 1: you try to make this a big issue? I mean,
[14:43] Speaker 1: my gosh, if there's anything that unites the parties, you
[14:46] Speaker 1: would think it's fighting sex exploitation of children.
[14:49] Speaker 3: So why will it take so long?
[14:51] Speaker 1: Then first you go to the magistrate, then a judge,
[14:53] Speaker 1: and then it goes to the appellate court. Then it
[14:55] Speaker 1: could go to the Supreme Court, and so it could
[14:57] Speaker 1: take a while. It could take a year, maybe even
[14:59] Speaker 1: a but it's probably in nurse of the benefit of
[15:02] Speaker 1: the Tape brothers to just accept the extradition because they're
[15:06] Speaker 1: in solitary confinement. They want to spend the next year
[15:08] Speaker 1: or two in solitary confinement. Doesn't seem like a victory
[15:11] Speaker 1: to me.
[15:12] Speaker 3: Well, they're asking for bail while they fight the extradition,
[15:17] Speaker 3: and there's going to be bail hearing on August thirteenth.
[15:21] Speaker 3: Their lawyers said they've been in solitary confinement, but they're
[15:24] Speaker 3: still under threat of getting stabbed, jump, murdered or whatever
[15:27] Speaker 3: it is in jail as accused sex offenders, but no
[15:30] Speaker 3: evidence of specific threats.
[15:33] Speaker 1: If you look up the definition of flight risk. You'll
[15:37] Speaker 1: see a picture of the tape.
[15:38] Speaker 2: Brothers.
[15:39] Speaker 1: Andrew Tate has all these bugattis and planes and money
[15:45] Speaker 1: and followers around the world. He's got passports for what
[15:48] Speaker 1: twelve different countries. He brags about that he can go
[15:52] Speaker 1: in any country and be immune from justice. This is
[15:56] Speaker 1: your typical flight risk that prosecutors point to and say,
[15:59] Speaker 1: do not let them out of jail. And so he's
[16:01] Speaker 1: not going anywhere. Now. What's interesting is that his brother,
[16:04] Speaker 1: Tristan Tate, has taken a different approach. His tweets about
[16:08] Speaker 1: his conditions are actually respectful. He praises the guards, Andrew
[16:11] Speaker 1: Tates the opposite. He can't help being the obnoxious guy
[16:14] Speaker 1: that he is. And so it sets up an interesting
[16:16] Speaker 1: situation that perhaps, just maybe you think that maybe Tristan
[16:20] Speaker 1: Tate sees his only way out of prison before he
[16:23] Speaker 1: dies is to flip on his brother. Do you think
[16:26] Speaker 1: or at least take a different approach, maybe cooperate. It
[16:29] Speaker 1: seems like Andrew's gonna go down with the ship.
[16:31] Speaker 3: Does it work anymore to say we'll put an ankle
[16:33] Speaker 3: bracelet on you, or does that not work anymore? In
[16:36] Speaker 3: the movies they cut them off.
[16:37] Speaker 1: I don't know. Yeah, they can cut them off. I mean,
[16:39] Speaker 1: he's got access to planes and fast cars and boats
[16:43] Speaker 1: and a legion of supporters around the country in so
[16:46] Speaker 1: many passports. And after all, he somehow managed to wiggle
[16:50] Speaker 1: out of house arrest in Romania because apparently the Trump
[16:54] Speaker 1: ministration weighed in on their behalf. They're not going to
[16:58] Speaker 1: do it this time. So they are a flight risk.
[17:01] Speaker 1: They're the ultimate flight risks. I can't imagine a bigger
[17:03] Speaker 1: flight risk. I mean, I know that did he tried
[17:06] Speaker 1: to get out and they say you're a flight risk
[17:07] Speaker 1: because you're living on a waterfront property in Miami and
[17:10] Speaker 1: you've got boats. Yeah, this is times ten for these guys.
[17:14] Speaker 1: So no, they're not going anywhere, which is to me
[17:16] Speaker 1: why they should stop fighting extradition and just go back
[17:19] Speaker 1: and fight the charges.
[17:20] Speaker 3: So now let's turn to someone who's already been convicted
[17:25] Speaker 3: and sentenced, Brian Kohlberger. So he pleaded guilty last year
[17:29] Speaker 3: to murdering four University of Idaho students. He's serving four
[17:33] Speaker 3: consecutive life sentences. That guilty plea did spare him from
[17:38] Speaker 3: a possible death penalty, but he told The New York
[17:41] Speaker 3: Times that he's innocent and he's filed a petition to
[17:45] Speaker 3: withdraw his guilty plea and go to trial. How difficult
[17:49] Speaker 3: is it to withdraw a guilty plea?
[17:53] Speaker 1: Almost impossible post sentencing change please, almost never happen. Now,
[17:59] Speaker 1: you can try to do it before you get sentenced.
[18:02] Speaker 1: You can try to say, you know what, I have
[18:03] Speaker 1: a change of heart. And it's still hard. But after
[18:06] Speaker 1: you've been sentenced, after the judge has already said, okay,
[18:09] Speaker 1: are you sure you want to plead guilty and accept
[18:12] Speaker 1: the four life prison terms? And are you doing this
[18:16] Speaker 1: because you are guilty?
[18:17] Speaker 3: Yes?
[18:18] Speaker 1: No, one's co wercuit. Know you like your attorneys?
[18:21] Speaker 3: Yes?
[18:22] Speaker 1: Now say I'm not guilty. I've been coerced and I
[18:24] Speaker 1: don't like my attorneys. Excuse me. You just set the
[18:28] Speaker 1: opposite under oath and you can't keep playing with the
[18:30] Speaker 1: emotions of the victims' families like this. But that's what
[18:33] Speaker 1: he's doing. Guy's a sociopath. The evidence is overwhelming against him.
[18:36] Speaker 1: That's why he took the plea. He really should have
[18:39] Speaker 1: gone to trials so he would be eligible for the
[18:41] Speaker 1: death penalty. But here he is his last throws a
[18:43] Speaker 1: power of leverage of relevance, where he is trying to
[18:47] Speaker 1: remind people who he is. You know, when he was
[18:50] Speaker 1: convicted and sent away, one of the family members of
[18:54] Speaker 1: the victims said, we will never think of you ever again.
[19:00] Speaker 1: Yet he's insisting that you will. And that's who this
[19:02] Speaker 1: person is, haven't The family's been through enough. So he's
[19:04] Speaker 1: going to lose. I don't even think he's going to
[19:06] Speaker 1: get a hearing. I think the judge will reject it
[19:08] Speaker 1: on the paper and he will be spending the rest
[19:10] Speaker 1: of his life in prison, which is still too good
[19:12] Speaker 1: for a guy like this. The only solace I have
[19:14] Speaker 1: is knowing that he hates prison. That's why, another reason
[19:17] Speaker 1: why he's doing this.
[19:18] Speaker 3: So here's what he said. That his attorneys failed to
[19:21] Speaker 3: disclose or review evidence that might have helped his case
[19:25] Speaker 3: during plea discussions, and that his attorneys insisted that his
[19:28] Speaker 3: plea need not be truthful despite petitioners vehement denial of
[19:32] Speaker 3: actual guilt, and they promised life in prison would come
[19:35] Speaker 3: with immediate contact, visits, freedom of movement, employment. The standard
[19:39] Speaker 3: is to show manifest injustice.
[19:42] Speaker 1: Yes, manifest in justice. You've got to show that you
[19:44] Speaker 1: are coerced into it. So if he has evidence that
[19:46] Speaker 1: he was coerced into taking the plea okay, show that
[19:49] Speaker 1: you just can't say it. Do you have evidence of
[19:51] Speaker 1: that that you were coerced into doing it or that
[19:53] Speaker 1: you had a mental deficiency at the time, not that
[19:56] Speaker 1: the attorneys you know, could have been better about researching
[19:58] Speaker 1: every lead out there. Those attorneys did an amazing job
[20:03] Speaker 1: for him because he was going to get the death penalty.
[20:05] Speaker 1: This is a pretty conservative state, Idaho. For innocent college
[20:10] Speaker 1: students slaughtered, and he was able to avoid the death penalty.
[20:13] Speaker 1: He should not be complaining about his attorneys. He should
[20:16] Speaker 1: be setting them a gift basket.
[20:17] Speaker 3: Great to have you on as always, Dave. That's Dave Ehrenberg,
[20:21] Speaker 3: former Palm Beach County State Attorney. And that's it for
[20:25] Speaker 3: this edition of The Bloomberg Law Show. Remember you can
[20:27] Speaker 3: always get the latest legal news on our Bloomberg Law Podcast.
[20:31] Speaker 3: You can find them on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, and at
[20:34] Speaker 3: www dot Bloomberg dot com, slash podcast Slash Law, and
[20:39] Speaker 3: remember to tune into The Bloomberg Law Show every weeknight
[20:42] Speaker 3: at ten pm Wall Street Time. I'm Junie Grosso and
[20:46] Speaker 3: you're listening to Bloomberg

Shows are listed from Apple Podcasts' charts and directory, and Podcast Index where it is used. Every show and episode belongs to its publisher and plays from the publisher's own feed; this site hosts none of them.