Robert Morgenthau, Weisselberg, Mike Best discussed on The Lawfare Podcast


I don't know maybe this is unique to that. My view of the office may be unique to him. Unique to his unit maybe advances different. But he would have brought cases that were really really hard like cases that the federal government will be like no way. Not touching it like. Suny would like turn the other way eating and why would turn the other way. We'd be like what we have it like because we didn't really care about losing. We were like we just kind of go in there and we under morgan. That kind of aggressive way of treating these things. Not i mean not unethical but when you really thought something went wrong and you were like this is a really hard case to prove. I'm gonna try it anyway just to be clear you're referring to robert morgenthau though robert morgenthau. We ran that office for before sites two years and totally dating myself. Because i did not work under fan so we're extend under mortgage thaw so i'm old but anyway so the point being that i. I think that it's not that they don't have again. Total speculation but my view is not that the is that it's not that they don't have a case it's that the case that they have would be really really hard to cruise under normal conditions. They might just bring that case. But if you bring a case that's a real stretch under these circumstances you really open yourself up to this narrative which is this is a witch hunt. And so i. If i were in the office right now. I'd be much more wary of bringing a case where you're relying on a lot of circumstantial evidence to prove intent and you're really want. Is that witness it. I don't know if i would say you don't have a case i'd say you have a case that's really really hard to prove. And you're scared about charging case. That's really really hard to prove in this climate. And so you're doing this creative thing or this unusual thing in order. Take a witness. Who will help you prove that case you pretty much. Thank you have it. But it's just you know it would be one of those cases that you could lose and if you you know i don't know what what what's the term like if you're coming after the king you better kill him like that. It seems like you can't do that now. You would end up undermining the legitimacy of the da's office. You don't wanna do that. So i don't as mike best guess i really don't i really don't know i had the same reaction as you to be on us so just just to clarify when you say this unorthodox thing what you're referring to is indicting a small piece of the case that you have rock solid and if the facts as alleged in this indictment are accurate. It's does seem like they've got him dead to rights on tax evasion with the idea that that generates pressure both on the organization which presumably won't settle on cooperation basis and with weisselberg. Who might is that. Is that the gambling right. And i and agree with daniel. That like would i. I heard the way. It was being spun by his defense attorneys. I was like wow. This is he's voice overs. Not even facing jail time so like now really. What are they doing. But when it's up close to nine hundred thousand dollars in tax loss Which daniel correct me. If i'm wrong but i think that's what i read. Then you know if you add up the federal plus the state were around that i think with the classy felony which grand larceny in the second degree is fifteen year max probation possible. There's no way with that amount of money that he would be getting probation and so weisselberg facing jail time. Maybe that really does change the picture. And so i was a little. I understood a little bit more once. I saw the indictment what they were doing. Which i think is what you were saying. Which is trying to put pressure on weisberg to flip before i saw when i thought it was just gonna be you know. Much smaller amounts i was Even more bewildered about what was going on all right before we go back into the whole history of this case which Fortunately quinta knows in unbelievable in excruciating detail. I want to focus on this question. Daniel of how big a deal. This stuff really is so. You've stressed the amount of money in question. It's nine hundred plus thousand dollars but it's nine hundred plus thousand dollars over fifteen years which you know when you amortize it over that period of time is Starts to look like a little bit less. Walk us through how this compares to other indicted tax cases that don't involve leona helmsley that that you've seen. There are a lot of indicted tax cases for smaller amounts involving people. You've never heard of at diner owner employees under the table way. Let me stop you. Let me stop you right there when you say a diner owner paying employees under the table. That's what this case is about right. It's it's it's a non diner owner paying people under the table. So when when when the trump organization when donald trump says this is just a witch hunt they never go after. This is what everybody does. They never go after people for this. Is that just not true. So i think there are three people in the last month on long island to in queens and one further out on long island Who have been indicted or pled federally on similar stuff paying employees under the table or charging personal expenses to a business account. It's not a new story. When it.

Coming up next