The NPR Politics Podcast - She Can Stay. But He's Gotta Go!

Episode Date: March 15, 2024

Fani Willis, Fulton County District Attorney, can continue to lead the prosecution against former President Donald Trump. A Georgia judge ruled Willis can continue on the case related to the attempt to interfere with the results of the 2020 presidential election in Georgia – but only if her ex-boyfriend, Nathan Wade, no longer works on the case. And, a Can't Let It Go you won't want to miss.This episode: White House correspondent Asma Khalid, congressional correspondent Claudia Grisales, and senior political editor and correspondent Domenico Montanaro.Our producers are Jeongyoon Han, Casey Morell & Kelli Wessinger. Our editor is Erica Morrison. Our executive producer is Muthoni Muturi. Listen to every episode of the NPR Politics Podcast sponsor-free, unlock access to bonus episodes with more from the NPR Politics team, and support public media when you sign up for The NPR Politics Podcast+ at plus.npr.org/politics.Learn more about sponsor message choices: podcastchoices.com/adchoicesNPR Privacy Policy

Support for this podcast and the following message come from Autograph Collection Hotels, with over 300 independent hotels around the world, each exactly like nothing else. Autograph Collection is part of the Marriott Bonvoy portfolio of hotel brands. Find the unforgettable at AutographCollection.com. Hi, this is Matt, Sarah, Hannah, Madison, and Andrew. We're in the middle of the Pamlico Sound, in our car, on a car ferry from Hatteras Island to Ocracoke Island. This podcast was recorded at 1226 p.m. Eastern Time on Friday, March 15th of 2024. Things may have changed by the time you hear it, but until then, we'll keep enjoying Spring Break 2024. Yay! Wow! by the time you hear it. But until then, we'll keep enjoying Spring Break 2024.

That's adorable. That sounds fun. I hope they brought enough snacks. Hey there, it's the NPR Politics Podcast. I'm Asma Khalid. I cover the White House. I'm Stephen Fowler. I cover the presidential election. And I'm Domenico Montanaro, senior political editor and correspondent. And this week, we got several updates on the various cases related to former President Donald Trump. I want to begin with what happened this morning. A Georgia judge decided on whether or not to remove Fulton County District Attorney Fawnie Willis in the case related to the former President Donald Trump's attempt to interfere with the results of the 2020 presidential election in Georgia.

You know, Stephen, folks may remember that fiery, hours-long testimony Willis delivered that aired across cable news networks last month. I don't know that folks fully understand, though, the specifics of what was going on and why there was even an issue about her being removed from this case. So walk us through that. Yeah. So, Asma, there was this attempt by some of the defendants in the case to get Fonny Willis and the Fulton County District Attorney's Office disqualified from continuing the prosecution. The allegations

were that Fonny Willis had these financial incentives and benefits from seeking these charges against Donald Trump and others, that she hired her boyfriend, a man named Nathan Wade, to be a special prosecutor on the case. They both financially benefited from this case. There was a conflict of interest, and as such, the case should not continue with them at the helm. Now, all of this testimony did find that, yes, Willis and Wade were in a relationship. There was a dispute over when it started, less so over when it ended. Willis and Wade both said that they broke things off before charges were filed.

And ultimately, what the judge found this morning is something that doesn't really satisfy any of the sides of this case. The judge did not find any evidence of a conflict of interest. The judge did not find that there was financial benefits gained. I mean, the district attorney makes well over $100,000 a year. The allegations that taxpayers paying her then-boyfriend that they then took trips together was some sort of self-dealing, didn't really hold water. But the key thing is that there was this appearance of impropriety and that as such, there were two options. One, Willis and the entire office could recuse themselves and this could go to a different district attorney. Or two, Wade would remove himself from the case. Okay. So Stephen, do we

know what is actually going to happen? I mean, have we heard from Willis yet respond to what the judge decided? We have not yet heard. I mean, the most likely option is that Nathan Wade will get the boot. You know, the simplest thing is to get rid of the distraction and move forward with the case. And we've already heard, you know, former President Donald Trump's lawyer weigh in and say this is not the end of our fight to get this case tossed out. So, I mean, the short answer, too, is that things are going to keep going. And there's enough in that judge's order to give ammunition for people to say, oh, look, you know, there's nothing wrong here. Things need to keep going. Donald Trump needs to be held accountable. But at the same time, there's enough ammunition to say it doesn't matter what the outcome is.

You know, there's already evidence that things are tainted, innocent of all charges. Got it. So do we have a sense of when the case might actually go to trial now? Or are you expecting things still to be held up for a while? Oh, this is definitely just one minor speed bump in the longer obstacle course of getting this case to trial. Because there are so many defendants, and because there are so many different legal things that have to be resolved before we can go to trial, you know, I don't expect this to go to trial before the 2024 election in November. With this complicated a case, with this high of stakes, I wouldn't expect anything to happen very fast. Domenico, what do you make of that? The fact that this case is unlikely, it sounds like from what Stephen is saying, to actually go to trial before the November election.

I know there's also been delays in some of the other trials that Trump is facing. What does that mean for the former president for his campaign? Well, it's a huge win for Trump politically, if that's the case. I mean, he's been really pushing him and his team to delay these cases as much as possible to get them kicked past the November 5th election. And if that is something that winds up happening in this case, it was considered one of the stronger cases against him, that that will be a huge win for him. And it's affecting the other cases as well. I mean, you think about the New York hush money case, for example, there's a 30 day delay. It seems that's possible in that case

because prosecutors are saying that they are open to that considering that there's new information that... And to be clear, Dibbinko, that's the trial that's related to the payment made to an adult film star, Stormy Daniels, back in 2016. Is that right? Yeah, Stormy Daniels and Playboy Playmate by the name of Karen McDougal, which this is really about how Trump's organization wound up using funds to pay for this. And that's really what the case is about. It's seen as the least consequential or least serious of the charges, though not unserious. But the other cases, we know that, for example, the judge in that case has been trying to coordinate with Judge Tanya Chutkin, who's the judge in the case of the foundational January 6th case.

That's also seeing delays because that's been kicked to the Supreme Court for whether or not a president is essentially above the law and whether or not they have immunity. That's going to be heard by the Supreme Court in late April. So this can just keeps getting kicked down the campaign calendar, essentially. And a lot of these cases may never come to trial. I mean, that big Supreme Court decision, to me, really seems like the fundamental question here legally, though, right? It's the question of whether or not a former president has immunity. And you say they're going to hear that in April. So when would we hear a decision? We don't know when there's going to be a decision. There's two different potential routes.

If they go with the precedent of US v. Nixon in the 1970s, they could release a decision, let's say, within three weeks. That still pushes things right to the brink of when we could have a verdict before the 2024 election. And if they go with regular order, essentially, of what they normally do, you wouldn't have a decision in this case, which is one of the bigger cases, until potentially June or late June. And that would almost certainly push a verdict beyond the November election. And also to add, covering a lot of Trump's rallies and campaign events so far,

you know, the further this goes down the road, the more he keeps mentioning them. And also, the more the coverage of all of these different trials and all of these different cases become front of mind for voters, maybe in a different way than if some of this was wrapped up by late spring, early summer. It keeps things top of mind because that door is still open. All right. Well, on that note, Stephen, I'm going to let you go. But thank you so much for joining us. Thanks for having me. And Domenico, please stick around because we've got more to talk about. We'll be back in a moment. Hi, I'm Casey Morrell, a producer on the show, and I'm here with a quick plug for our most recent bonus episode. It's a look back at the 1976 race for the Republican presidential nomination. President Ford today started scrambling for

a new strategy to protect him from Ronald Reagan. We had a pretty bitter contest and it was head to head, knocked down, dragged out of there. It was a fight that helped reshape the GOP into a conservative party. Available now for NPR Politics Podcast Plus listeners. If that's not you, it could be. You get bonus episodes, sponsor free listening, and you help support our work. To sign up, just go to plus.npr.org today. And thanks. And welcome back. We're joined now by Claudia Grisales, congressional correspondent for NPR. Claudia, it's great to have you with us.

Thanks for having me. So you spent a part of this week in White Sulphur Springs, West Virginia at the Greenbrier Resort, is that right? That is right. You were there not to take a luxurious vacation, but to attend the GOP retreat. Right. So what was it like? Yes, it is a very picturesque setting. You're surrounded by the Allegheny Mountains,

these beautiful rivers. The hotel has this 1950s era bunker where they could hide members of Congress and the potential of some sort of disastrous attack. And so it's got a little bit of those 1950s feel throughout the resort. And in part, it's kind of why Speaker Mike Johnson chose it. It's this family-friendly resort. And a lot of members brought their spouses. And there were a lot of meetings held outside, for example, press conferences, what have you. It was a very dramatic departure from last year's GOP retreat in Orlando under former Speaker Kevin McCarthy. But I heard a good number of members didn't show up this year. departure from last year's GOP retreat in Orlando under former Speaker Kevin McCarthy. But I heard a good number of members didn't show up this year. Exactly. So attendance was not great. I talked to some of those members who did not go. Some told me they were facing very tough primaries. They couldn't afford the time. It was an election year.

Some told me they had better things to do, like spending time with family. And then others, for example, Matt Gaetz of Florida chose to use this time instead to campaign against an incumbent Republican in the conference. This is Tony Gonzalez, who is facing a tough runoff in Texas. So it was all a reminder of the dysfunction that continues to dominate this conference. And then yesterday, Claudia, it seems like something that Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer said actually ignited a firestorm amongst a good number of Republicans. He took to the Senate floor with some comments about the Israel-Gaza conflict. I have known Prime Minister Netanyahu for a very long time. I believe in his heart he has his highest priority as is the security of Israel. However, I also believe Prime Minister Netanyahu has lost his way. As a lifelong supporter of Israel, it has become clear to me

the Netanyahu coalition no longer fits the needs of Israel after October 7th. Right. This was a dramatic statement by Schumer, the highest ranking Jewish elected leader in the United States, to take this direct hit against Netanyahu. And symbolically, at least publicly, he's going it alone as far as Democrats go, really highlighting the level of crisis and concern that we've heard from other Democrats, but in off the record kind of situations where they're not speaking out about it publicly. I spoke to one member, and they raised concern that if the US keeps throwing money at Israel, how much do they know if that money is not going to be used for Netanyahu's war room? And how would it be used? And so this moment definitely disrupted one of the sessions at the Republican retreat.

Speaker Johnson said there was a buzz in the room as soon as folks were getting alerts about it. They called to make a press statement to slam Schumer's remark. And by they, I'm talking about Johnson and other Republican leaders. What did they say? They said that Schumer's remark. And by they, I'm talking about Johnson and other Republican leaders. What did they say? They said that Schumer, his remarks were shocking, dangerous, and that he owed Israel an apology. This includes Johnson himself. Let's take a listen. This is not only highly inappropriate, it's just plain wrong for an American leader to play such a divisive role in Israeli politics

while our closest ally in the region is in an existential battle for its very survival. We need to be standing with Israel, and we need to give our friends and allies our full support. This is just before the House Republicans were meeting to have lunch with the Israeli Ambassador Michael Herz Herzog, at the retreat yesterday. And Republicans really took this opportunity to say now it's clear that only their party now stands with Israel. Let me take my hands off my pearls and just, you know, express my shock and awe with some of this outrage here. Look, the fact is there's a lot of American and Israeli politics at play.

You know, Joe Biden is having some real issues with the left flank of his party when it comes to his handling of the war in Gaza. You know, Biden has been very close to Netanyahu, you know, famously hugged him when he went over there. He said he's known him for a long time. He's thought that he could exert his influence on Netanyahu and really hasn't been able to really change how Israel has conducted the war, which, you know, at this point, the White House really feels like they've gone too far. And Biden has said as much publicly. This is really, it feels like an attempt by a prominent Democrat like Schumer to be able to give some cover to Biden to be able to clearly target Netanyahu, somebody who, by the way, is not very popular in Israel. So it's interesting for someone like Mike Johnson, the speaker, to say that

they're the only party that stands with Israel when, you know, Netanyahu's approval ratings in Israel itself are not very good at all. So there's a really interesting dynamic that's happening here as the White House tries to sort of distance itself from Netanyahu and Israel's approach to try to win back some of those younger voters that Biden needs this fall. I mean, I think it's hard for me to look at what's being said and not think that to some degree there are domestic politics at play here. Because as you mentioned, Domenico, certainly there is the left flank of the Democratic Party that has been rather disenchanted with how Biden has handled the conflict in Gaza. And, you know, White House officials are aware of that.

The Biden campaign is aware of that. You saw yesterday the White House sent a group of senior officials to Chicago, which is important because it is the site of where the Democrats will officially nominate Joe Biden to be their nominee in the 2024 election. And the Chicagoland area has the largest Palestinian population in the country. And so, you know, they were meeting with officials there. But, you know, a lot of folks didn't want to meet with the White House. So I think they are trying to navigate these domestic politics. You know, at the same time, I was intrigued by what you said, Domenico, about Schumer's comments kind of giving Biden cover because Biden himself was asked this morning for a reaction to Schumer's speech. And he said, quote, I'm not going to elaborate on his speech.

He made a good speech. And I think he expressed serious concern shared not only by him, but by many Americans. Yeah, it almost feels like Biden is telling Schumer, go ahead and make a speech like that, because that would be helpful. And Schumer, people have to realize, is somebody who kind of rose to power within Senate leadership, because he was sort of the message whisperer to Harry Reid, when Harry Reid, late senator from Nevada, who was the longtime Democratic leader in the Senate, would really rely on Schumer for his guidance and advice. They even at one point had a joint messaging office. So Schumer doesn't do these things unintentionally. He is very clear about what he is saying, what he wants to do. This is also somebody who used to run the Democratic Sanitorial Campaign Committee, which helps elect Senate

Democrats. So it's very calculated as far as what Schumer's trying to do. On the Republican side, also, a lot of what they're saying is really targeted toward white evangelicals who have a special interest in Israel, not so much at American Jews. They hope that it will have some effect in pulling some over. But Democrats have traditionally won about two thirds of the American Jewish vote. All right. Well, we are going to continue monitoring both the situation here domestically, as well as the possible negotiations for a ceasefire abroad. We'll keep an eye on all of that. But first, let's take a quick break. And when we get back, it's time for Can't Let It Go. And we're back, and it's time now for my favorite part of the show and yours called Can't Let It Go.

That's the part of the show where we talk about the things that we just cannot stop thinking about, politics or otherwise. And Claudia, why don't you kick it off for us today? I will kick it off with two words, Kate Gate. Ah, me too. Or Princess Kate, Kate Middleton. I can't let it go. I need more and I can't stop. It was what I was thinking about also, although I can let it go. I just... I can't stop looking away. The thing is, like, I looked through all the images. I looked at the Photoshops. The thing that I can't let go of is the crown

and how it's informed my ideas of how the firm, quote-unquote, Buckingham Palace, is just this huge PR machine that's also lying to people about stuff all the time. It also makes me feel like I need a new season of The Crown. Exactly.

I knew they cut off too early. This is ridiculous. Now we need two more seasons. Okay, so let me pause here because for listeners who might not be following Kate Gate as closely as us, though I do question that if you don't know these things. I will give you a basic lay of the land. So Kate Middleton, wife to the heir to the throne, Prince William, has not been seen, I believe, in public since December. In January, Kensington Palace informed us that Kate entered the hospital for abdominal surgery, and the palace said she would not return to her public duties until after Easter.

Then there was this very strange photo that appeared this past week. It appeared to be a picture of Kate celebrating Mother's Day in the UK, which, by the way, does not take place at the same time that Mother's Day occurs here in the United States. Anyhow, a bunch of news organizations

killed the photo after saying that they found evidence of it being photoshopped and manipulated. So there's a lot in there. And I am just left wondering, where is she? And what is going on? Yes, exactly. And then people have analyzed the metadata on that Mother's Day photo, and they have revealed from their investigative study and analysis, The zipper on Kate is off. There's something going on with Princess Charlotte's sleeve, maybe her hand.

I've studied it a few times as well, maybe as you have, Domenico, too. But it's just stunning in terms of where is Kate. There was another photo taken of Kate with William in a vehicle. And more recently, Kate is turned away from a camera. And now we have photographers defending pictures saying, no, it's real. She is in that car. It has not been manipulated. And so now every photo will come under this scrutiny because we don't know what to believe. And I have to say, all this attention is ridiculous. I mean, everything that they do all the time, everything that they do all the time and the attention that

they receive is ridiculous. I'm very firmly in sort of the Irish camp when it comes to the UK and their monarchy. I don't think I can repeat how they talk about it, but you can look up how Irish Times has described talking about them. They said, which is like kind of, you know, having clowns for neighbors. I feel like this isn't as much my fight, but as an American, we fought a war to get away from a monarchy. So the only reason I even care or think about it is to make fun of it. My problem is they just need to come clean on everything. That's what I'm like, right?

Like if she, if they had just said, this is what she's doing. I feel like you can't be in the public limelight. Take UK taxpayer dollars. I know, I'm not a British, but I feel for them. They are taking taxpayer dollars and then not have some degree of accountability. It's like all these weird signs. What else might be going on? And then recently, Prince William didn't take part in his godfather's memorial service. I mean, it's beginning to look like Harry and Meghan maybe made the right choice to disconnect, move to LA. I just wish Harry could get back in there, get the information, write another book, and

sell it. Get the information. A service for the problem. Exactly. Claudia wants all the tea. All the tea. Oh, very good way to end today's show. All right.

Well, that is a wrap for today's podcast. Our executive producer is Muthoni Mathuri. Our editor is Erica Morrison. And I want to just pause here for a moment because today is Erica's last day. And we have so appreciated your wisdom, your edits to our scripts. So thank you. Thank you. Our producers are Jung Yoon Han, Casey Murrell, and Kelly Wessinger. Special thanks to Christian Dove Calamer and Dana Farrington. I'm Asma Khalid. I cover the White House. I'm Claudia Grizales. I cover Congress.

And I'm Domenico Montanaro, senior political editor and correspondent. And thank you all, as always, for listening to the NPR Politics Podcast.