In this episode of All Things Investigations, host Tom Fox and Kevin Carroll discuss the alarming revelation that former President Trump allegedly shared sensitive information about nuclear submarines with an Australian civilian, as well as a peculiar court hearing involving a limited gag order on Trump. They explore the gravity of the information shared, its implications on national security, and the potential legal repercussions.
Kevin is a partner in the Washington, D.C., and New York offices of Hughes Hubbard & Reed in the White Collar & Regulatory Defense and Anti-Corruption & Internal Investigations practice groups. He also helps counsel businesses on CFIUS/FIRRMA, cyber security and data privacy, EAR/ITAR, FARA, FCPA, FISA, FMS, NISPOM, and OFAC compliance.
You’ll hear Tom and Kevin discuss:
- President Trump allegedly discussed secrets about nuclear submarines with an Australian civilian, Anthony Pratt.
- Kevin emphasizes the seriousness of this revelation, highlighting the crucial role submarines play in national security, including preserving Taiwan's independence and intelligence collection.
- Strategic missile submarines (boomers) are the ultimate nuclear guarantee, capable of retaliatory strikes against adversaries, and their secrecy is paramount.
- Kevin is surprised that additional charges were not laid against Trump for willfully communicating classified information to an uncleared foreign national.
- The disclosure of classified information poses a risk to national security, as adversaries may adapt their tactics and enhance technology based on the shared information.
- There is no remedy once sensitive information is released; the damage caused may be irreversible.
- The intelligence relationship between the United States and Australia is one of the closest, with both countries part of the Five Eyes alliance.
- A limited gag order was imposed on President Trump after an unusual hearing related to a motion brought by Special Counsel Jack Smith.
- Kevin criticizes the defense lawyers' aggressive approach and disrespectful behavior toward the federal judge during the hearing.
- The judge's decision to impose a limited gag order is a necessary step to prevent potential harm to individuals targeted by Trump's remarks.
- The broader societal implications of such unchecked criticisms from a public figure like Trump, with a significant following, are emphasized.
- Judges may consider escalating fines as a deterrent to gain Trump's attention and prevent further damage and incitement of violence.
- Trump's potential strategy may be to use incarceration as a political narrative, portraying himself as a victim.
- Kevin believes fines would be a more effective deterrent and expresses hope that financial penalties would capture Trump's attention.
- Repeated violations of the gag order is a strategy Trump may use to attempt to poison the jury pool. Such efforts might have more impact in Florida and Georgia.
- Venue selection in high-profile cases is crucial to ensure a fair trial.
- Lawyers have the responsibility to weed out jurors with preconceived notions, regardless of the case's profile. However, in some cases, it's impossible to find a jury unaffected by public awareness.
Resources
Hughes Hubbard & Reed website
Kevin Carroll on LinkedIn