0:00

Today's news can feel like uncharted

0:02

waters, but more often than you'd think,

0:04

we're not the first generation to confront

0:06

what we're dealing with today. We're just the

0:09

first generation to make a podcast about it. I'm

0:11

Rachel Maddow. I'm Isaac Davy Aronson. Each

0:13

week, we'll bring you a story from history.

0:15

That helps with something in the headlines

0:17

today. Rachel Maddow

0:20

presents Deja News with Isaac

0:22

Davy Aronson, an MSNBC

0:24

podcast. Search for Deja

0:26

News wherever you're listening and follow.

0:36

I say this to you. The

0:40

conduct of high individuals in the

0:42

Department of Justice, particularly

0:45

the conduct of the chief of the Criminal

0:47

Investigation Division of that department,

0:51

is unprofessional and

0:53

malicious and outrageous. It

0:56

is my intention to use the courts of this

0:58

country in an attempt

1:01

to gain permission to

1:04

examine under oath these

1:06

people who are trying to destroy

1:08

me politically through the abuse

1:11

of the criminal justice system of the United States.

1:17

Because of these

1:20

tactics which have been employed against

1:22

me, because small

1:26

and fearful men have been frightened

1:29

into furnishing evidence against

1:31

me, they have perjured

1:33

themselves. In many cases, it's my understanding.

1:38

I will not resign if indicted.

1:40

I will not resign if indicted.

1:42

Richard

1:46

Nixon's vice president, Spiro Agnew.

1:49

I will not resign if indicted.

1:52

When Spiro Agnew gave that defiant

1:55

speech in September 1973, the

1:58

Nixon administration was just under... incredible

2:00

pressure. The Watergate investigation

2:03

was in full swing. It was getting worse and

2:05

worse for

2:06

President Nixon by the day, and

2:08

everyone, particularly President Nixon,

2:11

knew it. The White House was basically

2:13

in chaos. The president himself, personally,

2:16

was kind of a mess. The

2:18

Justice Department was pretty sure at that

2:20

point that the presidency of Richard

2:22

Nixon was going to be cut short, that

2:26

one way or another, Nixon was not

2:28

likely to make it to the end of that term.

2:31

But when Vice President Spiro Agnew gave

2:34

that indignant speech, talking

2:36

about these people inside the Justice Department who

2:38

were trying to destroy him, saying

2:40

he would refuse to resign even

2:43

if he was indicted, he

2:45

was not talking about potential charges stemming

2:47

from the Watergate investigation. What

2:50

Agnew was talking about was his own thing,

2:52

his own troubles. He

2:54

was talking about this. Washington

2:56

was stunned today by the disclosure

2:59

that Vice President Agnew is under criminal

3:01

investigation by federal authorities

3:03

in his home state of Maryland. While

3:06

the Watergate investigation was front of

3:08

mind for the whole country,

3:10

three young federal prosecutors

3:13

out of Maryland working under the U.S. Attorney

3:15

in Maryland, they discovered

3:18

that there was something else criminal going on

3:20

in the Nixon administration. They discovered

3:22

that the Vice President Spiro Agnew

3:25

was running an active criminal

3:27

scheme of his own from

3:29

inside the White House. He was accepting

3:31

bribes, literal envelopes stuffed

3:33

full of cash

3:35

in exchange for official acts as

3:38

an elected official. That is

3:40

why Spiro Agnew was railing against the Justice

3:42

Department in that speech, because they

3:44

were daring to investigate him

3:47

for his illegal extortion

3:50

and kickback scheme, which he

3:52

absolutely, in fact,

3:53

was running from inside the White House.

3:57

Ultimately, the three young federal prosecutors

3:59

on that case, They turned up enough

4:01

evidence to bring dozens

4:04

of federal criminal charges against

4:06

Agnew. They wanted him

4:08

put on trial. They wanted a conviction. They

4:11

were sure they would get a conviction if they put him on

4:13

trial. And once they got a conviction,

4:15

they wanted Agnew to go to prison for

4:18

what he had done.

4:19

And that was their job, to be sure, right?

4:21

Nobody is above the law. But

4:23

charging someone while they are in

4:26

the White House, that was

4:28

a novel concept. It was a complicated

4:30

prospect. The constitutional

4:32

problems raised by the Agnew investigation

4:35

aren't bewildering. We've never had

4:37

a problem like this one before.

4:39

Spiro Agnew was refusing

4:41

to resign if he was indicted. And

4:45

with President Richard Nixon likely on his

4:47

way out because of Watergate, there was

4:49

a very, very good chance that Spiro Agnew

4:51

was about to become president. If

4:55

Agnew ascended to the presidency, what

4:58

would happen if there was a

5:00

pending indictment against him? What

5:02

would happen if he was on trial in that

5:04

moment? What would happen if he was convicted? Was he going

5:06

to try to be president from

5:09

prison?

5:10

Was he going to try to say, well, now that I'm president,

5:12

you cannot hold me in prison? The

5:14

Justice Department ultimately decided

5:17

that it would be best for the country not

5:19

to find out the answers to those

5:21

questions. Spiro T. Agnew

5:23

became a private citizen today, and

5:26

less than one hour after his resignation

5:28

as vice president became official, he

5:30

was convicted of a criminal charge of

5:32

tax evasion. Mr. Agnew and the Justice

5:34

Department had agreed on a bargain. Mr.

5:37

Agnew resigns as vice president and

5:39

pleads no contest to one count of income

5:42

tax evasion. The Justice Department

5:44

drops all other pending charges.

5:47

In the end, the Justice Department

5:49

struck a deal with Spiro Agnew. They

5:52

made public the evidence of the

5:54

dozens of crimes they believed that

5:57

he had committed. But then they let

5:59

him flee. no contest to just

6:01

a single charge of tax evasion.

6:05

All those felonies evaporated,

6:08

serious prospect of serious prison

6:10

time. Poof, gone. But

6:13

in exchange for that, what they made him

6:15

give up was big. It

6:17

was a condition of his plea deal that

6:20

he resign as vice president.

6:23

And that deal

6:25

is very much not what those three prosecutors

6:27

wanted, at least not initially.

6:29

They had worked so hard to investigate and expose

6:32

all of Agnew's crimes, they were ready

6:34

to go to trial. But

6:36

what the Attorney General, Elliot Richardson,

6:38

believed, and what the prosecutors

6:40

came to agree with, was

6:43

that the interests of justice would

6:45

best be served if they

6:47

did this deal. If they,

6:49

yes, told the world what they believed Agnew

6:52

had done, but then they

6:54

got him out of office and made that

6:56

the priority. Thus

6:57

preventing a national crisis and

7:00

the potential collapse of our constitutional

7:02

system of government. With a president trying

7:05

to run the country from prison and

7:08

a legal system trying to decide if

7:10

it could keep him there.

7:14

This whole episode has, of course,

7:17

been very much overshadowed in history

7:19

by Watergate, which happened very

7:22

near to this time. All of that drama

7:24

and what happened to President Nixon and his resignation

7:27

and his pardon. It's understandable

7:30

that Agnew has ended up a political

7:32

trivia question alongside all of that.

7:35

But a few years ago, we ended up with someone

7:37

else in the White House who looked like

7:39

he might conceivably face federal

7:41

criminal investigation. And suddenly

7:44

this sort of lost to history

7:46

precedent became really relevant, almost

7:48

urgently relevant.

7:51

So in 2018, with producer

7:53

Mike Yarvitz, I made a seven

7:56

part podcast about it and then we wrote

7:58

a book about it. And now,

8:01

the Agnew case is kind

8:03

of back again as we

8:05

enter into this newest chapter of crime

8:07

and high-level politics in American history.

8:10

Because now we've got someone

8:12

facing federal criminal charges who's,

8:15

yes, a former president, but

8:17

he's also a presidential candidate, a

8:20

leading presidential candidate. At this

8:22

point, he is the far and away front-runner

8:24

for the Republican Party's

8:25

presidential nomination. And

8:28

the Agnew case really is the

8:30

closest thing we've got to

8:33

a precedent of someone in that

8:35

position facing

8:36

federal criminal charges from the

8:38

U.S. Department of Justice.

8:41

Now, crucially, of course, the defendant

8:44

today is not a current official

8:46

like Agnew was. He's a former official. And

8:49

the Justice Department has decided to go ahead

8:52

and indict him and put him on trial. But

8:54

never got to that point with Agnew because they

8:56

let him

8:57

agree to that plea deal, where he

8:59

agreed to resign, in effect,

9:02

in order to make all his charges go away.

9:05

But the U.S. Justice Department is again facing

9:07

the same almost unthinkable prospect

9:10

of a criminal defendant, potentially

9:13

a jailed felon,

9:15

ascending to the presidency. We've never

9:17

had a problem like this one before. The

9:20

young federal prosecutors who faced the Agnew

9:22

crisis really were facing

9:24

something brand new when they contended with

9:26

this in 1973. But they

9:28

lived to tell the tale

9:30

as we now face something very much

9:32

like this again.

9:35

In the podcast Bagman, Mike Yarvitz

9:37

and I spoke to the three prosecutors

9:40

who investigated Spiro Agnew, who wrestled

9:42

with the ramifications for the Constitution and

9:44

the country of putting a potential president

9:46

behind bars. I have been

9:48

thinking about these three guys a lot lately,

9:51

wondering what they think about what's

9:53

happening in the news right now. And

9:56

if they have any advice for us as we grapple

9:58

with something... sort of like this

10:01

again. Those three young

10:03

men are named Tim Baker and

10:06

Ron Liebman and Barney Skolnick

10:07

and all three

10:10

of them join us now. Hi you guys, it's

10:12

good to see you. Hello. Hi Rachel.

10:15

Hi. We're also joined by an even younger guy,

10:18

Mike Yarvitz, my long time producer

10:20

and colleague, Mike and I made Bagman together

10:23

back in 2018. Hi Mike, good to see ya.

10:25

Hello Rachel, hello guys. Hi

10:27

Mike. Mike. Part of what happened

10:29

with Agnew, in terms of that plea bargain, was thinking

10:32

about what he had to trade away

10:34

and the biggest thing that he had to trade away was

10:36

his current office. There

10:39

was also the specter that he was

10:41

going to ascend to the presidency,

10:43

if Nixon fell for whatever reason. Did

10:47

you ever consider, as

10:50

part of those plea negotiations, was

10:53

it ever talked about that it would not just

10:55

be about

10:56

Agnew agreeing to resign, but

10:58

agreeing never to stand for office again? Or

11:01

were you able to just assume that if he was forced

11:04

out under these circumstances, that he'd

11:06

never even try to run again?

11:08

I don't think that ever came up

11:10

of his running, trying to run

11:12

again. And I think

11:15

if he, we just assume,

11:18

tacitly I guess, that if

11:20

he resigned as a part of some kind of plea

11:23

deal, no matter what the plea, if he resigned,

11:25

that would end his, basically

11:28

end his political career.

11:30

What we were concerned

11:32

about was we wanted jail time. And

11:37

we argued long and hard with Elliot Richardson

11:39

about that and he ultimately did persuade

11:42

us, but it took

11:44

a lot. It may be relevant to say

11:47

one of Richardson's arguments that

11:49

sort of fits in here, Barney

11:51

was arguing with Richardson.

11:53

Barney said,

11:56

just let us indict him. Just let us

11:58

indict him. He'll have to resign. resign.

12:01

And Richardson responded, Barney,

12:04

supposing he doesn't resign and supposing you

12:07

guys go to trial. Yes, you have an overwhelming

12:10

case, but supposing he takes to stand

12:12

and begins to testify in his own defense.

12:15

And while he is testifying, word

12:18

comes that Nixon has dropped

12:20

dead and he is now the President

12:22

of the United States.

12:25

Well, that took us back.

12:29

That was a real turning point. Can

12:31

I ask you though to keep going with

12:33

that thought experiment? He's indicted,

12:36

he's on trial, he's testifying

12:38

in his own defense. Word comes down,

12:40

burbles through the courtroom that Nixon

12:42

has died or resigned and now Agnew

12:45

is President. And

12:47

then what happens? Well,

12:49

I think the point of the argument

12:52

that persuaded me at

12:54

least, I think it was, oh my

12:56

God, we can't let that happen.

12:58

You got to get him out of there. We can't let it happen

13:00

that he,

13:02

even in the middle of a trial becomes President,

13:04

just can't.

13:05

So it's unthinkable. Barney,

13:08

if you had been

13:11

questioning the witness at that point or

13:13

Agnew is on the stand and

13:15

word came down, what

13:18

would you have done? What

13:21

a fun thing to think about. Yeah, we

13:27

were consumed

13:30

with the thought meeting

13:32

with the Attorney General in July

13:35

and August and September that

13:40

Nixon could drop dead tomorrow.

13:45

And then it's not just

13:47

that we don't have a case, we

13:49

don't have a job because

13:53

the next day if he's President, you

13:56

know how politicians always talk about what they'll

13:58

do on their first day in August.

13:59

office. We

14:02

knew what I would do on his first

14:04

day in office and it wasn't pretty.

14:07

And we were, you know, young,

14:10

bullheaded and

14:12

competent enough to be able to

14:15

calculate

14:17

whether or not we were comfortable

14:19

entertaining that possibility. And

14:21

the answer, of course, was no.

14:25

I mean, I remember very well that

14:28

that was a big part of my own

14:31

metamorphosis from he's

14:34

got to go to jail to how

14:37

soon can we get his ass in court and have

14:39

him resign. A big

14:41

part of that was Nixon.

14:43

In terms of the analogy and how it fits and how it doesn't,

14:48

you know, if the Trump trial does get pushed

14:50

till after the election, it's not Nixon

14:53

dying. It's Trump getting elected,

14:55

which then affects that same series

14:58

of events. Right. I mean, we know what he would do

15:00

on his day one in office if elected

15:03

to a second term. He'd make

15:05

the whole thing poof as well.

15:07

He'd probably abolish the Justice Department as we

15:09

know it.

15:11

Rachel, I'm 82 and conscious of

15:13

my own mortality and I do

15:15

not contemplate

15:19

Trump becoming president again. I mean,

15:23

I just don't think that's going to happen. And

15:26

and I don't want to think about the possibility

15:29

that

15:29

it might.

15:31

If you want to go down that path, you

15:34

go down it without me. You know, there's

15:36

a there's an interesting sort of

15:39

irony here.

15:40

Agnew's criminal

15:43

problems ended his political career,

15:45

and it's

15:47

quite possible that Trump's criminal

15:50

problems will enhance his political career.

15:52

Yeah.

15:53

But not to the point of his getting

15:55

elected again. When you

15:57

guys were considering the press.

15:59

of Agnew and

16:02

preparing potentially to put

16:04

him on trial. Did

16:07

you think about, did you talk about the

16:09

prospect that if

16:12

he was put on trial and he was acquitted, that

16:15

that might be sort of rocket fuel for

16:17

his

16:18

political future too? If

16:21

he was put on trial, he had no chance of

16:23

being acquitted. We had an overwhelming

16:26

case. No

16:29

chance, even with a

16:31

hostile judge. And

16:34

we also had a hell of a good team. We weren't just led

16:36

by Barney Skolnick, who may have been the best

16:38

prosecutor in the United States, but we also

16:40

had a fabulous team of IRS agents

16:43

led by Pete Stortewich, who's the best IRS

16:45

agent ever.

16:47

We interviewed Marty London for the podcast,

16:49

who was one of Speer Agnew's

16:51

defense attorneys at the time, who spoke

16:54

about the impracticalities of

16:56

trying and convicting a sitting

16:59

vice president and a man who might soon

17:01

become president, to

17:03

include, does he get secret service protection

17:06

in jail? And

17:08

if he's convicted

17:10

and sitting in jail, and

17:12

he suddenly becomes president, can he

17:15

pardon himself from a jail

17:17

cell?

17:19

Were those considerations top of mind

17:21

for you at all when it came to the

17:24

resolution of that case? And as

17:27

it relates to the current moment, how

17:30

do you assess those possibilities when

17:32

it comes to the former president,

17:34

who may soon be elected president

17:36

in the course of this? Well,

17:38

let me take a first crack at it. And

17:41

my answer is gonna be a little bit indirect,

17:43

because I'm

17:45

not worried about the situation.

17:48

I think the state of our

17:50

union remains strong.

17:52

And I think America will survive

17:55

the Trump era.

17:59

I have little doubt about it. about it. Yes,

18:01

there's a sizable number of people

18:04

with legitimate grievances

18:07

who

18:08

unfortunately find Trump appealing

18:12

and buy into all the nonsense

18:15

and the lies. But fundamentally,

18:19

in my opinion, this country, the

18:21

overwhelming majority are decent, law-abiding

18:25

people who tend to do

18:27

the right thing, and they tend to do the right thing when

18:29

they're on jury stories. Yes,

18:31

there could always be a hung jury, and it's a

18:33

risk in this case particularly, who lies

18:36

about jury service, who says

18:38

all the right things to be impaneled, but who really

18:41

secretly wants to acquit the defendant.

18:43

And a risk of a hung jury here,

18:45

I think, is a real risk.

18:49

The indictment is very

18:51

strong. I think the

18:53

case is very, very strong, and I think

18:55

it's quite likely if this case

18:57

goes to trial, he will be convicted. But

19:01

whether he is or whether he isn't, and with

19:03

all these moving parts, more indictments

19:05

to come, Trump's behavior,

19:08

yada-da-da-da-da-da, I'm

19:11

not worried. I think America will

19:13

survive this.

19:16

And I feel that in my

19:18

bones. And does he take the Secret Service

19:21

to prison? Well, you

19:23

know, they probably won't be allowed

19:25

to be in the cell with him, but

19:28

they can hang out outside and maybe,

19:30

you know, he can get some chewing gum

19:32

from them or whatever. But yeah, maybe.

19:37

We're talking with Tim Baker, Barney

19:39

Skolnick, Ron Liebman, the federal prosecutors

19:42

who brought charges against Vice President

19:44

Agnew in 1973. We'll

19:46

be back with more right after this.

19:55

Today's news can feel like uncharted

19:57

waters. But more often than you'd think,

19:59

we're

19:59

We're not the first generation to confront what

20:02

we're dealing with today. We're just the first

20:04

generation to make a podcast about it. I'm

20:06

Rachel Maddow. I'm Isaac Davie Aronson. Each

20:08

week we'll bring you a story from history.

20:10

That helps with something in the headlines

20:13

today. Rachel Maddow

20:15

presents Déjà News with Isaac

20:17

Davie Aronson, an MSNBC

20:19

podcast. Search for Déjà

20:21

News wherever you're listening and follow.

20:29

I'm Rachel Maddow. I'm here with producer

20:31

Mike Yarvitz and our guests are

20:34

Tim Baker, Barney Skolnick, and Ron

20:36

Liebman. They were the three young federal

20:38

prosecutors who spearheaded the

20:41

federal criminal investigation of

20:43

a man who was then the sitting vice president

20:45

of the United States, Spiro Agnew.

20:48

Just broadly speaking, what's been your reaction

20:51

to federal criminal charges being filed

20:53

against Trump, both

20:55

as a former president, but also as a presidential

20:57

candidate, as a sort of, I think at

20:59

this point, fair to say, a likely Republican

21:03

party presidential nominee.

21:06

When you found out that he was actually indicted,

21:08

that they were going ahead with

21:08

charges, how did you react or how have you

21:11

felt about it since then? Well, I certainly

21:13

wasn't surprised. I think we've

21:16

all been expecting multiple

21:20

indictments for a long time.

21:23

Like so many other people, we've been concerned

21:26

that it took so long

21:28

for the Department of Justice to get

21:31

off its ass. So

21:33

it was no surprise and

21:36

will continue to be known as both Georgia

21:39

and the January 6th investigation

21:41

lead to indictments. My

21:44

primary reaction is

21:47

and has been for months

21:49

to be anxious and worried about

21:51

our country because

21:54

he has the skill of

21:56

a fascist to

21:58

genuinely attract

22:01

people with grievances

22:05

and anger at their

22:07

lives, not being the way they want them to

22:09

be. That's what fascists

22:12

have done through history. The

22:15

phrase, I am your retribution, is

22:18

to me, terrifying

22:20

what's going on in this country with fully

22:23

a third of the people of this country, thinking

22:26

that he is not

22:28

just the

22:30

right guy to have been president, but

22:32

the right guy to be president again.

22:37

That to me is terrifying.

22:40

Even when he's gone,

22:42

a third of the country will probably

22:44

still

22:45

be looking for

22:47

somebody who can persuade

22:50

them that he is their retribution.

22:54

The thought that I will die

22:57

with our country in that

22:59

kind of shape

23:01

is

23:03

the phrase, what keeps you up at night,

23:06

that's what keeps me up at night. Given

23:10

the kind of power that you're describing

23:13

him having and

23:16

the way his power works, the kind of grip

23:18

on people that you're describing, do

23:21

you think that having federal

23:23

charges pending against him is

23:25

a risk to the legal

23:27

system, a risk to the constitutional order,

23:30

or do you think it the opposite? Well, there is

23:32

certainly a risk, but I don't

23:34

see that the country has any viable

23:36

alternative.

23:38

Tim, what was your reaction, or

23:40

what's been your reaction over time as we've seen

23:43

these indictments of Trump? No

23:46

Department of Justice worthy of its name

23:49

could have failed to bring these charges. Those

23:52

charges had to be brought, and yet they

23:54

scare the hell out of me. I

23:57

am terrified that he somehow

23:59

could... be acquitted in the Southern

24:02

District of Florida. I'm

24:04

very suspicious of that

24:07

judge who was so tilted in

24:09

Trump's favor back when the issues

24:12

around the grand jury subpoena were being litigated

24:14

and who was the 11th circuit

24:17

just trumped on her. But

24:20

trying a case in front of a judge who's

24:22

against you,

24:24

those of us who had the pleasure, it

24:27

is hell. And the judges

24:29

against you in lots of ways that are not reversible

24:33

error can ruin your

24:35

case. And if Trump is

24:37

acquitted,

24:39

I think that'll probably elect him president

24:42

again. And for all

24:44

the reasons Barney talked about, that is a terrifying

24:46

prospect

24:48

for our country, for

24:50

my children and my grandchildren. So

24:55

I think the overwhelming

24:56

thing that comes to mind, the overwhelming

24:59

issue is the effect of this

25:01

and other cases on the 2024 presidential

25:04

election. I have no idea

25:06

what the effect is going to be. This

25:08

hasn't played out, but

25:10

it could play out very, very badly.

25:13

If Trump is

25:16

in the classified documents case facing

25:19

a legal situation in

25:21

which things don't look good for him,

25:24

the judge is letting the

25:26

case proceed in a way that is fair

25:28

and sort of straight down the middle and the evidence

25:31

is holding up and looks as strong in the courtroom

25:33

as it does in the indictment. If it's all

25:35

looking bad for Trump and

25:38

he

25:38

conceivably is facing both conviction

25:41

and a prison sentence, should

25:44

the Justice Department offer him a

25:47

plea deal that

25:49

includes trading away the threat

25:52

of jail time for him

25:55

agreeing to never stand for public office again? Ron

25:57

should answer that as brilliantly as he answered in

25:59

a your program the other night. And

26:01

then I'll ask you both to agree with them. The

26:05

answer is no. I

26:08

mean, even if it's

26:10

Trump,

26:11

rather than the Justice Department that

26:13

comes up with the notion

26:16

that foregoing

26:18

a political career should be part of a plea

26:20

deal. And even if it's

26:22

documented and put in writing

26:25

in black and white,

26:26

Trump will tell his

26:29

people you know,

26:31

you see what they did to me? It was their

26:34

idea. They wanted me not to

26:36

run for office. Well, I had

26:38

to take the deal because I had to

26:40

be here available to do

26:42

your bidding. And I'm here even though I'm

26:44

no longer in public office. I'm

26:47

here and I'm your guy. So my

26:49

answer is and has been emphatically

26:52

no.

26:53

Why didn't Agnew try that against you guys?

26:57

Agnew was a crook

27:01

and a bad guy. But

27:03

comparing his behavior

27:07

and his mindset to Trump is

27:09

like comparing, I don't

27:12

know, an astronaut to a six year old child.

27:14

It just doesn't compute. And there's I totally

27:16

agree with Ron's simple conclusion

27:19

that the answer is no. There should be

27:21

no such deal. What Trump

27:23

has going for him

27:25

with regard to any deal is

27:28

that he is a Republican being

27:32

prosecuted under a Democratic

27:34

administration and all

27:36

the all the, you know, weaponization

27:41

and other similar crap that

27:44

he and his apologists can

27:46

make out of that. Agnew

27:48

didn't have that because

27:50

Agnew had a Republican

27:53

admitted he was a Republican being prosecuted

27:55

by a Republican president

27:57

or Republican Department of Justice.

28:00

and a Republican attorney

28:03

general.

28:04

So, you know, that line about, you know,

28:07

politicalization

28:10

and weaponization and so on, that

28:12

just wasn't available tag new and therefore

28:14

was never a consideration. Whereas

28:17

for the reasons Ron has articulated, it's

28:19

not just a consideration, it's

28:22

a very powerful, again, for the third

28:24

of the country that buys this stuff,

28:27

it's a very powerful argument, regardless

28:30

of what the deal says and

28:32

whether it's in writing and whether it has a seal

28:34

on it, you know, he

28:37

will say he

28:37

was forced to do it by

28:40

the bad guys and he's back

28:42

to be your retribution. So I

28:44

totally agree with Ron.

28:47

It would only confirm the belief

28:51

that this prosecution was

28:53

brought politically by a democratic administration

28:56

to knock Trump

28:59

out as Biden's opponent in 2024.

29:03

Agnew did try.

29:05

He had a Republican administration

29:08

or Republican attorney general or Republican

29:10

US attorney, but the three of us were

29:13

all Democrats and he did try and go after

29:15

us. He went after Barney because he'd worked for

29:17

Muskie in the

29:19

primaries

29:21

and he went after me because shield

29:23

your children from this because he thought

29:25

I was a real pinko because I'd been a Peace

29:28

Corps volunteer.

29:29

Ah, no, we have to

29:31

end this right now. I

29:34

remember us being in the

29:36

car with George Bell going

29:39

to Washington when he said to us, you

29:41

know, guys, I never asked you, are you registered

29:44

Republicans or Democrats? Did you tell

29:46

him? And what did you say? Yeah, yeah,

29:48

we told him. He didn't care.

29:53

We have much more to get to in this special episode

29:56

of Bagman. Stay with us.

30:13

Welcome back to our special bonus

30:16

episode of the Bagman Podcast.

30:18

I'm Rachel Maddow. I'm here with producer

30:20

Mike Yarvitz and our guests, former

30:22

federal prosecutors Tim Baker, Barney

30:25

Skolnick, and Ron Liebman. The

30:27

three young federal

30:28

prosecutors who prepared federal

30:31

criminal charges against then

30:33

Vice President Spiro Agnew. So

30:36

we're going to be posting this on

30:38

July 3rd, which

30:41

I believe is the 50-year anniversary

30:43

to

30:46

the day of a scene

30:48

that we described in Bagman, which has stuck with me

30:50

ever since, which was you guys

30:53

crammed into George Bell's

30:56

Audi 100, driving

30:59

from Baltimore

31:00

to Washington, D.C. to

31:03

go meet with Attorney General Elliot Richardson

31:05

for the first time to brief

31:07

him in person on what was going on

31:10

with the Agnew investigation. And

31:12

there was a lot of drama out of the way. We told that in the podcast

31:14

because I think you guys got pulled over. Like

31:17

there was, I mean, there was at least anxiety

31:19

on your part in terms of what the Attorney General was going to

31:21

think. I was wondering,

31:23

on 50 years since that day, if you

31:25

guys could tell us at all what that was

31:28

like when you were going to bring your

31:31

investigation and what you knew to the top of

31:33

the Justice Department, essentially for them to decide

31:35

what they were going to do with it. Well,

31:37

first of all, we were told not to come.

31:40

The Attorney General's secretary called us that

31:42

morning. I think this is the third or fourth time

31:44

that our proposed meeting with Attorney

31:46

General Richardson had been canceled.

31:49

And we were, it was canceled once again. And

31:52

we all decided we got in George's car and

31:54

we came, we went over to Washington and sat

31:57

in his waiting room anyway, even though we were

31:59

told not to be there.

32:01

And Tim, I believe it was you who, you

32:03

know, after you did finally get into

32:06

the attorney general's conference room and he, you

32:08

know, had to step out for various

32:11

calls, ultimately, it

32:13

was you who George Bell turned

32:15

to, I think, to explain

32:18

what exactly you were there for. Is that right? Yes.

32:21

In a lot of ways, our principal concern was that the

32:23

Department of Justice would take our

32:25

case away from us. And

32:28

so the first order of business was

32:30

for George to

32:31

establish our credibility, that we, in fact,

32:33

knew what we were doing. We had credentials,

32:36

we had experience. So George

32:38

started out with that and then Richardson

32:40

would immediately get a note from his secretary,

32:43

get up and leave, and was gone for what, guys, 20

32:46

minutes at one point? And we just

32:48

thought he'd never come back and we never even got

32:50

to even mention the word Agnew.

32:54

So then Barney and Ron remember

32:56

that he finally came back

32:59

and we had said to George, get the Agnew.

33:02

So that's what George blurted out. And we immediately

33:05

had Attorney General Richardson's total

33:07

attention.

33:08

How old were all of you at the time? I

33:10

was the baby. I was 29. I

33:13

was 32, the oldest.

33:14

And I was 31. 32, the

33:16

oldest. Ron,

33:20

can you talk about the months that

33:22

preceded you guys walking into the

33:24

Justice Department?

33:26

You at 29 years old

33:29

were

33:31

involved in some pretty heavy stuff

33:33

for the country and the fate of the presidency.

33:37

What was it like as a 29 year old investigating

33:40

the vice president? Well,

33:41

one of the wonderful aspects of youth

33:44

is you don't really realize

33:46

when you're young that there's something else beside

33:49

it. So I

33:51

really didn't think about that. We were three

33:54

assistant US attorneys with a

33:56

case that grew from

33:58

looking into bribery

34:00

for zoning, for land

34:03

in Maryland, to the Vice President

34:05

of the United States. And we,

34:08

none of us, I think, really thought about

34:11

our age at all. It

34:13

was a job we had to do. We did it.

34:15

And our concern was that,

34:18

having built this case, that

34:21

the Justice Department would

34:23

not let three Baltimore federal prosecutors

34:26

run with it.

34:27

That was what was in our heads. I

34:30

know from talking to you guys

34:32

and from the interviews that we did for Bagman

34:34

that you guys all hold George Bell, your former

34:36

boss, the U.S. attorney,

34:38

in really high esteem in

34:40

general and in terms of how he supervised

34:43

your work and the way that he

34:46

sort of served as a little bit of a heat shield

34:48

for you guys during the Agnew investigation. Obviously,

34:51

George Bell is no longer with us, but this

34:54

is a little bit unfair.

34:54

I wonder what you think that he would

34:57

think of today's Republican Party and the Trump

34:59

phenomenon. You

35:01

know, George Bell was sort of Republican royalty from Maryland.

35:04

I think he would be appalled, absolutely

35:07

appalled. Yeah, as many Republicans

35:10

are. George Bell

35:12

and Eliot Richardson were

35:14

both in

35:16

and or intending to

35:18

be active in Republican

35:22

politics. I have always

35:24

thought that the heroes of the case

35:27

are those two guys who had a great

35:30

deal at stake and they

35:32

and they took the right path, which

35:35

which was at least potentially, and

35:37

I think probably in fact, especially

35:40

as to George, a

35:43

you know, a sacrifice, because

35:46

he was never heard in elective politics

35:50

for the rest of his life, which, you

35:53

know, went on for almost 50 years. He

35:55

died just a few years ago.

35:57

Barney, I don't think George ever wanted to go

35:59

into elective. but he certainly

36:01

looked forward to a career of

36:04

Republican appointments to higher and higher

36:06

offices. And he knew perfectly well

36:09

that his chances of that happening

36:12

would come to an end because of Agnew. And

36:14

that's exactly what did happen to Eliot Richardson.

36:17

He never again held

36:18

a high kind of political

36:21

office in Republican administrations. He

36:23

got the throwaway jobs, and that

36:25

was all because of Agnew, the part

36:27

of the Republican Party that never forgave

36:29

him.

36:30

And he knew it, and George knew it, and they didn't

36:32

blink. Think how fortunate

36:35

Barney, Timmy, and I were to

36:37

report to both George Bell and

36:40

Eliot Richardson.

36:42

Absolutely. I wonder what

36:44

will happen to those Republicans who are

36:46

speaking up against Trump now,

36:49

Romney.

36:50

William Barr, Trump's

36:53

attorney general, has ridiculed

36:56

Trump's post defense to these

36:58

documents charges. And Chris Christie

37:00

is all over him

37:02

about all kinds of things. And

37:04

let's see who joins

37:07

them on this. Well, a lot more Republicans

37:09

need to do it.

37:11

You guys were describing how

37:13

Eliot Richardson and George Bell, your bosses,

37:16

took a much bigger risk than you did as individuals.

37:20

But you did get singled

37:22

out and attacked by the vice president,

37:25

and he sort of tried

37:27

to train the ire

37:30

of his supporters against

37:32

you guys for being Democrats, for somehow being

37:35

biased and trying to take him out. Was

37:37

that a cause of stress for you in the moment? And

37:39

you reflected all in terms of the prosecutors,

37:41

people like Jack Smith, who are getting

37:42

so much criticism from defendant Trump right

37:44

now. Do you have any advice for them? Well, Ron put

37:47

it well a couple of weeks ago when he said

37:49

you put your head down and you ignore the noise.

37:52

I think that's exactly right. And I'm

37:55

sure that's exactly what Jack

37:57

Smith is doing.

37:59

The

38:01

threat of violence is

38:04

the thing that

38:06

you can't not be aware of, but

38:08

the prosecutors are not

38:10

in the position to do anything directly about

38:12

that. They have to rely on the

38:15

security organizations

38:17

and so on. But I

38:20

seriously doubt that Jack

38:22

Smith or any of the other prosecutors are worried

38:26

about being personally attacked verbally.

38:30

Jack Smith from what I've seen on TV

38:33

has real armed security

38:35

with him because

38:37

the times are different and he needs

38:40

it. In 1973,

38:43

we didn't. We

38:47

just didn't. You didn't have a secret

38:49

service guard on you all run. I

38:52

mean, Mr. Forgotten that. You

38:55

guys had it and I did. Now you tell

38:57

me. We thought nobody's going to attack

38:59

you. That's right. They

39:02

only had two agents, I can spare.

39:06

Now you tell

39:08

me, Jesus. It's like running

39:10

from a bear. You don't have to be faster than the bear.

39:13

You just have to be faster than Ron. That's

39:17

right. Rachel, one of

39:19

the things we've talked about a little bit in the years

39:22

since, but never even thought about at

39:24

the time, which supposing

39:26

the Saturday night massacre in

39:29

which Eliot Richardson lost his job, supposing

39:31

that had occurred 10 days before

39:34

the plea deal was struck rather

39:36

than 10 days afterwards. So suddenly

39:39

our

39:40

protector and our hero is gone.

39:44

And supposing Nixon puts in a new

39:47

John Mitchell who says to

39:49

us very politely, well, of course, he has to review

39:52

the case and then just send

39:54

everything over and I'll look at it and days go

39:56

by, weeks go by, months

39:59

go by.

39:59

and every time we inquire, we're kind

40:02

of put off. Supposing we

40:04

decided to go ahead and bring an indictment

40:06

anyway. Of course, that

40:08

would have been an unauthorized indictment, but

40:10

we would have said that they're covering it

40:13

up over there and we're not gonna

40:15

let that happen. The grand jury agrees. So

40:17

here's an

40:19

unauthorized indictment. Do your worst.

40:22

And that would have been our last official

40:24

act. You bet, we'd have been fired that

40:26

day and probably disbarred. To

40:29

me, I love when you talk dirty. Yes.

40:33

Well, that would have been exciting. Very exciting.

40:36

That's one way to put it, yep, yep.

40:38

What would a judge do with an unauthorized

40:40

indictment? I'm just trying to imagine being the

40:42

judge in that circumstance, saying, this is just for you three

40:45

guys as citizens? It's a citizen's

40:46

indictment. No, no, the grand jury. Grand jury would

40:49

have returned it, but it wouldn't have been signed as

40:52

federal indictments have to be, wouldn't have been signed

40:54

by an authorized representative of

40:56

the Department of Justice. The purpose of it would

40:58

have been like a gigantic press release.

41:02

And the press conference would have said, this

41:04

is the Nixon administration doing it all

41:06

over again. They're covering it up. Imagine

41:09

the firestorm.

41:10

And then we would have gone home to our spouses

41:13

and said, I've got good news and

41:15

I've got bad news. That's crazy.

41:20

Would George Bell have signed that indictment?

41:22

Would he have been considered an authorized representative

41:25

of the Justice Department? No, he was not

41:27

authorized. And I don't think we would have included

41:30

him just out of respect, not asking

41:32

him to go along.

41:33

He would have been as surprised as everybody else and

41:36

probably just as mad. But what

41:38

else could we have done? I feel

41:40

a little bit like this time in history is

41:43

this moment that's training us to push

41:46

ourselves further and further into the what

41:49

if territory, because all the things

41:52

that were previously unthinkable just keep

41:54

happening. All the things that

41:56

seemed like, oh, that would pose a constitutional

41:58

crisis. And then who knows what would happen. We're

42:00

now in the who knows what would happen bit of

42:03

territory. It

42:05

seems like over and over again, a lot during the Trump

42:07

presidency, but a lot right now with

42:10

these prosecutions and with this 2024 campaign,

42:12

I guess as just kind of a

42:15

closing discussion

42:17

here. I think a lot of Americans

42:20

right now can see

42:22

that we are in what if territory, see that we

42:24

are in what feels like unprecedented territory

42:27

or at least potential crisis territory. And

42:29

it can't feel scary. It

42:32

can feel worrying or confusing.

42:34

It can make you want to withdraw and not pay attention

42:37

because it feels overwhelming. If you think

42:38

there's a prospect for a

42:40

civil war or some other terrible eventuality

42:43

that you never thought you'd have to face in your life and that now seems

42:45

possible,

42:48

it can be upsetting or innovating.

42:52

And I wonder if you have anything to say, having been through a

42:54

crisis of your own that you guys were intimately

42:56

involved in and part of the decision makers about, I just

42:59

wonder if you have any thoughts for people, anything you'd share

43:00

with them about those kind of being

43:03

involved in a big thing for your country where you really don't

43:05

know how it's going to end. Well,

43:08

we sort of addressed this earlier

43:11

in this discussion. On

43:14

the one hand, this could

43:17

destroy our country and our democracy.

43:22

The rabble, the crowds could overtake

43:25

the government. On the other

43:27

hand, as I indicated,

43:29

I believe, I think this is

43:32

another crisis. It's a major crisis.

43:34

A lot of moving parts, a lot of

43:36

things unanticipated

43:38

are

43:39

going to happen.

43:41

But I

43:43

think and I believe that the country

43:45

gets through this. Trump will be

43:48

remembered in history unkindly

43:50

as he should. And

43:53

then we'll be on to the next crisis.

43:56

Jimmy Barney, what do you guys think? I don't disagree

43:58

with the proposition that we'll. get through

44:00

this as a country. But

44:05

I do

44:06

really worry about

44:09

what

44:11

happens to the country after Trump

44:14

is gone, but

44:16

there are still

44:18

something like a third of the

44:21

country looking

44:23

for the next fellow who

44:26

says, give me power

44:28

and I will fix your problems. I

44:32

mean, to the extent that that's a siren song

44:34

that works and

44:37

has worked throughout history, it

44:40

doesn't stop

44:43

singing to some people just because

44:45

Trump personally is gone. And

44:49

that continues for me

44:51

to be a

44:52

real concern. I am not

44:55

as sanguine as you all are that

44:57

Trump cannot

44:59

and will not win the 2024 election and

45:02

become president again. I

45:04

think he's got a shot at it.

45:07

I don't underestimate it at all and

45:09

the consequences of that will be a disaster

45:12

for our country.

45:14

I really worry about it. Tim,

45:17

here's the part where you say, but here's

45:19

the reason why you shouldn't despair. Yeah,

45:22

over to you, Tim. If he becomes

45:24

president again, I despair. Oh,

45:27

great. It's not like the Agnew case

45:31

established some kind of standing DOJ

45:33

policy that a sitting president can't be indicted.

45:36

Well, the question is, what if a

45:39

man is elected president who has been

45:41

indicted and who has been convicted? Nobody

45:43

knows the answer to that.

45:45

I know that you guys think that George Bell

45:47

and Elliot Richardson were

45:49

the real heroes, but you guys did both very

45:52

good work and had

45:54

some heroics of your own. I also

45:57

feel like the Agnew story is understandably

46:00

overshadowed by what happened in Watergate, but I think

46:03

it's an important part of how we should think about the Justice

46:06

Department contending with the rule of law versus

46:08

political power. We are

46:10

very lucky as a country that you guys

46:13

at the nucleus of that story comported yourself

46:16

with such skill and such dignity.

46:18

Because if you were jerks or

46:21

if you'd made a bunch of mistakes, it would be harder

46:23

to tell that story. But because

46:25

you did it right. And again,

46:27

you comported yourself with such professionalism

46:29

and dignity in

46:31

a way that really stands up to history.

46:34

We get to tell that history in a way that is unapologetic

46:37

and I think still really illuminating and it keeps

46:39

coming up as newly relevant. So

46:42

I'm just happy that you guys are willing to talk to me and Mike.

46:46

Tim Baker, Ron Liebman, Barney

46:48

Skolnick. It

46:51

is an honor to talk

46:53

to you guys. All right, fellas.

46:56

Thank you.

47:01

So that's going to do it for us on this special

47:03

bonus episode of Bag Man. Bag

47:05

Man is a production of MSNBC

47:07

and NBC

47:07

News. It's executive produced by

47:10

myself and Mike Yarvitz. This episode

47:12

was written and produced by Kelsey Desiderio.

47:14

Our associate producer is Jumares Perez. Sound

47:17

design by Cedric Wilson. Our technical

47:19

director is Bryson Barnes. Our senior

47:21

executive producers are Corey Nazo and Laura

47:24

Conaway. Our web producer is Will

47:26

Femia. And you can read more about

47:28

the investigation into Spiro Agnew. You

47:30

can listen to all seven episodes of Bag

47:32

Man at our website, msnbc.com

47:34

slash bagman.

47:55

I'm just sick about it. I think he's

47:57

a man of his word and I think they've all been doing

47:59

it. the same thing for

48:01

ever since I started voting and I think it's

48:04

just too bad. I think he's a great man.

48:06

I thought he was one of the greatest men that this country

48:08

has ever had.

48:09

What is your reaction to the resignation? I

48:12

think it's a sad thing. I think it was very

48:14

unnecessary. I'm just sick. I'm

48:17

very unhappy. I don't think it was necessary. I

48:19

think it's a lot of political hogwash and

48:22

I'm... Oh!

48:30

Today's news can feel like uncharted

48:32

waters. But more often than

48:34

you think, we're not the first generation to

48:36

confront what we're dealing with today. We're

48:38

just the first generation to make a podcast about

48:40

it. I'm Rachel Maddow. I'm Isaac Davy

48:42

Aronson. Each week we'll bring you a story from

48:45

history.

48:45

That helps with something in the headlines

48:47

today. Rachel Maddow

48:50

presents Déjà News with Isaac

48:52

Davy Aronson, an MSNBC

48:54

podcast. Search for Déjà

48:56

News wherever you're listening and follow.