Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast.
Speaker 2: Catch Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Appocarplay.
Speaker 3: And then roud Otto with the Bloomberg Business app.
Speaker 2: Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch
Speaker 2: us live on YouTube.
Speaker 4: We are bringing you the latest on the indictment of
Speaker 4: sitting New York City Mayor Eric Adams, who has been
Speaker 4: indicted on a number of federal charges, including wirefraud, bribery,
Speaker 4: and solicitation of a contribution by a foreign national. All
Speaker 4: of this is in this fifty seven page federal indictment
Speaker 4: that was unsealed today after first being reported last evening.
Speaker 4: And as we've mentioned, Eric Adams is not intending at
Speaker 4: this point to resign. He says he will continue with
Speaker 4: his day to day work serving as mayor of New
Speaker 4: York City and is looking forward to defending himself against
Speaker 4: these charges. But we want to dig into what exactly
Speaker 4: these charges entail now and turn to June Grosso, who
Speaker 4: is the host of Bloomberg Law. This indictment is certainly
Speaker 4: something to behold.
Speaker 5: June.
Speaker 4: There's a number of allegations listed in here related to
Speaker 4: things like air travel, for example, on Turkish airlines. According
Speaker 4: to this indictment, and Adam staff are actually texting with
Speaker 4: an airline official about the price of a ticket, the
Speaker 4: airline manager asking how much should be charged. After floating
Speaker 4: fifty dollars, the staffer says, his every step is being
Speaker 4: watched right now one thousand dollars or so, let it
Speaker 4: be somewhat real. We don't want them to say he
Speaker 4: is flying for free with that kind of detailed June
Speaker 4: just how damning is this indictment?
Speaker 6: Well, it is very damning, and I want to call
Speaker 6: it a speaking indictment. So anyone could read this and
Speaker 6: see what the prosecution, what the US Attorney's office alleges happened.
Speaker 6: It's a very simple indictment to read. You don't need
Speaker 6: to be a lawyer to look into it. So, and
Speaker 6: it outlined all the different trips he took or upgrades
Speaker 6: got from Turkish airlines and Turkish businessmen. I think what's
Speaker 6: interesting about the quote that you just read. There are
Speaker 6: a lot of quotes of texts between Adams staffers and
Speaker 6: Turkish officials, unnamed Turkish officials or businessmen, but there are
Speaker 6: very few of Adams himself. There are some references to
Speaker 6: Adams saying something like I'll handle that. But that stood
Speaker 6: out to me because if the US Attorney's Office had
Speaker 6: those texts of Adams himself, I think they'd be in
Speaker 6: this indictment front and center. So that may be something
Speaker 6: that the Adams defense can work with. But I mean
Speaker 6: there's a lot of sort of what you'd consider undeniable evidence.
Speaker 6: And there's also not only that he took this, but
Speaker 6: that he created a straw map sort of to try
Speaker 6: a fake map to try to think that try to
Speaker 6: make people think that he had paid for this. So
Speaker 6: he created a paper trail. That's those are the two
Speaker 6: words I want. He created a paper trail or tried
Speaker 6: to create a paper trail. So that is really something
Speaker 6: that a jury could, you know, latch onto and say, well,
Speaker 6: obviously he knew what was going on if he's trying
Speaker 6: to create a paper trail to cover it up. So
Speaker 6: there's a lot of evidence here. And what also stands
Speaker 6: out is that he abused the New York City, the
Speaker 6: New York Matching Funds program where and I think they
Speaker 6: said to the extent of ten million dollars where where
Speaker 6: the York will match the donations you get. I believe
Speaker 6: it's three dollars to one dollar, so that equal very quick.
Speaker 6: And what comes out is this was you know, the
Speaker 6: travel is one thing, and that goes back a decade,
Speaker 6: but this was about getting money for him to run
Speaker 6: for office in New York. I mean, you don't see
Speaker 6: a lot of oh he got a goal watch from someone,
Speaker 6: or you know, personal except for the travel sort of
Speaker 6: personal benefits. It's about him trying to become mayor of
Speaker 6: New York and the cost of that and and what
Speaker 6: he needed to do. So it's it's very and I
Speaker 6: just want to say he has hired a celebrity entertainment,
Speaker 6: very very good attorney, Alex Spiro. He represented different points,
Speaker 6: Jay z Elon Musk. He's one of Elon Musk's favorite attorney,
Speaker 6: Alec Baldwin. So he's got already the you know, the
Speaker 6: top of criminal defense lawyers who's already put out statements
Speaker 6: about how this was a setup and it was a
Speaker 6: dog and pony show at Gracie Manson this morning. I mean,
Speaker 6: why did they have to raid Gracie Manchin. They already
Speaker 6: had his phones and texts and the and the mayor
Speaker 6: said he would turn over whatever they wanted.
Speaker 4: So a lot there, Well, it is a lot. And
Speaker 4: I wonder what kind of collective penalty if he's actually
Speaker 4: found guilty of these crimes. He'd be looking at here too.
Speaker 6: You know, I don't know what the what the crimes,
Speaker 6: what the penalties would be. I mean, you've got to
Speaker 6: believe it's it's decades. But but of course this is
Speaker 6: something that you know, we always talk about. They're facing
Speaker 6: one hundred years in prison, and no one gets that.
Speaker 6: It's the judge will look at he has no prior convictions. Obviously,
Speaker 6: he's the mayor of a large city, and the judge
Speaker 6: would look at that and compare it. I mean, I
Speaker 6: can't believe, but we're really jumping the gun here because
Speaker 6: we have to go through I mean, he hasn't even
Speaker 6: been arranged yet. And that was another thing that his
Speaker 6: campaign brought out that you know, how they learned about this,
Speaker 6: and they complained about leaks from the US Attorney's Office
Speaker 6: of Grand Jury Information. The mayor mentioned that as well
Speaker 6: as his attorney mentioned that in a statement. So it's
Speaker 6: a long way from conviction, but this is the same
Speaker 6: office that just won conviction against former Senator Bob Menendez,
Speaker 6: So public corruption is something that they do rather well here.
Speaker 4: Yeah, bribery charges of course in play in that case
Speaker 4: as well. June Grosso, host a Bloomberg Lab will be
Speaker 4: staying on top of this story for us all day
Speaker 4: here on Bloomberg Radio. We appreciate it very much and
Speaker 4: we want to add another voice to this conversation now.
Speaker 4: I'm please to say joining me is Nick Ackerman, former
Speaker 4: Watergate prosecutor, founder of the law Office of Nick Ackerman,
Speaker 4: the former assistant US Attorney.
Speaker 3: Nick.
Speaker 4: Always great to see you. I almost struggle with where
Speaker 4: to begin in this as we've been discussing extended indictment.
Speaker 4: I guess the question is, given the stature of this defendant,
Speaker 4: in particular, a sitting mayor of the largest city in
Speaker 4: the country, how rock solid would the prosecution have needed
Speaker 4: to feel this case was in order to bring these
Speaker 4: charges forward.
Speaker 7: Well, considering who the defendant is, they would have to
Speaker 7: feel extremely comfortable on the evidence. And it's pretty obvious
Speaker 7: from reading this indictment that they do. They lay it
Speaker 7: out in such detail. This is not a one shot deal.
Speaker 7: This goes over a period of time, starting when he
Speaker 7: was the involved in politics. You know a number of
Speaker 7: years ago, in twenty fourteen when he was the Brooklyn
Speaker 7: Bureau President. I mean, this goes way back. You've got
Speaker 7: very detailed evidence. You can pick out who the witnesses are,
Speaker 7: you can pick out where the emails are, you can
Speaker 7: pick out exactly who's testifying. This is absolutely looks like
Speaker 7: on the surface and overwhelming case for conviction.
Speaker 4: Well, I wonder how long it would take to actually
Speaker 4: get to that point, though, Nick and I would just
Speaker 4: point out we have a headline crossing the terminal now
Speaker 4: that Adams is entitled to the presumption of innocence. This
Speaker 4: is according to the Democratic leader in the House, Hackeen Jeffries,
Speaker 4: of course, a member from the state of New York.
Speaker 4: He says, the indictment of a sitting mayor is a
Speaker 4: serious and sober moment for New York City. Like every
Speaker 4: other New Yorker and American, Eric Adams is entitled to
Speaker 4: that presumption of innocence. That principle is central to the
Speaker 4: administration of justice in the United States of America. He
Speaker 4: goes on to say, in the meantime, I pray for
Speaker 4: the well being of our great city. So with that
Speaker 4: kind of political consideration, in minds here, Nick, it is
Speaker 4: worth pointing out that we're talking about a sitting mayor
Speaker 4: of New York who has been indicted. We are also
Speaker 4: talking about a Republican presidential candidate, the nominee, who has
Speaker 4: not just been indicted, but in fact convicted in the
Speaker 4: state of New York and indicted on a number of
Speaker 4: other crimes. What does this say about the political moment
Speaker 4: we are in when we're dealing with leaders at the
Speaker 4: highest levels who are so entangled in legal battles.
Speaker 7: Well, I'm not sure there's something general you can take
Speaker 7: out of this. I mean, this has been going on
Speaker 7: for years. I used to be an assistant UTI's attorney
Speaker 7: in a southern district of New York. Public officials were indicted.
Speaker 7: Back then, I was involved in the Watergate prosecution. We
Speaker 7: would have indicted the president but for his pardon. All
Speaker 7: of his aides were in guided and spent time in jail.
Speaker 7: This has been going on for a long time, despite
Speaker 7: the fact that the Department of Justice and local das
Speaker 7: have been vigilant in going after public corruption. I think
Speaker 7: even though Maar Adams does have the presumption of innocence here,
Speaker 7: the political problem posed by this indictment is overwhelming in
Speaker 7: the sense that it doesn't just allege general violations of law.
Speaker 7: It gives very specific dates, times, places, benefits that he
Speaker 7: received in terms of travel, certain actions he did in
Speaker 7: return for those benefits that related to the New York
Speaker 7: City Fire Department, the New York City Buildings Department. It
Speaker 7: is so detailed it is hard to imagine under these
Speaker 7: circumstances that he can continue as mayor.
Speaker 2: Well.
Speaker 4: He though says that he will and that his day
Speaker 4: to day won't change. I guess you might take issue
Speaker 4: with that notion when you're fighting a legal battle like
Speaker 4: this one a bit. But it goes back to the
Speaker 4: original question I wanted to ask you about timing. How
Speaker 4: long would you expect this process to play out? Considering,
Speaker 4: as June pointed out to us, he has not yet
Speaker 4: been arraigned, no arrest has taken place, or anything like that.
Speaker 4: How long will it take for this to reach conclusion?
Speaker 4: Would you estimate?
Speaker 7: Oh, I think it's going to take at least six months,
Speaker 7: possibly a year. First of all, he's got to be arranged.
Speaker 7: He's going to plead not guilty. I presume based on
Speaker 7: his statements. There's then going to be pre trial motions.
Speaker 7: There's going to be discovery that takes a long time.
Speaker 7: My senses from reading this indictment, there's lots of witnesses,
Speaker 7: there's lots of documents. He has the right to have
Speaker 7: all of that material beforehand. Then after he gets all
Speaker 7: those documents, will be a time period for motions to
Speaker 7: be made, and then ultimately the judge will have to
Speaker 7: decide on those motions. That takes time. This is not
Speaker 7: an uncomplicated case. In some ways, it's pretty straightforward and simple,
Speaker 7: but it's got a lot of witnesses, a lot of documents.
Speaker 7: I'm not sure there's too many legal issues here just
Speaker 7: looking at this indictment. This is going to be a
Speaker 7: hard one to get dismissed based on the face of
Speaker 7: the indictment, but they're going to try, and all of
Speaker 7: this does take time, and it just seems to me,
Speaker 7: based on the granularity of the allegations here and what's
Speaker 7: been identified, I think it's going to be very hard
Speaker 7: for him to continue acting as mayor despite what he's saying. Now,
Speaker 7: he can say whatever he wants, but I think that
Speaker 7: once the reporters and the press start digging into the
Speaker 7: granularity of what is in here and identifying who the
Speaker 7: people are, the incidents that relate, for example, to the
Speaker 7: Turkish government building that he gave preference to with the
Speaker 7: fire department. All of these things can be verified by
Speaker 7: the press, and I think the more of this that
Speaker 7: comes out, the harder it is for him to be
Speaker 7: governing as mayor of New York.
Speaker 4: Well, of course, he doesn't govern alone either. There is
Speaker 4: a whole city government to consider here as well. And
Speaker 4: we have seen nick the resignations of some city officials,
Speaker 4: others who have had who are close to Adams, who
Speaker 4: have had their homes rated, for example, as a prosecutor,
Speaker 4: how important should we be considering those other individuals into
Speaker 4: the ultimate case the prosecution will make here This idea
Speaker 4: that people could maybe roll on him, Is that what
Speaker 4: you would be trying to achieve if you were the
Speaker 4: Southern district of New York right now?
Speaker 7: Oh, no question, that's what they're trying to do. And
Speaker 7: it doesn't sound like this just relates to campaign contributions.
Speaker 7: It sounds like this is much broader than campaign contributions,
Speaker 7: that some of these other people who have resigned have
Speaker 7: done other things. The question is what is the evidence
Speaker 7: on Mayor Adams. What will they say about Mayor Adams
Speaker 7: if they make a deal with the government. There's just
Speaker 7: so many people involved, so many people have resigned over
Speaker 7: the last couple of months. We don't really know the
Speaker 7: complete scope and breath of what's out there, but I
Speaker 7: think we're going to learn that as it goes along.
Speaker 7: But yes, I think he's in a whole world have
Speaker 7: hurt here because there's just too much There's too many
Speaker 7: people that can come forward and testify against him.
Speaker 4: And if this goes to jury trial, which I'm assuming
Speaker 4: is what the course of action will take us to here,
Speaker 4: how complicated is it to try to see a jury
Speaker 4: in the city of New York when it's the mayor
Speaker 4: of New York in question. These are his constituents, some
Speaker 4: of them may be people who voted for him. How
Speaker 4: complicated is this likely to get?
Speaker 3: Nick?
Speaker 7: Well, I don't think it's going to be complicated. Look,
Speaker 7: they were able to set get a jury for Donald Trump,
Speaker 7: who is the former president United States, and it didn't
Speaker 7: take more couple of days to do that. It's all
Speaker 7: done in the questioning of the jurors, which is known
Speaker 7: as the vaidere to determine whether anybody has any preconceived
Speaker 7: notions or prejudices. This can all be done pretty quickly.
Speaker 7: You'd be surprised how many people have not focused on this,
Speaker 7: don't know anything about it, and are going to be
Speaker 7: clueless as to the facts of the case. And we'll
Speaker 7: be able to serve as good jurors on this case.
Speaker 7: So I don't see that being any kind of major
Speaker 7: obstacle in terms of delay, mainly because Donald Trump they
Speaker 7: were able to get a jury on him in less
Speaker 7: than two days. I mean, this shouldn't be any different.
Speaker 4: Well, fair enough, and of course Donald Trump was convicted
Speaker 4: on thirty four felony charges in New York earlier this year.
Speaker 4: This is still an indictment. He does carry the presumption
Speaker 4: of innotance. Finally, it before we let you go here,
Speaker 4: would you expect that because we've had this conversation in
Speaker 4: the Donald Trump case as well. If Eric Adams were
Speaker 4: to be found guilty of any or all of these crimes,
Speaker 4: could he serve time in prison?
Speaker 5: Oh?
Speaker 7: Absolutely, I mean, it all depends on the federal sentencing guidelines.
Speaker 7: You'd have to look at the guidelines for each of
Speaker 7: these violations. You've got wire fraud, a fraud on the
Speaker 7: City of New York for being able to get matching
Speaker 7: funds from the city. You've got bribery and other violations here.
Speaker 7: That it all depends on the federal sentencing guidelines and
Speaker 7: they what amounts of money involved, the seriousness of the crime,
Speaker 7: et cetera. So there's no way to know what that
Speaker 7: will be at the point, but it's serious, all right.
Speaker 4: Nick Ackerman, former Watergate prosecutor, thank you so much as
Speaker 4: always for joining us on this historic day as a
Speaker 4: sitting mayor of New York City is indicted on federal charges.
Speaker 4: Will have much more still ahead here on Balance of Power.
Speaker 1: On Bloomberg, you're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power
Speaker 1: podcast Ken Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern CarPlay.
Speaker 3: And then ron Otto with the Bloomberg Business app.
Speaker 2: You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our
Speaker 2: flagship New York station, Just Say Alexa playing Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 4: The indictment of New York City Mayor Eric Adams on
Speaker 4: bribery and fraud charges. He, of course, in the face
Speaker 4: of those is saying he looks forward to defending himself
Speaker 4: and will continue to serve as mayor. Of New York City,
Speaker 4: despite some calls from both Republicans and Democrats who represent
Speaker 4: New York and Congress for him to resign. Not an
Speaker 4: outright call for that though from the House Democratic Leader
Speaker 4: Hakeim Jeffries, who of course represents a district in New
Speaker 4: York City. He says the indictment of a sitting mayor
Speaker 4: is a serious and sober moment for New York City.
Speaker 4: Like every American, other New Yorker and American. Rather, Eric
Speaker 4: Adams is entitled to the presumption of innocence. So we
Speaker 4: wanted to get into this now with our political panel
Speaker 4: joining me today as Rick Davis, Bloomberg Politics contributor and
Speaker 4: Republican strategists, together with our Democratic strategists today Caitlin Lagaki
Speaker 4: Kitlyn and as the Democrat I have to come to
Speaker 4: you first. What is the responsible way for Democrats to
Speaker 4: be responding to this. Frankly one Democrat in particular, Eric Adam.
Speaker 4: Should he resign?
Speaker 8: Yes? I mean, if you read even the first page
Speaker 8: of his indictment, it's pretty alarming stuff. I expect that
Speaker 8: Leader Jeffries is working the phones pretty aggressively to help
Speaker 8: move Adams to the right decision. You know, I think
Speaker 8: we would all get a lot of short term satisfaction
Speaker 8: from Jeffries coming out immediately and calling on him to
Speaker 8: step aside. But you know, what I have seen previously
Speaker 8: is that it's just typically a lot more effective to
Speaker 8: work behind the scenes and get these people to step
Speaker 8: aside then to call on them publicly. So, you know,
Speaker 8: I fully expect that's what he's doing. And the indictment
Speaker 8: is so bad that I can't imagine that it lasts
Speaker 8: longer than a few days.
Speaker 4: Well, Caitlin, just to follow up if he does not
Speaker 4: do it, though, if he cannot be convinced to resign,
Speaker 4: what resign? What do you expect the consequences will be
Speaker 4: for other Democrats who represent New York and its surrounding areas,
Speaker 4: some of who might find themselves in tough races this cycle.
Speaker 8: Yeah, you know, I hope that Eric Adams, you know,
Speaker 8: for once, does the right thing and he steps aside.
Speaker 8: There are a handful of congressional seats in suburban New
Speaker 8: York City that are clear toss ups, and if Eric
Speaker 8: Adams's goal is to help Republicans hold those seats, then yes,
Speaker 8: he should stay in office. But I think he's going
Speaker 8: to be in self preservation mode. I wouldn't be surprised
Speaker 8: if he starts aligning himself with some characters who are unsavory,
Speaker 8: but who also argue that they are persecuted by the government.
Speaker 8: But you know, I don't think it has a huge
Speaker 8: impact on individual races. But it's just a distraction that
Speaker 8: cuts away from the narrative that these candidates want to
Speaker 8: be driving in their own races, and it undermines confidence
Speaker 8: in government, which I think is bad for everyone.
Speaker 4: Well, and Rick, on that point, I would love to
Speaker 4: bring you in on that. We're talking about the sitting
Speaker 4: mayor of New York City who is now under federal
Speaker 4: criminal indictment. At the same time, we have a Republican
Speaker 4: presidential nominee who is under multiple indictments, in fact, has
Speaker 4: been convicted on charges in the state of New York already.
Speaker 4: What kind of moment in politics are we in right now?
Speaker 9: A very litigious moment in politics. It seems to me
Speaker 9: most of the election yeer has been defined by indictments.
Speaker 9: Don't forget Senator from New Jersey also, Yes, I mean,
Speaker 9: you know, it just goes on and on, and I
Speaker 9: would say this is an era that we are suffering through.
Speaker 9: Maybe there's a level of.
Speaker 3: Corruption and.
Speaker 9: Misbehavior that the era is going to be known for,
Speaker 9: but it's not positive. And I think Caitlin's right. I
Speaker 9: think that, you know, I come from an era, maybe
Speaker 9: bygone era, where a politician like Eric and Adams would
Speaker 9: look at this and say, you know what, I can't
Speaker 9: do my job effectively for the people of New York.
Speaker 9: I want to live to fight another day. Clear my name.
Speaker 9: So I'm going to step down, you know, and clear
Speaker 9: my name and then come back hard. And there are
Speaker 9: examples where that has worked. And of course he's not
Speaker 9: going to do that, not without a massive campaign with
Speaker 9: people like you know, the House Minority Leader Hakim Jefferies,
Speaker 9: who is a colleague from New York, who didn't take
Speaker 9: the opportunity to make that suggestion today. It'll be interesting
Speaker 9: to see how long it takes to get him to
Speaker 9: that point, because it is a massive political distraction in
Speaker 9: what is otherwise a intensely watched campaign around the country.
Speaker 9: And a day we're talking about Eric Adams is a
Speaker 9: day we're not talking about congressional candidates who have got
Speaker 9: tight races in New York or the presidential race. So
Speaker 9: it is legitimately a distraction of the people in New York.
Speaker 4: Well, and I wonder about how it plays more broadly
Speaker 4: as well. Caitlin, just quickly here, Kamala Harris is running
Speaker 4: in part as a prosecutor. What should she be saying
Speaker 4: in response to this? Does she have a role to play?
Speaker 8: You know, I think she has a role to play
Speaker 8: in terms of fighting for the rule of law. I
Speaker 8: think that's where you'll see her draw a clear contrast,
Speaker 8: is that she believes that we live in a country
Speaker 8: where everyone is equally accountable to the law, whereas Donald
Speaker 8: Trump does not. I don't think she's going to want
Speaker 8: to weigh in on the individual allegations just because she
Speaker 8: understands as a prosecutor that you don't want to get
Speaker 8: in the middle of an ongoing legal process. But I
Speaker 8: do think that, you know, she is a prosecutor, She
Speaker 8: has a strong record on this, and I it gives
Speaker 8: her another opportunity to remind voters of whom possibly still
Speaker 8: don't know that Donald Trump has been indicted, that there
Speaker 8: is a clear distinction there, and that she's going to
Speaker 8: continue to make that.
Speaker 4: Argument, all right, Caitlin Lagaki and Rick Davis, our Political
Speaker 4: panel today. Thank you so much. We'll have much more
Speaker 4: with them in our next hour of Balance of Power.
Speaker 4: But we want to turn out a representative in Congress
Speaker 4: from the state of New York. Congresswoman Nicole Maliatakis is
Speaker 4: with me now. She represents New York's eleventh Congressional district.
Speaker 4: Her constituency covers Staten Island and southern Brooklyn, so areas
Speaker 4: of New York that are very much affected by this news. Congresswoman,
Speaker 4: thank you so much for joining us here on balance
Speaker 4: of power. You already have called today for either the
Speaker 4: resignation of Eric Adams or his removal by Governor Hochel.
Speaker 4: Why exactly does he need to resign with not being
Speaker 4: found yet guilty of these crimes when Donald Trump is
Speaker 4: still running for president, haven't been felt guilty of crimes
Speaker 4: and indicted on many others.
Speaker 10: Well, first of all, we have a city right now
Speaker 10: that is in peril, and I think that this is
Speaker 10: a major distraction for the mayor. I think the mayor
Speaker 10: needs to focus on these serious charges. You have to
Speaker 10: remember that there are multiple people within his cabinet that
Speaker 10: have resigned, So I think this is really the tip
Speaker 10: of the iceberg. But it has made this city really failing.
Speaker 10: It's failing and people are suffering as a result. We
Speaker 10: have so many problems right now, skyrocketing crime, We have
Speaker 10: this mass illegal migration.
Speaker 11: We have our hotels have been taken over with these lucrative.
Speaker 10: Contracts to re operated as migrant shelters, and the people
Speaker 10: in them are committing crimes and they are wreaking havoc
Speaker 10: in our city, rapes, shooting at police officers. We have
Speaker 10: an education system that is failing and a chancellor that
Speaker 10: just said he was going to resign at the end
Speaker 10: of the year. We have a police commissioner recently resigned
Speaker 10: when we have serious public safety issues. So the city
Speaker 10: is becoming completely mismanaged and the mayor is distracted, and
Speaker 10: the best thing for him to do is to step.
Speaker 11: Aside to deal with these issues, and that is I
Speaker 11: think the best thing for the city.
Speaker 10: Although I am concerned that we may end up with
Speaker 10: somebody worse than Mayor Adams, but I think it's the
Speaker 10: right thing to do if we are going to have
Speaker 10: any hope of restoring some sanity to this city, to
Speaker 10: make it governorable again, and to really give New Yorkers
Speaker 10: the government that it deserves.
Speaker 4: Well, of course, if he does choose to resign, which
Speaker 4: at this point he maintains he will not, acting mayor
Speaker 4: would be put into place, then a special election would
Speaker 4: be held to choose a replacement. Congressman, would you be
Speaker 4: interested in the role should it be vacated?
Speaker 11: Okay, you know I ran in twenty seventeen.
Speaker 10: People have made it clear they don't necessarily want a
Speaker 10: Republican being the mayor of New York City. I think
Speaker 10: that we have to, though, collectively, find a candidate that
Speaker 10: is palatable across the political spectrum, somebody that could have
Speaker 10: a like a business background, somebody who can really take
Speaker 10: the problems that we're facing as a city and bring
Speaker 10: some management.
Speaker 11: One of the biggest problems facing our city right.
Speaker 10: Now is the fact that they're contracting hundreds of billions
Speaker 10: of dollars out to nonprofit organizations. This is work that
Speaker 10: should be doing number one within the city government, and
Speaker 10: the government has just gotten so big and so broad.
Speaker 10: They're outsourcing so much of its responsibility in areas where
Speaker 10: the city shouldn't even be focusing. So we need to
Speaker 10: get the city budget under control. We need to make
Speaker 10: sure that we're actually using taxpayer money wisely for the
Speaker 10: things that we need in this city, transportation, infrastructure, public safety.
Speaker 11: And good education for our children. Those should be the
Speaker 11: top focuses.
Speaker 10: Not providing billions of dollars in taxpayer funds to citizens
Speaker 10: of other countries who came into the country legally and
Speaker 10: are even committing crimes. So I think that you know,
Speaker 10: I would like to see somebody like a Mike Bloomberg
Speaker 10: run again. Somebody who has a business background, knows how
Speaker 10: to manage a large organization, and somebody who'll be more
Speaker 10: of a centrist that Republicans and Democrats and independents can embrace,
Speaker 10: because this city has gone way too far to the
Speaker 10: left and we're paying for the policies of Bill de
Speaker 10: Blasio and Eric Adams. But remember the reason why this
Speaker 10: is a sanctuary city, not supporting people committing crimes in
Speaker 10: our city is because of Bill Deblasa in the far
Speaker 10: left council.
Speaker 11: So we need somebody who's gonna bring it more to
Speaker 11: the center.
Speaker 4: At this point, Congressman, I will disclose that Michael Bloomberg
Speaker 4: is the founder of majority owner of Bloomberg LP, which
Speaker 4: saws Bloomberg Media and this radio network. But we appreciate
Speaker 4: your thoughts. As always, I do wonder about your thoughts
Speaker 4: as well and what this does. We know that New
Speaker 4: York's congressional districts are very much battleground zones in this election,
Speaker 4: some of your colleagues are in tough races. Do you
Speaker 4: think whatever detrimental effect this may have on New York City,
Speaker 4: there is some benefit for your colleagues in this news.
Speaker 4: Does it make it easier for Republicans to keep the House?
Speaker 10: Well, Look, I think that the fact that there's been
Speaker 10: quite a few Democrats that I've had to resign and
Speaker 10: disgrace at the city and state level over the past
Speaker 10: few years may may bring some benefits to Republicans. I
Speaker 10: think maybe people see that, you know, we need some
Speaker 10: type of balance and common sense in our government and
Speaker 10: elect honorable people, not just by party label, but people
Speaker 10: that are actually going to do the job and do
Speaker 10: it right and do it honestly. But certainly I see
Speaker 10: no joy in seeing my city being torn apart right
Speaker 10: now and the issues that we're facing that you need
Speaker 10: desperate leadership and management, real management. And I'm very concerned
Speaker 10: about the future of our city. I've been concerned for
Speaker 10: quite some time over the late last years has taken
Speaker 10: a real downward turn, and we need to put somebody
Speaker 10: in the helm that is going to correct this ship,
Speaker 10: or else we're gonna have real fiscal problems for forever.
Speaker 10: And I don't know that New York City can return
Speaker 10: if we don't If we don't fix.
Speaker 4: It now, Congressman, I have less than a minute left here.
Speaker 4: But one of your Republican colleagues has also faced some
Speaker 4: allegations within the last week about uh corruption and more specifically,
Speaker 4: actually paying those close to him to serve in his
Speaker 4: office with taxpayer dollars. Anthony Desposito. Should he resign as well?
Speaker 10: Well what we've done in the past, or we refer
Speaker 10: it to Ethics Committee to do an investigation. Based on
Speaker 10: what I've seen so far, there has been nothing that's
Speaker 10: been that violated any laws taking place. But should we
Speaker 10: find out more information than we should handle that accordingly
Speaker 10: when the time is appropriate.
Speaker 11: As you know, I've had no problem calling for George
Speaker 11: Santos to resign. I've voted to expound, do you remember,
Speaker 11: so I have.
Speaker 10: No problem calling on those of my party when it's
Speaker 10: proven that they've done something illegal and wrong.
Speaker 4: All right, Congresswoman, really appreciate you hopping on with us
Speaker 4: as we deal with this historic news in New York,
Speaker 4: that is, the Republican Congresswoman Nicole mally Takis of New York.
Speaker 4: Appreciate your time joining us on the day in which,
Speaker 4: as we've been telling you here on Bloomberg Radio, Mayor
Speaker 4: Eric Adams has been indicted on federal bribery and fraud charges.
Speaker 4: We will continue to follow this story.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch
Speaker 1: Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Apple car Play,
Speaker 1: and then roudo with the Bloomberg Business app.
Speaker 2: Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch
Speaker 2: us live on YouTube.
Speaker 4: We're going to continue this conversation now and move to
Speaker 4: other subjects as well, as we head to Capitol Hill,
Speaker 4: where we find Republican Congressman Byron Donalds of Florida, who also,
Speaker 4: of course, is a vocal surrogate for the Trump campaign. Congressman,
Speaker 4: always great to see you here on bloom TV and radio. Obviously,
Speaker 4: we are seeing another indictment of a very high profile
Speaker 4: political figure in American politics. Donald Trump himself, as you
Speaker 4: well know, has come under multiple indictments as well. Do
Speaker 4: you see any parallels between this Adams case and the
Speaker 4: Trump ones.
Speaker 12: I really don't, because you're talking about two very different issues.
Speaker 12: If you look at the indictments of President Trump, you're
Speaker 12: talking about novel legal theories never been tried before, where
Speaker 12: they tried to basically push a square peg into a
Speaker 12: round poll to try to get the top Republican in
Speaker 12: the United States the nominee for the President of the
Speaker 12: United States and Donald J. Trump Versus what appears to be,
Speaker 12: according to the allegations against Eric Adams, a very deep
Speaker 12: and massive campaign finance violation where they were bringing wirefraud charges, etc.
Speaker 12: The very scheme is very different altogether. They're using tried
Speaker 12: and true criminal charge against the mayor of New York
Speaker 12: versus these insane novel legal theories trying to criminalize Donald Trump.
Speaker 12: They are very two things, and I could go step
Speaker 12: by step with you through every one of these indictments,
Speaker 12: but the two are not the same. And I think
Speaker 12: we got to be careful not to try to make
Speaker 12: it seem as that now the Department of Justice is
Speaker 12: operating with clean hands all the time. What we have
Speaker 12: seen on Capitol Hill is that that.
Speaker 3: Is not the case.
Speaker 4: Well, Congressman, as we consider the difference in these cases here.
Speaker 4: I was just speaking with one of your Republican colleagues
Speaker 4: from New York, Nicole Mallya Tacas. He was talking about
Speaker 4: how frankly, city leadership just doesn't need this distraction because
Speaker 4: the city needs to run. And it's at that point
Speaker 4: I would point out that many of these cases against
Speaker 4: Donald Trump have not been wrapped up yet. In fact,
Speaker 4: he hasn't been sentenced in the case in which he
Speaker 4: was actually convicted. Why should New Yorkers worry about the
Speaker 4: distraction of having to fight a legal battle on the
Speaker 4: part of the New York City mayor, but not worry
Speaker 4: about the distractions that could face a president of the
Speaker 4: United States.
Speaker 12: Well, this is a great question, and let me unfold that.
Speaker 12: Number One, the charges that have been brought, in my view,
Speaker 12: ridiculously against Donald Trump will have no bearing whatsoever on
Speaker 12: his ability to run the United States of America. Why
Speaker 12: would I say that. Number One, these charges that were
Speaker 12: brought around around mar Lago documents, the same stuff could
Speaker 12: have been charged against Joe Biden. The Department of Justice
Speaker 12: did not charge Joe Biden. And the reason why they
Speaker 12: didn't do that is because they said he was a
Speaker 12: well meaning old man. He was facing the same investigation.
Speaker 12: I would say, Joe Biden's done a terrible job, but
Speaker 12: it's not stopped him from doing his job when it
Speaker 12: comes to Eric Adams in New York. And this is
Speaker 12: why I'm saying it's important that you cannot try to
Speaker 12: create some moral equivalency between these two situations. What Eric
Speaker 12: Adams apparently is facing is dealing with major campaign finance violations,
Speaker 12: and I mean major to the tunes of tens of
Speaker 12: millions of dollars from overseas. Very different matter than the
Speaker 12: ridiculous indictments brought to us by Jack Smith Merrick Garland,
Speaker 12: the ridiculous rec go charges down in Georgia that make
Speaker 12: no sense at all. And obviously what happened in Lower Manhattan,
Speaker 12: where they had to reach into the past for something
Speaker 12: that the Federal Election Commission even said there was no
Speaker 12: there there. In New York, they basically tried to make
Speaker 12: a crime that did not exist. That's wrong, and that's
Speaker 12: not going to stop Donald Trump from being able to
Speaker 12: lead our country and get our country back on track
Speaker 12: and making America great again.
Speaker 4: Congressman, I'd like to ask you about the business of
Speaker 4: your chamber as well as we find you on Capitol
Speaker 4: Hill today, having yesterday, of course, seen the House and
Speaker 4: the Senate pass a three month continuing resolution to keep
Speaker 4: the government funded until December twentieth. I understand you or
Speaker 4: a know on that bill, and I wonder what you
Speaker 4: make of the way Speaker Johnson handled all of this,
Speaker 4: knowing his original plan for a six months R with
Speaker 4: the Save Act attached didn't make it through. It had
Speaker 4: to go with this clean cr plan B. Does he
Speaker 4: deserve to be Speaker again if the House is able
Speaker 4: to maintain the Republicans that is the majority.
Speaker 12: Well, look, I think the first answer to your core
Speaker 12: question is yes. Mike Johnson's in a tough spot. It's
Speaker 12: been a very difficult Congress to navigate. I will add
Speaker 12: that one of the reasons we are at this point
Speaker 12: here on Capitol Hill is because Chuck Schumer, Senate Democrats,
Speaker 12: and the White House have done nothing with respect to
Speaker 12: trying to find common sense solutions to funding the government
Speaker 12: going forward. In the House, under the leadership of Mike Johnson,
Speaker 12: we passed five of the twelve appropriation bills, which fund
Speaker 12: seventy three percent of the government. What did the Senate do.
Speaker 12: I will tell you what the Senate did under Chuck
Speaker 12: Schumer's leadership.
Speaker 5: They did nothing.
Speaker 12: They did no homework, They passed no bills, They came
Speaker 12: with no solutions. They didn't even try to work on
Speaker 12: this over the summer months. They basically sat in the
Speaker 12: Senate and just waited till the last minute, which is
Speaker 12: typical of Washington, DC to wait till the last minute
Speaker 12: so you can have to you're forced to deal with
Speaker 12: some massive bill to avoid a shutdown, which I did
Speaker 12: vote against because I don't believe we should be doing
Speaker 12: that right now. But then you set up a situation
Speaker 12: where you go into a Christmas on the bus that
Speaker 12: nobody reads. It is the same song in dance in Washington, DC.
Speaker 12: That's at the feet of Chuck Schumer and Joe Biden
Speaker 12: and Kamala Harris. Because they've had months to come to
Speaker 12: an agreement with House Republicans on federal spending, they have
Speaker 12: chosen not to. So I think what people really need
Speaker 12: to understand is that it's a difficult situation. Whether whether
Speaker 12: it was Mike Johnson or Kevin McCarthy or Paul Ryan
Speaker 12: or John Bayner or any other Republican Speaker, because the
Speaker 12: truth on Capitol Hill is that Senate Democrats and House
Speaker 12: Democrats for that matter, do not want to negotiate spending
Speaker 12: in an orderly manner where people can come to compromise.
Speaker 12: They want to wait for the last minute where you
Speaker 12: have to take you where you're dealing with a take
Speaker 12: it or leave it deal. And you have members on
Speaker 12: Capitol Hill who don't want the American people to be
Speaker 12: left in the lurch.
Speaker 5: It is an indictment of the process here.
Speaker 12: Democrats need to step up and do their job for one.
Speaker 4: And of course we all have questions as to whether
Speaker 4: or not the deal that former Speaker Kevin McCarthy, who
Speaker 4: you just mentioned, and the deal he did strike with
Speaker 4: Democrats will stand ultimately at the end of the day,
Speaker 4: especially that side deal we have all heard so much about.
Speaker 4: I'd like to ask you, as well, Congressman, about what's
Speaker 4: happening in the capital today. Ukrainian President of Vladimir Zelensky
Speaker 4: is there visiting with some of your colleagues before he
Speaker 4: meets with Biden and Harris later this afternoon. Many of
Speaker 4: your Republican colleagues have had criticism for Zelensky, with some
Speaker 4: of the comments he has made about Donald Trump while
Speaker 4: here in the US in the last week, as well
Speaker 4: as a visit to Pennsylvania and specifically a plant that
Speaker 4: is making ammunition that is helping Ukraine in this war.
Speaker 4: Mike Johnson, the Speaker, did call for the firing of
Speaker 4: the Ukrainian ambassador to the US over that visit. What
Speaker 4: is your thought on all of this?
Speaker 12: I agree with I agree with Mike Johnson. And here's
Speaker 12: why you now have a foreign leader who's now making
Speaker 12: plant visits in one of the key battleground states in
Speaker 12: our presidential election. Vladimir Zelenski is now talking tough or
Speaker 12: talking badly about Donald Trump.
Speaker 5: And he's here me.
Speaker 12: Obviously he's gonna have meetings with the President and members
Speaker 12: on Capitol Hill. But that stop in Pennsylvania was highly
Speaker 12: political in the middle of a presidential election. You know,
Speaker 12: the Democrats would lecture us about foreign influence in our elections. Well,
Speaker 12: what is more, what demonstrates foreign influence anymore than the
Speaker 12: leader of a foreign nation touring a facility in a
Speaker 12: battleground state forty days before a presidential election. This is outrageous.
Speaker 12: But I just want to be very clear with your viewers.
Speaker 12: The reason why this is allowed to occur is because
Speaker 12: most of the media will not question Kamala Harris or
Speaker 12: Joe Biden. That's if Kamala Harris or Joe Biden are
Speaker 12: even available to answer your questions, and they have no
Speaker 12: problem taking whatever help they feel they need from anywhere
Speaker 12: around the globe to win an election. It is election interference.
Speaker 12: It is wrong, and that's why Mike Johnson has made
Speaker 12: his stance. I stay with him in that and my
Speaker 12: colleagues on Capitol Hill, we need to be investigating this
Speaker 12: because you can't have foreign leaders coming into our country
Speaker 12: laying laying down their markers of who should be the
Speaker 12: next commander in chief.
Speaker 5: For our nation.
Speaker 4: And finally, Congressman, with your district in mind, in our
Speaker 4: last minute with you, we all are obviously watching Hurricane
Speaker 4: Helene as well as barrels toward Florida. Could be an
Speaker 4: incredibly strong storm. What does the state of Florida need
Speaker 4: in preparation and potentially in the aftermath is it getting
Speaker 4: is it not getting anything that it needs?
Speaker 12: Well, Look, I know our governor has been in contact
Speaker 12: with FEMA. They've been they've already been working on this
Speaker 12: in Florida. Unfortunately. Yes, we deal with hurricanes. Our leadership
Speaker 12: knows how to get this done. I know Governor DeSantis
Speaker 12: has already pre positioned assets in key areas to respond
Speaker 12: to the aftermath of the storm. In my district, we
Speaker 12: were hit with Hurricane Ian two years ago. We worked
Speaker 12: with the governor, with the governor of our state, we
Speaker 12: worked with FEMA and other partners to try.
Speaker 5: To build our area very quickly.
Speaker 12: Florida, unfortunately, unfortunately, is accustomed to this. We will get
Speaker 12: through it once again, and we'll be working with everybody
Speaker 12: to make sure that the people of Florida are restored
Speaker 12: and they get back on their feet as quickly as possible.
Speaker 4: All right, Congressman, appreciate your time today, sir. That is
Speaker 4: Republican Congressman Byron Donald of the state of Florida. Thank
Speaker 4: you so much, and stay safe out there if you're
Speaker 4: heading home in the next few days. This, of course,
Speaker 4: is Balance of Power on Bloomberg TV and radio. We
Speaker 4: will have much more ahead.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast kens
Speaker 1: Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay, and.
Speaker 3: Then Rodoto with the Bloomberg Business app.
Speaker 2: You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our
Speaker 2: flagship New York station, Just Say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 4: Love here in the US, which of course follows a
Speaker 4: big update in the Asian session, specifically for Chinese equities.
Speaker 4: Rallied more than four percent in the aftermath of new
Speaker 4: promises from the polab Buro as they aim, they say,
Speaker 4: to revive growth with pledges to support fiscal spending and
Speaker 4: to stop the declining they see in the property sector.
Speaker 4: More promises of stimulus coming to shore up the world's
Speaker 4: second largest economy. And our next guests just actually returned
Speaker 4: from a visit to China to discuss some of their
Speaker 4: macroeconomic issues. I'm pleased to say joining me here on
Speaker 4: Balance of Power on Bloomberg TV and Radio as Jay Shambah,
Speaker 4: he is the US Treasury Undersecretary for International Affairs. Sir,
Speaker 4: thank you so much for being with us. As I mentioned,
Speaker 4: you just returned from China, where I believe your fifth
Speaker 4: round of talks with your economic counterparts. They're part of
Speaker 4: what you were planning to raise, were issues of Chinese
Speaker 4: over capacity, the concern that China is generating so much
Speaker 4: that they don't necessarily have demand for at home and
Speaker 4: therefore flooding the global markets with it. Do the stimulus
Speaker 4: measures that we have seen China outline over the course
Speaker 4: of the last week satisfy some of your concern? Do
Speaker 4: they go far enough to revive domestic demand in China?
Speaker 13: Well, first, thanks very much for having me here. What
Speaker 13: I would say is I'm glad to see the Chinese
Speaker 13: senior policy makers talking about a lack of demand in
Speaker 13: the economy, about the need to support growth in the economy,
Speaker 13: especially from domestic demand. I don't know that I've seen
Speaker 13: anything concrete yet that I think would really answer the
Speaker 13: mail on that, but I think it's an important step
Speaker 13: that they are acknowledging that domestic demand needs to go faster,
Speaker 13: and that they need to support domestic their growth with
Speaker 13: consumption and with domestic demand. I think you know when
Speaker 13: we've as you mentioned, we were there for what we
Speaker 13: call the Economic Working Group. I led a kind of
Speaker 13: senior delegation of treasury officials there to talk to senior
Speaker 13: Chinese policy makers, and one of the key points we
Speaker 13: raised with them is that their savings rate is really
Speaker 13: high that leads this huge kind of imbalance in their
Speaker 13: economy unless they can drive some sort of demand for it,
Speaker 13: and otherwise what they've been doing is channeling that savings
Speaker 13: towards subsidies to manufacturing industry, producing a lot that they
Speaker 13: don't have domestic demand for. And that's what I'd like
Speaker 13: to see more of. And I think it's a good
Speaker 13: start to see them talk about it. I think we
Speaker 13: need to see more concrete policies.
Speaker 4: Did you censor that your counterparts are understanding of those
Speaker 4: concerns and maybe thinking about wider behavioral changes in that regard.
Speaker 4: What was the reception like when you raised these things.
Speaker 13: So this is something we've been talking to the Chinese
Speaker 13: about for quite a while. I'd say that in one
Speaker 13: of our trips in February, we really pushed the point
Speaker 13: quite hard. And then when Secretary Yellen was there in
Speaker 13: April of this year, she really tried to lay out
Speaker 13: the case for why this was a problem for both
Speaker 13: the world economy and really why it was a problem
Speaker 13: for the Chinese economy. You don't want to subsidize a
Speaker 13: lot of firms that are losing money. It's inefficient, it's
Speaker 13: a waste of fiscal resources. It's also just low productivity
Speaker 13: for your economy. So one of our advantages, frankly at
Speaker 13: Treasury right now is we have a world renowned economists
Speaker 13: leading Treasury, and so people take her seriously when she's there,
Speaker 13: and they really do want to listen to her. From
Speaker 13: a political perspective, they certainly push back on the narrative
Speaker 13: of over capacity. But I think what we're seeing on
Speaker 13: the policy grounds are steps hopefully that it will lead
Speaker 13: to ones in the right direction.
Speaker 4: Well to your point, sir, on Secretary Yellen, do you
Speaker 4: expect we will see another meeting between her and Holly
Speaker 4: Fung before this administration is over, I'm not sure.
Speaker 13: I think both sides view this channel as a really
Speaker 13: important one, and that's one reason I was just there,
Speaker 13: was to make sure that we could keep robust engagement.
Speaker 13: We've always said it's not tenable to have the two
Speaker 13: largest world economies not talk to each other.
Speaker 5: And one thing the Secretary.
Speaker 13: Has often said is we need to talk about the
Speaker 13: things we agree about and where we can work together,
Speaker 13: but it's equally as important, if not more so, to
Speaker 13: talk about the things where we don't agree.
Speaker 5: And so that's we try to go and do both.
Speaker 4: Cooperation and competition, if you will, Sir, I do wonder,
Speaker 4: especially given some of the rhetoric we're seeing on the
Speaker 4: campaign trail from Donald Trump, which I won't ask you
Speaker 4: to comment directly on, but he of course is talking
Speaker 4: about implementing higher tariffs on Chinese exports. Do you see
Speaker 4: tariffs as a mechanism to address some of these over
Speaker 4: capacity concerns essentially raise the cost of some of these
Speaker 4: goods that are being made so that people don't want
Speaker 4: to import them and that supply doesn't actually hit foreign markets.
Speaker 4: What is the proper role of trade specific measures here?
Speaker 13: So we have used trade tools already, I think narrowly
Speaker 13: targeted and strategic trade measures can sometimes try to either
Speaker 13: shift the calculus for a specific product, or for that matter,
Speaker 13: maybe change the other countries strategy a little bit. So
Speaker 13: I think narrowly targeted strategic tariffs can be a useful tool.
Speaker 13: One of the reasons we've been trying to have this
Speaker 13: conversation with China is to make clear that it won't
Speaker 13: just be the US doing this. You'll see this happening
Speaker 13: from a lot of countries, and that if they do
Speaker 13: start to see whether it's tariffs or other trade measures,
Speaker 13: they shouldn't think of it as US attacking China or
Speaker 13: US being against China. They should recognize that this is
Speaker 13: really defensive on our part, and China sometimes has agency
Speaker 13: here they can change their own policies in ways that
Speaker 13: would not lead to the rest of the world putting
Speaker 13: tariffs on their goods.
Speaker 4: Of course, sirwell, the US's focus is on its own
Speaker 4: relationship with China. There is concern as well about China's
Speaker 4: relationship with other countries, including adversaries like Russia. We of
Speaker 4: course saw Secretary Yellen earlier this year warning about companies
Speaker 4: providing material support Chinese companies that is, to Russia's war,
Speaker 4: whether it's through banking or other goods, that if there
Speaker 4: are providing the support, they risk being sanctioned by the US.
Speaker 4: Have you started to see behavioral changes on the parts
Speaker 4: of Chinese banks or other companies when it comes to
Speaker 4: dealing with Russia.
Speaker 13: So this is a topic that we talk about a
Speaker 13: lot with our counterparts. They recognize this is something that
Speaker 13: is a serious strategic interest of ours, and so China
Speaker 13: has said many times that they have no intention of
Speaker 13: allowing lethal aid to go to Russia. Where we've been
Speaker 13: really pressing them is on dual use goods that could
Speaker 13: be used by Russia to kind of build up the
Speaker 13: war machine. What we've made clear is that if financial
Speaker 13: firms are processing transactions towards sanctioned entities or with these
Speaker 13: dual use goods, they're exposed to sanctions. Large Chinese banks
Speaker 13: understand that connectivity to the US financial system and the
Speaker 13: global financial system is essential for them, and so neither
Speaker 13: those firms nor their regulators want them to do anything
Speaker 13: that runs afoul of our sanctions.
Speaker 5: So a lot of this is.
Speaker 13: Doing the hard work of making clear what really would
Speaker 13: expose you to risk and what wouldn't what exactly we're
Speaker 13: trying to get firms not to do.
Speaker 5: Sometimes that can lead to where we've had to sanction
Speaker 5: a firm.
Speaker 13: Not financial firms so far, but we have had to
Speaker 13: sanction a few Chinese firms because we felt that they
Speaker 13: were crossing lines. And what we try to do through
Speaker 13: dialogue is in some sense stop the behavior before it
Speaker 13: ever happens and before we have to take sanctions.
Speaker 4: And finally, Sir, in our last minutes with you here,
Speaker 4: i'd like to ask you kind of a wider question.
Speaker 4: It does relate to Russian behavior as well, the ongoing
Speaker 4: war between Russia and Ukraine and one of the great
Speaker 4: bread baskets of the world, a hot war in the
Speaker 4: Middle East as well, where of course a lot of
Speaker 4: energy is centered. How concerned are you when you look
Speaker 4: at the global economic outlook and some of these risks
Speaker 4: that are present about things that could refuel inflation, for example,
Speaker 4: or otherwise be disruptive to a global economy and a
Speaker 4: US economy. Frankly that to this point has been able
Speaker 4: to hold in there even as we've seen inflationary pressures
Speaker 4: come down.
Speaker 13: Look, I'm an economist by training, and so I worry
Speaker 13: about everything.
Speaker 5: But that being said, I think.
Speaker 13: What we know is that geostrategic risks or geopolitical risks
Speaker 13: are always out there. What we try to do is
Speaker 13: minimize any potential impact on the US economy. As you noted,
Speaker 13: I think we've seen a really strong US economy.
Speaker 5: I think it was a bloomberg pole.
Speaker 13: Maybe a year and change ago, where one hundred percent
Speaker 13: of the people polled thought we'd have a recession in
Speaker 13: twenty three.
Speaker 5: We didn't.
Speaker 13: We got through the year with actually quite strong growth,
Speaker 13: and we've managed to see inflation come down while the
Speaker 13: unemployment rate has stayed at a fairly historically low level.
Speaker 13: That's despite lot of challenges around the globe. We're obviously
Speaker 13: doing everything we can at Treasury and across the US
Speaker 13: government to minimize any of those challenges to prevent disruptions
Speaker 13: to energy markets or food markets or things like that
Speaker 13: that could damage the world economy and really blow back
Speaker 13: on US consumers. So we think about it all the time,
Speaker 13: we worry about it all the time, but we are
Speaker 13: hopefully taking the steps that would prevent those shocks from
Speaker 13: really reverberating.
Speaker 4: Here all right, Jay Shamba, the US Treasury Under Secretary
Speaker 4: for International Affairs, Affairs greatly appreciate your time today, sir,
Speaker 4: thank you so much for being here with us on
Speaker 4: balance of power.
Speaker 3: Now.
Speaker 4: Of course, the other big story we're following here on
Speaker 4: balance of power comes from New York with the federal
Speaker 4: indictment of Mayor Eric Adams on bribery and fraud charges.
Speaker 4: We want to dig more into the actual charges he
Speaker 4: is facing now and turn to Dave Ehrenberg, who is
Speaker 4: state attorney for Palm Beach County in Florida, but is
Speaker 4: in New York today. It is the place to be
Speaker 4: in the news today, Dave. Great to have you back
Speaker 4: here on Bloomberg TV and radio. Obviously, there's a number
Speaker 4: of federal charges here, alligation of accepting illegal contributions, including
Speaker 4: from foreign agents. How serious are these charges as a prosecutor?
Speaker 4: How easy is this case to prosecute? How hard will
Speaker 4: the defense be for Mayor Adams?
Speaker 5: Kaylie Good to be with you.
Speaker 14: The challenge is proving intent that Adams knew that he
Speaker 14: was accepting illegal campaign contributions and bribes. It's much easier
Speaker 14: to prove the free gifts, the air travel, that kind
Speaker 14: of stuff. But really the bread and butter of this
Speaker 14: indictment is the wire fraud accusation, which is a federal
Speaker 14: prosecutor's best friend. It's relatively easy to prove, and he
Speaker 14: can get you up to twenty years in prison. He's
Speaker 14: facing up to forty five years in total. I think
Speaker 14: the stuff that was laid out in the indictment shows
Speaker 14: that that Adams allegedly was trying to obstruct, was trying
Speaker 14: to hide his involvement in all this, changing his passwords
Speaker 14: on his phone, trying to cover up the documents that
Speaker 14: would have shown that he took these trips and these
Speaker 14: campaign contributions. So they've got a good case against him.
Speaker 14: After all, they're not going to go after the powerful
Speaker 14: mayor of New York City unless they've got the goods.
Speaker 4: Well, yeah, that was a question I had when this
Speaker 4: news first drop. How ironcloud does a case need to
Speaker 4: be to essentially make a sitting mayor of the country's
Speaker 4: largest city a criminal defendant. It was raised to me
Speaker 4: though earlier on the program, Dave this notion that while
Speaker 4: this indictment is vivid in detail in terms of messaging
Speaker 4: and texting that was exchanged with Adam staffers and various others,
Speaker 4: included representatives from Turkish airlines, for example, when it comes
Speaker 4: to some of this travel, not much of it is
Speaker 4: actual messaging from Adams himself. Is that a complicated factor
Speaker 4: here for the prosecution.
Speaker 14: It'd be better if you have his own words. But
Speaker 14: they do have the cell phones and the computers of
Speaker 14: a lot of his associates, and that's how you know
Speaker 14: that the Feds are serious. Once they have your electronic communications,
Speaker 14: something's going to go down. They've been investigating this for
Speaker 14: a while. I mean they've traced this back for nine
Speaker 14: years that he's allegedly received these improper benefits, and then
Speaker 14: they were specific that The alleged bribe occurred when the
Speaker 14: Turkish got sought to get an expedited approval of this
Speaker 14: thirty story consulate that was ready to go, except the
Speaker 14: Fire department said that doesn't meet code. Well, they invested
Speaker 14: allegedly in atoms and then Adams supposedly leaned on the
Speaker 14: fire department and the certificate of occupancy was granted thereafter.
Speaker 14: So that's where you have your bribery, that's where you
Speaker 14: have your wire fraud in partment. And then you have
Speaker 14: the abuse allegedly of the matching contribution.
Speaker 5: Laws in New York, where you're entitled to.
Speaker 14: Get matching campaign contributions if it comes from an individual donor.
Speaker 14: So then the Turkis's government apparently funneled the money through
Speaker 14: individuals so that it could then be multiplied under the
Speaker 14: campaign finance laws. So he get advantage of that, and
Speaker 14: that's where he's also being charged. So he's got a
Speaker 14: lot of problems ahead, and I would suspect that some
Speaker 14: of the people closest to him will flip on him
Speaker 14: to save their own hides.
Speaker 4: Well, and we have seen the resignation of a number
Speaker 4: of city officials others who of course have had their
Speaker 4: own proper already searched over the course of the last
Speaker 4: several months as this corruption investigation was ongoing. Is that
Speaker 4: really what's what's the lynchpin. The critical point here for
Speaker 4: the prosecution is to get to those flips to actually happen.
Speaker 14: That matters a lot to have him on the stand.
Speaker 14: Adams has some very prominent attorneys representing him, so the
Speaker 14: FEDS are going to have to come with all their
Speaker 14: firepower here. That means flipping witnesses who know where the
Speaker 14: bodies are, very metaphorically speaking, also using the electronic communications
Speaker 14: against Adams. One interesting anecdote need the indictment is that
Speaker 14: Adams apparently was tipped off that he was about to
Speaker 14: be searched having his phone seized, So when the Feds
Speaker 14: got his phones, he didn't have his personal phone on him,
Speaker 14: that was left at home or wherever. And then he
Speaker 14: previously had changed the password on that personal phone. The
Speaker 14: personal phone is where the more incriminating stuff apparently was,
Speaker 14: and he changed the password made it much harder for
Speaker 14: the Feds to access. And so he apparently knew what
Speaker 14: he was doing and that's going to be used against
Speaker 14: him too. It's all about intent.
Speaker 4: Finally, Dave. In our final moment with you, I'd like
Speaker 4: to ask you about a question a legal case much
Speaker 4: closer to home in Florida, which of course, was the
Speaker 4: attempted assassination of Donald Trump just weeks ago. The man
Speaker 4: Ryan Ruth, who was initially charged with firearms charges related
Speaker 4: to that, was indicted on an attempted assassination charge just
Speaker 4: this week. How does that case move forward from here?
Speaker 14: The Feds are doing a good job. First, they started
Speaker 14: with a low hanging fruit, the firearms offences that kept
Speaker 14: Ruth in jail, and then they came back after the
Speaker 14: evidence was developed to charge Ruth with attempted assassination that
Speaker 14: can get the guy up to life in prison. So
Speaker 14: when Governor DeSantis and former President Trump accused the feds
Speaker 14: of small ball, no, they're going for it all here
Speaker 14: because they've got that handwritten note from Ruth that shows
Speaker 14: that he did apparently intend to assassinate Donald Trump. So
Speaker 14: the Feds are going to move forward with this. Ruth
Speaker 14: will continue to plead not guilty. I don't think he
Speaker 14: could a plead deal out of this unless it involves
Speaker 14: decades in prison. So he's not going anywhere anytime.
Speaker 4: Soon, all right, Dave Ehrenberg, the state attorney for Palm
Speaker 4: Beach County. Always great to have you here on Bloomberg
Speaker 4: TV and radio. We appreciate your time, and of course
Speaker 4: Bloomberg will be staying on top of this story.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast Ken
Speaker 1: Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Apple.
Speaker 3: Car Play and then roud Oto with the Bloomberg Business app.
Speaker 2: You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our
Speaker 2: flagship New York station, Just Say Alexa Play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 4: We're keeping an eye on not just those down ballot campaigns,
Speaker 4: the presidential campaign as well. As this has been I
Speaker 4: think we could call it Economy Week for the presidential candidates,
Speaker 4: both Donald Trump and Kamala Harris giving speeches and key
Speaker 4: battleground states this week outlining their different policy proposals, some
Speaker 4: of them specifically targeted, for example, at manufacturing. Harris spoke
Speaker 4: in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, yesterday, and after doing so, sat down
Speaker 4: for an interview on MSNBC, where she faced more questions
Speaker 4: around these proposals and some questions around the proposals of
Speaker 4: her opponent, Donald Trump. Here's one thing she said to
Speaker 4: Stephanie Ruy.
Speaker 15: Part of it is you don't just throw around the
Speaker 15: idea of just tariffs across the board. And that's part
Speaker 15: of the problem with Donald Trump. Frankly, and I say
Speaker 15: this in all sincerity, he's just not very serious about
Speaker 15: how he thinks about some of these issues. And one
Speaker 15: must be serious and have a plan, any real plan
Speaker 15: that's not just about some talking point ending in an
Speaker 15: exclamation at a political rally, but actually putting the thought
Speaker 15: into what will be the return on the investment, what
Speaker 15: will be the economic impact on everyday people.
Speaker 4: So we want to get more into those questions now,
Speaker 4: and turned to row Hit Kumar, who was principal and
Speaker 4: co leader of Washington's National Tax Services at PwC and
Speaker 4: former policy director and deputy chief of staff to Senate
Speaker 4: Leader Mitch McConnell. Here with me in our Washington, d C. Studio.
Speaker 4: It's good to see you, as always, row Hit. She
Speaker 4: suggested that some of the ideas put forward by Trump,
Speaker 4: including around blanket tariff policy, she called them not serious policies.
Speaker 4: Would you agree with that?
Speaker 16: Creation serious policies? And I think people dismiss them at
Speaker 16: their own peril. Congress over the last almost one hundred years,
Speaker 16: has actually delegated quite a bit of authority to the executive.
Speaker 16: Those authorities have never been tested in the way that
Speaker 16: foreign President Trump is talking about testing them. So one
Speaker 16: assumes that if he actually does the things that he's
Speaker 16: saying he's going to do, that ends up in litigation
Speaker 16: and the courts to ultimately adjudicate the question. But I
Speaker 16: think one thing that is lost in this conversation, so
Speaker 16: you know, there's a criticism of the tariff policy, which
Speaker 16: is that, well, this is a cost that's ultimately born
Speaker 16: by regular consumers sales tax, sales tax, right, which is
Speaker 16: actually not too different than the way most of Western
Speaker 16: Europe funds it's government.
Speaker 17: But that's maybe a separate question.
Speaker 16: I think what's lost in this conversation is we're sort
Speaker 16: of there is a little bit of intentional fiction being engaged,
Speaker 16: which is these tariffs born by middle class consumers, et cetera.
Speaker 16: But like the corporate tax increases that Vice President Harris
Speaker 16: is proposing, it embracing many of the Biden proposals that
Speaker 16: those somehow come out of like a you know, out
Speaker 16: of a money tree that sits in a corporate boardroom
Speaker 16: or something like that. But the truth is, and there's
Speaker 16: a ton of academic research on this question corporate tax increases.
Speaker 16: You know, corporations at some level don't actually have their
Speaker 16: own money. They have other people's money, right, They have
Speaker 16: the money of their workers, their customers, and their shareholders.
Speaker 16: And so when you raise corporate taxes, it comes from
Speaker 16: some combination of workers, customers, and shareholders. And the academic
Speaker 16: data sort of varies. What's the distribution of the burden,
Speaker 16: but it's roughly half. You know, some would say it's
Speaker 16: half customers, some would say half labor. No one thinks
Speaker 16: it's all shareholders. And even if it were all shareholders,
Speaker 16: sixty one percent of the public owns share So all
Speaker 16: of these proposals that are being kicked around the cost
Speaker 16: of it is ultimately born. To the extent that we
Speaker 16: actually pursue any of these policies, that's a separate question
Speaker 16: for Congress. Ultimately, perhaps to adjudicate the cost is born
Speaker 16: by largely the same population of individuals.
Speaker 17: It just shows up in slightly different ways.
Speaker 4: Okay, So I guess it raises the question of what
Speaker 4: is the more responsible policy to fill the Treasury's coffers.
Speaker 4: If you're looking at tax cuts or credits for certain
Speaker 4: portions of the population, which they both are. Do tariffs work?
Speaker 4: Is that offset or does it have to be higher
Speaker 4: taxes of some would work economic consequence of that.
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 16: So that's an interesting question because the tariff play is
Speaker 16: a little more complicated because it's not just one bounce
Speaker 16: of the ball. You raise tariffs and some other sort
Speaker 16: of third party estimators. I suggested that the tariffs AT's
Speaker 16: sort of the low end of what foreign President Trump
Speaker 16: is talking about could raise. You have three hundred billion
Speaker 16: dollars a year or three trillion dollars over the ensuing decade.
Speaker 16: Just as a reminder, the tax cuts that expire at
Speaker 16: the end of twenty twenty five to fill that hole completely,
Speaker 16: if you want to extend all that tax relief, that
Speaker 16: would cost about four and a half trillion dollars over
Speaker 16: the next ten years.
Speaker 17: This is real money even for the US government.
Speaker 16: So tariffs could you know, hypothetically fill a substantial peace,
Speaker 16: if not the entirety of that whole. So it is real,
Speaker 16: it is certainly there. And likewise, on President or Vice
Speaker 16: President Harris, potentially President Harris's side, allegor you raise the
Speaker 16: corporate tax rate to twenty eight percent. You know, that's
Speaker 16: worth at least a trillion dollars or so of additional revenue,
Speaker 16: could be more, depending on you know where.
Speaker 17: You draw the line.
Speaker 16: Again, though, you know these are campaign proposals, right.
Speaker 4: And as you pointed out, you need Congress to implement.
Speaker 16: Well, you need Congress on corporate, corporate or any tax
Speaker 16: policy changes that requires Congresses. Kind of blessing the tariff
Speaker 16: play potentially right, And again, these these authorities have not
Speaker 16: been tested in the way that former President Trump is
Speaker 16: talking about testing them. But potentially tariffs could be done
Speaker 16: by execute authority. They could certainly be done by Congress.
Speaker 16: But separate question about whether you'd have the votes in
Speaker 16: Congress to.
Speaker 4: Do this well. And with that question, what are you
Speaker 4: telling clients right now with PwC about what you think
Speaker 4: is realistic knowing that there could be divided government? Are
Speaker 4: there areas of ten policy you do expect will change
Speaker 4: regardless of who is in ultimate control?
Speaker 16: I do, yeah, So you know, on the on the
Speaker 16: sort of good news side, for lack of a better term,
Speaker 16: both parties have agreed that no one making less than
Speaker 16: four under thousand dollars should experience this automatic tax increase
Speaker 16: that happens at the end of twenty twenty five. So
Speaker 16: that is now like table stakes in a divided government
Speaker 16: or even in unified control. No matter which party had
Speaker 16: unified control, both parties say no one lessen four unite
Speaker 16: thousand dollars should experience this automatic tax increase. That's about
Speaker 16: ninety five percent of all income tax payers in the country.
Speaker 16: There will be a negotiation if in divide a government
Speaker 16: of the more than four hundred thousand dollars crowd, There'll
Speaker 16: be a negotiation over the pass through deduction, the state
Speaker 16: tax exemption, you know, all the other child tax credit
Speaker 16: which gets cut in half at the end of twenty
Speaker 16: twenty five, although there's I think general consensus that letting
Speaker 16: that cut in half is not preferred policy. And look,
Speaker 16: I don't know who the next president is going to be,
Speaker 16: but if former President Trump becomes President Trump again, then
Speaker 16: you have to take this tariff question quite seriously and
Speaker 16: start looking at do we import product, where do we
Speaker 16: import it from? Is there a domestic alternative, and the like.
Speaker 16: So these are the kind of scenario planning questions we're
Speaker 16: going through.
Speaker 4: Well and as we continue to do. So please come
Speaker 4: back and talk to us more about it. Wish we
Speaker 4: had more time today. Rohit Kumar as principal and co
Speaker 4: leader of Washington National Tax Services at PwC and of course,
Speaker 4: former deputy Chief of Staff to Mitch McConnell in the Senate.
Speaker 1: Thanks for listening to the Balance of Power podcast.
Speaker 14: Make sure to subscribe if you haven't already, at Apple, Spotify.
Speaker 17: Or wherever you get your podcasts, and
Speaker 9: You can find us live every weekday from Washington, DC
Speaker 9: at noontime Eastern at Bloomberg dot com.