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 Applecarplay.
Speaker 3: And then Rouno 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: The President announcing the new tariffs on an additional eighteen
Speaker 4: billion dollars of Chinese imports. The announcement from the Rose
Speaker 4: Garden with evs in focus here the rate increasing fourfold,
Speaker 4: as Bloomberg reported two days ago, twenty five percent to
Speaker 4: one hundred. You've got lithium ion EV batteries on here,
Speaker 4: solar panels doubling to fifty percent, Tariffs on semiconductors doubling
Speaker 4: to fifty percent as well, all in effect by the
Speaker 4: year twenty twenty five. We're lucky to have the in
Speaker 4: site of Gene Sperling, senior economic advisor to the President,
Speaker 4: who has advised many presidents on the economy, and he
Speaker 4: joins us now live here on Bloomberg. Gene, it's great
Speaker 4: to have you back. We just heard the president's remarks.
Speaker 4: Our listeners and viewers had a chance to listen and
Speaker 4: watch live. Is Joe Biden not a free markets guy anymore.
Speaker 5: The President is a fair competition markets guy. That implies
Speaker 5: to how he looks at domestic market competition. He wants
Speaker 5: fair competition. That same principle applies internationally. We want nothing
Speaker 5: more than for countries like China, particularly China, to be
Speaker 5: a fair competitor where we are all playing by the
Speaker 5: same rules. We all know what happens though, with China's
Speaker 5: economic strategy. They decide that instead of dealing with their
Speaker 5: own demand internally, that they're going to grow by exporting
Speaker 5: at all costs. And what that really means is exporting
Speaker 5: at unrealistically overly subsidized costs that help their export numbers
Speaker 5: at the expense of American workers in American industry. And
Speaker 5: we've seen this movie before. We don't want to see
Speaker 5: it again now. The President is not coming at this
Speaker 5: just with a tariff approach. From the campaign when he
Speaker 5: had his Build Back Better strategy, there's been a focus
Speaker 5: exactly on this, the strategic manufacturing, jobs and industries of
Speaker 5: the future, ensuring that we both have a strategy to
Speaker 5: encourage investment. And it is remarkable to see over eight
Speaker 5: hundred billion of new private sector investment coming in in
Speaker 5: these critical sectors, but we know what could throw that
Speaker 5: off is to be flooded with Chinese imports on those
Speaker 5: same areas. So this is a very strategic hip, but
Speaker 5: it is one that is designed to ensure and encourage
Speaker 5: and fair competition and make clear you're not going to
Speaker 5: do this incredible over subsidization at times, trying to create
Speaker 5: more products than exist than there is demand in the
Speaker 5: whole world, and to do stuff that is so below
Speaker 5: market costs that it is your effort to grow at
Speaker 5: our expense.
Speaker 4: Okay, you just said a lot there, Gene. I'm just
Speaker 4: trying to get a sense of what's motivating the president here,
Speaker 4: having seen the surgical approach on certain items as opposed
Speaker 4: to the across the board approach that we saw from
Speaker 4: the Trump administration, and I know that the administration has
Speaker 4: been trying to highlight that difference, but we didn't see
Speaker 4: anything go down, and having seen all of the Trump
Speaker 4: tariffs remain in place, it sounds like he was on
Speaker 4: the right track.
Speaker 5: There just couldn't be a greater difference. And first of all,
Speaker 5: let's even just look at the results. Our trade deficit
Speaker 5: with China is right now, the lowest it's been in
Speaker 5: a decade, lower than any of the four years under
Speaker 5: the previous administration. There was no strategy on semi to
Speaker 5: actually revive a semiconductor industry in the United States to
Speaker 5: compete for electric vehicle jobs or electric batteries, no strategy
Speaker 5: at all. Now what you've seen is the most aggressive
Speaker 5: legislation that is widely praised by the US private sector
Speaker 5: and labor as well for encouraging more jobs here. So
Speaker 5: the President, as part of that integrated strategy that he
Speaker 5: has been working on every day since he's been here,
Speaker 5: is saying, we know what could disrupt our effort to
Speaker 5: increase supply and to make sure our companies have a
Speaker 5: chance to compete fairly and to sell our products domestically
Speaker 5: and externally, is for to engage as they continue have
Speaker 5: have in oversubsidization of key manufacturing sectors. This is not
Speaker 5: just our opinion, This is Europe's opinion. It is the
Speaker 5: opinion of even major other major of the bricks others,
Speaker 5: well you know which ones that would that China is
Speaker 5: not playing by the rules and that they are seeking
Speaker 5: to export their way out of their challenges at the
Speaker 5: expense of others. So this is really part of that strategy. Now,
Speaker 5: going across the board in areas that are not essential,
Speaker 5: where we're not trying to build supply where they could
Speaker 5: actually hurt production here or hurt families is not part
Speaker 5: of that kind of strategic approach. And if we had
Speaker 5: done nothing till now, if there's been no Chips Act,
Speaker 5: if there's been no Infrastructure bill, if there's been no
Speaker 5: IRA bill to urge electric vehicles and green manufacturing here,
Speaker 5: you could say, oh my god, this is just a
Speaker 5: one part, you know, off the cuff trade strategy.
Speaker 3: It's not.
Speaker 5: This has been part of an integrated strategy that has
Speaker 5: shown we can induce the private sector to create supply
Speaker 5: and manufacturing here, and manufacturing, as we know, punches above
Speaker 5: its weight in terms of private sector R and D
Speaker 5: innovation patents and the spread of suppliers and strong supply
Speaker 5: chain that we saw how much we were hurt by
Speaker 5: not having during the pandemic. And we are not going
Speaker 5: to let be disrupted with unfair trade practices from China.
Speaker 5: If they want to play by the rules, bring it on,
Speaker 5: let's compete.
Speaker 2: Okay.
Speaker 4: I want to talk about briefly our relationship with China
Speaker 4: and the reaction. Gene Spurling, the President said just now
Speaker 4: in the Rose Garden that China imports of US goods,
Speaker 4: to your point on the trade balance barely budged under
Speaker 4: the trade deal. But I see now the reaction from
Speaker 4: Beijing resolutely opposes the president's decision, sees the move as
Speaker 4: political manipulation. What's the drama for then, if we weren't
Speaker 4: buying China evs to begin with, and what does this
Speaker 4: mean for our relationship?
Speaker 5: Well, I think it's very clear, and the President's been
Speaker 5: very clear. We're not trying to provoke a trade war,
Speaker 5: We're not trying to hurt relations We're trying to have
Speaker 5: a sustainable, fair relationship where nobody seeks to strengthen their
Speaker 5: economy through unfair trade practices at the expense of others.
Speaker 5: But it really, you know, we're not talking about a
Speaker 5: situation of little differences in small products. We're talking about
Speaker 5: almost a global consensus that China still operates on a
Speaker 5: model where they oversubsidize products to the extent sometimes where
Speaker 5: they have more capacity than there is global demand. At
Speaker 5: that point, you just have an organized strategic effort to
Speaker 5: flood the market with cheap goods that undercut those who
Speaker 5: are trying to play by the rules, who can't possibly
Speaker 5: compete because their costs are so low, not because of innovation,
Speaker 5: not because they actually have lower costs, but because of
Speaker 5: excessive market subsidization. So the President is by having a
Speaker 5: targeted strategy making clear this is not just an across
Speaker 5: the board slap at your face that would also hurt
Speaker 5: American consumers and raise their prices. We are looking at
Speaker 5: the areas in electric vehicles, in semiconductors, in electric batteries,
Speaker 5: where we have invested in strong apply and a strong
Speaker 5: supply chain in the United States and are seeking to
Speaker 5: have an industry that can compete long into the future,
Speaker 5: where both sides are playing realistically with what their costs
Speaker 5: are going forward. So I think it sends a strong message.
Speaker 5: It lets them know the areas where they need to
Speaker 5: play by the rules, or at least understand that we've
Speaker 5: seen this movie before of them crushing American communities and
Speaker 5: jobs with unfair subsidies, and we're not going to just
Speaker 5: watch that movie again. You have a president who's going
Speaker 5: to take strong action. This is part of a comprehensive
Speaker 5: strategy he's had for American manufacturing revival. The private sector
Speaker 5: has bought in, labor has bought in, the American public
Speaker 5: has bought in. We're not going to sit by and
Speaker 5: let it be disrupted by China if they want to
Speaker 5: play by the rules and have fair competition. And what
Speaker 5: the President is saying is bring it on. Let's have that.
Speaker 4: Bring it on, says Gene Sperling. Gene, I'm glad you
Speaker 4: could join us today, and I appreciate that having heard
Speaker 4: from the President on tariffs and now his economic advisor
Speaker 4: with the Griffith Observatory at his back, that's why you
Speaker 4: should be on YouTube. Gene. Thank you. We're going to
Speaker 4: play this to the panel next hour. We'll have Rick
Speaker 4: Davis and Jeanie Shanzano with us. Also June Grasso from
Speaker 4: Bloomberg Law and Congress from Brad Sherman, the Democrat from California,
Speaker 4: will join with a lot more to talk about here
Speaker 4: on the fastest show in politics, This is Bloomberg.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast kens
Speaker 1: just live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then.
Speaker 3: Rod Oro 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 6: Really, it's where New York is the center of the action,
Speaker 6: and it has been for the last almost month as
Speaker 6: Donald Trump has been on criminal trial in this hush
Speaker 6: money case that continues today. But we could be nearing
Speaker 6: the endgame here is the prosecution's getting ready to finish
Speaker 6: up it's questioning of Michael Cohene as former attorney and fixer.
Speaker 4: Yeah, the cross will be the news is what we're
Speaker 4: expecting here. Obviously he hasn't said anything yet that we
Speaker 4: haven't really heard before. But yeah, to your point, I
Speaker 4: thought lawmakers were coming back to town today. The Speaker
Speaker 4: of the House is at the courthouse, along with several
Speaker 4: contenders for vice president. We want to get into this
Speaker 4: with June Grosso, of course, the host of Bloomberg Law,
Speaker 4: who has a beautiful distillation every evening six pm Eastern
Speaker 4: Time on Bloomberg Radio about everything that happened over the
Speaker 4: course of the day. June, it's great to have you
Speaker 4: back from world headquarters in New York. Is there any
Speaker 4: component of potential witness intimidation here? I realize anybody can
Speaker 4: come to the courthouse right but when you have some
Speaker 4: of the highest ranking elected officials. We saw Senator Rick
Speaker 4: Scott there today, the Speaker of the House.
Speaker 7: What's the.
Speaker 4: Testimony supposed to key off of here? What does Michael
Speaker 4: Cohen think when he looks up and sees all these people.
Speaker 8: Well, I'll tell you one that happened after the mid
Speaker 8: morning break. By the way, the speaker was down there,
Speaker 8: I think for about forty five minutes and left. But
Speaker 8: Michael Cohen, after the mid morning break, was in the
Speaker 8: middle of his testimony, and according to our reporters who
Speaker 8: were there, a number of these Republican leaders walked into
Speaker 8: the courtroom at the time when Michael Cohen was testifying
Speaker 8: so late, and they walked right down the middle of
Speaker 8: the court asle and went to their seat. You know,
Speaker 8: it is a little bit intimidating, I think for witnesses
Speaker 8: who are on the stand now. Michael Cohen may be
Speaker 8: used to it, but other witnesses it would be intimidating.
Speaker 8: For another interesting thing is the gag order. You know,
Speaker 8: these lawmakers came because Donald Trump is looking to have
Speaker 8: his family's not there. One of his sons is there
Speaker 8: on and off, but he's looking to have this support
Speaker 8: from his backers, But did he tell them anything? Did
Speaker 8: he tell them anything about what to say about the witnesses?
Speaker 8: If so, that's a violation of the gag order tech technically, So,
Speaker 8: I mean there are a lot of It's very unusual,
Speaker 8: and if the jurors know who they are, I wonder
Speaker 8: how they view this, Maybe not in the way that
Speaker 8: Donald Trump wants them to view it as oh, this
Speaker 8: is support, but more as oh, this is intimidation, and
Speaker 8: what's going on here? It's really unusual.
Speaker 6: Well, it's an interesting point on the gag order, Jude,
Speaker 6: because of course that Barstrump from speaking about certain witnesses,
Speaker 6: including Michael Cohen, but also members of the judges family,
Speaker 6: including his daughter and House speaker Mike Johnson specifically called
Speaker 6: out Judge Murshawn's daughter and her TISA to Democratic fundraising today,
Speaker 6: which I thought was interesting when it comes to the
Speaker 6: actual testimony though that we are hearing from Michael Cohen
Speaker 6: and the questions we have gotten from the prosecution to
Speaker 6: what extent is their line of questioning today basically trying
Speaker 6: to set up to hedge against what could come in
Speaker 6: the cross examination when the defense gets its turn.
Speaker 8: Well that's how they ended the direct examination. The last
Speaker 8: thing they did was go through, you know, Michael Cohen's
Speaker 8: various convictions and the lies that he told to Banks
Speaker 8: and Congress, et cetera. And the final question was one
Speaker 8: of those do you regret this? And he apparently his
Speaker 8: voice choked up and he talked about regretting all he'd
Speaker 8: done and he lost his moral compass, and they ended
Speaker 8: on that. So they did try to sort of what
Speaker 8: they call it, take the sting out of what's definitely
Speaker 8: coming up on the cross examination. But you know, he
Speaker 8: is a troublesome, really flawed star witness because he not
Speaker 8: only is saying that you know, he lied about at
Speaker 8: the times before Congress, but he's also on the stand
Speaker 8: saying and they're asking him, what about this document?
Speaker 9: Is that false?
Speaker 8: Yes? Did you lie about that?
Speaker 9: Yes?
Speaker 8: So his testimony itself is filled with I lied, I lied,
Speaker 8: I lied, but now you believe me. And so the
Speaker 8: prosecution is hoping that the backup that they have with
Speaker 8: the documents is going to make the jury, you know,
Speaker 8: comfortable believing him. I think one of the best documents
Speaker 8: they've had so far was introduced yesterday afternoon, and it
Speaker 8: was a slip from the bank saying that he had
Speaker 8: paid the one hundred and thirty thousand dollars to the
Speaker 8: Stormy Daniel's lawyer, and there was handwriting on it from Weiselberg,
Speaker 8: the CFO, and it was the formula for how he
Speaker 8: was going to be paid. And the interesting thing was
Speaker 8: that it took account for the fact that this is
Speaker 8: a little mathematical I'm not gonna get too mathematical, but
Speaker 8: if this is a payment for his services, then it
Speaker 8: would be taxed. If it was a payment reimbursement, it
Speaker 8: wouldn't be taxed. So they figured out what the taxes
Speaker 8: would be. They added another fifty percent onto it so
Speaker 8: that the taxes would be taken care of, and they
Speaker 8: sort of they say it they grossed it up, is
Speaker 8: the term that they used. So that's sort of interesting,
Speaker 8: and I think so very supportive of the fact that,
Speaker 8: you know, Wesseelberg did the formula here. And we've heard
Speaker 8: time and time again that Trump knew, you know, every
Speaker 8: dime that went out in his company. So I thought
Speaker 8: that was really good testimony.
Speaker 7: All right.
Speaker 6: June Grosso, the host of Bloomberg Law, breaking down another
Speaker 6: day of dramatic testimony in the Trump hush money case
Speaker 6: in New York, the trial that is, and of course
Speaker 6: it's not yet over. They are just on lunch break
Speaker 6: right now, June, thank you so much. And of course
Speaker 6: Joe Well, Donald Trump, as he campaigns for the presidency,
Speaker 6: wants to be elected in November, of course, has these
Speaker 6: legal headaches to deal with. President Biden has many headaches
Speaker 6: as well, not in the legal arena, but certainly in
Speaker 6: terms of geopolitics, as he has faced a lot of
Speaker 6: criticism over his handling of Israel and its conflict with
Speaker 6: a Moss most recently the decision to withhold sending large
Speaker 6: bombs to Israel because of concern over how they could
Speaker 6: be used in RAFA.
Speaker 4: Yeah, count the ways, I mean, from geopolitics to border
Speaker 4: politics to the economy. This is a candidate and a
Speaker 4: president spinning a lot of plates right now, as we
Speaker 4: saw him try to employ the Rose Garden strategy earlier
Speaker 4: announcing some new tariffs on China. But fascinating to see
Speaker 4: they're spending so many plates that we forget some of
Speaker 4: them sometimes. Kaylie is the Secretary of State touches down
Speaker 4: in Kiev with all the shuttle diplomacy throughout the Middle East,
Speaker 4: Ukraine is in the focus at the White House today.
Speaker 6: Yeah, the first time we've seen the Secretary there since
Speaker 6: the actual supplemental aid package passed Congress after months and
Speaker 6: months of efforts, finally Ukraine getting more military assistance that
Speaker 6: needed from the US. The question is how quickly does
Speaker 6: it make a difference in that conflict, especially when we're
Speaker 6: seeing another hot conflict in the Middle East as well.
Speaker 6: And it's on that note we want to turn now
Speaker 6: to Maara Rudman. She is the University of Virginia professor
Speaker 6: at the Miller Center. She's also former State Department Deputy
Speaker 6: Special Envoy for Middle East Peace and former Deputy National
Speaker 6: Security Advisor. Professor, thank you so much for being here
Speaker 6: on Bloomberg Television and Radio. If we could first begin
Speaker 6: in the Middle East, as the Prime Minister of Cutter
Speaker 6: was actually speaking at the Cutter Economic Forum that Bloomberg
Speaker 6: is helping host earlier today, suggesting that right now cease
Speaker 6: fire talks between Israel and AMMA are essentially at a
Speaker 6: stale meat. If it doesn't happen in the near immediate future,
Speaker 6: is it ever going to.
Speaker 9: Well, Yes, the hope will continue and the work must
Speaker 9: continue on getting to a pause in the fighting, in
Speaker 9: getting to Israel to focus more strategically on their goals
Speaker 9: and the best ability to defend themselves and getting hostages
Speaker 9: out and humanitarian aid in These are all the reasons
Speaker 9: why it's really critical to maximize pressure and focus on
Speaker 9: getting to a cease fire agreement.
Speaker 4: So, with that said, how much would a ceasefire depend
Speaker 4: on hostages being released? Knowing that not everyone believes they
Speaker 4: are all alive, and we keep hearing reports that Hamas
Speaker 4: cannot identify the location of all of the hostages with
Speaker 4: whom they are dealing, how does this play out in
Speaker 4: the end.
Speaker 9: So part of a ceasefire is very much dependent on
Speaker 9: getting hostages out, and that is badly at this point,
Speaker 9: whether it's bodies or whoever is remaining alive. The hostages
Speaker 9: have obviously been held under horrific circumstances, were taken into
Speaker 9: Gaza under even more horrific circumstances, and it is critical
Speaker 9: that they be returned they or sadly their bodies in
Speaker 9: terms of what Hamas knows or doesn't know about where
Speaker 9: they are. That was certainly brought out early in the
Speaker 9: immediate post effects of October seventh, given the number of
Speaker 9: different groups associated with Hamas that had a role in
Speaker 9: taking those hostages in. I think it has less credibility
Speaker 9: at this point since it is so clear that Yahya Sinhoar,
Speaker 9: who is the military commander of Hamas in Gaza, who
Speaker 9: orchestrated this entire October seventh attack and the aftermath, is
Speaker 9: a guy who is very much in control. So I
Speaker 9: think it begs credibility at this point that they don't
Speaker 9: know exactly where most, if not all, of the hostages are.
Speaker 6: It's interesting and I wonder if any of them maybe
Speaker 6: in Rafa, where more than a million Palestudians had sought
Speaker 6: refuge and where the US policy is really coming to most,
Speaker 6: or a conflict perhaps with what Israel would like to do,
Speaker 6: as the US would not like to see a major
Speaker 6: ground invasion of Rafa, and yet Israel is already making
Speaker 6: incremental moves in that city. In particular, the UN has
Speaker 6: said within the last twenty four hours that some four
Speaker 6: hundred and fifty thousand civilians have already fled Rafa in
Speaker 6: the last week. Do they have anywhere safe to go?
Speaker 6: For all of the administration saying we just want to
Speaker 6: make sure there is a plan in place to protect
Speaker 6: civilian life in Rafa, while Israel is trying to achieve
Speaker 6: its objectives of eradicating Hamas, getting those last remaining battalions
Speaker 6: they're taken care of. I just wonder if it really
Speaker 6: is possible for Israel to do both.
Speaker 10: Well.
Speaker 9: Kayley. The question you raised is a question being raised,
Speaker 9: and it has been continuously raised by the US administration
Speaker 9: at the most senior levels, and also reportedly by Israel military,
Speaker 9: Israel's military leaders who are increasingly coming out more publicly
Speaker 9: and questioning the ways in which Prime Mister Neyahu has
Speaker 9: been directing this effort. So there's a concern certainly about
Speaker 9: where the hostages are. It is almost certain that they're
Speaker 9: in tunnels that many, many, many tunnels that are deep
Speaker 9: under Gaza, and so whether they're in Rafa or in communits,
Speaker 9: they're almost certainly surrounding and being used as human shields
Speaker 9: for Yaya Sinwar, the military commander of Hamas, and probably
Speaker 9: for many other Hamas fighters. To be clear, much of
Speaker 9: Hamas the military units are deep underground in these tunnels,
Speaker 9: they do not. Hamas does not allow the many Palestinian
Speaker 9: innocence that privilege. In other words, they are using Palestinian
Speaker 9: innocence very much as fodder in a horrible way. And
Speaker 9: those folks are all on the ground, and as you say,
Speaker 9: there are no real safe places in Gaza at this point.
Speaker 9: And that's part of the point that National Security Advisor
Speaker 9: Jake Sullivan made really clearly just recently in saying that
Speaker 9: the United States has yet to see any kind of
Speaker 9: credible plan by Israel on how to protect Palestinians above
Speaker 9: ground in Gaza.
Speaker 4: Lur, I know you were in Ukraine just last month,
Speaker 4: in Kiev where the Secretary of State is today, knowing
Speaker 4: that the money has been passed, the weapons are on
Speaker 4: the way. What was the purpose of this visit by
Speaker 4: Anthony Blincoln if not only to send a message to
Speaker 4: Vladimir Putin?
Speaker 9: So in fact, I think that Secretary Blincoln was sending
Speaker 9: a message both to Vladimir Putin and frankly to the
Speaker 9: people of Ukraine as well. He and President Zelenski have
Speaker 9: a very good and strong relationship. Ukrainians have been quite
Speaker 9: concerned about the degree of US continued commitment to their
Speaker 9: very real fight, to their struggle against Russia, given how
Speaker 9: long it has taken the United States, frankly because of
Speaker 9: skirmishes within the Republican Party in Congress how long it
Speaker 9: had taken the United States to get that vitally needed
Speaker 9: assistance to Ukraine. So I believe what Tony Blnkoln was
Speaker 9: doing was spending a message was in a very real way,
Speaker 9: showing the people of Ukraine as well as President Zelensky
Speaker 9: the degree of US commitment and offering some reassurance, as
Speaker 9: Jake Sullivan did on his visit back. I believe in
Speaker 9: the end of March that usaid some of it has arrived,
Speaker 9: more is coming, and it will very much help Ukraine
Speaker 9: in the very significant challenges they are facing down from Russia.
Speaker 6: And finally Mara. In our final minute with you, obviously,
Speaker 6: while the US has provided aid to Ukraine, the US
Speaker 6: also has put essentially limits on what it would like
Speaker 6: Ukraine to do with that aid, including not doing anything
Speaker 6: offensively into Russian territory for Ukraine to win this war.
Speaker 6: Are we going to have to see a tweak on
Speaker 6: the margin to administration policy on that front?
Speaker 9: Two, Kayle, I think that's a very good way of
Speaker 9: describing it in terms of the language you just used
Speaker 9: about a tweak on the margins. I do think it's
Speaker 9: important that the United States have the most expansive possible
Speaker 9: view of allowing Ukraine to fight this fight. The United
Speaker 9: States is quite fortunate that we are the United States
Speaker 9: and Americans are not on the ground having to defend
Speaker 9: against Russia. We need to make sure that Ukraine has
Speaker 9: every ability to do so and to prevent the further
Speaker 9: spread of Russian aggression in Europe.
Speaker 4: Laura, it's great to have you and we appreciate the
Speaker 4: time today on balance of power. MARAA Rudman, University of
Speaker 4: Virginia professor, former State Department Deputy Special Envoy from Middle
Speaker 4: East Peace, spends a good deal of time in the
Speaker 4: National security space in your insights are important to us.
Speaker 4: I'm Joe Matthew alongside Kaylee Lines in Washington. Kaylie, we
Speaker 4: have to play this to the panel. We haven't heard
Speaker 4: from Rick and Genie yet, and we have a lot
Speaker 4: to cover today from both spheres and politics and both
Speaker 4: ends of Pennsylvania Avenue.
Speaker 6: Indeed, and up in New York where we're seeing the
Speaker 6: veepsteaks take things on the road all the way to
Speaker 6: New York City outside the courthouse.
Speaker 4: The optics are amazing today and we'll have more on
Speaker 4: all of this next with our signature panel on the
Speaker 4: fastest show in politics, This is Bloomberg.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch
Speaker 1: us live weekdays at noon Eastern on Appo, car Play,
Speaker 1: 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 6: I'm Kaylee Lines alongside Joe Matthew here in Washington, where
Speaker 6: we have had our eyes on New York on the
Speaker 6: ongoing hush money trial of former President Donald Trump. But
Speaker 6: we have another legal development that it impacts potentially the
Speaker 6: current president, or at least his family, specifically his son
Speaker 6: Hunter Biden. According to the Associated Press, a judge has
Speaker 6: rejected Hunter Biden's bid to delay his federal gun trial.
Speaker 6: That trial is now going to begin Joe next month
Speaker 6: in Delaware. Again, this is the son of the president,
Speaker 6: it's not the president himself, but still this could be
Speaker 6: a headache for Joe Biden as to campaigns for reelection.
Speaker 6: The legal issues certainly do not begin an end with
Speaker 6: the Republican presumptive nominee.
Speaker 4: Well, that's for sure, And obviously the president has had
Speaker 4: to deal with this more than once although at the
Speaker 4: same time, we've seen efforts in Congress to try to
Speaker 4: vilify what they refer to as the Biden crime family
Speaker 4: kind of fall flat to the point where it doesn't
Speaker 4: really appear that the impeachment preceding or the impeachment inquiry
Speaker 4: that could lead to a proceeding is underwan any longer.
Speaker 4: It's a lot of gray there right now with James
Speaker 4: Comber and his Oversight Committee.
Speaker 6: Yeah, so I guess we'll have to wait and see
Speaker 6: if we get developments out of Congress or any further
Speaker 6: announcements in regarding impeachment from the House Speaker Mike Johnson.
Speaker 6: But he wasn't actually even on Capitol Hill in Washington,
Speaker 6: d C. This morning. He was up in New York
Speaker 6: at the courthouse where Donald Trump is today. And this
Speaker 6: is what the Speaker had to say outside.
Speaker 11: I'm an attorney, I'm a former litigator myself. I am
Speaker 11: disgusted by what is happening here, what is being done
Speaker 11: here to our entire system of justice overall. The people
Speaker 11: are losing faith right now in this country, in our institutions.
Speaker 4: Let's get into it with our signature panel. Rick Davis
Speaker 4: and Genie Shanzano join us on balance of power for
Speaker 4: their take on this and a few other stories happening today.
Speaker 4: Great to see both of you here, Rick. These are
Speaker 4: politically motivated trials and they are a disgrace, said the
Speaker 4: Speaker of the House. You can weigh in on the
Speaker 4: value of this entourage, but I guess the point here
Speaker 4: is he can say things Donald Trump cannot. Is this
Speaker 4: a good strategy?
Speaker 12: Well, it certainly improves upon the strategy. I mean, when
Speaker 12: this trial got started, Donald Trump was basically alone in
Speaker 12: that courtroom and very few people as family coming in
Speaker 12: every now and then he started complaining about that, and
Speaker 12: I think limited himself to what he was starting to
Speaker 12: say about judges and what not to not trigger any
Speaker 12: more fines for contempt. So yeah, now it seems like
Speaker 12: this is all part of a choreograph campaign to interview
Speaker 12: vice presidential candidates, to show party unity around Donald Trump,
Speaker 12: and to undermine the legal process that's going on in
Speaker 12: New York. I came up today to New York just
Speaker 12: to see if I could get on the list of
Speaker 12: VP candidates. I guess that's probably not going to happen,
Speaker 12: But the reality is it's going to be crowded up here.
Speaker 6: Indeed, well of the VP candidates who are at the
Speaker 6: courthouse alongside Mike Johnson today. We're talking specifically about North
Speaker 6: Dakota Governor Doug Burgham, the Vakramswami, former presidential candidate himself,
Speaker 6: who was running against Trump at one point. In Florida
Speaker 6: Congressman Byron Donalds, who it's also been floated. But Mike
Speaker 6: Johnson has a genie. He's not in the running for VEEP.
Speaker 6: Why did he feel the need to go? Brick was
Speaker 6: just speaking to the strategy here for Donald Trump. What's
Speaker 6: the strategy for Mike Johnson.
Speaker 13: He's got to stay very close to Donald Trump because
Speaker 13: that's why he has his job.
Speaker 10: After all.
Speaker 13: That's why Donald Trump decided not to support Marjorie Taylor
Speaker 13: Green for the moment in her quest to vacate him.
Speaker 13: But I have to tell you I find this all
Speaker 13: a little depressing and sad for Donald Trump. I mean,
Speaker 13: you can't get your family there to show you some
Speaker 13: love when you're facing thirty four felon accounts, well except
Speaker 13: for his son, and so you're getting what all of
Speaker 13: these people who are only there because they want to
Speaker 13: maintain their positions or get their positions. It's very very strange.
Speaker 13: And you know, don't these people have anything else to
Speaker 13: do besides sitting in a New York courtroom all day,
Speaker 13: the Speaker of the House, sitting senators in the US.
Speaker 13: And you know, I would think they might be a
Speaker 13: little careful about calling out a young woman. We've heard
Speaker 13: Mike Johnson, We've heard JD. Vance attacking the judge's daughter
Speaker 13: because she has a job. I mean, folks, look back
Speaker 13: at what happened to Rudy Giuliani and others when they
Speaker 13: attacked Ruby Freeman and her daughter one hundred and forty
Speaker 13: eight million dollars later, you think they'd be very careful
Speaker 13: of this. But nothing can get between any of them
Speaker 13: and Trump apparently at this point.
Speaker 4: Well, while we're talking about the veepstakes here, I'm curious
Speaker 4: to get both of your reaction to what we heard
Speaker 4: from Ken Griffin Citadel, of course, talking about the weight
Speaker 4: to see who wins the veepstakes, he was asked if
Speaker 4: he had donated to the campaign.
Speaker 2: Yet here's what he said, I have not, will you.
Speaker 7: I'm going to wait to see who he picks as
Speaker 7: his VP candidate.
Speaker 1: Is there anyone whom you'd like.
Speaker 7: To see him pick as his VP candidate.
Speaker 1: I you know, I don't. This is again like poking
Speaker 1: the bear.
Speaker 7: Not sure which way my recommendation goes in terms of
Speaker 7: helping that person's prospects.
Speaker 4: So he doesn't want to thumb the scale on this one,
Speaker 4: I guess, Rick. But in a serious world, I don't
Speaker 4: mean to make you smirk here, but taking a look
Speaker 4: at those folks who were actually at the courthouse and
Speaker 4: some of the others who have been to fundraisers in
Speaker 4: Palm Beach recently, do any of them appeal more to
Speaker 4: the investment crowd, well, for sure.
Speaker 12: And I think this is what I'm hearing within the
Speaker 12: Republican donor community from people like King Griffin is I
Speaker 12: can see toward supporting Donald Trump those who haven't so far,
Speaker 12: and they're a lot if he picks the right vice president. Obviously,
Speaker 12: Doug Burgham is a good example of that. To a
Speaker 12: lesser extent, Jadie Vance, I've heard the Virginia Governor Youngkin
Speaker 12: mentioned many times how much more comfortable we would be
Speaker 12: if he had someone like Youngkin on and his VP selection.
Speaker 12: So I do think those kinds of folks matter, and
Speaker 12: I think that's an advantage for Tim Scott. You know,
Speaker 12: he's a ranking on the Banking Committee in the United States Senate.
Speaker 12: He's had a lot of support from Wall Street and
Speaker 12: the investment community, and so I think these things are
Speaker 12: going to matter to that group as to whether or
Speaker 12: not they put their thumb on the scale. As you say,
Speaker 12: and look, I mean, you know, somebody like Ken Griffin,
Speaker 12: He's already given sixty million dollars this cycle. I mean
Speaker 12: like he can really make a difference if they get
Speaker 12: the right candidate on that picket.
Speaker 6: Well, and where Ken Griffin is putting a lot of
Speaker 6: his money after he initially had donated to Nicky Haley
Speaker 6: obviously hasn't donated to Donald Trump yet, is down ballot
Speaker 6: races Genie. In fact, that's where a lot of mega
Speaker 6: donors have shifted their focus who have been reluctant to
Speaker 6: support Donald Trump, including the Coke Network for example, which
Speaker 6: was also back in Niki Haley now is looking down ballot.
Speaker 6: And on that note, we do have a pretty important
Speaker 6: primary that could help decide the composition of the United
Speaker 6: States Senate, potentially in Maryland. Larry Hogan, the very popular
Speaker 6: former governor of Maryland, the Republican is going to be
Speaker 6: up again either David Trone or Angela also Brooks, depending
Speaker 6: on who wins that Democratic primary today, could potentially Genie
Speaker 6: the Democrat decide whether or not Republicans flip that seat,
Speaker 6: and Larry Hogan could get a seat from Maryland at
Speaker 6: West Virginia to that the Senate's gone, right.
Speaker 13: It absolutely is. And of course Larry Hogan incredibly popular
Speaker 13: and interestingly not somebody who would probably be visiting the
Speaker 13: trial with Donald Trump because he has been a big
Speaker 13: Trump critic. But I think we are seeing in some
Speaker 13: of these down ballot races, unlike in the last midterm,
Speaker 13: Republicans are willing to go with and choose candidates who
Speaker 13: have a better shot of winning, not just because of
Speaker 13: their fealty to Donald Trump. And Larry Hogan's a perfect
Speaker 13: example of that. You know, on the Democratic side, it's
Speaker 13: a fascinating primary because also Brooks has the support of
Speaker 13: basically the establishment in Maryland up and down the ballot.
Speaker 13: But you know, Trone has spent so much money is
Speaker 13: I'm sure you know Killy living in that area. You
Speaker 13: can't go to the DC Virginia Maryland area and not
Speaker 13: see his his ads, and so it's going to be
Speaker 13: interesting to see where Democrats go on that does the
Speaker 13: establishment win? You know, you've got you know, a woman
Speaker 13: with a lot of support in that area, and you've
Speaker 13: got somebody who can spend his own money and basically
Speaker 13: making the case, do you want to be you know,
Speaker 13: spend the party's money we needed elsewhere, Let me spend mine.
Speaker 13: And so it's going to be fascinating to see what
Speaker 13: happens tonight.
Speaker 4: Well, so, Rick Davis, what is worth more the endorsements
Speaker 4: of Wes Moore Senator Chris van holland Stannie Hoyer or
Speaker 4: sixty dollars in your personal bank account.
Speaker 12: We're going to find out tonight because that's exactly what
Speaker 12: we're looking at in that Democratic primary. But I hate
Speaker 12: to burst their bubble. All of that may be for
Speaker 12: not because when I see the Kurt pulling, Larry Hogan
Speaker 12: is crushing him almost a twenty race, and I know
Speaker 12: that the popular thing is to say, oh, you know,
Speaker 12: people vote differently for governor than they do for the Senate.
Speaker 12: And generally speaking, I'd say that's probably the case, and
Speaker 12: they'd have to be very different in this case. But
Speaker 12: he left Larry Hogan left office with a seventy seven
Speaker 12: percent approval rating. Let's not underestimate the fact that it
Speaker 12: almost if you look at the polling today, is irrelevant
Speaker 12: who wins this primary tonight. It's going to be a
Speaker 12: very stiff undertaking for Democrats to hold that seat.
Speaker 9: All right.
Speaker 6: Rick Davis and Jeanie Shanzano are signature political panel joining
Speaker 6: us on this primary day. Thank you so much, and
Speaker 6: Joe again, we almost forget that they're still ongoing primaries
Speaker 6: because we have a presumptive Republican and Democratic nominee for president.
Speaker 6: But there still are a lot of important ones that
Speaker 6: are for other races that we still.
Speaker 9: Have to pay attention to.
Speaker 4: This is a big one in Maryland, and to your point,
Speaker 4: you get this in West Virginia behind you tonight.
Speaker 14: And we could have this decided already.
Speaker 4: We'll find out together.
Speaker 7: Yeah, you're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast
Speaker 7: Ken just live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay.
Speaker 3: And enroun Oo 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: Thanks for joining on the fastest show in politics alongside
Speaker 4: Kaylee Lines I'm Joe Matthew. As we were just discussing, Kayley,
Speaker 4: the political challenges that Israel policy has brought the Biden
Speaker 4: campaign and the Biden White House for that matter. It's
Speaker 4: been a problem for a lot of progressive Democrats, and
Speaker 4: the withholding of at least one, maybe two shipments of
Speaker 4: weapons upset a lot of Republicans on this matter, which
Speaker 4: will point our listeners and viewers to House Resolution twelve nineteen,
Speaker 4: a messaging bill, but an important one today, Kaylee that
Speaker 4: we'll see a vote tomorrow looks like yep.
Speaker 6: That is when the House is set to vote on this.
Speaker 6: This is essentially a bill that would force President Biden
Speaker 6: to send withheld weapons to Israel. Remember that this weapons
Speaker 6: withholding that we've seen the administration take here is offensive
Speaker 6: weapons large bombs that they have not yet sent, just
Speaker 6: paused for now because of concern over how they could
Speaker 6: be used in RAFA. Does not actually have anything to
Speaker 6: do with the supplemental funding that Congress pass that was
Speaker 6: mostly defensive weapons, including things that would restock the Iron
Speaker 6: Dome missile defense system. But there has been a lot
Speaker 6: of consternation about this decision from the administration, and now
Speaker 6: there's going to be an attempt to put members of
Speaker 6: the House on the record choosing a side on this.
Speaker 6: One of them who is going to have to do
Speaker 6: so is joining us now. Democratic Congressman Brad Sherman of
Speaker 6: California is with us here on Bloomberg Television and Radio. Congressman,
Speaker 6: welcome back. Thank you so much for joining us on
Speaker 6: Balance of Power. Will you be voting yes to this
Speaker 6: bill tomorrow?
Speaker 14: I will probably vote no.
Speaker 10: I wish the Republicans had worked with Democrats on a
Speaker 10: bipartisan resolution that we could vote yes on, because we
Speaker 10: should be shipping those weaponsons and more. Much more important
Speaker 10: than the bombs that are getting on the discussion is
Speaker 10: the jay dams. Those are kits that turn smart bombs
Speaker 10: dumb bombs into smart bombs. And to criticize Israel for
Speaker 10: not acting with precision while depriving them of the kits
Speaker 10: that make the bombs act precisely.
Speaker 14: Is just the wrong message.
Speaker 10: The problem with the Republican resolution is that it not
Speaker 10: only deals with these immediate concerns, but makes Israel permanently
Speaker 10: exempt from.
Speaker 14: The lay He review.
Speaker 10: That's a review to see whether the country's receiving our
Speaker 10: weapons or using them. According to international standards and our standards.
Speaker 14: Israel passes that review.
Speaker 10: Israel is doing a better job, and it's a very
Speaker 10: difficult job, but a better job than any other military
Speaker 10: in waging urban warfare with that while seeking to minimize
Speaker 10: civilian casualties. Now, it's a very hard thing to do,
Speaker 10: and there have been civilian casualties. But to exempt his
Speaker 10: real permanently from the standard is like me going to
Speaker 10: the high school and telling them, don't make my kids
Speaker 10: take the test. No, my kids are smart. I want
Speaker 10: them to take the test, and I know they're going
Speaker 10: to pass. And what we should do is have this
Speaker 10: standard apply and show that Israel is in fact complying
Speaker 10: with international law and our own standards.
Speaker 14: To exempt them.
Speaker 10: Feeds into this worldwide narrative that Israel is not seeking
Speaker 10: to minimize civilian casualties. Now, given that Hamas their whole
Speaker 10: strategy is to surround themselves with as many women and
Speaker 10: children as possible while firing rockets at Israel, that makes
Speaker 10: it difficult on Israel, but that is part of the
Speaker 10: standard that you used to review, and Israel should not
Speaker 10: be exempt.
Speaker 14: Israel, though, however, passes the standards.
Speaker 4: The report by the State Department, Congressman, thanks for being
Speaker 4: with us today. That Anthony Blinken submitted last week does
Speaker 4: bring some concerns accusing Israeli forces of potentially violating international
Speaker 4: humanitarian law. Have you told the President how you feel
Speaker 4: about this?
Speaker 10: I have told the State Department that I don't think
Speaker 10: that they phrased things correctly in that report. But the
Speaker 10: fact is that potentially violate everybody potentially might have violated.
Speaker 10: What the hell does that mean? But the fact is
Speaker 10: that Israel not only complies with the standards, but they
Speaker 10: have a system for reviewing their own military. Look in Vietnam,
Speaker 10: we didn't comply with all the standards, but Lieutenant Kelly
Speaker 10: went to prison because we identify and we had a
Speaker 10: system for.
Speaker 14: Reviewing the actions of our individual soldiers.
Speaker 10: Israel has that as well. They're conducting a number of
Speaker 10: of investigations. So according to Israel, it is possible that
Speaker 10: some of their soldiers acted wrongful, And according to America,
Speaker 10: it is possible that some Israeli soldiers have acted wrongful,
Speaker 10: But that.
Speaker 14: The Leahy standard isn't.
Speaker 10: That you cut off weapons to an ally because some
Speaker 10: soldiers may have acted wrongful, you inspect, you want to
Speaker 10: see the top echelons of any allied government implementing standards
Speaker 10: to hold their soldiers accountable. Israel does that, and that's
Speaker 10: why the ratio of civilian to mill it to terrorist
Speaker 10: deaths in Gaza is actually considerably better.
Speaker 14: Than what we saw in Moses and Fallujah. And we've got.
Speaker 10: A very moral and very capable on military force and
Speaker 10: that's what we.
Speaker 14: Used in a wrap.
Speaker 6: Well, Congressman, it's great to hear your perspective on issue
Speaker 6: of Israel's ongoing war with a mosque. Given your seat
Speaker 6: on the House Foreign Affairs Committee, but you also have
Speaker 6: a seat on another committee, which we'll be focusing on
Speaker 6: here at Bloomberg Tomorrow. House Financial Services will have the
Speaker 6: prudential regulators in front of you and your colleagues in
Speaker 6: a hearing. I'm sure there will be some questions for
Speaker 6: Michael Barr of the FED over the Basil three endgame
Speaker 6: and what that's looking like. But I'm imagining, especially your
Speaker 6: Republican colleagues, will have some very tough questions from Marty
Speaker 6: Grunberg of the FDIC. After that scathing third party report
Speaker 6: came out about the workplace culture at the FDIC, there
Speaker 6: have been a lot of calls serve for the chair
Speaker 6: to resign, would that at least go some distance to
Speaker 6: solving what is described as a deep rooted problem.
Speaker 10: I think we have to deal with the atmosphere at FDIC.
Speaker 10: They have over six thousand employees and they deserve a
Speaker 10: better atmosphere. But as important as those six thousand employees are,
Speaker 10: every American has a state and whether of these BOSL
Speaker 10: three regulations.
Speaker 14: Serve our economy.
Speaker 10: Well, if we go too far one way, banks won't
Speaker 10: have the sufficient capital and we'll see a press a
Speaker 10: need or at least a claim need.
Speaker 14: For bailouts in the future.
Speaker 10: But if we go too far the other way, banks
Speaker 10: won't lend, particularly to small business. They'll just invest in
Speaker 10: treasury bills, and that will leave a small business without
Speaker 10: a way to get the funds that they need. In addition,
Speaker 10: there are individual problems with the proposed regulations, provisions that
Speaker 10: don't treat appropriately energy efficiency standards and clean energy clean
Speaker 10: energy tax credits, which are an asset that banks should
Speaker 10: get credit for. There is a language in Basel three
Speaker 10: that will not give credit for mortgage insurance, so banks
Speaker 10: will be reluctant to lend the first time home buyers,
Speaker 10: even if they have mortgage insurance as a practical matter,
Speaker 10: insulates the bank from risk.
Speaker 14: We've got a host.
Speaker 10: Of other problems where these regulations seem to push the
Speaker 10: bank stared investing in bonds on Wall Street and push.
Speaker 14: Them away from making loans to local.
Speaker 10: Businesses on Main Street. That's the exact opposite of what
Speaker 10: we need. It's local businesses that need the capital. Wall
Speaker 10: Street's doon a fine job providing money to publicly traded corporation.
Speaker 4: Congress, and it's great to have you back, Brad Sherman,
Speaker 4: the Democrat from California, walking us through a couple of
Speaker 4: issues today. Thanks for joining us today on Bloomberg. I'm
Speaker 4: Joe Matthew alongside Kaylie Liones here on Bloomberg TV and Radio.
Speaker 4: And thanks for joining us on Balance of Power. We
Speaker 4: heard from the President a short time ago addressing the
Speaker 4: nation from the Rose Garden, where he made good on
Speaker 4: expectations to raise tariffs on certain China imports. If you've
Speaker 4: been with us here on Bloomberg TV and Radio or
Speaker 4: on its terminally, you saw this coming. Evs, solar panels, batteries,
Speaker 4: semiconductors all on the list. Kaylee, this is market moving
Speaker 4: stuff coming from the White House today, and I guess
Speaker 4: the President's trying to encroach on one of Donald Trump's
Speaker 4: lanes here.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 6: Donald Trump, of course, has proposed something much more sweeping,
Speaker 6: sixty percent blanket tariffs on every import coming from China,
Speaker 6: whereas the administration here is perhaps being more targeted. The question, Joe,
Speaker 6: is to what extent are the symbolic and to what
Speaker 6: extent will they actually have an impact considering existing tariffs
Speaker 6: are already in place for a number of these goods,
Speaker 6: essentially boxing Chinese products out of the US market.
Speaker 4: All Right, this is the type of thing we need
Speaker 4: Jenny Welch to help us with. That's why she's at
Speaker 4: Bloomberg of course, economist geoeconomists in our geopolitical division at
Speaker 4: Bloomberg Economics. It's great to see Jenny welcome back. This
Speaker 4: is something that does smack of Donald Trump. But the
Speaker 4: President also said in the Rose Garden that we weren't
Speaker 4: really getting any imports from China out of our trade
Speaker 4: deals anyway. Does this change anything?
Speaker 12: So?
Speaker 15: I think what this will change is it's particularly the
Speaker 15: specific sectors. As you noted, this is a very targeted
Speaker 15: move to target the industries that President Biden has made
Speaker 15: a lot of investments in and protect those investments so
Speaker 15: that they can be the industries of the future, as
Speaker 15: he calls them. In terms of the macro impact on
Speaker 15: US China trade, it's pretty small. The macro impact on
Speaker 15: China's economy is also small, But the signal it sends
Speaker 15: about Washington's interests and commitment to competing in these industries
Speaker 15: is major for Beijing.
Speaker 6: Well, so what signal will Beijing send in response? Already,
Speaker 6: their Ministry of Commerce has essentially said that they are
Speaker 6: not in favor of this, They view it as a
Speaker 6: political move. Should we expect retaliatory TIET tariffs on US
Speaker 6: goods going to China in response?
Speaker 15: Our expectation is that Beijing's response is likely to be
Speaker 15: more in the symbolic category of things for a few reasons. One, again,
Speaker 15: the impact on China's economy and on US China trade
Speaker 15: is relatively targeted. It's relatively modest. Second, China is probably
Speaker 15: where the fact that the EU is watching all of
Speaker 15: this very closely, and it could factor into the EU's
Speaker 15: own pending decisions about how it approaches Chinese goods like evs,
Speaker 15: And Third, retaliation bears some risk and harm to China
Speaker 15: and China's economy. We saw during the original trade war
Speaker 15: that China actually downshifted some of its retaliatory tariffs to
Speaker 15: avoid further harm to China's economy, which is now facing
Speaker 15: even greater headwinds than it was back then.
Speaker 4: Political manipulation, I think, is how Beijing described this when
Speaker 4: it was at least anticipated. Jenny, then what's the end
Speaker 4: results with our relationship? Having just seen Anthony Blinkn and
Speaker 4: Janet Yellen in Beijing.
Speaker 15: Well, on those trips, both Secretary Yellen and Secretary Blinkin
Speaker 15: pretty clearly signaled that the United States was concerned about
Speaker 15: overcapacity in several of these sectors.
Speaker 9: Right.
Speaker 15: I think this has been a pretty well telegraphed move
Speaker 15: that Beijing has been expecting.
Speaker 6: Well telegraphed indeed, and symbolic, as we've discussed in large part,
Speaker 6: at least for some of these industries like electric vehicles,
Speaker 6: for example, you can't really buy a lot of Chinese
Speaker 6: made evs in the US as it is for some
Speaker 6: of the other sectors though, in which we've seen the
Speaker 6: tariffs go into place, including a twenty five percent tariff
Speaker 6: now on critical minerals, things like batteries and the things
Speaker 6: the stuff that goes into them. The US needs these
Speaker 6: right to power a greener energy future, and we're still
Speaker 6: heavily reliant on China for those things. Is this going
Speaker 6: to backfire to some extent?
Speaker 15: So I think that's the exact reason that Bide administration
Speaker 15: took these steps, as they're concerned about China's dominance of
Speaker 15: these supply chains and US reliance on them. In particular,
Speaker 15: as you mentioned critical minerials batteries, we also get the
Speaker 15: vast majority of our lithium ion batteries, which are critical
Speaker 15: to evs and other clean energy products from China. That's
Speaker 15: part of the reason why the administration is phasing some
Speaker 15: of these terraces in. Some of them will come into play,
Speaker 15: like EV's this year after the initial comment period, but
Speaker 15: several are for twenty twenty five twenty twenty six to
Speaker 15: allow the market to adjust them, and is to create
Speaker 15: that space for more resilient, sort of diversified supply chains
Speaker 15: in these sectors.
Speaker 4: The idea of this as a tacit endorsement of the
Speaker 4: Trump tariffs is something I brought to Gene Sperling, who
Speaker 4: joined US earlier in the broadcast one of the President's
Speaker 4: economic advisors, and he wasn't having any part of that.
Speaker 4: We do need to acknowledge all the Trump tariffs have
Speaker 4: stayed in place. They didn't bring down any of them.
Speaker 15: Yes, no, that's absolutely right. And this is a process
Speaker 15: that folks should know began several years ago. It took
Speaker 15: a long time for it to come to culmination. It's
Speaker 15: an opportunity for Biden to put his personal stamp on
Speaker 15: the US trade approach to China and underscore what his
Speaker 15: priorities are and protect his investments. But yes, it reflects
Speaker 15: continuity in terms of concerns about the US China trade
Speaker 15: imbalance that former President Trump also shares well.
Speaker 6: And that President Biden called out the Trump administration policy
Speaker 6: when he was actually in the Oval office, as well
Speaker 6: as the policy that Trump said he would pursue if
Speaker 6: he gets to go back there again as president. This
Speaker 6: idea of sixty percent blanket tariffs. He said that that
Speaker 6: would raise costs by a certain dollar amount for American consumers,
Speaker 6: essentially be inflationary. Will these tariffs that announced today also
Speaker 6: be inflationary or are we likely not to really feel
Speaker 6: the economic impact?
Speaker 15: I think for these terrorists. Now it's a more modest
Speaker 15: impact for many of these goods. Again, with the exception
Speaker 15: of batteries and critical minter rules, where we do import
Speaker 15: a lot from China, we're actually not getting very much
Speaker 15: from them this space. But yes, if former President Trump
Speaker 15: were to be re elected and follow through on this
Speaker 15: pledge to enact sixty percent terrafts on all Chinese goods,
Speaker 15: that would have a significant impact on US China trade,
Speaker 15: bring it down to olmost zero. Depending on the timeline
Speaker 15: in which he does, that could be quite inflationary, all right.
Speaker 6: Jennifer Welsh, Bloomberg Economics, Chief geoeconomics analysts. This is the
Speaker 6: very definition of geoeconomics. Thank you so much for joining
Speaker 6: us here in Washington.
Speaker 4: Thanks for listening to the Balance of Power podcast. Make
Speaker 4: sure to subscribe if you haven't already, at Apple, Spotify,
Speaker 4: or wherever you get your podcasts, and you can find
Speaker 4: us live every weekday from Washington, DC at noontime Eastern
Speaker 4: at Bloomberg dot com.