Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio news.
Speaker 2: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch
Speaker 2: Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then
Speaker 2: Rouno with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever
Speaker 2: you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Speaker 3: Welcome to the Thursday edition of Bloomberg's Balance of Power.
Speaker 3: You made it to Little Friday. I'm Joe Matthew and Washington,
Speaker 3: where people are getting scarce around here. Just about two
Speaker 3: hours from now. That'll be it for the House. The
Speaker 3: Senate's already gone. Hey, it's President's Day recess at least
Speaker 3: for some. And we'll talk more about the dysfunction on
Speaker 3: Capitol Hill a little bit later on in the program.
Speaker 3: Here as we begin with Donald Trump's legal challenges and
Speaker 3: a remarkable headline. We've been talking about it for months
Speaker 3: and months. We expected it. It's not a surprise. Some
Speaker 3: folks thought it wouldn't be news, but it feels different
Speaker 3: when it actually happens. We've got a date to circle
Speaker 3: on the calendar, March twenty fifth, the first criminal trial
Speaker 3: of a former US president. We're joined this, of course,
Speaker 3: by the way, is Alvin Bragg's case, Stormy Daniel's hush money.
Speaker 3: We've been through this before, and it will begin before
Speaker 3: and likely conclude.
Speaker 4: Before or long before the presidential election.
Speaker 3: The question becomes what happens to Jack Smith's case, the
Speaker 3: special counsel, and so on. But we want to stick
Speaker 3: with this right now and bring in June Law, the
Speaker 3: host of Bloomberg Law, who's with us from world headquarters
Speaker 3: in New York.
Speaker 5: June.
Speaker 4: It's great to see you.
Speaker 3: It's so easy to drive by this headline because it's
Speaker 3: not a surprise, but we have to stop down and
Speaker 3: bring some perspective on how significant this actually is.
Speaker 6: It's not a surprise, and yet it is a surprise
Speaker 6: because the judge in the case at the hearing this
Speaker 6: morning was really tough. I think that judges are starting
Speaker 6: to learn now that they have to keep Trump's lawyers
Speaker 6: in check. Trump's lawyers brought out every possible argument you
Speaker 6: could think of being and I think we're gonna have
Speaker 6: to start making diagrams off to make a big diagram
Speaker 6: of which case is going and which case intersex because
Speaker 6: it's so confusing. But they said that there are forty
Speaker 6: two primaries and caucuses and Trump has to help prepare
Speaker 6: for trial, and that is an unconstitutional violation, and I'm
Speaker 6: looking at what constitutional violation we're in the constitution, it
Speaker 6: says that a president can be on trial in four
Speaker 6: criminal cases and still has the right to campaign, So
Speaker 6: we know that people have campaigned from prison, So that's
Speaker 6: that was a bad argument. But they also brought out
Speaker 6: all kinds of things, including that they've been They say
Speaker 6: they've been preparing for Jack Smith's trial, which is the
Speaker 6: DC federal election trial, which was supposed to go March fifth,
Speaker 6: but has been put off because they make Trump has
Speaker 6: been a claim of absolute presidential muni. So they said,
Speaker 6: your honor, we're busy preparing for that case. And he said, basically,
Speaker 6: too bad. I told you March twenty fifth. It's a
Speaker 6: date certain you proceeded at your own peril in representing
Speaker 6: him in two cases. So it's on.
Speaker 4: So that's where we are. It's on, says June Ross.
Speaker 3: So we've been told by a number of legal experts,
Speaker 3: Nick Ackerman most recently that he expects this to be
Speaker 3: a roughly three week trial that would allow a lot
Speaker 3: of room June for the Special Council Jack Smith to
Speaker 3: have his case here in Washington, and he did respond
Speaker 3: to the Supreme Court yesterday.
Speaker 4: He didn't wait more than two days to.
Speaker 3: Get back to the High Court on this issue of
Speaker 3: presidential immunity. When do we expect to hear from the
Speaker 3: Supreme Court and what could happen then?
Speaker 6: First, I just want to say that the judge in
Speaker 6: the hush money case said he expected the trial to
Speaker 6: be six weeks long just to get that out there.
Speaker 4: So yeah, we could hear that. That still leaves half
Speaker 4: a year.
Speaker 6: There is a lot of time if you look at
Speaker 6: the calendar, there is actually time here. If now the
Speaker 6: Supreme Court, we could hear from them at any moment,
Speaker 6: and they have to. It has to be five justices.
Speaker 6: So in other words, Trump is asking for a stay
Speaker 6: and what that will do would be to delay even
Speaker 6: more so it would delay, delay again, and so the
Speaker 6: Springbrook could rule at any time. Jack Smith's you know,
Speaker 6: his arguments actually I.
Speaker 1: Thought were very good.
Speaker 6: He still didn't bring out the argument that we all
Speaker 6: know is back there and that every judge knows, which
Speaker 6: is if Donald Trump gets elected, then this case will
Speaker 6: go away. So but he said it's in the interest
Speaker 6: of justice. I thought the most important thing he said was,
Speaker 6: in order to get this kind of a stay, you
Speaker 6: have to prove that there's a likelihood that you'll succeed
Speaker 6: on the merits. And you know, everyone says that Trump's
Speaker 6: claims of presidential immunity the way he's framed them are
Speaker 6: just not viable. So he said he's not going to
Speaker 6: win on that, and I think that's an important point.
Speaker 6: The only question being are there justices who want to
Speaker 6: address this issue? And if so, he said, okay, but
Speaker 6: then let's have oral arguments next month, so we'll see
Speaker 6: whether it's hard to tell right now whether the justices
Speaker 6: will take it or not. But from what you know
Speaker 6: from what's gone below, the fact that you have this
Speaker 6: really very well written and opinion that covered all the
Speaker 6: ground another thing Trump is done in that case, though
Speaker 6: he's also asking for the justices to put it on
Speaker 6: Hoole while he appeals to the full d C Circuit.
Speaker 6: And you know that's sort of a foolish. It's a
Speaker 6: thing that he'll do if he gets the chance, but
Speaker 6: there's no way the DC Circuit is going to overrule
Speaker 6: these three judges.
Speaker 3: There you have it, June, thank you for helping us
Speaker 3: make sense of it. It'll be a great evening to
Speaker 3: listen to Bloomberg Law with Junie Asso. We appreciate it
Speaker 3: as always. I haven't even mentioned Atlanta. We've had wal
Speaker 3: to wall coverage on cable news of what's happening down there,
Speaker 3: because it's not too It's three cases that are in
Speaker 3: the mix today, Donald Trump and co defendants seeking to
Speaker 3: disqualify Fannie Willis. That's the DA in Fulton County from
Speaker 3: running her case on news of her affair with one
Speaker 3: of the prosecutors. So this gets ever more complicated the
Speaker 3: more we talk about it. But getting back to where
Speaker 3: we began, the Alvin braggtrials, Stormy Annuals, Michael Cohen, They're
Speaker 3: all going to be there in court in New York
Speaker 3: starting in this case March twenty fifth, the beginning of
Speaker 3: the process will be there to bring that for you.
Speaker 3: Our other top story that we're following today is a
Speaker 3: scary one with the headline on the terminal Russia Mull's
Speaker 3: nuclear weapons in space. US Intelligence finds US goes back
Speaker 3: to Mike Turner's tweet from yesterday that we talked about
Speaker 3: talking about warning every one of this national security problem
Speaker 3: that he was urging the Biden administration to declassify so
Speaker 3: they could bring this forth. Apparently it does involve Russia
Speaker 3: discussing the possibility of basing a nuclear weapon in space.
Speaker 3: And it's another dangerous world conversation that we have with
Speaker 3: Michael Allen, Managing Director partner at Beacon Global Strategies.
Speaker 4: This is getting to.
Speaker 3: Be a habit having you in here to talk about
Speaker 3: scary stuff. But your experience brings you to this conversation, Michael,
Speaker 3: and it's great to have you here.
Speaker 4: Thank you for coming back.
Speaker 3: This is interesting because Jake Sullivan told the briefing room yesterday, Yeah,
Speaker 3: I actually already skeed to classified briefing with the Gang
Speaker 3: of Eight on this. Well he didn't say it was
Speaker 3: really on this, but we knew what he was talking about.
Speaker 3: What compelled the Intelligence Share to scare everybody with that
Speaker 3: sweet yesterday.
Speaker 7: You know, this is a sort of a parlor game already,
Speaker 7: everyone trying to figure out what he meant to do.
Speaker 7: I think he had good intentions at heart. I know
Speaker 7: that he cares a lot about nuclear issues, and I
Speaker 7: think he was just trying to get the word out
Speaker 7: and to remind his House Republican colleagues and others in
Speaker 7: the Republican Party that Russia is a true threat, that
Speaker 7: Russia is always working against our interests, and that they're
Speaker 7: profoundly destabilizing and they're taking another step change to weaponized space.
Speaker 3: So we understand that the administration or the Pentagon has
Speaker 3: known about this about a year. Congress has been briefed
Speaker 3: what about a week ago on this specific matter. We've
Speaker 3: also been talking about hypersonic weapons that Russia has reportedly
Speaker 3: used now in Ukraine for the first time. Are we
Speaker 3: falling behind Russia on missile technology?
Speaker 7: I think we're definitely behind on hypersonics. I think the
Speaker 7: United States has this has been a public record that
Speaker 7: China's way out ahead of us, and even is Russia.
Speaker 7: The interesting thing about the Russians using their hypersonics, however,
Speaker 7: in Ukraine, is that remember there was this stunning news
Speaker 7: last year that the Ukrainians repurposed our patriot missile batteries
Speaker 7: and actually shot down the Kinzol, which is a Russian
Speaker 7: hypersonics So I'm sure they're embarrassed about that. I don't
Speaker 7: doubt that they're trying to use every munition and missile
Speaker 7: that they can against the Ukrainians.
Speaker 3: Okay, in this case, though, if the hypersonics are being
Speaker 3: used in Ukraine, our patriot defense systems are useless against them.
Speaker 3: Russia doesn't have a lot of money or resources at
Speaker 3: the moment. Do they have many of these or is
Speaker 3: this a great threat or not?
Speaker 7: I think it is a great threat. I think it's
Speaker 7: something that our missile defenses would have a very hard
Speaker 7: time stopping because of the nature of the projectile's path
Speaker 7: when you're talking about hypersonics. So it's another reason why
Speaker 7: you know, we need to get on budget here in
Speaker 7: the United States. Congress actually passed the defense budget and
Speaker 7: start to move things along very quickly so that we
Speaker 7: can catch up on hypersonics and help Ukraine.
Speaker 3: That's a whole other conversation right now, because we're actually
Speaker 3: potentially shutting down the government starting.
Speaker 4: Three weeks from today.
Speaker 3: As a matter of fact, we can't seem to figure
Speaker 3: out how to fund our allies in Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan.
Speaker 3: I don't need to give you the background and all
Speaker 3: of that. There are new questions this week about NATO though,
Speaker 3: in a potential second Trump administration, as he's floated this
Speaker 3: idea now of a two tiered NATO.
Speaker 4: I'm sure you heard about this.
Speaker 3: Article five would only apply to those who meet their
Speaker 3: spending goals as part of the alliance.
Speaker 4: Is that the end of NATO in concept as we
Speaker 4: know it.
Speaker 7: I think it would be. Look, I know it's superficially attractive.
Speaker 7: Of course, we want everyone to pay their bills and
Speaker 7: we should stay on top of them. In fact, more
Speaker 7: of them since the Russian invasion of Ukraine have been
Speaker 7: paying up, have been exceeding two percent of their gross
Speaker 7: domestic product on military expenditures. But I think to create
Speaker 7: a two tiered system is exactly what Vladimir Putin wants.
Speaker 7: He wants dissension within NATA. We don't need questions about
Speaker 7: what countries NATO would defend and which ones they wouldn't.
Speaker 7: That is the beginning of the end of the alliance,
Speaker 7: and I don't think we should go this way.
Speaker 3: Well, it makes you question whether this is a transactional alliance,
Speaker 3: a transactional relationship, or something more principled, as the president
Speaker 3: would suggest. Now Joe Biden has made that point recently.
Speaker 7: Yeah, I believe that the president, well President Trump is
Speaker 7: transactional and is always or frequently trying to get a
Speaker 7: better deal. And so if you talk to people I
Speaker 7: think who were around the President Trump and when he
Speaker 7: was president will remind you that I don't think he's
Speaker 7: really trying to get out of NATO where I don't
Speaker 7: really think he's trying to vitiate some other treaty with
Speaker 7: our Asian allies. He's trying to get them to pay
Speaker 7: more and stand up and again, to a degree, I
Speaker 7: think that's a good idea. I'm even more comfortable with
Speaker 7: them being more aggressive about it, but not to the
Speaker 7: point where we're trying to kick out certain members who
Speaker 7: can't make the two percent GDP for whatever reason.
Speaker 3: The philosophy becomes dangerous or carries new risk at a
Speaker 3: certain point, it would seem yes. And so there's a
Speaker 3: larger question here about what Mike Turner might have been
Speaker 3: up to by releasing this, by bringing this information to
Speaker 3: make it public. Was it to underscore the need for
Speaker 3: funding in Ukraine? Was it to underscore the threat that
Speaker 3: Vladimir Putin poses?
Speaker 4: Was there more to it?
Speaker 7: I think so. I know that he is a strong
Speaker 7: supporter of Ukraine. He is a Russia skeptic. There was
Speaker 7: a famous clip of him challenging Tucker Carlson on Fox
Speaker 7: News about two or three years ago, and so he,
Speaker 7: I believe, wants to remind everyone. Just to Stucker, Carlson
Speaker 7: and others are visiting Moscow, and just as other members
Speaker 7: of the House are saying we don't want to pass
Speaker 7: the Ukraine supplemental I think it's the job of some
Speaker 7: of the members who've been around and are chairman of
Speaker 7: the National Security committees to stand up and say, listen,
Speaker 7: they're not our friends. They're spying on us, they're messing
Speaker 7: with our elections, and of course they're militarizing space because
Speaker 7: they want to take out all of our satellites in
Speaker 7: a time of war.
Speaker 3: That's what this is, right, This would be a weapon
Speaker 3: that could neutralize or destroy our satellites in orbit. This
Speaker 3: is something that they are apparently I guess, prepared to use,
Speaker 3: if not close to being ready to use. Here, the
Speaker 3: US is taking this matter seriously. I think it was
Speaker 3: Congressman Jim Hines who told one of the tip sheets
Speaker 3: this morning, it's not time to start buying gold yet, right.
Speaker 4: Is that true?
Speaker 2: Yeah?
Speaker 7: I think it is true. I don't think they've launched
Speaker 7: They definitely have not launched a nuclear weapon into space.
Speaker 7: I think we're right to be worried about it. It's
Speaker 7: something else that goes on to the agenda. And using
Speaker 7: anti satellite capabilities isn't new. You may remember at different
Speaker 7: times Russia and the United States have used ballistic missiles.
Speaker 7: But where this is a step change in addition to
Speaker 7: just having a nuclear weapon in space, which is frightening enough,
Speaker 7: it's that it would be a more efficient way to
Speaker 7: knock out numerous satellites, because what we're doing is hardening
Speaker 7: our satellites. We're trying to make them more redundant by
Speaker 7: having many, many more smaller satellites to be able to
Speaker 7: run GPS and navigation and the rest. And so this
Speaker 7: would be a more efficient way using radiation in space
Speaker 7: to knock out hundreds of them.
Speaker 4: This is real Star wars.
Speaker 7: It's still serious. It is serious business, incle that's right.
Speaker 4: It's a game changer though, right, it's a new front.
Speaker 7: I think it's I think the militarization of space is
Speaker 7: a new front and is all the arms control treaties
Speaker 7: with Russia and the former Soviet Union has sort of
Speaker 7: fallen by the wayside through the years. It's a new
Speaker 7: wild wild West.
Speaker 3: So when is it time to start stepping up the
Speaker 3: Space Force briefings.
Speaker 4: I'm not kidding.
Speaker 3: You say Space force and people start laughing. I don't
Speaker 3: know what it is about this. There is something just
Speaker 3: inherently humorous about the way it was rolled out. But
Speaker 3: this is a real agency task to handle this very issue.
Speaker 7: We have so many issues. This is why we need
Speaker 7: to increase defense spending. This is why we need to
Speaker 7: pass the supplemental This is why we need to get
Speaker 7: the defense budget passed on time and get off of
Speaker 7: continuing resolutions. We can't start new programs, we can't ramp up,
Speaker 7: we can't get the defense industrial base ramped up to
Speaker 7: where it needs to be. So I definitely think the
Speaker 7: Republicans and Democrats in Congress who are national security minded
Speaker 7: and Biden as well, need to get out there and
Speaker 7: stand together on certain core national security issues. And we
Speaker 7: haven't even talked about Charita yet.
Speaker 4: I haven't mentioned a lot of things.
Speaker 3: Yeah, and I keep hearing from the Freedom Caucus. Don't
Speaker 3: fear the shutdown. We're out of time.
Speaker 4: Do you think we're shutting down in three weeks or
Speaker 4: is there another seat?
Speaker 7: I think this time there will be a little bit
Speaker 7: of a there will be a little bit of a shutdown.
Speaker 3: You do.
Speaker 4: I think this is nobody's talking about it.
Speaker 7: I think the speaker has really tried hard so far
Speaker 7: and he might be out of lock.
Speaker 4: Wow.
Speaker 3: Great conversation as always with Michael Allen Beacon Global Strategies.
Speaker 3: Thanks for coming to see us. Thank you in the
Speaker 3: Washington bureau at Bloomberg. I'm Joe Matthew in the Nation's
Speaker 3: Capital and glad you're along here. On the radio, on
Speaker 3: the satellite and on YouTube.
Speaker 2: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast kens
Speaker 2: just live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and enroud
Speaker 2: Oro with the Bloomberg Business app. You can also listen
Speaker 2: live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station,
Speaker 2: Just Say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven.
Speaker 3: Thirty three plates spinning in the air today for Donald
Speaker 3: Trump's legal team.
Speaker 8: Absolutely, and of course we're spinning all the plates as
Speaker 8: well as a result, and Charlie Pellett's always spinning a
Speaker 8: lot of plates because there's a lot of different asset
Speaker 8: classes in financial markets to look at.
Speaker 1: Charlie, I've got you covered.
Speaker 5: Here's what's going on. Lots of earnings coming up after
Speaker 5: the close of trading, today among those names we'll be
Speaker 5: hearing from Applied Materials, Dropbox, Coinbase, door Dash right now, though,
Speaker 5: equities trading mixed, and of course big economic data tomorrow morning.
Speaker 5: Here's where we stand, right to the numbers. S and
Speaker 5: P hire by ten up now by two tenths of
Speaker 5: one percent, Dow Jones Industrial Average up one hundred and
Speaker 5: sixty eight, that is again now of four tenths of
Speaker 5: one percent. Nestak the composite index now back in the
Speaker 5: red law by twenty a drop there of one tenth
Speaker 5: of one percent. The big story, perhaps so the Russell
Speaker 5: two thousand surging another one point three percent today, Tenure
Speaker 5: yield four point two to three percent. We've got the
Speaker 5: two year four point five seven percent spot. Gold today
Speaker 5: is trading back above two thousand. We have got gold
Speaker 5: right now two thousand and four, the ounce up six
Speaker 5: tents of one percent, and West Texas Intermedia crewed up
Speaker 5: one point nine percent, seventy eight thirteen a barrel. So
Speaker 5: the Dow the SMP, they're both higher. We've got Nezstak
Speaker 5: in the red and again those earnings after the close
Speaker 5: of trading, Apply Materials, Dropbox, Coinbase, and door Dash there
Speaker 5: they are spinning plate. So I'm Charlie Pelock back we
Speaker 5: go to balance of power, Joe Matthew and Kaylee Lyones.
Speaker 8: All right, Charlie, thank you very much. As always, from
Speaker 8: financial markets to the very nuanced legal world. Joe, we
Speaker 8: have to go here at Bloomberg, we've all to some
Speaker 8: extent have at least had to get semi fluid in
Speaker 8: fluent in legal ease.
Speaker 4: I just called June Grosso.
Speaker 1: Well this is true.
Speaker 3: Well, we actually have some wonderful people to draw on,
Speaker 3: and this has been a massive effort from our legal
Speaker 3: and political teams to cover together.
Speaker 8: Absolutely because right now the legal in the political is
Speaker 8: very much intersecting. Because we were talking about the Republican
Speaker 8: front runner at this point, the very likely Republican nominee,
Speaker 8: who is now confirmed going to be in trial in
Speaker 8: the middle of primary season starting March twenty fifth. It's official,
Speaker 8: and it's hard to campaign when you're spending millions and
Speaker 8: millions and millions of dollars on legal fees.
Speaker 4: That's true.
Speaker 3: And as we're learning in some great reporting at Bloomberg,
Speaker 3: the cash crunch will get real for Donald Trump in July,
Speaker 3: knowing that he's already spent over fifty million dollars on
Speaker 3: attorney's fees. He's going to blow through another twenty three
Speaker 3: and change here in the next couple of months, and
Speaker 3: at that point in July could be in the throes
Speaker 3: of a trial, and we certainly will be the throes
Speaker 3: of a campaign. And that's where we start our conversation
Speaker 3: with Laura Davison, Bloomberg Politics editor here in Washington. Laura,
Speaker 3: it's great to see you. Let's start with what we
Speaker 3: learned today. This is Alvin Bragg's trial in New York,
Speaker 3: not considered by everyone to be the most serious of
Speaker 3: the cases against him, hush money payments, Stormy Daniels, Michael Cohen.
Speaker 3: We're going to see all of this unfold starting in
Speaker 3: just weeks now.
Speaker 9: Yes, and it's important to note that this will be
Speaker 9: after Super Tuesday, after a bunch of primaries coming up,
Speaker 9: So at that point it is very likely that Trump
Speaker 9: will have effectively sewn up the nomination and won't need
Speaker 9: to be out having rallies doing things on the campaign trail,
Speaker 9: will be able to dedicate more time to the courtroom,
Speaker 9: which you know, if you're his advisors, that's an advantageous thing,
Speaker 9: but it does mean that the campaign effectively shifts to
Speaker 9: the courtroom, and you'll be seeing that dichotomy between President
Speaker 9: Joe Biden in the White House campaigning as president and
Speaker 9: former President Donald Trump in.
Speaker 8: The courtroom, well, in the courtroom with a bunch of attorneys.
Speaker 1: And we already.
Speaker 8: Learned that in twenty twenty three he spent what fifty
Speaker 8: million dollars of funds for his campaign on legal fees
Speaker 8: coming from super packs.
Speaker 1: How much does he have left in the war chest?
Speaker 8: And when's he going to run out of money? Because
Speaker 8: if we're talking about a trial here in Washington that
Speaker 8: could follow the trial in New York in pretty short order,
Speaker 8: depending on the decision of the Supreme Court, we could
Speaker 8: be talking back to back trials that take us through
Speaker 8: the summer here.
Speaker 9: Yes, so here's kind of a simple breakdown of the numbers.
Speaker 9: He started with a little bit more than seventy five
Speaker 9: million dollars of money in his political operation he could tap.
Speaker 1: He spent just a little bit more than fifty million.
Speaker 9: Of that last year, and so over the next six
Speaker 9: months he's going to spend down very likely if he
Speaker 9: spends at the same rate he did last year.
Speaker 1: You know, the remaining twenty three million.
Speaker 9: Or so that he has left in the bank, and
Speaker 9: that's where things get tricky. One it'll be July, It'll
Speaker 9: be in the heat of both the summer as well
Speaker 9: as the general campaign mode, and he either then has
Speaker 9: to go to donors to get more money, which means
Speaker 9: that that money is not going into his campaign, or
Speaker 9: ask the RNC, the re Publican National Committee, to pay
Speaker 9: his legal bills, which is likely to be a sort
Speaker 9: of fraught discussion because they are.
Speaker 1: Also behind on fundraising.
Speaker 9: So this is sets up a really big issue for
Speaker 9: not only Donald Trump and his campaign, but Republicans across
Speaker 9: the board.
Speaker 3: What do the rules changing have to do when you
Speaker 3: go from primary spending to general elections spending? Does that
Speaker 3: affect any of the accounts that he's pulling from.
Speaker 9: So generally, you can raise, you the way that campaign
Speaker 9: finance rules work, you can raise money that certainly earmarked
Speaker 9: for the primary, and then new money that's in for
Speaker 9: the general. So he will be able to go back
Speaker 9: to donors who have donated before and get more money.
Speaker 9: But these are really big numbers that we're talking about,
Speaker 9: you know, you know, twenty five million dollars, you know,
Speaker 9: for over two quarters or so that is you know,
Speaker 9: a huge chunk of change and would really dent the
Speaker 9: money that would be going into other races.
Speaker 8: Yeah, and as you're talking about spending money there, maybe
Speaker 8: it's less money you'd be spending on traditional campaigning, which,
Speaker 8: as we've had extensive conversations about Donald Trump in many ways,
Speaker 8: isn't necessarily a traditional political candidate. He has a lot
Speaker 8: of earned media that he doesn't need to pay for,
Speaker 8: and part of that's the nature of being a form president,
Speaker 8: not just a presidential candidate. But we also know that
Speaker 8: voter's minds about him change. Our own polling here at
Speaker 8: Bloomberg with Morning Consult has shown this if he is
Speaker 8: convicted of a felony, and we very realistically could be
Speaker 8: talking about a conviction before we get to the Republican convention. Laura,
Speaker 8: how should we be thinking about this in political terms?
Speaker 8: What does this mean for Nicki Haley?
Speaker 1: For example, so.
Speaker 9: We know that the general is going to be close,
Speaker 9: you know, it does give Nicki Haley an advantage if
Speaker 9: he is convicted, if he's potentially behind bars, if something
Speaker 9: happens to him health wise or anywise else, you know,
Speaker 9: Nicki Haley is still running essentially so she can sort
Speaker 9: of be the party standard bearer in second place, and
Speaker 9: whether that means twenty twenty four or twenty twenty eight
Speaker 9: or something down the line. But if Trump, you know,
Speaker 9: is convicted, let's say over the summer or in the fall,
Speaker 9: we know that that means that in swing states voters
Speaker 9: are less likely to vote for him, which is a
Speaker 9: huge advantage for Joe Biden and also a reason why
Speaker 9: Trump would need more money to be able to run
Speaker 9: more ads, to do more get out the vote efforts,
Speaker 9: to do all of these things to make up for
Speaker 9: you know what that that you know, sort of headwinds
Speaker 9: would be on the conviction front.
Speaker 3: We were talking with our panel a little bit about
Speaker 3: how this could impact Nikki Haley's decision, even if she
Speaker 3: performs terribly in South Carolina, even if to your point, Laura,
Speaker 3: Donald Trump is the presumptive nominee following Super Tuesday, that
Speaker 3: she might want to wait to see how these trials
Speaker 3: pan out and just hold her breath until the conventions.
Speaker 3: Don't need to spend any money, just wait in the wings.
Speaker 9: Yeah, and Nikki Haley has done very well with fundraising,
Speaker 9: so she's able to kind of keep her campaign going
Speaker 9: even at just sort of a bare bones level, essentially
Speaker 9: for as long as she wants, you know, looking at
Speaker 9: just even the fourth quarter of twenty twenty four, she
Speaker 9: was almost raising as much money as Trump, which is impressive.
Speaker 9: She even today is in Texas. She's fundraising with Carlon
Speaker 9: Crow and other big oil and gas names down in Texas.
Speaker 9: So she's able to go and donors have said, look,
Speaker 9: we want.
Speaker 1: To keep funding her. We don't want Trump. We'll keep
Speaker 1: supporting her as long as she's in this fight.
Speaker 8: Well, and it's funny you mentioned Harlan Crowe because of
Speaker 8: course we also know that name because of his relationship
Speaker 8: with Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. And then this somehow
Speaker 8: comes back to the Supreme Court and the legal issues
Speaker 8: that we began this conversation talking about Bloomberg Politics editor,
Speaker 8: Lord Davison, Thank you so much. It certainly is head spinning.
Speaker 8: So to help us make sense of the developments specifically
Speaker 8: in the legal world today, we want to bring in
Speaker 8: now Jessica Roth. She is Jacob Burns Center for Ethics
Speaker 8: in the Practice of Lot Cardoza Law School co director
Speaker 8: and of course a formal federal prosecutor as well. Jessica,
Speaker 8: thanks so much for being with us. We got, of course,
Speaker 8: the decision from the judge today. The trial in New
Speaker 8: York will begin on March twenty fifth. Is there anything
Speaker 8: that Trump and his legal team can do between now
Speaker 8: and then to change that.
Speaker 10: I don't think there is, in the sense that I
Speaker 10: don't think this is an order that can be appealed
Speaker 10: to the New York courts at this stage. I suppose
Speaker 10: they could try to run the federal court to seek
Speaker 10: a stay. I don't think that that is likely to succeed.
Speaker 10: He's previously tried to remove the case of federal court
Speaker 10: and that was rejected. I think that as a practical matter,
Speaker 10: the thing that might delay it would be if there's
Speaker 10: movement in one of the other cases. For example, if
Speaker 10: the US Supreme Court were to say it wasn't going
Speaker 10: to take cert on the case involving immunity in the
Speaker 10: January sixth case, or if it quickly decided against him
Speaker 10: on that case and that matter were reset for trial
Speaker 10: in DC. That wouldn't preempt this trial in terms of
Speaker 10: the trial date. But if it looked like that were
Speaker 10: on track, one could imagine that the two judges the
Speaker 10: DC District Court judge and the judge in New York
Speaker 10: would communicate, and the judge in New York might defer
Speaker 10: to the preparations for that case, which is what we
Speaker 10: all thought was happening initially before the case got put
Speaker 10: on hold in DC. So it could be a calendaring
Speaker 10: issue between various courts, But legally, I'm not seeing the
Speaker 10: route to delay the proceedings in any other respect.
Speaker 3: Jessica, it's good to have you back on Bloomberg TV
Speaker 3: and radio. I'm wondering, if you can talk to us,
Speaker 3: assuming this trial starts as planned March twenty fifth, what
Speaker 3: jury selection would look like. Bloomberg is reporting that jurors
Speaker 3: may have to disclose what bumper stickers they have on
Speaker 3: their cars, whether they've read the art of the deal,
Speaker 3: what radio shows they listen to. How difficult will it
Speaker 3: be to assemble this group in New York.
Speaker 10: I think it's going to be a challenge to select
Speaker 10: a jury that can be fair and impartial in this case.
Speaker 10: I think the ver dear process, that questioning of jurors
Speaker 10: to know what they've heard about this case and whether
Speaker 10: they think they can be fair and impartial, is going
Speaker 10: to be a challenging one that said, the judge who
Speaker 10: presided over the civil case, the defamation case, and the
Speaker 10: sexual assault case involving Egene Carroll did in panel a
Speaker 10: jury twice, so we know it has been done before
Speaker 10: in New York. And these two courthouses, the Federal District
Speaker 10: Court were those defamation cases were tried, and the criminal
Speaker 10: court where this case is going to be tried in March.
Speaker 10: They're just across the street from each other, so they're
Speaker 10: drawing upon many of the same jurors, not exactly the
Speaker 10: same jury pool, the jury pool for the Manhattan cases
Speaker 10: Manhattan as opposed to the Federal District Court where it's
Speaker 10: a broader district. But nevertheless it's been done. I'll be
Speaker 10: very interested to see what if any protections are put
Speaker 10: in place for those jurors. As you may recall, in
Speaker 10: the civil defamation cases involving Egene Carroll, the judge made
Speaker 10: those jurors anonymous, meaning nobody learn their identities, and so
Speaker 10: I'll be very interested to see what, if any discussion
Speaker 10: there is about protections for the jury in the criminal
Speaker 10: case against former President Trump.
Speaker 8: Well, yeah, the security considerations around this certainly are significant,
Speaker 8: considering this as a former president we're talking about, and
Speaker 8: I would imagine there will be quite a circus in
Speaker 8: New York as this trial begins. I feel like it's
Speaker 8: worth reminding our TV and radio audience, as Jessica, just
Speaker 8: what exactly it is the former president has been charged with.
Speaker 8: Here we're talking thirty four counts of falsifying business records.
Speaker 8: Usually in the state of New York, that's just a misdemeanor,
Speaker 8: and Alvin Brown, I'd made them felonies because he says
Speaker 8: it was done with the intention of violating state and
Speaker 8: federal election law. Can you just walk us through the
Speaker 8: strength of these case, bringing these charges making them felony
Speaker 8: charges specifically, and how likely it is you think he
Speaker 8: would be convicted on all or any of them.
Speaker 10: So, the charges that were brought, as you mentioned, are
Speaker 10: falsification of business records. Under New York law, that can
Speaker 10: be a misdemeanor at its most basic level when a
Speaker 10: person intentionally creates and enters into the business records of
Speaker 10: their organization false entries. But it can also be a
Speaker 10: felony when that false entry is made with the intent
Speaker 10: to further or conceal another crime. And as a felony
Speaker 10: that is frequently charged in New York, so it's not
Speaker 10: all that unusual that this crime, in its felony version
Speaker 10: is charged here. The allegation is that the false entries
Speaker 10: were made in the business records of the Trump organization
Speaker 10: in order to conceal the payments to Michael to reimburse
Speaker 10: him for the payments he in turn made to Stormy
Speaker 10: Daniels and to others to conceal an alleged affair with
Speaker 10: the former president at the time that he was running
Speaker 10: for office in twenty sixteen, when it was thought that
Speaker 10: if the affair became public, or the allegations of the
Speaker 10: affair became public, that that would hurt his campaign chances,
Speaker 10: and the reimbursements to Cohen for those payments that were
Speaker 10: made during the campaign continued in twenty seventeen even after
Speaker 10: Trump took office. Now, the legal theory for the crime
Speaker 10: that Trump allegedly was trying to further or conceal through
Speaker 10: the false business entries, which was those entries of the
Speaker 10: payments to Cohen as reimbursement for payments for legal fees
Speaker 10: sort of. Those underlying crimes that the entries were designed
Speaker 10: to conceal are alleged to be several, including violations of
Speaker 10: the federal elections law, violations of New York state elections law,
Speaker 10: and violations of New York state tax laws. And the
Speaker 10: court basically said those are three permissible theories to underlie
Speaker 10: the charge, the felony charge, that the false business entries
Speaker 10: were designed to conceal one or more of those crimes.
Speaker 3: This will smack of a tabloid trial, though we're going
Speaker 3: to have Stormy Daniels on the stand here telling the story,
Speaker 3: Michael Cohen telling his story all over again.
Speaker 10: I would say, certainly we will have the testimony of
Speaker 10: Michael Cohen. I imagine we would have the testimony of
Speaker 10: Stormy Daniels, although to my mind that's less clearly necessary.
Speaker 10: But yes, Michael Cohen would be an important witness for
Speaker 10: the prosecution.
Speaker 1: We all are.
Speaker 10: Familiar with the problems of his credibility, given that, among
Speaker 10: other things, he has pleaded guilty to lying under oath
Speaker 10: before and all of that will be explored, I'm sure,
Speaker 10: on cross examination, and I imagine that the prosecutors will
Speaker 10: actually elicit it on their direct examination as well, so
Speaker 10: that they are putting before the jury on everything that
Speaker 10: they know about Michael Cohen and the jury can evaluate
Speaker 10: his credibility, and the key to the case from the
Speaker 10: prosecution's perspective is going to be can they corroborate Michael
Speaker 10: Cohen's accountess with the testimony of other witnesses and with
Speaker 10: documentary evidence, including the checks that were made out to him,
Speaker 10: the invoices, and other documents that would corroborate his account
Speaker 10: about what those payments were for.
Speaker 8: Jessica, we only have about a minute left with you,
Speaker 8: but I also want to get your take on the
Speaker 8: response we got from the Special Council here in Washington,
Speaker 8: Jack Smith's to the Supreme Court after Trump asked for
Speaker 8: a stay in this case. Here, Jack Smith basically says
Speaker 8: the case should go forward without delay because the nation
Speaker 8: has a compelling interest in seeing the charges brought to trial.
Speaker 8: How do you expect the court will decide here and
Speaker 8: how soon?
Speaker 10: It's really hard to say. I imagine that the court
Speaker 10: will decide fairly soon, perhaps as soon as next week,
Speaker 10: whether it's going to grant the stay or not. That's
Speaker 10: the first thing it has to decide. Will it stay
Speaker 10: the mandate from the District of Columbia Court of Appeals.
Speaker 10: If it doesn't grant the stay and the case is
Speaker 10: going to go back to the district court to resume
Speaker 10: the trial day, which is what we started talking about earlier.
Speaker 10: It also have to decide whether to actually review the
Speaker 10: case independently of the stay. So there's a scenario where
Speaker 10: they don't grant the stay, but they do say we'll
Speaker 10: consider the case on the merits. It's hard to say
Speaker 10: whether they're going to take it or not. It is
Speaker 10: such an important novel question whether there is immunity from
Speaker 10: criminal prosecution or a former president, but it's just it's
Speaker 10: really hard to predict.
Speaker 4: Well, Jessica, thank you.
Speaker 3: That was incredibly helpful as seminar once again with Jessica
Speaker 3: Roth with us from Cardozo Law, former federal prosecutor in
Speaker 3: the US Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York.
Speaker 3: Breaking news today in the case hush money case against
Speaker 3: Donald Trump.
Speaker 4: This is Bloomberg.
Speaker 2: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch
Speaker 2: us live weekdays at noon Eastern on epocr Play and
Speaker 2: then reuno with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand
Speaker 2: wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Speaker 8: Welcome back to Balance of Power on both Bloomberg TV
Speaker 8: and Radio. Nothing like scheduling testimony from the Chairman of
Speaker 8: the Fed the week of the State of the Union
Speaker 8: and potentially when parts of the government are going to
Speaker 8: be shut down, Joe. But I guess we all just
Speaker 8: got to buckle up for the first week.
Speaker 4: Of March taking that week off, So good luck with that.
Speaker 4: Let me know.
Speaker 3: Oh, I'm super Tuesday, Super Tuesday State of the Union.
Speaker 3: The hits keep coming here, Kaylee. And they do for
Speaker 3: this Republican speaker.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 3: And I'm not even talking about being jammed by the
Speaker 3: Senate or dealing with controversial legislation.
Speaker 4: It's the retirements. We're at five now, five high profile
Speaker 4: Republican chairs who say they don't want to do this anymore,
Speaker 4: and one of them just yesterday, Mark Green announced his
Speaker 4: resignation or retirement. I guess I should say, the day
Speaker 4: after his committee impeached the Homeland Security Secretary. And you
Speaker 4: would have thought that was a win.
Speaker 1: For him, you would have thought.
Speaker 8: And yet the statement he gave when announcing about that
Speaker 8: that he's not seeking reelection is pretty brutal.
Speaker 2: Joe.
Speaker 8: The quote, our country and our Congress is broken beyond
Speaker 8: most means of repair. I have come to realize our
Speaker 8: fight is not here within Washington. Our fight is with Washington.
Speaker 8: It's just a stunning statement.
Speaker 3: Mark Green add the chairs of Energy and Commerce, Financial Services, Appropriations,
Speaker 3: now the China Select Committee. Mike Gallagher was I think
Speaker 3: the most recent before Green. Here, we need to assemble
Speaker 3: our panel for their take on this. Ginny Shanzano is
Speaker 3: here Bloomberg Politics contributor, joined by Lisa Camuso Miller, former
Speaker 3: communications director of the RNC, host of The Friday Reporter
Speaker 3: pot Cast.
Speaker 4: Lisa.
Speaker 3: I don't want to pick on you as a Republican,
Speaker 3: but I am curious your thoughts here. You worked for
Speaker 3: a Republican Speaker of the House. What's Mike Johnson doing wrong?
Speaker 10: Oh?
Speaker 1: I don't know if the.
Speaker 11: Blame goes to the speaker. I mean, I think that
Speaker 11: this epidemic has been happening long before he took the.
Speaker 1: Gavel, that is for sure, Joe.
Speaker 11: What I think is happening, though, is I think we're
Speaker 11: losing some really tremendous leaders in the House in general.
Speaker 11: As we see these chairmen, the chairs step away. And
Speaker 11: the problem here is not so much that it leaves
Speaker 11: more room for those that are in sort of the
Speaker 11: troublemaking part of the conference to rise up to then
Speaker 11: become chairs. And that's something that I think is even
Speaker 11: more concerning. The districts that they're evacuating will either go
Speaker 11: to because some of them are are challenged districts, so
Speaker 11: they'll go to the Democratic Party. There's an opportunity for
Speaker 11: pickups in a couple of those seats, but also two
Speaker 11: we risk run the risk of now having more radical
Speaker 11: and more well willing to buck the system if you will,
Speaker 11: members come into those districts. So it's not as if
Speaker 11: a freshman member would step into the chair of some
Speaker 11: of these great and powerful committees. It's that it opens
Speaker 11: up an opportunity for more of sort of the early
Speaker 11: The problem in the conference is not necessarily with the
Speaker 11: leadership and those that have been there for some time.
Speaker 11: It's some of the newer members that are willing and
Speaker 11: ready to disrupt everything that is happening.
Speaker 1: And that's what we're.
Speaker 11: Seeing and I think that's the difficulty with some of
Speaker 11: these committee chairs is that they want to they want
Speaker 11: to invoke power. They also want to enact really great
Speaker 11: legislation and policy, and that is it's uncapable of being
Speaker 11: done right now. There's just not the ability to have
Speaker 11: that happen, and that's where you see the frustration and
Speaker 11: them stepping away. But the retirements aren't on both sides.
Speaker 11: So we see a lot of Republicans stepping away. There
Speaker 11: are a lot of Democrats that are also making that choice.
Speaker 8: Absolutely, And Genie, just to go back to the statement
Speaker 8: from the for Now chairman, our country and our Congress
Speaker 8: is broken beyond most means of repair. Do departures like
Speaker 8: this from leaders in the House make it all that
Speaker 8: more difficult to repair?
Speaker 1: How can it be repaired?
Speaker 12: Yeah, it is so difficult. You know, he's talking about
Speaker 12: fighting Washington from the outside, and what really needs to
Speaker 12: happen is Washington needs to be repaired from the inside.
Speaker 12: So we need to see reform in Congress itself. And
Speaker 12: if there is this brain drain, and that was a
Speaker 12: great descriptor that was used in the Bloomberg piece, you
Speaker 12: know that's what's actually occurring. And I would just say
Speaker 12: it's not just a brain drain, it's also the people
Speaker 12: who are the workhorses, who are want to make policy,
Speaker 12: who are interested in legislation. Those are the people that
Speaker 12: we're seeing leaving and the showmen and women are staying
Speaker 12: and that doesn't vote well for any of us. We
Speaker 12: have twenty four retirements now, fourteen of which are on
Speaker 12: the Republican side, five of which are chairs, and the
Speaker 12: numbers will likely only get worse. You know, Let's just
Speaker 12: remember it is what February fifteenth, The government shuts down
Speaker 12: at least partly starting March first, And where is Congress?
Speaker 12: The House is leaving town for two weeks. What sense
Speaker 12: does that make? And who would want to stay in
Speaker 12: an institution operating this way?
Speaker 4: Well, let's get into that for a minute here, Lisa.
Speaker 3: I think we've appropriately framed the dysfunction as the baseline
Speaker 3: in Congress. To Janie's point, everybody's leaving town. What an
Speaker 3: hour from now? It's official, Senate's already gone. They don't
Speaker 3: come back until the end of the month, and there
Speaker 3: will be seventy two legislative hours, not even actually it'll
Speaker 3: be three days, three business days to get this done.
Speaker 3: And when I say this, I mean figure a way
Speaker 3: to fund the government. Do people need to start preparing
Speaker 3: for a shutdown?
Speaker 11: Yep, for the longest short of it. So yeah, it
Speaker 11: seems really likely because there are so many things that
Speaker 11: are the fractions are everywhere, right. The fractions are happening
Speaker 11: in the Senate, in the House, on the Republican side,
Speaker 11: on the Democrat side. We can't seem to agree on
Speaker 11: just about anything at this point. And the problem is
Speaker 11: that this isn't just about shutting down the government in
Speaker 11: sort of the traditional people. We have to remember that
Speaker 11: that means that we have armed services that doesn't get paid.
Speaker 1: We have people that are in difficult.
Speaker 11: And challenging parts of the globe that are not getting
Speaker 11: paid and not getting compensated for the hard work that
Speaker 11: they do. So not just regular government functions, but everything else.
Speaker 11: And yes, it absolutely feels that way. I mean, it
Speaker 11: was Meg Greenfield who wrote this book, this great book
Speaker 11: that if you haven't read, you have to read. It's
Speaker 11: from my mid so many years ago. But it's about
Speaker 11: how Congress operates like a like a high school. You
Speaker 11: have freshmen, you have sophomores, you've seniors, you have a vacation,
Speaker 11: summer vacation, you have holiday breaks. That's precisely how your
Speaker 11: Congress works every single day.
Speaker 1: I read this book in so many days.
Speaker 11: But the other thing too, all of those things that's happening,
Speaker 11: they are right exactly right, Kaylee, It's exactly that. And
Speaker 11: so the difficulty here is we are dealing with teenagers.
Speaker 11: They are all on social media. They're all looking for
Speaker 11: ways to be, as Genie said, to be seeking publicity
Speaker 11: and not necessarily policy. That's the challenge that we have here.
Speaker 11: And so the fact that they're going home, that's the
Speaker 11: way they operate in Congress. But unfortunately it used to
Speaker 11: be that they would get their work done and then
Speaker 11: they would go home. Now it's just we're going home.
Speaker 11: And a lot of what you hear from leadership is
Speaker 11: that members are tired of being here and arguing all
Speaker 11: day long, Republicans and Democrats.
Speaker 1: So it's a challenge.
Speaker 11: It's a challenge we're going to see for the rest
Speaker 11: of the year, and it's only going to get harder
Speaker 11: because we're looking at.
Speaker 1: Election election Day in November.
Speaker 8: When you describe Congress like high school, it helps you
Speaker 8: understand the retirements a little bit more, perhaps because I
Speaker 8: wouldn't want to spend another year in high school. You
Speaker 8: cannot make me O, thank you go back there. Genie.
Speaker 4: Just to.
Speaker 8: To Speaker Johnson specifically, as we're talking about the challenge
Speaker 8: of funding the government, he of course, has said repeatedly
Speaker 8: he does not want to do another short term continuing resolution.
Speaker 8: We've already seen several short term continuing resolutions. Is this
Speaker 8: ultimately going to come down to the decision of doing
Speaker 8: another stopgap measure or losing your speakership in the process.
Speaker 12: Yeah, I think so. And Kaylee, you reminded me of
Speaker 12: that great Reese Witherspoon movie Election, which is fabulous, talking
Speaker 12: about Congress as high school.
Speaker 3: But everyone's aside tonight to go watch that, Genie.
Speaker 12: That's right, it's so good. But you know, the fact
Speaker 12: is is that he made a promise that he simply
Speaker 12: now cannot keep. And it's just one of many. I mean,
Speaker 12: the reality is he can't do anything about Faiza. I
Speaker 12: mean I was, you know, kept saying that I was
Speaker 12: optimistic only because they wouldn't want to shut down in
Speaker 12: an election year because obviously nobody wins in that case,
Speaker 12: that they would avoid it. But I'm not so sure
Speaker 12: how they avoid it now except for a cr and
Speaker 12: to your point, Kaylee, that could likely cost him the speakership.
Speaker 12: So the fact is, there's a great, great Peter Drucker
Speaker 12: quote where he talks about a job that defeats any person,
Speaker 12: you know, three, two or three people in a row
Speaker 12: needs to be rethought. The Speaker of the House job
Speaker 12: needs to be rethought and reconstructed. It is unworkable at
Speaker 12: this point. I'm no fan of Mike Johnson, but everybody
Speaker 12: who has tried it of late, except for Nancy Pelosi,
Speaker 12: has ended up in this same position and it's only
Speaker 12: getting worse.
Speaker 4: Well, there you have it. Maybe it's a power sharing agreement.
Speaker 1: I mean, Mike Jefferies.
Speaker 3: If Mike Johnson loses two more and anything's possibly, you
Speaker 3: got three vacancies. Now that's actually the conversation that we're
Speaker 3: going to be having here, isn't it.
Speaker 8: It very well could be. Also the question of if
Speaker 8: it's not Mike Johnson or hackeing Jeffries of a power
Speaker 8: sharing agreement can't be made, who's going to be the
Speaker 8: speaker next? Well, which many others have tried and failed.
Speaker 4: In this No one has the answer to that. But
Speaker 4: I am just going to just leave this here.
Speaker 3: Tom Emmer is going to be coming on Balance of
Speaker 3: Power a little bit later on today five o'clock here
Speaker 3: on Bloomberg TV and Radio.
Speaker 4: This is the majority whip.
Speaker 3: He ran for Speaker and he'd be on any shortlist, Kaylie,
Speaker 3: if there were one.
Speaker 4: To be drawn up.
Speaker 8: Well, we're going to ask him about that for sure
Speaker 8: later this evening. Remember Donald Trump didn't really like the
Speaker 8: idea of a speaker we first go around.
Speaker 4: Yes, that's true. Thanks for listening to the Balance of
Speaker 4: Power podcast.
Speaker 3: Make sure to subscribe if you haven't already, at Apple, Spotify,
Speaker 3: or wherever you get your podcasts, and you can find
Speaker 3: us live every weekday from Washington, DC at noontime Eastern
Speaker 3: at Bloomberg dot com.