Speaker 1: Now from our nation's capital. This is Bloomberg's sound On today.
Speaker 1: We intend to show the American people the January six
Speaker 1: is not an isolated incident. I said, are you out
Speaker 1: of your f in mind? It creates cave We're gonna
Speaker 1: drag through the streets. Floomberg sound on Politics, Policy and
Speaker 1: perspective from DC's top name. The United States will provide
Speaker 1: an additional one billion dollars security assistant package. A very
Speaker 1: tough slog, very severe battle of attrition, almost World War
Speaker 1: One life. Bloomberg Sound On with Joe Matthew on Bloomberg Radio.
Speaker 1: The January six Committee reveals back room conversations showing the
Speaker 1: Trump white House knew the plan to overturn the election
Speaker 1: was illegal. Welcome to the fastest hour in politics with
Speaker 1: new info today on the pressure campaign against Mike Pence,
Speaker 1: an Oval office phone call you have not heard about yet,
Speaker 1: and a pardon sought by Trump's legal counsel. We will
Speaker 1: discuss a pivotal day on Capitol Hill ahead with Bloomberg's
Speaker 1: Mike Dorning, and we'll focus on the legal outcome here
Speaker 1: with Michael Zelden, former federal prosecutor with us in just
Speaker 1: a moment later, as the fight in Ukraine grinds into
Speaker 1: a war of attrition, the US prepares another billion dollar
Speaker 1: weapons package. We'll talk about the status of this battle
Speaker 1: with Bill Roggio, Senior fellow at the Foundation for the
Speaker 1: Defense of Democracies our panel today. Bloomberg Politics contributor Democratic
Speaker 1: analyst Genie Shenzano was with us, along with Republican strategist
Speaker 1: Adam Goodman. The House Committee investigating January six brings new
Speaker 1: information about what led to the attack on the Capitol.
Speaker 1: They did hold another hearing today. We're watching so you
Speaker 1: don't have to focusing on how White House Council John
Speaker 1: Eastman cooked up a theory to overturn the election. You've
Speaker 1: heard about this, using so called alternate electors and the
Speaker 1: pressure campaign against Mike Pence to carry it out. When
Speaker 1: Mike Pence made it clear that he wouldn't give in
Speaker 1: to Donald Trump's skiing, Donald Trump turned the mob on him.
Speaker 1: Chairman Benny Thompson. The panel played video from that day,
Speaker 1: beginning with Donald Trump on the ellipse, the speech of
Speaker 1: course out in front of the White House, and then
Speaker 1: rioters hearing the news about Mike Pence Listening Mike Pence.
Speaker 1: I hope you're gonna stand up for the good of
Speaker 1: our constitution and for the good of our country. And
Speaker 1: if you're not, I'm gonna be very disappointed in you.
Speaker 1: I will tell you right now. I'm telling you what
Speaker 1: I'm hearing. The pits. I hearing the pits. Just cave. No,
Speaker 1: is that true. I'm here, I'm hearing reports the Pence cave.
Speaker 1: I'm telling you. If Pence cave, We're gonna drag through
Speaker 1: the streets. This is as they're walking towards the castle.
Speaker 1: They're going to the streets. And then of course the
Speaker 1: gallows directed to hang my pants new today in the
Speaker 1: hearing this is important. A phone call that Donald Trump
Speaker 1: made to Mike Pence for the Oval Office the morning
Speaker 1: of January six, before he put his coat on to
Speaker 1: go to the ellipse. The Trump family was in the room,
Speaker 1: including Ivanka, who you will hear, along with presidential advisors
Speaker 1: Eric Hirshman and Nicholas Luna. When I entered the office
Speaker 1: the second time, he was on the telephone with who
Speaker 1: I later found out to be was the Vice President.
Speaker 1: Could you hear the vice president or only hear the
Speaker 1: president's end? The only God the president's end at some point.
Speaker 1: It started off as a commer tone and everything and
Speaker 1: then became heated. The conversation was pretty heated, I think,
Speaker 1: until it became somewhat in a louder tone. I don't
Speaker 1: think anyone was paying attention to it initially. Did you
Speaker 1: hear any part of the phone call, even if just
Speaker 1: this the end that the president was speaking from? I did, yes,
Speaker 1: all right? And what'd you hear? So? As I was
Speaker 1: dropping off the note my memory, I remember hearing the
Speaker 1: word whim. Either he called him a whim. I don't
Speaker 1: remember he said you are a whim, You'll be a whim.
Speaker 1: Whimp was the word I remember. Whimp was one word
Speaker 1: used on that call. Ivanka Trump's chief of staff Julie
Speaker 1: Radford tells us that they got more profane from there,
Speaker 1: something to the effect, this is the wording is wrong.
Speaker 1: I made the wrong decision four or five years ago.
Speaker 1: Is the word that she relates to that the president
Speaker 1: called the vice president apologize for being impolite. But do
Speaker 1: you remember what she said? Her father called him the
Speaker 1: P word. The P word as described by Radford. Let's
Speaker 1: bringing Bloomberg, Congress reporter A longtime Washington journalist Mike Dorning,
Speaker 1: who watched this and has been writing about it all day.
Speaker 1: This was a tough day for Donald Trump. Mike, it's
Speaker 1: great to have you. But was it even worse for
Speaker 1: John Eastman? The stuff that we heard today, also learning
Speaker 1: that he sought a presidential pardon after this. Yeah, there
Speaker 1: were two things that kind of struck me that were
Speaker 1: really damning for John Eastman. One is um Vice President
Speaker 1: Um Pence, his chief council said that Eastman at one
Speaker 1: point admitted to him that, hey, if this legal strategy
Speaker 1: would come to the Supreme Court, we would lose nine
Speaker 1: ten nothing. And then, as you mentioned, after this was over,
Speaker 1: he was saying, please can I get on a pardon
Speaker 1: list for my part on this? When the committee tried
Speaker 1: to interview him, he invoked his Fifth Amendment rights because
Speaker 1: he wasn't pardoned A hundred times, Yeah, a hundred times.
Speaker 1: And we got a little bit of a taste of that. Um.
Speaker 1: That phone call is not something that we've heard about before,
Speaker 1: at least not on a formal level. Here with Trump
Speaker 1: calling Pence, isn't it something to hear it? Though? From
Speaker 1: the words coming directly from Ivanka Trump, who who seemed
Speaker 1: disturbed about what she had witnessed. Yeah, she said she'd
Speaker 1: never heard him speak to the vice president like that before.
Speaker 1: You know, maybe other people. Um, it does make a
Speaker 1: difference because some of this has been out there. The
Speaker 1: details of that call have been kind of out there
Speaker 1: in print, according to anonymous p ball, But it's something
Speaker 1: different to see the president's daughter saying under oath, this
Speaker 1: is what happened. Aids that were so close to the
Speaker 1: president that they were in the Oval Office with the
Speaker 1: President on this day. We're not talking minor aids. We're
Speaker 1: talking people in the Oval Office saying this on video
Speaker 1: under oath, under penalty of perjury. This is a dramatic
Speaker 1: portrait of the president that day. And and to me,
Speaker 1: the things that were most stunning about the hearing was
Speaker 1: just Pence's wild day and some of these new chilling
Speaker 1: detailshs and photographs in this undisclosed location and uh kind
Speaker 1: of um, you know, the mob was within forty feet
Speaker 1: of him. Informant for the Proud Boys from who was
Speaker 1: in the Proud Boys said that the Proud Boys were
Speaker 1: going to kill him. They got him and uh, some
Speaker 1: some sort of moments of steel that you know again
Speaker 1: these are being said under oath, so we assume they're truthful.
Speaker 1: That kind of uh, you know, glorify Pence. But one
Speaker 1: thing that struck me was not only did he refuse
Speaker 1: to leave the capital, but the Secret Service sort of
Speaker 1: wisely said, if we're stuck in this underground garage, let's
Speaker 1: get you inside the armored car in case, um, you
Speaker 1: wouldn't get in. He said, no way, because I don't
Speaker 1: want to leave here. And well, I trust you, the
Speaker 1: detail leader. I do not trust the driver of the
Speaker 1: mobs invading not to hit the gas. Mike Darning find
Speaker 1: his work on the terminal and on the website. It's
Speaker 1: great to have you with us. Let's do a deeper
Speaker 1: dive next here. And when is it? By the way,
Speaker 1: on's the next round. I think it's next Tuesday. He's
Speaker 1: got moved around a little bit and will of course
Speaker 1: have the full smash prime time conclusion at some point.
Speaker 1: I'm happy you could join us, Mike, thank you for
Speaker 1: I would love to absolutely we'll do it again here
Speaker 1: on Bloomberg sound On. As we mentioned that prey residential pardon,
Speaker 1: Congressman Pete Aghilar, Democrat on the panel, described what Eastman
Speaker 1: had put in email for Dr Eastman emailed Rudy Giuliani
Speaker 1: and requested that he'd be included on a list of
Speaker 1: potential recipients of her presidential pardon. Dr Eastman's email stated quote,
Speaker 1: I've decided that I should be on the pardon list
Speaker 1: if that is still in the works. Dr Eastman did
Speaker 1: not receive his presidential partner. He didn't. Michael Zelden joins
Speaker 1: us now former federal prosecutor, former special counsel to Robert
Speaker 1: Mueller while at the Department of Justice. It's great to
Speaker 1: have you back with us, Michael. A lot of us
Speaker 1: are trying to figure out where this is going, and
Speaker 1: we heard from the chairman, Benny Thompson a short time ago.
Speaker 1: I guess the Department of Justice is not happy that
Speaker 1: this panel has not been providing all of its information.
Speaker 1: They want transcripts of all these interviews. Is the committee
Speaker 1: slowing the investigation into what happened on January six? I
Speaker 1: wouldn't think so. I would think that the Committee will
Speaker 1: in good order give these transcripts to the d o J.
Speaker 1: Why they didn't yet is not knowable, But I don't
Speaker 1: expect that there will be any breach between the committee
Speaker 1: and the d J, and the d J will get
Speaker 1: everything it needs to make a determination. Yeah. Benny Thompson,
Speaker 1: as I mentioned, was asked about this, and we understand
Speaker 1: that he says it's not coming anytime soon, not until
Speaker 1: we're done with our hearings. Liz Cheney has been more
Speaker 1: in favor of passing that along. The fact of the
Speaker 1: matter is, though, Michael, and the reason why we wanted
Speaker 1: to talk to you, is how this culminates. Beyond setting
Speaker 1: the timeline in stone, what will be the legal ramifications
Speaker 1: that come from this, whether or not they decide to indict.
Speaker 1: That's um former President Trump. What is being presented here
Speaker 1: is evidence of a conspiracy with seven parts to it,
Speaker 1: and today we heard another one of those parts, or
Speaker 1: two parts actually, one was the pressure campaign that Trump
Speaker 1: placed on Pence, and then the second one is what
Speaker 1: they called the pouring gasoline on the fire, which was
Speaker 1: Trump summoning, assembling the violent mob and directing them to
Speaker 1: march on the capital. So we heard pretty clear evidence
Speaker 1: of this. And in a criminal conspiracy, the most difficult
Speaker 1: thing is to prove criminal intent. Did the person know
Speaker 1: that what they were doing was illegal and decided to
Speaker 1: act anyway? And That's what the evidence was most clear
Speaker 1: on today. Yeah, it's sounding a lot like it here, Michael.
Speaker 1: Not just Donald Trump I want to ask you about,
Speaker 1: but also John Eastman, this former counsel who, as we know,
Speaker 1: sought a pardon. Listen to what presidential advisor Eric Hirshman
Speaker 1: said when Eastman first approached him with this idea of
Speaker 1: overturning the election. He was walking through it at that time,
Speaker 1: and I said, to hold on a second, I want
Speaker 1: understand what you're saying. You're saying that you believe the
Speaker 1: Vice president, acting as President of the Senate can be
Speaker 1: the sole decision maker as to under your theory, who
Speaker 1: becomes the next president United States. And he said yes.
Speaker 1: M I said, are you out of your f in mind?
Speaker 1: Quite a conversation. January six happens the day after Johnny
Speaker 1: Easman calls Hershman on the phone to try to float
Speaker 1: the idea of doing something. There's another appeal they could
Speaker 1: make in Georgia or something like that. Hershman did not
Speaker 1: pull back this time either. Irena said, I don't want
Speaker 1: to hear any other f and words coming out of
Speaker 1: your mouth, no matter what other than orderly transition. Repeat
Speaker 1: those words to me. Eventually you said orderly transition. I said, good, John.
Speaker 1: Now I'm going to give you the best free legal
Speaker 1: advice you're ever getting in your life. Get a great
Speaker 1: f in criminal defense lawyer. You're gonna need it. Is
Speaker 1: he right? Michael's elden, Well, it again appears that the
Speaker 1: President United States, along with John Eastman, along with Rudy Giuliani,
Speaker 1: along with Sidney Powell, engaged in a criminal conspiracy to
Speaker 1: obstruct and defraud the United States government. That there was
Speaker 1: an agreement, there was guilty knowledge, criminal intent, and they
Speaker 1: were acts in furtherance of that conspiracy. And yeah, you know,
Speaker 1: from a straight constitutional analysis, there's nothing that prevents the
Speaker 1: former president from being indicted. And from a straight criminal
Speaker 1: law analysis, the elements of a criminal conspiracy have been
Speaker 1: laid out pretty clearly today. The next couple of hearings
Speaker 1: need to accomplish what Michael, if this is the direction
Speaker 1: we're going in, well, I think what they're going to
Speaker 1: be doing is trying to prove each of the seven
Speaker 1: prongs of their conspiracy. They're saying the president engaged in
Speaker 1: the seven part conspiracy. The first was the Big Law,
Speaker 1: the second was to replace the acting attorney general. The
Speaker 1: third was to pressure Pence, the fourth was to pressure
Speaker 1: state officials, the fifth was to do the false selectors scheme,
Speaker 1: the sixth was the violent mob, and the seventh was
Speaker 1: in action when this was going on. So I think
Speaker 1: what happens next is the pressure campaign on state officials.
Speaker 1: We haven't heard the evidence of that yet in these hearings,
Speaker 1: and so they're just working their way through these seven elements,
Speaker 1: and I think what they'll conclude with it to say,
Speaker 1: we have essentially proved our case America. The President of
Speaker 1: United States, former president of the United States, along with
Speaker 1: the following people engage in the conspiratory to obstruct into
Speaker 1: fraud the Congress in these seven ways, and then they'll say, here,
Speaker 1: d o J is up to you. What's DOJ doing? Lastly, Michael,
Speaker 1: right now, though they're they're conducting their own investigation in
Speaker 1: tandem here exactly right. They are not sitting back doing nothing.
Speaker 1: They are investigating. But they have not gotten the head
Speaker 1: start that the January six committee did, and that's why
Speaker 1: they're asking for assistance with the transcripts. And I think
Speaker 1: what is going to be the case is what Thompson
Speaker 1: said is as soon as they've laid out their case,
Speaker 1: They're going to give their information to organization has the
Speaker 1: authority to indict, and that's the d o J. In
Speaker 1: the end, this is a Department of Justice story. Though
Speaker 1: right Americans and and historians are following the committee, the
Speaker 1: do o J has the action. Well, I think that's true,
Speaker 1: and it's not true. I think it's true from a
Speaker 1: criminal law perspective. But of course what's going on here
Speaker 1: is a very important political story, which you know, on
Speaker 1: which the democratic government that we cherish is on trial.
Speaker 1: And so I think you have both. You have the
Speaker 1: what is what happened and what can we do to
Speaker 1: prevent it from happening politically? And then second who will
Speaker 1: be held accountable criminally? So I think those things happen
Speaker 1: in sandem. Look glad you could join us. Michael zeld
Speaker 1: In a voice of experience, former federal prosecutor and former
Speaker 1: special counsel to Robert Muller while at the Department of Justice.
Speaker 1: We thank you, Michael, I'm Joe, Matthew and Washington. This
Speaker 1: is Bloomberg sound On. You're not going to hear conversations
Speaker 1: like this anywhere else today as we try to not
Speaker 1: sensationalize what's happening, but better understand where the heck this
Speaker 1: is going. And we're gonna assemble our panel next for
Speaker 1: more on this. The headline on the terminal now January six.
Speaker 1: Committee wants to talk to Jenny Thomas, Yes, the wife
Speaker 1: of Justice Clarence Thomas. Apparently this will happen. The chairman,
Speaker 1: Bennie Thompson says, the committee plans to ask the wife
Speaker 1: of Justice Clarence Thomas to answer questions about her involvement
Speaker 1: in plans to overturn the election. As we have understood
Speaker 1: now that email correspondence from John Eastman, the aforementioned at
Speaker 1: the panel recently obtained shows that Jenny Thompson was in
Speaker 1: contact with the attorney and talked about her efforts to
Speaker 1: keep Joe Biden out of office. Washington Post broke it.
Speaker 1: We'll see if the Committee gets somewhere on this. Speaking
Speaker 1: of Benny Thompson, as we assemble our panel here, listen
Speaker 1: to this back and forth from the chair of the
Speaker 1: committee as he walks of the hearing room faces a
Speaker 1: group of reporters in the hallway to talk about why
Speaker 1: the committee is not sharing all of this with the
Speaker 1: Department of Justice. This just happened, essentially a letter accuse
Speaker 1: you guys of hampering their investigation. Are you going to
Speaker 1: turn over those transcripts? We just got the letter yesterday.
Speaker 1: I asked you about it on Tuesday too, So are
Speaker 1: you going to turn over the transcripts in due time?
Speaker 1: You will? Are you agree? Listen to me? There, don't don't.
Speaker 1: We got the letter yesterday, we're reviewing it. Will respond
Speaker 1: to them, but we in the midst of conducting hearings.
Speaker 1: We have a program to get over. We have to
Speaker 1: get the facts and circumstances behind January six. We will
Speaker 1: work with them, but we have a report to do
Speaker 1: what We are not going to stop what we're doing
Speaker 1: to share the information that we've gotten so far. All right,
Speaker 1: there's Benny Thompson straight from the chairman's mouth. A short
Speaker 1: time ago he was asked to how about the end
Speaker 1: of the week, He said no. As we assembled our panel,
Speaker 1: Genie's with us in studio today Bloomberg Politics contributor, Democratic
Speaker 1: analyst Jennie Chanzano joined by Adam Goodman, Republican Strategists, columnist
Speaker 1: and partner at Battered Partners in Washington, also a senior
Speaker 1: Fellow at Tufts University's Fletcher School. Genie, it's great to
Speaker 1: see in Washington and welcome back Adam Goodman. Pretty remarkable
Speaker 1: second half of the hearing, Genie, I think you and
Speaker 1: I both agree how much trouble is John Eastman in
Speaker 1: and what's going on here with the Department of Justice. Yeah, well,
Speaker 1: well John Eastman, first off, I mean, the idea that
Speaker 1: he asked to be put on that part in list,
Speaker 1: I mean shows that he has a sense that he
Speaker 1: could be in very big trouble. And I thought the
Speaker 1: clip you played by Hirshman is indicative of that. And
Speaker 1: he told him, I'm going to give you free legal
Speaker 1: advice and the best advice you're going to get to
Speaker 1: get an attorney because you're in trouble. And you know,
Speaker 1: I think the federal judge talking about this as a
Speaker 1: coup in search of illegal theory, and of course Eastman
Speaker 1: and Trump at the center of that coup, so he's
Speaker 1: in big trouble. I have a lot of questions about
Speaker 1: what's going on between the committee and the Department of Justice.
Speaker 1: I don't understand it Justice at the outset, and I
Speaker 1: wanted to ask you know, your previous guests this but
Speaker 1: why can't they turn over or won't they turn over
Speaker 1: this material? It can't be difficult for the committee to
Speaker 1: physically turn this over. They're not going to have to
Speaker 1: rewrite it by hand. They just put it on at
Speaker 1: the same thing. So I have a lot of questions
Speaker 1: as to why that's not happening. I don't know. Adam
Speaker 1: may have a better answer than I do, but I
Speaker 1: think it's it's a perplexing that there seems to be,
Speaker 1: you know, by Benny Thompson, this resistance to working with
Speaker 1: the Department of Justice at this point? Are they afraid
Speaker 1: that the d o J is going to steal their work?
Speaker 1: Wouldn't it actually add credibility to the committee to have
Speaker 1: d o J behind this? I'm laughing right now, jeez.
Speaker 1: I thought I could explain this. I explained in two words, Washington,
Speaker 1: you know, parlor game and ship games. Ship actually three words.
Speaker 1: I mean where we are right now? We have we
Speaker 1: if you if you remember the public, this seems to
Speaker 1: be West Wing meeting the House of Cards, right, So
Speaker 1: they're starting to they're starting to get very interested in, well,
Speaker 1: what's the next part, the next chapter. But let's put
Speaker 1: this all in perspective for a second. Uh, I believe
Speaker 1: that punishing actions in the past talking about political now,
Speaker 1: Punishing actions in the past will prove far more difficult
Speaker 1: than punishing such acts in the future because a lot
Speaker 1: of questions are being raised. So say this continues down
Speaker 1: this path, and you know the revelations that you're hearing,
Speaker 1: the conversations about between the president, the vice president, and
Speaker 1: the attorney. I mean, if this were a megaphone that
Speaker 1: had been in the presidential office for the last presidents,
Speaker 1: we have a lot of fun and a lot of color.
Speaker 1: But I'm not excusing. I'm just saying, this is act
Speaker 1: she bringing into light, the public light conversations that here
Speaker 1: before have been somewhat private. What does it really lead to.
Speaker 1: If it leads to some resolution that heals the republic,
Speaker 1: I think that's something that Americans will uccept. However, right now,
Speaker 1: I think we're moving down a path where, ultimately, short
Speaker 1: of indictment, the Democrats will think we didn't go far enough,
Speaker 1: Republicans I've went too far, and independence will thank we
Speaker 1: just had enough of all this. Let's get back to
Speaker 1: the real show, which is beating inflation. There's a lot
Speaker 1: to be said for that. Genie does it? Is it
Speaker 1: indictment or bust them? You know, Adam stole my notes
Speaker 1: because I wrote on my notes Adam House of Cards,
Speaker 1: and he had so he was smarter than I was.
Speaker 1: But yeah, but you know, I think what is so
Speaker 1: frightening to me about this is what the judge said
Speaker 1: at the end, which is that this is not just
Speaker 1: about history and not just about sort of an accounting
Speaker 1: what happened, but what's coming down the pike. And you
Speaker 1: and I were just talking to the last few days
Speaker 1: about the fact that we have two key swing states
Speaker 1: in Florida Nevada, which may have election deniers as in
Speaker 1: charge of the counting of votes as Secretary of States.
Speaker 1: We also have seen these Republican primaries where election deniers
Speaker 1: are winning far more than losing. And of course, you know,
Speaker 1: you also have the Proud Boys who have come out
Speaker 1: of the shadows of doing you know, threatening to kill
Speaker 1: the vice president out enough, taking over the Miami Dad
Speaker 1: Republican Party. So they have moved themselves into politics. So
Speaker 1: this is a very threatening time. I think committee doesn't
Speaker 1: change anything, and this committee doesn't change any of that.
Speaker 1: I think one thing, if they could, you know, reform
Speaker 1: that Electoral count Act. That would be a good start
Speaker 1: as far as I'm concerned. I think those are the
Speaker 1: kind of important things. And to get the American public
Speaker 1: to see that the election was Remember there was a
Speaker 1: time Democrats, namely progressives, were very upset with that as
Speaker 1: an option. They wanted the comprehensive of voting reform. How
Speaker 1: important is that, Adam Goodman to get that done? I
Speaker 1: think for the confidence of the American people, it's incredibly
Speaker 1: important that we find a way the field that elections
Speaker 1: not only means something again, but that we can take
Speaker 1: it to the bank. And we're not there. You look
Speaker 1: at two thousand sixteen or more of Democrats thought that
Speaker 1: Hillary was a legitimate winner. Two thousand twenty. Uh, you
Speaker 1: know you you go to two thousand twenty and the
Speaker 1: same thing in reverse terms of Trump. We gotta do
Speaker 1: something there. We don't and we and right now what
Speaker 1: we have is partisan bickering over what the resolution is.
Speaker 1: But can I just point out the irony of all
Speaker 1: this that les Okay, we were looking at an indictment,
Speaker 1: a seven part indictment. Pandora's Box had seven deadly sins rath, gluttony, greed,
Speaker 1: and the slow pride and lust. There are a lot
Speaker 1: of parallels here between that box in the box that
Speaker 1: I think America is find itself into these hearings. How's
Speaker 1: the Cards meets West Wing? Adam Goodman excellent, Jeannie Chanzino,
Speaker 1: the best analysis here. This is Bloomberg. Welcome to Bloomberg.
Speaker 1: Sound on as we join you live from the nation's
Speaker 1: capital with an eye on Ukraine. The President, in fact,
Speaker 1: was on the phone with Vladimir Zelenski yesterday, vowing to
Speaker 1: provide an additional billion dollars in security assistance as they
Speaker 1: try to fight off Russian forces in the east. The
Speaker 1: battle for the Don Bust continues. The Secretary of Defense,
Speaker 1: Lloyd Austin says, this is what happens when you're in
Speaker 1: the war zone. The United States. We'll provide an additional
Speaker 1: one billion dollars security assistant package for Ukraine, and that
Speaker 1: includes our twelfth draw down from d O D inventory
Speaker 1: since August. Were you're in a fight, you can never
Speaker 1: get enough. Uh. You you always want more, You always
Speaker 1: believe that you need more. And I have been there,
Speaker 1: uh and so I you know, certainly understand where the
Speaker 1: Ukrainians are coming from. And we're gonna fight hard to
Speaker 1: get them everything they need. They are indeed getting more.
Speaker 1: This latest weapons package includes for the first time launchers
Speaker 1: for vehicle mounted harpoon anti ship missiles. According to people
Speaker 1: familiar with the matter talking with Bloomberg, Tony Capaco, the Pentagon,
Speaker 1: Jennifer Jacobs at the White House reporting this, Denmark is
Speaker 1: going to supply the missiles. The US package also includes
Speaker 1: over threllion dollars for secure radios and related equipment, thermal
Speaker 1: night vision optics, millions more for training. Mark Millie, the
Speaker 1: of course, General Chair of the Joint Chiefs, describing the
Speaker 1: slow grind that this has devolved into in the dun Buss.
Speaker 1: This fight down on the don Buss has been going
Speaker 1: on since sixty and April UH and the advances that
Speaker 1: the Russians have made have been very slow, a very
Speaker 1: tough slog, very severe battle of attrition, almost World War
Speaker 1: One like UH, and the Russians have suffered a tremendous
Speaker 1: amounts of casualties, almost World War One like. Let's bring
Speaker 1: in Bill Rogio, senior fellow at the Foundation for the
Speaker 1: Defense of Democra. He's an editor of the Long War Journal,
Speaker 1: which has done a lot of reporting UH since the
Speaker 1: start of the invasion. Bill welcome back. Comparing this to
Speaker 1: World War One certainly draws images and horrible memories and
Speaker 1: really just expresses the tough slog that Ukraine is in here.
Speaker 1: You remember there was at one point we thought this
Speaker 1: would be done in a couple of weeks. Then it
Speaker 1: was a couple of months. This is showing no end
Speaker 1: in sight. Yes, thanks for having me back. I actually
Speaker 1: disagree with General Milly's assessment that this is like World
Speaker 1: War One. What I think what he's describing there is
Speaker 1: that trench warfare where the lines didn't move for a
Speaker 1: significant portion, and that's not actually what's happening. The Russians
Speaker 1: are advancing, it's just very very slow. Um. And he's
Speaker 1: not mentioning the Ukrainian losses as well. There there are
Speaker 1: now the Ukrainians are now saying they're losing one hundred
Speaker 1: soldiers a day and taking up to a thousand wounded.
Speaker 1: So this is a you know, the losses are mounting
Speaker 1: on both sides, and one side has a lot more
Speaker 1: to lose than the other, and that would be the Russians.
Speaker 1: So yeah, I just disagree with that assessment. I think
Speaker 1: that might have been the assessment a month ago. But
Speaker 1: it's just it's it seems very behind. So Russia is advancing,
Speaker 1: then will this new weapons package slow them down? I
Speaker 1: think the problem with this new weapons packages I'm hearing it,
Speaker 1: it's not going to arrive in theater for weeks, if
Speaker 1: not months, in totality. And I think this has been
Speaker 1: a big problem with the Western effort to arm Ukraine.
Speaker 1: It's it's been coming peace and coming into the country
Speaker 1: piece meal. It's not arrived. Not enough of his is
Speaker 1: arriving quick enough. In order to have an impact on
Speaker 1: the battlefield, you need to get those weapons systems um
Speaker 1: online and at the same time in order to be
Speaker 1: able to affect this the tactical situation, and that's not
Speaker 1: what we're seeing. We're seeing these the equipment roll in
Speaker 1: piece at a time. And then there's another issue with
Speaker 1: that is are the Ukrainians capable of handling these more
Speaker 1: advanced weapons systems and then will they be able to
Speaker 1: provide the ammunition for them as well. So the Ukrainians
Speaker 1: are now since they're depleting their stocks to Soviet weaponry,
Speaker 1: they're now becoming dependent on Western aid. And what happens
Speaker 1: if the Western if the US and other countries suddenly
Speaker 1: decide maybe it's not a good idea to keep providing weapons,
Speaker 1: and maybe we need to look for a political solution.
Speaker 1: We're a far distance from there, obviously. How about these
Speaker 1: harpoon anti ship missiles the Ukraine was asking for help
Speaker 1: in the Black Sea. I guess to your point weeks ago, Uh,
Speaker 1: what do these bring if not a more pronounced naval war.
Speaker 1: I think that this is one weapon system that can
Speaker 1: make a very real difference, even if provided and limited numbers.
Speaker 1: It can drive the Russian navy further off of the
Speaker 1: Ukrainian coast through Russian The Russians control about two thirds
Speaker 1: of the Black Sea coast and all the coasts of
Speaker 1: the Sea of Azov, so in the port of a
Speaker 1: city of Odessa that is under Ukrainian control, and Ukrainians
Speaker 1: are worrying about an amphibious assault and support of Russian
Speaker 1: forces from the sea. These types of weapons systems can
Speaker 1: target and hit Russian um warships at long range, but
Speaker 1: you know, in hundreds of miles, so the Russians are
Speaker 1: gonna have to stand off from the coast. This is
Speaker 1: one weapons system I think really can have an impact
Speaker 1: in this But it's a defensive weapons. Does it unlock
Speaker 1: the ports to to start moving grain. I don't believe
Speaker 1: it will, because the Russians could just back off and
Speaker 1: interdict sip ships for just further off the Ukrainian coast,
Speaker 1: these ports are still mined um. The Ukrainians would have
Speaker 1: to demine them, and then they would have to get
Speaker 1: those ships past a Russian blockade, and then the Turks
Speaker 1: would have to open up the Straits as well into
Speaker 1: the Black Sea. When you mentioned the political solution that
Speaker 1: it might be time to start having a more serious conversation,
Speaker 1: do you believe that Ukraine cannot win this militarily. Yeah.
Speaker 1: So what we were told, you know, in the very
Speaker 1: beginning was Russia was going to have a swift victory.
Speaker 1: That we were told Ukrainians are going to have a
Speaker 1: have a victory, gonna drive the Russians. Now, I think
Speaker 1: with the real um, the two scenarios that are more
Speaker 1: likely here is some form of stalemate when the Russians
Speaker 1: decided to stop advancing, and the other possibility that isn't
Speaker 1: being discussed here is what happens if the Russians do
Speaker 1: punch through in a significant way and get into more
Speaker 1: open undefended ground. This is why the Ukrainians need to
Speaker 1: be considering that possibility. Right now. Zelinski and the government
Speaker 1: is talking about victory, but there's a dark side of
Speaker 1: this that they have to consider. I don't know if
Speaker 1: they are behind closed doors, but they you know, it's
Speaker 1: as distasteful it is to everyone, their Ukrainians. They may
Speaker 1: lose some, but they they they risk losing a lot
Speaker 1: more um if if they if they're not able to
Speaker 1: get a halt to the fighting. So maybe Henry Kissing
Speaker 1: Drew was onto something. I mean, I dislike, uh, you know,
Speaker 1: he is onto something and that the borders may not
Speaker 1: look the same at the end of a political solution,
Speaker 1: a diplomatic solution, Bill Roggio, I appreciate your in It's
Speaker 1: come back and see us against soon Foundation for the
Speaker 1: Defense of Democracies and look for the long ward journal
Speaker 1: that Bill is editing. Right now. We'll reassemble the panel
Speaker 1: for more on this. Next This is Bloomberg. You're listening
Speaker 1: to Bloomberg you sound on with Joe Matthew on Bloomberg Radio.
Speaker 1: Pretty tough assessment of the situation in Ukraine from Bill Rojo,
Speaker 1: and you do wonder where we're going to be here
Speaker 1: in terms of public opinion, public sentiment, and the appetite
Speaker 1: for more, say com August Labor Day, or we're gonna
Speaker 1: be talking about this when we vote in November. It's
Speaker 1: sure sounds like it. As we reassemble the panel now,
Speaker 1: Jennie Schanzano is in studio in Washington, Bloomberg Politics contributor
Speaker 1: and Democratic analyst, joined today by Adam Goodman. He's back
Speaker 1: with US Republican strategist columnist partner Ballard Partners. It's great
Speaker 1: to have both of you here. Genie. This doesn't sound
Speaker 1: very good here when you consider the messaging we've heard
Speaker 1: from Democrats and Republicans who have completely leaned into this
Speaker 1: support for the war in Ukraine. Another billion dollars is
Speaker 1: going out the door here, and the Chairman of the
Speaker 1: Joint Chiefs is describing this. I know, Bill disagreed, but
Speaker 1: not only as a war of attrition but something more
Speaker 1: like World War One. How much time does President Biden
Speaker 1: have politically to continue funding this war? You know, with
Speaker 1: the economy the way it is, it becomes really really
Speaker 1: difficult for people to say you should keep funding you know,
Speaker 1: twenty thirty billion, another billion here. Um. So as much
Speaker 1: as people are supportive of Ukraine and want Ukraine to uh,
Speaker 1: you know, be able to push Russia back, they also
Speaker 1: are really concerned about what's going on at home, so
Speaker 1: you know, that becomes an issue. I think from a
Speaker 1: broader perspective that the real challenge here is the challenge
Speaker 1: we see in all proxy wars. They become I thought
Speaker 1: Bill was so great, They become protracted to the point
Speaker 1: often of stalemate. They are incredibly deadly for civilians and
Speaker 1: you have to have a way out. But when you
Speaker 1: keep sending in arms, you do increase the duration of
Speaker 1: these conflicts, but the impact of the fighting on civilian
Speaker 1: populations increases as well. And what is the end game
Speaker 1: is the big question here? Where is that political diplomatic solution.
Speaker 1: I think that's something that the President and the administration
Speaker 1: are going to have to ask. In the mind of
Speaker 1: the administration, what do they see as the endgame here?
Speaker 1: Adam good, But if it's not obvious Ukraine can win
Speaker 1: this militarily in the next couple of months, when does
Speaker 1: the White House need to make that calculation? This is
Speaker 1: very difficular. This is gonna sound maybe surprising. I I
Speaker 1: really support uh and have supported the the administration and
Speaker 1: and and all others and funding the Ukrainian effort because
Speaker 1: I think if you we don't draw the line there,
Speaker 1: there's some very scary consequences beyond that. With that set.
Speaker 1: You know, we live at a time when inflations running
Speaker 1: buck we have um gass over five dollars a gallon
Speaker 1: bread and two dollars alow. People are kind of really
Speaker 1: kind of freaking out about that. But Joe Biden, President
Speaker 1: Biden needs to win. He needs to win somewhere. And
Speaker 1: I will say that as it's difficult, if not impossible,
Speaker 1: for him to get a win, a short term win
Speaker 1: in this election cycle on inflation and other things. He
Speaker 1: needs to find it somewhere else. And if he's gonna
Speaker 1: throw caution to the winds and try to find somewhere
Speaker 1: where he takes a gutty strong principle stand and funny
Speaker 1: as it sounds, it maybe Ukraine. What's that stand though,
Speaker 1: to to to keep more doing more or to seek
Speaker 1: a diplomatic solution. Well, I think he has to do both.
Speaker 1: You cannot just throw money at this problem. That's of
Speaker 1: course going to be the Republicans planes against the Democrats.
Speaker 1: Everything that in the world needs more money. No, that's
Speaker 1: not true. We need better ideas. We need more ideas
Speaker 1: that work. And if he were to do both to
Speaker 1: fund this and to seek diplomatic solutions and to say, uh,
Speaker 1: in very strong terms, this is why we're doing this.
Speaker 1: Because you talk about the economy and all their ra
Speaker 1: amplications already on our economy because of what's happening over there,
Speaker 1: it's going to get worse. You. I want to make
Speaker 1: sure it does. This is how real wars UH get
Speaker 1: started and expand UH. In many cases mission creep right
Speaker 1: when a when a general or an executive in this
Speaker 1: particular case, Jeanie says, all right, then we're going for broke.
Speaker 1: It's surge time in Ukraine or something like that, to
Speaker 1: try to you know, close the curtains on this. Are
Speaker 1: you concerned, Genie that happens. Yeah, I think we have
Speaker 1: to be concerned. You know, the United States has been
Speaker 1: providing and I have supported it rightly, so weapons to
Speaker 1: the Ukraine, and there has been a promise that they
Speaker 1: would not be shot over the border, because the United
Speaker 1: States of course wants to maintain you know, the distance
Speaker 1: from this. But you know, imagine that that happens and
Speaker 1: and there is a response, then do we get drawn
Speaker 1: into this thing? You know, to go back to the
Speaker 1: proxy war idea, One reason that you engage in those
Speaker 1: as a superpower is because you can keep the hands off.
Speaker 1: You can engage from Afar. You don't suffer the casualties
Speaker 1: at home, you don't suffer the poor public opinion. But
Speaker 1: we could easily get drawn into this thing if we're
Speaker 1: not very careful. And again, you know, I think to
Speaker 1: go back to Adam's point. You know, President Biden has
Speaker 1: long made a case that the challenge of the twenty
Speaker 1: one century is democracy versus autocracy. And one of his
Speaker 1: stands on this was to take a stand against Russia
Speaker 1: in this aggression against Ukraine. And he's right about that,
Speaker 1: but he also, I think has to have an end
Speaker 1: game here. What is the political and diplomatic solution. It's
Speaker 1: not unlike what people asked in Afghanistan years ago to
Speaker 1: U S presidents, what is the end game there? You
Speaker 1: can't just go in, even in a proxy sense, and
Speaker 1: not have an end game or a way out. And
Speaker 1: that I think the White House needs to articulate in
Speaker 1: a way that Americans can get behind and understand, Adam,
Speaker 1: this is the conversation Vladimir Putin has been waiting for,
Speaker 1: right and he knows that that patients wears thin very
Speaker 1: quickly in a America, probably surprised by by how aggressive
Speaker 1: our response was, but he knows that this conversation is inevitable.
Speaker 1: Does Joe Biden know that? Um? I'm unsure. I don't
Speaker 1: don't speak for the president, but I can tell you
Speaker 1: he should, uh, Vadamir Putin has not lost this war.
Speaker 1: He lost the quick win, he lost a quick win,
Speaker 1: but he hasn't lost the war. And I think he's
Speaker 1: probably looking at just what you suggested, Joe, which is
Speaker 1: a war of attrition where we started to bear on
Speaker 1: the nerds of the American public and the appetite of
Speaker 1: American public for continuing to rally behind us. And in
Speaker 1: terms of clarifying what the president is after, what his
Speaker 1: end game is, uh, the genius point to I think
Speaker 1: he has to do that like right now, like avertly
Speaker 1: say this is where we're going and this is the
Speaker 1: end game for us. Another spending bill and another problem
Speaker 1: we have to take on in a world that seems
Speaker 1: to be royal by turmoil as opposed to encourage by hope.
Speaker 1: Incredible and a great conversation with our panel. If you're
Speaker 1: just joining us, it's Bloomberg sound on. You should subscribe
Speaker 1: to the podcast. Then you won't have to worry. As
Speaker 1: we spend time with Genie and Adam, I'm Joe Matthew
Speaker 1: in Washington. I want to ask you both while you
Speaker 1: hear about some politics in Florida, because Elon Musk has
Speaker 1: been the big story today around here in his effort
Speaker 1: to address the workforce at Twitter and is he gonna
Speaker 1: buy it? Is he not going to buy it? But
Speaker 1: it's actually creeped into politics this week by way of
Speaker 1: Florida Governor Rhonda Santis. Uh. Interesting that we hear from
Speaker 1: Elon Musk who says he might be a supporter here
Speaker 1: Uh if he runs for president in Elon Musk says
Speaker 1: he maybe on board. Well, de Santis was delighted, I
Speaker 1: guess to get this support. Here was his reactions. So
Speaker 1: what I would say, um, you know, I'm focused on two.
Speaker 1: But with Elon Musk, what I would say is, you know,
Speaker 1: I welcome support from African Americans. What can I say? Okay,
Speaker 1: laughter from the crowd, And of course Elon Musk is
Speaker 1: from South Africa. Uh. I guess he was trying to
Speaker 1: keep it light there, Jeannie, But what was the point
Speaker 1: of that? Is he trying to remind or suggest just
Speaker 1: because you're from Africa, you're you're not a person of color?
Speaker 1: Where are we going here? You know, I scratched. I
Speaker 1: scratched my head for a moment there before it hit me.
Speaker 1: And you know, I think, you know, look at Rond
Speaker 1: De Santis is going to welcome the support of you know,
Speaker 1: the wealthiest man in the world at this point, certainly
Speaker 1: and Elon Muski, you know, should he take over Twitter,
Speaker 1: whether he does or not, he's you know, made this
Speaker 1: case that there's going to be a massive red wave
Speaker 1: this year that he leaning towards supporting De Santis. You know,
Speaker 1: of course, to Santis is going to welcome that, and
Speaker 1: so you know, if he can get that kind of
Speaker 1: free media, why not take it? So, you know, I
Speaker 1: have to say, thinking about it, is probably a good
Speaker 1: line on to santiss partner, I say that grudgingly. Is
Speaker 1: he seeing that, Adam because he doesn't have the port
Speaker 1: of many African Americans. I can't speak for what the
Speaker 1: governor said, but this is a very interesting comment because
Speaker 1: you know, we've seen the last couple of months what's
Speaker 1: happened between the Governor of Florida and Disney where disneyse
Speaker 1: numbers went from seventy seven favorable, fifteen unfavorable, too favorable,
Speaker 1: forty unfavorable in five weeks. So and then everyone's saying, well,
Speaker 1: that will really hurt the Governor of Florida because that
Speaker 1: means business is what we wanted to come to Florida.
Speaker 1: They really want to come to Florida for a lot
Speaker 1: of reasons, and they're starting to understand the new politics.
Speaker 1: The corporations of American of the world are understanding from
Speaker 1: this governor in particular, that new the real politics of
Speaker 1: today is uh is different than what it was even
Speaker 1: six months ago, and they don't get on board, or
Speaker 1: more or worse, they try to challenge it and take
Speaker 1: it on. I think, like Mickey Mouse is very sad
Speaker 1: right now for what happened over the last couple of
Speaker 1: months in Florida. I think the scantist is really doing that.
Speaker 1: As far as the is comment about Els, I don't know.
Speaker 1: I don't know there's a joke or not. I hope,
Speaker 1: I hope it was received that way. You know, they'll
Speaker 1: be playing this back if he of course ross but
Speaker 1: is Genie, Is he a real contender for twenty four?
Speaker 1: Are we're making too much out of this? Does it
Speaker 1: depend on whether Trump runs? It does depend in part
Speaker 1: on whether Trump runs. But he is absolutely I think
Speaker 1: at least, you know, one of the top contenders on
Speaker 1: the GOP side again if Trump doesn't win, And Adams
Speaker 1: should not be talking about Mickey Mouse as sad he's
Speaker 1: always happy, Adam Um, But no, I think De Santis
Speaker 1: is is you know, certainly he has proven himself um
Speaker 1: in the governorship. And you know we should also mention
Speaker 1: another thing that Elon Musk tweeted was he tweeted that
Speaker 1: he voted for Mayra Flora's this, you know, huge win
Speaker 1: for Republicans on the border of Texas. First time they've
Speaker 1: taken over that district in a hundred years, he said,
Speaker 1: first time he's voted for a Republican. So, you know,
Speaker 1: I think it is indicative of sort of this charge
Speaker 1: he's leading, at least to people who following millions of
Speaker 1: people on Twitter, does De Santis have to yield to
Speaker 1: Trump in twenty four Adam, Um, that everyone's watching to
Speaker 1: see what happens. I can tell you one thing, Rhonda
Speaker 1: Santis is the alternative to don Donald Trump right now,
Speaker 1: and everyone around the country is starting to understand why
Speaker 1: and just if I don't mind be adding to the
Speaker 1: Mickey Mouse comment from Genie, he is sad Genie for
Speaker 1: one reason. He has stock and Disney too, as the
Speaker 1: first stock I ever bought in my life as a
Speaker 1: child was Disney. You got the certificate? And where they
Speaker 1: still doing that? I guess I had the mouse ears
Speaker 1: and everything. Joe Matthew, I'm sorry to tell you. I
Speaker 1: think Mickey got it early on the options. Adam, I
Speaker 1: don't know he's still doing okay, maybe I'm wrong. This
Speaker 1: is a riot though. I do wonder where this ends
Speaker 1: up in twenty four and how long you know? Donald
Speaker 1: Trump is gonna drag this out till the bitter end, right,
Speaker 1: which is gonna make life difficult for a guy like
Speaker 1: the Santis Adam to figure out his plans. Well, here's
Speaker 1: here's the bottom line, uh Trump. The Trump brand is
Speaker 1: done very well, I think overall, and the Republican primaries overall,
Speaker 1: he has had some loss of the overall has done well,
Speaker 1: but the de Santis message is really resonant and it's fresh,
Speaker 1: and that's what makes this very interesting in terms of
Speaker 1: how it all shakes out for the nomination. Will Joe
Speaker 1: Biden run against either of them? Jennie, you know, it's
Speaker 1: so many Democrats, that's the that's the million dollar questioned. Yeah.
Speaker 1: And if he decides not to, just when is the timing?
Speaker 1: When does he tell people? Because that says a lot
Speaker 1: about whether he supports Kamala Harris or not. Why this
Speaker 1: is so much to figure out still, but that's why
Speaker 1: we have Genie and Adam Goodman. Thank you so much
Speaker 1: for being back with us today on Bloomberg Sound on,
Speaker 1: great panel and nice to see a Genie here in
Speaker 1: the nation's capital. We'll do it again tomorrow on the
Speaker 1: fastest hour in politics. Markets and traffic are on the way.
Speaker 1: I'm Joe Matthew. This is Bloomberg