Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at
Speaker 1: noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then Roudo with the Bloomberg
Speaker 1: Business App. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts,
Speaker 1: or watch us live on YouTube.
Speaker 2: Thank you for being with us on Bloomberg TV and radio.
Speaker 2: The Wednesday edition of Balance of Power, I'm Joe Matthew
Speaker 2: and Washington Kaylee Lines is on assignment as we pick
Speaker 2: up the pieces from debate night, but also bring you
Speaker 2: breaking news from Washington. Amazing how things can change in
Speaker 2: twenty four hours. We were talking at this time yesterday
Speaker 2: about a looming vote on a stopgap measure that Speaker
Speaker 2: Mike Johnson had brought forth to extend to kick the
Speaker 2: can on government funding six months down the road, knowing
Speaker 2: that funding expires September thirty. This was not expected to
Speaker 2: be easy. Tied with the Save Act Democrats didn't like,
Speaker 2: it wasn't expected to pass the Senate even if it
Speaker 2: did pass the House. Now it's not happening today, as
Speaker 2: we report the Speaker talking to reporters earlier, there will
Speaker 2: be no vote today on the short term spending plan
Speaker 2: to avoid a government shutdown. They're going to work through
Speaker 2: the weekend. It seems, in fact, we may not see
Speaker 2: a vote now until next week. Remembering time is tight
Speaker 2: and this is going to be an interesting debate. Donald
Speaker 2: Trump saying on Truth Social yesterday, Republicans should not vote
Speaker 2: for any stopgap unless it does come with the Save Act,
Speaker 2: which Democrats remind tries to solve a problem that is
Speaker 2: not in existence because it is already illegal for non
Speaker 2: citizens to vote in elections. Now, that's where we start
Speaker 2: our conversation with someone who had his eyes on the
Speaker 2: debate last night, and of course was in Lower Manhattan
Speaker 2: this morning on this anniversary of nine to eleven. That
Speaker 2: would be Dan Goldman, Democratic congressman New York's tenth district,
Speaker 2: with us live from Capitol Hill. Congressman, it's great to
Speaker 2: see you. Thanks for coming back. Did Republicans rhetoric change
Speaker 2: on this stop gap after the debate last night?
Speaker 3: I don't actually think the debate had that much to
Speaker 3: do with it. I think it was very clear that,
Speaker 3: for a variety of reasons, there were numerous Republicans who
Speaker 3: did not want to move forward with this. Some understood
Speaker 3: that billions of dollars would be underfunded for veterans, for
Speaker 3: the military, for our national security if this went a
Speaker 3: full six months and others realized that this was a
Speaker 3: non starter, it was never going to ultimately become law,
Speaker 3: and it was playing more brinksmanship with a government shutdown,
Speaker 3: and the Republicans would have held responsibility for that a
Speaker 3: month before the election.
Speaker 2: Are you worried about a shutdown or is the Senate
Speaker 2: going to solve this for the House once again.
Speaker 3: Look, I'm always worried about a shutdown, but I think
Speaker 3: we've been through this several times before, and we've seen
Speaker 3: and we know how it's going to play out, and
Speaker 3: it's going to play out ultimately with Speaker Johnson needing
Speaker 3: the Democrats to pass a short term stop gap three
Speaker 3: month cr that is exactly what has happened the last
Speaker 3: couple times that we've been through this sprinksmanship and bewildering
Speaker 3: why he continues to do it again and again and again.
Speaker 3: It's the definition of insanity to think that something will
Speaker 3: be different. But here we are recognizing three weeks before
Speaker 3: that this is not going to happen.
Speaker 2: This is a familiar feeling of afraid Congressman to your point.
Speaker 2: We've seen this movie before. The talk is then if
Speaker 2: not six months, three months, is that what happens. We
Speaker 2: fund the government through the end of the year, and
Speaker 2: whoever wins the election, the next president is going to
Speaker 2: have to deal with this problem on day one.
Speaker 3: Well, I think part of the point of actually doing
Speaker 3: it in mid December is so that whoever becomes president
Speaker 3: does not have to deal with this on day one,
Speaker 3: that we will get it done before the new president,
Speaker 3: who I believe will be Kamala Harris, takes office on
Speaker 3: January twentieth. And that's the way it should be done,
Speaker 3: and that's the way that I expect it to be done.
Speaker 4: But it just goes to show Joe.
Speaker 3: How consistent and continuous the Republicans are in playing games
Speaker 3: with our government, with our national security, with our veterans,
Speaker 3: with the things that matter to the American people. And
Speaker 3: it is political brinksmanship after political brinksmanship. They are not
Speaker 3: serious about doing the actual work to solve the problems
Speaker 3: for the American people. That has been the story this
Speaker 3: entire Congress. And that is why Democrats need to win
Speaker 3: in November so that Democratic majority can actually do the
Speaker 3: work for the American people. That the Democrat majority did
Speaker 3: in the last Congress, and that basically the Democratic major
Speaker 3: minority rather has done this this Congress because everything that
Speaker 3: has passed Congress has required Democrats.
Speaker 2: Well, if the idea here is then to do a
Speaker 2: stopgap through December and then somehow craft a real budget
Speaker 2: with twelve spending bills in regular order, it would take
Speaker 2: a Christmas miracle, Congressman, and I would love to be
Speaker 2: talking to you about that if it gets that far
Speaker 2: by the end of the year. But I want to
Speaker 2: ask you about the debate last night. I know you
Speaker 2: were watching here, and I know the matter of Ukraine
Speaker 2: is important to you or support for the war in Ukraine,
Speaker 2: knowing that you were the lead council in the first
Speaker 2: impeachment against Donald Trump, which brought us back to the
Speaker 2: original perfect phone call. As we all remember, Donald Trump
Speaker 2: said a couple of things last night. If he had
Speaker 2: been president, this war never would have started. Vladimir Putin
Speaker 2: never would have invaded Ukraine. He also said, if Kamala
Speaker 2: Harris gets elected, that this is going to take a
Speaker 2: very different direction. Do you believe that's true that this
Speaker 2: war would not have happened with Donald Trump in office?
Speaker 4: Absolutely?
Speaker 5: Not.
Speaker 3: The war happened because Donald Trump had messed around and
Speaker 3: undermined our alliances with our allies to the point where
Speaker 3: there was so much discord and disagreement between Donald Trump
Speaker 3: and our closest allies that Vladimir Putin believed that it
Speaker 3: was the opportune time for him to make his illegal
Speaker 3: and improper invasion of a democratic state Ukraine next door
Speaker 3: to him. And the reason why Vladimir Putin so desperately
Speaker 3: wants Donald Trump to be president again and why he
Speaker 3: is paying social media right wing media to promote Russian
Speaker 3: propaganda to help Donald Trump win, is because he knows
Speaker 3: that he has Donald Trump wrapped around his finger. And
Speaker 3: the reality is Donald Trump could not even say last
Speaker 3: night that he wants the democratic Ukraine to beat and
Speaker 3: win this war against the dictator Vladimir Putin from Russia.
Speaker 4: That is all you need to know.
Speaker 3: This man coddles up to dictators and he undermines democracy
Speaker 3: both here at home and abroad. And it's why so
Speaker 3: many of the national security officials who work for Donald
Speaker 3: Trump have said that he is unfit to the president
Speaker 3: and that they are supporting Kamala Harris.
Speaker 4: This is a critical, critical.
Speaker 3: Issue and that specific answer was so telling as to
Speaker 3: who Donald Trump is and what kind of presidency a
Speaker 3: Trump two point zero would be. It would be a
Speaker 3: red carpet for Vladimir Putin to take over Ukraine and
Speaker 3: expand into Europe.
Speaker 2: Well, it's interesting because Kamala Harris said last night that
Speaker 2: if Donald Trump were elected, Vladimir Putin be sitting in
Speaker 2: Kiev right now. But the fact of the matter is, Congressman,
Speaker 2: we've talked to the president of Poland, President Dudas sat
Speaker 2: here right at the table with us. We had the
Speaker 2: same conversation with a son of Markarova, the ambassador of
Speaker 2: Ukraine to the United States, when we ask them about
Speaker 2: what a Trump two point zero would mean for US
Speaker 2: support for NATO and the war in Ukraine. They both said, Hey,
Speaker 2: Donald Trump gave Ukraine lethal weapons when others would not,
Speaker 2: and he deserves credit for that. Are they wrong?
Speaker 3: Well, that is factually correct, But then he withheld those
Speaker 3: lethal weapons in order to coerce and extort the president
Speaker 3: of Ukraine to make up a bogus investigation to help
Speaker 3: Donald Trump's election and his electoral prospects, and so yes,
Speaker 3: on the one hand, that's right, but this is the
Speaker 3: problem with Donald Trump, you can't trust him because when
Speaker 3: push comes to shove, he will always put.
Speaker 4: His personal interest over the countries.
Speaker 3: And so he may do something the right way because
Speaker 3: he doesn't care about it. He's not paying attention to it.
Speaker 3: But if he finds something that he can do that
Speaker 3: can help him personally, he always do that. And that's
Speaker 3: why he got impeached the first time, is because he
Speaker 3: illegally withheld essential military and financial support for Ukraine against Russia.
Speaker 3: And so that's obviously why Vladimir Putin is so eager
Speaker 3: for Donald Trump to become president again.
Speaker 2: You know, you saw, Congressman Donald Trump was given several
Speaker 2: occasions last night, several opportunities to say that he wanted
Speaker 2: Ukraine to win the war. Each time he would simply
Speaker 2: say he wanted the war to end. How do you
Speaker 2: interpret that?
Speaker 3: I interpreted exactly as you did, which is it's one
Speaker 3: thing if he perhaps doesn't answer the question once, but
Speaker 3: I believe he was asked three times and he refused
Speaker 3: to say that he preferred that the democratic, independent, sovereign
Speaker 3: nation of Ukraine that was invaded by a dictator Vladimir
Speaker 3: Putin would win the war. And then when he talks
Speaker 3: about in grandiose terms, how and he consistently does this.
Speaker 3: He would end it on day one before he's even president,
Speaker 3: and you ask him, how are you going to do that?
Speaker 3: Never once has he provided any information about how he's
Speaker 3: going to do that. And we all know the reason why,
Speaker 3: and Vice President Harris said it last night, because he
Speaker 3: will just allow Vladimir Putin to walk over Ukraine and
Speaker 3: to take over Kiev and to take over a democratic
Speaker 3: nation for the first time since World War Two. So
Speaker 3: you don't have to dig deep to figure out what
Speaker 3: Donald Trump wants.
Speaker 4: He makes it very clear.
Speaker 3: And what he wants is for dictators and strong men
Speaker 3: like Victor Orbon who he bragged about, and Vladimir Putin
Speaker 3: to be his friends. Those are his models, not democracies
Speaker 3: like Ukraine.
Speaker 2: Well, Congressman, you represent New York's tenth districts, and this
Speaker 2: is an awfully important day here, this eleventh of September,
Speaker 2: for the people in your district, for you, for the
Speaker 2: people of New York City, for everyone who's listening and
Speaker 2: watching this right now. I was struck this morning to
Speaker 2: see the images from Lower Manhattan in this memorial service
Speaker 2: that we've grown so used to every year to see
Speaker 2: Joe Biden, Kamala Harris, Donald Trump all standing together to
Speaker 2: pay tribute. What does that tell us about the significance
Speaker 2: of this.
Speaker 4: Day, Well, it tells us many things.
Speaker 3: First of all, this was the anniversary of the worst
Speaker 3: terrorist attack against the United States on US soil and history,
Speaker 3: and it is critical that we never forget that we
Speaker 3: have enemies abroad who want to destroy us, and.
Speaker 4: That still remains the case.
Speaker 3: It's also a time to appreciate and remember all of
Speaker 3: the first responders who so bravely went into Ground zero,
Speaker 3: into the towers first, and then cleaned off the pile,
Speaker 3: many many thousands of whom are now suffering from mental
Speaker 3: health consequences. There's rather health consequences. But the other thing,
Speaker 3: Joe and I think this is really really important. Nine
Speaker 3: to eleven was a day that brought all Americans together.
Speaker 4: Whether you were Democratic.
Speaker 3: Or you were Republican, or you were independent or nothing,
Speaker 3: that day, we were all Americans. And this morning, as
Speaker 3: we stood there at nine to eleven, we were just
Speaker 3: Americans there to commemorate one of the worst days in
Speaker 3: American history. And it is really really important, even in
Speaker 3: our divisive and polarized political times, that we remember we
Speaker 3: are all Americans, we all love this country, we all
Speaker 3: want this country to be better. And that was to
Speaker 3: me so much of the takeaway this morning as I
Speaker 3: stood next to Rudy Giuliani and JD. Vance and Donald
Speaker 3: Trump and President Biden, Vice President Harris, Senator Schumer, Governor Hockel,
Speaker 3: it didn't matter what parties we were for this day,
Speaker 3: because we were commemorating an American holiday, which is now
Speaker 3: nine to eleven.
Speaker 2: It's incredibly important. Congressman, I appreciate your answering that question,
Speaker 2: and I'm glad that you were there for us today
Speaker 2: because I'll tell you what, waking up this morning, I
Speaker 2: have rarely felt further away from that moment, and so
Speaker 2: many of us wonder how we can get back to
Speaker 2: it without a tragedy. Great to be with us today
Speaker 2: on Bloomberg. Congressman, thank you, Dan Goldman, New York's tenth District,
Speaker 2: Live from Capitol Hill. He's made his way back to Washington,
Speaker 2: as many lawmakers have following the tributes this morning in
Speaker 2: New York.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast can
Speaker 1: Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then
Speaker 1: Ronoo with the Bloomberg Business App. You can also listen
Speaker 1: live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station,
Speaker 1: Just say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 2: We do thank you for being with us here on
Speaker 2: Bloomberg TV and Radio, and on YouTube, where you can
Speaker 2: always find us search Bloomberg Business News Live on this
Speaker 2: eleventh of September twenty twenty four. A lot of us
Speaker 2: notice the weather when we woke up this morning here
Speaker 2: Washington and in New York, that clear blue sky, the
Speaker 2: fall tempts felt a lot like it did twenty three
Speaker 2: years ago. And you keep seeing the hashtag or hearing
Speaker 2: people say never forget. You'll see a lot more of
Speaker 2: those today. The fact of the matter is, if you
Speaker 2: were in Washington that day, or in New York or
Speaker 2: in Pennsylvania, if you smell the smoke and felt the
Speaker 2: fear and the confusion, you couldn't possibly forget. And of
Speaker 2: course that goes for Americans all over the country who
Speaker 2: woke up that morning, woke up that morning to find
Speaker 2: that news on their way to work or as they
Speaker 2: were packing up the kids for school. It changed their worldview.
Speaker 2: But you advanced this story twenty three years later, and
Speaker 2: the ceremonies, the names being read, the chimes being heard,
Speaker 2: means something different for a lot of young people who
Speaker 2: don't remember it or who were not alive when it happened.
Speaker 2: And that brings us to a noted this morning in
Speaker 2: the Philadelphia Inquirer by the former Governor of Pennsylvania, Mark Schweiker,
Speaker 2: writing about remembering nine to eleven and advancing the lessons
Speaker 2: that we learned that day to the next generation. It
Speaker 2: is important to acknowledge, he says, the legislation signed into
Speaker 2: law in June by Governor Josh Shapiro, which established a
Speaker 2: moment of silence in our schools on nine to eleven
Speaker 2: to be observed yearly. The sponsor of that legislation, Rep.
Speaker 2: Jim Haddock, had the unanimous support of the Pennsylvania General Assembly.
Speaker 2: Former Governor Schwiker also hoping that everyone will pause on
Speaker 2: nine to eleven every year in a moment of silence.
Speaker 2: And you wonder if there is more that is needed
Speaker 2: to remember He's with us right now in Pennsylvania. As
Speaker 2: a matter of fact, in Philadelphia this morning after the debate,
Speaker 2: and Governor, it's good to see you here. People should
Speaker 2: know that you became governor as a direct result of
Speaker 2: nine to eleven when Tom Ridge was called to Washington
Speaker 2: to run the new Department of Homeland Security, and you've
Speaker 2: lobbied and worked closely with the families of nine to eleven.
Speaker 2: What is your thought now as you talk to people
Speaker 2: in their early to mid twenties and think about their
Speaker 2: kids ten or twenty years from now in advancing the
Speaker 2: lessons that we learned twenty three years ago.
Speaker 6: Well, I think there is an American instinct to understand
Speaker 6: more about it, to know more about it, to inquire
Speaker 6: about it. I think for those of us on the
Speaker 6: front line, Joe, as you've already emphasized, it's a day
Speaker 6: never to be forgotten out of respect for the families.
Speaker 6: And you know that day. You know, by the end
Speaker 6: of the day, two nine hundred and ninety six Americans
Speaker 6: had perished.
Speaker 4: So we're not going to forget it anytime soon.
Speaker 6: But relative to younger folks, I do believe that they
Speaker 6: want to understand what occurred, what led us to that point,
Speaker 6: and that they're inclined to be a storyteller of sorts,
Speaker 6: so that it's handed down over generations through families as well.
Speaker 2: You write and remind us, by the way, it wasn't
Speaker 2: just the almost three thousand people who die that they
Speaker 2: nearly as many first responders have died after nine to
Speaker 2: eleven as those who perished in the moments after the
Speaker 2: terror attacks. Within three years, more than seventy thousand people
Speaker 2: suffering from physical and mental health issues related to the attacks.
Speaker 2: This is something the nation had to deal with, Governor,
Speaker 2: And you remember the moments that followed nine to eleven,
Speaker 2: the unity that so many people have tried to reach
Speaker 2: back to and recreate since then, it has never been duplicated.
Speaker 2: Why not?
Speaker 6: Well, so to speak, America has moved on.
Speaker 4: Here we are.
Speaker 6: You've mentioned this also twenty three years later, on this
Speaker 6: gorgeous Wednesday morning or Wednesday afternoon. Now you know that life,
Speaker 6: so to speak, is somewhat back to normalcy. You know,
Speaker 6: we don't feel threatened by external forces.
Speaker 4: They couldn't be more wrong.
Speaker 6: You know, think about this. Not too long ago. There
Speaker 6: are eight would be terrorists from Tashikastan. Two of them
Speaker 6: we're in Philadelphia in my estimation, probably casing locations in
Speaker 6: and around Philadelphia, because in twenty twenty six, when we
Speaker 6: celebrate the two hundred and fiftieth birthday of this great country,
Speaker 6: this longest running democracy in history of the world. I
Speaker 6: don't think they were here looking for a place to
Speaker 6: buy hot dogs or ice cream, probably casing the place,
Speaker 6: as law enforcement would say.
Speaker 4: So we've got to stay.
Speaker 6: On top of our game, if anything, on this gorgeous Wednesday.
Speaker 4: It's also about proper.
Speaker 6: Reflection, commemorating those who pershed, and relative to homeland security
Speaker 6: that it's more than just a moniker, more than just
Speaker 6: two words individually speaking, And certainly those who serve in
Speaker 6: high levels of government, state and federal and county and
Speaker 6: so on need to be extra vigilant as these kinds
Speaker 6: of instances that occur. So I think nine to eleven
Speaker 6: can be not just about commemoration, even though that's the
Speaker 6: lion's share of the emotional aspect. Today, staying on top
Speaker 6: of our homeland security game and remaining visual is essential
Speaker 6: as well.
Speaker 2: As we spent time with former Pennsylvania Governor Mark Schweiker
Speaker 2: with us in a very busy downtown Philadelphia this day
Speaker 2: after the debate, of course, Governor, we have to remind
Speaker 2: ourselves that we would not have had a debate last
Speaker 2: evening about the US withdrawal from Afghanistan, if it were
Speaker 2: not for the events that took place twenty three years ago.
Speaker 2: Today this has become a big point of contention in
Speaker 2: this debate. And as you support one candidate or the
Speaker 2: other in this race, and you can tell me where
Speaker 2: you're going to fall on this, to the extent that
Speaker 2: you're involved in this election cycle, does Kamala Harris deserve
Speaker 2: some of the blame for the way that withdrawal was conducted?
Speaker 6: Well, you know, individually speaking, I'm like most Americans. I'm
Speaker 6: paying very close attention to every minute in every rhetorical
Speaker 6: turn of.
Speaker 4: Last night's debate.
Speaker 6: Individually speaking, along with my wife, will make a decision
Speaker 6: in due time. As I see it, relative to Afghanistan,
Speaker 6: it was by most military accounts, most third party independent accounts,
Speaker 6: it was a messy withdrawal. Lives that, in the in
Speaker 6: the assessment of many, did not have to be lost
Speaker 6: if there were a thorough, sensible strategy for exit from Afghanistan.
Speaker 6: So I do think that the president bears some responsibility here,
Speaker 6: the current president, President Biden.
Speaker 4: As I see.
Speaker 6: It, it's a bit of a reach to suggest that
Speaker 6: the Vice president and management decision. Fingerprints was on on
Speaker 6: that maneuver that day. On the other hand, it's an
Speaker 6: administration that that bears responsibility. So I do I sensed
Speaker 6: last night a bit of defensiveness on her part.
Speaker 4: But as I see it, Joe, we're.
Speaker 6: In a situation now where we've got to be talking
Speaker 6: about just living and the the aspects of shopping and
Speaker 6: the extra expense.
Speaker 4: In the supermarket.
Speaker 6: We've got to talk about preserving Pennsylvania's economy, which is
Speaker 6: heavily dependent on natural gas and extraction technologies. So in
Speaker 6: that regard, I stand here as a long time Pennsylvanian.
Speaker 6: Those jobs at paychecks need to be protected as well.
Speaker 6: So aside from what happened in Afghanistan, let's talk about
Speaker 6: what's underway in the rural areas of Pennsylvania and the
Speaker 6: prospect of SHU. Should that industry be diminished, that means
Speaker 6: jobs at paychecks are taken away from Pennsylvania residents.
Speaker 2: Well, I'd like to talk about that. Do you take
Speaker 2: Kamala Harris at her word that she would not ban fracking?
Speaker 2: What does that mean for voters in western Pennsylvania?
Speaker 6: In my assessment that stands today, other than some areas
Speaker 6: of Pennsylvania, largely.
Speaker 4: Urban across the state.
Speaker 6: There are great misgivings about her seeming comfort years ago
Speaker 6: to say fracking needs to be stopped, and at this point,
Speaker 6: on this gorgeous September afternoon, I believe there are an
Speaker 6: awful lot of Pennsylvanians who believe they cannot take her
Speaker 6: at her work.
Speaker 2: Josh Shapiro, of course, is not one of them. I
Speaker 2: think you're a fan of the governor. Is he the
Speaker 2: best asset she has in Pennsylvania?
Speaker 4: Without question? I mean, Josh Shapiro.
Speaker 6: Is someone that has won a number of elections. I
Speaker 6: think it confirms he knows how to compete both on
Speaker 6: a rhetorical and public policy choice level. I think in
Speaker 6: sensible fashion, he has made it clear that we're not
Speaker 6: in a state government is not in the business of
Speaker 6: destroying the local economy. It's about sensibly helping it in
Speaker 6: that regard federal attitude on some counts, and yes, as
Speaker 6: expressed by the Vice President, the idea that fracking should
Speaker 6: go away, that's just that is Hillary Clinton.
Speaker 4: Like here in Pennsylvania. If you remember, let's.
Speaker 6: Look back a couple of years back, when Hillary Clinton
Speaker 6: was competing against Donald Trump, she made, I think, in
Speaker 6: the estimation of many, the rhetorical misstep and said in
Speaker 6: West Virginia, these cold jobs are going away. Well, you
Speaker 6: know what happened to West Virginia, and you can't. As
Speaker 6: I see it, it's not the job of an officeholder
Speaker 6: or a nominee to say I want to take away
Speaker 6: your job in paycheck. In effect, that's what it means.
Speaker 6: So as I see it, some on this September Day,
Speaker 6: kind of a no blood outcome to last night's debate,
Speaker 6: and the Pennsylvanias will be looking very closely at how
Speaker 6: they comport themselves between now and November fifth, particularly on
Speaker 6: economy building efforts, and particularly on natural gas because Pennsylvania,
Speaker 6: after Texas, is the number two producer. We're talking about
Speaker 6: jobs and paychecks for regular Pennsylvanians.
Speaker 4: So I think they're going to have.
Speaker 6: To step very carefully relative to and I think listen
Speaker 6: to Josh Shapiro, I think he's got it right.
Speaker 2: Fascinating conversation, and it sounds like Kamala Harris has more
Speaker 2: convincing to do to get Pennsylvanians to vote for her.
Speaker 2: I only have thirty seconds. Governor is Tim Walls the
Speaker 2: right man to deliver that message to your state.
Speaker 6: As I see it, his outlook is really all about
Speaker 6: a growing role, and this is odd coming from a
Speaker 6: state's governor. Generally, it's an assertion that the federal government
Speaker 6: should be a central force in American life. I don't
Speaker 6: believe most Americans see it that way. And regardless of
Speaker 6: the issue or the policy proclamation that he shares, suggestion
Speaker 6: that the federal government should be bigger in our life,
Speaker 6: I think most of America has questioned that direction.
Speaker 2: Rank Governor Mark Schweiker, the former governor of Pennsylvania, with
Speaker 2: us on this twenty third anniversary of nine to eleven
Speaker 2: on Bloomberg.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch
Speaker 1: Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Eppo CarPlay, and
Speaker 1: then Proudoro with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand
Speaker 1: wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on
Speaker 1: YouTube DJT.
Speaker 2: Look at that is basically sixteen dollars stock now after
Speaker 2: approaching seventy where'd that top out sixty six dollars a share?
Speaker 2: Lots changed since then, like the entire race. Thanks for
Speaker 2: joining us here on Balance of Power. I'm Joe Matthew
Speaker 2: in Washington, the fastest show in politics, not slowing down
Speaker 2: this day after the debate, even as we peak out
Speaker 2: of one eye. I don't know if you were with
Speaker 2: us for our special coverage last evening. We went through
Speaker 2: this all together here with Rick Davis and Jeanie Shanzano,
Speaker 2: and I'm deeply curious to hear what's on their mind.
Speaker 2: Having remember the moment he was right in the first
Speaker 2: half hour, maybe the first twenty minutes, when Kamala Harris
Speaker 2: reached into the bag to pull something out that she
Speaker 2: knew would upset Donald Trump. Of course, it came down
Speaker 2: to crowd size last night. Let's listen.
Speaker 7: You will see during the course of his rallies he
Speaker 7: talks about fictional characters like Hannibal Lecter. He will talk
Speaker 7: about wind mills cause cancer. And what you will also
Speaker 7: notice is that people start leaving his rallies early out
Speaker 7: of exhaustion and boredom.
Speaker 8: She said, people start leaving. People don't go to her rallies.
Speaker 8: There's no reason to go. And the people that do go,
Speaker 8: she's busting them in and paying them to be there.
Speaker 2: The whole mood of the debate, the direction of the conversation.
Speaker 2: The tone and tenor, and the body language all seemed
Speaker 2: to change at that point. And here we are now
Speaker 2: today looking at a series of headlines indicating Donald Trump
Speaker 2: took the bait? How does the panel see it? They're
Speaker 2: back with us, Jenny Shanze know and Rick Davis, as
Speaker 2: I mentioned, Genie of course, a senior Democracy Fellow with
Speaker 2: the Center for the Study of Presidency in Congress and
Speaker 2: political science professor at Iona University. Rick Davis, partner at
Speaker 2: Stone Court Capital, Republican strategist. Great to see you both, Genie.
Speaker 2: I was the guy questioning whether this was a worthy
Speaker 2: effort here. Why not simply go out and lay at
Speaker 2: your policy proposals, tell the American people what you want
Speaker 2: to do with the country, instead of spending all this
Speaker 2: time prepping on how to needle Donald Trump, get it
Speaker 2: under his skin, trolling him before try to draw him
Speaker 2: out on an open microphone. But was that in fact
Speaker 2: the right strategy.
Speaker 9: It was the right strategy. I think this was a
Speaker 9: win for all of those of us who liked to prepare.
Speaker 9: Kamala Harris was well prepped, well prepared, and she delivered.
Speaker 9: Donald Trump, on the other hand, he looked something like
Speaker 9: an incumbent president who's too busy to repair, doesn't take
Speaker 9: this all that seriously, goes in there with one job
Speaker 9: to do, define Donald to define rather Kamala Harris as
Speaker 9: too liberal, too dangerously liberal, to be trusted with the
Speaker 9: keys to the White House. And he simply could not
Speaker 9: stick to that message. He kept getting distracted, and so
Speaker 9: from that perspective, she certainly got the better of him,
Speaker 9: consistently goading him into responding to things that, quite frank
Speaker 9: they weren't going to help him, like crowd sizes.
Speaker 2: Is it as simple as that, Rick, And did Donald
Speaker 2: Trump perform any worse last night than he did in
Speaker 2: the first debate?
Speaker 10: You know, I think he did a little bit worse
Speaker 10: this time.
Speaker 2: Obviously.
Speaker 10: You know, he didn't quote take the bait in the
Speaker 10: first debate. He was driving the messaging against Joe Biden,
Speaker 10: and Joe Biden was taking the bait and trying to
Speaker 10: respond to his outlandish claims and in many cases nonfactual statements.
Speaker 10: So you know, never answer a lie with a fact.
Speaker 10: I mean, it just doesn't make sense in a debate.
Speaker 10: But I think there was a bit of an elegance
Speaker 10: to the way that Kamala Harris did the debate, and
Speaker 10: that was not only did she trol Trump, bait him
Speaker 10: into getting off of substantive issues to talk about, you know,
Speaker 10: things that drive his ego, like crowd size, but then
Speaker 10: she tied that kind of behavior into how authoritarians like
Speaker 10: Putin and she can take advantage of him. And I
Speaker 10: didn't really notice it that much in real time, but afterwards,
Speaker 10: I really thought through the whole approach to the debate
Speaker 10: was very comprehensive in that she proved to Trump, to voters,
Speaker 10: to viewers that Trump could take debait, that he would
Speaker 10: be able to be played like that. And then she said,
Speaker 10: and others who don't have America's interests in mind play
Speaker 10: him the same way. And I thought, wow, that's a
Speaker 10: really interesting construct that they did, because it's a little subtle,
Speaker 10: but I thought it was very elegant.
Speaker 2: Love to hear from you both on the moderators, because
Speaker 2: you know, we're all hearing, and we were hearing before
Speaker 2: we left the air last night. Three on one is
Speaker 2: the take of the Trump campaign. Senator Lindsey Graham tweeted,
Speaker 2: I mentioned this earlier. The moderators might as well be
Speaker 2: on the DNC payroll. This is ridiculous. This is the
Speaker 2: worst moderated debate in history. Genie, is he right?
Speaker 9: No, you know, I don't think it's the worst in history.
Speaker 9: I think Candy Crowley probably still owns that mantle. Love Candy,
Speaker 9: I think she still owns that one. But you know,
Speaker 9: there was points at which you could nitpick and say
Speaker 9: that they were fact checking Trump more than they were
Speaker 9: fact checking Harris. Harris did make some misstatements. The one
Speaker 9: that stood out to me had to do with the
Speaker 9: bloodbath comment. She took it out of context, could have
Speaker 9: been fact checked. But that said, her comments were not
Speaker 9: as egregious as Donald Trump's were, and so that is
Speaker 9: the result of that. So yeah, I think you can
Speaker 9: nitpick on the moderators, but the reality is Donald Trump
Speaker 9: did himself no favors in this debate. We have long said,
Speaker 9: and I will stand by this through the election. Whoever
Speaker 9: this election is about is going to lose. That was
Speaker 9: true when it was Joe Biden as the Democratic nominee.
Speaker 9: Same thing for Harris and Trump. And last night Donald
Speaker 9: Trump made it all about Donald Trump. And that is
Speaker 9: a problem. This is an egotistical guy. He does not
Speaker 9: want to make this about Kamala Harris. But that's unfortunately
Speaker 9: what he needs to do. Define her, talk about how
Speaker 9: liberal she is, talk about issues he wins on, like
Speaker 9: the economy, like security, like immigration, like inflation. He tried,
Speaker 9: but he just couldn't get out of his own way.
Speaker 9: So you know, I don't think you can blame the
Speaker 9: moderators for that as much, again as you can nitpick
Speaker 9: on little things. I think both the no moderators candled
Speaker 9: it as well as can be expected live broadcast. That's
Speaker 9: awfully difficult to do.
Speaker 2: Rick they did fact check Donald Trump four times on abortion,
Speaker 2: the idea of a post birth abortion, claims about Haitian
Speaker 2: immigrants eating dogs and people's pets, violent crime going up
Speaker 2: when it was down in the twenty twenty election, whether
Speaker 2: it was stolen? Should they have fact checked Kamala Harris more?
Speaker 2: Should they have fact checked Donald Trump less? One thing
Speaker 2: I did notice is that the moderators let Donald Trump
Speaker 2: bend the rules a lot more. He managed to roll
Speaker 2: over them more than Kamala Harris, who was held to time.
Speaker 2: What's your thought, Yeah.
Speaker 10: I mean, overall, I thought that the moderators did a
Speaker 10: great job. Donald Trump's maybe the hardest presidential contestant in
Speaker 10: a debate ever to manage, and by and large, most
Speaker 10: of the moderators that have had to moderate Donald Trump
Speaker 10: presidential debates have failed miserably. And I would point, you
Speaker 10: know to my good friend Jake Tapper and the CNN
Speaker 10: debate just you know, a couple months ago that was
Speaker 10: a disaster, and they had a gloves off polow see,
Speaker 10: they let him say whatever he wanted to say, and
Speaker 10: it went unchecked. I think the four things you mentioned,
Speaker 10: I think our friend Lindsey Graham would actually never say
Speaker 10: those things because he knows them to be untrused. And
Speaker 10: so I'm not sure what part of that that he
Speaker 10: would disagree with. On the second, on the other hand,
Speaker 10: and you make a good point, there were some things
Speaker 10: that the Matters could have fact checked Kamala Harris on.
Speaker 10: But then again, the Harris campaign has a right to
Speaker 10: be complaining about the fact that she was cut off repeatedly.
Speaker 10: And Donald Trump, I don't think it was ever cut off.
Speaker 10: They let him go on and on. He added, question,
Speaker 10: you know, responses to everything that Kamala Harris said, even
Speaker 10: though it wasn't in the rules to do that. And
Speaker 10: so look, I mean, these things are an art, they're
Speaker 10: not a science. The rules are set up to manage guardrails,
Speaker 10: not to dictate every activity in a debate, and for
Speaker 10: a network to do this, which is hard to do,
Speaker 10: and for the contestants to be willing to go in
Speaker 10: without an audience, with microphones turned off and all the
Speaker 10: rules that were I thought it was I thought it
Speaker 10: was a very well run debate. We should aspire to
Speaker 10: have these kinds of debates all the time, where if
Speaker 10: you lie, you get called out and you have plenty
Speaker 10: of time to make your case. And that is the case.
Speaker 10: Even the fact that they extended the time of the
Speaker 10: debate outrageous, right, I mean, like, nobody ever does that. Oh,
Speaker 10: let's give you another ten minutes. Right at that hour,
Speaker 10: I was ready for bed. But I thought it was
Speaker 10: actually a really great decision. People could take a lot
Speaker 10: from that, And I thought.
Speaker 2: This is this.
Speaker 10: I thought it exceeded my expectations when it comes to
Speaker 10: creating a forum for both the candidates to be able
Speaker 10: to make their case.
Speaker 2: There's a phrase we hear in the newsroom sometimes or
Speaker 2: in the studio, blow the brake, because sometimes you have
Speaker 2: to go into overtime. Rick Davis and Genie Shanzano. Thank you.
Speaker 2: They were with us for the Big dance last night.
Speaker 2: They'll be back with our two here on balance of Power,
Speaker 2: as we will welcome our global TV audience to the
Speaker 2: conversation the big question a lot of us have. They're
Speaker 2: going to be another one. Kind of felt like it
Speaker 2: last night that Donald Trump might want to come back
Speaker 2: around and maybe take another swing at this here. The
Speaker 2: Harris campaign was welcoming it within minutes. Let's do that again,
Speaker 2: said Brian Fallon on Twitter, within moments of the debate ending.
Speaker 2: But this kind of took on a new wrinkle this
Speaker 2: morning Fox and Friends, Donald Trump qualifying this idea. Fox
Speaker 2: has now floated a couple of dates to potentially do
Speaker 2: a second round in October. But it's very difficult to
Speaker 2: tell where we stand on that, and that's why we
Speaker 2: want to bring in Tyler Kendall. God blessed. Tyler is
Speaker 2: still in Philadelphia, having been there for the duration yesterday
Speaker 2: reporting for Bloomberg and producing our great coverage last night. Tyler,
Speaker 2: it is great to see you. What are you hearing
Speaker 2: on the ground this morning in Philadelphia?
Speaker 11: Yeah, Hey, Joe, so new this morning former President Trump
Speaker 11: casting out on whether or not there will be a
Speaker 11: second debate, saying that he's not inclined to do one after,
Speaker 11: as you mentioned, the Harris campaign challenged him to one
Speaker 11: after last night's quickly concluded. We started to hear this
Speaker 11: messaging from Republicans pretty quickly after the debate last night
Speaker 11: in the Spin room, including from former President Trump himself,
Speaker 11: who made a surprise visit to US reporters in the
Speaker 11: Spin room, holding this impromptu press conference where he repeatedly
Speaker 11: said that if Harris has to do a second debate,
Speaker 11: that must mean that she has more explaining to do
Speaker 11: on her policies, but that he doesn't necessarily feel like
Speaker 11: he needs to do that. I heard pretty similar messaging
Speaker 11: from most Republicans sort gets in the room last night.
Speaker 11: That includes Senator Marco Rubio, a Republican from Florida, of course,
Speaker 11: a former presidential candidate himself, someone we know was on
Speaker 11: the vice presidential shortlist for Trump's campaign. I asked him
Speaker 11: if Trump should engage and have a second debate. Take
Speaker 11: a listen to what he told me.
Speaker 1: Maybe.
Speaker 12: I mean, I think you would do fine in a
Speaker 12: second debate. I think it's interesting she wants one. Usually, look,
Speaker 12: if you're winning. I've done debates. If you're winning a
Speaker 12: camp pain, you don't want any more debates like you're winning,
Speaker 12: Why do you want to expose yourself to something going
Speaker 12: wrong on the stage.
Speaker 9: Now.
Speaker 11: Democrats, for their part, were incredibly eager to try to
Speaker 11: hold this second debate, all the surgets coming out. But
Speaker 11: what really struck me was just the sheer number of
Speaker 11: Democratic turguits that came out and how quickly they started
Speaker 11: to fill the spin room floor. It shouldn't start. Contrast
Speaker 11: to I was at the Atlanta debate and we literally
Speaker 11: had to wait and hardly saw any Democratic circuits come
Speaker 11: out after President Joe Biden's performance on the debate stage then.
Speaker 11: But Joe, I will quickly mention that one person who
Speaker 11: bloomed pretty large but was not in the spin room
Speaker 11: was Taylor Swift and her endorsement of Vice President Kamala
Speaker 11: Hair shortly after the debate ended. That was pretty much
Speaker 11: a huge talker in the spin room last night as
Speaker 11: Democrats cheered the endorsement. But for his part, Former President
Speaker 11: Donald Trump was asked about it this morning and he
Speaker 11: said that he's not a fan.
Speaker 2: Not a fan. I thought he was working on that
Speaker 2: endorsement Tyler.
Speaker 4: Thank god.
Speaker 2: Tyler came on to mention, I haven't even mentioned Taylor
Speaker 2: Swift this hour. I am remiss. Thank you, Tyler. It
Speaker 2: travels safe to get home Tyler Kendall in Philadelphia this
Speaker 2: day after the debate.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast Kens
Speaker 1: just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and Enron
Speaker 1: Oro with a Bloomberg Business app. You can also listen
Speaker 1: live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station,
Speaker 1: Just Say Alexa Play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 2: It was in the first what ten minutes we got
Speaker 2: to inflation, the issues of the economy. We did hear
Speaker 2: from both candidates. Let's go to Philadelphia, Kamala Harris and
Speaker 2: Donald Trump.
Speaker 7: My plan is to give a fifty thousand dollars tax
Speaker 7: deduction to start up small businesses, knowing they are part
Speaker 7: of the backbone of America's economy. My opponent, on the
Speaker 7: other hand, his plan is to do what he has
Speaker 7: done before, which is to provide a tax cut for
Speaker 7: billionaire and big corporations.
Speaker 8: We've had a terrible economy because inflations, which is really
Speaker 8: known as a country buster it breaks up countries. We
Speaker 8: have inflation like very few people have ever seen before,
Speaker 8: probably the worst in our nation's history. This has been
Speaker 8: a disaster for people, for the middle class.
Speaker 2: I don't know if it's a country buster or who
Speaker 2: calls it that, but it's a problem for Kamala Harris.
Speaker 2: And as I mentioned, if this had taken place yesterday,
Speaker 2: CPI that is that conversation might have gone a bit
Speaker 2: differently here. This is something that has tested obviously very
Speaker 2: poorly for Kamala Harris. Look at our own Bloomberg News
Speaker 2: Swing State Pole with Morning Console. This is the issue
Speaker 2: Donald Trump beyond any other except maybe the border. People
Speaker 2: trust Donald Trump more when it comes to how to
Speaker 2: handle the economy, when it comes how to handle infrastrates,
Speaker 2: when it comes to lowering prices. At least that was
Speaker 2: the narrative going into last night. Did that change it all?
Speaker 2: I've got a lot of questions for Frank Lunz. What
Speaker 2: a great day to spend time with, mister Luntz politics
Speaker 2: communications consultant Polster, CEO of fil Frank, thanks for being
Speaker 2: up with us. It was a late night for everybody.
Speaker 2: And like I said, I want to go around the
Speaker 2: horn with you here for a minute. It's great to
Speaker 2: have you on the matter of the economy as we
Speaker 2: look at the CPI data this morning. I saw you
Speaker 2: talking about markets earlier today. Did Kamala Harris convince anyone
Speaker 2: that she was the one to be best trusted with
Speaker 2: this issue.
Speaker 13: It's a great question. I don't really think so. But
Speaker 13: she still performed much better than Donald Trump. Let's be
Speaker 13: completely accurate. She did not provide significant detail. She did
Speaker 13: not explain step by step what she's going to do
Speaker 13: starting on inauguration day. She's still very, very light with
Speaker 13: the details, but she answered the questions and we do
Speaker 13: get an idea of where her priorities are. In Trump's case,
Speaker 13: when they asked him about his strongest issue, for some reason,
Speaker 13: he pivoted to immigration, and when they came back to it,
Speaker 13: he was talking about some other issue. There's a rule
Speaker 13: of politics which is if you're defining the election, you're
Speaker 13: winning the election. And he absolutely did not do that
Speaker 13: last night. In fact, he gave away the definitions where
Speaker 13: he was strongest. So I don't think it was pretty
Speaker 13: I don't think last night was a good night for America,
Speaker 13: and I know it was not a good night for
Speaker 13: Donald Trump.
Speaker 2: The headlines this morning are something, if only in their continuity.
Speaker 2: Frank Trump takes. The bait is everywhere. It doesn't matter,
Speaker 2: it seems where you're looking here. The New York Post
Speaker 2: headline is cambush. Are they deserved?
Speaker 3: Yes?
Speaker 13: And then deserved because you should have known better. She's
Speaker 13: never had a podium like this. She's never had this opportunity.
Speaker 13: He did it in twenty sixteen, he did it in
Speaker 13: twenty twenty. He's had the experience. Let me differentiate here
Speaker 13: because I want to be careful. His campaign in twenty
Speaker 13: twenty four is better than the previous two. The candidate
Speaker 13: is what's worse. The campaign is running comparative ads. The
Speaker 13: campaign is focused on what Trump should be focused on
Speaker 13: to win the selection. But the candidates, I don't know
Speaker 13: what it's like. He didn't attend debate prep, or he
Speaker 13: didn't listen, or he didn't learn. I believe that most
Speaker 13: high school student body presidents would have out debated Donald
Speaker 13: Trump last night, and I don't say that easily. And
Speaker 13: in the end, food and fuel, housing, in healthcare, the
Speaker 13: sense of insecurity, the policies that matter most to Americans.
Speaker 13: Donald Trump is the advantage as she started to say
Speaker 13: in the introduction, but you want to have known that
Speaker 13: last night, because that's not how he communicated. And in fact,
Speaker 13: I think it was so bad that it is quite
Speaker 13: possible that Harris will never agree to stand up next
Speaker 13: to him again. And then this came Pain is over.
Speaker 2: I'm gonna get your thoughts on the moderators in a
Speaker 2: moment here, Frank, because I keep hearing three verses one.
Speaker 2: But when I woke up this morning, the same thing
Speaker 2: was trending on Twitter. Then when I went to Better
Speaker 2: around two o'clock in the morning, they're eating the dogs.
Speaker 2: People talk about, you know, the takeaways, the historic moments
Speaker 2: from the big campaigns. You're no John Kennedy, you know,
Speaker 2: whatever it might be. That's apparently the moment we're gonna
Speaker 2: remember from the campaign They're eating the dogs. Was that
Speaker 2: the moment that he lost.
Speaker 13: That's the moment when people looked each other and said,
Speaker 13: what the hell. When we actually had to get a check,
Speaker 13: we had to look at the transcript because it was
Speaker 13: so insane. And of course Trump is not going to
Speaker 13: back down. Of course, he's not going to admit that
Speaker 13: he made a mistake, and he's not going to acknowledge
Speaker 13: that he got this wrong because he doesn't do it.
Speaker 13: He was given the opportunities several times last night to
Speaker 13: acknowledge what every other American acknowledges, humility, decency, that you're
Speaker 13: not perfect. Well, here's the good news for Trump. He'll
Speaker 13: continue to complain that he's perfect and other people have
Speaker 13: got it wrong, and he'll be doing it from mar
Speaker 13: A Lago, not from the White House. I can't begin
Speaker 13: to tell you how poor a performance he exhibited for
Speaker 13: the American people. Now, his conclusion was very strong, but
Speaker 13: the opening and for the first hour and almost hour
Speaker 13: and a half that people just scratching their heads wondering
Speaker 13: what is up here? Is he actually trying to lose
Speaker 13: that no human being could could with his experience, could
Speaker 13: actually be as ineffective, could could say things calling Victor
Speaker 13: Orbron one of the great leaders in the world. Is
Speaker 13: I'm literally speechless, and I've never been speechless. I'm bloomberg
Speaker 13: and never been speechless in politics. It is so absolutely unfathomable.
Speaker 13: But that's exactly what he did.
Speaker 2: You made a great point about the closing statements, Frank,
Speaker 2: this thing went into overtime, by the way, if he
Speaker 2: didn't watch it in real time. They got their second
Speaker 2: commercial break, and all of a sudden, we're going five
Speaker 2: minutes late time for closing statements. And Donald Trump said
Speaker 2: something that I expected he was going to say, at
Speaker 2: the very beginning of the debate. If you have all
Speaker 2: these good ideas for helping average Americans, why haven't you
Speaker 2: implemented them in the last three and a half years
Speaker 2: that you've been in the White House. Frank, why didn't
Speaker 2: he do that first?
Speaker 13: And because he was just so poorly prepped or he's
Speaker 13: just really bad at this. We forget that he's old.
Speaker 13: That we made fun of Joe Biden for being eighty
Speaker 13: one and Trump is almost eighty, and that he's not
Speaker 13: the same person that he was eight years ago or
Speaker 13: four years ago. Probably he forgot. Probably his irritability wasn't
Speaker 13: just Harris getting under his skin, but it's simply we
Speaker 13: know older people. Probably I've done it. Then we get
Speaker 13: agitated and irritated if things don't go our way, we
Speaker 13: become more impatient. But you're not supposed to do that
Speaker 13: when you're running for president. You're not supposed to You're
Speaker 13: supposed to be have self control. And we didn't see
Speaker 13: any of that last night, and I think I wonder
Speaker 13: how many people are telling Trump the truth because I've
Speaker 13: seen the tweets he's been sending out. He says it's
Speaker 13: his best debate ever. If he really believes that, then
Speaker 13: he actually is in real trouble emotionally, intellectually, and physically.
Speaker 2: Well. He does say that this was three on one,
Speaker 2: and he's not the only one saying that this morning, Frank,
Speaker 2: your thoughts on the moderators, Lindsey Graham tweeted after the debate,
Speaker 2: the moderators might as well be on the DNC payroll.
Speaker 2: This is ridiculous. This is the worst moderated debate in
Speaker 2: him history. The fact is they fact checked Donald Trump
Speaker 2: four times during that debate, First on abortion when he
Speaker 2: said that it was legal in some states to kill
Speaker 2: a baby after it was born, the claims about Haitian immigrants.
Speaker 2: We mentioned eating people's pets, violent crime, it's up, as
Speaker 2: you know, the FBI said it was down. And then
Speaker 2: the stop the Steal thing twenty twenty, whether he actually
Speaker 2: won the election, was that a justified effort to fact
Speaker 2: check him? In real time? He's complimenting CNN this morning, Frank,
Speaker 2: should they have stopped down and fact checked Kamala Harris
Speaker 2: more than what we saw last night.
Speaker 13: Look perceptions reality, and if the perception is that the
Speaker 13: moderators are biased, then there's something that's not right about
Speaker 13: what's happening. ABC had every right to hold people accountable.
Speaker 13: The public has every right to hear the truth, and
Speaker 13: the politicians have every response ability to tell the truth.
Speaker 13: There's no attribute or value more important than the truth
Speaker 13: in these debates, conversations, and in the debate itself. And
Speaker 13: they found what Trump was saying to be wanting to
Speaker 13: be questionable. Should they have done the same thing to Harris? Absolutely?
Speaker 13: And it did come across as being one sided, and
Speaker 13: maybe that's because of the things that Trump said. I'm
Speaker 13: actually surprised that no one has asked me even up
Speaker 13: to now, why is it that both Mike's returned on
Speaker 13: why is it you could actually hear the crosstalk between
Speaker 13: the two candidates that was part of the rules, and
Speaker 13: no one's.
Speaker 2: Talking about it. They did reserve the right to do that,
Speaker 2: and I'm glad they let it happen at least for
Speaker 2: a moment. Frank, I wish I had more time with you.
Speaker 2: I appreciate your insights as always Frank Lunz this day
Speaker 2: after the debate fil and of course the familiar voice
Speaker 2: to our viewers and listeners here on Bloomberg. I'm Joe
Speaker 2: Matthew in Washington.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch
Speaker 1: just Lie weekdays at noon Eastern on Apocarplay and then
Speaker 1: Prounoto with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand wherever
Speaker 1: you get your podcasts, watch us live on YouTube.
Speaker 2: So much on this eleventh of September. We thank you
Speaker 2: for joining us on the Wednesday edition of Balance of
Speaker 2: Power here on Bloomberg Radio, on the satellite, and on YouTube,
Speaker 2: where you can always find us search Bloomberg Business News
Speaker 2: Live as we bring the program to you live from
Speaker 2: Washington just hours it feels like, well about twelve hours
Speaker 2: after we left here after the Grand Debate last night,
Speaker 2: that we're going to be talking a lot more about
Speaker 2: with some words, not a lot of specifics, in terms
Speaker 2: of policy delivered on Ukraine, on Israel, other matters of
Speaker 2: foreign policy, including the US withdrawal from Afghanistan. But it
Speaker 2: is Ukraine we want to begin with with our colleague
Speaker 2: from the Pentagon, Tony Capasio, who's with us today. Following,
Speaker 2: of course, he had another important and emotional ceremony at
Speaker 2: the Pentagon this morning. Ukraine asking the US and the
Speaker 2: UK for that matter, and this has been going on
Speaker 2: months to allow to be able to use Western made
Speaker 2: weapons offensively against Russia, beyond the cross border incursion that's
Speaker 2: already been had. Now add Ben Carden's voice to the story,
Speaker 2: of course, Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chair. He says the
Speaker 2: US must act swiftly to ease these restrictions on Ukraine's
Speaker 2: use of US provided weapons against Russia, calling for greater
Speaker 2: flexibility in his statement to target Russian military assets to
Speaker 2: degrade Moscow's ability to harm the Ukrainian people. It's got
Speaker 2: a lot in common right now with some Republicans House
Speaker 2: Armed Services Committee Chair Mike Rogers, House Foreign Affairs Committee
Speaker 2: Chair Michael McCall making the same call. And you wonder
Speaker 2: if we are getting close to something, as we've seen
Speaker 2: this movie before. First it's a no, then it's a maybe,
Speaker 2: then it ends up being a yes, it seems eventually,
Speaker 2: whether we're talking about Abrams tanks or F sixteen's Tony.
Speaker 2: It's great to see you. Thank you for being available.
Speaker 2: On what I know is a busy day for you.
Speaker 2: Are we about to see evolution in these restricts.
Speaker 5: Yeah, that's my impression that the attacking is issue is
Speaker 5: going to fall next. The issue these the longer range
Speaker 5: missiles that they actually gave these two Ukraine in March.
Speaker 5: They stealthily gave them to them as part of any
Speaker 5: arms package that they didn't disclose until weeks eleven.
Speaker 2: Been asked for months to provide them, right, these are
Speaker 2: the longer range versions.
Speaker 5: Back in October they started using the shorter range versions
Speaker 5: with a lot of effectiveness in Crimea, and the longer
Speaker 5: range versions they've now been using in Crimea and other
Speaker 5: parts of Ukraine and then the narrow pocket in the
Speaker 5: north into Russia that the White House allowed. The debate
Speaker 5: now is whether to allow them to go longer into Ukraine,
Speaker 5: and I think that's going to that's going to change
Speaker 5: interesting other on the sub on below the surface, they
Speaker 5: have F sixteen's, but also the White House is reviewing
Speaker 5: whether to give them the jazz and long arranged cruise missile,
Speaker 5: stealthy cruise missile that has qualified on US aircraft that
Speaker 5: can go like three or four five hundred miles within
Speaker 5: and it's a very precise coordinate, has GPS coordinates that
Speaker 5: could destroy Russian bombers that drop these glide bombs at
Speaker 5: their basis. If in fact the administration allows that, that
Speaker 5: will be a bigger kahuna, so to speak, than the
Speaker 5: attack them's almost.
Speaker 2: How about that. We have no indication on where the
Speaker 2: administration is in this evolution, do we, or whether Kamala
Speaker 2: Harris sees this differently than Joe Biden.
Speaker 5: No, she's not going to go differently on this subject.
Speaker 5: I mean, she is the vice president. She doesn't make
Speaker 5: the policy on this stuff.
Speaker 2: She advises, but were she elected, you wonder if she
Speaker 2: might see it differently.
Speaker 5: I'm thinking that it would continue. There's to be continuity there.
Speaker 5: I don't see any great change. But the Jazzam decision
Speaker 5: will be a big one, almost bigger than the attack
Speaker 5: ems issue. But they have attack thems now know how
Speaker 5: to use them. Jasms of pilots out of sixteens would
Speaker 5: have to learn how to use them. So there's a
Speaker 5: learning curve figure picture.
Speaker 2: With the weapon systems that we've mentioned that we were
Speaker 2: told were maybe not appropriate or useful or most efficient
Speaker 2: for Ukraine. I mentioned the abrams tanks, the F sixteen's.
Speaker 2: Have people been proven wrong or are these toys that
Speaker 2: are kind of hanging around that aren't being used.
Speaker 5: Well, no, no, they're being modified. In fact, Kamala Harrison
Speaker 5: her weapons last night that she talked about in terms
Speaker 5: of beefing up Ukraine and US, she actually mentioned the
Speaker 5: Abrams in one of her sentences. Well, no, My understanding
Speaker 5: is the Ukrainians. Ukrainians have used have come up with
Speaker 5: ways to protect the Abrams from Kamakazi drones in terms
Speaker 5: of top cover on the tanks and on the bradley.
Speaker 5: So there's been no great stories saying that the bradleys
Speaker 5: haven't been effective where Abrams haven't been affected. The issue
Speaker 5: is maneuver and visibility. Drones take a lot of that
Speaker 5: away in terms of you know where the tanks the
Speaker 5: ground systems are.
Speaker 2: Interesting to what extent is this argument over government funding
Speaker 2: going to become a challenge for the Pentagon. I know
Speaker 2: I'm sneaking up on you on this, but I keep
Speaker 2: hearing Chair of Armed Services the Pentagon itself a six
Speaker 2: month stopgap will impact readiness. What do they say? What
Speaker 2: do they mean when they say that?
Speaker 5: What it means is that certain funding will not be allocated.
Speaker 5: I'm not sure how operations and maintenance would be effected
Speaker 5: or pay what would be effected A new contracts, for sure,
Speaker 5: and the columns.
Speaker 2: I wonder how much of that is blustering you. We're
Speaker 2: talking about this in a budget debate.
Speaker 5: Yeah, this is this has been the least. This happens
Speaker 5: every year, every year, annually. The Pentagon's learn to adjust
Speaker 5: GEO did a good The General Government Accountability Office did
Speaker 5: a pretty good report a couple of years ago, three
Speaker 5: four years ago, talking about how the Pentagons learned to
Speaker 5: work around these restrictions. So it's not as cataclysmic as
Speaker 5: it once was, but the language of cataclysm continues. It's
Speaker 5: just I'm skeptical of how impactful it is.
Speaker 4: I mean, a year.
Speaker 5: Would be bad, Yes, sure a year would be bad,
Speaker 5: but the troops would they would get paid. It's new
Speaker 5: contracts would not be issued, and there would be impacts
Speaker 5: on current contracts. But it's not new contracts.
Speaker 2: Yeah. I just know nobody follows the money quite like
Speaker 2: you do at the Pentagon. I bet you. I thought
Speaker 2: the same thing that you did when I walked out
Speaker 2: the front door this morning, go out to walk the dog.
Speaker 2: You're going to work or whatever it was, walk out
Speaker 2: the front door. The weather was exactly today like it
Speaker 2: was twenty three years ago. You're right, it was crystal
Speaker 2: blue sky, the crisp fall air. It's been twenty three
Speaker 2: years since nine to eleven. You were going to work
Speaker 2: that day, coming up the escalator when everybody was coming
Speaker 2: down there. You can take the metro. People should know
Speaker 2: to the Pentagon, right. What do you remember from that?
Speaker 5: I remember pretty well.
Speaker 2: Did you get in the building.
Speaker 5: We didn't get into the building. I was going up
Speaker 5: the escalators, which no longer exist, by the way, ye did.
Speaker 2: The walls all.
Speaker 5: Blocked off and the people were coming down the other two.
Speaker 5: It was urgent, but it wasn't panic. And I heard
Speaker 5: some people say they'll get out of the buildings about
Speaker 5: the blow. Nobody knew what happened.
Speaker 2: Had been struck, but it had been start.
Speaker 5: But just so you know, we were on the opposite
Speaker 5: end where the plane hit. It was the day of
Speaker 5: the Locusts, so to speak. Your phones were crickets. You
Speaker 5: heard crickets. I had a motoroll of Star Tech. Nobody
Speaker 5: had smartphones, by the way. We had beepers, yes, we did.
Speaker 5: For hours and hours. Nobody really knew in that area
Speaker 5: it was a war zone. In other parts of the
Speaker 5: building where I was, people were milling, kind of mindlessly
Speaker 5: milling and confused. We did watch the wedge fall. I
Speaker 5: was with Tom Bowman, then with the Baltimore Son We
Speaker 5: were interviewing a guy was in tattered clothing. So it
Speaker 5: wasn't panic. There wasn't a lot of knowledge. It wasn't
Speaker 5: untill later in the day that we knew that a
Speaker 5: plane had hit. But why that wedge just collapsed? It
Speaker 5: looked like a prize fighter. I told another reporter, well,
Speaker 5: its teeth knocked out, but the boxer was still standing.
Speaker 2: Incredible. You've then spent many hours, of course, going through
Speaker 2: news conferences. I'll never forget walking home. I was in
Speaker 2: the press building at that time and walking home down
Speaker 2: the center lane of Connecticut Avenue without a car in site.
Speaker 2: Is this something that we'll never quite forget, that feeling
Speaker 2: in Washington by the end of the day, But before
Speaker 2: those quiet moments came and it was the confusion, the madness.
Speaker 2: How long was it because we don't have photographs of
Speaker 2: that impact outside for some stray security camera. Oh how
Speaker 2: long until you realize what had happened at the Pedaga.
Speaker 5: It was later that day I was someone pointed to
Speaker 5: me an FBI agent who knew what was going on.
Speaker 5: So I ran up to this FBI agent and he
Speaker 5: turned out to be he worked for US at WUSA nine.
Speaker 5: He put his and he drove away. He says, I'll
Speaker 5: talk to you later. So he came back to me
Speaker 5: later and he gave me a great quote. He actually
Speaker 5: saw the plane hit. He said, I could see those
Speaker 5: double as hitting on the plane as it hit the Pentagon.
Speaker 5: We used a quote in one of our stories, but yeah,
Speaker 5: it was it was. The knowledge was there was no
Speaker 5: knowledge of what happened. Basically, you thought it was a bomb.
Speaker 5: You thought it was a bomb. I was there till
Speaker 5: like two in the morning covering a lot of this,
Speaker 5: and then I covered the Rumsfeldt Henry Shelton press conference.
Speaker 5: Rumsfelt was very Secretary.
Speaker 2: Of Defense that night, Yes he was.
Speaker 5: He said the Pentagon will be open for business the
Speaker 5: next day.
Speaker 2: And it was really something. You still were There were
Speaker 2: a lot of people who were in the building less
Speaker 2: less and less well. I believe that. And what does
Speaker 2: it mean though? And it's twenty three years later on
Speaker 2: a morning like this President of the United States comes by
Speaker 2: for the memorial.
Speaker 5: Well, it gives you a sense of the vulnerability of
Speaker 5: institutions about that and the need for eternal vigilance. I
Speaker 5: don't want to sound too much like a falk here,
Speaker 5: but the need for vigilance and the resilience of a
Speaker 5: human spirit to not only take that tragedy and conculcate it,
Speaker 5: but keep moving on and keep working.
Speaker 2: And the building.
Speaker 5: The building was functional the next day. It's full of
Speaker 5: smoke in the National Guard armed National Guard, but we
Speaker 5: found out they didn't have bullets in their eclips, but
Speaker 5: their built flames are still billowing in parts of the
Speaker 5: building and clouds of smoke and accurately ugly smoke. So
Speaker 5: the human spirit survived that day, and you know it
Speaker 5: was It was a day of resilience that Americans can
Speaker 5: be proud of.
Speaker 2: This is why I wanted you to come on today,
Speaker 2: because this is the stuff that informs your worldview. I'll
Speaker 2: never forget up but Arlington, you could go up there
Speaker 2: and look down at the blue drape for a long
Speaker 2: time before that was repaired. I was on the other
Speaker 2: side of the river from you, and I came out
Speaker 2: of Metro Center. I was underground when the Pentagon was
Speaker 2: hit and I came out to the sound of fighter jets,
Speaker 2: saw the smoke, and you said it perfectly. People thought
Speaker 2: it was a bomb. They thought I remember there was
Speaker 2: a report that the State Department had been bombed that day.
Speaker 2: It was the confusion in that moment that's hard to forget.
Speaker 5: And it's it's it was an undocumented crime because nobody
Speaker 5: had cell phones. I had to buy I ended up
Speaker 5: buying three rolls of quarters from the Ritz Carlton guest shop.
Speaker 2: I skiv you down. That's a real reporter.
Speaker 5: I skiv you down from a highway spider walked down.
Speaker 5: I borrowed twenty bucks from a flack I knew who
Speaker 5: he was standing buy Macy's and I bought three rolls
Speaker 5: of quarters, and we use that throughout the day to
Speaker 5: make phone calls to my office.
Speaker 2: And I give you were a reporter's best friend.
Speaker 10: I was.
Speaker 2: Everybody who was here that day has a story like that.
Speaker 2: Everyone who was in New York has a story or Shanksville.
Speaker 2: Of course, glad that you could come on to talk
Speaker 2: to us. You know, we spent a lot of time
Speaker 2: this week on the US withdrawal from Afghanistan. Wouldn't be
Speaker 2: talking about it if it weren't for what happened twenty
Speaker 2: three years ago today.
Speaker 5: Twenty three years ago set the stage for a rock
Speaker 5: that disaster and then Afghanistan.
Speaker 2: I hope you have a good day. Thank you for
Speaker 2: sharing part of you with us. Tony Capasio doing great
Speaker 2: work as always on behalf of Bloomberg. Thanks for listening
Speaker 2: to the Balance of Power podcast. Make sure to subscribe
Speaker 2: if you haven't already, at Apple, Spotify, or wherever you
Speaker 2: get your podcasts, and you can find us live every
Speaker 2: weekday from Washington, DC at noontime Eastern at Bloomberg dot com.