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 and five pm Eastern on Apple, Cocklay and Android
Speaker 1: Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever
Speaker 1: you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Speaker 2: Were You're keeping an eye on what's about to go
Speaker 2: down at the White House because for a second day
Speaker 2: in a row, it's a meeting with Congressional Republicans and
Speaker 2: the newly president once more, Donald Trump. Knowing that the
Speaker 2: debt cealing needs to be dealt with some kind of
Speaker 2: aid package theoretically for those who have suffered from the
Speaker 2: wildfires in Los Angeles. Unclear how those things will be
Speaker 2: tied together. Then there's the matters of the actual legislative
Speaker 2: agenda items immigration and the border, energy and tax reform
Speaker 2: inclusive of here comes the buzzword salt.
Speaker 3: Yes, that's right. What's the old line? As my dad
Speaker 3: used to say, if it was easy, anyone would do it.
Speaker 3: It's not easy, and no one can seem to figure
Speaker 3: this out. Yet. There have been multiple meetings with Donald Trump,
Speaker 3: from the Army Navy game to the UFC fight to
Speaker 3: the White House, and still not sure if it's one big,
Speaker 3: beautiful bill or exactly how that debt ceiling is going
Speaker 3: to be managed. Tyler Kendall's trying to seek answers to
Speaker 3: all of these questions and joins us live from the
Speaker 3: White House right now, reporting for Bloomberg from a frigid
Speaker 3: and snowy North lawn. Tyler, what are you hearing? We've
Speaker 3: got another meeting set for today?
Speaker 4: Yeah, hey, Joe.
Speaker 5: And actually, those three House Republicans who are here at
Speaker 5: the White House set a quick high and by to
Speaker 5: us reporters in the White House briefing room before darting
Speaker 5: out into the back of Those include Congressman Mike Lawler,
Speaker 5: Don Bacon, and Brian Fitzpatrick, all three of whom won
Speaker 5: in districts in twenty twenty four that former Vice President
Speaker 5: Kamala Harris also won. So consider it to be more
Speaker 5: moderate lawmakers who are going to be absolutely critical as
Speaker 5: President Trump tries to kickstart his agenda in Congress, because
Speaker 5: as we've been talking about this flurry of executive orders
Speaker 5: that have been coming down, ultimately we know that those
Speaker 5: can only go so far, and he's going to need
Speaker 5: buy in from Congress to tackle some of those big
Speaker 5: ticket priorities that you were mentioning. Now, how Speaker Mike
Speaker 5: Johnson was asked about this by reporters earlier today on
Speaker 5: Capitol Hill, and he said that Congress is trying to
Speaker 5: get things going.
Speaker 6: What the President is trying to do right now is
Speaker 6: reset and I second guess his decisions on that. He's
Speaker 6: using his executive authority because desperate times call for desperate measures. Now,
Speaker 6: our role is an article one branch of the government
Speaker 6: is to look through legislatively, which of these things will
Speaker 6: we codify? What do we need to address it.
Speaker 4: Now?
Speaker 5: Those comments coming, of course after a Speaker Johnson and
Speaker 5: also Senate Majority Leader John Thune were here at the
Speaker 5: White House yesterday, but very few details emerged on if
Speaker 5: a concrete plan or deal was made during those closed
Speaker 5: doors conversations with President Trump, as we know that there
Speaker 5: are some disagreements on a way forward when it comes
Speaker 5: to a reconciliation package and whether or not to divide
Speaker 5: up priorities as Kelly mentioned at the top there when
Speaker 5: it comes to immigration and energy and also a tax
Speaker 5: over but Joe and Cayley, we might get more details
Speaker 5: next week. It appears as House Republicans gather for both
Speaker 5: a way forward but also on their messaging at an
Speaker 5: annual retreat at the Trump National Golf Course in Miami, Florida.
Speaker 2: Well, as we all would love to be a fly
Speaker 2: on the wall in these meetings, Tyler, I also wonder
Speaker 2: if Republicans are bringing up with the President elect at
Speaker 2: all as they discuss things that can get the requisite
Speaker 2: amount of votes to pass in Congress. The fact that
Speaker 2: they actually were able to pull off something by bartisan
Speaker 2: in the last Congress with the TikTok divest Or Band bill,
Speaker 2: and he wants to essentially extend the deadline now through
Speaker 2: executive Order. TikTok obviously something high on the President's mind
Speaker 2: in the last few days.
Speaker 5: Right when you think about that wide bipartisan support when
Speaker 5: the TikTok bill passed back in April with that supplemental
Speaker 5: assistance package. We're talking about people like House Speaker Mike
Speaker 5: Johnson pairing up with a Democratic leader Hawking Jeffries on that.
Speaker 4: Now.
Speaker 5: President Trump was asked about the future of TikTok yesterday
Speaker 5: here at the White House, and he has that he
Speaker 5: will prioritize national security when negotiating any potential deal. Now,
Speaker 5: we do know a few weeks ago that Bloomberg News
Speaker 5: did report that Chinese officials were potentially looking at Elon
Speaker 5: Musk as somebody who could make that acquisition. And I
Speaker 5: want you to take a listen here to President Trump
Speaker 5: when he was asked if he would support Musk being
Speaker 5: part of that deal, I would.
Speaker 7: Be if he wanted to buy it. Here, I'd like
Speaker 7: Larry to buy it too. I have the right to
Speaker 7: make a deal. So the deal I'm thinking about Larry
Speaker 7: let's negotiating in front of the media. The deal I
Speaker 7: think is this, And I've met with owners of TikTok,
Speaker 7: the big owners. It's worthless if it doesn't get a pairamit?
Speaker 5: So Trump has floated some sort of joint venture between
Speaker 5: the US government and a US buy are important to
Speaker 5: note that Musk would likely face antitrust concerns considering his
Speaker 5: ownership of the platform X. But as we think about
Speaker 5: this moving forward, we know that Trump says that he
Speaker 5: will take an active role in the negotiat He called,
Speaker 5: of course, Chinese President Jijingping last week and said that
Speaker 5: TikTok was on their list on their agenda list. But
Speaker 5: Joe and Gaily. One final thing from those comments, Trump
Speaker 5: said himself that he's looking at potentially or suggesting that
Speaker 5: he would download TikTok. We know, by last count, he
Speaker 5: has about fifteen million followers on the platform and.
Speaker 2: It's bringing him the youths at least, so he says.
Speaker 2: Bloomberg's Tyler Kenda live at the White House for us today,
Speaker 2: Thank you so much and get warm as you can.
Speaker 2: And Tyler just mentioned there, Joe that we do know.
Speaker 2: Donald Trump spoke about TikTok with Chinese President Hijin Ping
Speaker 2: just days ago. The other two items, though, that he
Speaker 2: listed as being subjects on their phone call were trade
Speaker 2: and specifically fentanyl. And that's something else he was discussing
Speaker 2: last night, that it's because of the movement of fentanyl
Speaker 2: from China to other countries like Canada and Mexico that
Speaker 2: he's threatening tariffs.
Speaker 8: Donald three of them.
Speaker 3: Yeah, ten percent across the board here, I guess on China.
Speaker 3: But he's also floated this February first date that they're
Speaker 3: going to study things. In the meantime, they'll be a
Speaker 3: hard decision made by then. It's a little bit difficult
Speaker 3: to tell if this is just the start of a
Speaker 3: negotiation or what the endgame is You're having promised to
Speaker 3: do this on day one.
Speaker 2: Yeah, so we want to get more into this now.
Speaker 2: In turn to naswag Na Koktar, she is national Security
Speaker 2: Practice Group lead at Wiley Bryan and former Assistant Secretary
Speaker 2: for Industry and Analysis at the International Trade Administration. You
Speaker 2: worked on these issues in the first Trump admin and
Speaker 2: here we are days into the second and welcome back
Speaker 2: to Bloomberg TV and Radio. Are you surprised that we
Speaker 2: didn't see tariffs put in place on day one?
Speaker 4: Well, again, thank you for having me, and absolutely not.
Speaker 4: We have a number of tariff authorities and each of
Speaker 4: those authorities require a specific factual, set of analysis and circumstances, etc.
Speaker 4: So I think it's completely reasonable that Trump administration is
Speaker 4: in his new appointees are about to go in and
Speaker 4: some of them are in there, and they're going to
Speaker 4: kind of take the reins and look at the facts
Speaker 4: and look at the tariff authorities. We just the bottom
Speaker 4: line is we have really so many economic distortions, from
Speaker 4: subsidies to industrial policies to the exports offensanal as you mentioned,
Speaker 4: it lots to take on. I think the Trump is
Speaker 4: relying on his team to go in there and figure
Speaker 4: out what we're going to take on for a second, third, etc.
Speaker 3: Well, this would fly in the face of criticism that
Speaker 3: Trump is using tariffs as a blunt object to kind
Speaker 3: of go after the rest of the world. Here are
Speaker 3: we to believe? Then there are teams studying these on
Speaker 3: case by case levels right now, what's happening inside the
Speaker 3: White House as they try to make this determination and
Speaker 3: to what extent is this a kind of an opening
Speaker 3: salvo the threats on the campaign trail versus the reality
Speaker 3: in the White House?
Speaker 4: Yeah, So I think it's really important to remember that
Speaker 4: in the first Trump administration, right, I mean, whenever he
Speaker 4: imposed tariff, there was a legal tool and there was
Speaker 4: an analysis behind it, and he took those tools right
Speaker 4: up to the red line, right, but he never crossed it,
Speaker 4: which is why they were upheld in the courts. And
Speaker 4: so yeah, there's a lot of analysis that needs to
Speaker 4: be done to determine, you know, would tariffs on China
Speaker 4: be justified for its exports of fensanyl and how is
Speaker 4: the Chinese government supporting it? It's we know it's subsidizing
Speaker 4: the exports of vensanyl and hasn't really been been shutting
Speaker 4: it down. So what's the factual predicate there that would
Speaker 4: lead to the imposition of tariffs.
Speaker 3: Lie, we show China our work if it comes to that,
Speaker 3: if in fact that results in a new.
Speaker 4: Tear absolutely so, there's a lot of it already publicly available.
Speaker 4: The government is going to produce a report that will
Speaker 4: justify the imposition of tariffs or whether they're global tariffs
Speaker 4: on products or sceptors, through a two thirty two right
Speaker 4: that the President then has to articulate what the national
Speaker 4: security threat is for the imposition of tariffs. The China
Speaker 4: tariffs are three on fentanyl. That's retaliatory tariffs. So all
Speaker 4: of this is going to be supported by really good
Speaker 4: analysis to make sure that the tariff authorities are going
Speaker 4: to be are not going to be enjoined, and are
Speaker 4: going to withstand judicial scrutiny.
Speaker 3: Absolutely well.
Speaker 2: So when we consider the analysis here, Donald Trump has
Speaker 2: suggested in recent days that for Canada, for example, we
Speaker 2: don't need the things that are coming from Canada. He
Speaker 2: basically said that you can cut off business and imports
Speaker 2: from Canada and no one will be the wiser. And
Speaker 2: I just wonder to what extent that's really true, that
Speaker 2: imports from some of these countries are easily replaceable and
Speaker 2: the US can source from elsewhere.
Speaker 4: So I mean, I think his point is, you know,
Speaker 4: there is we're not going to be in a situation
Speaker 4: where our dependencies, Remember what we learned from China, our
Speaker 4: dependencies are so grave that even if we impose tariffs
Speaker 4: on some things, we would be cutting off our nose
Speaker 4: despite our face. And what I think what the President
Speaker 4: is trying to articulate is no more the United States
Speaker 4: isn't going to be on the position that we're so
Speaker 4: desperate for imports from a country that we're not going
Speaker 4: to be able to take critical national security measures. Right
Speaker 4: there's a lot of things that for all of our
Speaker 4: trading partners, including Canada, that we can make it home.
Speaker 4: But you know, I will also want to underscore that
Speaker 4: Canada has the largest heavy rare earth mines outside China.
Speaker 4: Right there, we actually do need the Canadian supply chain.
Speaker 4: At the end of the day, both countries really value
Speaker 4: their integrated supply chains, are going to work to integrate it.
Speaker 4: And these the these trade irritants that we have, not
Speaker 4: that they're not legitimate, but both governments, I am confident
Speaker 4: will be able to overcome because the trading relationship is
Speaker 4: so important.
Speaker 3: So when you hear Justin Trudeau say dollar for dollar,
Speaker 3: bring it on, that doesn't sound like a real response
Speaker 3: to you.
Speaker 4: That actually seems like the type of response that makes
Speaker 4: me think that Canada really doesn't understand what we're articulating.
Speaker 4: We've got subsidies, we've got immigration issues, we've got fensanel,
Speaker 4: we've got the Canadian government allowing China to circumvent a
Speaker 4: lot of our trade rules, including forced labor right. And
Speaker 4: when we confront Canada and say, look, we're going to
Speaker 4: have to impost tariffs to correct for these distortions until
Speaker 4: we negotiate our way out of them, and Canada's response
Speaker 4: is no, I'm not going to work with you to
Speaker 4: correct the distortions that I have in my markets. I'm
Speaker 4: going to retaliate against you. That's not constructive, right. If
Speaker 4: we're going to move ahead with our trading relationships with
Speaker 4: our important trading partners, we have to have constructive discussions.
Speaker 2: When Donald Trump was asked about this at the White
Speaker 2: House yesterday, he suggested that this is not just about
Speaker 2: kind of launching into a renegotiation of the USMCA trade agreement.
Speaker 2: But if there were to be some renegotiating on that happening,
Speaker 2: what would a better outcome look like for the United
Speaker 2: States in that regard? How would you tweak it?
Speaker 4: Think? I think two key things that are driving the
Speaker 4: United States and desired outcomes for USMCA is the rules
Speaker 4: of origin. AUTO rules are the origin that's going to
Speaker 4: be incredibly important. And this immense amount of not only
Speaker 4: Chinese investments in Mexico that are really working for the
Speaker 4: Chinese to circumvent the Section three oh one tariffs, the
Speaker 4: retaliatory terrorists that we imposed on them for IP theft,
Speaker 4: but also benefit from USMCA, to the point that the
Speaker 4: Canadian government has suppressed trade data so the United States
Speaker 4: can't determine how much circumvention is happening through Mexico. When
Speaker 4: the government does that to hide the ball from US,
Speaker 4: then we've got problems. Right then We've got to have
Speaker 4: a serious discussion. You're not working in an alliance with US,
Speaker 4: You're working in an alliance with China, and we're going to
Speaker 4: have to deal with this.
Speaker 3: We're hearing about tariffs against Russia. As Kayleie mentioned a
Speaker 3: bit earlier, I don't know what is there to teariff
Speaker 3: or to sanction after the last four years of all
Speaker 3: of this, Where does this come down to you? When
Speaker 3: Donald Trump talks to Vladimir Putin?
Speaker 4: I you know, I think it's just ultimately a maximum
Speaker 4: pressure campaign. We do have a lot of sanctions on
Speaker 4: and we have sectoral import restrictions from Russia, and so
Speaker 4: at the end of the day in terms of volume,
Speaker 4: will it really materially impact anything. No, But it's a
Speaker 4: signaling too, a maximum pressure I'm going to impost tariffs
Speaker 4: on you, and by the way, Putin, I can impose
Speaker 4: more sanctions on you. I think it's signaling to let
Speaker 4: President Putin know that the president has the tool test
Speaker 4: to deploy more tools to invoke a maximum pressure campaign
Speaker 4: on Russia until it retreats from Ukraine.
Speaker 2: But isn't the problem with all of this that Russia
Speaker 2: to alleviate that pressure has been able to turn to
Speaker 2: China is that it is actually China where there needs
Speaker 2: to be tighter reinforcement of what China is still purchasing
Speaker 2: from Russia.
Speaker 4: Absolutely, absolutely, how.
Speaker 9: Do you do that?
Speaker 3: Secondary sanctions?
Speaker 4: Wait, absolutely, secondary sanctions, I mean China, what China has
Speaker 4: been doing with respect to Iran, right with respect to
Speaker 4: hamas with respect to Russia, is inexcusable. Every single day
Speaker 4: they're working to undermine our national security interests. Yet we
Speaker 4: still don't have enough Chinese company designated to the PLA
Speaker 4: Affiliate DoD list on the Entity list in sanctions on China.
Speaker 4: I mean, they barely exist when all of this is happening.
Speaker 4: That is all of the work that the Chinese government
Speaker 4: is doing in Chinese companies who are in large part
Speaker 4: affiliate with the Chinese government anyway, working to embolden our
Speaker 4: adversaries to the detriment of US national security interests. It
Speaker 4: is just mind boggling that we haven't been imposing sanctions
Speaker 4: on them much more aggressively. Seventy percent of Chinese transactions
Speaker 4: are still in the US dollars, our mas. Our sanctions
Speaker 4: have real impact. Let's use them to safeguard our national
Speaker 4: security interests.
Speaker 3: Just to completely change the subject on you have a
Speaker 3: lot of experience in Washington that we can tap here
Speaker 3: as we spend some time together at the table. You
Speaker 3: were confirmed unanimously in the US Senate as an Assistant
Speaker 3: Secretary and Department of Commerce unanimously. There are a lot
Speaker 3: of questions about some of the votes that we're going
Speaker 3: to see for some of Donald Trump's cabinet nominees. What
Speaker 3: would that mean to see someone not get out of
Speaker 3: committee or not actually be confirmed on the floor.
Speaker 4: You know, I think there's I mean, I'm sad to
Speaker 4: say that there's always a lot of gamesmanship on the
Speaker 4: hill too. Even though I was unanimously confirmed, I was
Speaker 4: put on hold because a senator wanted a faster imposition
Speaker 4: of the steal and aluminum tariffs, and our position was,
Speaker 4: don't you understand we're supportive of this. Led us through
Speaker 4: so we can help accelerate this. So it's a long
Speaker 4: way of saying lots of gamesmanship. I think that there's
Speaker 4: points where objections aren't really meaningful objections. There's just to
Speaker 4: stall and retaliate or whatever, and so we're going to
Speaker 4: have to deal that. I think everybody in Washington knows
Speaker 4: that this is just a game, and you're going to
Speaker 4: have to now get industry support to overcome somebody putting
Speaker 4: on you on hold or not voting you out of committee.
Speaker 4: And everybody goes into these hearings prepared to kind of
Speaker 4: play that game. And so I think that these cabinet
Speaker 4: members and the officials will get voted out of committee.
Speaker 4: It's just the question is how long and how much
Speaker 4: effort does it take to push back.
Speaker 3: Very few Americans have ever done that dance, so it's
Speaker 3: really interesting to hear about NASA. Thank you so much
Speaker 3: for being back with us on Bloomberg TV and Radio.
Speaker 3: Kaylie will assemble our signature panel. Next, you have a
Speaker 3: lot to talk about with Rick Davis and Gdi Shanzino.
Speaker 2: Yeah, including their reaction to an important conversation that took
Speaker 2: place earlier today at Davos between Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky
Speaker 2: and Bloomberg Zone Editor in chief John Mickelthwaite. Will have
Speaker 2: a bit of that conversation just ahead. So stick with
Speaker 2: us right here on Bloomberg TV and Radio.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power Podcast. Catch
Speaker 1: us live weekdays at noon and five pm Eastern on
Speaker 1: Apple Cocklay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App.
Speaker 1: You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our
Speaker 1: flagship New York station, Just say Alexa Play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 2: Welcome back to Washington, where we're always keeping one eye
Speaker 2: on the Newswire and another eye on the True Social
Speaker 2: feed of the forty seventh President Donald Trump, who of courses,
Speaker 2: in his second full day in office and on this day,
Speaker 2: has a message for Russia's Vladimir Putin, taking to True
Speaker 2: Social to say, I'm going to do to Russia, whose
Speaker 2: economy is failing in President Putin a very big favor,
Speaker 2: settle now and stop this ridiculous war. It's only going
Speaker 2: to get worse if we don't make a deal in soon.
Speaker 2: He says, I have no other choice but to put
Speaker 2: high levels of taxes, tariffs, and sanctions on anything being
Speaker 2: sold by Russia to the United.
Speaker 3: States, almost like a parrot. We can do it the
Speaker 3: easy way or the hard way, he says, and the
Speaker 3: easy way is always better. Question is what will the
Speaker 3: borders look like? What would a peace deal look like?
Speaker 3: Would it involve US peacekeeping troops? Because that's what Vladimir
Speaker 3: Zelenski said to John Mickelthwaye today.
Speaker 2: Indeed, our editor in chief sat down with Ukraine's president
Speaker 2: at Davos and they did talk about Donald Trump. Here's
Speaker 2: a piece of their conversation.
Speaker 10: President Trump is now on top, as they say, he
Speaker 10: had a strong victory in the elections and is now
Speaker 10: taking steps directed at internal politics. The issue of ending
Speaker 10: the war in Ukraine must be I believe the victory
Speaker 10: for Trump and not for Putin. Putin is nobody for him.
Speaker 10: America is way stronger, and Europe is way stronger. China
Speaker 10: is way stronger than Russia. They are all players.
Speaker 11: I remember seeing a video of you when they had
Speaker 11: the talks with Putin before, when I think it was
Speaker 11: Merkle and Macron were there, and to the outside eye
Speaker 11: they seem to sideline you a bit that that particular
Speaker 11: set of talks. Do you worry that America will try
Speaker 11: and do a deal behind your back?
Speaker 9: Maybe?
Speaker 10: I very much believe that the US won't do that,
Speaker 10: although I'm not sure that earlier this did not happen here.
Speaker 10: I'm not speaking about America, speaking here also about some
Speaker 10: European partners. I don't know, and I'll be frank with
Speaker 10: you what I know. I know, and I'm always frank
Speaker 10: and sharing that the fact that the US and Europe
Speaker 10: communicated with Russians on the level of intelligence before the
Speaker 10: full scale invasion and during the full scale invasion, all
Speaker 10: that was in place.
Speaker 11: Trump has said that he's arranging a call with Putin.
Speaker 11: From what you've just said, it sounds like you would
Speaker 11: be nervous about that or are you confident that President
Speaker 11: Trump will make your case.
Speaker 10: I would put it in the following way. I think
Speaker 10: that for all of us who truly want to end
Speaker 10: the war, who want to end it fast, if that
Speaker 10: is possible, for all of us, it is desirable to
Speaker 10: have a plan until we have communication with Putin. I
Speaker 10: believe that this is in the interest of the United States,
Speaker 10: the European Union, Europe as a whole. It is in
Speaker 10: the interest of Ukraine and our people.
Speaker 3: Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelenski in conversation with John Nicholthwaite today
Speaker 3: on Bloomberg are editor in chief bringing forth some pretty
Speaker 3: interesting headlines here in the ask for US peacekeeping forces
Speaker 3: before we even reach a settlement is an interesting stop
Speaker 3: on the road here we want to hear about from
Speaker 3: our panel. Rick Davis and Genie Shanzano join us our
Speaker 3: signature panel. Rick is partner at Stone Court Capital Republican strategist,
Speaker 3: and Genie is our Democratic analyst and Senior Democracy Fellow
Speaker 3: with the Center for the Study of the Presidency and Congress.
Speaker 3: Rick Donald Trump is talking, he said that he would
Speaker 3: end the war on his first day. Now Here we
Speaker 3: are on the third, of course, and he's threatening new sanctions,
Speaker 3: new tariffs, and taxes against Russia. Will he get it
Speaker 3: done well?
Speaker 8: I think he's going to do something. In other words,
Speaker 8: if Putin doesn't take the hint and enter into a
Speaker 8: discussion with Trump, then I do think Trump will start
Speaker 8: to tighten up on sanctions. And there's plenty that still
Speaker 8: can be done. Some of the criticism of the Biden
Speaker 8: administration is he wasn't tough enough soon enough to get
Speaker 8: Russia's attention. So I don't think Donald Trump's going to
Speaker 8: follow that path of incremental steps. The fact that he
Speaker 8: is doing this right now, the very first week of
Speaker 8: his administer it should be a telegram to Vladimir Putin
Speaker 8: that he needs to respond in kind. I mean, we've
Speaker 8: already seen Vadimir Putin deny even talking to him after
Speaker 8: the election, which according to Donald Trump, a conversation took place,
Speaker 8: and no effort on Putin's part to take the offer
Speaker 8: of peace from Donald Trump seriously up until this point
Speaker 8: in time. I mean, this is more a threat to
Speaker 8: get to the table. It's not a negotiation. For peace
Speaker 8: and so until at which point in time by the
Speaker 8: Trump administration finds a way to get Vladimir Putin motivated
Speaker 8: to want to have that conversation. All this talk about
Speaker 8: peacekeepers and what will the peace plan look like are
Speaker 8: irrelevant because right now there's no counterparty to these discussions.
Speaker 8: Vladimir Putin does not seem ready to negotiate peace.
Speaker 2: Well, and Genie, I wonder if that is a not
Speaker 2: motivating factor, a factor that could suggest Vladimir Putin that
Speaker 2: he might not have to go to the table for
Speaker 2: some time because he knows the person who has just
Speaker 2: sworn in as Vice President jd. Vance, as well as
Speaker 2: many of his former colleagues in the Senate and in
Speaker 2: the House, are not willing to continue to provide financial
Speaker 2: support for Ukraine. So is there an argument that says, Okay,
Speaker 2: Donald Trump, you can threaten all you want, but I
Speaker 2: know I can wait this one out.
Speaker 5: Yeah.
Speaker 12: That's always been the concern is the fact that you
Speaker 12: have many members of Congress, and now, as you mentioned,
Speaker 12: the new Vice president, who including Donald Trump by the way,
Speaker 12: who aren't inclined to spend more money supporting Ukraine at
Speaker 12: this point, And that gives Vladimir Putin. What he has
Speaker 12: always wanted and needed is the time necessary. He predicted
Speaker 12: that the West, the US and its allies would tire
Speaker 12: of this at some point we would stop funding and
Speaker 12: Ukraine would be his and so that time does benefit him.
Speaker 12: And I think what we also see here is Donald
Speaker 12: Trump making the mistake, which is number one, you can't
Speaker 12: negotiate the end to a war on social media. You
Speaker 12: can't negotiate it. As Richard Blumenthal said via bombbast you
Speaker 12: have to get the parties to a table and the table,
Speaker 12: and he is not have the Ukrainians at the negotiating
Speaker 12: table in a position of strength at this point. They
Speaker 12: both need to be there, and so he is going
Speaker 12: to undermine what he indeed wants to see happen, which
Speaker 12: is an end to this war quite frankly before he
Speaker 12: even got into office, which was his promise, and of
Speaker 12: course he didn't deliver on that.
Speaker 3: Well, from that, this can be easy or this can
Speaker 3: be hard file That line was also used by John
Speaker 3: Thune yesterday, the majority leader in the Senate is promising
Speaker 3: to keep everybody here for weekend attention. They will keep
Speaker 3: the chamber in session for the weekend as Democrats try
Speaker 3: to slow walk some of the confirmation votes for Donald
Speaker 3: Trump's cabinet nominees. Rick, I'm sure you saw this. John
Speaker 3: Ratcliffe's nomination was blocked yesterday by Chris Murphy. A vote
Speaker 3: was at least even though he was approved fourteen to
Speaker 3: three in the Intelligence Committee. They've also put up some
Speaker 3: procedural hurdles for Pete Hegseth and so John Thune says,
Speaker 3: you want to vote on these Tuesday, or want to
Speaker 3: vote on Friday and Saturday, And it looks like based
Speaker 3: on the calendar, they will have to stay the weekend
Speaker 3: to make this happen. Rick, you were a longtime creature
Speaker 3: of the Senate. What does that tell you about the
Speaker 3: overall momentum for Trump's team.
Speaker 8: Yeah, kudos to you, know, Senator Thune, the majority leader
Speaker 8: for calling a question on this. I mean, if the
Speaker 8: Democrats are going to play procedural games to try and
Speaker 8: slow down what has been a meteoric confirmation process, then
Speaker 8: they better have good reason to do it. And the
Speaker 8: other thing that Stiffen's Thune spine on this a lot
Speaker 8: is the threat of recess appointments. And this came up
Speaker 8: in the conversation as I understand it a to the
Speaker 8: reports that when he met with the president, President said,
Speaker 8: you know, look on you know, if this doesn't get
Speaker 8: going on the confirmation process, I'll be happy just to
Speaker 8: recess appoint all these people. Now, if the Democrats want
Speaker 8: all these cabinet members without a debate, without a vote,
Speaker 8: and just put in through recess appointments, then the strategy
Speaker 8: they're doing will work just fine. And if they want to,
Speaker 8: you know, complain about that, it's at their own doing.
Speaker 8: So let the process continue. The one thing that would
Speaker 8: be strengthening all the normal hands of state would be
Speaker 8: to get back to a regular order process and to
Speaker 8: actually not be seen as slow walking initiatives. Just take
Speaker 8: the vote if you've got the votes to beat it, fine,
Speaker 8: if you don't take the vote, and keep moving.
Speaker 9: Well.
Speaker 2: On the subject of alloming vote, Pete Hegseth Genie, the
Speaker 2: nominee for Secretary of Defense, did make it out of
Speaker 2: the Arms Star Serviss Committee. He was able to get
Speaker 2: through that vote. A full floor vote is yet to
Speaker 2: be scheduled, and in the meantime, senators yesterday received a
Speaker 2: sworn affidavit from his former sister in law alleging that
Speaker 2: he made his second wife fear for her safety. We
Speaker 2: should note that wife says he was not physically abusive
Speaker 2: toward her. But do you see this as being a
Speaker 2: new factor that has entered the conversation here that could
Speaker 2: actually change his odds of confirmation.
Speaker 12: You know, I don't think we have signs yet that
Speaker 12: it changes the vote. I haven't seen any signs that
Speaker 12: Republicans who have been willing to go along with Pete
Speaker 12: heg Seth's nomination are changing their mind. We do know
Speaker 12: that this was the work of a Democratic senator who
Speaker 12: felt that the FBI background check was not thorough enough,
Speaker 12: and of course was released to the press. But I
Speaker 12: don't see this changing things. But the reality is the
Speaker 12: longer this takes, the more likely material like this comes out,
Speaker 12: which is why of course Senator Thune wants to move
Speaker 12: this forward as quickly as possible and get Keete heegsas
Speaker 12: potentially confirmed this weekend. And of course the other two
Speaker 12: are Tulci Gabbert and of course RFK Junior, who really
Speaker 12: doesn't seem to be signs that they're moving forward with
Speaker 12: their hearings at this point. They haven't been on the hill,
Speaker 12: so that is another curious element of this that we
Speaker 12: have to watch and see what happens to those two,
Speaker 12: because at this point I think Gabbert is the shakiest
Speaker 12: among Donald Trump's nominees, whether she'll get support or not.
Speaker 3: Of course we're watching Cash Bettel as well. Rick. He's
Speaker 3: got a date a hearing set for January twenty ninth.
Speaker 3: Earlier in the broadcast, we played a clip from Enrique Torres,
Speaker 3: the former leader of the Proud Boys, invoking Cash Betel's
Speaker 3: name in an interview with Alex Jones last night. Is
Speaker 3: this going to be the real fireworks out of all
Speaker 3: these hearings?
Speaker 8: You know, it's hard to tell. I think the thing
Speaker 8: with Cash Battell is he's been very consistent about this
Speaker 8: for four years. He was outspoken about what he thought
Speaker 8: were campaign irregularities, election irregularities. Back in twenty twenty. He
Speaker 8: was the tip of the spear for the Trump efforts
Speaker 8: to try and you know, overturn certain aspects of the
Speaker 8: election counts. And so you know, it doesn't surprise anybody
Speaker 8: that he's he's the guy who's you know, in the
Speaker 8: debate now because of these January sixth, you know pardons, Yeah.
Speaker 2: We'll be glued to that hearing next week. Rick Davis
Speaker 2: and Jeanie Shanzano our signature political panel. Thank you so
Speaker 2: much for joining us. And there's still more ahead here
Speaker 2: on Balance of Power. Former House Financial Services Committee Chair
Speaker 2: Patrick mckenry is on his way in next Right here
Speaker 2: on Bloomberg TV and Radio.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch
Speaker 1: us live weekdays at noon and five pm Eastern on
Speaker 1: Alma Cockley and Android Otto with the Little Birk Business Up.
Speaker 1: Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch
Speaker 1: us live on YouTube.
Speaker 3: In the Nation's Capital, I really have to catch up
Speaker 3: on Squid Game to see the second Squid Game. We're
Speaker 3: like the only two people you know about the first one.
Speaker 3: Oh wow, you have a whole weekend planned. It's very
Speaker 3: cold down here in Washington. Much to discuss today, A
Speaker 3: lot of questions that we've been asking for days, weeks actually,
Speaker 3: when it comes to the congressional agenda, sequencing, how reconciliation
Speaker 3: is going to work, what do we do with the
Speaker 3: debt ceiling At this moment, we still basically have no idea. Yes,
Speaker 3: and while we're at it, and that's despite a meeting
Speaker 3: between Donald Trump and congressional leaders Republican leadership in the
Speaker 3: White House yesterday. While we're at it, he's also kind
Speaker 3: of making fun of Mike Johnson's slim majority, which he
Speaker 3: is somewhat responsible for having tapped. I believe three members
Speaker 3: of the House Republican Conference to join the administration. Remember
Speaker 3: this from Monday.
Speaker 7: Congratulate Mike Johnson for the job that he's doing. Stup,
Speaker 7: We gave him a majority of almost nothing, and then
Speaker 7: I said, to make it tougher on him, let me
Speaker 7: take two or three of the people, right, I said,
Speaker 7: he'll only have to suffer with that for about three months.
Speaker 7: How are they doing, by the way, are they?
Speaker 3: Is that moving along?
Speaker 2: Uncomfortable? After I don't know what They're just saying the
Speaker 2: quiet part entirely out loud at high volume to a
Speaker 2: very crowded Emancipation Hall on Inauguration Day. But we want
Speaker 2: to talk more on the path ahead and the House
Speaker 2: of Representatives specifically, was someone who for a brief period
Speaker 2: of time actually held the gavel to control the House,
Speaker 2: at least on a temporary basis, the former chair of
Speaker 2: the House Freedom Caucus and former congress or excuse me,
Speaker 2: how's financial Services Committee. It's because of the question I'm
Speaker 2: about to ask you, sir, I apologize that was a
Speaker 2: Freudian slip. Patrick McHenry, that is correct.
Speaker 3: My friends would have loved that, would have loved that
Speaker 3: I said that.
Speaker 2: The question I was going to ask you is Mike
Speaker 2: Johnson's problem. He has people like those in the House
Speaker 2: Freedom Caucus. He also has members like the ones meeting
Speaker 2: with Trump at the White House as we speak, the
Speaker 2: frontliners who are actually in blue districts, Congressman Lawler Bacon Fitzpatrick.
Speaker 2: How does he get both of those groups to agree
Speaker 2: on one thing, to tally all two hundred and eighteen votes.
Speaker 3: That's the art form.
Speaker 13: That's the art form, and that's how you make the box.
Speaker 13: What I love about the clip that you showed is
Speaker 13: that is quintessential Donald Trump. He knows the complaints behind
Speaker 13: closed doors, and rather than just let those complaints fester
Speaker 13: behind closed doors, he's the one making the joke about
Speaker 13: it and forcing the person in an uncomfortable position.
Speaker 3: To laugh about it, which is so rich. Does that
Speaker 3: cut the tension?
Speaker 13: It does cut and also is a warning shot that
Speaker 13: you can complain behind closed doors, but there are no
Speaker 13: closed doors in this town, especially in this era. So
Speaker 13: Mike Johnson's challenge and the House representative challenge is navigating
Speaker 13: this pathway to what is essential and what is consequential
Speaker 13: in the timeframe that they have and focusing those high
Speaker 13: priorities means that you can actually get that narrowband done okay,
Speaker 13: but the secondary issues are going to be more difficult
Speaker 13: to get done with this really diverse Republican conference. You
Speaker 13: have those three members you mentioned, Fitzpatrick, Bacon, and Lawler
Speaker 13: are in Joe Biden districts, yet one in this election.
Speaker 13: If they were not members of the House Representatives, wed
Speaker 13: not have a Republican majority right now, and the whole
Speaker 13: legislative agenda is dramatically different. They're at the White House
Speaker 13: today making it clear that their colleagues and friends at
Speaker 13: the House rather than just staying in the meeting, They're
Speaker 13: going to have the meeting with the President to elevate this.
Speaker 13: So members of the House and their colleagues understand they
Speaker 13: need to listen to them. The Freedom Caucus has a
Speaker 13: dominant voice right now, and they're able to capture a
Speaker 13: lot of media attention around their group that is semi unified.
Speaker 13: The moderates are the ones that are unified, and they're
Speaker 13: unified on making sure that this is a high priority
Speaker 13: economic agenda and that what we achieve on those social
Speaker 13: issues are things that are actually broadly popular with the
Speaker 13: American populace. And I think that is important to remember.
Speaker 13: There are popular measures that Donald Trump is all about.
Speaker 13: The border policy highly popular, economic policy on taxes and
Speaker 13: spending highly popular. You get into all these other secondary issues, though,
Speaker 13: that is where we're not going to have unity among Republicans.
Speaker 3: Interesting, you know, there's a thought that Donald Trump simply
Speaker 3: needs to tell them what path to take. Put your
Speaker 3: foot down, tell them you've been in the Speaker's office
Speaker 3: when the phone rings and it's Donald Trump. Does he
Speaker 3: care enough to say, get it done in one bill
Speaker 3: and start writing the legislation, or he seems to be saying,
Speaker 3: you know, this is what I want, but you guys
Speaker 3: can figure it out too, and we're losing a lot
Speaker 3: of time.
Speaker 13: Well, he recognizes it's a coequal branch of government. It
Speaker 13: is his bully pulpit that enables policy to move on
Speaker 13: Capitol Hill. It's his prioration that enables policy to move
Speaker 13: on Capitol Hill. But the details of that that's not
Speaker 13: his business.
Speaker 3: That's not what he does.
Speaker 13: It's like he has a contract lawyer, he has a
Speaker 13: deal lawyer. He has a variety of people that he
Speaker 13: has doing things like that. But he's going to go
Speaker 13: focus on the big picture item. And the big picture
Speaker 13: item here is he wants a reconciliation bill on his
Speaker 13: desk as quickly as possible, with as much policy in
Speaker 13: it as possible. I'll leave it to you, right And
Speaker 13: so that leaving it to you. The Senate wants to
Speaker 13: do two bites of the apple. The House wants to
Speaker 13: do one bite of the apple. Reconciliation is designed for
Speaker 13: the Senate procedure to make it easier, so the Senate
Speaker 13: on one bill or two bills a year. The Senate
Speaker 13: can act like the House of Representatives and have a
Speaker 13: majority vote and an act policy. It means that the
Speaker 13: art here is in the Senate and the Senate wants
Speaker 13: two bills. Trump thinks, I don't care. This is not
Speaker 13: of priority to me. I've got high priority issues, not
Speaker 13: a question of do you send me two bills or
Speaker 13: one bill? To just get everything you can get done
Speaker 13: done and I'll be happy.
Speaker 2: Well, and one of those things that they're going to
Speaker 2: have to get done. In the middle of all of
Speaker 2: this is at some point lifting the debt ceiling, because you,
Speaker 2: as former chair of the House Financial Services Committee, know
Speaker 2: what could happen if we even approached the X state,
Speaker 2: let alone going over it, which we've never done before.
Speaker 2: How do you see that getting resolved? Knowing how difficult
Speaker 2: it was last time, it was one of the precipitating factors,
Speaker 2: and you ultimately temporarily serving as Speaker of the House,
Speaker 2: how do you see this falling into the legislative picture.
Speaker 13: Well, it needs to get done, it needs to get
Speaker 13: done quickly, and the longer it goes, the more likely
Speaker 13: that the president gets leveraged. Joe Biden had Democratic majorities
Speaker 13: in the House and the Senate. He could have raised
Speaker 13: the debt ceiling with zero trade offs with his majority.
Speaker 13: They chose not to, and so they had to negotiate
Speaker 13: with Kevin McCarthy and Kevin McCarthy opened up the negotiations
Speaker 13: the first week of a speakership and it took four weeks.
Speaker 13: I'm sorry it took four months for it to be done.
Speaker 13: And it took three months to actually get Joe Biden
Speaker 13: to even egleged that he had to negotiate with the
Speaker 13: Speaker of the House to raise the debt ceiling. We
Speaker 13: had to pull them kicking and screaming, and we did.
Speaker 13: And Democrats in the final bit of negotiations with the
Speaker 13: White House, I was in a meeting and one of
Speaker 13: the Democratic negotiators said, there is nothing in this for Democrats.
Speaker 13: I said, yes, that's the point we are driving. Republicans
Speaker 13: are driving the policy making well. What Senate for us
Speaker 13: raising the debt ceiling and avoiding default. So we had
Speaker 13: spending cuts paired with changes to the social safety net,
Speaker 13: entitlement reform, and regulatory changes that make it easier and
Speaker 13: faster to build in America. These are popular things that
Speaker 13: we leveraged in the debt ceiling and drew the Biden
Speaker 13: administration along with Trump. What the Democratic members of the
Speaker 13: House and Senate want to do for their votes is
Speaker 13: to raise spending, to increase spending. That is not as
Speaker 13: popular as cutting spending in America today, and that is
Speaker 13: not commensurate with the presence commitment to the American people.
Speaker 13: So the longer this draws out, the more likely the
Speaker 13: Democratic members get their leverage point to raise spending.
Speaker 10: Well.
Speaker 2: And Donald Trump suggested the fires in Los Angeles make
Speaker 2: this whole thing easier. Do you see that as being
Speaker 2: realistic leverage? That that's how you get the Democratic votes
Speaker 2: by essentially withholding emergency aid in lists.
Speaker 3: Let's not withholding right now.
Speaker 13: Congress still needs to appropriate for hurricane damage in the
Speaker 13: flooding in the southeast that is not yet done. That
Speaker 13: was unfinished business of November and December of last year.
Speaker 13: So naturally, with a massive damage and around Los Angeles
Speaker 13: with these wildfires, we need a disaster Aid supplemental bill.
Speaker 13: It would fit to attach the dead ceiling to that
Speaker 13: measure to get it done quickly. It would fit to
Speaker 13: attach to the reconciliation bill to get it done quickly.
Speaker 13: It would fit for it to be a part of
Speaker 13: the government funding bill that with government funding running out
Speaker 13: and in a couple of weeks, all those things fit
Speaker 13: with the debt ceiling. It's just a question of executing
Speaker 13: in a timely way and for the leadership in the
Speaker 13: House in the Senate to make that decision.
Speaker 3: Maybe not withholding it, but using it as leverage. I
Speaker 3: think is where Kayley was going here, right. Donald Trump
Speaker 3: said last night when he was asked did you reach agreement?
Speaker 3: It said pretty much, a lot of Demos are going
Speaker 3: to be asking for help. We're going to take care
Speaker 3: of la. The Speaker of the House echoed that sentiment
Speaker 3: on Fox News last night that you put these together
Speaker 3: here and well, Democrats are going to have to vote
Speaker 3: to raise the debt ceiling or whatever else it might
Speaker 3: be attached to. You're from North Carolina, Your state was
Speaker 3: hit pretty hard by some of those storms. Is that
Speaker 3: just the way things work in Washington? You comfortable with
Speaker 3: that construction?
Speaker 13: Well, you think that it's leveraging Democratic members to vote
Speaker 13: for bills that the Democratic members normally vote for. Democrat
Speaker 13: members of the House are accustomed to voting to raise
Speaker 13: the debt ceiling without any pay for, so then there's
Speaker 13: they're customer voting for government funding bills as well. House
Speaker 13: Republicans have a much more difficult time much. It's much
Speaker 13: more a challenged vote for a Republican to vote for
Speaker 13: government spending, even if it is less government spending. They
Speaker 13: have a very difficult time talking to their constituents about
Speaker 13: it and to say, yeah, I did vote to fund
Speaker 13: the government, but I'm funding it at a lower level.
Speaker 13: We are saving money, And they said, well, how are
Speaker 13: you saving money by spending money, because we're not going
Speaker 13: to turn.
Speaker 3: The lights out on the government.
Speaker 13: And it's harder for Republicans to articulate that it is
Speaker 13: a jam up vote if you attach anything to disaster
Speaker 13: supplemental bills. But disaster supplemental bills always have something attached
Speaker 13: to it, and there is no pure vote in the
Speaker 13: House or the Senate in any era of Congress, but
Speaker 13: especially not right now.
Speaker 2: I want to switch gears here because you obviously spent
Speaker 2: a lot of time in Congress. In your time in
Speaker 2: Congress working on crypto specifically, and we have now learned
Speaker 2: that Hester Purs, Commissioner at the SEC, is going to
Speaker 2: be leading a new task force on this at the
Speaker 2: Commission on Digital Asset Regulations. We knew this administration was
Speaker 2: going to be taking a different tact than the prior
Speaker 2: one on crypto. But what do you expect to see
Speaker 2: out of this SEC, in particular in the absence of
Speaker 2: market structure legislation happening before here.
Speaker 13: Well, there are things that the agency can do, and
Speaker 13: Commissioner Purse is steeped in understanding of securities law really
Speaker 13: deeply understands a crypto and digital assets and understands what
Speaker 13: is in the art of the possible under current laws
Speaker 13: for the Serious Exchange Commission, it makes complete sense for
Speaker 13: hester person to run this deep look at this deep dive,
Speaker 13: and it's needed. It is about a decade past due
Speaker 13: in fact now absent Congress legislating though for a market
Speaker 13: structure built, you're still going to have this divide in
Speaker 13: this rub between the Series' Exchange Commission and the CFTC
Speaker 13: of what is a digital asset, what is a digital commodity,
Speaker 13: what is a digital security? How do you find those things?
Speaker 13: And there's there are clear things that need to change
Speaker 13: under law for the CFTC to have spot market authority
Speaker 13: so they can properly regulate a crypto native marketplace. So
Speaker 13: there's things that Congress still has to do, but the
Speaker 13: agency should be fast at work and prioritize very important things,
Speaker 13: especially starting with custody, so that people that think they
Speaker 13: own crypto in fact do own crypto and it can
Speaker 13: stand alongside similar assets and they're protected from bankruptcy proceedings
Speaker 13: and things like that are not really partisan. They became
Speaker 13: partisan because of Gary Gensler's regime at the Securities Exchange
Speaker 13: Commission and because of a statement they're trying to make
Speaker 13: about crypto absent that there's some reasonable things the SEC
Speaker 13: should should be about. And I think Commissioner Purse will
Speaker 13: find those things.
Speaker 3: We have less than a minute, so you're saved by
Speaker 3: the bell. Does trump coin show, by the way, blania
Speaker 3: coin help to delegitimize serious.
Speaker 13: Look meme coins are they have another handle for him?
Speaker 13: Another four letter word?
Speaker 3: I heard about that. Yeah, okay, I think that's your answer.
Speaker 3: Can't say it on the air, And yeah, I'm trying
Speaker 3: to hold back.
Speaker 13: But all these meme coins really undermine what I think
Speaker 13: of is what is digital properties that can make a
Speaker 13: huge difference over the long term. But people buy it?
Speaker 3: Yeah, who are interested in it?
Speaker 13: And I wasn't into beanie babies, but perhaps this is
Speaker 13: digital beanie babies.
Speaker 3: Former chair of the House Financial Services Committee, he held
Speaker 3: the speaker's gavel. That's Patrick McHenry with us at the table.
Speaker 3: He never ran the Freedom Caucus. Come back and see
Speaker 3: us soon with hilly lines. I'm Joe Matthew. It's all good.
Speaker 3: This is Bloomberg.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch
Speaker 1: us live weekdays at noon and five pm Eastern on
Speaker 1: apple Cocklay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app.
Speaker 1: You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our
Speaker 1: flagship New York station Just Say Alexa played bloom Were
Speaker 1: at eleven.
Speaker 3: Donald Trump making news on the war in Ukraine, telling
Speaker 3: Vladimir Prutin to end the war or face a new
Speaker 3: wave of punitive measures, think tariffs, taxes, sanctions. What is
Speaker 3: there left to sanction? You ask, We will seek answers here,
Speaker 3: as he writes on Truth Social we could do it
Speaker 3: the easy way or the hard way, and the easy
Speaker 3: way is always better. Now. This comes against the backdrop
Speaker 3: of a conversation with President Zelenski himself of Ukraine here
Speaker 3: today on Bloomberg. This is something you will not hear
Speaker 3: anywhere else, generating the headline US must be part of
Speaker 3: Ukraine peacekeeping Force, part of his conversation with Bloomberg's editor
Speaker 3: in chief John Micklethwaite. Let's listen.
Speaker 9: It's great if we will have troops, but we have
Speaker 9: to understand that the troops will not be in the
Speaker 9: center of the capital. Yes, they will not have relaxed time. Yes,
Speaker 9: it's it's very important because I heard them some allies
Speaker 9: said that, yes, But it's okay. We can be in
Speaker 9: the center of some city and no, no, no, we
Speaker 9: don't need such contingent contingents. No no, yes without without
Speaker 9: without with our people. Of course, yes, because this means
Speaker 9: security and and that's it. So, but it can't be.
Speaker 9: It can't be without the United States. I will explain
Speaker 9: you why even if some European friends think that it
Speaker 9: can be, No, it will not be. First of all,
Speaker 9: nobody will risk without the United States. The second, that's
Speaker 9: what can divide. Need to divide EU and USA. That
Speaker 9: is a goal and dream of putting to divide this unity.
Speaker 11: You mentioned China. How important is in these negotiations. I mean,
Speaker 11: China is the backer of Russia. They seem to have
Speaker 11: had an impact on things like Putin not using nuclear weapons.
Speaker 11: Those are the things. Can China push Putin? And do
Speaker 11: you have any contact with the Chinese?
Speaker 9: I had some contacts with the Shin Jipin. We had
Speaker 9: phone call during the war, not to watch not enough.
Speaker 9: I think yes, he can push Putin to piece.
Speaker 3: I'm sure.
Speaker 9: I think that only President Trump is strongest and shin Zimpion.
Speaker 9: I think that there's no other allies who can really
Speaker 9: do it. Yes, because his economy put in after sans
Speaker 9: everything depends very much of China.
Speaker 11: You would like Donald Trump and of China to work
Speaker 11: together to h I think yes, yes, but not without us.
Speaker 9: It's important.
Speaker 3: Ukrainian President Volama Zolenski in conversation with John Mickelthwaite, our
Speaker 3: editor in chief here at Bloomberg they met in Davos.
Speaker 3: Pretty remarkable language coming from Zelensky at a very important
Speaker 3: point here in its struggle against the Russian invasion. It
Speaker 3: can't be done without the United States. The enduring headline
Speaker 3: as we bring in the voice of experience in Kurt Volker.
Speaker 3: I'm glad to say the ambassador is back with us here,
Speaker 3: former US Ambassador to NATO, former US Special Representative for
Speaker 3: Ukraine negotiations, back at another critical time twenty seventeen, twenty nineteen.
Speaker 3: Mister ambassador, welcome back to Bloomberg. It's great to see
Speaker 3: you here. I'd like to just back up to where
Speaker 3: we started and what we heard from Donald Trump today,
Speaker 3: threatening new sanctions and tariffs against Russia. He said he
Speaker 3: would end this war on day one, and he was
Speaker 3: asked about it. He said, well, I've only had a
Speaker 3: half day. Do you take seriously this attempt to end
Speaker 3: the conflict.
Speaker 7: I do.
Speaker 9: I do.
Speaker 14: And if you listen to what you read out at
Speaker 14: the beginning of this segment here where Trump is tweeting
Speaker 14: to Vladimir Putin, you can do this easy way, or
Speaker 14: you can do this the hard way, and the easy
Speaker 14: way is always better. This is very, very smart. It
Speaker 14: is doing exactly what he should do to demonstrate that
Speaker 14: he is in a stronger position than Putin, that he
Speaker 14: wants to end the war. He knows the only reason
Speaker 14: there's a war is because Putin is causing the war
Speaker 14: and he wants it to stop. And giving Putin an opportunity, Okay,
Speaker 14: you come to a table, you figure this out, you
Speaker 14: end this war. We're going to do this. I think
Speaker 14: that Trump is exactly on point here. I was very
Speaker 14: disappointed to hear President Zelensky just now because he missed
Speaker 14: a great opportunity to say nothing. Trump is doing exactly
Speaker 14: the right thing here of putting the pressure on Vladimir Putin,
Speaker 14: say you end the war. It's not the time to
Speaker 14: be making demands, to be saying the US has to
Speaker 14: be present on the ground, to be defining in advance
Speaker 14: what a detern force in Ukraine needs to look like
Speaker 14: it is time to align with President Trump and end
Speaker 14: the war. That's what we need to be focused on.
Speaker 3: Well, that's fascinating to hear you say all of that.
Speaker 3: And when you envision the future map of Ukraine, are
Speaker 3: the borders in place where lines have been drawn? Now?
Speaker 14: Yes, So here's the way I think of this. Ukraine's
Speaker 14: international borders were recognized by the entire world, were recognized
Speaker 14: by Russia in the nineteen nineties. They were confirmed by
Speaker 14: Russia in the Budapest Memorandum of nineteen ninety four. So
Speaker 14: those are Ukraine's international borders. Russia temporarily occupies about eighteen
Speaker 14: percent of Ukrainian territory. That's unacceptable, and I think we
Speaker 14: can say that we disagree, and Ukraine can say they
Speaker 14: do not accept Russia's occupation. They can even put it
Speaker 14: in their constitution that they should get these territories back.
Speaker 14: A different issue is where whether you have a war
Speaker 14: over that right now, Putin should not want a war.
Speaker 14: As Trump has said, he's in a very bad position.
Speaker 14: He's destroyed Russia, he's destroyed their military forces. He needs
Speaker 14: to stop it. Ukraine is in a bad position as well.
Speaker 14: They can't take these territories back militarily, so we can
Speaker 14: have a long term dispute, very much as we had
Speaker 14: with West Germany and East Germany, where West Germany had
Speaker 14: it in its constitution about the unification of all the
Speaker 14: Germans and they didn't unify until forty years later when
Speaker 14: East Germany fell apart and became part of modern Germany.
Speaker 14: Same thing with the Baltic States. They were occupied by
Speaker 14: the Soviet Union for forty years, but they got their
Speaker 14: freedom back and now they're again independent sovereign states, part
Speaker 14: of the EU, part of NATO. So that's the way
Speaker 14: to look at the territorial question. But the first step
Speaker 14: here is what Trump is focused on, is end the war.
Speaker 3: It's interesting to hear Zelensky appeal to not only Donald
Speaker 3: Trump but Shesian Ping for assistance here. And I wonder,
Speaker 3: if you close your eyes, can you see a Yalta
Speaker 3: conference with Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin, Xesian ping? How does
Speaker 3: this end? What formed are these tops tas?
Speaker 14: That would be a nightmare. That would be a nightmare
Speaker 14: if my eyes were closed, and that's what I saw,
Speaker 14: I'd be having a nightmare that there is no reason
Speaker 14: to be talking with Vladimir Putin about things that he
Speaker 14: should have no say over, and the future of Ukraine
Speaker 14: as an independent sovereign state, whether they joined the EU,
Speaker 14: whether they join NATO, whether there is any kind of
Speaker 14: foreign military presence on their territory. All of these things
Speaker 14: are up to Ukraine, They're not up to Russia. So
Speaker 14: we should not be negotiating about that. What we should
Speaker 14: be doing is exactly what President Trump is doing, which
Speaker 14: is sending a signal that we have plenty of time,
Speaker 14: plenty of capability, plenty of will, and this is not
Speaker 14: going well for Vladimir Putin, so he needs to end
Speaker 14: the war. That's it just ended, and then the we
Speaker 14: can move on from there. As for China, you mentioned
Speaker 14: that I think China has played a mixed role here.
Speaker 14: I don't buy the assessments that China is fully in
Speaker 14: Russia's court. They have not provided direct military aid to Russia.
Speaker 14: They probably want to take part in reconstruction in Ukraine.
Speaker 14: They do not like the comparison of Russia attacking a sovereign,
Speaker 14: independent country and taking territory, as compared to China with
Speaker 14: their efforts to retake Taiwan, which they see is very
Speaker 14: different from a legal perspective. So I think China is
Speaker 14: uncomfortable with Russia's behavior. They'd like to see it end
Speaker 14: as well, and they'd like to be positioned to have
Speaker 14: a relationship with Ukraine. So I think that Zelenski is
Speaker 14: actually smart to make a little bit of an appeal.
Speaker 4: To she as well.
Speaker 3: I've only got about a minute left, Ambassador. If indeed
Speaker 3: we're looking at the lines that we're going to have,
Speaker 3: at least in the initial phases of a ceasefire or
Speaker 3: negotiated settlement, here, should we expect a settlement to include
Speaker 3: NATO peacekeeping forces along Ukraine's eastern border.
Speaker 14: I don't think that's the way to think of it.
Speaker 14: We're not there yet. I don't think anyone has given
Speaker 14: this serious thought. I think putting Western forces along a
Speaker 14: ceasefire line facing Russian forces is not the way to go.
Speaker 14: I think there are many, many, many more Ukrainian forces
Speaker 14: that are capable of holding a line, and what we
Speaker 14: need is a presence in Ukraine as a deterrent force
Speaker 14: to deter Russia from further attacks aim at taking over Ukraine.
Speaker 14: And they could be anywhere in Ukraine, and they could
Speaker 14: participate in different roles such as air cover, air defense,
Speaker 14: including ground based air defense.
Speaker 3: They could be doing a lot to.
Speaker 14: Work with train support, equip empower Ukrainian forces who are
Speaker 14: already very capable and can hold a front line with
Speaker 14: that kind of support. So I would look at it
Speaker 14: more as a deterrence force. I look at it as
Speaker 14: a stepping stone to Ukraine NATO membership. We may not
Speaker 14: get there in a day, but we can get there
Speaker 14: over time. And I look at this as a way
Speaker 14: of stabilizing Europe again, because as long as Putin thinks
Speaker 14: he has more to gain, he'll keep fighting. And what
Speaker 14: we need to do is convince Putin there's nothing left
Speaker 14: to gain here.
Speaker 3: Always learned something when we talk to Kurt Volkler, ambassador,
Speaker 3: thank you. It's great to have you back. He's worked
Speaker 3: for Democrats and Republicans, former Special Representative for Ukraine negotiations,
Speaker 3: and the Trump administration is Ambassador to NATO in the
Speaker 3: second Obama term. Make that the first. Thanks for listening
Speaker 3: to the Balance of Power podcast. Make sure to subscribe
Speaker 3: if you haven't already, at Apple, Spotify, or wherever you
Speaker 3: get your podcasts, and you can find us live every
Speaker 3: weekday from Washington, DC at noontime Eastern at bloomberg dot com.