Speaker 1: Now from our nation's capital. This is Bloomberg Sound On.
Speaker 1: We will begin to examine evidence bearing on what President
Speaker 1: Trump and members of the White House staff news. Your
Speaker 1: President says something to the effect of, I'm the fing
Speaker 1: president taking up to the Capitol. Now Bloomberg sound On, Politics,
Speaker 1: Policy and perspective from DC's top name, We're going to
Speaker 1: go to the Capitol. He didn't look up from his
Speaker 1: phone and said something to the effect of there's a
Speaker 1: lot going on cast, but I don't know. Things might
Speaker 1: get real, real bad. On January six, Sloomberg Sound On
Speaker 1: with Joe Matthew on Bloomberg Radio, he lunged at the
Speaker 1: Secret Service agent who said no, Mr President. Welcome to
Speaker 1: the fastest hour in politics, with new revelations today from
Speaker 1: the January six committee startling testimony about what happened inside
Speaker 1: the West Wing and the motorcade before and during the
Speaker 1: attack on the Capitol, and also who asked for part
Speaker 1: will get you up to date and discuss the findings
Speaker 1: with Asha Rangappa from Yale University's Jackson Institute for Global Affairs,
Speaker 1: former Associate dean at Yale Law School. Later, the fallout
Speaker 1: from the Supreme Court's decision on Row. We'll discuss with
Speaker 1: Carry Franklin from the Center Reproductive Health Law and Policy
Speaker 1: at the u c l A School of Law, and
Speaker 1: our signature panel is in place on an important day.
Speaker 1: We'll talk all this out with Bloomberg Politics contributors Jeanie
Speaker 1: Chanzano and Rick Davis. The top witness before the January
Speaker 1: six committee today certainly made a lot of news. This
Speaker 1: was the executive assistant to Donald Trump's Chief of Staff,
Speaker 1: Mark Meadows, and her account of what happened in the
Speaker 1: days before and after the attack on the Capitol. It
Speaker 1: was enough to generate an unscheduled hearing. Let's listen, Miss Hutchinson.
Speaker 1: Did Rudy Giuliani ever suggest that he was interested in
Speaker 1: receiving a presidential pardon related to January six? He did,
Speaker 1: Miss Hutchinson. Did White House Chief of Staff Mark Meadows
Speaker 1: every indicate that he was interested in receiving a presidential
Speaker 1: pardon related to January six? Ms? Meadows did seek that pardon, Yes, ma'am,
Speaker 1: that's new information. Blueberg Government's Emily Wilkins was covering the
Speaker 1: hearing all day on Capitol Hill and joins us now
Speaker 1: with her take on some of this. Emily It's hard
Speaker 1: to overplay the significance of what we heard today. Yeah, Joe,
Speaker 1: this was incredibly explosive testimony. UM. There was a reason
Speaker 1: that the committee uh who had which had initially canceled
Speaker 1: all of its hearings for this week, decided that they
Speaker 1: would hold this one, that they announced it at the
Speaker 1: last minute, that they were initially quite secretive about the
Speaker 1: fact that Cassidy Hutchinson would be their singular witness here
Speaker 1: and would be testifying. UM. And it really was this
Speaker 1: inner look, this TikTok of what it was like in
Speaker 1: the day's leading up to January six, and what it
Speaker 1: was like to be around Trump and Trump's chief of
Speaker 1: staff Mark Meadows on January six. And there were just
Speaker 1: so many moments that we were previously unaware of that
Speaker 1: really illustrate the president's state of mind. The fact that
Speaker 1: he begged initially to go to the capital, and when
Speaker 1: Secret Service went let him, he tried to grab the
Speaker 1: steering wheel of the limo and try and push a
Speaker 1: Secret Service out of the way. The fact that Hutchinson
Speaker 1: said she heard this noise in her office and walked
Speaker 1: out to find a White House employee he who then
Speaker 1: gestured to a wall, and she saw that the wall
Speaker 1: had been smeared with ketchup, that there's a plaque shattered
Speaker 1: at the bottom, and was told that Trump was so
Speaker 1: upset over what it was going on that he threw
Speaker 1: his lunch. And perhaps most most shockingly, well several things.
Speaker 1: Most shockingly that when Trump was told that rioters were
Speaker 1: chanting and hang Mike Pence, Hang Mike Pence, that Trump
Speaker 1: was said, this is what Pence deserves, and that I
Speaker 1: think this is the final one, Joe, And I know,
Speaker 1: I know there's a lot here. But when Trump was
Speaker 1: told when he was doing the rally at the White House, um,
Speaker 1: he was told that there are people here that have
Speaker 1: weapons and he is his response was that's fine, They're
Speaker 1: not here to hurt me. And it really just shows
Speaker 1: what Trump's mindset was on that day, and as the
Speaker 1: riots before, during, and after attacking the Capitol. Emily, we
Speaker 1: don't know when the next hearing will be correct and
Speaker 1: after what we've seen today, I guess they could pop
Speaker 1: up at any time. We are expecting two more hearings
Speaker 1: to take place in mid July. I mean both the
Speaker 1: House and the Senate are most lawmakers of course. January,
Speaker 1: uh six excluded. Most of them are back home in
Speaker 1: their districts this week as well as next week. They'll
Speaker 1: be returning to d C around July eleventh, July twelve,
Speaker 1: so that's what we're expecting to see more. And of
Speaker 1: course the committee is trying to wrap their work up
Speaker 1: with the cut least a few months to spare before
Speaker 1: the November elections, just to try and give time for
Speaker 1: everything to settle and for Americans to digest it before
Speaker 1: they hit the ballot box. Fascinating day in Washington, that's
Speaker 1: for sure, Emily, thank you so much for the update.
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Governments and Only Wilkins, who will be guest hosting
Speaker 1: this broadcast later on this week. The panel used Cassidy
Speaker 1: Hutchinson to tell the story of what led to the
Speaker 1: events of January six, having already testified. She testified three times,
Speaker 1: of course, behind closed doors, and had already said that
Speaker 1: Rudy Giuliani and Mark Meadows discussed the idea of using
Speaker 1: alternate electors as far back as Thanksgiving, and the planning
Speaker 1: for January six started shortly after. Here's Hutchinson describing a
Speaker 1: conversation an important moment here with Rudy Giuliani on the
Speaker 1: night of January two. As Mr Giuliani and I were
Speaker 1: walking to his vehicles that evening, he looked at me
Speaker 1: and said something to the effect of, cast are you
Speaker 1: excited for the sixth? It's going to be a great day.
Speaker 1: I remember looking at him saying, Rudy, did you explain
Speaker 1: what's what's happening on the six uh And he had
Speaker 1: responded something to the effect of, We're going to the capital.
Speaker 1: It's going to be great. The President is going to
Speaker 1: be there, He's going to look powerful, he's going to
Speaker 1: be with the members, he's going to be with the senators.
Speaker 1: Talked to the Chief about it. Talked to the Chief
Speaker 1: about it. He knows about it. And did you go
Speaker 1: back then up to the West wing and tell Mr
Speaker 1: Meadows about your conversation with Mr Giuliani. I did. After
Speaker 1: Mr Giuliani had left the campus that evening, I went
Speaker 1: back up to our office and I found Mr Meadows
Speaker 1: in his office on the couch. He was scrolling through
Speaker 1: his phone. Remember leaning against the doorway and saying, I said,
Speaker 1: an interesting conversation, as Rudy Mark, it sounds like we're
Speaker 1: going to go to the capital. He didn't look up
Speaker 1: from his phone and said something to the effect of
Speaker 1: there's a lot going on, Gusts, but I don't know.
Speaker 1: Things might get real, real bad on January six things
Speaker 1: might get real, real bad. She would go on to describe,
Speaker 1: and I rate Donald Trump. Following his speech on the
Speaker 1: sixth on the Ellipse, when the Secret Service informed him
Speaker 1: that he would not be going to the capital as
Speaker 1: he wished, they did not have secure or access in place,
Speaker 1: Hutchinson says, the President lunged her word at the agent
Speaker 1: in the presidential limo, saying I'm the effing president. This
Speaker 1: is where we start with Asha Rangappa, senior lecturer at
Speaker 1: Yale University's Jackson Institute for Global Affairs and former special
Speaker 1: Agents in the New York Division of the FBI, A shot.
Speaker 1: It's great to have you with us here. The news
Speaker 1: media describing this as a bombshell today. Did you hear
Speaker 1: anything that changed the game and could lead to an
Speaker 1: indictment or criminal charges today? Yes, definitely, and thank you
Speaker 1: for having me on. I think what happened today, what
Speaker 1: was revealed today, actually expands the possible criminal exposure of
Speaker 1: Trump and his inner circle. And this is because until
Speaker 1: now we've really had two different pieces of the overall plot.
Speaker 1: One is what I call the legal blueprint. This was
Speaker 1: concocted by John Eastman. This involved the fake elector scheme
Speaker 1: from the states and the vice president rejecting the certified
Speaker 1: slate of electors from several states, um and somehow getting
Speaker 1: the election to Trump. Then we've had the mob and
Speaker 1: the militia groups who stormed the Capitol, and we've had
Speaker 1: a couple of those groups, the Oathkeepers and the Proud Boys,
Speaker 1: arrested and charged with seditious conspiracy, in addition to eight
Speaker 1: hundred other individuals. What today did was create a link
Speaker 1: between those two parts, and specifically to show that there
Speaker 1: was fore knowledge of violence on January six, and potentially
Speaker 1: that there was an intention for that violence to be
Speaker 1: used as part of the pressure campaign for Pence. Let's
Speaker 1: actually hear a piece of that. This is once again
Speaker 1: Cassidy Hutchinson talking about what they had learned. The President
Speaker 1: had been told that weapons were being brought into the
Speaker 1: area of the Ellipse, and some folks actually wouldn't even
Speaker 1: go through security because of what they were caring. Let's
Speaker 1: listen to that. I recall Tony and are having a
Speaker 1: conversation with Mark probably around ten am ten fifteen am,
Speaker 1: where I remember Tony mentioning knives, guns in the form
Speaker 1: of pistols and rifles, UM, bear spray body armor, spears
Speaker 1: and flag poles. Spears were one item, flag poles for
Speaker 1: one item, and then Tony had relieved me something to
Speaker 1: the effect of and these I think people are fastening
Speaker 1: spears onto the ends of flag poles, fastening spears under
Speaker 1: the ends of flagpoles. There's there is just incredible symbolism
Speaker 1: there for starters shop people using the American flag literally
Speaker 1: as a weapon. In that case, that's speaking to a
Speaker 1: point you just made. So they knew that violence was
Speaker 1: at hand, not only because of the planning but the
Speaker 1: very weapons they carried that day, including by the way,
Speaker 1: assault weapons UM. There were reports of people who had
Speaker 1: a R fifteens. I think the most damning part of
Speaker 1: this UH segment of the testimony was Hutchinson saying that
Speaker 1: Trump said, let them in. I know they're not here
Speaker 1: to hurt me. And you know in that statement there
Speaker 1: there's just so much packed in there. How does he
Speaker 1: know like he has he clearly has some idea that
Speaker 1: these people are safe there on his side. They're a
Speaker 1: part of his tribe. Um and also he wants them there,
Speaker 1: and he not only wants them as a part of
Speaker 1: his rally, but he indicates that he wants them to
Speaker 1: march on the Capitol. He wants to send them to
Speaker 1: the Capitol, knowing that they are armed with all kinds
Speaker 1: of weapons, including the most destructive assault weapons. UM. I
Speaker 1: thought he wanted to go as well. It was extraordinary.
Speaker 1: We know that the President wanted to go to the
Speaker 1: capital and deliver a speech and in fact personally enter
Speaker 1: the House chamber, which would have been an incredible moment,
Speaker 1: certainly as rioters were busy. If I don't know if
Speaker 1: this would have been carried out the same way, but
Speaker 1: he was. He was told no from the Secret Service. Asha,
Speaker 1: what's the next leg here? We just talked about a
Speaker 1: number of really important things that we learned today. We
Speaker 1: also know that the Department of Justice is watching these hearings.
Speaker 1: Are they building an indictment now? As Mark Meadows or
Speaker 1: any of the top White House officials we're talking about
Speaker 1: here going to jail. Well, let's remember that there are
Speaker 1: multiple phases of an investigation, and the indictment and charging
Speaker 1: is at the very end. Look, there is clearly probable
Speaker 1: cause to to investigate Trump, Meadows, Ethanan, all these people
Speaker 1: for a number of crimes ranging from conspiracy need to
Speaker 1: defer the United States, to conspiracy to obstruct an official
Speaker 1: proceeding too after today, in my opinion, incitement to insurrection
Speaker 1: and even seditious conspiracy. Um, they will need more evidence
Speaker 1: than what was just presented today. But I think we
Speaker 1: have to take the totality of the bigger picture that's
Speaker 1: being built by these hearings and what's coming out, and
Speaker 1: then the question is do they have enough to convince
Speaker 1: the jury beyond a reasonable doubt? And then is Mark
Speaker 1: Garland gonna charge? I think that investigation has to be underway, um,
Speaker 1: and they're definitely building. I mean, if they are, the
Speaker 1: evidence is very much mounting to make a compelling case.
Speaker 1: Along all of the charges that I just mentioned is
Speaker 1: one we haven't mentioned yet, and that's witness tampering. We
Speaker 1: don't know who got these messages, but Liz Cheney today
Speaker 1: shared a couple of messages. Uh, some of them were
Speaker 1: worked in text form. Another one was a phone call.
Speaker 1: You know, somebody wants me to let you know he's
Speaker 1: thinking about you. He knows you're loyal, he knows you'll
Speaker 1: do the right thing when you go in. We wouldn't
Speaker 1: want anything to happen to you. This is like watching
Speaker 1: uh a mob movie for crying out loud. How important
Speaker 1: is that charge on its own witness tampering. It's huge
Speaker 1: And you know we have seen this before. This was
Speaker 1: a part of the Mueller investigation. UH, witness tampering, obstruction. Um.
Speaker 1: You know, these are bread and butter crimes. They're often
Speaker 1: poo poodas process crimes, but they become part of the
Speaker 1: equation as well. And in trying to tamper with the witness,
Speaker 1: you are also demonstrating a consciousness of guilt. You know,
Speaker 1: if what you are doing subtly um, as you said, incode,
Speaker 1: is to try to dissuade or persuade the witness to
Speaker 1: be favorable to you or the people around you, it's
Speaker 1: because you have something to hide. So and we we've
Speaker 1: seen that already with the you know, wanting to be
Speaker 1: on the pardon list preemptively so um. But you know,
Speaker 1: those process crimes will come into play, and you know,
Speaker 1: I have a sneaking feeling that that we'll see some
Speaker 1: possible obstruction behavior when when all is said and done
Speaker 1: after after the hearings. Uh, I'm glad you could join us.
Speaker 1: I appreciate your insights here. Let's let's talk as we
Speaker 1: learn more. Ah show Rangappa of Yale University's Jackson Institute
Speaker 1: for Global Affairs, former special agent here in the New
Speaker 1: York FBI. I'm Joe Matthew in New York at Bloomberg
Speaker 1: World Headquarters, joined in studio by Rick Davis. Of course,
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Politics contributor Jeanie Chanzano is also with us as
Speaker 1: we assemble our panel here for an extended conversation on
Speaker 1: an important day. First of all, great to have both
Speaker 1: of you with us here. We couldn't do this without you.
Speaker 1: I want you to hear. Uh. This one piece of
Speaker 1: the hearing today that seems to be generating the most news,
Speaker 1: even if it's not the most important. This idea of
Speaker 1: the President lunging not at the wheel but at a
Speaker 1: secret service agent. He had just done the speech on
Speaker 1: the ellipse on January six. He thought he was on
Speaker 1: his way up to the capital along with everyone else
Speaker 1: who was there, and he was told no, here's the story.
Speaker 1: When the President got in the beast, he was under
Speaker 1: the impression from Mr Meadows that the off the record
Speaker 1: movement to the Capitol was still possible and likely to happen,
Speaker 1: but that Bobby had more information. So once the President
Speaker 1: had gotten into the vehicle with Bobby, he thought that
Speaker 1: they were going up to the Capitol, and when Bobby
Speaker 1: had related to him, we're not. We don't have the
Speaker 1: assets to do it. It's not secure. We're going back
Speaker 1: to the West wing. The President had very strong, very
Speaker 1: angry response to that. Um Tony described him as being irate.
Speaker 1: The President said something to the effect of I'm the
Speaker 1: fving President. Take me up to the capital now, to
Speaker 1: which Bobby responded, sir, we have to go back to
Speaker 1: the west wing. The President reached up towards the front
Speaker 1: of the vehicle to grab at the steering wheel. Mr
Speaker 1: Angel grabbed his arm, said sorry, you need to take
Speaker 1: your hand off the steering wheel. We're going back to
Speaker 1: the west wing. We're not going to the capital. Mr
Speaker 1: Trump then used his free hand to lunge towards Bobby
Speaker 1: Angle and Mr. When Mr Ronado had recounted this story
Speaker 1: to me, he had motioned towards his clasicals that would
Speaker 1: be his collar bone, Cassidy Hutchinson. I wonder if she
Speaker 1: becomes a household name now Rick Davis. Uh, my goodness,
Speaker 1: her life just changed. First of all, the witness, Why
Speaker 1: do you think they didn't bring her out on the
Speaker 1: first day of the first night. Well, the only thing
Speaker 1: I can tell is that, um, some of this testimony
Speaker 1: she's already given to the committee, so they knew how
Speaker 1: explosive the information was. And um, the only thing I've
Speaker 1: noticed in the reporting is that she recently got new counsel,
Speaker 1: So it may be that the lawyers that were now
Speaker 1: representing her thought that she would be better off actually
Speaker 1: making a public disclosure of this information. Uh. The reality
Speaker 1: is that it does remind us that this committee has
Speaker 1: not done with their job. There's an enormous amount of information,
Speaker 1: some of it is highly explosive, like today's hearing, and
Speaker 1: that their their job is going to continue for some time.
Speaker 1: And we talked so much right now about the Justice
Speaker 1: Department picking up. But I want to see where this
Speaker 1: leads us, and I want to see where this committee
Speaker 1: brings us, because they've done what I think is an
Speaker 1: extraordinary job so far of painting a picture, creating a
Speaker 1: narrative that is understandable and and and very nerve racking
Speaker 1: when you think that this is the kind of contact
Speaker 1: the conduct the President United States has exhibited in an
Speaker 1: effort to try an overturn election that he lost. Jennie,
Speaker 1: people were glued to this today because it's highly entertaining.
Speaker 1: I know that it's not probably a very popular thing
Speaker 1: to say, we're journalists here and we're covering this story.
Speaker 1: But these are wild stories, and anyone would stop and say,
Speaker 1: my god, what did you hear? That they're gonna be
Speaker 1: talking about it over dinner and at work tomorrow. I
Speaker 1: guess I'm just wondering, is that what we had today
Speaker 1: or was this a game changing day of testimony that
Speaker 1: builds the criminal case. It was a game changing day.
Speaker 1: And and just to follow up on what Rick was saying, Um,
Speaker 1: she not only got new counsel, but we understand her
Speaker 1: fourth death position was last week, and they were concerned
Speaker 1: about the danger she was in, the danger to her
Speaker 1: she was in for what she knew, and that's why
Speaker 1: they had her testify live today. And I think it
Speaker 1: also ties into what Liz Cheney did at the end,
Speaker 1: which was talk about witness tampering. I think there's a
Speaker 1: real concern that they have witnesses who are being tampered with.
Speaker 1: And you know, you know, I know both you and
Speaker 1: Rick are loyal to me and you'll do the right thing.
Speaker 1: So I feel confident about that, Joe. But nothing's going
Speaker 1: to happen to that pretty face. Although I don't know,
Speaker 1: ask Rick, he's onze here. I trust you. But but
Speaker 1: can I just say I I just want to say
Speaker 1: that you know this young woman, the bravery she showed
Speaker 1: today to come out publicly, she is if you go
Speaker 1: into the White House and as she did at this level,
Speaker 1: you are a Trump loyalist. He has been attacking her
Speaker 1: already on truth social She's done what people like Pat
Speaker 1: Zippoloni and these other men in the White House won't do.
Speaker 1: And I think hopefully this changes some minds. But she
Speaker 1: deserves a lot of credit for having the courage to
Speaker 1: go out today and say what she did, because she
Speaker 1: is very much alone amongst Trump loyalists and doing this
Speaker 1: At this point, Liz Cheney shared two messages that she
Speaker 1: said witnesses got before they were deposed. She did not
Speaker 1: name those witnesses. I'd just love to know who we're
Speaker 1: talking about here, but they shared the messages. These are
Speaker 1: text messages presumably or emails that they got beforehand. These
Speaker 1: are direct quotes. What they said to me is, as
Speaker 1: long as I continue to be a team player, they
Speaker 1: know that I'm on the team and I'm doing the
Speaker 1: right thing, I'm protecting who I need to protect, I'll
Speaker 1: continue to stay in the good graces in Trump world.
Speaker 1: Uh that's the first text. The next one. They've reminded
Speaker 1: me a couple of times Trump does read transcripts, and
Speaker 1: just keep that in mind, as I proceved through my
Speaker 1: depositions and interviews with the committee, Rick, you really think
Speaker 1: Donald Trump's hanging around reading transcripts for one? But two?
Speaker 1: How important is the witness tampering component of this case? Yeah,
Speaker 1: I mean it just reminds me of sort of an
Speaker 1: ongoing criminal enterprise. Right. It doesn't sound like a white
Speaker 1: house that's that's that's supposed to uphold the democratic norms
Speaker 1: of our society. It sounds like the mob movie. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's a component movie, and and and Donald Trump is
Speaker 1: the mob boss and and and Honestly, I mean, I
Speaker 1: don't know how you can take it any other way.
Speaker 1: We want to believe something different, right, we really do
Speaker 1: want there to be a happy ending here, but there's
Speaker 1: not gonna be one. And and whatever ultimately happens, I
Speaker 1: think it's incredibly important that that Cassie Hutchison major testimony
Speaker 1: public that that this committee is informing the public, they're
Speaker 1: setting a historical record. A lot of people ask me,
Speaker 1: what do think it's gonna come out of this, and
Speaker 1: in the reality is if nothing comes out of it
Speaker 1: other than the fact that we now have a historical
Speaker 1: record that every generation can look and say, you know what,
Speaker 1: our democracy was under attack by President United States. Here
Speaker 1: are the details associated with there. They're they're they're the
Speaker 1: facts of the case. And we should learn from this
Speaker 1: House leader though, who's saying that this is illegitimate, unconstitutional,
Speaker 1: and don't listen to what they're saying. Yeah, and and
Speaker 1: these are the same people who evidently we're gonna meet
Speaker 1: Donald Trump at the door of the House of Representatives
Speaker 1: and walking down to disrupt an election election count. So
Speaker 1: I mean, like, consider the source. I mean, honestly, I
Speaker 1: don't think we're done yet. As I said earlier, I
Speaker 1: think this committee's got work to do. We have not
Speaker 1: heard about what kind of conducts some of these House
Speaker 1: Republicans were doing. Were they showing some of these marauders
Speaker 1: of the capital ways to get around in advance of
Speaker 1: this siege on on August or on January six? So
Speaker 1: I mean, like, that's why I think that we're not
Speaker 1: going to really understand the full picture of the conspiracy
Speaker 1: until this committee ends, And whether or not the Justice
Speaker 1: Department picks it up is going to be up to them.
Speaker 1: But at least the American public will know the facts.
Speaker 1: And and Cassie Hutchinson today did a real good job
Speaker 1: for our democracy to lay it out there. Jene, How
Speaker 1: does the committee maintain credibility to do what just described here?
Speaker 1: When when Republicans who are still serving, including the man
Speaker 1: who could be the former speaker, say that this is
Speaker 1: illegitimate tell people not to believe they're findings. Well, you know,
Speaker 1: time is not on the committee side. But I give
Speaker 1: them so much credit for what they have done so far.
Speaker 1: And I do think that Donald Trump is right at
Speaker 1: this point when he says that Kevin McCarthy made a
Speaker 1: big mistake by not seating people. One thing that has
Speaker 1: happened with this committee is they've been able to tell
Speaker 1: a story. They haven't gotten muddled up with back and
Speaker 1: forth or partisan bickering or any of that, and so
Speaker 1: you know, this has really worked to their advantage. And
Speaker 1: I think the Committee is absolutely on the right track.
Speaker 1: If the Republicans take the House, you know, obviously their
Speaker 1: work is going to have to be done by that point.
Speaker 1: But you know, I do think just back to this,
Speaker 1: you know, the sort of mob component of this. This
Speaker 1: is very much like what Michael Cohen described when he
Speaker 1: talked very early on about how Donald Trump operates. It
Speaker 1: was never a straight out don't do this or I'll
Speaker 1: do this. It was these threats, and it makes it
Speaker 1: difficult then to convict somebody. And that's where I think
Speaker 1: some of this legal and criminal exposure gets difficult for
Speaker 1: somebody like a Merrick Garland. I think people like you know,
Speaker 1: Mark Meadows and others, they're exposed. I'm not sure at
Speaker 1: this point that Trump is exposed yet, but I think
Speaker 1: the Committee is working up to that, and they may
Speaker 1: find themselves there if this continues, and particularly if more
Speaker 1: Republicans are moved to come out by what happened today.
Speaker 1: We'll see about that. Of course, we'll talk about it
Speaker 1: if and when it happens here on sound On the
Speaker 1: panel stays with us Rick and Jeanie for the hour.
Speaker 1: As we turn next to the fallout from Row. This
Speaker 1: is Bloomberg. One of the first things President Biden said
Speaker 1: after the Supreme Court's ruling on Roe v. Wade on
Speaker 1: Friday was the need for a new task force that
Speaker 1: he was going to create two investigate what needed to
Speaker 1: be done to protect women across the country, ensure their
Speaker 1: ability to travel, and even ensure their access to prescribed medications. Today,
Speaker 1: the Secretary of Health and Human Services, Javier but Sarah,
Speaker 1: was asked about this in testimony on Capitol Hill. The
Speaker 1: outlined actions that his department is taking. They would be
Speaker 1: the overseers of such a task force here in the
Speaker 1: wake of what he called the despicable court ruling. Arius
Speaker 1: to every American who's impacted, my apologies today, As I said,
Speaker 1: we can't tell you there's a silver bullet. But what
Speaker 1: I am saying to you is that the more we dig,
Speaker 1: we will do everything we can with what we find
Speaker 1: to make sure we're protecting women's reproductive health care services.
Speaker 1: It takes a little time because we want to do
Speaker 1: it right and we want to do it acording to
Speaker 1: the law. This is where we begin with Carry Franklin,
Speaker 1: who's joining us from the Center on Reproductive Health Law
Speaker 1: and Policy at the u c l A School of Law. Carry,
Speaker 1: it's great to have you here. Your thoughts on this
Speaker 1: to begin with on on the extent that the Biden
Speaker 1: administration can actually help on a federal level women who
Speaker 1: are impacted by this decision. Are are they promising too much? Well?
Speaker 1: I think the Secretary of Health and Human Services was
Speaker 1: careful to say they're looking into it. They don't know
Speaker 1: exactly what they'll be able to do. I do think
Speaker 1: they'll be able to move forward with medication abortion and
Speaker 1: the f d A saying that this medication regime is safe,
Speaker 1: it's been proven safe, and state laws to the contrary
Speaker 1: but bar these abortion pills because on the fury that
Speaker 1: they're unsafe, UH conflicts with federal law, and it's perhaps
Speaker 1: preempted by the FDA. That would be a move the
Speaker 1: federal government could make. It's not clear what else they
Speaker 1: can do. Can you explain that much? Though? The idea
Speaker 1: you that UH, this medication by mail, if I should
Speaker 1: be calling it, that is different than getting an abortion
Speaker 1: procedure in that state. How would how would states delineate
Speaker 1: the difference. Well, some states have passed laws are considering
Speaker 1: laws that bar medication abortion on the grounds that it's unsafe,
Speaker 1: And the FDA has studied this and said, that's simply
Speaker 1: not true. We have years and years of data and
Speaker 1: evidence showing that, uh, these medications are safe, and we
Speaker 1: want to preempt those state laws, which the federal government
Speaker 1: and federal law can do to say that states are
Speaker 1: not able to make those rulings. I think the problem is,
Speaker 1: uh that a state could say, Okay, well we we
Speaker 1: could even concede that these pills are safe, but they
Speaker 1: bar our criminal abortion. Where we were barring abortion medication
Speaker 1: for criminal reasons. And it's not clear can be done
Speaker 1: well that that, And it sure seems like that's where
Speaker 1: we're heading in some states here. My goodness, your neighbor
Speaker 1: in Texas could turn you in for taking that medication, right.
Speaker 1: That's that's how I understand the law there. Yes, Texas
Speaker 1: has passed this law that not just anyone in Texan,
Speaker 1: but but anyone in the country or anywhere presumably could
Speaker 1: be liable under this Texas law. That's why we've seen
Speaker 1: a lot of states in recent days on the coasts
Speaker 1: passing laws saying we're not going to participate. We're not
Speaker 1: going to cooperate with these vigilante and other state laws
Speaker 1: that try to reach beyond borders into California, into Massachusetts
Speaker 1: to try to capture people there, uh and punish people
Speaker 1: for activity that goes on lawfully in those other states. Rry,
Speaker 1: I'd love your legal view on what's happening in courts
Speaker 1: since Friday, because you know, people saw trigger laws taking
Speaker 1: effect almost immediately in some states, and we saw judges
Speaker 1: temporarily block abortion bands in Louisiana, in Utah, while a
Speaker 1: federal court, as I read from the Associated Press in
Speaker 1: South Carolina, says a law restricting the procedure after six
Speaker 1: weeks would take effect there immediately. Uh. As this now
Speaker 1: goes to basically courthouses, state level court houses around the country. Here,
Speaker 1: is there going to be a slower role on these
Speaker 1: trigger laws taking effects as judges consider their impact. Perhaps?
Speaker 1: I mean, we've just opened a Pandora's box of legal
Speaker 1: questions on every issue you can imagine, and this will
Speaker 1: be one of them. So one thing that some states
Speaker 1: are trying to do is put into effect law old,
Speaker 1: old laws that row prevented from going into effect, and
Speaker 1: some courts are saying, no, those laws are anequated or
Speaker 1: those laws are fake. They don't make clear what procedures
Speaker 1: are allowed, and we can't have laws like that, so
Speaker 1: they're stopping those laws. There also maybe provisions in state
Speaker 1: law under state constitutions that bar certain of these restrictions
Speaker 1: that states are trying to put in. And that's what
Speaker 1: the state courts are trying to figure out right now,
Speaker 1: now that the federal protection has gone what kind of
Speaker 1: protections exist under state law that might bar these recent
Speaker 1: attempts by anti abortion states to criminalize abortion. So I
Speaker 1: guess they'll have hearings on these trigger laws and we
Speaker 1: could find ourselves then carry by the end of the summer,
Speaker 1: I'm assuming with thirteen states having implemented them, is that
Speaker 1: your expectations we could We absolutely quite a few states
Speaker 1: I believe will have bands in place, uh within months. Lastly,
Speaker 1: then the states that are actually writing laws to protect
Speaker 1: women coming from other states, what prevents them from being
Speaker 1: charged with a crime when they go home now much? Uh?
Speaker 1: You know, California and Massachusetts, Illinois, New York, they're trying
Speaker 1: to pass protections. Those protections can protect their the providers,
Speaker 1: and it can protect people in California and Massachusetts wherever
Speaker 1: um uh from prosecution in these other states. It can
Speaker 1: say we're not going to revoke your licenses. I would say,
Speaker 1: we're not going to pantalyze anyone who comes here. But
Speaker 1: once those people return to their home states where abortion
Speaker 1: is criminalized, it's not clear that California could do anything
Speaker 1: to help them, right. Yeah, that's We spoke last evening
Speaker 1: with the Attorney general from Delaware who said basically the
Speaker 1: same thing. It's it strikes me that we're about to
Speaker 1: enter a world where there's a lot of secret travel
Speaker 1: going on. Carrie, thank you for your insights. We'd like
Speaker 1: to stay in touch with you on this story because
Speaker 1: God knows it's going to be unfolding and evolving over
Speaker 1: weeks and months. I think we just established Carrie Franklin
Speaker 1: is a director the Center of Reproductive Health Law Policy
Speaker 1: you see l a school of law. And we'll reassemble
Speaker 1: the panel next on this. Rick Davis and Jeannie Chanzano
Speaker 1: are with us. Are Bloomberg Politics contributors with some very
Speaker 1: difficult debates to be had around all of this. That's
Speaker 1: why they're here. Of course, we'll check traffic and the
Speaker 1: markets on the way for you as well. On the
Speaker 1: fastest hour in politics. Thanks for spending part of your
Speaker 1: Tuesday with us. I'm Joe Matthew in New York. This
Speaker 1: is Bloomberg. This is Bloomberg. So long with Joe Matthew
Speaker 1: on Bloomberg Radio. The statement is out from the White House,
Speaker 1: which makes things look and feel a lot more official.
Speaker 1: Having read the headline already on the terminal, Finland Sweden
Speaker 1: closer to joining NATO with Turkey deal. It was important
Speaker 1: today from President Biden sit down with President Urdawan of Turkey.
Speaker 1: This of course as they arrived in Madrid for the
Speaker 1: NATO summit on the heels of the G seven that
Speaker 1: was happening in Germany. These are coming back to back.
Speaker 1: It's not just you. There are two different major summits
Speaker 1: going on here and looks like the meeting works. Statement
Speaker 1: just out from the White House Joe Biden, I congratulate
Speaker 1: a Turkey, Finland and Sweden on signing a trilateral memorandum
Speaker 1: which paves the way for allies to invite Finland and
Speaker 1: Sweden to join NATO at the Madrid summit. And so
Speaker 1: we reassembled our panel Genie Chanzano and Rick Davis, Bloomberg
Speaker 1: Politics contributors. Genie, this is a pretty major development here
Speaker 1: and would in fact be something to show for the
Speaker 1: summit that's taking place, A significant victory for NATO, for
Speaker 1: Joe Biden. Um, the White House has got to be very,
Speaker 1: very pleased by this, and it really does. You know,
Speaker 1: it is a deliverable um and a big one for
Speaker 1: this summit. And you know, it's it's a significant expansion
Speaker 1: of NATO, the largest we've seen in years. And it
Speaker 1: also shows how much Putin has lost. I mean, the
Speaker 1: whole reason he went into Ukraine, well, one of the
Speaker 1: major reasons was to you know, restrict this NATO expansion,
Speaker 1: and it has now come on his doorstep. Exactly what
Speaker 1: he feared most has now happened. So this is a
Speaker 1: huge victory for the Biden administration. It's not a done deal.
Speaker 1: We should let everyone know here, Rick, But boy, this
Speaker 1: is the last thing I'm assuming Vladimir Putin saw happening
Speaker 1: when he started all. Yeah, I think this is a
Speaker 1: major strategic error by Vladimir Putin. You know, his incursion
Speaker 1: into the Ukraine was supposed to restore the Motherland, and
Speaker 1: you know, create this this broader you know, Russia into
Speaker 1: the East. And and the reality is, uh, he's strengthened NATO.
Speaker 1: He's I mean, like no better example that than Finland
Speaker 1: and Sweden, you know, Helsinki and Stockholm joining the team, right,
Speaker 1: Sweden who was known for its independence for three years. Uh.
Speaker 1: And and and so that's one thing too. I mean,
Speaker 1: there's already a hundred thousand new troops in the border
Speaker 1: of NATO countries next to Russia. So that's actually worst
Speaker 1: news even for Vladimir Putin. And an agreement coming out
Speaker 1: of this weekend's discovered this week's discussions is to move
Speaker 1: that to three hundred thousand NATO troops. I mean, so
Speaker 1: the idea that he's like, you know, uh taking away
Speaker 1: the heft of NATO has resulted in exactly the opposite.
Speaker 1: And and so I don't know how he actually rationalizes
Speaker 1: at himself, but uh, it's really bad news for vlad Yeah. Well,
Speaker 1: so that said, he's going to steam over this tonight
Speaker 1: or has been. I'm assuming maybe he'll throw a plate
Speaker 1: with ketchup at the wall, Genie. But I'm trying to
Speaker 1: figure out how he'll interpret this. If if a couple
Speaker 1: of Big twenty nine's would be seen as escalatory. What
Speaker 1: is this going to do? Well? I like how Rick
Speaker 1: calls him lad. That might make him throw catch up
Speaker 1: against the wall. Um, you know he I think he's
Speaker 1: going to try to use this to his advantage, and
Speaker 1: you could see playing Devil's advocate how that works. He
Speaker 1: tells people in Russia that this is exactly what I
Speaker 1: told you was happening. NATO is advancing to our borders.
Speaker 1: You know, what would they think if we were creeping
Speaker 1: into Canada against the United States are up by Mexico.
Speaker 1: This is what they're doing. So in some ways it
Speaker 1: does work. You could see how he will work this
Speaker 1: to his advantage and say, this is all the more
Speaker 1: reason we need to fight. We need to continue and
Speaker 1: increase our efforts visa the Ukraine because they're doing exactly
Speaker 1: what I warned you about there, trying to destroy us
Speaker 1: in our way of life, and this is a perfect
Speaker 1: example of that, the West against the East. Does he
Speaker 1: use this as a justification to attack supply lines or
Speaker 1: somehow expand this beyond the borders of Ukraine, Rick or
Speaker 1: more heavily bombard Kiev, where he knows our diplomatic Corps
Speaker 1: is located. Well, he's he's bombarding Keep now, so that's
Speaker 1: already happening. Um, it escalates a lot if he goes
Speaker 1: outside of the Ukraine conflict, especially if it touches any
Speaker 1: NATO country, where all of NATO would then be seen
Speaker 1: to to get back into this this war. I would
Speaker 1: say one thing, he may be able to spin it
Speaker 1: in Russia, but there are a hundred countries that are
Speaker 1: not part of the sanction regime now. And part of
Speaker 1: the message that this NATO Summit is sending a along
Speaker 1: with the Seventh Summit, is that you need to get
Speaker 1: on board with the rest of this This this is massive.
Speaker 1: Billions of dollars are going to go to reconstruction in Ukraine,
Speaker 1: billions of dollars going to go to the defense of Ukraine.
Speaker 1: UM other other countries like Finland and Sweden joining NATO.
Speaker 1: That's a message to these other countries that you need
Speaker 1: to get on board and start taking sides. And and
Speaker 1: they're they're not going to let these independent countries who
Speaker 1: have not put on sanctions get away with it. This
Speaker 1: is going to be the next phase of the development
Speaker 1: of this war. So when we talk about new sanctions,
Speaker 1: then Genie, it's a new scale of sanctions. I mean,
Speaker 1: or will we be in a situation where Jake Sullivan
Speaker 1: is is flying around the world trying to button up
Speaker 1: the rest of those countries. Yeah, I mean they're doing
Speaker 1: that now. They would absolutely like to do that. And
Speaker 1: I was struck by the way as as Jake Sullivan
Speaker 1: does his work that he very clearly tried to get
Speaker 1: McCrone out of the way of the cameras when McCrone
Speaker 1: was explaining to Biden that he had spoken with with
Speaker 1: with uh MBS and they didn't have more oil to produce.
Speaker 1: So I think a very interesting development is going to
Speaker 1: be what happens with the President's trip, because Russia knows,
Speaker 1: I mean, they want this thing to last. They want
Speaker 1: to outlast the United States and NATO and the West
Speaker 1: keep this going so domestically these alliances fall apart and
Speaker 1: the politics become too hard. The President is trying to
Speaker 1: buttress that with the sanctions, decreasing oil prices and those
Speaker 1: kinds of things, but he has his work cut out
Speaker 1: for him. If you just listen to that little clip
Speaker 1: with McCrone telling Biden, you're not going to be able
Speaker 1: to get them to produce more because they don't have
Speaker 1: more to produce. I think that's a big morning sign.
Speaker 1: Is that true? Rick, the President wouldn't go there unless
Speaker 1: there was more oil. Oh yeah, I think that that
Speaker 1: they're gonna find oil under any rock they can. They're
Speaker 1: going to increase production as much as they can. It's
Speaker 1: a short term thing, right, I mean, really not talking
Speaker 1: about anything other than getting it through the summer so
Speaker 1: that these prices, gas prices don't increase. There's already some
Speaker 1: evidence that they're decreasing sing and so uh and and
Speaker 1: by the way, this is a big part of the
Speaker 1: secondary sanctions that that we were just talking about. The
Speaker 1: Middle East is still doing business with Russia. And so
Speaker 1: in addition to saying, hey, we we need your oil,
Speaker 1: they're gonna say we need your support. And I'm not
Speaker 1: sure it's a quid pro quote, but there's gonna be
Speaker 1: a lot of heavy pressure in that regard. For five
Speaker 1: months into this genie, we spoke yesterday a bit about
Speaker 1: the potential for war fatigue, for exhaustion here uh by Americans.
Speaker 1: Five months in extend that to November, what's this conversation
Speaker 1: gonna feel like? You know, I don't think we know you,
Speaker 1: I think so far Americans have been united. I give
Speaker 1: the Biden administration a lot of kudos for the way
Speaker 1: they have managed this so far. But you know, I
Speaker 1: am a little concerned about that. You know, will be
Speaker 1: there as long as it takes. We're going to get
Speaker 1: this over by the end of the year. Those red
Speaker 1: lines can be a bit damaging and a bit dangerous,
Speaker 1: But so far the American public has been in support.
Speaker 1: The one real key issue I think here is does
Speaker 1: at some point this argument that you're spending billions of
Speaker 1: dollars overseas and yet we are suffering at home come
Speaker 1: back to her politically, and that's something the White House
Speaker 1: is going to have to address. They've got to keep
Speaker 1: making the case that this is an our interest, not
Speaker 1: the interests of other people somewhere else that you know
Speaker 1: very little about. Spending time with Rick and Genie. In
Speaker 1: the remaining moments of our hour here today, the fastest
Speaker 1: hour in politics, will end where we began with the hearing,
Speaker 1: a surprise hearing of the January six Committee, and many
Speaker 1: references throughout this hour to throw and catch up at
Speaker 1: the wall. So let's listen to what we actually heard
Speaker 1: today Cassidy Hutchinson talking about Uh, remember when the billboard
Speaker 1: the Attorney General did this interview with the AP and
Speaker 1: said that he couldn't find any evidence that the election
Speaker 1: was not stolen. You wonder what happened that day inside
Speaker 1: the West Wing, inside the Residents or the oval. Cassidy
Speaker 1: Hutchinson brought us there. After Mark had returned, I left
Speaker 1: the office and went down to the dining room, and
Speaker 1: I noticed that the door was propped open and the
Speaker 1: valet was inside the dining room changing the tablecloth off
Speaker 1: of the dining room table. He motioned for me to
Speaker 1: come in and then pointed towards the front of the room,
Speaker 1: near the fireplace, mantel and the TV, where I first
Speaker 1: noticed there was catchup dripping down the wall, and there's
Speaker 1: a shattered porcelain plate on the floor. The valet had
Speaker 1: articulated that the President was extremely angry at the Attorney
Speaker 1: General's AP interview and had thrown his lunch against the
Speaker 1: wall um, which was causing them to have to clean up.
Speaker 1: So I grabbed a towel and started wiping the catch
Speaker 1: up off of the wall to help the valet out um,
Speaker 1: and he said something to the effect of he's really
Speaker 1: ticked off about this. I would stay clear of him
Speaker 1: for right now. He's really really ticked off about this
Speaker 1: right now. Not exactly aligning with the current environment when
Speaker 1: it comes to office politics, Rick Davis. But we we
Speaker 1: we know this kind of rings true because well, he
Speaker 1: puts ketch up on everything. The man is a catchup fanatic.
Speaker 1: And uh and it's sad m I served in the
Speaker 1: White House with Ron Reagan, who never took his jacket
Speaker 1: off in the Oval office because he felt that it
Speaker 1: required that level of uh, distinguished behavior. And and here's
Speaker 1: a president who's throwing plates against the wall. You know,
Speaker 1: those plates are owned by the American people, Mr President.
Speaker 1: I mean, like you know, you're you're these are not
Speaker 1: yours to break. So uh, I don't know. I mean,
Speaker 1: of all the incursions that that Donald Trump did while
Speaker 1: president United States, this is probably one of the minor ones,
Speaker 1: but it is one of the more entertaining ones. Well,
Speaker 1: I suppose there we go again with that. Jennie. She
Speaker 1: said it wasn't the first time he was throwing plates
Speaker 1: around the White House. What it's stunning, and you know,
Speaker 1: you listen to it, it's stunning. On the one hand,
Speaker 1: it's not so stunning on the other And one thing
Speaker 1: I kept trying to understand was he's grabbing the wheel.
Speaker 1: What was he going to do if he got to
Speaker 1: the Capitol? On January six, Sanity all around the dog
Speaker 1: that caught the car Rick and Jeannie with us here
Speaker 1: our panel on a Great Sound on edition live from
Speaker 1: World Headquarters in New York passed the catch up. This
Speaker 1: is Bloomberg