Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, Podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch Just Live weekdays at
Speaker 1: noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then Roudoo with the Bloomberg
Speaker 1: Business App. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts,
Speaker 1: or watch us live on YouTube.
Speaker 2: Welcome to the Monday edition of Balance of Power here
Speaker 2: on Bloomberg TV and Radio. Indeed, I'm Joe Matthew alongside
Speaker 2: Kaylee Lines in Washington with something to show for their work. Kayleie,
Speaker 2: the bills pass the House and they're headed for the
Speaker 2: Senate tomorrow, and that includes TikTok. We've spent a lot
Speaker 2: of time talking about Ukraine in Israel. The divestor band
Speaker 2: TikTok bill is part of the so called sidecar that
Speaker 2: will all.
Speaker 3: Be stitched together here and sent to the Senate.
Speaker 2: I told my sixteen year old over the weekend that
Speaker 2: it was entirely possible now they're going to ban TikTok
Speaker 2: if they couldn't find a buyer, and he did not
Speaker 2: believe me.
Speaker 3: He's tired of hearing that.
Speaker 4: Well, we've heard it repeatedly for some time now, and
Speaker 4: to this point, Bite Dance's lobbying efforts against any kind
Speaker 4: of bill that was divested or band We're working until
Speaker 4: I guess maybe they stopped working, because we now have
Speaker 4: a piece of legislation that is very likely to pass
Speaker 4: the Senate and get the signature from President Biden. Although
Speaker 4: there is a longer window here for that divestiture. Initially
Speaker 4: the bill that first passed the House was six months.
Speaker 4: Now they're going to have up to a year, that's right.
Speaker 4: The question is does Bite Dance use that year to
Speaker 4: actually try to find a buyer for its US TikTok
Speaker 4: arm or is it just going to use that year
Speaker 4: fighting this thing out in court.
Speaker 2: Well, we know that the court's coming. This is a
Speaker 2: question of whether I guess they try both, because also
Speaker 2: the Chinese government has to sign off on this as well. Right,
Speaker 2: And we've got a lot of big questions to.
Speaker 4: Ask about this, yes, and we have some of them
Speaker 4: now for Mike Shepherd, who is a senior editor for
Speaker 4: Technology and Strategic Industries here in Washington and is joining
Speaker 4: us in studios. So, Mike, if we could first just
Speaker 4: look at the way that TikTok or Byte Dance specifically
Speaker 4: is likely to respond. Already, there's signaling nope, we're taking
Speaker 4: this to court. We are not going to go down
Speaker 4: without a fight.
Speaker 5: Essentially, you're right, Key, And in fact, they made clear
Speaker 5: in their statement overnight while we were preparing to get
Speaker 5: a good night's rest for today in this big week
Speaker 5: of news, that they were going to fight this in
Speaker 5: court pretty much as soon as President Joe Biden signs it,
Speaker 5: as soon as the ink is dry on his signature.
Speaker 5: And they are making clear that this fight will be
Speaker 5: waged on First Amendment grounds too. They see this as
Speaker 5: an infringement of people's freedom of expression and also the
Speaker 5: impact on businesses. There are a lot of small businesses
Speaker 5: that use TikTok to reach niche audiences of consumers, and
Speaker 5: so their argument is going to be on the speech
Speaker 5: grounds and then also in the business grounds as well.
Speaker 2: So a year is the timeline, Could the legal effort
Speaker 2: last longer than that, or maybe a better way of
Speaker 2: asking it, could the legal effort last longer than November?
Speaker 2: Because a lot of this is going to key off
Speaker 2: of who wins the select in terms of the long game.
Speaker 5: Well, as we've seen in previous court battles involving companies
Speaker 5: and politicians and the government of course, lawyers have a
Speaker 5: superpower in being able to drag things out. In fact,
Speaker 5: if you look at Donald Trump we've been talking about
Speaker 5: his legal proceedings, the cases, each of those cases has
Speaker 5: been kicked down the road to some degree or another.
Speaker 5: And with so much at stake here, and especially given
Speaker 5: not only the national security grounds that the US government
Speaker 5: is alleging are at stake in this case, but also
Speaker 5: the geopolitical and diplomatic stakes with China, this is a
Speaker 5: very sensitive case and so it will be handled carefully
Speaker 5: by whatever court picks it up, and the lawyers from
Speaker 5: both sides are going to be looking to the government
Speaker 5: may want to move faster, but certainly bye dance, as
Speaker 5: lawyers will want to take their time.
Speaker 4: Okay, so it may take a great deal of time
Speaker 4: for this to actually play out in court. But in
Speaker 4: the hypothetical scenario that the US government comes out on
Speaker 4: top that bye dance challenge, wh does not work and
Speaker 4: it really is faced with this option of divest or
Speaker 4: get banned in the US, what is that divestiture actually
Speaker 4: likely to look like? Who is a realistic buyer for
Speaker 4: a company that could be worth tens of billions of
Speaker 4: dollars and also could raise antitrust concerns if another tech
Speaker 4: company were to try to absorb something of that.
Speaker 5: And these are great questions that you're asking here, Kayley,
Speaker 5: because the mechanism of the divestiture is going to be
Speaker 5: incredibly complex. Not only are the anti trust grounds. I
Speaker 5: think though, we have to back up a little bit
Speaker 5: because there are a couple of steps that we need
Speaker 5: to clear before we even get to the point of
Speaker 5: an actual sale. A. The company would have to agree
Speaker 5: to it. B the Chinese government would have to sign off,
Speaker 5: and that they are already making clear that that's a
Speaker 5: no go. And then even if they do agree to
Speaker 5: a sale, would that come with the very thing that
Speaker 5: any sensible buyer would want, And those are the algorithms,
Speaker 5: the crown jewels of TikTok, the thing that makes it
Speaker 5: so good and that makes it work. Now, assuming that's
Speaker 5: all in there, and I'm highly skeptical that each of
Speaker 5: these hurdles would be cleared, then you would have to
Speaker 5: find deep enough pockets to buy this to fend off
Speaker 5: the anti trust questions, and then somebody'd be willing to
Speaker 5: take on the risk. This is a lot of user
Speaker 5: data and you have this lingering concern that there might
Speaker 5: be some still existent connection to China.
Speaker 2: So it sounds to me like you just outlined the
Speaker 2: case for a ban. It may be impossible, if I'm
Speaker 2: reading you correctly, to find a buyer who could check
Speaker 2: all of those boxes.
Speaker 5: Well, if not a band, then an outright ban. In
Speaker 5: other words, you talked about your your son and the
Speaker 5: interest in keeping TikTok alive and the inability to suspend
Speaker 5: disbelief that wait a minute, this app that I've come
Speaker 5: to know and love will go away. It could exist,
Speaker 5: but just not on the app stores. The bill would
Speaker 5: require the app stores to delist it. But you know,
Speaker 5: kids and users have a way around it.
Speaker 4: Well, it's like VPNs. I mean, as someone who had
Speaker 4: visited China several years ago and I wanted to be
Speaker 4: able to use Facebook on my phone, I already had
Speaker 4: it on my phone. I probably couldn't have downloaded it
Speaker 4: while in China, got a VPN, could use it fine fun. Basically,
Speaker 4: this could just make the US with this particular app
Speaker 4: look a lot like what people have to do in
Speaker 4: China and using other apps that are a banned in China.
Speaker 5: Kaylie also brought up another good point and that is
Speaker 5: the election A year from now is a long time. Now,
Speaker 5: think about it. If we have a change in administration
Speaker 5: or changes in Congress, we could perhaps see another move
Speaker 5: to maybe defuse or defang this in some fashion. Not
Speaker 5: saying it's going to happen, but I wouldn't rule out
Speaker 5: maybe some attempt by that if it becomes a Trump
Speaker 5: administration that's incoming, they may seek to try to stop
Speaker 5: this from actually taking effect. Remember Trump was the one
Speaker 5: who would sign the order initially seeking to ban TikTok,
Speaker 5: but now a month ago he changed this tune. He
Speaker 5: said he thought the legislation was a bad idea because
Speaker 5: it would give in effect too much to meta.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 5: Of course, he has an axagrind with Facebook over him
Speaker 5: being banned there after January sixth.
Speaker 2: Yes, not dealing with TikTok on its own right, but
Speaker 2: just don't want to strengthen the other guy in this case.
Speaker 3: You said something.
Speaker 2: Important though about the Crown Jewels. That's the algorithm. Let's
Speaker 2: say Steve Manuchin or somebody stands up. Let's say it's
Speaker 2: a patriotic move. They buy this thing from more than
Speaker 2: it's worth. God knows what's going to happen. But without
Speaker 2: the special sauce there, this could become a really different product.
Speaker 2: It could be one that my sixteen year old doesn't
Speaker 2: care about it anymore. Right, because the algorithm is the
Speaker 2: essence of the business.
Speaker 5: Well, that's what makes it work, that's what makes it distinctive. Now,
Speaker 5: somebody like Steve Manuchin could find a group of investors
Speaker 5: and technologists to maybe get it pretty close. You know,
Speaker 5: is it closer? Is it close enough to Coca Cola?
Speaker 3: Right? Exactly?
Speaker 5: But you know, people have you know, there are coke
Speaker 5: people and they're pepsi people. And if the TikTok person
Speaker 5: finds the new flavor just a little bit off or
Speaker 5: maybe not serving the purpose that they have in mind.
Speaker 5: Because as I said, there are also businesses who have
Speaker 5: been using this to target their audiences. People with very
Speaker 5: niche businesses. If they make something and knitting or crochet
Speaker 5: or makeup or whatever, something maybe related to sports, they
Speaker 5: have a way, a pathway to that audience of consumers
Speaker 5: that they have built up over this time.
Speaker 4: Well, of course we've all seen the advertisements. I'm sure
Speaker 4: part of TikTok's lobbying effort against getting banned with highlighting businesses.
Speaker 4: I think I saw a beekeeper that made like honey
Speaker 4: products or soaper or.
Speaker 6: Something like that.
Speaker 4: There's veterans involved really trying to take their case to
Speaker 4: the public just as much as to Capitol Hill.
Speaker 3: Totally agree with it or not?
Speaker 4: Yeah, fair enough. Final question, just because you raise the election,
Speaker 4: regardless of what happens in court or whatever, we're talking
Speaker 4: a year window in which TikTok will assumably be fully operational,
Speaker 4: nothing will change. How concerned should we be about the
Speaker 4: information misinformation, disinformation that could be propagated on that platform
Speaker 4: in the run up to November in the interim.
Speaker 5: Well, Kelly, when you talk to the proponents of the legislation,
Speaker 5: that is one of the very reasons that they argue
Speaker 5: for a ban. They are saying that there's already so
Speaker 5: much misinformation out there that's skewed and distorted, and in
Speaker 5: a way, the social media platforms in general have stepped
Speaker 5: away from any kind of role in being moderators of content.
Speaker 5: They don't want to have to take ownership of a
Speaker 5: responsibility for specific material that could be disinformation. They really
Speaker 5: just want to say, hey, this is town square. It's
Speaker 5: up to you to figure out who you want to
Speaker 5: trust and who you decide to believe in, and this
Speaker 5: is the case here with TikTok. But the trouble is
Speaker 5: since it does have this foreign tie. You know, you
Speaker 5: talked to national security experts here in this town. Many
Speaker 5: of them will say, be careful.
Speaker 3: Great to have you in studio with this.
Speaker 2: Michael, congratulations on the new title as well, Senior Editor
Speaker 2: for Technology and Strategic Industries, which means you're going to
Speaker 2: be spending a lot of time on stories like this one,
Speaker 2: and we'd love to continue tapping your expertise here on Bloomberg.
Speaker 2: Great to have Michael Shepard with us as we add
Speaker 2: the voice of former Ambassador Mark Ginsberg. He spent time
Speaker 2: as US Ambassador to Morocco, bringing us his geopolitical view.
Speaker 2: Is also now president of the Coalition for a Safer
Speaker 2: Web and has a good sense of what we're talking about.
Speaker 2: Mister ambassador, Welcome back to Bloomberg. It's good to see
Speaker 2: you here. We've talked about so many variables. I wonder
Speaker 2: what your thought is. Assuming this is passed tomorrow and
Speaker 2: is signed by the President, we then enter a protracted
Speaker 2: legal battle.
Speaker 3: How will that end?
Speaker 7: It's hard to tell. With the negotiations in Caracas, and
Speaker 7: I worked up on the hill for seven years when
Speaker 7: this bill originally came to the Senate. The Senate it
Speaker 7: because there was fear that TikTok would actually be able
Speaker 7: to prevail in a constitutional challenge. It's been timed up
Speaker 7: considerably in order to prevail in any TikTok induced constitutional challenge,
Speaker 7: which because they're surely going to go to court at
Speaker 7: the same time, it's probably not going to take effect
Speaker 7: for at least a year under the current legislative framework.
Speaker 7: There's also an opportunity that this could be subject to
Speaker 7: a filibuster by Senator Ran Paul, So you have it's
Speaker 7: not a sure bet that it's going to breeze its
Speaker 7: way out of the Senate.
Speaker 4: Shortly, Okay, So there still could be fights ahead, whether
Speaker 4: it's in the Senate or whether it's in the courts
Speaker 4: moving forward. It does raise the question, though, Mark of
Speaker 4: and we were just speaking with Mike about this. I'm
Speaker 4: not sure if you heard him the master, but essentially
Speaker 4: around the idea of the misinformation or disinformation that could
Speaker 4: be making their way to to TikTok users as they
Speaker 4: continue to use the platform in the run up to
Speaker 4: the election. How concerned. Are you about what's happening in
Speaker 4: real time, not what could happen a year from now
Speaker 4: when it's time to either divestor or get banned.
Speaker 7: I read the National Director for Intelligence twenty twenty two
Speaker 7: report on the midterm elections. That report was probably one
Speaker 7: of the most important triggers to get a ban on TikTok.
Speaker 7: Why because the Director of National Intelligence report assessed that
Speaker 7: byte Dance, the parent of TikTok, was conveying privacy information
Speaker 7: back up to the Chinese government, and that the Chinese
Speaker 7: government was tailoring the Byte Dance TikTok algorithms to interfere
Speaker 7: in the twenty twenty two midterm election. They got away
Speaker 7: with it, and if they got away with it in
Speaker 7: twenty twenty two, they're going to try to get away
Speaker 7: with it in twenty twenty four. Its longest TikTok is
Speaker 7: tied to by Dance, and the Director of National Intelligence
Speaker 7: assesses that that continuation of Chinese government interference in our
Speaker 7: election is going to remain unimpeded. I'm all in favor
Speaker 7: of worrying every hour of every day until twenty the
Speaker 7: twenty twenty four is election is over. With what by
Speaker 7: Dance and TikTok are up to.
Speaker 2: Well, we've got a lot to learn here. Obviously, there
Speaker 2: are questions, Ambassador about the algorithm. Is it possible to
Speaker 2: have a TikTok two point zero if Byte Dance is removed,
Speaker 2: if the Chinese government is in fact removed, and there's
Speaker 2: an American operator here, could it be the same product?
Speaker 7: Yeah, Listen, algorithms are not necessarily limited by national boundaries.
Speaker 7: I mean surely. Of course, the particular TikTok algorithm that
Speaker 7: was developed by Bye Dance is proprietary. I don't know
Speaker 7: whether the Chinese government and by Dance will permit at
Speaker 7: the sale of those algorithms. They's insisted in any statement
Speaker 7: that is made on this legislation that they will not
Speaker 7: permit those algorithms to be conveyed to a private equity
Speaker 7: firm that Steve Minuchin, the former Secretary of the Treasury,
Speaker 7: has claimed that he wants to gather in order to
Speaker 7: purchase TikTok. Can an alternative algorithm be produced in order
Speaker 7: to substitute for the existing algorithm. Well, there may be
Speaker 7: a TikTok disruption as a result. I do believe that
Speaker 7: it's not going to be easy to replicate the proprietary
Speaker 7: algorithm as quickly as some people may think.
Speaker 4: All right, Ambassador, it's always great to have you here
Speaker 4: on Balance of Power. Too short, but we hope you'll
Speaker 4: be back soon. That's Ambassador, former US Ambassador to Morocco,
Speaker 4: Mark Ginsberg.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Can
Speaker 1: just live weekdays at noon Eastern on apocarp Rono with
Speaker 1: the Bloomberg Business app. You can also listen live on
Speaker 1: Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station. Just say
Speaker 1: Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 4: Here in Washington, Joe, it does seem like there is
Speaker 4: somewhat of an upbeat mood because something actually got done,
Speaker 4: at least in one chamber of Congers. As we await
Speaker 4: the second chamber of a second believe it to pass it.
Speaker 4: But it took months and months and months for foreign
Speaker 4: need to actually pass the House of Representatives.
Speaker 6: But it has now done so well.
Speaker 3: That's right.
Speaker 2: We were told by the administration at the end of
Speaker 2: last year that the window was closing in Ukraine. How
Speaker 2: they have managed to get by to this extent is
Speaker 2: frankly a mystery to a lot of folks. They've been
Speaker 2: dug in in some cases waiting for artillery for weeks
Speaker 2: on end. There was a unit we read about last
Speaker 2: week in Politico have been waiting for a month for
Speaker 2: shells to arrive, and now they are going to be
Speaker 2: sent that way. The question is how quickly that can
Speaker 2: be done. And again we'll be talking to Kelly Grico
Speaker 2: about that coming up from the Stimpson Center, who was
Speaker 2: with us recently Kaylee talking about the run up now
Speaker 2: and be curious to hear her take now that it's
Speaker 2: actually happened, as I am also curious to hear from
Speaker 2: Jack Fitzpatrick, our appropriations expert, had a working weekend following
Speaker 2: the ball here on four bills that are going to
Speaker 2: be now stitched together into one and sent to the Senate.
Speaker 2: All the while we're wondering what happens to the Speaker
Speaker 2: of the House. He's at Bloomberg Government, Jack Fitzpatrick, Great
Speaker 2: to see you. Probably feels like Wednesday or something to
Speaker 2: you at this point. Mike Johnson has a couple of days.
Speaker 2: I guess to breathe. When lawmakers return next week, is
Speaker 2: there in fact going to be a motion to vacate
Speaker 2: the lawmakers who have signed on to one seem to
Speaker 2: think that they're going to force him to resign.
Speaker 3: Why in the world would he do that.
Speaker 8: I don't think he would. It does seem that Marjorie
Speaker 8: Taylor Green is not backing down. She says that she's
Speaker 8: going ahead with forcing a vote on this motion to vacate.
Speaker 8: She's been tweeting about it. Yeah, it doesn't seem like
Speaker 8: a major danger for Johnson. It's been a while now
Speaker 8: that we've heard that there are Democrats who don't want
Speaker 8: to see him ousted over allowing a vote on Ukraine Aid.
Speaker 8: So there are a few hardline members who, certainly, unless
Speaker 8: they back down, are going to force a vote. But
Speaker 8: it's not as tough a situation for Johnson as it
Speaker 8: was for McCarthy. I think there's some fatigue with the
Speaker 8: palace intrigue and the politicking on the House floor that
Speaker 8: dominated people's attention for so long, and Democrats don't want
Speaker 8: to punish the speaker for allowing a vote on a
Speaker 8: bill that they liked.
Speaker 4: Well, we certainly have heard from Democrats on this very program,
Speaker 4: Congressman Amibarrev California at Smith of Washington, who also expressed
Speaker 4: that essentially that they think the speakers the right ada,
Speaker 4: so why would they not protect him? So I guess
Speaker 4: maybe that is why it will turn out differently for
Speaker 4: Mike Johnson than Kevin McCarthy. I want to ask you, though,
Speaker 4: just around this idea in the Senate, because we're all
Speaker 4: kind of operating under this could happen quickly. It's going
Speaker 4: to pass. Yeah, we know it's the US Senate, and
Speaker 4: if you don't have unanimous consent, things can move slowly.
Speaker 4: Any One one senator could be disruptive. Are we going
Speaker 4: to face that potentially around amendment votes and the.
Speaker 8: Like less than we normally would because congressional leadership was
Speaker 8: on board and put things in the rule in the
Speaker 8: House and package this in a way that kind of
Speaker 8: expedites it. Usually it takes if you don't have unanimous consent,
Speaker 8: and the Senate can take about a week to pass
Speaker 8: something that's probably cut in half or even less. Because
Speaker 8: they packaged this into a bill that had previously been
Speaker 8: taken up in the Senate, there's no work to do
Speaker 8: on the motion to proceed. I could talk for an
Speaker 8: hour about the procedural aspect of this long story short.
Speaker 8: If a lot of people want to slow this down.
Speaker 8: It could be a thirty hour delay between voting to
Speaker 8: limit debate and then passing it, but that's not nearly
Speaker 8: as bad as if it could take a week, which
Speaker 8: is usually what can happen. So they don't really need
Speaker 8: unanimous congressional leadership worked together. So that this is going
Speaker 8: to get the initial procedural vote tomorrow. It might be
Speaker 8: late tomorrow, or it might take until Wednesday to actually
Speaker 8: pass it. It's not entirely clear, but this is not
Speaker 8: going to drag on throughout the week like Rand Paul
Speaker 8: at one point had been threatened.
Speaker 2: Safe to say, the majority of senators want to get
Speaker 2: out of town and get their recess started. So what's
Speaker 2: most likely at some point on Wednesday we wrap this up.
Speaker 8: If not late Tuesday, it could be late Tuesday, it
Speaker 8: could stretch into Wednesday. One person can still slow it down,
Speaker 8: but if the if a lot of members don't want
Speaker 8: to take up their time to debate, we're probably talking
Speaker 8: much less than the thirty hour period, So either Tuesday
Speaker 8: or Wednesday, and this does seem to clearly have the
Speaker 8: votes they voted previously on a foreign aid package. Already,
Speaker 8: This all fastest out seventy if I remember seventy for that,
Speaker 8: so all of their's got more than three hundred votes
Speaker 8: in the House, so it looks good in the Senate.
Speaker 4: Could it lose some votes though, because the TikTok divest
Speaker 4: sure dunvest or ban has been included.
Speaker 8: That is one of the most interesting parts of this,
Speaker 8: because the packaging of this was more about the political
Speaker 8: question of do the hawks stand together, do the neo
Speaker 8: conservatives stand together, and do some do what they want?
Speaker 8: And this was sort of a hawkish packaging of things.
Speaker 8: The TikTok band doesn't really have anything to do with
Speaker 8: Ukraine Aid, but this came together as essentially a show
Speaker 8: of political willpower by the Republican Hawks, the governing wing.
Speaker 8: It all fit together politically, so I don't think that
Speaker 8: would necessarily lose a lot of support in the Senate.
Speaker 4: All right, Jack Fitzpatrick, who covers Congress for Bloomberg Government,
Speaker 4: thank you so much. As always, certainly we're all going
Speaker 4: to keep an eye on the Senate over the course
Speaker 4: of the next day or two to see when this
Speaker 4: thing actually can head to the President for a signature.
Speaker 4: And we know the President of Ukraine certainly is waiting
Speaker 4: for it. He talked this weekend on NBC's Meet the Press.
Speaker 9: Here he is this eight will strength think we did.
Speaker 7: Lose the initition, now have all the chance to stabilize
Speaker 7: the situation and to.
Speaker 1: Or take the initiative.
Speaker 4: And we want to get more on how exactly this
Speaker 4: will help Ukraine and how quickly with Kelly Gricos, she
Speaker 4: a senior fellow with the Reimagining US Grand Strategy program
Speaker 4: at the Stimson Center. Kelly, it's always great to have
Speaker 4: you here on balance of power. What is your assessment
Speaker 4: of just how fast this aid could change the situation
Speaker 4: on the ground for Ukraine.
Speaker 6: Well, thank you for having me.
Speaker 10: I think, you know, I think there's two parts of
Speaker 10: that answer, which is one, I think within a few days,
Speaker 10: once it passes the Senate, certain critical things like artillery
Speaker 10: can probably be delivered to Ukraine, though it might take
Speaker 10: longer for Ukraine to distribute that within the country, and
Speaker 10: then other systems that are state side will take longer
Speaker 10: to be able to deliver again to Ukraine. But it will,
Speaker 10: you know, it will be weeks to months probably before
Speaker 10: it has a very significant effect.
Speaker 2: That sounds like a painfully long wait if you're an
Speaker 2: under resourced Ukrainian soldier in the field, Kelly, how much
Speaker 2: of this will go to weapons or equipment that has yet.
Speaker 3: To be made.
Speaker 2: We've all been learning about the defense industrial base over
Speaker 2: the course of this debate, and I know that much
Speaker 2: of the weaponry still needs to be actually manufactured. So
Speaker 2: will this be rolled out over the course of the
Speaker 2: rest of this year, Yes.
Speaker 10: I mean, this is exactly the challenge, right is that
Speaker 10: there's funding, but you need to be able to buy something,
Speaker 10: and a lot of these things have, as you said,
Speaker 10: not been made. And many of these high valued systems
Speaker 10: that are in low quantity, like patriot missiles, have also
Speaker 10: been promised to other countries. So one of the issues
Speaker 10: that needs to be addressed is where the priority is
Speaker 10: going to be in terms of Ukraine, perhaps sending more
Speaker 10: of those miss that were intended for others to Ukraine,
Speaker 10: and that still needs to be worked out, so that's
Speaker 10: certainly going to take time.
Speaker 4: Well, and as we consider time, Kelly, it also raises
Speaker 4: the question of how far sixty billion dollars in aid
Speaker 4: goes into conflict like this before more aid might be
Speaker 4: needed if there's no real end in sight, Is this
Speaker 4: money going to bring us closer to the end of
Speaker 4: this war or just prolong it further because it gives
Speaker 4: Ukraine longer to have a fighting chance.
Speaker 7: Yeah.
Speaker 10: So this is really where I'm the most concerned because
Speaker 10: I supported, you know, providing Ukraine with more aid, particularly
Speaker 10: for artillery that it desperately needs in the United States
Speaker 10: is able to provide. But I think you're asking the
Speaker 10: right question, which is we need to start thinking really
Speaker 10: seriously about long term strategy here and pivoting from a
Speaker 10: talk about liberating all Ukrainian territory and militarily defeating Russia
Speaker 10: to how do we create a credible, sustainable defense for
Speaker 10: Ukraine because this is a war of attrition and it's stillmated,
Speaker 10: and bringing it to the negotiating table. It goes back
Speaker 10: to what Mark Milly, General Mark Milly said about a
Speaker 10: year ago when he was still chairman and the chiefs
Speaker 10: of the Joint Chief Staff, which is that this is
Speaker 10: a war that's going to end in negotiations, and so
Speaker 10: we really need to start be thinking about what is
Speaker 10: the strategy to get there.
Speaker 2: Well, that's offully important. Then a little more on that, Kelly,
Speaker 2: what would that look like? You just got sixty billion
Speaker 2: dollars here, You've got a finite amount of time to
Speaker 2: work with it. How does Ukraine deploy that money in
Speaker 2: a way that would in fact strengthen its hand at
Speaker 2: the negotiating table. I'm guessing that's a strategy of its own.
Speaker 2: Does it need to start punching through Russian lines? Does
Speaker 2: it take down the bridge to Crimea? Is there something
Speaker 2: specific that would help?
Speaker 10: Yeah, I think actually it really needs to focus on
Speaker 10: defensive systems and defensive mortifications. So if you think about
Speaker 10: when it Ukraine went it on its own conor offensive,
Speaker 10: you know, which failed, it was partly because Russia had
Speaker 10: devised really dense, thick defensive fortifications, so anti tank obstacles,
Speaker 10: well defended trenches, and so Ukraine is starting to do that,
Speaker 10: but it's months behind in its preparation. And I think
Speaker 10: that's actually one of the areas where we could really
Speaker 10: help is sending some of those some of that capability,
Speaker 10: some of the you know, concrete, the construction equipment, not
Speaker 10: just advance you know, missiles and artillery. And I think
Speaker 10: though it really is about a long change, change shift
Speaker 10: in perspective. You know, already as soon as it passed
Speaker 10: this bill passed, you started hearing, you know, talk about
Speaker 10: twenty twenty five, Ukraine returning to the Conor offensive, and
Speaker 10: you know, we don't want to repeat Groundhog Day here
Speaker 10: and waste sort of this capability going on a very
Speaker 10: costly Conor offensive that's unlikely to succeed. So I think
Speaker 10: it's coming to terms with the reality that Ukraine should
Speaker 10: focus first and foremost on holding the territory that it has.
Speaker 4: Well, Kelly, when we think about potential future counter offensive,
Speaker 4: it really just brings us back to the idea of
Speaker 4: the force that Ukraine is trying to counter, which is Russia.
Speaker 4: How is Russia likely to respond knowing more assistance is
Speaker 4: coming Ukraine's way, does it change what they will do
Speaker 4: in real time in the interim and potentially make this
Speaker 4: a more dangerous moment for Ukraine while they wait for
Speaker 4: everything to arrive to them.
Speaker 10: Yeah, I mean it's clear that Kremlin's not happy. They've
Speaker 10: issued their usual kind of statements indicating indicating that it
Speaker 10: does create a window for Moscow in terms of how
Speaker 10: it's thinking about launching an offensive which is expected a
Speaker 10: spring and summer, and that it might be thinking now
Speaker 10: that it has a window of a few weeks to
Speaker 10: a few months to try to do that when Ukraine
Speaker 10: is that it's maximum vulnerability, and that's possible. I don't
Speaker 10: know though, if the Russians are really capable of being
Speaker 10: that agile to speed things up. They haven't really shown
Speaker 10: that during the course of the war. But I think
Speaker 10: the real issue here is that Russia thought its strategy
Speaker 10: was that it could outlast Western support, including US support
Speaker 10: work for Ukraine, and this is certainly sending a signal
Speaker 10: that that strategy is not working. And so the hope
Speaker 10: I have is that there will be more pressure on
Speaker 10: both sides of this conflict to head to a negotiating table.
Speaker 10: And there's supposed to be some kind of diploma diplomatic
Speaker 10: effort in June in Switzerland, and I'd like to see
Speaker 10: both parties actually attending that and really working towards some
Speaker 10: kind of settlement.
Speaker 2: Spending time with Kelly Grico from the Stimpson Center. Following
Speaker 2: the passage of Ukraine funding in the House and the
Speaker 2: expected passage of Ukraine funding in the Senate, should Joe
Speaker 2: Biden go back and I ask you that because morale
Speaker 2: has been as much of an issue as equipment and
Speaker 2: materiel so of troops.
Speaker 3: By the way, Kelly, in our remaining moment.
Speaker 2: I'd love for you to focus on that, whether or
Speaker 2: not the President should be there. Again, this does not
Speaker 2: buy more manpower for Ukraine. What does it do about
Speaker 2: the issue of bodies on the battlefields?
Speaker 10: Yeah, I mean, at the end of the day, this
Speaker 10: is Ukraine's war and that includes manpower, as you suggest,
Speaker 10: and Ukrainon took months trying to pass a bill to
Speaker 10: lower the recruitment age. I don't think that Biden is
Speaker 10: actually all that important a visit from him in terms
Speaker 10: of morale. I think, you know, Ukraine has to do
Speaker 10: that itself, and they have been very determined and that's
Speaker 10: something I think for their leadership to work out.
Speaker 3: It's great to have you back.
Speaker 2: Kelly Stimpson Center, Senior fellow with the re Imagining US
Speaker 2: Grand Strategy Program. Kelly Grico, thanks for joining as always
Speaker 2: here on Balance of Power. It's going to be pretty
Speaker 2: quick from here. It sure seems like after what we
Speaker 2: just heard in the last ten minutes here, Kaylee, there's
Speaker 2: going to be an agreement, likely on debate in the Senate.
Speaker 2: This could be done tomorrow. We could be talking about
Speaker 2: a law by Wednesday morning.
Speaker 4: Yeah. I guess if all the timing works out, and
Speaker 4: President Biden would very likely give its signature to that
Speaker 4: bill almost immediately after. We know that the President did
Speaker 4: speak with Vladimir's Lenski today underscore or the US's lasting
Speaker 4: commitment to supporting Ukraine. But just because this past, Joe,
Speaker 4: there is still the question of how much more lasting
Speaker 4: that commitment will be as this conflict potentially goes on
Speaker 4: well into the future.
Speaker 2: That's for sure, and it sounds like the narrative is
Speaker 2: going to be very quickly coalescing around an endgame. Here
Speaker 2: the negotiating table and how this money can help them
Speaker 2: get there. With Kaylee Lines, I'm Joe Matthew the Panels, Next,
Speaker 2: I'm Bloomberg.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch
Speaker 1: Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Appo, CarPlay, and
Speaker 1: then roud Otto with the Bloomberg Business app Listen on
Speaker 1: demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live
Speaker 1: on YouTube.
Speaker 4: Kaylee Lines and Joe Matthew are here in Washington checking
Speaker 4: on whether Marjorie Taylor Green seems to have changed her
Speaker 4: mind yet about whether she thinks Mike Johnson should keep
Speaker 4: his job as House speaker well as of an hour ago, Joe,
Speaker 4: it does not seem so. Her latest post on X
Speaker 4: Mike Johnson still hasn't shown Congress or the American people
Speaker 4: the proof that Russian tends to invade the rest of
Speaker 4: Europe after finishing its campaign in Ukraine. It goes on
Speaker 4: for a few more sentences and ends with we need
Speaker 4: a new speaker to exclamation points.
Speaker 3: Okay.
Speaker 2: The refrain though over the weekend from Marjorie Tayler Green
Speaker 2: Tom Massey is that they wanted him to resign, that
Speaker 2: they would ratchet up the pressure until Mike Johnson had
Speaker 2: no other option but to leave on his own. And
Speaker 2: of course, Kaylee, he already articulated last week the words
Speaker 2: I will not resign, leading us to doubt that as
Speaker 2: a viable option. But they could pull the trigger on this.
Speaker 2: He could still lose his job, and so we may
Speaker 2: as well dive in there with the panel.
Speaker 4: Right sounds good.
Speaker 2: Rick Davis and Jeanie Shanzano are with us Bloomberg Politics contributors.
Speaker 2: I have to apologize to both of you in advance.
Speaker 2: I really don't want to do this to you every day,
Speaker 2: but it's hanging out there. Genie, what are we going
Speaker 2: to do about the motion to vacate or should Mike
Speaker 2: Johnson resign? That does seem to be with the three
Speaker 2: Republicans who have their name on this believe. All the while,
Speaker 2: some are arguing he's more powerful now that he got
Speaker 2: these bill passed.
Speaker 3: What do you think?
Speaker 9: Yeah, he seems to have found the secret sauce, which is,
Speaker 9: you know, one hundred percent Democrats, fifty percent or so Republicans,
Speaker 9: and he can pretty much pass anything there. You know,
Speaker 9: I think it's probably not what the Marjorie Taylor Greens
Speaker 9: of the world want to hear, but you know, I
Speaker 9: think as it pertains to his job number one, who
Speaker 9: wants it? Number two? You know, I think he's probably
Speaker 9: safe until November. It depends obviously on what happens in
Speaker 9: the election, and I've never thought he had a real
Speaker 9: shot at keeping the job next year. I in fact
Speaker 9: think that's more likely now than I did before. But
Speaker 9: I think for the moment he's probably safe. That doesn't
Speaker 9: mean she can't move forward on the motion to vacate,
Speaker 9: but I think we're hearing enough Democrats who would be
Speaker 9: there to support him, and that would keep him safe
Speaker 9: at least until probably November.
Speaker 7: Rick.
Speaker 4: When we think about Mike Johnson staying safe, especially if
Speaker 4: the cost of staying safe is having Democrats step in
Speaker 4: to help you, Is he safe with no real power.
Speaker 4: You keep the gavel, but your ability to wield it
Speaker 4: for your own purposes is kind of not really there
Speaker 4: because you need Democrats to do anything. In your own
Speaker 4: party has members that really would not like you to
Speaker 4: be in the job. I just wonder how we think
Speaker 4: about what's safe is for Mike Johnson, Well, there's.
Speaker 11: Really nothing safe about ever being a speaker. So the
Speaker 11: whole concept of safety is not really relevant to politics
Speaker 11: in general because you never know what shifting alliances are
Speaker 11: going to occur. And in the course, you know, in
Speaker 11: this day and age, when you have such a divided
Speaker 11: country that's extremely well represented in almost a completely divided
Speaker 11: House of Representatives, you know, there's no place to hide,
Speaker 11: there's no safe place.
Speaker 1: And so I think that the band aid has been
Speaker 1: ripped off.
Speaker 11: I mean, you know, we now have a coalition government
Speaker 11: in the House of Representatives, and that coalition government will
Speaker 11: probably stick together between now and the election because there's
Speaker 11: nothing new to happen, right, they can just band together
Speaker 11: and pass whatever they want. Frankly, the things that would
Speaker 11: get past probably fine ready acceptance with the President and
Speaker 11: with the Senate, so they could actually be a more
Speaker 11: productive House of Representatives between now and election day, even
Speaker 11: when usually that's when people shut down and they go
Speaker 11: home into a campaign. So it's an odd, upside down
Speaker 11: world we live in, and it's currently being well represented
Speaker 11: by the House. So my guess is there's no fear
Speaker 11: at all of Marjorie Taylor Green. This motion to vacate
Speaker 11: will be tabled almost immediately, and so the idea that
Speaker 11: they have any leverage over Mike Johnson is a fantasy.
Speaker 11: So I think we're going to see the rest of
Speaker 11: this Congress be a bipartisan year in the House of Representatives.
Speaker 11: Certainly not where we thought when we started this year.
Speaker 2: Well, god knows it's not. Then, Genie, is there a
Speaker 2: way for Joe Biden to leverage a so called coalition
Speaker 2: government here on Capitol Hill to maybe sneak something through
Speaker 2: in a campaign year that could make a difference beyond
Speaker 2: what's just happened.
Speaker 9: Yeah, you know, I don't know that I would believe
Speaker 9: that in a Congress which has passed what sixty nine
Speaker 9: or so bills, what are the lowest in history that
Speaker 9: in you know, months before an election, the president of
Speaker 9: the opposition party could pass through much. I mean, it's possible.
Speaker 9: But I think Joe Biden has got to be very
Speaker 9: happy with what happened over the weekend and quite frankly,
Speaker 9: what he has been able to accomplish in this Congress,
Speaker 9: because it has been you know, I think against all
Speaker 9: odds that he has gotten through what he's gotten through.
Speaker 9: So he's got to be happy. He's moving on the
Speaker 9: campaign trail. You know. I do think we may see
Speaker 9: a little, you know, a little dust up in the
Speaker 9: Senate with some of this, you know, as they move forward.
Speaker 9: I think they're going to move quickly on this. But
Speaker 9: I think it's fascinating people like Mike Lee trying to
Speaker 9: force an amendment that ensures that Ukraine pays back this money.
Speaker 9: I mean, the of parts of this that we're hearing,
Speaker 9: there's not just you know, inter party fighting in the House.
Speaker 9: It's also in the Senate. You know, you look at
Speaker 9: jd Vance and Lindsey Graham. So I think there may
Speaker 9: be a little conversation there in the next twenty four
Speaker 9: hours or so, but they want to get out this weekend,
Speaker 9: so I think they're going to I mean this week
Speaker 9: rather so I think they're going to pass this pretty
Speaker 9: quickly if they can.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 4: I guess the difference, maybe Rick, would be that in
Speaker 4: the Senate, the Republican infighting is in the minority, where
Speaker 4: you didn't have the much power anyway, versus in the
Speaker 4: House it's in the majority, which has rendered the majority
Speaker 4: a little less useful perhaps than a typical majority would be.
Speaker 4: I just wonder, given everything we've seen and what you
Speaker 4: were just speaking to, the idea that something did pass
Speaker 4: it was in a bipartisan way, which probably is what
Speaker 4: the majority of the American people would like to see.
Speaker 4: Have the Republicans improved their odds of being able to
Speaker 4: retain the House in November, especially if we don't see
Speaker 4: another chaotic go around for a new speaker because Mike
Speaker 4: Johnson gets kicked out.
Speaker 11: Yeah, last first, Yes, I think this last week has
Speaker 11: been a step in the right direction for members, especially
Speaker 11: in the more swing districts, who can go back and say, hey,
Speaker 11: I got Ukraine funding, I got funding for our allies
Speaker 11: in Asia and the Middle East, and there'll be some
Speaker 11: explaining to do about the TikTok ban, But other than that,
Speaker 11: I think that The reality is this is this is
Speaker 11: actually going to be helpful to Republican members going home.
Speaker 11: And it's not that it's not helpful to Democrats, but
Speaker 11: I think it's a good incumbency racket to have passed
Speaker 11: this bill. I think that's why you saw so many
Speaker 11: members of Congress being for this, because it's good politics
Speaker 11: and it's good for the country. That being said, I mean,
Speaker 11: I think we have to get away from this whole
Speaker 11: idea that anybody in the House has leverage. It's going
Speaker 11: to be you know, sort of like you know, whatever
Speaker 11: coalition you can bring to bear, and with one vote
Speaker 11: margin of majority, the concept of a majority is kind
Speaker 11: of thrown out the window. So getting things unlike the
Speaker 11: Farm Bill and the Faay author these are big things, right,
Speaker 11: I mean, that have been steimy. You couldn't even get
Speaker 11: a rule for any of this stuff in the past.
Speaker 11: Now you're going to have Democrats in the Rules Committee
Speaker 11: voting regularly to get things out. Now that they've gotten
Speaker 11: done once, why not do it more often? So I
Speaker 11: think it's completely changes a dynamic in the House of Representations.
Speaker 11: It's like a different chamber now than it was a
Speaker 11: week ago. And maybe for the positives for American taxpayers.
Speaker 2: It's a different chamber. I'm gonna have to start watching
Speaker 2: these Rules Committee hearings to see what Chip Royd does
Speaker 2: in the face of this coalition government.
Speaker 3: Genie.
Speaker 2: Lastly, Joe Biden is talking about Earth day to day,
Speaker 2: is going to be campaigning again this week while Donald
Speaker 2: Trump is in.
Speaker 3: And out of court.
Speaker 2: I presume it helps him from the making good on
Speaker 2: promises file here to say that we are standing by
Speaker 2: our allies. I got this across the finish line. Is
Speaker 2: that enough to make up for all the young people
Speaker 2: who are going to be angry with him and with
Speaker 2: Democrats about TikTok?
Speaker 9: You know, I don't know if it's enough to make
Speaker 9: up for it. And I think the anger amongst young
Speaker 9: people room we see it just in you know, the
Speaker 9: NBC poll out, I think it was yesterday. It's a
Speaker 9: big problem for him, and the biggest challenge there has
Speaker 9: to do with what's going on in Israel. So, you know,
Speaker 9: I'm not sure the passage of this bill helps him
Speaker 9: with that constituency. And it's something he really needs to
Speaker 9: work on because the numbers are really problematic as it
Speaker 9: pertains to enthusiasm amongst that group, and so you know,
Speaker 9: he can talk about this success, but I'm not sure
Speaker 9: it's a message he would want to take to college campuses.
Speaker 9: Quite frankly at this.
Speaker 4: Point, all right, Rick Davis and Jeanie Shanzeno, our Bloomberg
Speaker 4: Politics contributors, thank you very much. And of course, Joe
Speaker 4: college campuses is where we see kind of an overlap
Speaker 4: in this Van diagram in many ways. On the one hand,
Speaker 4: you have a lot of people who are getting news
Speaker 4: and information from TikTok. There has been a lot of
Speaker 4: conversation as to whether or not there is a pro
Speaker 4: palace to me and bent in some of that content
Speaker 4: they will see. And of course you're seeing what we're
Speaker 4: seeing at Columbia, where they've had to move classes online
Speaker 4: because of the goings on of the last several days.
Speaker 2: And again the White House stepping in to get them
Speaker 2: what's happening on a college campus. It's pretty remarkable what's
Speaker 2: happening there. Whether TikTok ends up being banned, though you know,
Speaker 2: this may not be answered even during this campaign cycle,
Speaker 2: if we enter this protracted legal challenge that we're hearing about.
Speaker 2: By the way, Bloomberg Intelligence, we love talking to the
Speaker 2: analysts of b I about they're running odds on this, Kayley, Yeah,
Speaker 2: and they say seventy percent odds. The government wins a
Speaker 2: legal challenge by TikTok that it will in fact go
Speaker 2: through the legislature.
Speaker 4: And the courts well, and then it becomes a question
Speaker 4: what does TikTok do then, or specifically, what does byte
Speaker 4: Edance do. Do they agree then to the divestiture or
Speaker 4: do they hold onto the algorithm though, which would make
Speaker 4: maybe the whole thing worth a lot less than it
Speaker 4: would be otherwise. There are so many remaining questions and
Speaker 4: we're going to be digging a lot more into this.
Speaker 1: Listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast kens just
Speaker 1: live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and enroun Oo
Speaker 1: with the Bloomberg Business Ad. You can also listen live
Speaker 1: on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just
Speaker 1: Say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 2: As we get ourselves back to business on a Monday,
Speaker 2: Welcome to Balance of Power on the radio, on the
Speaker 2: satellite and on YouTube. Amazing what can happen if we
Speaker 2: put our minds to it. A busy weekend in the
Speaker 2: House of Representatives.
Speaker 3: It was so busy.
Speaker 2: It might be in the end of the speakership, depending
Speaker 2: on who you ask. But they're pretty happy in Ukraine
Speaker 2: because the money is coming. We still have to go
Speaker 2: through the Senate and the President's got to sign it,
Speaker 2: but all of that appears to be a kind of
Speaker 2: the easy part here. Getting through the House was the
Speaker 2: tough one. Aid for Ukraine while you were enjoying your
Speaker 2: weekend passes three eleven to one twelve, Aid for Israel
Speaker 2: three sixty six to fifty eight. Tomorrow is when they
Speaker 2: get to it in the Senate. The President's waiting to
Speaker 2: intercept this. By the way, they're going to fast track
Speaker 2: this thing in the Senate because they're already over time
Speaker 2: on starting their recess.
Speaker 3: And that's gonna work, of course for everybody.
Speaker 2: And then they'll come back for the White House Correspondences dinner, presumably,
Speaker 2: or at least those who get invited. Tom Massey, who
Speaker 2: signed onto the motion to vacate along with Marjorie Taylor Green,
Speaker 2: these were the original two. Like Marjorie Taylor Green, he
Speaker 2: is now calling for the resignation of Mike Johnson. But
Speaker 2: if it comes to it, he says, a vote will
Speaker 2: be called referring to the MTV, and it is unclear today.
Speaker 2: Of course, they're all gone now on recess. What's going
Speaker 2: to happen when they come back, or if maybe Mike
Speaker 2: Johnson is suddenly a made man because he's got Democrats
Speaker 2: on his side at least at the moment. Kate Accley
Speaker 2: will help us with all of this. She was covering
Speaker 2: it over the weekend. Spoke with her on Friday going
Speaker 2: into the votes, and she's with us now from Bloomberg Government. Kate,
Speaker 2: it's great to see you. Does Mike Johnson have to
Speaker 2: worry this morning or does he know that the other
Speaker 2: party will be there for him?
Speaker 12: I don't know if he can know that the other
Speaker 12: party is going to be there for him. He has
Speaker 12: shored up a lot of support even among his own
Speaker 12: you know, Republicans. He has, you know, gotten this Ukraine Aid,
Speaker 12: Israel Aid. Also that TikTok bill all that they cleared
Speaker 12: that all on Saturday and sent it as a you know,
Speaker 12: sort of bundled it up in a package, sent it
Speaker 12: over to the Senate and the Senate is poised to
Speaker 12: move on it this week. It looks like that's going
Speaker 12: to get to the President's desk, you know, this week,
Speaker 12: so you know, definitely he has done the things that
Speaker 12: people like Marjorie Taylor Green said, you know, if you
Speaker 12: do this, we're it's going to trigger this this motion
Speaker 12: to vacate, you know. I mean there are a lot
Speaker 12: of people who were acting like you know, last Thursday
Speaker 12: Friday that Mike Johnson was, you know, essentially kind of
Speaker 12: a dead speaker walking, if you will. Who now think
Speaker 12: he has more support, including from Democrats. You know, it's
Speaker 12: really hard to predict how this will all shake out.
Speaker 12: I mean, how long is he going to be speaker?
Speaker 12: Who knows? Because you know, after the November elections, Republicans
Speaker 12: could lose the House anyway and then there's no Republican
Speaker 12: speaker at all. So it's not maybe like he has
Speaker 12: real long term job security, if you will. It's that
Speaker 12: kind of job. But he's going to laugh through this
Speaker 12: week because they're in recess.
Speaker 2: That's right, He's at least got a week to think
Speaker 2: about things. Kate, we should talk about what was actually
Speaker 2: accomplished here. It's not just funding for Ukraine and Israel,
Speaker 2: both of which were controversial in their respective quarters, but
Speaker 2: TikTok passed.
Speaker 3: Divest or ban, and it's going to the Senate.
Speaker 2: Now, that was something that we thought would fail in
Speaker 2: the Senate if it ever got a vote. Now senators
Speaker 2: are faced with a choice. If you don't like TikTok,
Speaker 2: that means you have to vot against Israel in Ukraine.
Speaker 2: So this is seen as a done deal here. Correct,
Speaker 2: all of this in one piece should pass the Senate,
Speaker 2: assuming they can have a deal to end debate.
Speaker 12: Yes, I exactly. I mean this. We thought that the
Speaker 12: TikTok measure was going to at least be very slowed
Speaker 12: down in the Senate, if not completely stopped. This has
Speaker 12: a little bit of a change. It gives a longer time,
Speaker 12: you know, the I think the initial bill was like
Speaker 12: six months where TikTok would have to divest from Byte Dance.
Speaker 12: It's uh, you know, for an owned parent company. This
Speaker 12: gives a little bit more time potentially. TikTok has been
Speaker 12: saying and you know, as Bloomberg has been reporting that
Speaker 12: it will you know, TikTok Byte Dance will fight this
Speaker 12: if this is enacted, we'll fit it in the courts
Speaker 12: saying that it, you know, is not legal constitutional. So
Speaker 12: it's maybe not the end here, but this is a
Speaker 12: huge setback for TikTok.
Speaker 2: Kind of amazing. You specialize in covering lobbyist money, Kate.
Speaker 2: Is this going to be another free for all? Is
Speaker 2: there anything lobbyists can do at this point? Or is
Speaker 2: it all in the courts?
Speaker 12: I mean people, usually companies usually will have a strategy
Speaker 12: in tandem courts, you know, litigation, lobbying, you know, anything
Speaker 12: you can signal, even if you get just a bill
Speaker 12: introduced on something or or you know, get members of
Speaker 12: Congress to talk about something that can certainly help help
Speaker 12: with a court case. So these are often things that
Speaker 12: go in tandem. I don't think that TikTok would abandon
Speaker 12: a congressional strategy, a legislative strategy and just only pursue,
Speaker 12: you know, a litigation strategy. But it certainly looks like
Speaker 12: unless something and I don't think it's going to happen,
Speaker 12: I mean, something really changed dramatically that this TikTok ban
Speaker 12: or divest bill does look like it's on the fast
Speaker 12: track this week.
Speaker 3: There you have, Kate Accley. It's great to see you, Kate.
Speaker 2: I hope you didn't work the entire weekend, but good
Speaker 2: to have you with us. Here on balance of power
Speaker 2: reporting for Bloomberg government passing the House, we're now waiting
Speaker 2: on the Senate, and then of course the President probably
Speaker 2: won't be able to sign this fast enough when that
Speaker 2: likely happens. But I want to get back to the
Speaker 2: matter of the Speaker, Mike Johnson, who's got, as we
Speaker 2: have already indicated, some time to think about things, and
Speaker 2: so do the three Republican lawmakers who have filed this
Speaker 2: motion to vacate that, by the way, is still not privileged.
Speaker 2: This is still just a threat hanging over his head,
Speaker 2: and it's an important thing to remember here knowing that
Speaker 2: this could in fact be a.
Speaker 3: Problem for Mike Johnson when he returns.
Speaker 2: Lisa Camuso Miller knows what it's like to work in
Speaker 2: the Speaker's office and the many complexities that come with this,
Speaker 2: particularly in this case for someone with no experience in
Speaker 2: the higher echelons of leadership. She was, also, of course,
Speaker 2: here's communications director for the RNC, and she's host of
Speaker 2: the Friday Reporter podcast. Now, Lisa Kamusa Miller, great to
Speaker 2: see you. You have a sense of what Mike Johnson
Speaker 2: is facing. Do you believe the threat? Because I feel
Speaker 2: like I could ask you today fairly, is he weaker
Speaker 2: or more strengthened by what happened over the weekend.
Speaker 6: So I am really amazed at how much he has
Speaker 6: come to accomplish. I feel like I'm in the camp
Speaker 6: that he is stronger today than he has ever been.
Speaker 6: I know that there are these outside threats that have
Speaker 6: been offered, but can you imagine how politically unpopular it
Speaker 6: would be for the Republicans in the House to now
Speaker 6: go back through try to remove the Speaker again and
Speaker 6: have another fight for another leader just six months before
Speaker 6: election day. I can think of nothing less popular to do.
Speaker 6: And this package of legislation that will now go to
Speaker 6: the Senate is in support of our allies and a
Speaker 6: vote against our enemies, which is China, which ultimately is
Speaker 6: the fight that we're having over TikTok. And the Speaker
Speaker 6: did it in a way where he did it over
Speaker 6: with coalition, like a coalition of bipartisanship, in a way
Speaker 6: that has not happened. It to me is one of
Speaker 6: those things where he is showing signs of leadership in
Speaker 6: the absence of leadership in a place that is very
Speaker 6: difficult to govern right now, and so to me. It
Speaker 6: just feels like everything he has promised to do has
Speaker 6: been delivered and delivered in a way that while it's
Speaker 6: been slower, everybody knows that the House Republican Conference has
Speaker 6: been incredibly difficult to govern, and he's done it in
Speaker 6: a way that I think a lot to be lauded
Speaker 6: and people ought to be proud of.
Speaker 2: The Thing is that very coalition you talk about is
Speaker 2: why Marjorie Taylor Green wants him to be gone. They
Speaker 2: don't want a Republican speaker who's working with Democrats. I
Speaker 2: think it was Andy Biggs, forgive me if I'm getting
Speaker 2: the wrong Freedom Caucus member here, who referred to essentially
Speaker 2: a coalition government last week. If Democrats protect him in
Speaker 2: emotion to vacate, could that in fact be as undoing
Speaker 2: when it comes to perception within his own conference.
Speaker 6: Perhaps, But there's also a risk that this small faction
Speaker 6: of unhappy all the time Republican members of the Conference
Speaker 6: could also find themselves with Congressman Jeffries leader Jeffries as
Speaker 6: their speaker, which would really be unpopular for them to
Speaker 6: So there's all kinds of factions that are in place here, Joe,
Speaker 6: all kinds of small things that are happening. It surprises
Speaker 6: me how much power this small coalition of Freedom Conference
Speaker 6: folks have over the overall Republican Conference. So to me,
Speaker 6: it feels as if if governing is the priority of
Speaker 6: the House of Representatives, then it's in the best interest
Speaker 6: of the Republicans and the Democrats to keep things as
Speaker 6: they are so that we can keep proceeding and go
Speaker 6: home in November and celebrate the wins that we've had.
Speaker 6: Republicans and Democrats will obviously celebrate those wins, but if
Speaker 6: Republicans continue to meddle with progress in government, it will
Speaker 6: be detrimental to their success in November.
Speaker 2: I want you to bring us inside the Speaker's office here, Lisa.
Speaker 2: You worked for Speaker Dennis Hastard, and I recall a
Speaker 2: tweet by Tom Massey last week in which he said
Speaker 2: the Speaker now shares procedural power with the Democrats. How
Speaker 2: do you take that line, because you know what it's
Speaker 2: like to sit in the Speaker's office and strategize and
Speaker 2: talk about whipping votes and moving an agenda here. Does
Speaker 2: Hakim Jeffries actually play a role in that starting now?
Speaker 6: I'm not so sure about that. I do think though,
Speaker 6: that we are governing with one seat majority. That is
Speaker 6: very different from the time when I was in the majority.
Speaker 6: We had a wide berth. We had an opportunity where
Speaker 6: folks could make a little bit more of a personal
Speaker 6: to their own district decisions while also voting almost always
Speaker 6: with the leadership. Nowadays, we're in a place where if
Speaker 6: we expect to keep our allies close and support folks
Speaker 6: like Israel and Ukraine and make decisions about how not
Speaker 6: to do business with China, we are very much going
Speaker 6: to have to work with others on the other side
Speaker 6: of the aisle, regardless of our differences in policies, because
Speaker 6: some of these policies, as much as we want to
Speaker 6: play politics all the time, are more about country than
Speaker 6: they are about party. And that to me, even though
Speaker 6: it's making some of these hardliners very unhappy, it is
Speaker 6: definitely still to me a way to govern and lead.
Speaker 6: And that's when I was in leadership, that's what we
Speaker 6: were looking to do show leadership. In fact, Speaker Aster
Speaker 6: used to say he is a speaker for the entire
Speaker 6: House of Representatives. He was elected by his peers, but
Speaker 6: he was elected to lead, and that to me is
Speaker 6: something that I'm seeing in this speaker in an unconventional way. Sure, yeah,
Speaker 6: he's got to work with Democrats. Does he want to
Speaker 6: do it? Probably no? But does he want to govern?
Speaker 6: Does he want to be perceived as someone who can
Speaker 6: work and make change? I think that's absolutely his priority.
Speaker 2: Well, so what does he do with this moment, then, Lisa,
Speaker 2: or what can he do? Because every time he walks
Speaker 2: around a corner, Donald Trump is going to be standing there.
Speaker 2: And I think we can argue that Donald Trump helped
Speaker 2: him survive last week, giving him cover after he went
Speaker 2: to mar A Lago, and he's trying to keep things
Speaker 2: together here to avoid a speaker battle, knowing that that
Speaker 2: could be a problem for Republicans up and down the ticket,
Speaker 2: all the way up to the top of the ticket
Speaker 2: in his case. Is Mike Johnson capable of doing anything
Speaker 2: to coalesce around a certain group and actually activate an
Speaker 2: agenda here or is he just waiting for the phone
Speaker 2: to ring from mar A Lago?
Speaker 6: Well, I think it's hard to say. I think Donald Trump,
Speaker 6: regardless of where you stand on Donald Trump, I think
Speaker 6: he does. He really wants to win in November, and
Speaker 6: I think that the people around him know how to win. Elections,
Speaker 6: and they know that having success and having opportunities to
Speaker 6: point to supporting smart policies that people back home are
Speaker 6: activated about is the right way to go and having
Speaker 6: these petty discussions and arguments about who should be in
Speaker 6: charge is not the path to success in November. And
Speaker 6: Donald Trump has seen that, and he has said that,
Speaker 6: and I've heard from friends of mine that are closer
Speaker 6: into that circle that he is unhappy with this constant
Speaker 6: back and forth. He wants to see leadership. He wants
Speaker 6: to see something that he can stand on to say
Speaker 6: Republicans know how to govern in spite of the fact
Speaker 6: that there's a Democrat in the White House and the
Speaker 6: Democrats are controlling the Senate. So that to me seems
Speaker 6: like if it's that's the.
Speaker 2: End of the story, then it doesn't matter what Marjorie
Speaker 2: Taylor Green thinks. As long as Donald Trump does not
Speaker 2: want his campaign to be interrupted, Mike Johnson is a
Speaker 2: safe man. He's got the speaker's gavel.
Speaker 6: I really think so, Joe.
Speaker 2: That says a lot to us as we work our
Speaker 2: way through the next six months. Can he get anything
Speaker 2: passed in that environment?
Speaker 6: Well, I don't know. This is kind of an amazing
Speaker 6: weekend for him. I think that it all remains to
Speaker 6: be seen. I think there's a lot of work that's
Speaker 6: still yet to be done, but also to keeping those
Speaker 6: factions as close as they can, keeping them working together.
Speaker 6: I mean, there was so much that was set in
Speaker 6: a pathway starting in January, from the one vote to
Speaker 6: motion to vacate the Senate or the Speaker to putting
Speaker 6: two hardliners on the Rules Committee. It has made the
Speaker 6: Speaker's office so much less powerful that if nothing else,
Speaker 6: he can point to these as wins and point to
Speaker 6: these as ways that perhaps they can work together as
Speaker 6: a conference to get more done.
Speaker 2: But glad you could talk to us today about it,
Speaker 2: Lisa Camussa Miller. It's great to have you back, Lisa.
Speaker 2: Thanks for listening to the Balance of Power podcast. Make
Speaker 2: sure to subscribe if you haven't already an Apple, Spotify,
Speaker 2: or wherever you get your podcast, and you can find
Speaker 2: us live every weekday from Washington, d C. At noontime
Speaker 2: Eastern at Bloomberg dot com.