Speaker 1: Now from our nation's capital. This is Bloomberg Sound on
Speaker 1: people want to move away from politics as you hit Thanksgiving,
Speaker 1: as you hit Christmas, as we're spending time with families,
Speaker 1: as we're trying to figure out how we're gonna fill
Speaker 1: our oils. Our goal is to see to it that
Speaker 1: our relationship with Saudi Arabia is calibrated and recalibrated. Bloomberg
Speaker 1: Sound on Politics, Policy and perspective from DC's top name.
Speaker 1: The only red way this season is going to be
Speaker 1: a German shepherd, Commander Knox over the cranberry sauce on
Speaker 1: our table. If that is the Democrats solution, Boy, are
Speaker 1: we cut? Bloomberg Sound On with Joe Matthew on Bloomberg Radio.
Speaker 1: She loves Me, She loves Me not. Welcome to the
Speaker 1: fastest hour in politics. As we go from talk of
Speaker 1: a production hike in Saudi Arabia to full denial in
Speaker 1: just twenty four hours, and with another OPEC meeting on
Speaker 1: the calendar next month and the holiday travel season starting now.
Speaker 1: We talked with Bob McNally of Rapid and Energy, the
Speaker 1: author of Crude Volatility, on what lies ahead Later. Donald
Speaker 1: Trump gets the keys back from Twitter how will it
Speaker 1: impact a presidential campaign and the virtual town square. We
Speaker 1: talk it out with Brian Ott, professor of Communication at
Speaker 1: Missouri State University, co author of the Twitter Presidency, and
Speaker 1: after the prospective Republican presidential field is rolled out in
Speaker 1: Las Vegas, we're joined by our signature panel, Bloomberg Politics
Speaker 1: contributors Jeanie Chanzano and Rick Davis with us for the
Speaker 1: hour to find some sense in the madness. Just because
Speaker 1: they deny it does not mean it isn't true. But
Speaker 1: Saudi Arabia is indeed rebuffing reports from earlier today that
Speaker 1: it's talking about a production hike for next month's OPEC meeting.
Speaker 1: Prices were up after the Wall Street Journal report went
Speaker 1: right backed down when the Saudis said, not so much,
Speaker 1: I assume, leaving people like Bob McNally with a bit
Speaker 1: of whiplash today. Bob's founder and president of Rapid and
Speaker 1: Energy Group, author of Crude Volatility, The History and Future
Speaker 1: of boom Bust oil prices. Bob, welcome back. Who do
Speaker 1: you believe on this one? Are are prices high enough?
Speaker 1: You just heard Charlie Pellett. We're back below eighty dollars
Speaker 1: of barrel. I realized that was partly because of the headline,
Speaker 1: but high enough for Saudi's to pump more. Yeah, no way, Joe, No,
Speaker 1: you're right. I'm having my neck fitted for a break.
Speaker 1: So much loop flash this morning. Um. If anything, the
Speaker 1: conversation has been trending towards a possible cut. So I
Speaker 1: was quite surprised to see the headline that they're thinking
Speaker 1: of half manion barrel to day hike. It just made
Speaker 1: no sense and we advised our clients to that pretty fast.
Speaker 1: And then the minister came out and also the U
Speaker 1: a E Minister as well shut it down. You know
Speaker 1: what's interesting in his statement. He came out and said,
Speaker 1: uh that if we need to, we'll cut again, you know.
Speaker 1: He his statement was quite sporty, um and quite pointed,
Speaker 1: and he said, look, the deal we did, the deal
Speaker 1: we took here, the decision we made last month is
Speaker 1: in force until the end of three um, and if
Speaker 1: we have to act again by cutting, we'll do so.
Speaker 1: So no, quite a quite a firm SmackDown from the Saudias,
Speaker 1: and I would believe that for December four cutting not hiking.
Speaker 1: So here we are heading into the big Thanksgiving travel weekend,
Speaker 1: crude oil falling below eighty dollars as we heard, the
Speaker 1: average price of gas three six nationally according to Triple A,
Speaker 1: though I see there's still paying above four dollars in
Speaker 1: Pennsylvania and Illinois. California is still above five. What's this
Speaker 1: winter look like? Whether you heat your home or you're
Speaker 1: getting in the car to drive? Is this is this
Speaker 1: going to be painful? Or is this relief coming at
Speaker 1: exactly the right time? Joe, It could be either. I'll
Speaker 1: tell you. In thirty two years, I've never seen a
Speaker 1: situation where the near term is is confronting such huge
Speaker 1: and offsetting risks. I can make a case for fifty
Speaker 1: dollar oil and two fifty gasoline, and I can make
Speaker 1: a case for a hundred and fifty dollar oil and
Speaker 1: four fifty dollar gasoline or five dollars. Look, it's Russia
Speaker 1: versus recession, and right now the procession is winning. China's winning.
Speaker 1: So oil prices are falling, but for the wrong reason
Speaker 1: because of slowing demand. But there's a very big risk
Speaker 1: and the market is sort of decided to ignore Russia
Speaker 1: and the sanctions and so forth. That's going to get
Speaker 1: started here next month. And I'm afraid. I'm afraid there's
Speaker 1: more pain coming. I'm a little bum bullish this winner.
Speaker 1: But the market so far seems to be in a
Speaker 1: very bearish mode. This is fascinating Russia versus recession, and
Speaker 1: it sounds like I can swing at any given moment
Speaker 1: depending on the headlines here. So let's stick with recession
Speaker 1: right now. If that's what the market is looking at, Bob,
Speaker 1: And the idea is that that's coming in three maybe
Speaker 1: towards the back end of the year, that would keep
Speaker 1: energy prices depressed for months. You could, that's right, but
Speaker 1: you know what I think, um, In this case, this
Speaker 1: is very different than ORF or even the OPEC plus producer,
Speaker 1: especially Sati Arabian U and U A. They're in a
Speaker 1: better position now to keep a floor under prices unless
Speaker 1: we have a spectacular, terrible recession right because the Saudis
Speaker 1: no longer have to worry about shale growing too fast.
Speaker 1: Our production has been has been kneecapped, and Russia is,
Speaker 1: if anything, about to be involuntarily contributing future cuts. So
Speaker 1: the two big problems Opex that Fatory even U A
Speaker 1: E have had is is sort of too much shale
Speaker 1: and too much Russia and both of these problems are solved.
Speaker 1: So you know what, I think it's credible. I think
Speaker 1: they can hold a floor at seventy or eighty dollars
Speaker 1: next year. Even if we get into a mile down turn. Now,
Speaker 1: if we have a big one, uh you know, Katie
Speaker 1: by the door, they could lose control to the bottom.
Speaker 1: But I think OPEC plus is in the driver's seat
Speaker 1: here next year, unless it's a very big contraction. Well,
Speaker 1: it would suggest that they're reading the market perfectly in
Speaker 1: the at least the scenario you just outlined. How about
Speaker 1: the plus though, I mean, what kind of a relationship
Speaker 1: are oil producing nation is going to have with Russia
Speaker 1: dumping crude uh sometimes in the dark to the nations
Speaker 1: that are somehow not being sanctioned or secondary sanctioned by
Speaker 1: then who knows if that becomes an issue or is
Speaker 1: it such a bottleneck and such a squeeze in Europe
Speaker 1: that going into the winter heating season it simply doesn't matter. Well,
Speaker 1: you know, I think the OPEC plus producers, the Arab
Speaker 1: golf producers are trying to strike a balance here. On
Speaker 1: the one hand, keep the market from getting too tight,
Speaker 1: but also too loose. Sending Europe diesel and disc lite,
Speaker 1: which they are on the other hand, you know, helping
Speaker 1: rush out as much as they can without getting cross
Speaker 1: wise with the United States. And uh, I think you're
Speaker 1: gonna still see that balancing market at the end of
Speaker 1: the day. You know, these spreads and differentials and margins
Speaker 1: are going to move around and incentivize a lot of
Speaker 1: different behavior, like India going from almost nothing to a
Speaker 1: million barrels a day of Russian the Saudi's taking Russian
Speaker 1: fuel oil, and so forth. But it's all gonna happen
Speaker 1: at high speed and and and in different places and
Speaker 1: with varying motives. And I think folks are really focused
Speaker 1: just on these sanctions and what Putin is doing in
Speaker 1: Ukraine and so forth, and hope that these, as you say,
Speaker 1: this dark movement of oil doesn't get so much notice. Well,
Speaker 1: let's play that the Russia card a little bit more.
Speaker 1: As you put a recession versus Russia. How much is
Speaker 1: the war in Ukraine going to dictate the price of
Speaker 1: oil in You know, I think it's going to be
Speaker 1: a big factor. I think we're gonna lose about a
Speaker 1: million and a half barrels a day of Russians supply.
Speaker 1: So far, we have hardly lost any right. The reason
Speaker 1: oil prices touched almost a hundred and forty dollars this
Speaker 1: spring was we thought we were gonna lose three million
Speaker 1: barrels a day this summer, and we didn't. But these
Speaker 1: sanctions are coming into place, and I don't think Putin
Speaker 1: can redirect all of that two plus million barrels a
Speaker 1: day that he's now shipping to Europe, especially that the
Speaker 1: refined products distilate so Putin's and and you know Indian
Speaker 1: China can only take so much, and there's many, so
Speaker 1: many boats, so we think they're gonna lose quite a bit.
Speaker 1: I don't think that's really discounted yet in the market.
Speaker 1: I don't think the price cap is going to stop
Speaker 1: that the Treasury is putting out. I think that's intended
Speaker 1: to help those flows, but there's still gonna be a
Speaker 1: loss about a million and a a half barrels a day.
Speaker 1: And you know, wars are not good for that. They
Speaker 1: can contribute to recessions, but these wars U and these
Speaker 1: attacks on infrastructure. We've seen accidents at the KPC pipeline,
Speaker 1: CPC rather pipeline, UH and UH, you know I think
Speaker 1: I think there's some bullish risk coming here here. Fundamentally,
Speaker 1: the combination of the OPEC plus cut, the loss of Russia.
Speaker 1: And you know, while we talk about recession, so far,
Speaker 1: the demand data aren't that bad. I mean, India is scorching. Actually,
Speaker 1: China is not that terrible. And even in the US, Okay,
Speaker 1: we're not leaping and bounding above, but nor are we cratering.
Speaker 1: You know, So maybe there's a third card there, Bob,
Speaker 1: isn't it China? I mean, what if we just take
Speaker 1: the wraps off, we we take the restrictions off everything.
Speaker 1: There's no more COVID in China? What's that? This is
Speaker 1: a very different conversation, right, Joe, Very different, and you
Speaker 1: know that's kind of our scenario. But after Q one,
Speaker 1: we think there's gonna be she shimping is still consolidating
Speaker 1: his power grab, and we think through the through the
Speaker 1: holiday period in the first quarter and they have his
Speaker 1: two sessions conference and so forth, we think that they
Speaker 1: will air towards lockdowns. But after that we think he reopens.
Speaker 1: Demand goes back about sixteen million barrels a day. And
Speaker 1: if we've if we've lost some Russian supply by then,
Speaker 1: and we've baked in this OPEC plus cut. Uh, then
Speaker 1: things get tight and sporty, and then I think sentiment
Speaker 1: ships back to a more bullish bullish framework. Well, you know,
Speaker 1: we're always looking at the price of oil, uh, and
Speaker 1: the price of gas for that matter, as as not
Speaker 1: only an economic indicator, but a political one, because Joe
Speaker 1: Biden's presidential approval ratings have followed them so closely. When
Speaker 1: you hold up these two charts, they're identical. Actually, So
Speaker 1: let's get back to your initial proposition here fifty dollars
Speaker 1: a gallon or a hundred and fifty dollars a gallon.
Speaker 1: As we head into three, which is more likely, I
Speaker 1: think we're gonna go up first. So we're looking at
Speaker 1: about a hundred and fifteen dollar brent average in the
Speaker 1: first quarter. Uh, and then I think we're gonna go
Speaker 1: down to about eighty. I think that the economic weakness
Speaker 1: is there, and another oil price spike will even exacerbate that.
Speaker 1: The central banks are still raising raids. We don't think
Speaker 1: the FED is done and so um, so we think
Speaker 1: we have one more spike. That spike in addition to
Speaker 1: these other macro factors, A strong dollar, et cetera. Will
Speaker 1: depress activity, so then we think you probably have a
Speaker 1: sell off later in the year, again not for good reasons.
Speaker 1: So up and then down would be our view. We
Speaker 1: don't touch one, fifty, we don't touch fifty. We head
Speaker 1: toward the first and then towards the second. I guess
Speaker 1: how much of an issue will be the bottleneck in
Speaker 1: the Northeast when it comes to distal. It's heating oil
Speaker 1: in particular for our listeners in Boston who were thinking
Speaker 1: about refilling now or maybe you you you know you
Speaker 1: only put a little bit in there, wait till this
Speaker 1: maybe starts to break in the coming weeks or months. Well,
Speaker 1: I'll tell you I would be filling. I'm from Connecticut
Speaker 1: and I was viers up there. Still I I'd be filling,
Speaker 1: because you know, it depends on the weather. Look, we're
Speaker 1: gonna pull a lot of distill it over from Europe.
Speaker 1: The spread between the Northeast and Europe Rotterdam has opened up,
Speaker 1: so cargoes are coming and uh until at least the
Speaker 1: Russian supplies are cut off, right, lad will be February.
Speaker 1: We have several weeks to a couple of months where
Speaker 1: Europe can send us some and hopefully we can um,
Speaker 1: we can replenish, and the Biden administration is also looking
Speaker 1: at options try and rush some more distill it up there.
Speaker 1: So uh, but you know what, it's a weather call.
Speaker 1: If it were me, I would be I'd have my
Speaker 1: you know, snow shovels ready, and I'd have my eating
Speaker 1: tanks full. Oh boy, Bob, thank you. I'm cold just
Speaker 1: thinking about it. Bob McNally's founder and president Rapid and Energy.
Speaker 1: His book Crude Volatility in a great way to start
Speaker 1: the fastest hour in politics. We learned something from Bob
Speaker 1: every time, and the political implications here are huge. That's
Speaker 1: why we assembled the panel. Next Rick and Genie on
Speaker 1: the way, I'm Joe Matthews. This is Bloomberg. This is Bloomberg.
Speaker 1: So long with Joe Matthew on Bloomberg Radio. It's the
Speaker 1: snark and the statements that makes it worth reading. Saudi
Speaker 1: Arabia's energy minister says, in response to the story that
Speaker 1: there's a possible production ike being talked about next month. Quote,
Speaker 1: if there's a need to take further measures by reducing production,
Speaker 1: we remain ready to intervene unquote what about the fifth bump?
Speaker 1: It's like the Fifth Bump never happened. We assemble our panel.
Speaker 1: Rick Davis back with us today along with Jeanie Chanzano
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Politics contributors. Is this just another swipe at the
Speaker 1: Biden administration? Genie? You know, you you float a story
Speaker 1: like that, you see you can knock it down and
Speaker 1: have fun with everyone. You know, there are so many
Speaker 1: questions and what a strange day it has been in
Speaker 1: this regard, and you know, you know, a big question
Speaker 1: that can be asked is, you know, was this a
Speaker 1: one OPEC nation or more? Who wants in production to
Speaker 1: increase um? These are really good reporters at the Wall
Speaker 1: Street Journal, so it's hard to imagine they got the
Speaker 1: story wrong. But yet, you know, you look at the
Speaker 1: statement that came from Saudi Arabia, and you know, sporty, snarky,
Speaker 1: those are all the words that you guys are using.
Speaker 1: I think that's right. But another big thing here is
Speaker 1: the timing. I mean, let's not forget that this is
Speaker 1: coming just as the Biden administration said that MBS should
Speaker 1: be shielded from this lawsuit over his role in the
Speaker 1: Kashogi killings, which has led some to believe and report
Speaker 1: before that the statement from Saudi Arabia that perhaps this
Speaker 1: was you know, payback for that. Of course, then you
Speaker 1: have the switch in time, so it's hard to know.
Speaker 1: But the timing is very, very difficult to wrap your
Speaker 1: head around. And let's not forget because shogis poor fiance
Speaker 1: coming out and saying after the Biden administration did this
Speaker 1: that he died again today. So real pushback politically here
Speaker 1: on this decision to say he should be immune from
Speaker 1: this from responsibility here legally, you get the sense of
Speaker 1: Rick Davis said that Joe Biden will be haunted by
Speaker 1: Saudi Arabia for the balance of his presidency. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: don't that I would definitely agree with. There's a lot
Speaker 1: to unpack with Genie's comments, but I would say absolutely
Speaker 1: this is not a story that's gonna end this week. Right,
Speaker 1: We've been baffled time and time again by the Kingdom
Speaker 1: and their their politics of oil. There are allegiances to Russia,
Speaker 1: their friendship with China, They're disliked with the Biden administration,
Speaker 1: and at the end of the day, I don't think
Speaker 1: we really know what's motivating them. Um, obviously they don't
Speaker 1: have a good relationship with the Biden administration. It doesn't necessarily,
Speaker 1: even a good one wouldn't necessarily translate to playing petro
Speaker 1: politics with Biden. So um, I think we just got
Speaker 1: to take it at face value. Uh, somebody got it wrong.
Speaker 1: Here's what they're gonna do, and they're just as likely
Speaker 1: to reduce prices as hike them, you know, in my opinion,
Speaker 1: regardless of what they're saying today, you should talk more
Speaker 1: about what what you just brought up here, Jennie. The
Speaker 1: Biden administration decides to rant's sovereign immunity, Uh, to MBS
Speaker 1: Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed been Salmi, shielding him from a
Speaker 1: lawsuit over the killing of Jamal ka Shogi. Uh. What
Speaker 1: this is the same guy who said it would make
Speaker 1: Saudi Arabia a pariah on the world stage. How do
Speaker 1: you connect the dots here? And that's what's gotten so
Speaker 1: many Democrats in particular, but people across the political landscape frustrated.
Speaker 1: At the point where you thought the by administration was
Speaker 1: being rewarded with a production, Well yeah, and I would
Speaker 1: say not just me, but that has been reported in
Speaker 1: the press, particularly before they took it back quote unquote,
Speaker 1: you know, so it's hard to wrap your head around it.
Speaker 1: But that call for immunity, which is non binding, so
Speaker 1: a judge may you know, overturn that, but it was
Speaker 1: the official view of the Biden administration, and you know,
Speaker 1: it could be something that the judge grants. That has
Speaker 1: gotten real blowback from people across the board who say,
Speaker 1: this is a who said to your point that this
Speaker 1: was a pariahs state. This is somebody who was kidnapped,
Speaker 1: dismembered and you know, an American journalist from the Washington
Speaker 1: Post and found, you know, in the diplomatic mission. You know,
Speaker 1: this is um something too. For the bidenman administration to
Speaker 1: come out and say he should be shielded from this
Speaker 1: is quite a statement, and coming of course on the
Speaker 1: Keels as of his infamous fist pump going over there
Speaker 1: and fist bumping, and then you had, you know this
Speaker 1: this you know, oddly time decision today that we hear
Speaker 1: in the Wall Street Journal that they're going to, you know,
Speaker 1: potentially take this step, which is a whole skill reversal
Speaker 1: from what they said a month ago. So the timing
Speaker 1: is very suspect, indeed confused, Rick, you know who else
Speaker 1: agreed with Joe Biden's Mark Warner UH Democrat or a
Speaker 1: senior senator Senator in Telligence Committee chair. He says, even
Speaker 1: for leaders we don't like. The reason why there was
Speaker 1: a grant of sovereign immunity is as much to protect
Speaker 1: American leaders in American diplomats when they are abroad. As
Speaker 1: he write about that. Yeah, I think there's way too
Speaker 1: much being sort of read into this, right, I mean,
Speaker 1: there is a standard around the world, uh that officeholders
Speaker 1: have sovereign immunity, and it creates even though sometimes it
Speaker 1: seems incredibly unfair, like in this case, um, it does
Speaker 1: keep the idea of maintaining UM one click above chaos
Speaker 1: as a global standard. It would be a very bad
Speaker 1: thing if every president, every prime minister, every foreign minister
Speaker 1: or defense minister of any country in the world could
Speaker 1: be sued by anybody who's got a grievance about a
Speaker 1: policy that they've done. And and so there's a reason
Speaker 1: why months ago um um mbs the Crown Prince became
Speaker 1: the prime minister because sovereign immunity probably does not extend
Speaker 1: to a royal but it does extend to a prime minister. Well,
Speaker 1: that does tell us something Genie, but then that prime minister. Apparently,
Speaker 1: according to McNally, there has a floor under oil and
Speaker 1: gas prices for the for the next year. How much
Speaker 1: of a problem is that for Joe Biden. It's a
Speaker 1: real problem for Joe Biden. And is it the timing
Speaker 1: of him being named a prime minister when he is
Speaker 1: not yet king that has other people scratching their heads
Speaker 1: as well in the United States responding to that as
Speaker 1: if he is prime minister, that is another question. Boy,
Speaker 1: we're out of something here with the panel. Jennie and
Speaker 1: Rick are back there here for the hour, our signature panelists.
Speaker 1: We bring in Brian Odd coming up. Who's out with
Speaker 1: an op ed in the New York Times today on
Speaker 1: Trump's return to Twitter. This is Bloomberg. So it came
Speaker 1: down to a poll. It was a twenty four hour poll,
Speaker 1: as most things should be decided of import right at
Speaker 1: twenty four hour Twitter poll, fifteen million votes, fifty eight
Speaker 1: and he's back. Elon must says Donald Trump's account to
Speaker 1: be restored. He still has not tweeted There'll be an
Speaker 1: earthquake when that happens, right, assuming that that happens. But
Speaker 1: this whole codependency between Donald Trump and Elon Musk is fascinating.
Speaker 1: As Tim O'Brien writes today in Bloomberg Opinion, Then again,
Speaker 1: Donald Trump not a real fan of Elon from what
Speaker 1: we've heard and seen in terms of writing and language.
Speaker 1: Remember this one from this was over the summer at
Speaker 1: a Trump rally. Elon, Elon is not gonna buy Twitter.
Speaker 1: Where did you hear that before? You know? From me?
Speaker 1: From a fank account? She says, fake a lot of them. No,
Speaker 1: he's got himself a mess, you know. He said the
Speaker 1: other day, Oh, I've never voted for a Republican. I said,
Speaker 1: I didn't know that. He told me voted from me,
Speaker 1: So he's another boat artist. Okay, there you go. Actually
Speaker 1: a lot was said there if you think about it.
Speaker 1: And I bumped into this guest essay in The New
Speaker 1: York Times. I studied Trump's Twitter use for six years.
Speaker 1: Prepare for the worst, the writing of Brian Ott, who
Speaker 1: joins us now on Bloomberg sound On, professor of Communication
Speaker 1: at Missouri State University, co author as well of the
Speaker 1: Twitter Presidency, Donald Trump and the Politics of White Rage. Professor,
Speaker 1: I clearly you are not a fan. How bad is
Speaker 1: this going to get? In your view, well, I think
Speaker 1: it could get very bad. Joe. When does he finally
Speaker 1: given and tweet something. I don't think we'll have to
Speaker 1: wait long for him. I don't think he can resist
Speaker 1: um and and I don't think he can help himself.
Speaker 1: So I think he'll tweet probably within the next two weeks. Okay,
Speaker 1: that's that's funny. And you look, I'm sure he's reading
Speaker 1: the tweets from Elon Musk and so forth. You outlined
Speaker 1: a pretty scary scenario here in your column, and it basically,
Speaker 1: if I'm the arc, if I'm doing it right, is
Speaker 1: social media in this case, specifically, Twitter is the kindling.
Speaker 1: Trump is an accelerant, as you say, and his message
Speaker 1: is a match what goes off this time. A lot
Speaker 1: of people say January six wouldn't have happened without Twitter.
Speaker 1: So I think it's important to understand that um Trump
Speaker 1: is a fairly predictable figure. A lot of figures in
Speaker 1: political life are not all that predictable, but Trump is
Speaker 1: a fairly predictable figure. I've been studying his his rhetoric
Speaker 1: and his use of social media for six years, and
Speaker 1: it's pretty safe bet how he's going to behave and
Speaker 1: so you know, like he um holds grudges and so um,
Speaker 1: the first time that somebody really angers him, um, he's
Speaker 1: gonna go after them on Twitter because it's a much
Speaker 1: broader following. I mean he has he has a Donald
Speaker 1: Trump has fewer than five million followers on his own
Speaker 1: truth social network right now. He had eighty eight million
Speaker 1: followers on Twitter. Yeah, that's remarkable. How are you do
Speaker 1: you follow him on truth as well? Do you see
Speaker 1: what he's doing now? I don't. I don't follow him
Speaker 1: on truth. He does even the people writing about him.
Speaker 1: I love that. So that means he has to go.
Speaker 1: But so how about forgive the the boring geeky question here, Brian,
Speaker 1: But why not just forward truth to Twitter? Why not
Speaker 1: just put the truth son on the Twitter sphere? So
Speaker 1: a lot of his followers do do that. Trump has
Speaker 1: a a contract with his his own company, and he's
Speaker 1: supposed to give a six hour exclusive time to anything
Speaker 1: he posts on truth social before it can be posted
Speaker 1: as some other social media platform. Now there are some
Speaker 1: really important exclusions to that, not the least of which
Speaker 1: is political messaging. Okay, so much for the embargo then,
Speaker 1: so this so that that might be one way to
Speaker 1: do this and you get your your brand out there
Speaker 1: or something like that. I mean, we're assuming that Donald
Speaker 1: Trump still stands to make money in some sort of
Speaker 1: a spack deal with truth social is that? Is that
Speaker 1: still true? So so Donald don't Yeah? Yes, absolutely. Plus
Speaker 1: Donald Trump is is one of the most successful mine
Speaker 1: of fundraisers UM in US American politics, and so he
Speaker 1: probably better than anyone, has leveraged social media platforms and
Speaker 1: Twitter specifically as a fundraising tool. And so that's one
Speaker 1: of the reasons why I think he will absolutely return
Speaker 1: to Twitter as he continues to pursue UM the presidency.
Speaker 1: So back to your headline, I studied Trump's Twitter for
Speaker 1: six years. Prepare for the worst. That means you probably
Speaker 1: visualize what you see as the worst. Brian, what is it? So?
Speaker 1: I think we're likely at some point to see a
Speaker 1: repeat of January six. Uh. So, you know Trump UM
Speaker 1: likes to incite his followers UM. He likes to to
Speaker 1: to leverage UM emotional messages UM to get those people
Speaker 1: angry at a particular UM individual or event. And would
Speaker 1: that be on Elon Musk if that did happen again?
Speaker 1: So I think Musk has behaved terribly irresponsively in relationship
Speaker 1: to this whole thing. Actually, I think he's behaved terribly
Speaker 1: irresponsibly in his management of Twitter since he returned. Therefore, yes,
Speaker 1: he carries some responsibility. You know, there's all this talk
Speaker 1: about the digital town square, and I don't know if
Speaker 1: I buy that, if there's even really such a thing
Speaker 1: to try to compare that to you know, to to
Speaker 1: the to the way we conduct ourselves in an actual
Speaker 1: town square. Brian, Uh, what what does Elon's vision look like?
Speaker 1: What's the game? So? So, Elon Musk is a is
Speaker 1: a business person, and he is interested in making money.
Speaker 1: And virtually every decision he has made since arriving at
Speaker 1: Twitter or taking acquisition Twitter has been in the interest
Speaker 1: of trying to turn a profit at the company. And so, um,
Speaker 1: my guess is he's That's why he's trying to recruit
Speaker 1: Donald Trump. It's so it's a ratings game, just like
Speaker 1: any old fashioned media company. That's the we got there
Speaker 1: just in the nick. Hey, I like talking to you, Brian.
Speaker 1: Thank you for chiming in on this. What a time
Speaker 1: to meet Brian Ott. The Twitter presidency. Indeed it comes
Speaker 1: back around. We'll see about that. Uh. And We'll ask
Speaker 1: our panel as well, Genie Chanzano, when Rick Davis up
Speaker 1: next Bloomberg Politics contributors on the fastest hour in politics.
Speaker 1: It's called sound Off. This is Bloomberg, this is Bloomberg.
Speaker 1: So long with Joe Matthew on Bloomberg Radio. Gennie is watching,
Speaker 1: so we don't have to, Genie Chanzano. Half of our
Speaker 1: signature panel is still the only one, and I keep
Speaker 1: asking who I can actually confirm is on truth social
Speaker 1: Rick Davis joins us from London as the other half
Speaker 1: of our panel, and it's great to have both of
Speaker 1: you with us here. I mean even you know, we
Speaker 1: just talked to Brian, even the man who is researching
Speaker 1: and writing about Trump is not following him on truth
Speaker 1: or Genie, I should take this moment to thank you
Speaker 1: for the work you've done. I do it for you,
Speaker 1: Joe Matthew. Some of us have too, so I'm willing
Speaker 1: to put myself out there. And you know Brian, Brian
Speaker 1: can't do it, he's busy on Twitter. I'll do it
Speaker 1: for you. Joe. Well, maybe he's coming back around to Twitter,
Speaker 1: which of course remains the big question here. Uh, And
Speaker 1: we do want to get both of your take on
Speaker 1: this genie. Can he resisted? I know that you think
Speaker 1: probably not, But but at what point does it start
Speaker 1: to impact the political conversation? You know, A part of
Speaker 1: it is he can't resist it because as Brian talked about,
Speaker 1: the differential in the numbers, you know, under five million
Speaker 1: over eighty million. And the fact is also Brian's right
Speaker 1: about the fundraising. He raises a lot of money on
Speaker 1: a place like Twitter, and he's running. As we saw
Speaker 1: over the weekend, a lot of big Goop funders don't
Speaker 1: want to fund him, at least as of now. He
Speaker 1: might need those small donors. But I'll tell you a
Speaker 1: big problem he has, and it's going to be a
Speaker 1: decision for him to make if he has to leave
Speaker 1: truth Social he's the only one keeping that afloat, and
Speaker 1: there goes another brand that he has his name on
Speaker 1: that collapses that it's also a big problem for him.
Speaker 1: So he's caught between a rock and a hard place.
Speaker 1: You know. I think he may be be looking at
Speaker 1: this December eighth deadline and this date that they keep
Speaker 1: talking about. I don't know if he goes on Twitter
Speaker 1: before that, because that's going to be a big deadline.
Speaker 1: Unless they extend it for them to make a decision
Speaker 1: about truth. He was talking over the weekend a couple
Speaker 1: of instances, and in this case at a Mara Lago event.
Speaker 1: There was a gala there, and he's got the black
Speaker 1: tie and the whole bit at the podium in which
Speaker 1: he responds to the appointment of the Special Council. This
Speaker 1: is something we haven't had an opportunity to talk about
Speaker 1: with the panel yet. Jack Smith, of course appointed on
Speaker 1: Friday by Attorney General Merrick Garland, and uh, the former
Speaker 1: president just couldn't believe it. Listen to him from over
Speaker 1: the years, I've given millions and millions of pages of documents,
Speaker 1: tax returns and everything else, and they have found nothing,
Speaker 1: which means I've proven to be one of the most
Speaker 1: honest and innocent people ever in our country. That's it,
Speaker 1: one of the most honest and innocent people in the
Speaker 1: history of our country, unless you ask the His Attorney
Speaker 1: general no longer Former Attorney General Bill Barr had a
Speaker 1: heck of an interview as well over the weekend on PBS.
Speaker 1: Asked about the case that Jack Smith now presides over. Listen,
Speaker 1: given what's gone on, I think they probably have the
Speaker 1: evidence that would check the box. They have the case,
Speaker 1: and if they have it, should they That's a decision
Speaker 1: for if you were a g would you I'm not
Speaker 1: going to get into that. Do you think they will?
Speaker 1: I think it's becoming increasingly more likely, increasingly more likely
Speaker 1: they've checked the box, Rick Davis, they have the case.
Speaker 1: Would this have gone to Jack Smith if that were
Speaker 1: not the case? Uh? Yeah, I think that no matter what,
Speaker 1: they were going to get it out of the Department
Speaker 1: of Justice because you've got a an individual running for
Speaker 1: president who you know, uh, they don't want to look
Speaker 1: like they're putting their finger on the scale politically, and
Speaker 1: and and you've got to give credit to Merrick Garland this.
Speaker 1: It would have been easier, frankly to keep it at
Speaker 1: Justice And the fact that you know, he's gone out
Speaker 1: of his way to create the special prosecutors gonna cost more. Mind,
Speaker 1: It's gonna be harder to control. Um. The reality is
Speaker 1: it is probably the right thing to do, regardless of
Speaker 1: weather Doctrum thought it was a good idea or not.
Speaker 1: What I've really found fascinating by that former Attorney General
Speaker 1: Barr comment was even though he thinks the guy probably
Speaker 1: has a case when they asked whether he would do
Speaker 1: anything about it, he absolutely good to answer the questions
Speaker 1: the right answer. Someone breaks the law, they should be prosecuted.
Speaker 1: I mean, like, how hard is that? Well, although I mean, look,
Speaker 1: you've both had the weekend to think about this. The
Speaker 1: idea of of the of this case, never mind all
Speaker 1: of these cases, my god, you have the Southern District
Speaker 1: of New York, you had Fulton County, Georgia. The idea
Speaker 1: of them resolving in the middle of a presidential campaign
Speaker 1: with a potenti acentual indictment with potential criminal charges Genie
Speaker 1: is something we've not seen. We haven't and it is
Speaker 1: a very tough decision for this special counsel, that special
Speaker 1: prosecutor to make. I don't think he should be charged
Speaker 1: unless and this is where I do think it is difficult.
Speaker 1: He should not be charged unless they can confirm in
Speaker 1: their own minds that he will definitely be found guilty.
Speaker 1: And I think that's a very high bar for any
Speaker 1: prosecutor to meet. And that's where I think it's going
Speaker 1: to be difficult. And I think Merrick Garland wanted to
Speaker 1: get this to a special prosecutor. Either way, whether he's
Speaker 1: charged or not. Merrick Garland wants this out of his
Speaker 1: hands because there is no political upside to him keeping
Speaker 1: this in the d o J. And it's not just
Speaker 1: about Donald Trump announcing he's president he's running. It's also
Speaker 1: Joe Biden saying that he is seriously considering as well
Speaker 1: or has an intention to run. For those reasons, Merrick
Speaker 1: Garland is not going to keep it in the d
Speaker 1: o J. Nor shouldy he made the right choice here.
Speaker 1: But well, look this is where the whole idea of
Speaker 1: another January six comes into play. Rick, I'm sure you
Speaker 1: visualized this. Brian Ott, who we spoke with a couple
Speaker 1: of moments ago, certainly has is. He says, prepare for
Speaker 1: the worst with Trump back on Twitter, he could orchestrate
Speaker 1: potentially something like that. But I mean that that kicks
Speaker 1: off just a whole new level of division, right, even
Speaker 1: if it is justified that this ends in an indictment
Speaker 1: or a criminal charge. Yeah, I would first say that
Speaker 1: I don't think anything law enforcement, the Department of Justice,
Speaker 1: Special productutors anywhere in you know, the in Washington, New York,
Speaker 1: Fulton County, Georgia, I don't. I don't think any of
Speaker 1: those are a prerequisite to him inciting violence. He's gonna
Speaker 1: do that anyway. He's already been doing it right long
Speaker 1: before there was even a raid on mar Lager. I
Speaker 1: know we're not supposed to call it a raid, but
Speaker 1: the rate at mar Lago, he was already inciding violence
Speaker 1: in politics. So I think we gotta quit thinking that
Speaker 1: he actually needs a reason to do it. It's what
Speaker 1: he does. And I would say the one thing you
Speaker 1: know on on this issue of of you know whether
Speaker 1: to prosecute. Nobody can predict whether or not you can
Speaker 1: get a judgment that you want. But if you have
Speaker 1: evidence that indicates there's been a crime, you have an
Speaker 1: obligation to the taxpayers to actually prosecute the crime. You
Speaker 1: may or may not win, but you don't have But
Speaker 1: if you don't have a case, then you shouldn't prosecute.
Speaker 1: That should be the only determination by these prosecutors. This
Speaker 1: will be happening simultaneously, Jennie, as we have heard from
Speaker 1: the incoming leadership in the Republican led House, this will
Speaker 1: be happening alongside investigations into Hunter Biden's laptop, the Biden
Speaker 1: crime Family as it's as it's been referred to, along
Speaker 1: with the withdrawal from Afghanistan and any number of other
Speaker 1: UH investigations that will be coming out of Oversight and
Speaker 1: other committees in the House. Just that idea though, of
Speaker 1: the Hunter Biden laptop at last being pursued in the
Speaker 1: eyes of Republicans and Donald Trump being indicted in the
Speaker 1: middle of a presidential campaign, is that worth it? Well,
Speaker 1: you know, I think it's very telling that this is
Speaker 1: what we've heard out of the GOP incoming house leadership
Speaker 1: from Jim Jordan, James Comber. The first you know, press
Speaker 1: conference they held was about these investigations. It's gonna be
Speaker 1: coming simultaneously, as you mentioned, and we move into and
Speaker 1: you know, this is sort of what is going to
Speaker 1: be so divisive on both sides, and I think we
Speaker 1: have to underscore this. Their investigations of this, you know,
Speaker 1: the Hunter Biden, Joe Biden, the you know d o J,
Speaker 1: the Democratic d o J. According to some investigating Donald Trump,
Speaker 1: it is going to polarize even further as we move
Speaker 1: into four. And that's where you get this sort of
Speaker 1: recipe for disaster, as you know, in another January six.
Speaker 1: And by the way, I don't think it's going to
Speaker 1: take just Donald Trump to incite it. I think there
Speaker 1: are others out there as well. And that's where Elon
Speaker 1: Musk does bear responsibility for what's coming on his platform,
Speaker 1: and he doesn't seem to be take that taking that
Speaker 1: as seriously as we, you know, many of us may
Speaker 1: have hoped he would, and it all seems to be
Speaker 1: about ratings and God bless him as a businessman. But
Speaker 1: if he's going to talk about democracy and freedom and
Speaker 1: all of these kinds of things, he's also going to
Speaker 1: have to take responsibility for what this platform elicits in
Speaker 1: the next in the next few months, well, we have
Speaker 1: to take responsibility for another January six rick as as
Speaker 1: Brian Not said, Oh yeah, I mean I think that, uh,
Speaker 1: I think that this is exactly what Genie was just
Speaker 1: referring to. Is that, um, you know, Brian Not thinks that, uh.
Speaker 1: For a lot of different reasons, his hot rhetoric incites
Speaker 1: his people. They look for the the the cues. I mean,
Speaker 1: is this part of Elon He wants to have an
Speaker 1: open discourse, right, just let it rip. Everybody say what
Speaker 1: you gotta say, and go home and and and and
Speaker 1: be better for it. But if it's inciting violence, it's
Speaker 1: a different conversation. Yeah, but I think this is this
Speaker 1: is the question is whether you know Elon Musk or
Speaker 1: his content moderation unseld that from what we can tell,
Speaker 1: had nothing to do with letting Donald Trump back on
Speaker 1: um you know, is going to be able to moderate
Speaker 1: that and at the same time do what Brian not said,
Speaker 1: which is turn a profit. And I think that if
Speaker 1: you have to rely on Elon Musk to turn a
Speaker 1: profit or do the right thing, gee, what do you
Speaker 1: think he's gonna do? I think that's pretty clear. On
Speaker 1: the day that Joe Biden issues a pardon, there was
Speaker 1: some talk over the weekend about, gosh, what would happen
Speaker 1: if he if he pardoned Donald Trump? Here and you
Speaker 1: know you can hear the laughter from the other end
Speaker 1: of Pennsylvania Avenue. But today, of course, it was for
Speaker 1: chocolate and chip this Thanksgiving week. Here he is with
Speaker 1: the turkeys based on their temperament and commitment to being
Speaker 1: productive members of society. I hear by pardon, I hear
Speaker 1: by parton, Yes, I hear by pardon, chocolate and chip.
Speaker 1: Let's hear it for chocolate and chip, Geanie. You know
Speaker 1: they get a night at the Willard Hotel. Uh, just
Speaker 1: for that before they go off to to roam the
Speaker 1: pastors after Thanksgiving. At least some traditions stay alive a
Speaker 1: tried and true tradition. Last year it was peanut butter
Speaker 1: and jelly. I think was that PJ and this this
Speaker 1: year it's chocolate and chip. I love it. They're going
Speaker 1: to go enjoy themselves at the hotel tonight and then
Speaker 1: they are off to the pastors, as we all will
Speaker 1: be someday. Joe, there might be pictures on the Hunter
Speaker 1: Biden laptop from that hotel room, Rick, But I don't
Speaker 1: know what do you think yis? I mean, actually think
Speaker 1: it shouldn't be chocolate chip. It should be Donald and
Speaker 1: Hunter and then everyone can claim they got there. Thank
Speaker 1: you for Rick Davis live in London, Jeannie Chanzana in
Speaker 1: New York. I'm Joe, Matthew and Washington. The fastest hour
Speaker 1: in politics. This is bloom curfe