Speaker 1: Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at
Speaker 1: noon Eastern on Appocarplay and then Roudoto 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 Tuesday edition of Balance of Power. Here
Speaker 2: we are again on the radio, on the satellite, and
Speaker 2: on YouTube, and we do have breaking news. If you've
Speaker 2: been with us just a couple of hours ago, Hunter Biden.
Speaker 2: Has it even been that long, not even an hour ago?
Speaker 2: Hunter Biden convicted on gun charges by a jury in Delaware.
Speaker 3: We saw it coming.
Speaker 2: It's only three counts, and we were told, with overwhelming evidence,
Speaker 2: this should not be a long deliberation.
Speaker 3: And it wasn't.
Speaker 2: Three up and three down. And as you wonder, we
Speaker 2: keeps asking, what's Joe Biden going to do? What'll he say?
Speaker 2: How does the White House handle this? We got the statement,
Speaker 2: this is officially from the President of the United States.
Speaker 3: I'm going to read the whole thing for you. Quote.
Speaker 2: As I said last week, I am the president, but
Speaker 2: I am also a dad. Jill and I love our
Speaker 2: son and we are so proud of the man he
Speaker 2: is today. So many families who have had loved one's
Speaker 2: battle addiction understand the feeling of pride seeing someone you
Speaker 2: love come out the other side and be so strong
Speaker 2: and resilient in recovery. Joe Biden goes on to write,
Speaker 2: as I also said last week, I will accept the
Speaker 2: outcome of this case and will continue to respect the
Speaker 2: judicial process as Hunter considers an appeal. Jill and I
Speaker 2: will always be there for Hunter and the rest of
Speaker 2: our family with love and support. Nothing will ever change that, unquote.
Speaker 2: So that's how he's going to handle it. He will
Speaker 2: be speaking later today. Questions about whether he might indulge
Speaker 2: the press with something in person, we'll find out about that.
Speaker 3: But this is the first statement, the first reaction from
Speaker 3: the White House.
Speaker 2: June Grosso has been all over this from the beginning,
Speaker 2: and she's with us now from New York. Of course,
Speaker 2: the host of Bloomberg Law. We knew it would be
Speaker 2: pretty quick here, June, three counts guilty. Do we have
Speaker 2: a sentencing date? What actually happens next? Procedurally?
Speaker 4: The judge didn't set a sensing date yet, but she
Speaker 4: said it's within usually about one hundred and twenty days,
Speaker 4: So that puts it in October, I think, and then we'll,
Speaker 4: you know, we'll find out. I mean, it's not though
Speaker 4: he is facing you know, and we say facing like
Speaker 4: the max he could get is twenty five years. There
Speaker 4: is also a chance that he could get probation because
Speaker 4: and we have to go through the sentencing guidelines to
Speaker 4: look at you know, this is like a mathematical calculation
Speaker 4: that federal prosecutors who do these kinds of cases and
Speaker 4: defense attorneys know how to do. But there is a
Speaker 4: chance that he could just get probation according to what
Speaker 4: I'm seeing, because the gun wasn't used in any kind
Speaker 4: of a crime and he only had it for eleven days.
Speaker 4: But we'll learn more about that as we go through
Speaker 4: the guidelines.
Speaker 2: Well understood, Yeah, it's just to your point. Two of
Speaker 2: the gun counts carry a prison term as long as
Speaker 2: ten years, another punishable by as many as five brings
Speaker 2: us to a potential twenty five year term. How about
Speaker 2: fines though, would they not be more likely?
Speaker 5: Well?
Speaker 4: I think you know, fines would be in order. I
Speaker 4: think is it two hundred and fifty thousand for the
Speaker 4: two counts.
Speaker 6: Each of the two counts.
Speaker 3: You're the expert I have.
Speaker 4: Yeah, well, I'm not actually expert on the on the
Speaker 4: sentence in guidelines unless I study them. So I think
Speaker 4: that the fines are pretty high, and yeah, she might
Speaker 4: she might do a fine as well. But what's important
Speaker 4: here is that, you know, despite what Donald Trump has
Speaker 4: been saying about the justice system, here you have a
Speaker 4: case where the Biden Justice Department prosecuted the president's son
Speaker 4: and there is a guilty verdict and you're going to
Speaker 4: have a Trump appointed judge give the sentence. So it's
Speaker 4: kind of hard to argue, although I'm sure they will,
Speaker 4: it's kind of hard to argue that the system is
Speaker 4: you know, biased, right.
Speaker 2: And this is federal court as opposed to the New
Speaker 2: York court that Donald Trump was in. Are we going
Speaker 2: to hear from the Department of Justice? Is there a
Speaker 2: news conference? Are they treating it that way? June because
Speaker 2: of the level of scrutiny that this case is getting.
Speaker 4: You know, that's an interesting question because it is the
Speaker 4: Special Council here, and you know that special councils have
Speaker 4: been subject to a lot of criticism. This special council
Speaker 4: was appointed at the sort of the last minute because
Speaker 4: he requested. And there's this mystery about why he needed
Speaker 4: to be a special council. Was it just so he
Speaker 4: could bring because he's it's the same counsel who was
Speaker 4: investigating Hunter Biden in Delaware, so he could bring cases
Speaker 4: in Delaware, and he could bring the case in California,
Speaker 4: the tax case. So it'll be interesting to see. I
Speaker 4: would think not, because you know, federal prosecutors are different
Speaker 4: from state prosecutors who go out there a lot of
Speaker 4: them elected, and they go out and they talk after
Speaker 4: the verdict and you know, give themselves kudos, et cetera.
Speaker 4: So federal prosecutors keep it close to the vest. And
Speaker 4: since there's another case pending, I would think that he
Speaker 4: might not do a press conference. I mean, look at
Speaker 4: how many press conferences Jack Smith has given and how
Speaker 4: you know, how illuminating they've been, you know, five minutes
Speaker 4: of a statement. So I don't think so, but it's
Speaker 4: always possible, and.
Speaker 3: It's really interesting.
Speaker 2: You've been good at crystallizing this case because, as we write,
Speaker 2: there's been some very sensational and emotional testimony family members
Speaker 2: and ex lovers. You can read about it on the
Speaker 2: terminal talking about Hunter's drug fueled lifestyle when he was
Speaker 2: in the throes of addiction to crack cocaine. But what
Speaker 2: we're talking about here, in a deeply personal matter for
Speaker 2: the Biden family, is whether he checked a box June.
Speaker 3: As you've stated, I.
Speaker 4: Know it's and the prosecution the closing argument said we
Speaker 4: had to do this. But did they really have to
Speaker 4: do it the way they did it. I mean, they
Speaker 4: dragged him through the mud in you know ways that
Speaker 4: you mentioned, and also you know the kind of pictures
Speaker 4: that they show the laptop, and they had the evidence,
Speaker 4: so I don't think they had to really go to
Speaker 4: that length to do it, but maybe they just wanted
Speaker 4: to make sure the jury saw him for who he was.
Speaker 4: What's interesting is I think that the the defense kind
Speaker 4: of blew up its case because on during their case,
Speaker 4: they had Naomi Biden and she was supposed to testify,
Speaker 4: which she did that her father she saw him around
Speaker 4: that time and he seemed really good, he seemed healthy.
Speaker 4: But on cross examination, the prosecution brought out these text
Speaker 4: messages from the time when around the time when the
Speaker 4: gun was being purchased that showed that he was, you know,
Speaker 4: he couldn't be found. She was like where are you
Speaker 4: am I going to see you? And then all of
Speaker 4: a sudden he pops up and says, you know, I
Speaker 4: need the car and it was two am. So that
Speaker 4: and then you saw what happened was all of a sudden,
Speaker 4: the defense said, no more witnesses today when his uncle
Speaker 4: was supposed to testify, and there was apparently, you know,
Speaker 4: some yelling, according to one report from the room, and
Speaker 4: then the defense rested without calling Hunter Biden. So the
Speaker 4: defense had a tough road. I think the only thing
Speaker 4: they were hoping for was jury nullification, that some of
Speaker 4: the jurors would say, we have people in our family
Speaker 4: who are addicted, and there are several jurors who do
Speaker 4: who've been through the whole process, and we don't think
Speaker 4: that he should be, you know, prosecuted or sentenced for
Speaker 4: filling that box out. But that obviously didn't happen at all.
Speaker 4: The jurors were you know, didn't I guess, didn't let
Speaker 4: their family experiences get in the way of their decision.
Speaker 2: Yeah, all right, June Grosso, we thank you, as always
Speaker 2: the host of Bloomberg Law, thanks for being with us
Speaker 2: here in the clutch as we had the voice of
Speaker 2: Nick Ackerman I'm glad to say he's with us, the
Speaker 2: former assistant US Attorney, former assistant special Watergate prosecutor, mister Ackerman.
Speaker 2: Great to see you here, Thanks for joining. Now that
Speaker 2: we have a verdict, has this whole argument about the
Speaker 2: weaponization of the Justice Department been put to bed?
Speaker 7: Yeah?
Speaker 8: I think so.
Speaker 7: I mean, it's pretty obvious if the Department of Justice
Speaker 7: is going out after the president's son that you can't
Speaker 7: very well say the Department of Justice is weaponized, not
Speaker 7: to mention the fact that you also have the prosecution
Speaker 7: of Senator Menendez that's going on in the Southern District
Speaker 7: of New York, a Democratic senator from New Jersey. So
Speaker 7: I think it's pretty obvious that the Department of Justice
Speaker 7: is an equal opportunity prosecutor. Whether you're a Democrat, an Independent,
Speaker 7: or anything else, if you commit a crime, you're going
Speaker 7: to pay for it.
Speaker 3: What's your take on this case.
Speaker 2: We spent so much time talking about Donald Trump's legal journey.
Speaker 2: I'm not sure you've spoken to the veracity of this
Speaker 2: case or what many people say in the legal community,
Speaker 2: is the unusual nature of this case for someone to
Speaker 2: be brought down on felony charges like this in the
Speaker 2: case that involves addiction.
Speaker 3: How do you see it in a cap of it.
Speaker 7: Oh, it's pretty unusual and so unusual. I don't know
Speaker 7: why they even bothered to go to trial in a sense,
Speaker 7: because either they should have made a or he should
Speaker 7: have just eaten the indictment and pled to all three
Speaker 7: counts before the trial started. They had to have known
Speaker 7: right from the get go that there were these text
Speaker 7: messages during the period of time when he signed that
Speaker 7: form and filled in those boxes and also possessed the gun,
Speaker 7: even though it was for a short period of time.
Speaker 7: They knew that there was evidence that Hunter Biden was
Speaker 7: still addicted and was still taking crack cocaine. So I
Speaker 7: don't understand for a second why they even bothered to
Speaker 7: go to trial on this thing. Because if he had
Speaker 7: just pled guilty and decided right from the beginning he
Speaker 7: was going to eat the indictment all three counts, he
Speaker 7: would have at least under the federal sentence in guidelines
Speaker 7: gotten two points for basically admitting his guilt, which is
Speaker 7: a big item. And so I think all of this
Speaker 7: augurs for the other case in California, I just think
Speaker 7: he has to plead guilty to that. Well, he's got
Speaker 7: to make a deal or guilty. The amount of time
Speaker 7: he's going to get is not going to be significant,
Speaker 7: if at all, And there's just no point in going
Speaker 7: through with this.
Speaker 2: So Nick Ackerman says, plead guilty in the tax evasion.
Speaker 2: That's a million dollars in taxes he allegedly did not pay. Nick,
Speaker 2: what kind of a sentence would he be in for
Speaker 2: if he played along like that?
Speaker 7: Well, again, a million dollars, yes, but he's already paid
Speaker 7: back the taxes. He's paid back. I believe all the penalties,
Speaker 7: he's already made his amends with the irs. Normally, under
Speaker 7: circumstances like that, where somebody's addicted, there is a good
Speaker 7: shot that the person wouldn't even be prosecuted in the
Speaker 7: first instance. So to me, as a criminal defense lawyer,
Speaker 7: as well as having been a prosecutor, I think you
Speaker 7: just have to go in, take your lumps and argue
Speaker 7: that this is a case for probation. I mean, I
Speaker 7: think that is the approach he should be taken at
Speaker 7: this point, and should have taken before.
Speaker 3: We saw a statement.
Speaker 2: Well, and of course there was a plea deal at
Speaker 2: one point in this case, and I want to ask
Speaker 2: you about the statement from the President of the United States.
Speaker 2: He's already said he will not pardon Hunter Biden. He says,
Speaker 2: I will accept the outcome of this case and will
Speaker 2: continue to respect the judicial process. As Hunter considers an appeal.
Speaker 2: Will there be an appeal? What's their case going to be?
Speaker 7: I think there is going to be an appeal based
Speaker 7: on the Second Amendment. It's hard to believe that that's
Speaker 7: going to go very far or it's going to be successful.
Speaker 7: But I suppose he's got nothing to lose by doing that.
Speaker 7: Even after he's sentenced, an appeal will go before the
Speaker 7: Circuit Court and then possibly the Supreme Court. I just
Speaker 7: find it hard to believe that a court, the appellate court,
Speaker 7: is going to say that this statute is some way
Speaker 7: violative of the Second Amendment.
Speaker 3: Fascinating.
Speaker 2: We're spending time with Nick Ackerman, as he just said,
Speaker 2: a criminal defense attorney, but also noted former Watergate prosecutor.
Speaker 2: As we consider the last twenty four hours in which
Speaker 2: Donald Trump sat down for his first interview with a
Speaker 2: probation officer. That's not getting any conversation today, Nick, because
Speaker 2: this Hunter Biden news just broke but I wonder your
Speaker 2: thought on the way this was handled. He was allowed
Speaker 2: to do this virtually, and he was allowed to have
Speaker 2: his lawyer in the room, which we understand is not
Speaker 2: typical for most defendants in a criminal case like this.
Speaker 2: Should he have been afforded those exceptions?
Speaker 7: Well, First of all, I think the interview by Zoom
Speaker 7: is not necessarily a big exception since the pandemic. I
Speaker 7: know that there are others who have also had that
Speaker 7: ability to be able to be interviewed by probation over
Speaker 7: Zoom see that being a big deal. The fact that
Speaker 7: his lawyer was there. Normally in the federal system, the
Speaker 7: lawyer is present for those kinds of conversations. So I
Speaker 7: don't you know, I know the judge allowed this exception
Speaker 7: based on the request by the attorneys. I don't see
Speaker 7: this being a big deal. And look, he's being treated
Speaker 7: just like anybody else. He's being interviewed by probation. The
Speaker 7: big issue I suppose with probation is going to be
Speaker 7: whether he respect essentially evinces any kind of remorse for
Speaker 7: what he did, which it's hard to believe he would
Speaker 7: based on the statements he's been making since the conviction.
Speaker 7: So I don't see how this interview is going to
Speaker 7: help him anyway. If anything, I think it's going to
Speaker 7: be a big negative that's going to be given to
Speaker 7: the judge for sentencing purposes.
Speaker 2: How about that, say, No, I ask you this because
Speaker 2: there was a statement from a group of public defender
Speaker 2: groups including the Legal Aid Society, the Bronx Defender and
Speaker 2: said these exceptions made for Trump are not typically afforded
Speaker 2: to low income defendants. I think the idea here is
Speaker 2: if I had a public defender, they would not be
Speaker 2: allowed to join me in that room. Whether that moves
Speaker 2: the needle for you at all, Nick, worry you on
Speaker 2: potential sentencing because to your point, that's where this interview
Speaker 2: is heading.
Speaker 7: Yeah, well obviously, I mean I saw that statement, and like,
Speaker 7: I don't think materially it makes a difference that Trump
Speaker 7: did it by zoom or that he has lawyer present.
Speaker 7: I think the real question comes down to just what
Speaker 7: you just asked. What is the sentence going to be?
Speaker 7: And I would be surprised if he does not get
Speaker 7: some jail time, mainly because Michael Cohen, the witnesses who
Speaker 7: testified against him, served three years as a result of
Speaker 7: this crime. In part also Alan Weiselberg, who was one
Speaker 7: of the architects of setting up this false document scheme
Speaker 7: with Trump's approval, has already set is going to be
Speaker 7: at the end of the day have served six months
Speaker 7: at Rikers Island for other offenses. So I think it's
Speaker 7: going to be hard for the judge to justify why
Speaker 7: those two people serve time and Donald Trump is not.
Speaker 7: So I think that's his big problem here is that
Speaker 7: there are others that were as culpable, more and less
Speaker 7: culpable than him that we're involved in this, that have
Speaker 7: spent some time in jail.
Speaker 3: Wow.
Speaker 2: July eleventh, right, I don't know if you're busy, Nick,
Speaker 2: but we're going to be calling you. Great to see
Speaker 2: you again, Nick Ackerman with us on Bloomberg, I'm Joe,
Speaker 2: Matthew and Washington the fastest show in politics. On this day,
Speaker 2: Hunter Biden becomes the first son of a president of
Speaker 2: the United States to be convicted on criminal charges. We'll
Speaker 2: have much more ahead on the fastest show in politics.
Speaker 3: This is Bloomberg.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Ken
Speaker 1: just live weekdays at noon Eastern on applecarp Ronoto with
Speaker 1: the Bloomberg Business ad. You can also listen live on
Speaker 1: Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station. Just say
Speaker 1: Alexa play Bloomberg eleven.
Speaker 2: Thirty building shook a little bit when the Hunter headlines
Speaker 2: broke redhead on the terminal. Hunter Biden convicted gun charges
Speaker 2: by a jury in Delaware. No one surprised. We were
Speaker 2: told yesterday overwhelming evidence, only three charges. The liberations should
Speaker 2: not take long.
Speaker 3: And here we are.
Speaker 2: As we tried to pick through this from a legal
Speaker 2: perspective and explore the potential political ramifications. As I already
Speaker 2: told you, we've heard from Joe Biden today saying he
Speaker 2: will stand by his son. This is a personal matter
Speaker 2: obviously for the Bidens. The first lady was in the
Speaker 2: courtroom for the bulk of this roughly week long trial.
Speaker 2: But I have an important conversation to bring you, and
Speaker 2: it's a familiar voice if you watch or listen to
Speaker 2: this program. Denver Riggleman, the former Republican congressman, former Air
Speaker 2: Force intel diligence officer, former member of the House Freedom Caucus,
Speaker 2: is also a data analyst and has a firm that
Speaker 2: specializes in data forensics, and in fact went to work
Speaker 2: with as a consultant with Hunter Biden's legal team to
Speaker 2: take a look inside the laptop and follow any number
Speaker 2: of allegations that had been brought by Republicans. And Denver's
Speaker 2: with us right now. It's good to have you back, sir.
Speaker 2: I wonder your thoughts. Having spent the time that you
Speaker 2: did also as a technical consultant for the January sixth committee,
Speaker 2: you actually looked inside this laptop. You've been around the
Speaker 2: horn a number of times on this, and as you've
Speaker 2: told us, you have a personal relationship a friendship, if
Speaker 2: I can call it that, with Hunter Biden. Did you
Speaker 2: ever think that the conviction, if there was going to
Speaker 2: be one, would come from a check box here in
Speaker 2: this case, on a gun form.
Speaker 8: Yeah. I mean I think you know, when you look
Speaker 8: at it first of all, you know, really it's really
Speaker 8: hard to get your arms right. I had a brother
Speaker 8: convicted of a minor drug offense that ended up being
Speaker 8: actually a felony, and you're thinking, well, it's just marijuana,
Speaker 8: but he had broken the law. And I remember the
Speaker 8: sadness in our family when he went to jail. And
Speaker 8: I can't imagine the sadness, you know, the Hunter Biden's
Speaker 8: family has right now. But when you look at the
Speaker 8: evidence and what had happened, regardless of the years that
Speaker 8: had passed, and the effort that Hunter has put into
Speaker 8: his own life, which is extraordinary, I think when you
Speaker 8: look at the black and white language of the law,
Speaker 8: I'm not surprised at the guilty verdict, Joe. It's just
Speaker 8: not really surprising at all. And when you talk about
Speaker 8: looking in the laptop, I know, it's an incredible question.
Speaker 8: Is I actually looked at the data supposedly from the
Speaker 8: laptop and there's multiple laptops, which a lot of people
Speaker 8: don't know, and that's another question. That another thing, But
Speaker 8: there's multiple lawsuits out there about that specific data that's
Speaker 8: supposedly from the laptop. That that's why I don't get
Speaker 8: into it too much, even with idiots on Twitter and X.
Speaker 8: You know, but I think that you know, I think
Speaker 8: that you know, like, well, prove the negative. It's ridiculous.
Speaker 8: But looking at you know, there's really no impeachment thing
Speaker 8: going to happen. We know there's no huge you know,
Speaker 8: there's financial crime you know, uh, stuff that's coming out
Speaker 8: of the Comer Committee or things like that. That's sort
Speaker 8: of gone. But this right here is a specific charge,
Speaker 8: and I think Joe that I think it's no surprise,
Speaker 8: you know, to anyone that he was found guilty on this.
Speaker 2: We've got a statement both from Hunter Biden and from
Speaker 2: his attorney, Abby Lowell. We're naturally disappointed by today's verdicts
Speaker 2: law rights. We respect the jury process, and as we've
Speaker 2: done throughout this case, will continue to vigorously pursue all
Speaker 2: the legal challenges available to Hunter.
Speaker 3: So what will this appeal look like or what should
Speaker 3: it look like?
Speaker 8: Then? You know, it's interesting, you know, and Joe, you know,
Speaker 8: I'm not a lawyer. I'm you know, just a lowly
Speaker 8: former congressman and data analytic counter terrorism expert and company
Speaker 8: owner and distillery owner. But I think I think what
Speaker 8: this means Abby Lowe is an incredible attorney. You know,
Speaker 8: I know him personally. Also, I think what they're going
Speaker 8: to look at again is really how long the charges are,
Speaker 8: but almost a compassionate look at the at what has
Speaker 8: happened to Hunter since then. But as far as the appeals,
Speaker 8: I think it's really going to depend on the sentencing.
Speaker 8: I'm really wondering, you know, if Hunter gets jail time.
Speaker 8: I think it's possible he does get some jail time here,
Speaker 8: and again, what does that do with the ridiculousness that
Speaker 8: we saw before the verdict, where you had the far
Speaker 8: right or people that were Trump supporters saying he was
Speaker 8: going to get off. I mean, it destroys that narrative.
Speaker 8: I don't think that makes any difference with the breathlessness
Speaker 8: of deep state and globalist conspiracy theories that seemed to
Speaker 8: have you know, captured Maga Joe. But I think the
Speaker 8: appeals process with Abby he knows, you know, where he
Speaker 8: really does know where the gaps are in a prosecutorial
Speaker 8: case and what he can exploit based on the rule
Speaker 8: of law. But think about what he said he respects
Speaker 8: the jury process. That's really not something you got out
Speaker 8: of the Trump team on his thirty four conviction. So
Speaker 8: I think it's just that stark contrast the rule of
Speaker 8: law and individuals who respect American institutions and those who don't.
Speaker 2: So let's get to the politics of it, Denver. That's
Speaker 2: the world in which you come from, and we tend
Speaker 2: to talk about here. You mentioned some important names. Really
Speaker 2: one of them and James Comer. I could mention Jim
Speaker 2: Jordan as well, everyone's asking what this means for the
Speaker 2: presidential election. I'm curious what it means for these two
Speaker 2: chairs in the Republican House who wanted to impeach Joe Biden.
Speaker 3: It might be emboldened by this verdict.
Speaker 8: You know, if they're emboldened by a guilty verdict of
Speaker 8: a recovering addict, that really you know, I think I
Speaker 8: think it would be pretty amazing for them to try
Speaker 8: to pursue this based on the fact that the gun
Speaker 8: charge was a specific thing that Hunter Biden did that
Speaker 8: really had nothing to do with the laptop politics. It's
Speaker 8: it's a really specific charge, and there's so much there's
Speaker 8: so many differences to say between the gun charge, the
Speaker 8: tax charges, and what the impeachment proceedings are. These are
Speaker 8: three huge different wickets, you know that they're going after.
Speaker 8: So if they try to reboot this, I think what's
Speaker 8: gonna happen is they got to you know what they're
Speaker 8: gonna do. They're gonna war game this out. There's gonna
Speaker 8: be a political backlash because now you have this duplicity
Speaker 8: right where you have Hunter Biden being convicted and Donald
Speaker 8: Trump with his thirty four counts, where the question is
Speaker 8: going to be Hold on a second, you guys certainly
Speaker 8: have failed up to this point. It was actually legal.
Speaker 8: We have a legal proceeding for this. What are you
Speaker 8: guys doing where you're trying to reboot this We're using
Speaker 8: American tax payer money where it's already been discredited. I
Speaker 8: think there is going to be some war gaming on
Speaker 8: that side, but we're also so close to the election. Joe,
Speaker 8: I don't know if it matters that much. I don't
Speaker 8: think the far right's going to change. I don't think
Speaker 8: there's going to be anybody else who changes or vote,
Speaker 8: you know, to Trump, you know, based on the fact
Speaker 8: that they're doing this. I don't think that happens. I
Speaker 8: think the gas lighting and the deep state conspiracy theories
Speaker 8: are so entrenched in a large portion of our population.
Speaker 8: I just don't know if it matters.
Speaker 2: We talked earlier with Nick Ackerman, the former Watergate prosecutor,
Speaker 2: who suggested that if you were giving Hunter Biden legal advice,
Speaker 2: he just go ahead and plead guilty in the next
Speaker 2: trial for more favorable treatment.
Speaker 3: What do you think about that?
Speaker 8: You know, listen, when I think for me, you know,
Speaker 8: if you're trying to fix your life and you've done
Speaker 8: things in the past, and you're talking about, you know,
Speaker 8: offenses that happened years and years ago. I think there's
Speaker 8: a willingness or a pride to where you want to fight.
Speaker 8: It depends, I think, on what they see the sentence thing. Again,
Speaker 8: I don't think he's going to plead guilty on the
Speaker 8: tax charges. I just don't see that happening. The fact
Speaker 8: that he paid, you know, paid those taxes back. I
Speaker 8: think it's going to be an interesting case. I think
Speaker 8: it's probably more complex than the gun case. To be honest,
Speaker 8: I think this was rather straightforward. I don't see him
Speaker 8: pleading guilty on those charges, or maybe some limited plea
Speaker 8: on specific charges, maybe another plead deal. But again, I
Speaker 8: just don't see if they if they don't offer them
Speaker 8: a plea deal, I just don't see him pleading guilty
Speaker 8: at this point. Of course, you know, Joe, sometimes I'm right,
Speaker 8: sometimes I'm wrong, but I just don't I just don't
Speaker 8: see him doing I don't see him pleading guilty at
Speaker 8: this point.
Speaker 2: It's a very insightful statement. When you're trying to fix
Speaker 2: your life, you might be more likely to fight. As
Speaker 2: we spend time with Denver, Riggelman. In our last minute
Speaker 2: or two here Denver, we're going to hear from the
Speaker 2: special counsel David Weiss. Looks like coming up top of
Speaker 2: the hour about a half an hour from now, we're
Speaker 2: told he will not take questions.
Speaker 3: What do you think he'll say.
Speaker 8: I think he's going to say that he's going to
Speaker 8: have to really toe the line. I think he's going
Speaker 8: to say he rejects you know, he respects the jury
Speaker 8: process also. But here's what I want to watch for.
Speaker 8: If it's something like nobody's above the law and it's
Speaker 8: cockshore and it's preening, I think it's going to come
Speaker 8: off as ludicrous because he is a Trump appointed attorney.
Speaker 8: I think what they need to say is they need
Speaker 8: to respect somebody who's trying to come back from addiction
Speaker 8: and all the addicts that are out there, including members
Speaker 8: of my family who've gone through this, and I think
Speaker 8: they need to recognize that, yes, he broke the rule
Speaker 8: of law and he needs to be held accountable, but
Speaker 8: this is somebody trying to fix their life. So I
Speaker 8: would actually hope that David Weiss would go for leniency
Speaker 8: on sentencing. I don't see that happening. But I think
Speaker 8: that's the right thing to do. But you know, right
Speaker 8: and politics are sometimes mutually exclusive, my friend, and so
Speaker 8: it could be you know, so it could be a
Speaker 8: cockshore preening. You know, we knew we were right the
Speaker 8: whole time. But my guess is it won't be because
Speaker 8: I think it comes off as gratuitous.
Speaker 2: If he does that, well, you and I both know
Speaker 2: that everyone's family is exposed to this somehow, I refuse
Speaker 2: to believe that any family has spared this experience when
Speaker 2: it comes to addiction.
Speaker 3: I have less than a minute as the weaponization argument over.
Speaker 8: Oh no, no, I mean, oh no, I mean I
Speaker 8: still think it should be over if you're saying and
Speaker 8: you have any rational thought in your pee brain, right,
Speaker 8: But I think that honestly, I think they're going to
Speaker 8: try to find another way to slant angle this on
Speaker 8: the far right and Trump supporters, and now it's going
Speaker 8: to be always going to get out of jail time.
Speaker 8: I don't think he does, but we'll see. I hope
Speaker 8: he does. But I don't think it's really going to
Speaker 8: change the weaponization argument at all from the far right.
Speaker 8: I think they're so embedded in it and they really
Speaker 8: have no way to get out of it that they're
Speaker 8: going to try to continue it in some ridiculous, conspiracy
Speaker 8: infested way.
Speaker 2: I told you I was going to bring you a
Speaker 2: different conversation, and that's always what it is with Denver Wriggleman.
Speaker 2: It's great to have you back, and I appreciate your
Speaker 2: personal insights. To Denver, you can't talk about this without
Speaker 2: feeling some level of personal impact, knowing that this is
Speaker 2: a story of addiction, it's a story of personal behavior.
Speaker 2: It's a very messy story here if you want to
Speaker 2: read about it on the criminal and one that the
Speaker 2: Biden family was obviously struggling with.
Speaker 1: For the last week, you're listening to the Bloomberg Balance
Speaker 1: of Power podcast. Catch Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern
Speaker 1: on Eppo car Play, and then Proudo with the Bloomberg
Speaker 1: Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts,
Speaker 1: or watch us live on YouTube.
Speaker 9: All of our attention here in Washington has been in
Speaker 9: William Wilmington, Delaware today, where we got the verdict from
Speaker 9: the jury twelve peers finding Hunter Biden guilty of three
Speaker 9: different crimes. It's worth pointing out, Joe that those three
Speaker 9: crimes combined could carry a maximum sentence of twenty five
Speaker 9: years in prison, although that sentencing has not happened yet.
Speaker 9: The judge did not set a date for that today.
Speaker 2: Yeah, the fact that we don't have a sen sentencing
Speaker 2: date is interesting because obviously we're just trying to get
Speaker 2: a sense of what that could mean and whether there's
Speaker 2: going to be an appeal. Based on the statement from
Speaker 2: Abby Loohola, it looks like there will be one. It's
Speaker 2: just a question of what form that appeal takes, and
Speaker 2: we want to hear about it. From Eric Larson, Bloomberg
Speaker 2: legal reporter who has gone from one courthouse at Lower
Speaker 2: Manhattan covering Donald Trump's trial, to one in Wilmington with
Speaker 2: Hunter Biden, and back with us from World Headquarters in
Speaker 2: New York.
Speaker 3: Eric, it's great to see you here. The next phase
Speaker 3: would be sentencing. How long will we wait?
Speaker 10: Well, the judge ended the hearing today without giving any
Speaker 10: indication other than to say that normally, in most cases,
Speaker 10: it would be about one hundred and twenty days out.
Speaker 10: That's what the judge said. That would put his sentencing
Speaker 10: in October, which of course would be just about a
Speaker 10: month before the election. So it's unclear what the parties
Speaker 10: will argue. Hunter Biden could argue for later sentencing, suggesting
Speaker 10: that it could go after the election, or make some
Speaker 10: other arguments for or prosecutors could try to have it
Speaker 10: happen sooner just to get it out of the way.
Speaker 9: Well, and how would that timeline and potentially the appeal
Speaker 9: process if the defense does indeed pursue that interact with
Speaker 9: the separate trial that he is facing in California in
Speaker 9: September on tax charges, could failure to wrap up this
Speaker 9: case entirely be justification for a delay in that case.
Speaker 6: Potentially, you know.
Speaker 10: It's possible, but that could also go the other way.
Speaker 10: The prosecutors could argue to have a sentencing happen faster
Speaker 10: to get it wrapped up before the next trial begins.
Speaker 10: It's kind of a similar argument and discussions that we've
Speaker 10: had around Trump with his four competing criminal cases, and
Speaker 10: of course most of those did end up getting delayed,
Speaker 10: but we do have sentencing happening anyway in that first
Speaker 10: Trump case, So these will happen eventually, will happen, but
Speaker 10: this September trial is really going to be a huge,
Speaker 10: a huge threat to Biden. I think much more significant
Speaker 10: than this gun case. So they're going to have a
Speaker 10: lot of preparation and getting ready for that one.
Speaker 2: Eric, we're waiting to hear from the Special Council. David
Speaker 2: Weiss will be holding forth soon from Wilmington. Less than
Speaker 2: a year ago, he was on Capitol Hill in a
Speaker 2: closed door hearing with lawmakers professing to the level of
Speaker 2: authority that he had in this case to bring charges.
Speaker 2: Republicans were concerned that there was interference in this case.
Speaker 2: He made clear there was not. What's he going to
Speaker 2: say today.
Speaker 10: You know, I think he's going to make a very
Speaker 10: strong case for his independence. He's going to point out
Speaker 10: that he was going to say that he wasn't being
Speaker 10: told what to do in any way. Of course, Trump
Speaker 10: and his allies insists that Joe Biden has been pulling
Speaker 10: the strings behind the scenes here. The Special Council is
Speaker 10: going to insist on the independence. In fact, that's the
Speaker 10: whole point of a Special Council. That's why Merrick Garland
Speaker 10: appointed him, was to get rid of any suggestion of
Speaker 10: involvement by the White House.
Speaker 9: Well, Eric, it'll be interesting to hear the Special Council
Speaker 9: speak to the nature of these charges as well that
Speaker 9: he was found guilty of considering we've heard repeatedly that
Speaker 9: it's a bit abnormal for a case like this to
Speaker 9: be going into court. This question around lying on the
Speaker 9: forms when purchasing a gun, we have heard usually wouldn't
Speaker 9: have been prosecuted in this way. A case pursued this heavily.
Speaker 9: Can you just provide some context here as to how
Speaker 9: unusual this is?
Speaker 10: Well, I think arguments can be made on both sides there.
Speaker 10: Perhaps it's possible that individuals who are caught lying on
Speaker 10: a form like this may not be charged, but in
Speaker 10: a case is high profile, is this when you have
Speaker 10: a defendant who is being investigated so deeply, it's difficult
Speaker 10: for a prosecutor or an investigator to uncover significant wrongdoing
Speaker 10: and then just not charge it. I mean, that would
Speaker 10: have played into the allegation that hunter Biden was receiving
Speaker 10: special treatment. We did see that there was this plea
Speaker 10: agreement that was reached. Of course, that all fell apart
Speaker 10: because largely, you know, the judge questioned whether or not
Speaker 10: Hunter Biden should be free from any future prosecution, basically
Speaker 10: saying that the deal was too sweet for hunter Biden,
Speaker 10: and sort of played into the Republican criticisms there. So
Speaker 10: you know clearly the jury agreed here whether or not
Speaker 10: every single case like this would have been brought. It
Speaker 10: was put before a jury and they deliberated for just
Speaker 10: three hours before deciding that the government was correct and
Speaker 10: that Hunter Biden had broken this law.
Speaker 9: Yeah, the whole thing did happen relatively quickly. Bloomberg Legal
Speaker 9: reporter Eric Larson, thank you so much for joining us,
Speaker 9: helping us break things down. We want to get some
Speaker 9: more reaction now from Nicole Bernecki. She is a partner
Speaker 9: at Jodre Bernecki and is joining us now from New York. Nicole,
Speaker 9: welcome to Balance of Power on Bloomberg TV and Radio.
Speaker 9: We were just speaking with Aaron Eric there about the
Speaker 9: relatively unclear timeline as to when sentencing could actually happen.
Speaker 9: But do you expect that Hunter Biden will serve at
Speaker 9: least sometime in prison for these crimes he was found
Speaker 9: guilty of.
Speaker 6: Good afternoon. Thank you for having me.
Speaker 5: I honestly do not expect that he will serve any time,
Speaker 5: and this has nothing to do with him being a
Speaker 5: public figure. Sentencing in federal courts is a process. It's
Speaker 5: a mechanical process that requires practically going down checklist of
Speaker 5: many factors. You have to see if there's factors that
Speaker 5: are aggravating, factors that are mitigating potentially. Right now, he's
Speaker 5: accused of these tax crimes as well. That has not
Speaker 5: been resolved, so the issue of whether there will be
Speaker 5: any priors to consider is still open. But there's other
Speaker 5: factors as well, whether the crime was violent, whether there
Speaker 5: were any victims that had to be made whole. As
Speaker 5: we know, this is not really applicable here, so I
Speaker 5: don't think that this will result in incarceration, but we
Speaker 5: will obviously see what will happen depending on the outcome
Speaker 5: of the other case and how quickly this will go.
Speaker 2: Nicole, As we wait to hear from the Special Council
Speaker 2: in this case, he's going to be speaking from the
Speaker 2: podium in Wilmington shortly here. I wonder your thoughts on
Speaker 2: the quick nature of these deliberations only three hours, and
Speaker 2: what type of case Hunter Biden's attorneys will bring on appeal.
Speaker 5: I think the reason that it went so fast with
Speaker 5: the deliberations is that, if you think about it, this
Speaker 5: case actually is pretty simple on his face. That's why
Speaker 5: there was not a lot of witnesses, not a lot
Speaker 5: of evidence, because this case revolved around his intent and
Speaker 5: whether he committed these acts that he was accused of knowingly.
Speaker 5: So the jury can consider credibility issues, can consider circumstantial
Speaker 5: evidence to create a picture of whether this was knowing
Speaker 5: and intentional. And I think that in their minds that
Speaker 5: given his prior history of drug use and his own
Speaker 5: candor in discussing his drug use problems, I think they
Speaker 5: just didn't have a big dilemma right there in order
Speaker 5: to determine that he was actually guilty and committed it knowingly.
Speaker 9: So what could the defense do on appeal realistically to
Speaker 9: change the narrative, to change mindsn cole or do you
Speaker 9: not really see a path for that?
Speaker 5: I think it will be very complicated. First of all,
Speaker 5: the successive appeal depends on what objections they asserted on
Speaker 5: the record. There is certain procedure in bringing an appeal
Speaker 5: you have to preserve it during the trial, So we
Speaker 5: need to know reading the transcript how effective they were
Speaker 5: doing that. But in terms of the legal theory, and
Speaker 5: in terms of the jury's decision, and in terms of
Speaker 5: the fact that there was not a lot of witnesses
Speaker 5: not a lot of evidence. I don't think this will
Speaker 5: be an easy appeal for them to.
Speaker 6: Be successful on.
Speaker 3: It's interesting to consider.
Speaker 2: We spoke earlier with Nick Ackerman, the former Watergate prosecutor Nicole.
Speaker 2: He said it would be hoof Hunter Biden and his
Speaker 2: legal team to plead guilty at the next trial that's
Speaker 2: tax evasion trial to get preferred favorable treatment.
Speaker 3: Do you agree.
Speaker 5: There is some merit to that. It really depends on
Speaker 5: the evidence in the other case. But I think it's
Speaker 5: also pretty straightforward. I don't think he has a lot
Speaker 5: of defense, so it would be better to just just
Speaker 5: get it out there and be proactive about finalizing these
Speaker 5: cases instead of dragging them to trial. If the evidence
Speaker 5: is overwhelming and if your chances are slim to none
Speaker 5: at prevailing, so I would they have to have an
Speaker 5: honest discussion and see what's the best course of proceeding.
Speaker 5: But I think that a guilty please would make a
Speaker 5: lot of sense.
Speaker 9: Wow, well, Nicole. I also wonder about whether or not
Speaker 9: Hunter Biden, having made the decision not to testify in
Speaker 9: his own defense this time around, maybe should consider doing
Speaker 9: so and the appellate process. I mean, if all of
Speaker 9: this is about his state of mind and his intention
Speaker 9: when he bought that gun in twenty eighteen. Can anyone
Speaker 9: else really describe that other than he himself.
Speaker 5: You make a great point, but in the legal process
Speaker 5: it's a little different.
Speaker 6: It's usually advisable.
Speaker 5: Not to put the defendant on the stand because that
Speaker 5: opens a lot of doors to questions that can just
Speaker 5: ruin their defense and ruin their case. And I think
Speaker 5: that in his particular case, given the books that he wrote,
Speaker 5: given the statements that he made, I think it's better
Speaker 5: that he just does not testify on his own behalf.
Speaker 6: That would be a better legal strategy.
Speaker 5: But as I said, these two cases are slightly different,
Speaker 5: So we'll see what they decide.
Speaker 2: Thanks for being with us year on Bloomberg TV in radio.
Speaker 2: As we anticipate commentary from David Weiss the Special Council, Nicole,
Speaker 2: if we have to interrupt you, our apologies in advance.
Speaker 2: The podium has been set and we understand that he's
Speaker 2: going to be speaking about five minutes from now. Nicole,
Speaker 2: What will he tell us about this case? What point
Speaker 2: does he need to make today? Is the political world
Speaker 2: as well as the legal world watches.
Speaker 5: In case of this particular case, as well as the
Speaker 5: Trump case that ended in New York. As you stated,
Speaker 5: these are very popular defendants, these are public figures. But
Speaker 5: he needs to definitely emphasize the fact that we need
Speaker 5: to look at the evidence and the law and not
Speaker 5: just not be influenced in anyone by the fact that
Speaker 5: he's the son of a sitting president.
Speaker 9: Well a sitting president for now Nicole, who has promised
Speaker 9: that he would not pardon Hunter Biden for these crimes.
Speaker 9: But he, of course is competing for reelection right now.
Speaker 9: Say he loses in November and becomes a lame duck
Speaker 9: and decides maybe he has nothing else to fear politically
Speaker 9: and pardons Hunter Biden at that time. Could that be
Speaker 9: something then undone by Donald Trump if he wins a
Speaker 9: second term in office.
Speaker 6: It could. But you're also making a great point.
Speaker 5: I know that right now he's saying that he will
Speaker 5: not pardon him, but you know he can change his
Speaker 5: decision later. We need to remember that he's also currently
Speaker 5: an actively campaigning politician, so he needs to say things
Speaker 5: that are right in the eyes of the public, especially
Speaker 5: right now. It's a very sensitive time given that the
Speaker 5: political polls state that they have each have fifty to fifty.
Speaker 6: Chants of winning.
Speaker 5: So everything that they do going forward will will have
Speaker 5: a lot of significance for the campaign. So he's saying
Speaker 5: that right now. It makes a lot of sense, but
Speaker 5: we'll see what he does later.
Speaker 2: Nicole Brenecki, partner at Jodre Brinecki. We appreciate your insights, Nicole.
Speaker 2: Thank you for being with us here on this breaking
Speaker 2: news day.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast kench
Speaker 1: just live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then
Speaker 1: roun Oo with a Bloomberg Business app. You can also
Speaker 1: listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station,
Speaker 1: Just Say Alexa Play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 2: Rick Davis and Jeanie Shanzano are with us Bloomberg Politics
Speaker 2: contributors for their take on this.
Speaker 3: It's great to have you both with us here.
Speaker 2: Genie, now that you've heard from the special counsel, your
Speaker 2: feelings on this day, Hunter Biden is found guilty and
Speaker 2: I'm asking you this from a political perspective. I don't
Speaker 2: want to turn either of you into legal analysts here,
Speaker 2: but this is important. There seems to be an equivalency
Speaker 2: in many minds between this case and that of the
Speaker 2: former president Donald Trump, who's running for reelection.
Speaker 3: Do you see it that.
Speaker 11: Way to a certain extent, I mean, we are hearing that.
Speaker 11: I will tell you what comes top of mind for
Speaker 11: me amidst all of this stunning news that we've had
Speaker 11: in the last couple of weeks, but certainly today is
Speaker 11: really the fact that, you know, the Trump campaign is
Speaker 11: having sort of machinations going on behind the scenes as
Speaker 11: to how they're going to respond to this. And I
Speaker 11: think this is important to underscore he's been empathetic in
Speaker 11: the last week to this issue of addiction. We just
Speaker 11: heard the special counsel say this case wasn't about addiction,
Speaker 11: it was about lying on a form. But there's also
Speaker 11: the underreported reality here that this is a Second Amendment case,
Speaker 11: a case that many Second Amendment supporters feel that Hunter
Speaker 11: byte Biden can and should take to the Supreme Court
Speaker 11: and potentially win. And of course I'm not clear as
Speaker 11: to why the President's team line has him lined up
Speaker 11: today to go talk about gun prevention. It's just sort
Speaker 11: of the conflation of odd realities here that are creating
Speaker 11: a mishmash, and the Trump campaign issues a statement pulls
Speaker 11: it back. So it's hard for both of these campaigns
Speaker 11: to respond to this given all that it entails. But
Speaker 11: I do want to underscore the two AA community very
Speaker 11: very supportive of Hunter Biden on this, nothing to do
Speaker 11: with his father, but to do with the issue of
Speaker 11: the Second Amendment and the fact they think that this
Speaker 11: could expand access to guns, something that would be ironic
Speaker 11: if Hunter Biden takes that to the Supreme Court, given
Speaker 11: the fact where his father is right now and always
Speaker 11: has been politically on guns.
Speaker 9: Yeah, and he quite literally today is at in every
Speaker 9: town for gun safety event. The split screen is pretty remarkable.
Speaker 9: Genie was mentioning the reaction from the Trump campaign. Rick
Speaker 9: we got in a statement a quote, this trial has
Speaker 9: been nothing more than a distraction from the real crimes
Speaker 9: of the Biden crime family. Of course, those crimes have
Speaker 9: not been fully born out in a formal prosecution or
Speaker 9: a jury of peace finding them guilty of anything. That
Speaker 9: is just the case in this case where Hunter Biden
Speaker 9: was found guilty of these three crimes. How difficult is
Speaker 9: it for the Trump campaign to seize on this conviction?
Speaker 9: Is this actually potentially just difficult water to navigate considering
Speaker 9: we are talking about addiction here, something that also has
Speaker 9: played Donald Trump's own family.
Speaker 12: That's right. I'm glad you mentioned Accilla because you know,
Speaker 12: a lot of people don't realize that Donald Trump's brother,
Speaker 12: Fred Junior died of alcohol addiction, and it's an issue
Speaker 12: that he doesn't talk openly about. But did you know
Speaker 12: after becoming president. And I think it was one of
Speaker 12: the most honest moments of the Trump presidency in twenty seventeen.
Speaker 12: So I'm sure that part of this informs, you know,
Speaker 12: that opinion of the Trump campaign and Donald Trump himself.
Speaker 12: That being said, if they thought this could be exploited
Speaker 12: to hurt Joe Biden, I think they would, And I
Speaker 12: think that's why they're being cautious because I don't think
Speaker 12: they see an opening in the exploitation. I'm sure they've
Speaker 12: pulled it. I'm sure Tony Ferbrizio is sitting in there saying,
Speaker 12: be careful, guys, this is likely to blow back on
Speaker 12: you if you go after the sins of the sun.
Speaker 12: And frankly, the Judiciary Committee under Jim Jordan has failed
Speaker 12: miserably at trying to connect the two and create an
Speaker 12: impeachment process for Joe Biden. So, as you point out,
Speaker 12: nobody's been able to find the goods on the Biden
Speaker 12: crime family, and so I think this was a head
Speaker 12: nod in that direction. But I don't think it goes
Speaker 12: very far from here.
Speaker 2: As we're talking politics here, Genie and I know this
Speaker 2: stuff is very deeply personal for a lot of families,
Speaker 2: many of whom we're hearing from on social media, who
Speaker 2: can relate with the Bidens today. Is there an empathy vote?
Speaker 2: Is that part of this for the Biden campaign?
Speaker 8: There could be.
Speaker 11: We haven't seen that show up in the polls yet.
Speaker 11: Of course, we're just an hour or two out of
Speaker 11: the conviction, so we may see that. But I'm reminded
Speaker 11: about the twenty twenty debate when one of the most
Speaker 11: important statements that Joe Biden made, the most remembered, if
Speaker 11: you will, after the debate, was the fact that he
Speaker 11: said I love my son when it was brought up,
Speaker 11: and I support him and he's struggling with addiction. That
Speaker 11: was something a lot of voters looked at him and said,
Speaker 11: we feel your pain, so to speak. We understand because
Speaker 11: so many of us, including as Rick just mentioned, the
Speaker 11: former president, have dealt with this issue. You know, one
Speaker 11: other thing we should keep in mind as we think
Speaker 11: of the politics. And you were just talking to Nicole
Speaker 11: about this prior to the Special Council statement, was on
Speaker 11: this issue of the pardon, the President said, I will
Speaker 11: not pardon my son. What he hasn't said as far
Speaker 11: as I know, And I'm curious for one of the
Speaker 11: great Bloomberg reporters to ask, does that include commuting a sentence?
Speaker 11: Because he can pardon, he can also commute, And depending
Speaker 11: on what happenings with what happens in the sentencing phase
Speaker 11: in this and or the tax case, would he consider
Speaker 11: commuting that sentence. I don't think he wouldn't. I don't
Speaker 11: think he should, but he hasn't as far as I know,
Speaker 11: gone on the record of the difference between the pardon
Speaker 11: and the commutation, and he could constitutionally do both.
Speaker 9: It's an excellent point, jeaning, I wonder if that is
Speaker 9: a question he may end up being asked in a
Speaker 9: presidential debate in this cycle, keeping in mind that the
Speaker 9: first one is just sixteen days away, scheduled for June
Speaker 9: twenty seventh in Atlanta, Rick, And as we consider what
Speaker 9: the tenor of that debate may be like, how these
Speaker 9: various legal troubles plaguing both the Biden family through Hunter
Speaker 9: Biden and Donald Trump through his myriad legal cases that
Speaker 9: he is facing, may come up. Does this conviction today
Speaker 9: take away a talking point from Donald Trump about the
Speaker 9: weaponization of a justice system considering that very same system
Speaker 9: just convicted the son of a president.
Speaker 12: Yeah, he has to be careful. It's not an easy
Speaker 12: attack now because the parry on this by Biden could
Speaker 12: be very powerful. Could be that, you know, if there
Speaker 12: was any political manipulation that the Justice Department, wouldn't I
Speaker 12: have done it for my own son. That could be
Speaker 12: a big moment in the debate. And so I think
Speaker 12: Donald Trump has to be extraordinarily cautious, you know, and
Speaker 12: even because he's got sentencing after that. And so the
Speaker 12: last thing you want to do is use a national
Speaker 12: debate to work the ref the judge in this case
Speaker 12: in a way that is going to have the judge
Speaker 12: basically say, look, obviously there's no remorse for Donald Trump.
Speaker 12: You know, let's put him in a who scout Rikers
Speaker 12: Island is not a bad place to spend the weekend.
Speaker 12: So I think that I think that it's a very
Speaker 12: treacherous issue for Donald Trump. Now, it was kind of
Speaker 12: a free option for the last year. He could say
Speaker 12: and do pretty much whatever he wanted to, got a
Speaker 12: couple of fines for, you know, breaking gag orders which
Speaker 12: were totally irrelevant. And now it'sactly going to potentially hurt himself.
Speaker 12: And that's when I think you'll see Donald Trump's self
Speaker 12: interests to the four and probably temper anything he says
Speaker 12: about these legal issues.
Speaker 2: Genie, I want you to go a little bit further
Speaker 2: down the road you were just driving here, whether it's
Speaker 2: a commutation or a pardon. If Joe Biden changes his mind,
Speaker 2: how does that play publicly here? If we're looking at
Speaker 2: what appears to be a benign reading on the campaign trail, Now,
Speaker 2: what would an action like that mean?
Speaker 11: Very very tough for Joe Biden, because of course he
Speaker 11: has publicly said he won't pardon. He would have to
Speaker 11: go back on his word, and that never, you know,
Speaker 11: sort of sits well with people because it's considered a lie.
Speaker 11: Now he could try to explain it away, this is
Speaker 11: my son, but that would play right in the hands
Speaker 11: of this two tier justice system that the Republicans keep
Speaker 11: talking about and of course, if we go further down
Speaker 11: the line, imagine if Donald Trump wins and Joe Biden
Speaker 11: is a lame duck, does you know legacy reasons? He
Speaker 11: may care, but otherwise he may say, I am going
Speaker 11: to make a really tough sort of Sophie's choice, if
Speaker 11: you will, between my duties as a parent and my
Speaker 11: love for my son and my duties as the president
Speaker 11: of the United States. Now that I'm a lame duck,
Speaker 11: I'm going to think about seriously pardoning or commuting. You know,
Speaker 11: there's no good option here. Again, I think most of
Speaker 11: us would empathize that this is a tough decision, But
Speaker 11: how he manages that I think is going to be
Speaker 11: fascinating to watch. And of course we've got the tax
Speaker 11: trial coming up in LA and people are going to
Speaker 11: be a lot less forgiving, I think, on that than
Speaker 11: they are on this gun issue. So that is going
Speaker 11: to complicate things further for the president.
Speaker 9: Yeah, especially considering the timing with that scheduled for September,
Speaker 9: where we are much closer to the vote on November fifth.
Speaker 9: I also want to talk about how this reflects not
Speaker 9: just on Hunter Biden and the Biden family, but the
Speaker 9: Department of Justice. We heard Special Counsel David Weiss and
Speaker 9: his remarks just moments ago, specifically calling out Attorney General
Speaker 9: mare Garla and thanking him for providing them the resources
Speaker 9: and the independence to bring this prosecution forward. But Merrit
Speaker 9: Garland also, as soon as this week could be held
Speaker 9: in contempt of Congress, at least on the floor of
Speaker 9: the House. That's something that they are pursuing, and has
Speaker 9: been last week before, testifying before a chamber in the
Speaker 9: House and in a Washington Post OpEd today defending the
Speaker 9: Justice Department. The op ed published said, in recent weeks,
Speaker 9: we've seen an escalation of attacks that go far beyond
Speaker 9: public scrutiny, criticism, and legitimate and necessary oversight of our work.
Speaker 9: They are baseless, personal and dangerous. Rick, how do you
Speaker 9: think Hunter Biden now being convicted may alter the way
Speaker 9: in which Congress pursues these questions around the Justice Department?
Speaker 9: Can you hold Merret Garland in contempt over her audio
Speaker 9: tapes if he did just allow all of this to
Speaker 9: happen to an unpopular president's son.
Speaker 12: Yeah, I think it's arguable that there's been open warfare
Speaker 12: between the House Judiciary Committee. Jim Jordan and the Department
Speaker 12: of Justice since Jordan became chairman, and this is very
Speaker 12: unhealthy for democracy and for the legal system. Jordan went
Speaker 12: all over he could late last year bring Weiss, the
Speaker 12: special prosecutor, into a hearing in the Justice Committee, first
Speaker 12: time anybody can remember a special counsel actually testifying to
Speaker 12: Congress before there's any trial at all and any prosecution.
Speaker 12: So it broke a lot of ground, new ground and
Speaker 12: not positive ground. I mean that was the beginning of
Speaker 12: a very bad cycle. And now, as you say, has
Speaker 12: presented itself here. I think this verdict completely undermindes Jim
Speaker 12: Jordan's entire premise, which is the Department of Justice is
Speaker 12: cooking the books for Hunter Biden and in reverse going
Speaker 12: after actively prosecuting Donald Trump. So right now, I think
Speaker 12: it makes Jordan look bad. I think it undermines the
Speaker 12: ability to go after I think they'll be Republicans who say,
Speaker 12: why are we talking about this? This is not something
Speaker 12: that we want to go into the election year to discuss.
Speaker 12: This is fundamentally the problem with the right wing of
Speaker 12: the Republican Party. They want to go down swinging, even
Speaker 12: if that means losing, and the vast majority of Republicans
Speaker 12: in the House want to be in the majority next
Speaker 12: year and continue to make policy changes they think are important.
Speaker 12: So this is as much a conflict within the Republican
Speaker 12: Caucus as it is in between the Department Justice and
Speaker 12: Jim Jordan.
Speaker 2: Isn't that type of overreach, Genie the best thing that
Speaker 2: could happen in the Biden campaign.
Speaker 11: It is, It's one of the best things that could
Speaker 11: happen to them. But I am just I'm listening to
Speaker 11: Rick and I am agreeing with him personally. But then
Speaker 11: I'm thinking back to what Jim Comer said when the
Speaker 11: conviction came out, and he's the chair of the Oversight
Speaker 11: and Accountability Committee, and what did he say. You hear
Speaker 11: them saying that the dj tried to give Biden a
Speaker 11: sweetheart clee deal that was smoked out by a federal judge.
Speaker 11: Today is a step forward in accountability, he says. But
Speaker 11: until the DOJ investigates everyone involved in the corrupt you
Speaker 11: know family, I can't remember the exact words, Biden family
Speaker 11: that generated like almost twenty million dollars according to his account,
Speaker 11: then the DOJ is going to continue to be in
Speaker 11: the pocket, so to speak, for the big guy Joe Biden.
Speaker 11: Now that was some of that is by memory, so
Speaker 11: I didn't get his exact words right, but you could
Speaker 11: hear the tone, which is that this is not going
Speaker 11: to put this to rest, at least according to Jim
Speaker 11: Comer and that committee apparently. And they are saying this
Speaker 11: only happened because the federal judge you know, smoked out
Speaker 11: the sweetheart deal and put you know, a made Hunter
Speaker 11: Biden go on trial. So this is where we stand,
Speaker 11: and I think they're going to continue running down this
Speaker 11: road as fast as they can. They can't get Joe
Speaker 11: Biden yet for an impeachment, but they're darn sure going
Speaker 11: to keep going after Hunter and the rest of the family.
Speaker 9: Yeah, it's great to point out that a statement from
Speaker 9: Chairman Comer. Certainly, we've seen a lot of statements flying
Speaker 9: thick and fast to day, including the statement that we
Speaker 9: got from the President. But Jeanie, do we also need
Speaker 9: to actually hear from him on this, not in written form,
Speaker 9: should he say something to address cameras, address the media.
Speaker 9: We just got an update and guidance from the White House.
Speaker 9: He's going to go to Wilmington this afternoon after his
Speaker 9: remarks here in Washington. At that Everytown event. He'll be
Speaker 9: in Wilmington, Delaware, presumably going to the side of his son.
Speaker 9: Does he need to say much more?
Speaker 11: I think he should. I have not surprised he is
Speaker 11: going to be with Hunter on this very tough day
Speaker 11: for his son. But I think he should say exactly
Speaker 11: what their statement said in his own words. I love
Speaker 11: my son, Jill, and I support him. We're proud of
Speaker 11: him for his recovery. We also respect the justice system
Speaker 11: and the jury verdict, and we will support him as
Speaker 11: he continues to look forward to appeals and I am
Speaker 11: going to go, you know, spend some time with my
Speaker 11: family in private. I think all of us as human
Speaker 11: beings could respect a statement like that, and I think
Speaker 11: he should say it. I don't know if he will.
Speaker 11: I think if he does, it'll probably be like with
Speaker 11: helicopters spinning around, so it's hard to hear him. But
Speaker 11: I think he should try to say it and get
Speaker 11: that word out all right.
Speaker 9: Jeanie Schanzeno and Rick Davis, Bloomberg Politics contributors, thank you
Speaker 9: so much for joining us on what is another historic
Speaker 9: day in American political history. The first time ever that
Speaker 9: a child of a sitting President has been convicted.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch
Speaker 1: Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Apple car Play
Speaker 1: and then broud Outo with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen
Speaker 1: on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us
Speaker 1: live on YouTube.
Speaker 3: Here on Bloomberg TV and radio.
Speaker 2: It's been spending a lot of time on the Hunter
Speaker 2: Biden verdict, as we promised you that we would. But Kaylee,
Speaker 2: we also have to turn our attention to this very
Speaker 2: slowly developing story in Israel. Anthony Blincoln on his eighth
Speaker 2: trip now to the Middle East, and of course a
Speaker 2: wait on what's going to happen with a potential ceasefire
Speaker 2: that the Biden White House rolled out some time ago.
Speaker 2: Now the UN Security Council voting to endorse the ceasefire
Speaker 2: deal on the table yesterday, and now reporting that Hamas
Speaker 2: says that it is accepting that UN Security Council ceasefire resolution.
Speaker 2: Anthony Blincoln met with Benjamin nett Yahoo to talk about this.
Speaker 3: Here's what he had to say.
Speaker 13: I met with Prime Minster Netanyahu last night and he
Speaker 13: reaffirmed his commitment to the proposal. Everyone's vote is in
Speaker 13: except for one vote, and that's from US, and that's
Speaker 13: what we wait for for more.
Speaker 9: We turn now to Hadar Suskin. He is Americans for
Speaker 9: Peace Now, President and CEO. As we make sense of
Speaker 9: what we're hearing from the Secretary of States, from the
Speaker 9: Israeli Prime Minister, and from Hamas itself. Hadar, it does
Speaker 9: feel like the messages are running potentially into some conflict here.
Speaker 9: As Blincoln says, yes, Israel is behind this. Netanyahu has
Speaker 9: reaffirmed this, But Netanyahu and his government also reaffirmed that
Speaker 9: they want to see Jamas entirely destroyed, and a ceasefire
Speaker 9: agreement would potentially make that difficult to accomplish. And for
Speaker 9: Hamas saying that it does support the UN ceasefire resolution,
Speaker 9: we haven't seen all of the parties come out and
Speaker 9: say the ceasefire begins. So what is your understanding of
Speaker 9: what exactly is happening here?
Speaker 14: Well, Kayley, I think what we're seeing is both the
Speaker 14: Nittanyahu government and the Hamas leadership want to be seen
Speaker 14: by the US, by the UN globally as saying yes
Speaker 14: to this. They want to be seen as the party
Speaker 14: that is moving toward peace. At the same time, while
Speaker 14: Natignano just reaffirmed it, and Hamas has now welcomed the
Speaker 14: UN resolution. Neither one has said, okay, let's sit down,
Speaker 14: let's let's start talking, let's implement the ceasefire. They both
Speaker 14: agreed in prince and said all right, now, let's start
Speaker 14: talking about the details, while at the same time both
Speaker 14: telling their domestic audiences nothing has changed on the Israeli side,
Speaker 14: and ten Yahou and others in his government are still
Speaker 14: saying they're going to completely destroy Hamas, the war is
Speaker 14: not over until again Hamas is completely eliminated, and other
Speaker 14: very non specific goals like that that are frankly pretty
Speaker 14: impossible to measure. And Hamas quite similarly has you know,
Speaker 14: accepted the principle, but is still launching attacks, obviously has
Speaker 14: not released hostages, and is still telling it's its constituency
Speaker 14: that you know, its plans haven't changed either.
Speaker 3: So bring us to a finer point here, Hidar.
Speaker 2: We all saw the president roll out a fairly detailed,
Speaker 2: three phased plan that seemed to be something everybody had
Speaker 2: their eyes on here.
Speaker 3: But your point is a good one.
Speaker 2: Once all the parties sit down, they have to hammer
Speaker 2: out the fine print. What will be this sticking points
Speaker 2: when that happens.
Speaker 14: Well, there's really one big one, right. The president's plan
Speaker 14: that he that he proposed, which again was presented as
Speaker 14: an Israeli proposal, not the president's proposal himself, said a
Speaker 14: six week ceasefire during which certain hostages would be released
Speaker 14: and negotiations would start for a long term ceasefire, for
Speaker 14: a secession of hostilities, actually not just a ceasefire. And
Speaker 14: the president said if after those six weeks everything has
Speaker 14: not been finalized yet but negotiations are ongoing, then that
Speaker 14: the ceasefire would hold. And the real difference, the breakpoint
Speaker 14: here is this insistence by Nitin Yahu that they will
Speaker 14: not end the war until Hamas is completely eliminated, and
Speaker 14: Hamas is of course assistance insistence that they are not
Speaker 14: going to disappear. So that's that's the difference. The six
Speaker 14: weeks can be worked out, even the hostage release and
Speaker 14: the prisoner exchange, because part of this is of course
Speaker 14: Palestinian prisoners who are held in Israeli prisons being released.
Speaker 14: All of that could be worked out if the two
Speaker 14: sides would be willing to sit down and do so.
Speaker 14: But the whole plan here is to get to an
Speaker 14: actual endgame. It's not just to have this short term
Speaker 14: and this prisoner hostage exchange. And that's where the seemingly
Speaker 14: unbridgable difference is.
Speaker 9: Well, it seemed it was unbridgable even inside the Israeli
Speaker 9: government because it was a disagreement over what exactly the
Speaker 9: endgame should be that drove Beny Gantz out of the government,
Speaker 9: out of the war cabinet. He was unhappy with the
Speaker 9: Prime Minister not meeting his demands. What influence do you
Speaker 9: think that departure ultimately has on how this moves forward
Speaker 9: to dark.
Speaker 14: Well, you know, Gance and his folks leaving still leaves
Speaker 14: Nita Nyahu with a sixty four seat majority in the
Speaker 14: one hundred and twenty seat Kness. So it doesn't change
Speaker 14: anything immediately in terms of going to new elections, but
Speaker 14: it's one more sort of push, one more data point,
Speaker 14: because ultimately what we're going to need is to get
Speaker 14: to this agreement is is a call for new elections
Speaker 14: in a new government. There is no way that this government,
Speaker 14: with not only Nita Nyahu but the parties led by
Speaker 14: ben Vier and Smotrich, those two in particular, will absolutely
Speaker 14: never agree to any kind of agreement. They've been quite
Speaker 14: clear on that.
Speaker 8: Now.
Speaker 14: The opposition parties, led by Yeah you're Lapide, Yeah your
Speaker 14: Golan and others have said that should Nita Naho move
Speaker 14: forward with this agreement, they would support his government from
Speaker 14: the outside, not as members, to implement the agreement. But
Speaker 14: that would mean that that sort of starts the clock
Speaker 14: ticking on the process of moving toward new elections. And
Speaker 14: the thing that is maybe the most interesting thing that
Speaker 14: came up this week is there's a lot of talk
Speaker 14: now that Nitayahu himself maybe getting to the point where
Speaker 14: he realized he's played out this line this government. You know,
Speaker 14: he's dragged it out in all these different ways. He's
Speaker 14: done all these different things, and he may be ready
Speaker 14: to start organizing for new elections sooner rather than later.
Speaker 3: Fascinating.
Speaker 2: How about the war cabinet so called headar is Benny
Speaker 2: Gance replaced by a hard liner or does the war
Speaker 2: cabinet begin to fracture?
Speaker 14: Well, the only people left in the government are very hardliners.
Speaker 14: And you know Ben Vier, who has not had a
Speaker 14: seat in that war cabinet, has been demanding one. It's
Speaker 14: one of the things he wants to see happen Frankly,
Speaker 14: I don't think it makes a very big difference whether
Speaker 14: he has that seat or not, because there are now
Speaker 14: no contrasting voices within the government. So the war cabinet
Speaker 14: becomes largely irrelevant, frankly, because you did have Gance and
Speaker 14: his deputy Eisenkott sitting there with presumably at least some
Speaker 14: differing views, some moderating views. Now that they're out, the
Speaker 14: only voices in the government are very hard lined. You
Speaker 14: also really have only one leader in the government with
Speaker 14: significant military experience, which is Joav Galan, the Secretary of Defense,
Speaker 14: because again Smotriz ben Vere, the Religious Party leaders, none
Speaker 14: of those people even served their regular you know, three
Speaker 14: years of military service, much less were they generals and
Speaker 14: military leaders. So they've really thinned the bench there within
Speaker 14: the coalition.
Speaker 9: Hadar, do you think visits, repeated visits like what we're
Speaker 9: seeing from the Secretary of State are actually helpful in
Speaker 9: all of this. He's been to the Middle East now
Speaker 9: eight times since October seventh, and it seems pretty consistently
Speaker 9: he leaves empty handed, even though he says things like
Speaker 9: Netanyahu when he spoke with him, still reaffirmed his commitments
Speaker 9: to a ceasefire agreement is the is the US government helping?
Speaker 14: Well, they're certainly trying to help. And I think that
Speaker 14: there are benefits to these visits. Remember they're not solely
Speaker 14: for the purpose of meeting with Ninitayahu or Israeli leaders.
Speaker 14: I met with Palestinian leaders, Jordanians, many others as well,
Speaker 14: and it's part of patching together, you know, the Nessy
Speaker 14: Coalition to have the political backing to move this forward.
Speaker 14: But I think the US government can and should do more,
Speaker 14: and can and should take a stronger position visa VI
Speaker 14: the Israeli government. But what's sure is that this is
Speaker 14: not moving forward without that significant push from the Americans,
Speaker 14: and so having Secretary Blink in there. President Biden has
Speaker 14: been himself, so many of our of our other leaders Burns,
Speaker 14: Jake Sherman and others have been there, I think is
Speaker 14: important in trying to move these conversations forward. The question
Speaker 14: is you know what's going to be the ultimate push,
Speaker 14: the ultimate declaration that nudges n across the line. Because
Speaker 14: we can talk and talk and talk, and what we've
Speaker 14: seen now as many months of talking about ce spires,
Speaker 14: talking about process, talking about different opportunities and different deals,
Speaker 14: but at the end there's a binary decision, right yes
Speaker 14: or no? Is there a ceasefire and whatever it is.
Speaker 14: You know, we haven't gotten to that point yet. And
Speaker 14: I think the next big question that or the next
Speaker 14: big moment out there is, of course, we have Nittanyahu
Speaker 14: scheduled to come here to Washington on July twenty fourth, now,
Speaker 14: and we'll see what the situation is you on that day.
Speaker 3: We're going to be calling you for insights.
Speaker 2: I think, Kadar Suskin, it's great to have you back
Speaker 2: to DAR Americans for Peace now, President and CEO. A
Speaker 2: story that we'll keep tabs on here on Bloomberg TV
Speaker 2: and radio. It's worth mentioning, Kaylee, because we spent so
Speaker 2: much time and you actually made tracks to Baltimore when
Speaker 2: it happened that Francis Scott Key Bridge collapse, the deadly collapse,
Speaker 2: and a major milestone and the cleanup here is Baltimore's
Speaker 2: main shipping channel finally reopens.
Speaker 9: Yeah, reopened yesterday, which is pretty remarkable and it's actually
Speaker 9: something we had the chance to speak to Maryland Governor
Speaker 9: Wes Moore about a few weeks ago on May thirtieth,
Speaker 9: including the economic ramifications the collapse had for the state
Speaker 9: of Maryland and when he can confidently say things would
Speaker 9: get back to normal.
Speaker 15: We saw during the month of April where there was
Speaker 15: a real concern about where unemployment rate for the state
Speaker 15: of Maryland was going to go for the month of April.
Speaker 15: And we're proud that because we were able to work
Speaker 15: with the private sector, work with our partners and all
Speaker 15: of our port partners, that not only for the month
Speaker 15: of April, has Maryland continued to have amongst the lowest
Speaker 15: unemployment rates in the entire country. We actually gained thousands
Speaker 15: of jobs during that same time period and watch labor
Speaker 15: participation actually increase during the month of April. So I
Speaker 15: could not be more proud of the response of this state.
Speaker 15: We've got a long road to go and I will
Speaker 15: not stop until we have a new bridge, a new
Speaker 15: Francis Scott Key Bridge built and overlooking the skyline of Baltimore.
Speaker 15: But the speed of this recovery really has been a marvel,
Speaker 15: and it's really been because we've had a coordinated effort
Speaker 15: in getting.
Speaker 12: It done well.
Speaker 2: You do have a lot to be proud of, Governor,
Speaker 2: and the heroic actions of the public safety officials in
Speaker 2: Baltimore and the state of Maryland, including the divers who
Speaker 2: have been risking their lives to comb the bottom of
Speaker 2: the floor, of the remarkable stories to tell. But then
Speaker 2: it becomes a question about money. And we've talked about
Speaker 2: this before on Bloomberg. In fact, we had a conversation
Speaker 2: earlier with Republican Congressman Patrick McHenry, chairs the House Financial
Speaker 2: Services Committee, and we asked him directly about the chances
Speaker 2: for a supplemental budget to rebuild the bridge passing this Congress,
Speaker 2: and he talked about offsets that would be needed, other
Speaker 2: budget cuts, suggesting that we're spending too much. What are
Speaker 2: you hearing from leaders in the House about that making
Speaker 2: that happen to rebuild the bridge.
Speaker 15: You know, I've been incredibly encouraged by the amount of
Speaker 15: bipartisan support that we've received, you know, people from from
Speaker 15: not just the Democratics side of the House, but also
Speaker 15: people from Chair Womack and Chair Cole from Oklahoma and
Speaker 15: from Arkansas and Oklahoma respectively, people who have said, we
Speaker 15: understand the importance of getting this bridge rebuilt because it's
Speaker 15: a core artery for the Port of Baltimore, which is
Speaker 15: indispensable to the American economy, and what we're asking for
Speaker 15: the one hundred percent cost share is just not saying
Speaker 15: all the American people are going to pay for it.
Speaker 15: I'm very confident that the American people will be made
Speaker 15: whole when you look at everything from insurance to potential
Speaker 15: pending litigation. Lloyd's of London has indicated this is going
Speaker 15: to be the most expensive maritime tragedy in our nation's history.
Speaker 15: So the American people will be made whole. The reason
Speaker 15: our ask for the one hundred percent cost share is
Speaker 15: essentially it's essentially bridge financing. It's saying that while we're
Speaker 15: going through the process of a potential litigation, which we
Speaker 15: know could take years, we've got to get moving. We've
Speaker 15: got to get building because my commitment to the people
Speaker 15: of my state and the people of this country, frankly,
Speaker 15: is that we are going to build this thing on
Speaker 15: time and on budget and effectively, and we're going to
Speaker 15: get the Port of Baltimore going again because it's important
Speaker 15: to the largest supply chain of our nation. But we've
Speaker 15: got to get moving. That's the importance of the bipartisan
Speaker 15: support for the one hundred percent cost share, and we've
Speaker 15: been incredibly heartened by the amount of by the encouraging
Speaker 15: words and supports that we've received from members from both
Speaker 15: sides of the aisle on this issue.
Speaker 2: Maryland Governor west More talking with us last month about
Speaker 2: today's development. Now this week at least to port of
Speaker 2: Baltimore's main shipping channel fully reopen Power.
Speaker 3: Thanks for listening to the Balance of Power podcast.
Speaker 2: Make sure to subscribe if you haven't already, at Apple, Spotify.
Speaker 3: Or wherever you get your podcasts, and
Speaker 2: You can find us live every weekday from Washington, DC
Speaker 2: at Noontimeeastern at Bloomberg dot com.