Speaker 1: Now from our nation's capital. This is Bloomberg's sound on
Speaker 1: Republicans cannot both be loyal to Donald Trump and loyal
Speaker 1: to the Constitution. The attempt was to take away your vote,
Speaker 1: no matter who you voted for. The President says something
Speaker 1: to the effect of, I'm the fing President. Take me
Speaker 1: up to the capital now. Bloomberg Sound on Politics, Policy
Speaker 1: and perspective from DC's top names. This trip will reinforce
Speaker 1: a vital American role in a strategically consequential regions. This
Speaker 1: diversity of this community as unique as the breakfast tacos
Speaker 1: here in San Antonio. Bloomberg Sound On with Joe Matthew
Speaker 1: on Bloomberg Radio. Donald Trump Unhinged. Welcome to the fastest
Speaker 1: hour in politics. As the January six Committee attempts to
Speaker 1: connect the dots between the White House, the conspiracy theorists,
Speaker 1: and the militia groups who attacked the capital. We will
Speaker 1: walk you through another here ring in which we learn
Speaker 1: of an unhinged as described Oval Office meeting in advance
Speaker 1: of the riot. Will discuss the legal path next with
Speaker 1: Don Air, Deputy Attorney General, and the George H. W.
Speaker 1: Bush administration. Later, President Biden takes off tonight for the
Speaker 1: Middle East High Hopes for Diplomacy and Oil will be
Speaker 1: joined by Jonathan Panakoff from the Atlantic Council to talk
Speaker 1: about it, and our signature panel is in place to
Speaker 1: help us on packet All analysis today from Bloomberg Politics
Speaker 1: contributors Rick Davis and Jeanie Schanzano. So where were you
Speaker 1: on the night of December eighteen, If you were in
Speaker 1: the West Wing, you heard some wild stuff as told
Speaker 1: today by the January six Committee. It's seventh hearing, and
Speaker 1: the argument over how to pursue fraud conspiracy claims exploded,
Speaker 1: as I read by Mike Dorning and Billy House on
Speaker 1: the terminal into an unhinged meeting in the Oval Office.
Speaker 1: That sounds like a movie trailer. Congress from Jamie Rasn,
Speaker 1: Democrat on the committee, says, Sydney pal picture that Sydney Powell,
Speaker 1: former National Security advisor, Michael Flynn, and the former CEO
Speaker 1: of Overstock overstock dot com. That's the power trio there
Speaker 1: to push ideas on challenging the results. Here's Jamie Raskin.
Speaker 1: They were able to speak with the President by himself
Speaker 1: for some time until White House officials learned of the meeting.
Speaker 1: What ensued was a heated and profane clash between this
Speaker 1: group and President Trump's White House advisors, who traded personal insults,
Speaker 1: accusations of disloyalty to the president, and even challenges to
Speaker 1: physically fight. He must have been something, White House aid
Speaker 1: Cassidy Hutchinson, who testified in the prior hearing, I said,
Speaker 1: this was no normal Oval Office meeting. So that was
Speaker 1: the first point that I had recognized. Okay, there's nobody
Speaker 1: in there from the White House. Marks gone, what's going
Speaker 1: on right now? Nobody from the White House. We heard
Speaker 1: from one of the administration officials who actually entered the room.
Speaker 1: Listen to White House Council Pat Sippoloni from his recent testimony.
Speaker 1: This is from when he just sat down last Friday.
Speaker 1: We hear from him today. I saw General Man, I
Speaker 1: saw Sidney Powell sitting there. I was not happy to
Speaker 1: see the people in the overaw Well, yeah, I don't
Speaker 1: think big in the providing Well, first of all, the
Speaker 1: overstocked person I've never never everything to discussed was actually
Speaker 1: the first thing I did. I walked in, I looked
Speaker 1: at him, and I said, who were you? The overstocked CEO?
Speaker 1: His name is Patrick Byrne, former CEO and by the way,
Speaker 1: big Trump Guy will now reportedly meet on Friday with
Speaker 1: the committee to discuss his involvement that day, possibly why
Speaker 1: they delayed the prime time hearing that was set for Thursday.
Speaker 1: That meeting took place December eighteen. As I mentioned, it
Speaker 1: was only hours later Donald Trump sent then in from
Speaker 1: his tweet inviting his supporters to Washington January six, saying
Speaker 1: it would be wild now. The committee presented more testimony.
Speaker 1: We heard from a Twitter official described an uptick and
Speaker 1: violent postings and threats after that. While the pro Trump
Speaker 1: site that Donald Winn posted pictures of tunnels under the Capitol.
Speaker 1: They encouraged people to show up with handcuffs stand outside
Speaker 1: the tunnels. The leaders of the Proud Boys and the
Speaker 1: Oath Keepers started making big plans. But did the committee
Speaker 1: connect the dots as we heard would happen in advance
Speaker 1: of the hearing from Trump to those groups. How close
Speaker 1: did they get? We take the legal view with Don Ayre,
Speaker 1: who served as Deputy Attorney General and the George H. W.
Speaker 1: Bush administration, former Principal Deputy Solicitor General of the United
Speaker 1: States and now a professor at Georgetown Law School, Deputy
Speaker 1: Attorney General, is great to have you with us year.
Speaker 1: Do you have a sense of that did they connect
Speaker 1: the dots to get close enough to Donald Trump to
Speaker 1: make a difference today in the narrative? Well, I think
Speaker 1: you have to ask the question of connect with dots
Speaker 1: um And I think it's important to remember that what
Speaker 1: we're most basically dealing with here and the potential charges
Speaker 1: that people are I think most immediately focusing on are
Speaker 1: are the ones about trying to steal the election. And
Speaker 1: I think those dots are totally connected at this point.
Speaker 1: I think what we have and what we had today
Speaker 1: was more specifics and more details showing how obsessed Donald
Speaker 1: Trump was with achieving the goal of overturning the legitimate election.
Speaker 1: And there's lots of colorful episodes here, and the ones
Speaker 1: you recounted in your in your lead up to this
Speaker 1: are are really excellent and colorful and wild and crazy,
Speaker 1: but they're part of a bigger picture. And the bigger
Speaker 1: picture includes other stuff going on at the same time
Speaker 1: that we've already heard about. We've heard about him making
Speaker 1: multiple phone calls to state officials to get them to
Speaker 1: change the vote count. We've heard of him having meetings
Speaker 1: and phone calls, daily phone calls with Jeffrey Rosen at
Speaker 1: the Justice Department, getting him to proclaim falsely that fraud
Speaker 1: had been perpetrated, his efforts to influence pants, all the
Speaker 1: things that you've heard all the evidence about. And here
Speaker 1: today we have this stuff about the lead into the rally,
Speaker 1: so proving the case that he worked hard personally really
Speaker 1: was the driving force in overturning the election. I think
Speaker 1: that case is made. Is it worth trying to prove
Speaker 1: that a Roger Stone or Rudy Giuliani was you know,
Speaker 1: had the Proud Boys on the phone, that that that
Speaker 1: that violent escalation was in fact planned in Trump's orbit?
Speaker 1: Or is that is that not a good time spent
Speaker 1: legally as they try to build this case. Well, I
Speaker 1: think it depends on what all the evidence ultimately shows.
Speaker 1: And I I you know, I I agree that we
Speaker 1: don't yet have, from what we've heard, ironclad direct evidence
Speaker 1: between Donald Donald Trump and these people per perpetrated the fraud.
Speaker 1: But the big picture here, and the one that really
Speaker 1: matters to me and I think most people, is that
Speaker 1: we have got to get accountability when the president tries
Speaker 1: to overturn an election and steal it and stay in
Speaker 1: office winning lost. That's what the issue is. That case
Speaker 1: I think is in the can. I think that case
Speaker 1: is ready to be made. And whether this other case
Speaker 1: about perpetrating all the violence is one that you ultimately
Speaker 1: brain against Donald Trump. I think time will tell, and
Speaker 1: I think we have to see what all the Justice
Speaker 1: Department has when all the evidence is in. Um, I
Speaker 1: think you're gonna have to know a little more than
Speaker 1: we know. Now. Yeah, I want to ask you about
Speaker 1: witness tampering. We heard from Liz Cheney at the very
Speaker 1: end of the hearing. Some people may have tuned out
Speaker 1: by now, just some closing remarks, and she took direct
Speaker 1: aim at Donald Trump. Now, we've heard that some of
Speaker 1: the witnesses, including Cassidy Hutchinson, have received texts or calls
Speaker 1: that sound like something out of a mob movie. Hey,
Speaker 1: you hate for something to happen to you. If you
Speaker 1: know you say that, we know you're going to do
Speaker 1: the right thing. This is interesting, though, a letter from
Speaker 1: the former president. Let's listen to Liz Cheni and we'll
Speaker 1: get your thoughts on this. Here she is. After our
Speaker 1: last hearing, President Trump tried to call a witness in
Speaker 1: our investigation, a witness you have not yet seen in
Speaker 1: these hearings. That person declined to answer or respond to
Speaker 1: President Trump's call and instead alerted their lawyer to the call.
Speaker 1: Their lawyer alerted us, and this committee has supplied that
Speaker 1: information to the Department of Justice. Don here how severe
Speaker 1: is that charge compared to the others that we're talking
Speaker 1: about here in what is the Department of Justice up
Speaker 1: to you right now? Well, I think I think the
Speaker 1: idea that target of an investigation is interfering with witnesses
Speaker 1: and it is an incredibly serious post ability. And I
Speaker 1: wouldn't describe what she said as a charge because I
Speaker 1: think it was, you know, it was an anecdote of
Speaker 1: something that was reported. But I think it's a It's
Speaker 1: a very positive sign that when these things are happening,
Speaker 1: they're being made public and there's got not going to
Speaker 1: be any place to hide, I think for Donald Trump
Speaker 1: or for anyone else who does this. UM. I think
Speaker 1: what the Justice Department is up to now is the
Speaker 1: job that they should be doing, and that is quietly
Speaker 1: developing the evidence in this case. They've had real help,
Speaker 1: no question from the Select Committee and the work that
Speaker 1: they've done. But I think they're doing their job. The
Speaker 1: last thing they should be doing, and the last thing
Speaker 1: that I think Merrick Garland would want to be doing
Speaker 1: is talking publicly about where the investigation stands or pumping
Speaker 1: his chest about how he's going to get Donald Trump.
Speaker 1: That's totally inappropriate. And what do you want to see
Speaker 1: in this final hearing? We had a primetime ring set
Speaker 1: for Thursday. They postponed that they're obviously cooking up something here.
Speaker 1: They're going to interview the former Overstocked CEO, maybe Steve
Speaker 1: Bannon is involved. How do you how do you close this?
Speaker 1: You know, I'm gonna be interested to see because I
Speaker 1: don't think there's a clinker in the deck of the
Speaker 1: seven hearings they've had so far, so I have I
Speaker 1: have a lot of respect for the people that are
Speaker 1: putting on the presentation here. I don't know. I think
Speaker 1: we're going to hear more about at least part of it.
Speaker 1: I've I've been I've heard say today is we're going
Speaker 1: to hear more about um Donald Trump's day on on
Speaker 1: on January six, and and what else they'll put on
Speaker 1: I think is a function of what more evidence they've got.
Speaker 1: I guess the thing I would just stress as the
Speaker 1: overarching point is there's so many facts here, there's so
Speaker 1: many specifics and so many, you know, really bad things
Speaker 1: that Donald Trump personally has done that it's hard to
Speaker 1: keep the all in mind and see them in the
Speaker 1: context of each other. And that's really what we have
Speaker 1: to do, because it's a big picture. He was the
Speaker 1: man running the train on all of these different aspects
Speaker 1: of this conspiracy. That's the amazing realization from his hearing.
Speaker 1: Don Air, thank you so much for the time to
Speaker 1: get us rolling here on Bloomberg Sound On. We would
Speaker 1: love to stay in touch with you as these hearings roll.
Speaker 1: We've got one more. It's gonna be prime time and
Speaker 1: we'll let you know once it's scheduled and we'll assemble
Speaker 1: our panel next for a lot more on this with
Speaker 1: breaking news again on the terminal here, and it has
Speaker 1: to do with Twitter, with the Twitter General counsel now
Speaker 1: discussing a lawsuit in a memo against Elon Musk, telling
Speaker 1: staff that it asked for an expedited trial and asking
Speaker 1: a judge in Delaware for the case to be heard
Speaker 1: in September. Charlie Pellett will have more on that coming
Speaker 1: up in just a few minutes. We're gonna keep the
Speaker 1: beat on the January six hearing, though, and what we
Speaker 1: learned today what will matter to the d o J.
Speaker 1: With Rick Davis and Jennie Chanzano. This is Bloomberg. This
Speaker 1: is Bloomberg Sound on on Bloomberg Radio. The January six
Speaker 1: Committee refers a story of witness tampering, at least a
Speaker 1: suggestion by Congresswoman Liz Cheney from Donald Trump himself recently
Speaker 1: attempted to contacts. He says, an unnamed witness in the
Speaker 1: committee's investigation of the riot didn't get back to Donald Trump,
Speaker 1: sent it to the committee, who referred it to the
Speaker 1: d o J. One of the things that we learned
Speaker 1: today in the hearing, did we have something on that?
Speaker 1: If I missed that, forgive me. One of the live
Speaker 1: witnesses today, though, was a man named Jason Van Taytenhoff,
Speaker 1: described as the former spokesman for the oath Keepers, Right,
Speaker 1: this was the hearing that was going to connect the
Speaker 1: dots to the militias. By the way, former spokesman for
Speaker 1: the how does that work? To the oath keepers? Run
Speaker 1: an ad for a spokesman, he was getting paid. He
Speaker 1: talked about how you know, his life, he had to
Speaker 1: give up his job and lost his income. Anyway, he
Speaker 1: shows up in the congressional hearing with a faced tattoo,
Speaker 1: wearing a denim jacket and had some pretty scary stuff
Speaker 1: to say as he tried to make the point that
Speaker 1: this was real what you saw there on January six,
Speaker 1: that this group, the Oath Keepers, the dangerous militia as
Speaker 1: he described at that attracted white nationalists and quote straight
Speaker 1: up racists unquote. He said they were there to participate
Speaker 1: in a riot. Listen to Jason van Tatenhom. There was
Speaker 1: a gallows set up in front of the capitol. This
Speaker 1: could have been the spark that started a new civil
Speaker 1: war and no one would have won there. That would
Speaker 1: have been good for no one. As we assemble our
Speaker 1: panel today, forgive that delay. Rick Davis and Jeanie Schanzano,
Speaker 1: we thank you for being with us as always here Nie,
Speaker 1: what did we learn that was new that moved you?
Speaker 1: Was it witness tampering or was it, in fact the
Speaker 1: conversion as Jamie Raskin has called it, trying to get
Speaker 1: these groups to show up and cause trouble. Well, you
Speaker 1: know the the clip you were just talking about. I
Speaker 1: thought one of the most chilling aspects of the day.
Speaker 1: And I have I have a list of them, Joe,
Speaker 1: but I won't go through all them. But one of
Speaker 1: the most chilling was both Jason vand Um Tattenhoff is
Speaker 1: that how you say his name? And taitten Hoff and
Speaker 1: and Steven Ayres who testified live today, They both of
Speaker 1: their own accord, warned about what can happen in the
Speaker 1: next election, and I thought that was incredibly chilling. They said,
Speaker 1: and essentially, this is not over. There is a reason
Speaker 1: that we are here and that we need to address
Speaker 1: this publicly because this thing is not over. I thought
Speaker 1: that was chilling. I thought Liz Cheney's bombshell at the
Speaker 1: beginning or at the end, sorry about witness tampering. And
Speaker 1: also at the beginning when she told I think the
Speaker 1: Department of Justice, but anybody who would listen that Trump
Speaker 1: is a seventy six year old man, he's not an
Speaker 1: impression of child, and he is responsible for his actions.
Speaker 1: Those are the three things that really caught my attention.
Speaker 1: What did the d o J care about that they
Speaker 1: heard today? Rick? You know, I think they heard that
Speaker 1: about intent. Just as Jeanie was saying, Steven Airs made
Speaker 1: it very clear that they're intent. They hung on every
Speaker 1: word of Donald Trump, and he was telling them to
Speaker 1: go wreck violence on January six, Whether it was in
Speaker 1: the original call to you know, his supporters at one
Speaker 1: forty two a m. Who tweets at one forty two
Speaker 1: a m. After this wild White House meeting, I mean,
Speaker 1: and uh and and and all the way through the
Speaker 1: process to the point where they stormed the Capitol, they
Speaker 1: were acting on his orders. At least we're talking about
Speaker 1: guys reading Twitter or guys who were getting phone calls
Speaker 1: from people in Trump's orbit. Well, I think I think
Speaker 1: it's all of the above, because what we're finding out
Speaker 1: is that once Trump sort of announced the event, it's
Speaker 1: set into motion all his lieutenants and all his operatives
Speaker 1: in the States, even some of the campaign actually you know,
Speaker 1: recruiting and turning people out to the degree that the
Speaker 1: oath keepers actually you know, held organizing conference calls and
Speaker 1: zooms in advance of the event, tell him people to
Speaker 1: bring you know, violent equipment with them. So he owes
Speaker 1: a responsibility to American public for having put those things
Speaker 1: in emotion and and all along the way, including on
Speaker 1: the steps of the Capitol, inciting them to violence. And
Speaker 1: so I think the justice parts look at that going
Speaker 1: is you know exactly what don Air was saying, Um,
Speaker 1: you know, uh, she was there there, probably causing him
Speaker 1: trying to overturn the election. Sure, uh and uh and
Speaker 1: and and this is just one of the chapters in
Speaker 1: that book. Dohn Air told us Genie that they've they've
Speaker 1: made the case uh for trying to overturn the election,
Speaker 1: that the tampering uh with election results is as good
Speaker 1: as done. Uh. With that said, what do we need
Speaker 1: to hear or see in the final hearing that wraps
Speaker 1: this up in an effective way? And should they were
Speaker 1: furthest to the d o J. Yes, yes, And and
Speaker 1: you know, I think what we're going to hear is
Speaker 1: what the chairman described as a supreme dereliction of duty
Speaker 1: and what exactly what Donald Trump was doing on January six.
Speaker 1: Then I was very happy to hear a lawyer and
Speaker 1: don Air talk about the fact that they have established
Speaker 1: a legal culpability at least enough to refer it to
Speaker 1: the d o J. The question here, since I'm not
Speaker 1: a lawyer, is what has to happen next, and that
Speaker 1: is that Merrick Garland's got to be as convinced as
Speaker 1: Liz Cheney is about the historical fact that if they,
Speaker 1: if Donald Trump and the people accountable for this are
Speaker 1: not held accountable, what history teaches us is it will
Speaker 1: repeat itself. And I go back to what those the
Speaker 1: witnesses were saying today. You know, you look at somebody
Speaker 1: like like Timothy Snyder's on tyranny, This happens again if
Speaker 1: it's not addressed. And that's I think the big message
Speaker 1: out of today. Well, there you go, number seven from
Speaker 1: the January six Committee. Rick and Genie are with us
Speaker 1: on the Tuesday edition of Bloomberg Sound on the Fastest
Speaker 1: Hour in Politics. President Biden gets on air Force one
Speaker 1: hours from now on his way to the Middle East.
Speaker 1: We'll talk about it next with high hopes here in
Speaker 1: Washington and at the gas station. This is Bloomberg. The
Speaker 1: President's National Security advisor, Jake Sullivan brief reporters ahead of
Speaker 1: Joe Biden's trip to the Middle East. He takes off
Speaker 1: tonight on the way to Israel and then Saudi Arabia,
Speaker 1: but he started with news on Iran, not directly tied
Speaker 1: to the President's trip, but certainly informing it and maybe
Speaker 1: providing the backdrop for it. As Sullivan has news that
Speaker 1: the Iranian government is providing Russia, I'll let him say it,
Speaker 1: with hundreds of drones for use in Ukraine. Here's Jake Sullivan.
Speaker 1: The Iranian government is preparing to provide Russia with up
Speaker 1: to several hundred U A V s, including weapons capable
Speaker 1: U a V s on an expedit expedited timeline are in.
Speaker 1: Information further indicates that Iran is preparing to train rush
Speaker 1: and forces to use these U A B s, with
Speaker 1: initial training sessions slated to begin as soon as early July.
Speaker 1: It's unclear whether Ron has delivered any of these U
Speaker 1: A B s too Russia already early July. So here
Speaker 1: we are, so now with more questions about the purpose
Speaker 1: of this trip. Is it just to get more oil?
Speaker 1: Because we keep hearing Saudi Arabia, the U A E
Speaker 1: the only two nations that have spirit capacity three million
Speaker 1: barrels a day combined. Let's see he gets all of
Speaker 1: that oil and brings it home to the United States
Speaker 1: with refining capacity already spoken for, Does it actually make
Speaker 1: a difference? Maybe not according to some people, but as
Speaker 1: we heard or read and the President's op ed over
Speaker 1: the weekend, at least the White House says there are
Speaker 1: much bigger plans within the eye on the Abraham Accords
Speaker 1: and potentially normalizing relations between Israel and Saudi Arabia had
Speaker 1: an awfully precarious time in our history. That's where we
Speaker 1: begin with Jonathan Pannakoff, director of the Atlantic Council's Brent
Speaker 1: Skullcroft Middle East Security Initiative, Former Deputy National Intelligence Officer
Speaker 1: for the Near East. Jonathan, how ambitious is Joe Biden
Speaker 1: feeling as he gets on Air Force one, Well, good
Speaker 1: afternoon to you, and thanks so much for having the
Speaker 1: I think he's not feeling that ambitious. To be honest,
Speaker 1: I think there are places that he knows that he
Speaker 1: can advance, both Israeli, Saudi and others um engagement. UM.
Speaker 1: I think more than anything, this trip is really about
Speaker 1: resetting relations with Saudi Arabia and with some of his
Speaker 1: other golf allies, including the United to Emirates. But when
Speaker 1: it comes to the oil itself, as you said, three
Speaker 1: million barrels, I've heard the number might be as little
Speaker 1: as two million barrels. The fair capacity just isn't really there,
Speaker 1: and the odds that it's going to have a meaningful effect,
Speaker 1: I think on oil prices are is pretty minimal. I
Speaker 1: think what he's really hoping more than anything, is that
Speaker 1: if he can stabilize the relationship now that he can
Speaker 1: move it beyond just the traditional energy and defense sectors
Speaker 1: and really expanded to economic issues, to climate issues, UM
Speaker 1: two other alternative energies, and as well of course as security.
Speaker 1: What is he's going to the West Bank as well?
Speaker 1: What does this mean for the potential you know, to
Speaker 1: state solution as he becomes the first president to fly
Speaker 1: from Israel to Jetta on Friday. Yeah, so I don't
Speaker 1: think that the saudiast in israelis are ready to normalize yet.
Speaker 1: My senses that as long as King Solomon is on
Speaker 1: the throne, it would be unlikely that Saudi Arabia would
Speaker 1: normalize relations with Israel formally unless there was a too
Speaker 1: state solution UM MBS sives the throne then obviously that
Speaker 1: might change the conversation. He seems to have a slightly
Speaker 1: word uh progressive take on whether or not normalization UM
Speaker 1: requires a two state solution. I think for the West
Speaker 1: Bank to be honest, and for the Palestinians, what it
Speaker 1: really is is a chance to get back in the
Speaker 1: game a little bit. Obviously, they cut diplomatic relations after
Speaker 1: the Trump administration move the embassy to Jerusalem. Reason. Yeah,
Speaker 1: that's absolutely right, and so I think this is an
Speaker 1: opportunity to try to hopefully reset things a little bit.
Speaker 1: I don't know, Jonathan, I've been hearing a lot of
Speaker 1: big talk. I mean, expectations get awfully high, especially when
Speaker 1: people start tying it to very specific things like gas prices.
Speaker 1: The president's being beat up by Republicans for going so
Speaker 1: called hat in hand two mbs to beg for oil,
Speaker 1: is getting beat up by progressives for well, you know,
Speaker 1: not considering I guess to the extent that they think
Speaker 1: he should, the human rights record, the kah Kashogi murder,
Speaker 1: which he says he will bring up. Here are expectations
Speaker 1: perilously high, as he's set up for failure because it
Speaker 1: doesn't sound like you see many deliverables. Well, I think
Speaker 1: that there's a few, but I certainly agree that if
Speaker 1: the expectation in the public sentiment seems to be that
Speaker 1: this will bring down oil prices, then there's going to
Speaker 1: be disappointment. I think that there are places that can
Speaker 1: be advanced. So, for instance, in addition to UM the
Speaker 1: BI ladder exchange with the Israelis, don't be an eye
Speaker 1: to YouTube virtual conference, eye to being Israel and India
Speaker 1: YouTube in the United States and the United are of Emirates,
Speaker 1: which creates a bit of a new coalition that we
Speaker 1: haven't seen before that really could have a long term
Speaker 1: impact when we think about Israeli technology, Emirati UH capital
Speaker 1: and the industrial base that the Indians have. So I
Speaker 1: think that's a possibility. I also think on the security side, look,
Speaker 1: the move of Israel into the sent calm area of
Speaker 1: responsibility from the ucom one is not a small move.
Speaker 1: It brings the Israelis into the same room as the Saudis,
Speaker 1: as the Cutteries, even though they don't have formal diplomatic relations.
Speaker 1: I think this is about making marginal progress, but you know,
Speaker 1: a huge deliverable. I mentioned at the outset this news
Speaker 1: of Iran supplying drones to Russia. UH, that's going to
Speaker 1: be in the air and part of the conversation. I
Speaker 1: presume as as lines are being drawn, Jonathan, this Iranian
Speaker 1: Russian axis is becoming a bigger worry for Saudi Arabia
Speaker 1: it is. I think it shows the shifting alliances and
Speaker 1: frankly transactional nature of most Middle East states, and that
Speaker 1: includes Iran. I think at this point it's obviously going
Speaker 1: to overhang a number of different conversations, both in Israel
Speaker 1: and the president's conversations with the so called GCC plus
Speaker 1: three UH in Jedda. At the end of the week,
Speaker 1: my senses there will be a recommitment to Israeli defense
Speaker 1: and Israeli security. I think you'll also see the same
Speaker 1: commitment to the Arab states. What that actually means purposefully,
Speaker 1: I don't quite no. I think there's some discussion about
Speaker 1: integrated air and maybe maritime defense system. That certainly would
Speaker 1: be a great starting place, but it will take some
Speaker 1: time to develop. Jonathan, thank you for the insights. Jonathan
Speaker 1: pannakoff the Atlantic Council with us on Bloomberg sound On,
Speaker 1: What does it mean for the Iran nuclear deal? And
Speaker 1: is the President set up for failure by his own expectations?
Speaker 1: Will reassemble the panel next, Rick and Genie here on
Speaker 1: sound On. I'm Joe Matthew, this is Bloomberg. This is
Speaker 1: Bloomberg sound On on Bloomberg Radio, President Biden dragging some
Speaker 1: heavy baggage with him across the Atlantic on the trip
Speaker 1: to Israel and Saudi Arabia. They take off tonight, but
Speaker 1: our expectations too high to succeed. Let's reassemble the panel
Speaker 1: with a lot still to cover on the Fastest Hour
Speaker 1: in politics. Rick Davis and Jeanie Chanzano or here Bloomberg
Speaker 1: Politics contributors. What's your on this, Rick, we talked a
Speaker 1: bit yesterday about the broader diplomatic goals versus simply securing
Speaker 1: more oil. But based on our conversation that we just had,
Speaker 1: it's interesting to consider a president who could come back
Speaker 1: with another story of incremental progress, like a lot of
Speaker 1: things domestically. Yeah, that's right, and um and I think
Speaker 1: that Vladimir Putin did him a little favor by, you know,
Speaker 1: arranging the week after Biden's in the region to go
Speaker 1: to Tehran for meetings there with the Mulla's who help Ran.
Speaker 1: I think it points out that it's a competition, right
Speaker 1: If the US pulls out of the Middle East, China
Speaker 1: and Russia move in, and that's a big spot to fill.
Speaker 1: And so I think that Biden making it more of
Speaker 1: a priority than he thought it was going to have
Speaker 1: to be in his administration. Last thing he wanted to
Speaker 1: do was focus on the Middle East. UM, but he
Speaker 1: realizes now, I think that that that the US cannot
Speaker 1: abdicate its role UH in both security, defense and economics.
Speaker 1: And economics is code for oil in the region, and
Speaker 1: so he's going to have to devote his time and
Speaker 1: attention to it. And I think he's got a good,
Speaker 1: good trip plan for that. And uh and and and
Speaker 1: and a reminder is, if we're not there, you know,
Speaker 1: Vladimir Putin and she will move right in behind us.
Speaker 1: It's got a lot to deal with here, and only
Speaker 1: two days, Genie, it seems like this has been built
Speaker 1: up despite his attempts to tamper expectations and into something
Speaker 1: more than it should be here. If we're just going
Speaker 1: over there to hit the reset button. UH, people are
Speaker 1: are ready for for lower gas prices on Monday. Yeah.
Speaker 1: And as Jonathan just said to you, it's not going
Speaker 1: to likely have a meaningful effect on on oil prices.
Speaker 1: I don't suspect it's going to have a meaningful impact
Speaker 1: on the human rights record that America. Those are the
Speaker 1: two big things Americas are concerned about. And you know
Speaker 1: what I do think we are starting to see and
Speaker 1: what you hear from some of the foreign policy experts,
Speaker 1: is that whereas again Joe Biden ran promising to change
Speaker 1: Donald Trump's Middle East policy, it's looking more and more
Speaker 1: like he is going to broaden and continue it. They're
Speaker 1: describing that now as a reset um and we're hearing
Speaker 1: more and more about some effort to expand the Abraham Accords,
Speaker 1: some kind of strategic defense cooperation packed. Those are not
Speaker 1: things though you're hearing about from the White House to
Speaker 1: the American public, And I think that is the concern
Speaker 1: that you know, they're being told it's going to be
Speaker 1: about oil and maybe human rights, and it's about something else,
Speaker 1: and I think that becomes a confusing message for people.
Speaker 1: Well here, so here comes the next stuff, and that's
Speaker 1: tomorrow CPI data. As the President is heading on this trip,
Speaker 1: the next inflation numbers are going to come out here domestically,
Speaker 1: and of course that's going to be somebody's job at
Speaker 1: the White House to react to that. The economic team
Speaker 1: here Rick. We heard from Karine John Pierre, the Press Secretary, yesterday,
Speaker 1: trying to get ahead of what could be a painful report.
Speaker 1: Here she is, we will have new CPI inflation data,
Speaker 1: and we expect the headline umber, which includes gas and food,
Speaker 1: to be highly elevated, mainly because gas prices were so
Speaker 1: elevated in June. Gas and food prices continue to be
Speaker 1: heavily impacted by the war in Ukraine. And there are
Speaker 1: a few important points to keep in mind when we
Speaker 1: get this backwards looking data. First, June CPI data is
Speaker 1: already out of date because energy prices have come down
Speaker 1: substantially this month and are expected to fall further. Rick Davis,
Speaker 1: isn't all economic data backward looking? Yeah? I don't understand
Speaker 1: that at all. So the people who suffered high gas
Speaker 1: prices throughout the month of June should just ignore that
Speaker 1: because they got through it and they're still alive. I mean, like,
Speaker 1: what is that? That's insane. If it goes up over
Speaker 1: one percent, it's going to be seen as a horrible
Speaker 1: situation and everybody will be talking about the Fed coming
Speaker 1: back with another seventy basis point increase in interest rates,
Speaker 1: and and and and Biden is going to be out
Speaker 1: of town. And look, he doesn't talk about this stuff
Speaker 1: when he's here, so I guess he might as well
Speaker 1: leave town. Is it important to be getting ahead of
Speaker 1: it like this, genie. They tried this last month as well.
Speaker 1: It's important to get ahead of it. But what you're
Speaker 1: hearing there is sort of like a Wizard of Oz.
Speaker 1: Don't look behind the curtain. It's nothing to see here.
Speaker 1: Keep moving forward. And you know that's not a message.
Speaker 1: So yes, getting in front of it, helping explain it,
Speaker 1: that would be helpful. That wasn't the message that we
Speaker 1: were hearing. And you know, we are seeing the president
Speaker 1: do what presidents do when domestic politics get tricky. They
Speaker 1: look overseas. Meeting with the Mexican president today, you know,
Speaker 1: going overseas because what else can Joe Biden do when
Speaker 1: he's got the New York Times pole coming out saying
Speaker 1: his approval rating is like three and ten. Jill Biden
Speaker 1: apologized today, I suspect you guys saw this. I needed
Speaker 1: your take on it because the fact of the matter is,
Speaker 1: if Donald Trump said it, we would be talking about it.
Speaker 1: And in this case, the first lady is speaking in
Speaker 1: San Antonio, Texas at the Anitos you SA Annual conference
Speaker 1: in Hispanic conference and started talking about, well, I guess
Speaker 1: the benefits of the community. Here's what she said, the
Speaker 1: diversity of this community, as distinct as the bogadas of
Speaker 1: the Bronx, as beautiful as the blossoms of Miami, and
Speaker 1: as unique as the breakfast tacos here in San Antonio
Speaker 1: for breakfast tacos. Look, and you did hear some people
Speaker 1: laughed and clapped. Uh. There was outrage over this. Uh.
Speaker 1: The First Lady accused of being insensitive, to the point
Speaker 1: where her Press secretary Michael Rossa had to, in fact
Speaker 1: issue an apology. The First Lady apologizes that her words
Speaker 1: conveyed anything but pure admiration and love for the Latino community.
Speaker 1: Was it something to apologize for? Rick? Yeah, sure, I
Speaker 1: mean you can't call people tacos. I mean, like that's
Speaker 1: sort of stand up on politics. And well, you know
Speaker 1: she was comparing diversity, and you know it was just
Speaker 1: predibly in artful. I mean, how that got through a
Speaker 1: White House speech writer's editing process is beyond my comprehension,
Speaker 1: because if people were laughing, I mean, it's you know, okay,
Speaker 1: but like you always laugh at what a principle says,
Speaker 1: and and so the reaction is predictable, and you gotta
Speaker 1: find ways of talking about uh, you know, diversity and
Speaker 1: and and people in a way that doesn't compare him
Speaker 1: to a food, uh, you know, uh sandwich. So I
Speaker 1: don't know, I mean, I it's just another sort of
Speaker 1: This cycle is not good for the Biden's uh there.
Speaker 1: Every little thing they do and say on or off
Speaker 1: camera is getting heightened attention, and it's up to the
Speaker 1: staff to make sure that they're not put in an
Speaker 1: awkward position. That is not Jill Biden's fault. That is
Speaker 1: her staff's thought for having that in the speech and
Speaker 1: not having done a better job of etting it. Do
Speaker 1: you agree with this, Jennie, Would you have gone after
Speaker 1: Donald Trump for saying the same thing? Um? Yeah, I mean,
Speaker 1: you know, you know it's not Donald Trump and it's
Speaker 1: not Jill Biden. It is she did not write this speech,
Speaker 1: and you know, should she have read it? Should she
Speaker 1: have cut that out? You know? Yeah? But but you know, yeah,
Speaker 1: but you know what the attempt was there? She apologized afterwards.
Speaker 1: It was in hurtful is the right description? You know?
Speaker 1: I never quote him, but Ted Cruizes communication advisor said,
Speaker 1: this isn't veep, which White House speechwriter won the bet
Speaker 1: for getting her to say this. I mean, it's in
Speaker 1: it's it is a meme story you've got. You know,
Speaker 1: You've got Marco Rubio changing his Twitter profile to a taco.
Speaker 1: You know, so it is taken on that life. But
Speaker 1: you know, in the case of Trump or Jill Biden,
Speaker 1: these these you know, they can't be responsible for everything,
Speaker 1: and they need teams around them that are working in
Speaker 1: This communications team has had trouble, is probably the nicest
Speaker 1: way to say it. And this is one example. And
Speaker 1: it's embarrassing to the first ladies. That is why we
Speaker 1: have Rick and Ginue to help us make sense of
Speaker 1: it as we try to. Now I'm going to end
Speaker 1: on a positive note. Okay, from breakfast Tacos. You can
Speaker 1: only go up from here. With the head line on
Speaker 1: the Terminal Space telescope captures new detail of distant galaxy cluster.
Speaker 1: If you could have seen Joe Biden's face when he
Speaker 1: saw the image that you saw earlier today or last
Speaker 1: night on social media, right this new image from the
Speaker 1: James Web Space telescope. Don't tell me government does nothing good.
Speaker 1: Bring us in the room, this president. If you held
Speaker 1: a grain of sand on the tip of your finger
Speaker 1: at arms length. That is the part of the universe
Speaker 1: that you're seeing, just one little speck of the universe.
Speaker 1: Today's historic day. Six and a half months ago, a
Speaker 1: rocket Launchermarth carrying the world's newest, most powerful deep space
Speaker 1: telescope on a journey one million miles into the cosmos.
Speaker 1: First of all, that blows my mind. A million miles
Speaker 1: into the cosmos. You know, a hundred years ago, Miss
Speaker 1: President Madame Bidge, President, a hundred years ago, we thought
Speaker 1: there was only one galaxy. Now the number is unlimited.
Speaker 1: Light where stars were born and from where they die,
Speaker 1: Light from the oldest galaxies, the oldest documented light and
Speaker 1: the history of the universe from over thirteen billion let
Speaker 1: me say it again, thirteen billion years ago. It's hard
Speaker 1: to beat it. Fathomed more than four billion years ago,
Speaker 1: the distant Galaxy cluster. With great inspiration at the White House.
Speaker 1: They should have more events like that, you know, how
Speaker 1: about that for the new strategy. When things aren't going great,
Speaker 1: bring NASA in. They're doing incredible. I it this was
Speaker 1: in credible. Rick Davis. Did you see the images? They
Speaker 1: blew my mind last night and this morning. Yeah, I
Speaker 1: want to be an astronaut now exactly. But this is
Speaker 1: the kind of thing and I'm not kidding around here
Speaker 1: in our remaining seconds, Genie, that we never talked about.
Speaker 1: Just we trashed through the politics. But this is also
Speaker 1: happening in Washington. It is and it is. It's what
Speaker 1: the government does, and they need you to do the
Speaker 1: music underneath these rollouts. Joe Matthew, it's amazing. What the
Speaker 1: best panel in the business. Rick Davis and Jeannie Chanzana
Speaker 1: will meet you back here tomorrow for the fastest hour
Speaker 1: in politics. Man. We have a lot to talk about
Speaker 1: every day, and we'll meet you back here. Subscribe to
Speaker 1: the podcast if you showed up late. I'm Joe Matthew.
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg.