Speaker 1: Now from our nation's capital. This is Bloomberg Sound on
Speaker 1: need help and all those who think with not getting
Speaker 1: it right, they should commish was how to get it right?
Speaker 1: Republican governors using migrants as political pond is shameful. Their
Speaker 1: virtue signaling is a from Bloomberg Sound on Politics, Policy
Speaker 1: and Perspective from DC's top name. I am very pleased
Speaker 1: to announce a tentative labor agreement between that has been
Speaker 1: reached between the railroad workers and the railway company's paper products,
Speaker 1: the grain based products. They will be there. There will
Speaker 1: be enough. Don't ask Schloomberg Sound On with Joe Matthew
Speaker 1: on Bloomberg Radio. Immigration moves to the front page, has
Speaker 1: two Republican governors continue bussing undocumented migrants north. Welcome to
Speaker 1: the fastest hour in politics, as Martha's vineyard becomes the
Speaker 1: latest destination for immigrants along with Kamala Harris's front yard.
Speaker 1: This morning, the legal implications are looming large, and we'll
Speaker 1: explore them with Leon Fresco, formerly with the Office of
Speaker 1: Immigration Litigation at the Justice Department Civil Division. Later, President
Speaker 1: she meets Vladimir Putin. Will they hug each other into isolation?
Speaker 1: We'll talk with former Ambassador to the U N and
Speaker 1: Russia Thomas Pickering, and analysis from the panel. Bloomberg Politics
Speaker 1: contributor Republican strategist Rick Davis is with us along with
Speaker 1: Jim Kessler, co founder of Third Way. The White House
Speaker 1: calling out Republican governors Rhonda Santis of Florida and Greg
Speaker 1: Abbott of Texas for bussing undocumented immigrants to democratic cities.
Speaker 1: This has been going on for weeks, cities like New York, Chicago, Washington,
Speaker 1: d C. Calling their actions cruel and shameful stunts. Today
Speaker 1: it's not the first time this has come up at
Speaker 1: the White House in the briefing, but well, today it
Speaker 1: was a whole new level of concern and urgency as
Speaker 1: bus loads of immigrants were sent from Texas to Vice
Speaker 1: President Kamala Harris's home that would be the U. S.
Speaker 1: Naval Observatory right up there on Massachusetts Avenue, and also
Speaker 1: two planeloads from Florida to, of all places, Martha's vineyard.
Speaker 1: We're you know, at church in some community groups were
Speaker 1: luckily there to give them shelter and food. Many of
Speaker 1: them seem overwhelmed. We just started feeding people outside while
Speaker 1: they were standing around because everybody was just really hungry,
Speaker 1: and then moved them inside us as we got people
Speaker 1: on cops in the parish fall. We've got people on
Speaker 1: cops here, We've got families on air mattresses down in
Speaker 1: homeless shelter in the library. Barbara Rush from St. Andrew's
Speaker 1: Parish on the vineyard, talking today with ABC News. White
Speaker 1: House Press Secretary Korean John Pierre asked about this, condemned
Speaker 1: the actions of the two Republican governors. There's a process
Speaker 1: in place, we have had a process in place. There's
Speaker 1: a legal way of doing this um and for managing migrants.
Speaker 1: Republican governors interfering in that process and using migrants as
Speaker 1: political ponds is is shameful, is reckless, and just plan wrong.
Speaker 1: So as usual, there's a political side to this, and
Speaker 1: there's also illegal when it sounds like based on her
Speaker 1: answer by the way she says people sent to the
Speaker 1: vineyard in this case were promised housing and jobs. Let's
Speaker 1: bring on Leon Fresco, partner at Holland and Knight, former
Speaker 1: Deputy Assistant Attorney General for the Office of Immigration Litigation
Speaker 1: at the Justice Department's Civil Division. Leon, it's great to
Speaker 1: have you with us here? Do I hear Karine Jean
Speaker 1: Pierre correctly that the White House might be suggesting this
Speaker 1: is illegal. Well, I think they're gonna have to look
Speaker 1: because there's a couple of laws that don't necessarily fit perfectly.
Speaker 1: There's an unlawful transport foreign national law that might apply,
Speaker 1: but that would only apply if they could only be
Speaker 1: prosecuted under that if they had sort of done the
Speaker 1: travel in further into uh, the unlawful entry that was
Speaker 1: initially effectuated into the United States, And so Texas would
Speaker 1: say that that's not going to really apply because they
Speaker 1: were already at it by ice and allowed to be
Speaker 1: released after that travel. So that one would work. But
Speaker 1: there also could be a trafficking law that would be
Speaker 1: put into place that you could actually sue on there,
Speaker 1: which would occur if you misled people into being transported
Speaker 1: across the line, And so that one, you know, depending
Speaker 1: on if they want to get serious, they could start
Speaker 1: they could start charging people for human trafficking there. Okay,
Speaker 1: So that I guess that, you know. The question so
Speaker 1: many people have is I realized that these are undocumented immigrants,
Speaker 1: They are from another country. They don't have the rights
Speaker 1: of an American citizen. But is it legal for a
Speaker 1: governor of any state to send them wherever they want
Speaker 1: for whatever reason? Well, it is certainly legal if you're
Speaker 1: doing it voluntarily. So if you're saying, look, they're the
Speaker 1: entry point for four nationals from the southern borders in Texas,
Speaker 1: that once they arrived in Texas, you sort people out
Speaker 1: and you ask them where is your final and the destination,
Speaker 1: and then you send them to Chicago. If that destination
Speaker 1: is closest to Chicago or New York and is closest
Speaker 1: to New York, none of that's going to be illegal.
Speaker 1: But if you mislead people and you tell them, oh,
Speaker 1: this boss is going to Boston and you send them
Speaker 1: to markets vineyard or something, where you start to potentially
Speaker 1: have legal problems. How about if you promise jobs and
Speaker 1: housing that's not there, correct, That's the whole point. Now
Speaker 1: it's gonna matter is who's doing the promising under what
Speaker 1: authority are they doing it? Is it sort of a
Speaker 1: rhetorical promise or in the an actual promise, And those
Speaker 1: are the kinds of things that are gonna have to
Speaker 1: be investigated. Boy, these are really great questions here that
Speaker 1: I know at least in the case of Florida, there's
Speaker 1: a state program that funds twelve million dollars for relocating
Speaker 1: undocumented immigrants. Is it legal to use taxpayer money to
Speaker 1: fly them again? It would be. But here's what's a
Speaker 1: little bit strange about Florida. Almost none of the undocumented
Speaker 1: population that the United States of dealing with comes into Florida.
Speaker 1: Only a very small group of migrants who would be
Speaker 1: coming from Cuba through the water. So the people who
Speaker 1: are actually being sent from Texas to Florida intend for
Speaker 1: Florida to be their final destination because they have relatives there.
Speaker 1: And so for Florida I actually send people out, if
Speaker 1: it's going to be doing it against their will, then
Speaker 1: that would be illegal. I would actually be on a
Speaker 1: lawful imprisonment, which you're not allowed to do in that situation,
Speaker 1: and you could actually be civilly or criminally prosecuted. What
Speaker 1: happened in the case where they pull people to our
Speaker 1: divine here is they stopped in Florida. But that's white
Speaker 1: originated in Texas, and so that's the point here is
Speaker 1: this money is really not going to be used to
Speaker 1: take people from Florida proper to anywhere else, because Florida
Speaker 1: is not an entry point, it's actually a final destination
Speaker 1: for a lot of men. Well, there's nothing complicated about this, Leon,
Speaker 1: And you know, I just wonder, based on your experience,
Speaker 1: if the Department of Justice has a case to pursue
Speaker 1: here because the White House is referring questions to them,
Speaker 1: I think they are going to need to make tract
Speaker 1: intensive analysis about what people are being told when they're
Speaker 1: being answering all these buses that all these trades and
Speaker 1: I'll be played. And if people are being misled, then
Speaker 1: there is an unlawful imprisonment and there's a trafficking component
Speaker 1: that the Department of Justice can potentially prosecute people for.
Speaker 1: And the question is isn't going to want to do
Speaker 1: that in this situation? Yeah? Right? Leon Fresco is with
Speaker 1: US Holland and Knight and spend time as Deputy Assistant
Speaker 1: Attorney General for the Office of Immigration Litigation at the
Speaker 1: d j's Civil Division, So we have an expert on
Speaker 1: this story here. How about the other way around? Just
Speaker 1: to look at this, if if if the United States
Speaker 1: releases an undocumented immigrant, is there any obligation to provide
Speaker 1: food or shelter at that point. No, what happens at
Speaker 1: that point once the once the once somebody the pained
Speaker 1: by the Department of Homeland Security upon their initial unlawful
Speaker 1: entry and they've been cleared to basically they're called released
Speaker 1: on their own recognizance of their cordiering. At that point, Unfortunately,
Speaker 1: it's up to that human being to basically say alive
Speaker 1: but cordering. So let's say your sent to Martha's Vineyard
Speaker 1: in that case, like that means they still have a
Speaker 1: court date. I'm assuming that's not going to be on
Speaker 1: the vineyard or how's that going to work? Correct? Correct?
Speaker 1: Now they can file a change the venue to have
Speaker 1: their coord date in Boston. But the point is they're
Speaker 1: not going to really end up at Martha's Vineyard because like,
Speaker 1: these people have some sort of plan. They don't just
Speaker 1: come to the US with no plan. They have a
Speaker 1: general idea. They're trying to get the family or to
Speaker 1: someone else. I got you, yes, correct? Wow, Leon, we're
Speaker 1: learning a lot here. How How long can this go
Speaker 1: on before the d o J says something? Because it's
Speaker 1: it's this has been you know all summer. New York
Speaker 1: is at the point where the homeless shelters are to
Speaker 1: the maxed out there people from other countries there well.
Speaker 1: I think there are a lot of cities that are
Speaker 1: now starting to grapple with contingency planning for what will
Speaker 1: happen if people are being brought to their cities. I
Speaker 1: do think you're going to continue to see this. I
Speaker 1: don't think this is going to end any time soon,
Speaker 1: because I do think we're in a little bit of
Speaker 1: a what I would call an attrition factor here where
Speaker 1: Texas really is trying to get trying to force some
Speaker 1: action here, and they I think they actually would welcome
Speaker 1: some sort of litigation or something on this run because
Speaker 1: they're they're basically trying to force that next step. That's
Speaker 1: where this is going to go locality, right, And the
Speaker 1: question is for these localities, can they basically come up
Speaker 1: with a logistical turnaround that's quick click enough because they
Speaker 1: don't have to use shelters, that they could basically re
Speaker 1: round people to the locations they're actually trying to intend
Speaker 1: to go to. And that's what's going to be the
Speaker 1: real issue here. Okay, I got you. And so in
Speaker 1: the meantime, you wait for the activist group to file
Speaker 1: the lawsuit and at the ball rolling Yeah, I mean,
Speaker 1: I think whoever it is, I think there's the potential,
Speaker 1: I mean, the potential lawsuit that the actual undocumented people
Speaker 1: who have been transported can say is that they were
Speaker 1: transported against their will using trickery or false pretense. And
Speaker 1: if you do that, that kind of interstate trafficking of
Speaker 1: a person can get some person in trouble. But you're
Speaker 1: gonna have to prove a causation of who likes you
Speaker 1: and where they ordered to like to you, etcetera. Got
Speaker 1: it fascinating? Leon Fresco, thanks for your time and coming
Speaker 1: back to talk to us. He's at Holland and Night
Speaker 1: now former Deputy Assistant Attorney General Immigration Litigation at d
Speaker 1: j's Civil Division, with us on the fastest hour in politics.
Speaker 1: This is Bloomberg. Sound on. I'm Joe Matthew in Washington.
Speaker 1: We're going to connect in a moment on the line
Speaker 1: with a state senator from Massachusetts who's obviously is uh.
Speaker 1: Area includes Martha's Vineyard, which is you know what, uh,
Speaker 1: forty five minute ferry ride from Hyannis, and I do
Speaker 1: wonder from Falmouth at least a little longer from Hyannis.
Speaker 1: I wonder what he's got to tell us, because they're
Speaker 1: still trying to figure out, as as Leon said, what
Speaker 1: were they told, who actually sent them, who put them
Speaker 1: on the buses and the airplanes, and what were they promised.
Speaker 1: We'll have the panel weigh in on this coming up
Speaker 1: as well. Have you ever heard of the reverse freedom rides?
Speaker 1: You ever heard that story in nineteen six two. This
Speaker 1: this is really something because this was not in my
Speaker 1: history book in school. Segregation is from the South came
Speaker 1: up with a plan to shame northern liberals by sending
Speaker 1: African Americans from the South up to northern cities. It's
Speaker 1: pretty remarkable here, uh, when you think about history. They
Speaker 1: went to northern cities, including of all places, Cape Cod.
Speaker 1: Half of them went to Hyenas, the home of the Kennedy's.
Speaker 1: They were promised jobs and housing. This actually happened. Some
Speaker 1: were told, in fact, that Kennedy's would be waiting for
Speaker 1: them when they got off the bus in Hyenas. None
Speaker 1: of that was true, of course, But north they went
Speaker 1: and fascinating to hear the language the rhetoric from these
Speaker 1: two guys, George Singleman and Amos Guthridge were the so
Speaker 1: called architects of the reverse freedom rides. They were interviewed
Speaker 1: in nineteen sixty two. This is from a story on NPR.
Speaker 1: Listen to the language they use. The ultimate accomplishment, of course,
Speaker 1: has already been obtained, and that is to focus attention
Speaker 1: on the hypocrisy of the Northern Leberals and the n
Speaker 1: double A CP have been league and people like that especially.
Speaker 1: We intend to continue it until those people in the
Speaker 1: majority tell those politicians we are through with this foolishness
Speaker 1: about a civil rights George Singleman and Amos Guthridge speaking
Speaker 1: in nineteen sixty two, it's uh, it's kind of interesting
Speaker 1: to watch history as you try to understand the current
Speaker 1: shape of things. Although those were Americans, they were busting.
Speaker 1: Let's bring in the panel for their take on this.
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Politics contributor Rick Davis is with us along with
Speaker 1: Jim Kessler today, co founder It's Third Way, democratic strategist
Speaker 1: and former legislative policy director for Senator Chuck Schumer. Thanks
Speaker 1: for being back with us, Jim and Rick. I wonder
Speaker 1: your thoughts on the political nature of this today. As
Speaker 1: Rhonda Santis and Greg Abbott make a name for themselves
Speaker 1: here for better or worse. Yeah, I think it's for
Speaker 1: better or for worse, as you say, I mean a
Speaker 1: lot of people are gonna react to this in a
Speaker 1: very emotional way. I mean there's a sense of fairness
Speaker 1: Amongst American people who say, you know, you don't throw
Speaker 1: people on a bus and ship them to a state,
Speaker 1: don't alert their authorities and dump them out on a curb.
Speaker 1: Their children involved in this, Uh, I can see that
Speaker 1: becoming a campaign commercial pretty easily. Uh. I think this
Speaker 1: is all about what you were just describing, which is
Speaker 1: getting attention. But I think they run the risk of
Speaker 1: looking pretty callous in the process. Listen to Rhonde's antis today.
Speaker 1: He was at an unrelated event and answered the criticism
Speaker 1: he was getting from Democrats a minute, even a small
Speaker 1: fraction of what those border towns deal with every day
Speaker 1: is brought to their front door. They all of a
Speaker 1: sudden go berserk and they're so upset that this is happening.
Speaker 1: And it just shows you, you know, their virtue signaling
Speaker 1: is a fraud. Jim Kessler, is this virtue signaling from Democrats?
Speaker 1: I think Rhond the sens has made it's I think
Speaker 1: it's a kind of a waterloo for him. Politically on
Speaker 1: this immigration. If you are promising people something, you put
Speaker 1: them on a bus, you can tell them a lie.
Speaker 1: You tell them you're going to see them, you tell
Speaker 1: them they're going to have jobs, and it's all a lie.
Speaker 1: You trupt into someplace that is different than when you
Speaker 1: told them. It's because you think those people are so
Speaker 1: human and you know who had in the previous segment.
Speaker 1: You know what happened in nineteen two with African Americans,
Speaker 1: and you know for other this is the thing that
Speaker 1: they pulled through and pulled lindon other places too, when
Speaker 1: they got them on the train. Well, I think one
Speaker 1: of the places where you know, the Santists and others,
Speaker 1: a really missingness is how if you're a certain ethnicity
Speaker 1: or certain race in America, it is a reminder of
Speaker 1: what happened to you. And the other thing I was
Speaker 1: going to this is what happens when you were in
Speaker 1: a canopic funt match. Jim, we're having a hard time
Speaker 1: hearing you. I'm hoping that we can reconnect if if
Speaker 1: if we can do that in the studio, that would
Speaker 1: be great because I want to hear you and what
Speaker 1: you're actually saying here, Ricord is comparisons fair, Yeah, I
Speaker 1: think so. I mean we we we talk a lot
Speaker 1: about the coyotes, you know in Mexico, who round these
Speaker 1: people up, promise some jobs, stick them on a bus,
Speaker 1: horrific conditions. They break the law by bringing them across
Speaker 1: the border, and then they dump them out, and and
Speaker 1: and there are all kinds of challenges in Texas. I
Speaker 1: get it, um. Um. You know they're they have border
Speaker 1: towns that are overrun. Uh, we don't have a border
Speaker 1: policy with this administration that that that makes any sense whatsoever.
Speaker 1: So it does create a lot of problems. But like,
Speaker 1: you know, do you really want to be coyote ron? Right?
Speaker 1: I mean, like, what's the difference between him and a
Speaker 1: coyote at this stage? By putting people on bus, promising
Speaker 1: them something else, and dumping them off in another location
Speaker 1: with no help the differences? We're using taxpayer money to
Speaker 1: do it, right, I mean, like that seems really stupid. So, um,
Speaker 1: I think this is gonna play out in a way that,
Speaker 1: uh sure it will bring attention to immigration. Maybe they
Speaker 1: feel bad that all the discussion on abortion and inflation
Speaker 1: hasn't included an immigration discussion. But I think this has
Speaker 1: the potential to backfire in a pretty big way. Uh.
Speaker 1: Listen to Karine Jehan Pierre again today at the White House.
Speaker 1: It's not just the fact that these people were busted,
Speaker 1: it's the way that they did it by not letting
Speaker 1: anyone know they were coming. Well with with one exception,
Speaker 1: listen to the Press Secretary, there's a process in place.
Speaker 1: We have had a process in place. There's a legal
Speaker 1: way of doing this um and for managing migrants. Republican
Speaker 1: governors interfering in that process and using migrants as political
Speaker 1: ponds is is shameful, is reckless, and just plain wrong.
Speaker 1: Give us that she gives us a sense here more
Speaker 1: about the lack of notice. The fact that the that
Speaker 1: Fox News and not the Department of Homeland Security, the city,
Speaker 1: or local NGOs were alerted about a plan to leave migrants,
Speaker 1: including children, on the side of a busy d C
Speaker 1: Street makes clear that this is just a cool, premeditated
Speaker 1: political stunt. So Rick, they alerted Fox News and there
Speaker 1: was a camera there on mass av when the buses
Speaker 1: pulled up, but no one else. What does that tell you?
Speaker 1: I think in this case, She's right, this was a
Speaker 1: political stunt. It was made to get headlines. It's not
Speaker 1: meant to alleviate the suffering on a border town in Texas.
Speaker 1: It's just meant to get news. And of course the
Speaker 1: news it's most favorable to. Uh. Abbott and de Santis
Speaker 1: are going to be Fox, and so call Fox. Make
Speaker 1: sure the cameras are there, and and and and let's
Speaker 1: what what are they doing making fun of the people
Speaker 1: who are standing on the street corner, um, you know,
Speaker 1: and then and then uh, you know, demagoguing the fact
Speaker 1: that people are shocked. I actually think the authorities in
Speaker 1: both places act pretty cool. They make sure these people
Speaker 1: have places to stay and food and and um you know,
Speaker 1: maybe they wind up staying and getting a job. I mean,
Speaker 1: we have a shortage of personalness country. I'm not suggesting
Speaker 1: illegal immigration is a way to solve it, but the
Speaker 1: reality is, um uh, this is the land of opportunity
Speaker 1: and we're certainly not acting like it. Rick Davis standby
Speaker 1: with us, and Rick will be here for the hour,
Speaker 1: of course, as part of our political panel. Uh as
Speaker 1: we we have a state senator from Massachusetts on the
Speaker 1: line who's been dealing with this all day, Julian Sear
Speaker 1: Uh is uh gotta obviously Cape cod In in his
Speaker 1: in his state here and specifically Martha's Vineyards. A Senator welcome.
Speaker 1: I'm I'm glad you could take some time. I know
Speaker 1: it's been very busy. I just er what you have
Speaker 1: learned about who actually put these people on airplanes and
Speaker 1: what they were told. So, Uh, you know, we we
Speaker 1: first and for almost have been working, um, you know,
Speaker 1: around the clock since these planes arrived just after three
Speaker 1: pm yesterday. Uh, you know, to to welcome these migrant families,
Speaker 1: to treat them with data in respect, to get them
Speaker 1: food and shelter, and and to take care of them.
Speaker 1: And the people in Martha's Vineyard has done I've done
Speaker 1: a tremendous job and doing that what we've learned, you know,
Speaker 1: as these are migrants who are mostly from Venezuela. UM.
Speaker 1: They had crossed the border recently into Texas. They were
Speaker 1: staying in the shelter in San Antonio. UM. A woman
Speaker 1: who went by the name of her La approached them
Speaker 1: outside the shelter. UM and and essentially this woman lured
Speaker 1: them into taking the plane. She must led them about
Speaker 1: where they would be going. Uh. And she primised promised
Speaker 1: these migrants UM that they would be sent to a
Speaker 1: place where they can get expacited work papers. Uh, and
Speaker 1: and and and so on. Uh. Some were told they
Speaker 1: were going to Boston. Um, but they really didn't exactly
Speaker 1: know certainly where they were when they landed, had never
Speaker 1: sort of heard of Marcus Vineyard. And when they arrived, Um,
Speaker 1: you know, there was no notification to any official in
Speaker 1: Marthus Vineyard or anyone in Massachusetts for that matter, that
Speaker 1: I'm aware of about their arrival. They landed at at
Speaker 1: the airport Marthus Vineyard. You know, we're a pretty small
Speaker 1: rural place, especially a year round, right about twenty thousand
Speaker 1: people lived here. Landed at the airport. Um, they had
Speaker 1: a range for actually white vans uh to to take
Speaker 1: the micro families from the airport to Martus Waniord Community Services,
Speaker 1: a human service agency about three miles from the airport.
Speaker 1: And they had ranged actually to have a camera crew
Speaker 1: to film the planing. But but but really no concern
Speaker 1: for the health and safety and well being of these
Speaker 1: migrant families. Really this was a shameless political stunt. So
Speaker 1: nobody gave anyone a heads up. How did you find
Speaker 1: out about it on the news? Uh? No that this
Speaker 1: our shareff we have a terrific shareff and Margaret's vineyard
Speaker 1: and and he called me, you know, maybe within within
Speaker 1: an hour or so. Uh, and we started marshalling resources
Speaker 1: and on the ground here in Martha's vineyard and of
Speaker 1: course you know in Massachusetts. Um, you know, but this,
Speaker 1: this truly is a pretty uh it's a cruel route
Speaker 1: ruse that that you know, manipulated vulnerable families who are
Speaker 1: seeking about her life. And I'm really glad that you know,
Speaker 1: you raised the reverse freedom rites. That's something we've been
Speaker 1: talking about. Um. Of course considering that uh a ninety
Speaker 1: six families you know, came to hiaen Us in the
Speaker 1: ninet sixties. And um, you know, these these are fundamentally
Speaker 1: racist and xenophobic tactics. They've been used before, and it's
Speaker 1: sad to see been being used again. Well, what do
Speaker 1: you say to Republicans who's who like Greg Abbott today
Speaker 1: who said, you know what, this is just a taste
Speaker 1: or I guess it was Rhonda Santis, this is just
Speaker 1: a taste of what border towns are experiencing every day.
Speaker 1: And I believe the line from Rhonda Santis was your
Speaker 1: virtue to signaling is fraudulent. How would you reply. So,
Speaker 1: so let's be clear, this isn't about um, you know,
Speaker 1: helping border towns who are struggling with with with with
Speaker 1: so many migrants coming over the border. This isn't about
Speaker 1: helping the migrants families. This is about a political stun
Speaker 1: and getting attention. If you wanted to help people, you
Speaker 1: actually coordinate, you reach out. Government works best right when
Speaker 1: when we're pulling together. Massachusetts, actually we've had a history
Speaker 1: of helping helping migrants. Um. You know, a number of
Speaker 1: years ago under Governor of all Patrick, Massachusetts welcome hundreds
Speaker 1: of unaccompanied minors to Massachusetts. They were brought to Massachusetts
Speaker 1: and partnership with the the federal government. That's how states like
Speaker 1: Massachusetts an other states that are not border states, you know,
Speaker 1: can help border states can address you know, address this crisis.
Speaker 1: But they don't care, they don't actually care about the people. Well,
Speaker 1: in our remaining moment here, Senator, what what can you
Speaker 1: tell our listeners will become of these people? What what's
Speaker 1: your plan for them? So first and foremost, just making
Speaker 1: sure that they have shelter, um, you know, are are
Speaker 1: are well fed, you know for the night. The current
Speaker 1: shelter we have here in Martha's vineyard. Uh, it's a
Speaker 1: church parish. It's it's it's quite it's quite small, use
Speaker 1: one bathroom, it's sort of insufficient. So we're going to
Speaker 1: be meaning a sort of larger, larger space for them.
Speaker 1: There's been an outflouring of resources, support, coordination at all
Speaker 1: levels of government Massachusetts. UM. So we're gonna be doing
Speaker 1: everything we can to help them. UM. But we're very
Speaker 1: clear eyed about about what this is, that this is
Speaker 1: capitalizing on people who are in different difficult circumstances for
Speaker 1: our gotcha moment a Sun, it's to stoping. Thank you
Speaker 1: for being with us. Julian sere on the line from
Speaker 1: Massachusetts as we try to figure out where they came
Speaker 1: from and where they might be going. Stay with us, Sun,
Speaker 1: sound on. I'm Joe Matthew. This is Bloomberg. They met
Speaker 1: on the sidelines of the Shanghai Corporation Organization. This is
Speaker 1: a Beijing led group sort of a counter to other
Speaker 1: Western alliances. And there he was face to face with
Speaker 1: Vladimir Putin. It was President. She this after getting off
Speaker 1: the airplane with a mask and was masked almost the
Speaker 1: whole time, walking around indoors. They finally sat down for talks,
Speaker 1: and as I read on the terminal, remarkable Putin told
Speaker 1: his counterpart from Beijing he understands China's questions and concerns
Speaker 1: about his invasion of Ukraine, as the Chinese leader said
Speaker 1: that two countries could inject stability and positive energy to
Speaker 1: a world in chaos. So, as I asked earlier, this
Speaker 1: embrace between she and Putin, will they hug each other
Speaker 1: into isolation? And we're joined to talk about it? By
Speaker 1: Thomas Pickering, former Ambassador to the United Nations, former Ambassador
Speaker 1: to Russia, India, Israel, Nigeria, Jordan, and Al Salvador. Is
Speaker 1: quite a career in business card ambassador, welcome back. What's
Speaker 1: your take of having seen the readouts from both sides
Speaker 1: of this meeting? The early read outs, Joe, are very interesting.
Speaker 1: They first indicate that China continues not only to sit
Speaker 1: on the fence very carefully on Russian invasion of Ukraine,
Speaker 1: but has now in diplomatic channels, begun to express concerns
Speaker 1: about what Russia and Putin are doing there. The first
Speaker 1: time we've had this kind of a break in their policy.
Speaker 1: Uh and Mr Putin took the chance to announce it himself,
Speaker 1: I think in large measure, because he wanted to do
Speaker 1: everything he could to characterize those differences as minor or
Speaker 1: semi minor and the subject that he would correct in
Speaker 1: his conversations with Presidency, and at the same time, I
Speaker 1: think try to minish their importance across the board for
Speaker 1: a relationship that began last February before the invasion, with
Speaker 1: a kind of unlimited friendship and now has clearly begun
Speaker 1: to show its limits. Well, okay, but when you hear
Speaker 1: President she speaking as he did, what does that do
Speaker 1: to the US China relationship? Obviously Vladimir Putin has been
Speaker 1: written off here, but could could President Biden still meet
Speaker 1: with him in the near term after this today? I
Speaker 1: don't know, because both sides have had reservations about that.
Speaker 1: But if someone were to ask me for my advice,
Speaker 1: I would encourage, as I have with friends, that the
Speaker 1: US work harder with China to eliminate some of those
Speaker 1: obstacles that are now in the way in which both
Speaker 1: countries could cooperate in reducing I do it quietly and carefully.
Speaker 1: Economic obstacles or what do you mean, ambassador, Oh, the
Speaker 1: trade problems that have come out of US trade sanctions
Speaker 1: and so on. They're they're there, and they're they're not fictional,
Speaker 1: and I have made them up. And at the same time,
Speaker 1: I think it's important for the US to carry out
Speaker 1: a relationship so that it doesn't take actions, particularly UH
Speaker 1: stretches of actions that in one way or another, bring
Speaker 1: China and Russia excuse me, Joe together against the United States.
Speaker 1: It's important for US to take advantage of Mr. She's
Speaker 1: doubts now about what Putin is doing and the isolation
Speaker 1: he's put himself into, and indeed the failures that over
Speaker 1: the last week and a half have emerged from his
Speaker 1: military retreat from a significant part of the Ukraine as
Speaker 1: a result of Ukrainian military action. Well, I'm going to
Speaker 1: add another log on the fire here, Ambassador. As the
Speaker 1: Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and I'm sure you're read in
Speaker 1: on this, has approved a bill. It's happening, Yes, data
Speaker 1: boost ties with Taiwan and give more military hardware, more
Speaker 1: weapons to deter a potential Chinese invasion. The final legislation
Speaker 1: UH would need to overcome objections from the White House.
Speaker 1: Nobody knows of it as the votes, but to see
Speaker 1: this kind of deliberation happening on Capitol Hill following the
Speaker 1: series of delegations, including Speaker Pelosi's to Taiwan. Our relationship
Speaker 1: is certainly not improving by the day. What does this do.
Speaker 1: I think it's time, if I can call it that,
Speaker 1: to take a deep breath and think through these relationships.
Speaker 1: There's no reason at all why we should not support
Speaker 1: Taiwan under the conditions of the existing Taiwan Relations Act,
Speaker 1: and we have over a period of time been a
Speaker 1: provider of military equipment to Taiwan. It's not my view
Speaker 1: right now that it's the time to load up or
Speaker 1: increase those particular efforts, but it is time to make
Speaker 1: it clear as we have that we're the People's Republic
Speaker 1: of China to use force against Taiwan uh in conditions
Speaker 1: which clearly were designed to use force to reincorporate Taiwan
Speaker 1: back into China. Then we ought to be firm. We
Speaker 1: also ought to be quietly firm that we do not
Speaker 1: and can, on the basis of our One China policy
Speaker 1: support independence for Taiwan. That's been a thirty in a
Speaker 1: year US policy, and there's no reason to change it,
Speaker 1: and there's no reason to shift the ground now in
Speaker 1: my view in this development in Uzbekistan with the Putinshi
Speaker 1: meeting is not going to totally change anybody's relationship. It's
Speaker 1: too early to look for those kinds of shifts, but
Speaker 1: it is something we need to keep our eye on,
Speaker 1: and it is something we need to deal with in
Speaker 1: my humble view, on the basis of strategic thinking and
Speaker 1: careful wisdom. Always a fascinating conversation. Ambassador, thank you for
Speaker 1: joining us. Thomas Pickering, former ambassador to the United Nations
Speaker 1: and to Russia, among several other countries. I'm Joe Matthew
Speaker 1: and Washington. This is Bloomberg sound On. As I read
Speaker 1: on the terminal, she called Putin old friend and said
Speaker 1: China is willing to work with Russia, display the responsibilities
Speaker 1: of the major powers, and play a leading role to
Speaker 1: injectability and positive energy to a world in chaos unquote.
Speaker 1: I can't wait to hear from the panel on this.
Speaker 1: Rick Davis and Jim Kessler are coming up next on
Speaker 1: the Fastest Hour in Politics. This is Bloomberg. This is
Speaker 1: Bloomberg sound On on Bloomberg Radio. So how does the
Speaker 1: White House respond to this meeting today between Vladimir Putin
Speaker 1: and President, she Putin hailed the balanced position. This is
Speaker 1: a quote, the balanced position of our Chinese friends on
Speaker 1: the Ukraine crisis, as he offered to explain in detail
Speaker 1: their position on Ukraine, which, by the way, you've heard
Speaker 1: before they say they're going to denazify the country. Let's
Speaker 1: reassemble the panel. Rick Davis has a take on this,
Speaker 1: I can assure you. Republican strategist Bloomberg Politics contributor, joined
Speaker 1: today by Democratic strategist Jim Kessler, co founder of Third Way. Rick,
Speaker 1: what's your thought here, because when I see stories like this,
Speaker 1: I start thinking, whatever happened to the conversation about secondary sanctions? Yeah, well,
Speaker 1: I think that's a continuing discussion, may wind up coming up,
Speaker 1: you know, in the next session in November. You know,
Speaker 1: in the middle of November they have the G twenty
Speaker 1: UM and UH and so that that would certainly be
Speaker 1: ger Main there. In this case, I think that the
Speaker 1: US was probably listening as intently as anyone to how
Speaker 1: uh Premier she was going to react to Vladimir Putin.
Speaker 1: And I think you had the perfect person today to
Speaker 1: analyze this in an Ambassador Pickering. I mean, he is
Speaker 1: so well experienced and strategic in his thinking. Uh. And
Speaker 1: the point he made that I think was worth pointing
Speaker 1: out again is that Vladimir Putin actually went first and said, oh,
Speaker 1: I know, my friends in China have some questions about
Speaker 1: what's going on in the Ukraine, right, And so he
Speaker 1: was able to inoculate the discussion. Now, you know, if
Speaker 1: he's done that, then there were probably some pretty serious
Speaker 1: discussions about concerns China has regarding their operation in the Ukraine.
Speaker 1: So the fact that Vladimir Putin got to go first
Speaker 1: was probably a daily cut and let me handle it.
Speaker 1: I'll answer all the questions regarding that, and then you
Speaker 1: can talk about what good friends we are. Is that
Speaker 1: how you see it here, Jim? And does the White
Speaker 1: House just stay silent on this? Well? I think this
Speaker 1: was a really interesting meeting, and in some ways it
Speaker 1: was a watershed meeting because this was the first time
Speaker 1: that you saw really unequivocally that China is the big
Speaker 1: brother in this relationship and Russia's the little brother in
Speaker 1: this relationship. And even though if you look at sort
Speaker 1: of economically and militarily, China has surpassed Russia and has
Speaker 1: surpassed Russia, you know, have did a long time ago,
Speaker 1: You've never really seen it act out that way among
Speaker 1: the leaders in person. And that's that is really significant
Speaker 1: to me. And that's you know, if I was the
Speaker 1: White House, I would be looking at that as the
Speaker 1: queue that now rush then. Now China is in the
Speaker 1: driver's seat in this relationship. The walls are closing in
Speaker 1: on flat a mere Putin. Rick. Yeah, I think that
Speaker 1: when he has this kind of an outing, you know,
Speaker 1: which was supposed to boost his prospects on the international
Speaker 1: stage and you know, sort of reinforce his position as
Speaker 1: the superpower, and the best he's got is you know, hey,
Speaker 1: we're good buddies. Um, that really isn't very sufficient for him,
Speaker 1: especially considering he's starting to get some heat at home.
Speaker 1: And you know, we've talked about this a lot since
Speaker 1: the initial invasion, and like we've discussed the fact that
Speaker 1: the one thing that could sort of halt progress for
Speaker 1: Vladimir Putin in the Ukraine, regardless of when he whether
Speaker 1: he thought he was winning and losing, is political instability
Speaker 1: at home. It's not all this international sanctions he can
Speaker 1: bear that. He'll figure out a way around it. He's
Speaker 1: got print friends like China who can backdoor his needs,
Speaker 1: but the reality is when the politics at home turn
Speaker 1: against him, kind of hard to retreat from that. And
Speaker 1: that smells like where we're headed next. Rick Davis and
Speaker 1: Jim Kessler with us on Bloomberg Sound On. As we
Speaker 1: turn and back to what was happening today at the
Speaker 1: White House in the Rose Garden, Joe Biden with some
Speaker 1: news he was really hoping to share. So I thank
Speaker 1: the unions in the row companies for negotiating good faith
Speaker 1: they have up for twenty straight hours through that negotiation
Speaker 1: and uh, and for sticking with it, especially over the
Speaker 1: last few days. In fact, the negotiator shoot today. I
Speaker 1: don't think they've been to bed yet. So twenty hours
Speaker 1: of talks. They got a deal here. It's not been
Speaker 1: ratified yet, but we're going to avoid this massive rail shutdown.
Speaker 1: UH that could have happened tomorrow. Jim Kessler, the administration
Speaker 1: was directly involved. They clearly see this as a win.
Speaker 1: As any anyone can remember this in November, well you
Speaker 1: remember it if it was a loss, Well, that's right,
Speaker 1: So you know it's the absence of a bad thing.
Speaker 1: And it continues a Biden winning streak that's really started
Speaker 1: since July UM legislatively and international affairs, and with some
Speaker 1: is like gas prices in particular. Look, I think Joe
Speaker 1: Biden has written and trap M truk for fifty years,
Speaker 1: so you would expect him to be able to solve
Speaker 1: a problem with the with the rail unions. But you know,
Speaker 1: and also that this is a big moment for Marty
Speaker 1: war Walsh, the Labor Secretary, to who I think is
Speaker 1: a rising star in this administration. What's he gonna do next? Jim, Well,
Speaker 1: you know there's rumors. You know, look, Ron Clean is
Speaker 1: the chief of Staff and he's probably if he wants
Speaker 1: to be chief of staff ll state chief of staff.
Speaker 1: But most people don't stay after two years. And people
Speaker 1: are talking, you know, perhaps it's Marty Walsh. Well you
Speaker 1: heard it here on Sound on UH, producer Matt asks
Speaker 1: the question Rick, should they have rescheduled James Taylor to today? Yes,
Speaker 1: we were hard on them the other day for this
Speaker 1: very much. So well, look, I mean, this is how
Speaker 1: you get rid of a hangover, right, you have a
Speaker 1: good day. So we talked about what a disaster the
Speaker 1: signing of the Inflation Reduction Act was because of the
Speaker 1: day that flash and actually went up and uh and
Speaker 1: so um uh it was a competency issue, right, I mean,
Speaker 1: here we go again. One year ago they were pulling
Speaker 1: out of Afghanistan in the most hamhanded way ever imaginable,
Speaker 1: and here they do back flip. They have something positive
Speaker 1: and they wreck it on the shore. So today was
Speaker 1: a great way to sort of shrug that off and say,
Speaker 1: you know what, we don't screw up every time. And
Speaker 1: uh and so you know this is and this is big.
Speaker 1: I mean we had a big run up to this.
Speaker 1: Everybody was looking a lot of concerns about the impact
Speaker 1: on the economy, and the team and the president came
Speaker 1: through and and this is what you wanted to have happened,
Speaker 1: and they deserve a right to celebrate. I want to
Speaker 1: ask you both about if we can go back to
Speaker 1: primary night this week, the last primary in New Hampshire
Speaker 1: was the one we were watching closely. The headlines on
Speaker 1: Wednesday morning were an election. Denier wins the primary, just
Speaker 1: like Democrats hoped to run against Maggie Hassan for Senator.
Speaker 1: His name is Don Baldock. We talked about him the
Speaker 1: other day. Uh Rick Davis, Jim, I'll have you weigh
Speaker 1: in on this in exchange today on Fox News. That
Speaker 1: was noteworthy. This is someone who just a couple of
Speaker 1: weeks ago, in the fourteenth of August, said this at
Speaker 1: a primary debate that was televised. I signed a letter
Speaker 1: with a hundred and twenty other generals and admirals saying
Speaker 1: that Trump won the election, and dammit, I stand by
Speaker 1: my Okay, pretty cut and dry. Don Baldock today on
Speaker 1: Fox News was played that cut and asked if he
Speaker 1: still stands by this. He made it a central theme
Speaker 1: of his campaign that election was stolen and that Joe
Speaker 1: Biden was an illegitimate president. Here's Don Baldock just weeks later.
Speaker 1: So you know, we uh we we uh, you know,
Speaker 1: live and learn, right, um. And I've done a lot
Speaker 1: of research on this, and I've spent the past couple
Speaker 1: of weeks talking to grantited status all over the state
Speaker 1: from uh, you know, every party, and I have come
Speaker 1: to the conclusion, and I want to be definitive on this.
Speaker 1: The election was not stolen. Was there fraud? Yes? Is
Speaker 1: that a concern of granted status all over the state? Yes,
Speaker 1: there is. Is there a responsibility for public servants and
Speaker 1: elected positions to ensure that our citizens have faith in
Speaker 1: their voting system, yes, but elections have consequences, and unfortunately
Speaker 1: President Biden is the legitimate president of this country. Wow,
Speaker 1: now that is an evolution, Rick Davis. Are we going
Speaker 1: to hear more so called election deniers do this between
Speaker 1: now in November? Boying? That was a bounce, wasn't it.
Speaker 1: I gotta tell you it kind of sound effects. It
Speaker 1: kind of makes my heart feel feel good to complete
Speaker 1: flip flop. Right. If that's not an ad I wouldn't.
Speaker 1: There's no ad maker in the world who could do
Speaker 1: something better than what he's just done to himself. Well,
Speaker 1: but somebody told him to say that, right, Or did
Speaker 1: he call religion after being elected himself or something? Look there,
Speaker 1: it's all a fraud, right, All these guys who campaign
Speaker 1: out there to get a Republican nomination from Donald Trump,
Speaker 1: his his Emperor mater, and then literally flipped the day
Speaker 1: after and and and it's not just him, you know,
Speaker 1: it's it's it's in Arizona, it's in Pennsylvania. It's I mean,
Speaker 1: it's just startling. And so either they're complete frauds when
Speaker 1: it comes to their desire to have Trump endorse them
Speaker 1: so they can win the nomination or they're equally completely
Speaker 1: complete frauds to think that they can actually get people
Speaker 1: to forget all that stuff in a general election. We
Speaker 1: used to we used to go right, ideologically right on
Speaker 1: the issues of things like that and and what not
Speaker 1: to uh to get a nomination, and then tacked to
Speaker 1: the center on issues that are more you know, appealing
Speaker 1: to independent voters. And that was a pretty acceptable strategy. This,
Speaker 1: I don't even know what to call this. This is
Speaker 1: not tacking to the center. This is bouncing right off
Speaker 1: the face of the earth. So, Jim, is it up
Speaker 1: to Democrats to remind voters of evolutions like these for
Speaker 1: the next several weeks. Joe, I don't think you have
Speaker 1: to worry about that going on that that's gonna happen.
Speaker 1: I mean, look what happened here, and this has happened
Speaker 1: in Arizona too. Is like, the good news is you
Speaker 1: just won the primary. The bad news is, if you
Speaker 1: hold this position on elections, or you hold this positions
Speaker 1: on abortion, you're gonna lose by fifteen points. So we're
Speaker 1: gonna need an evolution, and we're gonna need one real fast.
Speaker 1: And let's rip the band aid off and let's do
Speaker 1: it on favorable media to see if we can get
Speaker 1: away with it. And you know it usually doesn't work.
Speaker 1: It just usually doesn't work. And yes, Democrats will spend
Speaker 1: eight figures per state reminding voters of where they were
Speaker 1: and where they went. Insights from two great political professionals,
Speaker 1: Jim Kessler, Third Way, Rick Davis, Bloomberg Politics contributor. You
Speaker 1: won't hear conversations like this anywhere else. Incredible. We'll do
Speaker 1: this again tomorrow. We do it every day on Bloomber
Speaker 1: m