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 Applecarplay and then Rouno 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: We have got a lot to talk about at the
Speaker 2: threshold of the weekend. Here we are. Votes will happen Saturday,
Speaker 2: we're told. And the reason why we can tell you
Speaker 2: that now is because an important vote just occurred, the
Speaker 2: magic number three sixteen to ninety four. They got the
Speaker 2: rule passed. And around here that's news lately. Ask Speaker
Speaker 2: Mike Johnson, who has seen seven rules fail on the floor,
Speaker 2: what happened last night in the Rules committee. This is procedural,
Speaker 2: I get it. We're walking out. This is the kind
Speaker 2: of stuff. This is how the sausage is made. And
Speaker 2: you may not want to look because it's not pretty.
Speaker 2: But last night in the Rules Committee, it took Democrats
Speaker 2: to pass the framework for the bills to be voted upon.
Speaker 2: The Rules Committee, known affectionately as the Speaker's Committee, this
Speaker 2: is supposed to be a rubber stamp for the Speaker
Speaker 2: and three Republicans said hell no. So it took Democrats
Speaker 2: to come in here and get this done. And once
Speaker 2: again today look at the number three sixteen ninety four Democrats.
Speaker 2: This might not play well for Mike Johnson when it
Speaker 2: comes to this whole motion to vacate matter. But let's
Speaker 2: get to the hill right now. Billy House has been
Speaker 2: watching all this unfold before his eyes, remembering that the
Speaker 2: Supplemental Emergency funding Bill passed the Senate back in February.
Speaker 2: Ukraine has been waiting for that long, and so is
Speaker 2: Israel for that matter. Billy House with us right now. Billy,
Speaker 2: we're looking at a working weekend, and I guess the
Speaker 2: glide path is set.
Speaker 1: Here.
Speaker 2: Are these all going to pass based on the numbers
Speaker 2: we saw today?
Speaker 3: Well, it looks that way. This test vote today was
Speaker 3: very strong, but you're correct. Actually more Democrats one hundred
Speaker 3: and sixty five voted in favor of Johnson's Package Foreign
Speaker 3: eight package than his own Republicans only one hundred and
Speaker 3: fifty one of them did, so that'll probably fall suit
Speaker 3: tomorrow late afternoon. In the final vote in the House.
Speaker 2: Remarkable comments from members on both sides with regard to
Speaker 2: Speaker Mike Johnson and what he has just accomplished or not,
Speaker 2: depending on.
Speaker 1: Who you ask.
Speaker 2: Tom Massey, who's signed on to this Republican from Kentucky
Speaker 2: the motion to vacate with Marjorie Taylor Green, He writes,
Speaker 2: the US House is now officially in an alternate universe
Speaker 2: where the speaker shares procedural power with Democrats. Is he
Speaker 2: wrong about that, Billy?
Speaker 3: He's not wrong about that. But what he's not really
Speaker 3: saying is that the narrow majority the Republicans have demand
Speaker 3: that no matter whose speaker, they've already run through one
Speaker 3: Kevin McCarthy, and now the same things are or challenges
Speaker 3: are being hit by a hit on Johnson, Mike Johnson
Speaker 3: his successor. So yeah, it's a new universe, but it's
Speaker 3: not a universe either. These speakers really have control over
Speaker 3: They just happened to preside over it.
Speaker 4: Mm hmm.
Speaker 2: We heard from Speaker Mike Johnson a little bit earlier today.
Speaker 2: Listen to the language that he used in trying to
Speaker 2: frame the differences between this legislation and that which passed
Speaker 2: the Senate. The House could have taken that up, brought
Speaker 2: it to the floor. We were told that it would
Speaker 2: pass but he chose not to because of opposition from
Speaker 2: conservative Republicans, namely members of the Freedom CAUs who aren't
Speaker 2: probably going to vote for this thing anyway. Here's Speaker
Speaker 2: Mike Johnson from earlier today.
Speaker 5: It's not the legislation that we would write if Republicans
Speaker 5: were in charge of both the houses in it in
Speaker 5: the White House. This is the best possible product that
Speaker 5: we can get under these circumstances to take care of
Speaker 5: these really important obligations.
Speaker 2: He's making the case here if you couldn't understand what
Speaker 2: he was saying, I know it's noisy and he's surrounded
Speaker 2: by marble. Not the legislation that we would have written
Speaker 2: if Republicans were in charge of both the House, the Senate,
Speaker 2: the White House. Billy, he's right about that. Mike Johnson
Speaker 2: seems to be the one person who knows he cannot
Speaker 2: pass this with his own conference.
Speaker 3: Well, it's correct, But what he's saying there is that
Speaker 3: they were able to put in such things as a
Speaker 3: loane concept in the funding for Ukraine or sanctions on
Speaker 3: Russia and Iran. In this process. He's put together that
Speaker 3: some different things than what would have been in the
Speaker 3: Senate bill still nobody. Ukraine has waited and waited, and
Speaker 3: there's been a lot of the world has waited for
Speaker 3: the US to either act or not act on this
Speaker 3: as the Houses kind of rolled around trying to figure
Speaker 3: out what it was going to do.
Speaker 2: What should we know about the motion to vacate then, Billy,
Speaker 2: I'm sure that's the talk on the hill. If these
Speaker 2: all passed tomorrow, they get stitched together, it goes to
Speaker 2: the Senate. What does Marjorie Taylor Green do? She said,
Speaker 2: you vote on Ukraine, you bring it to the floor,
Speaker 2: and you're fired. But we haven't seen that happen.
Speaker 3: Yet, right, and we're all aways. We're on her this afternoon,
Speaker 3: I mean this morning when this vote was taking place.
Speaker 3: But she left that House floor and kind of a huff,
Speaker 3: saying she wasn't going to talk to anybody. Now. She
Speaker 3: could trigger that motion and force a vote on the
Speaker 3: House floor on Mike Johnson's future, but he could also
Speaker 3: first call for a vote to table it. And so
Speaker 3: what we saw today with the Democratic help on this
Speaker 3: package of bills, some people are saying, and some Democrats
Speaker 3: are saying, they're going to help rescue Mike Johnson on
Speaker 3: that that'll help him obviously, but in the long run,
Speaker 3: what's a speaker or Republican speaker's future if it has
Speaker 3: to if he has to rely on Democrats to keep
Speaker 3: him speaker.
Speaker 2: A working weekend, Billy, I wish you luck. We're going
Speaker 2: to be watching for your reporting, of course on the
Speaker 2: terminal and online. Billy House congress reporter here at Bloomberg.
Speaker 2: He is part of the woodwork up there, and he
Speaker 2: knows what he's talking about. We'll stick with Billy and
Speaker 2: the rest of our congressional team as we advance to
Speaker 2: these votes tomorrow. The Senate would then, of course take
Speaker 2: that house build A president's already said I'll sign it
Speaker 2: if he gets it. We could be in a different
Speaker 2: world come Monday. And after what happened last night, you
Speaker 2: do have this urgency. A lot of people pointed to
Speaker 2: the attack from Iran against Israel for relighting the fires
Speaker 2: on Capitol Hill to get this thing moving a lot
Speaker 2: more quickly, and Israel has now responded. You probably got
Speaker 2: the alerts from Bloomberg last night against Iran following the
Speaker 2: drone and missile attack last weekend. State TV in Iran
Speaker 2: says military and nuclear facilities safe. They're showing pictures of
Speaker 2: the city. People are driving through intersections like it's any
Speaker 2: whole day. But that might have been the point here.
Speaker 2: There was a lot of worry, of course, about Israel overreaching,
Speaker 2: and we had a lot of questions as we asked
Speaker 2: General Mackenzie here yesterday about what would be a proportionate response.
Speaker 2: That's where Mick mulroy comes in. He's co founder of
Speaker 2: the Lobo Institute, former US Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense
Speaker 2: for the Middle East with US now live on Bloomberg. Mick,
Speaker 2: it's great to have you.
Speaker 1: Thank you.
Speaker 2: Israel had a couple of different audiences with this response.
Speaker 2: What did it accomplish last night?
Speaker 6: So Joe, I think they wanted to accomplish a couple
Speaker 6: different things. So the first was they couldn't let this
Speaker 6: unprecedented attack on them by Iran just go unanswered, or
Speaker 6: they would have set a different paradigm in the Middle
Speaker 6: East and one that they didn't find acceptable. The second,
Speaker 6: I think they really wanted to show that if they
Speaker 6: wanted to, they could strike deep into the heart of
Speaker 6: Iran in the location where they both have an air
Speaker 6: base and a part of their nuclear facilities complexes, if
Speaker 6: you will, that they use to develop the uranium necessary
Speaker 6: to eventually make a bomb. If that was where they're going,
Speaker 6: and that's where many people think they are, but they
Speaker 6: did so in such a limited manner that it was
Speaker 6: more symbolic but important symbol rather than really made to
Speaker 6: cause destruction.
Speaker 2: Appears interesting. Ian Bremmer tweeted earlier that this was in
Speaker 2: fact a de escalatory move, and I wonder if you
Speaker 2: agree with that. Having been so precise and so careful
Speaker 2: not to overreach, did Israel just end this for now?
Speaker 6: Yes, I agree with that. I think this was certainly
Speaker 6: intended to be a de escalatory move, where again it
Speaker 6: was limited large at knabolic, but it did show essentially
Speaker 6: that Iran couldn't even stop this. I mean, they're probably
Speaker 6: special type of munitions that are very difficult to detect,
Speaker 6: but obviously weren't detected until they were well into her
Speaker 6: On and it struck near the target. We haven't seen
Speaker 6: a battle damage assessment, but essentially I do think it
Speaker 6: was very minimal damage, and I do think the intent
Speaker 6: along with not talking about it, except for one notable exception,
Speaker 6: the Israeli cabinet has said nothing about it, so they
Speaker 6: don't want to poke anybody in the eye with the
Speaker 6: idea that this could contain this confrontation and essentially start
Speaker 6: moving in the other direction, which is de escalatory and
Speaker 6: likely back into the shadow shadows of where this war
Speaker 6: has been fought for the last several decades.
Speaker 1: Fascinating.
Speaker 2: Well, it sounds to me like you think they struck
Speaker 2: the right balance here if de escalating was in fact
Speaker 2: the goal. Reports Mike say that the US did get
Speaker 2: a heads up here on this move, but did not
Speaker 2: green light it. It's an important distinction. What do you
Speaker 2: make of that?
Speaker 6: So, Jerrold, this is something that the US was concerned
Speaker 6: about because of the strike in Damascus. They didn't believe
Speaker 6: they got a heads up, which is unusual, I have
Speaker 6: to say, having been in roles and been involved in
Speaker 6: notifications when it comes to this, usually Israel does give
Speaker 6: us a heads up. This time they obviously did too,
Speaker 6: probably because they had issues because they did not in
Speaker 6: the strike and Damascus that killed those senior I r
Speaker 6: GC CUDS Force generals, But this time they did. I
Speaker 6: don't think they were asking for permission, but I do
Speaker 6: think there was an ongoing discussion with Israel star starting
Speaker 6: higher up the escalation ladder. If you will, when it
Speaker 6: came to their original course of action and then progressively
Speaker 6: going down in the last week and to the point
Speaker 6: where they got to this. The United States isn't going
Speaker 6: to green light it. But I do think they felt
Speaker 6: that this was something that the United States would accept
Speaker 6: more and more importantly, would accept it because did it
Speaker 6: looks like de escalate the situation where Iran doesn't look
Speaker 6: like they're going to retaliate.
Speaker 2: We're spending time with mc mulroy of the Lobo Institute.
Speaker 2: The area that was targeted here, Mick, Isfahan was significant
Speaker 2: and what you said is important here. While we may
Speaker 2: not be talking about massive destruction, they wanted to prove
Speaker 2: that they could reach deep into Iran without being intercepted,
Speaker 2: certainly not the way Iranians. Iran's attack was. This is
Speaker 2: home to Iran's nuclear program. What kind of a wake
Speaker 2: up call is that? For Tehran.
Speaker 6: Joe, That is the wake up call. So Isfahan is
Speaker 6: the third largest city in Iran, It's deep in the
Speaker 6: middle of it. It has two facilities, one in Isfahan
Speaker 6: and then another in the Tons, which is only I
Speaker 6: think seventy kilometers from there. That's a very difficult target,
Speaker 6: but it does show that they could get these munitions
Speaker 6: into this location without being intercepted, either in the air
Speaker 6: near it or actually striking the ground. And we don't
Speaker 6: know and might not find out, but it does certainly
Speaker 6: show that Israel has the capacity to strike in Iran
Speaker 6: when it needs to, even when it's expected, because a
Speaker 6: lot of I mean, this has been built up and
Speaker 6: people expected, and I'm sure that the Iranian era and
Speaker 6: missile defense were on high alarth right, So even when
Speaker 6: it's telegraphed, they still were able to do it. But
Speaker 6: they did it in a way that we think didn't
Speaker 6: cause much damage. And so I think they did strike
Speaker 6: the right balance here, and I think the US, if
Speaker 6: they would comment, would agree that this is about the
Speaker 6: best scenario to de escalate the situation.
Speaker 2: McK what did you make of the attack by Iran
Speaker 2: a week ago? A lot of people said this thing
Speaker 2: was made to be intercepted, that they telegraphed for a
Speaker 2: week they were coming, they gave Israel hours notice, and
Speaker 2: of course we know that ninety nine percent of the
Speaker 2: drones and missiles were in fact knocked down. Was that
Speaker 2: the aim by Iran are both of these countries tiptoeing
Speaker 2: around each other.
Speaker 6: I think you could make that argument, yes, because of
Speaker 6: the delay, and the delay actually allowed the US military
Speaker 6: to move assets in the region to intercept the missiles.
Speaker 6: I mean, if you really wanted to cause a lot
Speaker 6: of destructions, you would have likely gone immediately. That said,
Speaker 6: it was so much, so many, so you know, ballistic missiles,
Speaker 6: cruise missiles, and drones three hundred and twenty total that
Speaker 6: were sequenced in my opinion to basically end up in
Speaker 6: Israel at the same time. So yes, they launched a
Speaker 6: slow moving she needs first, but then they started getting
Speaker 6: caught up with by the ballistic cruise missiles and their
Speaker 6: ballistic missiles right, so they had really had to rely
Speaker 6: on the capability of Israel to intercept that many along
Speaker 6: with the United States and UK and our ARA partners.
Speaker 6: That was a big risk. I mean, there could have
Speaker 6: been things that had gone wrong and it could have
Speaker 6: caused catastrophic damage. But I do think it's fair to
Speaker 6: say that that Iron wanted time for this to happen,
Speaker 6: but they did make They didn't send a pretty big
Speaker 6: risk or put out a pretty big risk that all
Speaker 6: these will be intercepted. But it's also important they launched
Speaker 6: a lot, and they were not successful. So I know
Speaker 6: they tried to couch it as some kind of victory,
Speaker 6: but from the military perspective, it looks like even with
Speaker 6: all their capabilities they launched, they had zero effect on target,
Speaker 6: essentially zero.
Speaker 2: Gosh, that's for sure. That's also I just wonder, it's
Speaker 2: super important, Mick. I wonder how much we learned about
Speaker 2: our own capability. Even if Uran slowed this down so
Speaker 2: we could knock some of these down, surely they didn't
Speaker 2: bet we could get ninety nine percent of them. And
Speaker 2: while we've had a lot of wargames to show our abilities,
Speaker 2: to actually do this in the field, in the wild
Speaker 2: and pull it off in reality is a different matter.
Speaker 2: Mick mulroy, great to see you. Thank you for coming
Speaker 2: to talk to us again on Bloomberg. He's co founder
Speaker 2: of the Lobo Institute, and he knows what he's talking about,
Speaker 2: having served as Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for the
Speaker 2: Middle East. Great insights today as well from Billy House.
Speaker 2: The bills are moving on Capitol Hill, and it sounds
Speaker 2: like things might be calming down at least for a
Speaker 2: moment in Israel and in Iran, as they try to
Speaker 2: map out their next moves. We have much more ahead
Speaker 2: on Balance of Power. Stay with us on Bloomberg.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast kens
Speaker 1: just live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then
Speaker 1: Round Oro with the Bloomberg Business App. You can also
Speaker 1: listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station,
Speaker 1: Just Say Alexa a Bloomberg eleven.
Speaker 7: First, the G seven condemned the unprecedented Iranian attack on Israel.
Speaker 7: Unprecedented in scope and scale, scope because it was a
Speaker 7: direct attack on Israel from Iran, scale because it involved
Speaker 7: more than three hundred communitions, including ballistic missiles. We're committed
Speaker 7: to Israel security. We're also committed to de escalating, to
Speaker 7: trying to bring this at tension to a close.
Speaker 8: That was Secretary of State Anthony Blincoln speaking at the
Speaker 8: G seven alongside many other US allied countries, including some
Speaker 8: from Europe, and so we want to get more perspective
Speaker 8: now from the European Commission. Valdis Danbrofsky's is joining us
Speaker 8: now here in our Washington, d C studio on Bloomberg
Speaker 8: Television and Radio. He is the European Commission Executive Vice
Speaker 8: President for an Economy that works for people, Sir, thank
Speaker 8: you so much for being here with us today. If
Speaker 8: we could first begin give the developments overnight in the
Speaker 8: Middle East, knowing that you primarily look at the economy,
Speaker 8: how concerned are you about possible escalation from here and
Speaker 8: the impact that that could have on energy prices, which
Speaker 8: we know has been highly problematic for the European economy
Speaker 8: in years past.
Speaker 4: Well, first of all, we see that the world economy
Speaker 4: is proving to be resilient despite a difficult situation and
Speaker 4: different geopolitical tensions and conflicts we are currently experiencing. And
Speaker 4: also the impact on energy prices so far has been
Speaker 4: quite limited. Obviously, we need to monitor closely all of
Speaker 4: those developments, but the assessment is that the risks to
Speaker 4: the economic outlook are now broadly balanced.
Speaker 2: You've been in Washington here meeting with lawmakers about the
Speaker 2: big story that we've been talking about here for months,
Speaker 2: mister Executive Vice President, and just today we saw an
Speaker 2: important procedural vote pass for funding for Ukraine, Israel in
Speaker 2: the Indo pak region. You're obviously very concerned about funding
Speaker 2: for Ukraine. What did you tell lawmakers when you met
Speaker 2: with Well.
Speaker 4: Indeed, that was my main message in the meetings on
Speaker 4: the Hill, and basically I was emphasizing that from the
Speaker 4: EU side, we are doing a lot to provide financial
Speaker 4: but also military and other kind of support to Ukraine.
Speaker 4: So far we have provided support of around one hundred
Speaker 4: billion euros. We know how fifty billion euros Ukraine facility
Speaker 4: for the forty years twenty twenty four to twenty twenty seven.
Speaker 4: We're already disbursing from this facility. So it's important that
Speaker 4: also other international donors and first and foremost US come
Speaker 4: also with their contribution. And therefore I very much look
Speaker 4: forward for tomorrow's votes and hope this Ukraine support is
Speaker 4: being approved because what we see that in the last months,
Speaker 4: actually the situation in Ukraine is deteriorating for the lack
Speaker 4: especially of military support. We see it both at the
Speaker 4: front line and we see it with the daily shellings
Speaker 4: of Ukrainian cities, residential areas, critical infrastructure. So this support
Speaker 4: is very much needed. I would say the collective West
Speaker 4: has all the necessary resources to stop Russian not to
Speaker 4: allow this shelling to take a place, and so hopefully
Speaker 4: this is a period of undecision and bittering is coming
Speaker 4: to the end, and we will be able to come
Speaker 4: with a strong and firm response to to Russia and
Speaker 4: also to other autocrats around the world, because it's also
Speaker 4: not only about Ukraine, it's about our collective security.
Speaker 8: Well, you outline there the amount that Europe already has
Speaker 8: contributed to the Ukrainian cause. It's worth pointing out that
Speaker 8: there is at least a faction of thought here in
Speaker 8: the United States that thinks Europe is not caring as
Speaker 8: much weight as it should be. One of them is
Speaker 8: the presumptive Republican nominee. Former President Donald Trump posted on
Speaker 8: social media yesterday effectively to summarize his words, saying that
Speaker 8: Ukrainian survival is more important to Europe than it is
Speaker 8: to the US. So why is Europe not giving more
Speaker 8: money to help Ukraine? Why can't it equalize or match
Speaker 8: the money? This is a quote put in by the
Speaker 8: United States of America. Is there more that Europe could
Speaker 8: be doing, sir? I wonder what your response would be
Speaker 8: to Donald Trump.
Speaker 4: Well, first of all, facts has never been the strong
Speaker 4: side of Donald Trump, and it's also unfortunately this time
Speaker 4: is the case. So that's why I'm emphasizing so much
Speaker 4: as a financial aid EU has already provided, which is
Speaker 4: one hundred billion euros in all kinds of support Ukraine facility,
Speaker 4: which is already in place of fifty billion euros. So
Speaker 4: the fact is that EU is the largest donor to Ukraine,
Speaker 4: and we are willing to continue this way because after all,
Speaker 4: indeed it's a war on Ukrainian on European continent, But
Speaker 4: of course it also requires solidarity from a broader democratic world,
Speaker 4: and with EU and US being strategic allies, US support
Speaker 4: is not only financially very important, but also as a
Speaker 4: signal of a West being united against this Russian aggression.
Speaker 2: Chryst Donald Trump's view reflects the view of some Republican
Speaker 2: members in the House who are voting against this package.
Speaker 2: I wonder when you met with lawmakers this week, what
Speaker 2: was your reception. Did you hear pushback, did you hear
Speaker 2: criticism or were you well received with the lawmakers you met?
Speaker 4: Well? I would say youse were definitely worrying on this topic.
Speaker 4: But my point was really to make the case why
Speaker 4: it's important not only for Ukraine but for entire global
Speaker 4: security architecture, because what we are seeing that also other
Speaker 4: autocrats are seeing if the West is not even able
Speaker 4: to contain Russia, so then also having ideas and the
Speaker 4: recent Iran attack against Israel is just another manifestation of
Speaker 4: this nine twenty few. It's important to stay firm and determined.
Speaker 4: Another one, indeed, to make this point on the EU's
Speaker 4: contribution so far, to really show that EU is doing
Speaker 4: a lot of EU is actually doing more than the
Speaker 4: United States. We're happy to continue to do so, but
Speaker 4: everyone has to contribute well.
Speaker 8: Of course, your conversations here in Washington have not just
Speaker 8: been limited to lawmakers. You are also here while the
Speaker 8: IMF World Bank meetings are underway, and I wonder from
Speaker 8: an economic lens, what you're hearing in the messaging and
Speaker 8: what message you are providing about the state of the
Speaker 8: European economy right now. Knowing that for now policy is
Speaker 8: still tight, there's questions around when will ease and where
Speaker 8: the economy will be depending on when that easing actually happens.
Speaker 8: How are you thinking about the outlook for Europe? As
Speaker 8: the IMF essentially said, there could be a soft landing,
Speaker 8: but there are risks here well.
Speaker 4: Indeed, as I was saying before, actually the global economy
Speaker 4: is proving resilient to both's current geopolitical attentions and also
Speaker 4: to the process of this inflation, which we know how
Speaker 4: to go through. So the expectations for a global gross
Speaker 4: is of three point two percent of BOSS this year
Speaker 4: and next. That's a IMFs world economic outlook. And as
Speaker 4: regards the EU, we are expecting zero point nine percent
Speaker 4: growth this year one point seven percent growth next year.
Speaker 4: It's somewhat subdued growth right now, one could say. But
Speaker 4: at the same time, despite a war on Zeropean continent,
Speaker 4: despite as a need to tame high inflation, different this,
Speaker 4: since we are facing EU's economy is nevertheless growing.
Speaker 2: I want to ask you about another foreign policy matter
Speaker 2: that you've been concerned with, and that's China supplying components
Speaker 2: to Russia and potentially evading sanctions. There's an economic element
Speaker 2: to this, there's obviously a geopolitical element to it.
Speaker 4: How big of a problem is this becoming, Well, that's
Speaker 4: certainly a cause of concern. And the two elements one
Speaker 4: is circumvention of sanctions, but also another is innocence backfilling
Speaker 4: of the sanctions, and we are engaged with China on
Speaker 4: both of those elements. So in a sense what we
Speaker 4: are doing. We have what we call a high priority
Speaker 4: Battlefield items list, meaning items which we are finding in
Speaker 4: Ukrainian battlefields in Russian military equipment. We are tracing the
Speaker 4: origin of these different kind of components. Is this lethal weaponry, Well, yes,
Speaker 4: it's Russian military weaponry which is being found on Ukrainian battlefields.
Speaker 4: And because it's not only about weapons deliveries, there are
Speaker 4: also many dual use components, if we talk about semiconductors,
Speaker 4: all kinds of other components. So we're tracing it back
Speaker 4: where it actually origins. Because we must face there's also
Speaker 4: still quite a few of those components of Western origin
Speaker 4: which are reaching Russia. So we also need to work
Speaker 4: with our own companies, both in the U and US,
Speaker 4: making sure that they are not engaged in those sanction circumventions.
Speaker 4: And in the U we also have a possibility actually
Speaker 4: to go after the companies which are knowingly engaging in
Speaker 4: these kind of activities. We are putting also requirements on
Speaker 4: no result to Russia on exports of dual use items,
Speaker 4: and we're actually coordinating this work quite a lot with US.
Speaker 4: We recently also put certain measures against Chinese and Hong
Speaker 4: Kong Ngong paniques which are involved in sanctions circu convention
Speaker 4: by prohibiting EU companies to do any business with them.
Speaker 4: So there are things which we can do. And it's
Speaker 4: clear as we are now putting strict sanctions against Russia, EU,
Speaker 4: US other players, Russia is looking at a ways to
Speaker 4: say convince them. So we need to stay alert, follow
Speaker 4: the patterns and to the extend possible closes circ convention
Speaker 4: and possible Loopholese.
Speaker 2: Faldest Don brobscast with a view from the European Commission.
Speaker 2: We appreciate you making us part of your week here
Speaker 2: in Washington, and I hope the spring meetings of the
Speaker 2: IMF continue well for you. Thanks for talking with this.
Speaker 2: I'm Bloomberg Kelly. A lot to cover there as we
Speaker 2: consider a vote on the REPO Act yeah tomorrow that
Speaker 2: plays into this Ukraine story in a big way.
Speaker 8: Yeah, the so called sidecar fourth piece of legislation that
Speaker 8: has not just REPO but also that TikTok divestiture bill.
Speaker 8: All of that going to be bundled together and sent
Speaker 8: to the Senate. Chuck Schumer says, could be a working
Speaker 8: weekend for senators too, not just the House and We'll
Speaker 8: have more on that with our political panel next. On Bloomberg.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch
Speaker 1: us live weekdays at noon Eastern on Appo, car Play,
Speaker 1: and then rout Otto with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen
Speaker 1: on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us
Speaker 1: live on YouTube.
Speaker 8: I am Kaylee Lines alongside Joe, Matthew and Washington, where
Speaker 8: it's also busy here. The House has passed one rule
Speaker 8: for four different measures that they will vote on on Saturday.
Speaker 8: We know, Joe that this rule had bipartisan support, helping
Speaker 8: to move forward this ninety five billion dollars foreign aid package.
Speaker 8: I wonder, though, when it becomes a chance to vote
Speaker 8: for each of these packages individual Ukraine, Israel into Pacific,
Speaker 8: the sidecar with everything else in it, what the vote
Speaker 8: breakdown is going to look like. And if as many
Speaker 8: Democrats will show up for the Israel funding, that's a question.
Speaker 8: As for others, and perhaps maybe they're more likely to
Speaker 8: after what we saw overnight with potential further escalation, though
Speaker 8: not as escalatory as it could have been, as this
Speaker 8: reel strikes a.
Speaker 2: Well and I guess that was the plan here from
Speaker 2: Mike Johnson, right, he knew that Dems might have a
Speaker 2: problem with Israel. He certainly knew that his Republican conference
Speaker 2: had a problem with Ukraine. I don't know what everyone
Speaker 2: thinks about TikTok at this point, of course, the House
Speaker 2: already moved at TikTok divest or ban bill, and so yeah,
Speaker 2: the margins might look a little different for each of
Speaker 2: these either way, the Speaker of the House, Mike Johnson,
Speaker 2: is pretty happy with what he sees here in a
Speaker 2: rule that passed. It took more Democrats than Republicans to
Speaker 2: do it, and he talked to reporters earlier today, here's
Speaker 2: the Speaker.
Speaker 5: It's not the legislation that we would write if Republicans
Speaker 5: were in charge about the House and send it in
Speaker 5: the White House. This is the best possible product that
Speaker 5: we can get under these circumstances to take care of
Speaker 5: these really important obligations.
Speaker 2: We did the best we could. The message from the
Speaker 2: Speaker as we assembled our panel. Rick Davis and Jeanie Shanzano,
Speaker 2: Bloomberg Politics contributor, It's great to have you both with
Speaker 2: us here as we actually prepare for voting. Jeanie, let's
Speaker 2: get to what Kayleie was talking about. Here are we
Speaker 2: going to see a sizeable number of Democrats vote, know
Speaker 2: on funding for Israel this day after the retaliation against
Speaker 2: ir own.
Speaker 9: Yeah, I think that's going to be one of the
Speaker 9: curious things to watch. You know, you all were talking
Speaker 9: about the attack last night. You know, in New York
Speaker 9: here a lot of local attention on the protests at
Speaker 9: Columbia University where students are asking the university to divest
Speaker 9: from their investments in Israel. So this is a lot
Speaker 9: of tension on the ground. We saw San Francisco not
Speaker 9: that many days ago, so I do think there's a
Speaker 9: possibility we do see at least a call to place
Speaker 9: more conditions on that aid. But I think all in all,
Speaker 9: in the end this is going to pass. But with
Speaker 9: all of these sort of four buckets, if you will,
Speaker 9: in this larger bill, I think we're going to see
Speaker 9: some strange bedfellows and that's going to be one of
Speaker 9: the dramatic things tomorrow is by how much do these
Speaker 9: votes do these bills or if the separate bills pass,
Speaker 9: assuming all for or at least three of the four
Speaker 9: seem on their way to passage.
Speaker 8: Well, Rick, we know what a lot of the progressive
Speaker 8: Democrats who take issue with Israel's policy in Gaza have
Speaker 8: been pushing for is Israel to have more constraint or
Speaker 8: restraint rather in the consideration of the civilian death tool here,
Speaker 8: they would like them to be more restrained in their operations,
Speaker 8: focusing more on humanitarian aid. But there also has been
Speaker 8: a lot of push for Israeli restraint in response to
Speaker 8: what we saw AROANDU last weekend. Has Israel actually heeded
Speaker 8: that message? Is that what we learned overnight that Okay,
Speaker 8: when the US and allies do call for restraint in
Speaker 8: what could have potentially been a very escalatory incidence, Israel
Speaker 8: seems largely to have done that.
Speaker 10: Yeah, I think that would be our guess. The fact
Speaker 10: that Secretary Blankin did not criticize Israel today for any
Speaker 10: of their actions and actually was pretty quiet about the
Speaker 10: entire incursion. I mean, like Israel launches a drone strike
Speaker 10: in Iran any other day that would be above the
Speaker 10: full headline creating a global crisis. Now it almost seems like, oh,
Speaker 10: thank god they did that. And I would say the
Speaker 10: only criticism that I've seen of any real value is
Speaker 10: within nit Yahoo's own wark cabinet, and you know, he
Speaker 10: had some of his top allies in his coalition say
Speaker 10: this was a weak attempt at a response, and so
Speaker 10: you know, he was balancing the conservatives in his coalition
Speaker 10: with the needs of his people and the global attitude
Speaker 10: toward a broader conflict. And you know, my guess is
Speaker 10: they probably figured this one out. I mean, the question
Speaker 10: now is is this the end of this sort of
Speaker 10: messaging phase where you know, Ran sends a message to Israel,
Speaker 10: Israel sends a message to Iran. I mean, these aren't
Speaker 10: really calculated as diminishing capacity on either front. It is
Speaker 10: really to send messages. And so are we done with
Speaker 10: the messaging phase? And can we move on now to
Speaker 10: a more constructive dialogue around the humanitarian crisis and what's
Speaker 10: going on in Gaza? And there's a big chunk of
Speaker 10: change in this supplemental package to address some of those
Speaker 10: humanitarian needs almost ten billion dollars. And so this could
Speaker 10: actually be an incredibly good weekend for the president because
Speaker 10: he can look at this and say I got the
Speaker 10: supplemental that I basically wanted, and I have a calmer
Speaker 10: Middle East to where we can actually step off and
Speaker 10: start finding solutions to the death toll in Gaza, and
Speaker 10: you know that's a if he can get that done,
Speaker 10: that's a pretty good week of work.
Speaker 2: Fair enough, Jeanie, I went to your point, your view
Speaker 2: on Rick's point. Officials were clear here in the US
Speaker 2: last night that they did get a heads up by Israel,
Speaker 2: but they wanted to make the point that the US
Speaker 2: did not greenlight the response. Does that make a difference
Speaker 2: to progressives who are already angry at Joe Biden about Israel?
Speaker 9: You know, I'm not sure it's going to make that
Speaker 9: much of a difference politically. I think Israel showed an
Speaker 9: awful lot of restraint, Asrick was just talking about in
Speaker 9: the aftermath, as well as did the administration. I think
Speaker 9: all sides, or most sides are hoping that this is
Speaker 9: the end of it, that Iron doesn't decide to retaliate,
Speaker 9: and the de escalation was achieved. But I will tell
Speaker 9: you some of the reporting we're hearing is the kind
Speaker 9: of thing that makes people on the left concerned and
Speaker 9: feel that there is double speak, as some people call it,
Speaker 9: come on out of the administration, And this is the
Speaker 9: reporting just now that the Biden administration is considering sending tanks, mortars,
Speaker 9: vehicles to got to Israel. This is the kind of
Speaker 9: thing where people on the left say they don't really
Speaker 9: care what the you know, sort of muted response was
Speaker 9: to last night. The fact that their government is still
Speaker 9: supplying and the civilian situation and the number of casualties
Speaker 9: and the humanitarian crisis continues is what is the source
Speaker 9: of a lot of this frustration and angst. And so
Speaker 9: you know, that's where I think the political end of
Speaker 9: this is going to show up. And I think Joe
Speaker 9: Biden as usual is having to walk a really tough,
Speaker 9: you know, tightrope on this. We heard Blinken supporting Israel
Speaker 9: and our closest allies and condemning Around's attack last weekend,
Speaker 9: but of course that has done little to assuage the
Speaker 9: critics on the left. So it's a very tough moment
Speaker 9: for the administration on all of this.
Speaker 8: Yeah, of course, because you're not just an incumbent president
Speaker 8: and administration but also trying to actively campaign for president
Speaker 8: and want to get reelected in November, which just makes
Speaker 8: this all the more compli And of course the man
Speaker 8: Biden is running against the presumptive Republican nominee Rick is
Speaker 8: spending his time not so much maybe focused on geopolitics,
Speaker 8: so there's certainly he has been weighing in on true
Speaker 8: social but spending a lot of time, including today at
Speaker 8: a courtroom in New York. We do now have the
Speaker 8: jury seated. Twelve jurors have been selected one alternate. We're
Speaker 8: looking for five more. But it does seem like the
Speaker 8: jury selection process could wrap up in the not so
Speaker 8: distant future and we could potentially be getting into opening
Speaker 8: statements next week. Rick, How consequential is it going to
Speaker 8: be when voters start to hear details about an alleged
Speaker 8: affair between Donald Trump and a porn star and everything
Speaker 8: that has happened in the aftermath.
Speaker 10: Yeah, I think there's been so much written and talked
Speaker 10: about that Donald Trump has taken advantage of these court
Speaker 10: cases and then he's raised money off of them, and
Speaker 10: he's turned him into political events. I think he starts
Speaker 10: to feel the pain when all the details start coming
Speaker 10: out about you know, his illicit relationships, you know with
Speaker 10: not just the porn star, but all so a playboy model.
Speaker 10: You know, he's got his own people who are going
Speaker 10: to testify. Hope Hicks likely will be on the stand
Speaker 10: Michael Cohen, who's gotten a lot of press about this.
Speaker 2: This is going to be horrible.
Speaker 10: I mean like there's no campaign manager on the face
Speaker 10: of the earth that's going to look at next week
Speaker 10: and say, oh, this will be great for us. I
Speaker 10: think we can really win a lot of votes this way.
Speaker 10: It'll be damage control. And we see them trying to
Speaker 10: do that by putting people like President Dudah in meetings
Speaker 10: with the President to try and change the topic. But
Speaker 10: there's only so much you can do while you've got
Speaker 10: a court case going on all day.
Speaker 2: David Pecker is another name as we hear about this operation.
Speaker 2: I forget the name of the thing, Kayley, what do
Speaker 2: they call the hide and seek whatever it is that
Speaker 2: they had going there to basically snuff out stories that
Speaker 2: were detrimental to Donald Trump by buying off some individuals here,
Speaker 2: catch and kill. Elizabeth, thank you for helping me out
Speaker 2: that testimony could resonate more than some of the others. Genie,
Speaker 2: how will it play?
Speaker 9: Oh, you know, I think I agree with Rick on this.
Speaker 9: I think it's going to be very tough. You know,
Speaker 9: I was just talking to a group of young people
Speaker 9: not that long ago who don't watch all that closely,
Speaker 9: and they just scratch their head out the idea that
Speaker 9: he is in the first of four criminal trials, even
Speaker 9: those who support him and say, how can this person
Speaker 9: run for office and potentially be the next president? So
Speaker 9: I think next week is critical because all of this
Speaker 9: we've been talking about about these trials comes home to
Speaker 9: roost and people actually see the reality, which is that
Speaker 9: so close to the White House may indeed be found
Speaker 9: guilty of thirty four counts in a criminal trial.
Speaker 8: All right, Jeanie Shanzeno and Rick Davis are Bloomberg Politics contributors.
Speaker 8: Thank you both so much, and just to bring you
Speaker 8: the latest on Trump's hush money trial up in New York.
Speaker 8: All six alternates have now been selected. Wow, so we
Speaker 8: have a full panel of alternates and jurors for this case.
Speaker 2: Joe opening statements on Monday? Isn't that what that means?
Speaker 8: Potentially they do have a half day Monday and Tuesday
Speaker 8: for passover, But next week it looks like it could happen.
Speaker 1: You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast kens
Speaker 1: Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and enroud
Speaker 1: Oro with a Bloomberg business app. You can also listen
Speaker 1: live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station,
Speaker 1: Just say Alexa, play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Speaker 2: With actual news on Capitol Hill. They passed a rule
Speaker 2: that should not be news. But after rules failed seven
Speaker 2: times already, for this speaker, it was a big deal
Speaker 2: to see Democrats line up behind him a few more
Speaker 2: than Republicans today to pass the rule that will allow
Speaker 2: all these separate funding bills to be stitched together into
Speaker 2: a single body and sent to the Senate. The line
Speaker 2: from Thomas Massey, one of the Republicans now two who
Speaker 2: have joined Marjorie Taylor Green with her motion to vacate,
Speaker 2: says all he takes to Twitter, the US House is
Speaker 2: now officially in an alternate universe where the speaker shares
Speaker 2: procedural power with Democrats. Kaylee lines, is that not true
Speaker 2: at this point of the game, Well, I.
Speaker 8: Guess, effectively, if you need Democrats to get everything over
Speaker 8: the finish line because you can't get enough Republican votes, yeah,
Speaker 8: and you might need Democrats to save your gavel if
Speaker 8: this motion to vacate actually is acted upon by Marjorie
Speaker 8: Taylor Green and her two buddies in this effort, then, yeah,
Speaker 8: you rely on Democrats at the very least. Do we
Speaker 8: go all the way and say this is a coalition government?
Speaker 2: Yeah, but maybe that formal power sharing agreement, right.
Speaker 8: Maybe that's one step too far, but maybe we're.
Speaker 11: Not far from it.
Speaker 2: Mixican a pull us in from the ledge on this.
Speaker 8: You see Mick Mulvaney, the former Republican congressman from South Carolina.
Speaker 8: Of course, former acting chief of Staff under the Trump administration.
Speaker 8: He has a litany of other titles as well. Make
Speaker 8: always great to have you here on balance of power?
Speaker 8: What's your take on what's happening in the House and
Speaker 8: the extent to which might Johnson is not relying on
Speaker 8: his own party but the other to get his job done.
Speaker 11: Hey, Kaylee, Joe's going to see you guys as actually
Speaker 11: sitting here, just jotting down some notes as you were
Speaker 11: doing your little infro. And the word I kept I
Speaker 11: wrote about three times was exactly what Kaylee just said.
Speaker 11: This is a coalition government. That's exactly what this is.
Speaker 11: Right now, And let's let's geek out a little bit,
Speaker 11: shall we on House procedure If that's okay?
Speaker 1: Right?
Speaker 11: Rules are supposed to pass on party lines, and when
Speaker 11: the Speaker's Committee and the Rules Committee is the Speaker's committee,
Speaker 11: that the Speaker puts all the Republicans on that particular committee.
Speaker 11: When that committee cannot pass a piece a rule out
Speaker 11: and you have to rely on the Democrats, then you
Speaker 11: are now in a coalition government. You're now passing stuff
Speaker 11: that is acceptable to a majority of both Republicans and Democrats,
Speaker 11: a coalition style government. Give him on what a rule is.
Speaker 11: Because of the arcane way that the House Representative works,
Speaker 11: there aren't really any rules until you say a rule
Speaker 11: for every single piece of legislation. That rule includes when
Speaker 11: it will be debated, how long it will be debated,
Speaker 11: who gets to speak, and for how long which amendments
Speaker 11: will be in order or allowed to be debated and
Speaker 11: voted on, et cetera. Without that, you have to do
Speaker 11: what you guys mentioned in the intro, which is do
Speaker 11: a suspension of the rules, which is essentially just bring
Speaker 11: something down and see if two thirds to people support it.
Speaker 11: If so, it passes. This is again a bizarre way
Speaker 11: to do business, but with the House's word for generations.
Speaker 11: When the Republicans need the Democrats or vice versa to
Speaker 11: pass a rule, which is what you have to have
Speaker 11: to bring a bill to the floor where it can
Speaker 11: pass with a civil majority. You have a coalition government,
Speaker 11: and that's what's functioning right now in the House.
Speaker 2: Well that's remarkable. I thought you were going to say,
Speaker 2: come on, guys, give them a break. This isn't a
Speaker 2: formal power sharing agreement. But we read you, Mick, and
Speaker 2: I guess I'm just wondering what happens next. Then if
Speaker 2: this is in fact a coalition style government, whatever we're
Speaker 2: going to call it, that would also protect him from
Speaker 2: being fired.
Speaker 11: Right, Well, that's the test, right, I mean, I know
Speaker 11: if you all saw it. Kevin McCarthy, he said, I
Speaker 11: can't remember what the outlaw was. Last week, he said
Speaker 11: he thought that he had an understanding from the Democrats
Speaker 11: that they would come to his aid, which is why
Speaker 11: he said reach out because he didn't want to spoiler
Speaker 11: his relationship with his own party. And it might be
Speaker 11: that Mike has something formal, something informal. It might be
Speaker 11: Mike thinks they're coming to his aid, but we won't
Speaker 11: really know until the vote happens. And that's why let's
Speaker 11: get to the interesting stut right. The vote to vacate
Speaker 11: the chair is a privileged motion, So anybody, now that
Speaker 11: it's been filed and it's ripened, it's sat in the
Speaker 11: hopper for X number of days, it can be brought
Speaker 11: up at any time by anyone, and once it is,
Speaker 11: it stops all other activity. So if Marjorie Taylor Green
Speaker 11: and Thomas Manaseer are sincere about trying to stop what's
Speaker 11: happening on the floor, they could, in theory, not in theory,
Speaker 11: they could actually bring the motion now and bring the
Speaker 11: House to a halt, at least temporarily. Why they vote,
Speaker 11: or semi permanently if it passes, until they reach a
Speaker 11: new until they hire a new speaker, well make I.
Speaker 8: Think it's interesting that some of those who cast a
Speaker 8: vote to oust Kevin McCarthy last fall are suggesting that
Speaker 8: they would not do so again this time because they
Speaker 8: have serious concerns either it's going to hurt the Republicans
Speaker 8: electorally come November, or because there's a real chance that
Speaker 8: Hockey Jefferies could end up the House speaker. What's different
Speaker 8: now that wasn't true when we were dealing with Kevin
Speaker 8: McCarthy inside the Republican Party, including the House Freedom caucus.
Speaker 8: Bob Good does not seem to want to go along
Speaker 8: with us. Can you just try to take us inside
Speaker 8: that room and work through what you think they might
Speaker 8: be thinking.
Speaker 11: I think some of the folks are starting to realize
Speaker 11: what poor decision making they may have made when they
Speaker 11: remove Kevin McCarthy. They sort of brought this stain on
Speaker 11: the reputation of Republican Party and didn't get better policies
Speaker 11: out of it anyway. So I think they're scratching their
Speaker 11: heads going maybe all those people like Mulvaney who are
Speaker 11: saying this is a stupid move might have been right.
Speaker 11: By the way, one of my favorite sayings is that
Speaker 11: the biggest line Washington, d C. Is I hate to
Speaker 11: say I told you so. Everybody loves saying I told
Speaker 11: you so in Washington, DC, but I said a lot
Speaker 11: of folks were starting to realize that I wouldn't disminish
Speaker 11: the role of Donald Trump here. I don't think Donald
Speaker 11: Trump and that's the reason you saw him with Mike
Speaker 11: Johnson this week was our last week. I guess it
Speaker 11: lose track of time was because he doesn't want this distraction.
Speaker 11: He wants the negative focus that's on Biden now about
Speaker 11: the economy and Biden's inability to that and to navigate
Speaker 11: what's happening in the Middle East, and he wants the
Speaker 11: attention on his trials, which he is using now to
Speaker 11: his political game. If the Republicans replace a speaker or
Speaker 11: move replace a speaker, that goes to the top of
Speaker 11: the media list and it kicks him down one, maybe
Speaker 11: two notches, that he doesn't like that. So I think
Speaker 11: he's a combination of things. But keep in mind, and
Speaker 11: we had this conversation, Kaylee, with John Bayner the day
Speaker 11: before he retired. He called a bunch of us into
Speaker 11: a room, etaid, I think six or eight of us,
Speaker 11: and said, are you all going to bring the motion
Speaker 11: to vacate? And because it had been sitting there sort
Speaker 11: of like it is now for Mike Johnson, and we said,
Speaker 11: you know, mister speaker, no we won't. We'll give you
Speaker 11: our word on that, but if anybody else does, we
Speaker 11: are going to vote to vacate the chair. And that's
Speaker 11: the question right now is are those folks out there
Speaker 11: who are saying, you know, I don't want to change
Speaker 11: a speaker. Let's not change the speaker now, it's bad
Speaker 11: for the party.
Speaker 6: Et cetera.
Speaker 11: If the vote actually comes down, will they vote to
Speaker 11: keep Mike Johnson in there or will they vote to
Speaker 11: vote amount.
Speaker 2: Well, it's really something. As your former House Freedom Caucus
Speaker 2: weighs in on this. To Kaylee's point, they met last
Speaker 2: evening and decided that this motion to vacate was a
Speaker 2: bad idea. Mick, is it about the devil?
Speaker 6: You know?
Speaker 2: The Freedom Caucus doesn't want a Steve Scalize or a
Speaker 2: Tom Emmer to replace Mike Johnson, or God forbid, in
Speaker 2: their view, a Hakim Jeffries, right.
Speaker 11: I think I don't think Hakim Jeffries's possibility is for real,
Speaker 11: but there might be a compromised person. But I think
Speaker 11: the bottom line is this is that I think they've
Speaker 11: now realized that the things they didn't like about what
Speaker 11: was happening under Kevin McCarthy's speakership was not because of
Speaker 11: Kevin McCarthy. It was because they have a three or
Speaker 11: four or five vote margin period.
Speaker 1: That's it.
Speaker 11: And replace seeing Mike Johnson and any other Republican is
Speaker 11: not going to change. And the outcomes at this point
Speaker 11: nobody who they can imagine in their wildest dreams. Keep
Speaker 11: in mind, Mike Johnson was praised by the right wing
Speaker 11: when he took over as speaker. He was their win.
Speaker 11: I remember that the right wing groups claiming that this
Speaker 11: is what it was all about, it was worth it
Speaker 11: to get rid of McCarthy. Is look at the great
Speaker 11: Conservative and things are going to be different now and
Speaker 11: the A team, and we were right, And now they're
Speaker 11: sort of looking their hands over and going maybe it
Speaker 11: wasn't a personality driven thing or an individual driven thing.
Speaker 11: Maybe it was systemic. And I think that's correct. This
Speaker 11: is what you get when your majority is only four
Speaker 11: or five people, and I think now some of them
Speaker 11: are starting to realize that.
Speaker 2: Nick Maulvaney, great to see you, Mick. Thanks for coming
Speaker 2: back to talk to us. We'd love to connect next
Speaker 2: week once this is all done. Co founder of the
Speaker 2: House Freedom Caucus, of course, former congressman and former acting
Speaker 2: Chief of Staff and the Trump administration. Thanks for listening
Speaker 2: to the Balance of Power podcast. Make sure to subscribe
Speaker 2: if you haven't already, at Apple, Spotify, or wherever you
Speaker 2: get your podcasts, and you can find us live every
Speaker 2: weekday from Washington, DC at noontime Eastern at Bloomberg dot com.