Loading summary
Transcript78 lines
- [00:00]
Host/Announcer
Okay, before we get into it, little side note for the IT leaders listening in. I was reading up on a Microsoft Commission survey the other day and learned that teams using Windows 11 Pro PCs report 62% fewer security incidents compared to Windows 10 PCs, including three times fewer firmware attacks. Pretty significant. With security built in, you'll have AI ready it. That sets you up for operational efficiency as well as long term resilience. Upgrade to Windows 11 Pro at Windows means business.com
- [00:36]
Podcast Narrator
Bloomberg Audio Studios podcasts Radio news. You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon and 5pm Eastern on Apple CarPlay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts or watch us live on YouTube
- [00:59]
Main Interviewer/Anchor
watching the markets for us as they watch for development when it comes to the war with Iran and potentially progress toward a cease fire deal, or at the very least a deal that would reopen the Strait of Hormuz enough to satisfy President Trump so that he will not order the United States military to target Iranian infrastructure as he suggested he would in a press conference yesterday.
- [01:21]
Congressman Suha Subramunian
We're giving them till tomorrow, 8 o' clock Eastern Time. And after that they're going to have
- [01:27]
Rick Davis
no bridges, they're going to have no power plants. Every bridge in Iran will be decimated
- [01:35]
Congressman Suha Subramunian
by 12 o' clock tomorrow night where
- [01:38]
Rick Davis
every power plant in Iran will be out of business. The entire country can be taken out in one night and that night might be tomorrow night.
- [01:49]
Main Interviewer/Anchor
And his language has gone from yesterday saying that the entire country can be taken out in one night to today saying on true social a whole civilization will die tonight. Going on to say, I don't want that to happen, but it probably will. Just how probable is that outcome? Bloomberg's Tyler Kendall is joining me now in our Washington D.C. studio. She, of course, is our Washington correspondent. Tyler, I'm not going to ask you to have the firm answer to that because frankly, no one knows. Even the White House press secretary said it's only Donald Trump who knows where things stand on Iran. There is a we're kind of operating in the darkness here, right?
- [02:24]
Tyler Kendall
And there's just been so many headlines that have come out and really the last three hours that are informing what is our perception of what could potentially happen here. One thing, though, that appears clear is that this White House isn't backing off of its threat of 8pm Eastern tonight. As we see this escalation with the president's rhetoric in this post on Truth Social, I think it may be worth recapping Some of the reporting, though, that we've gotten recently started with the Wall Street Journal saying that in response to President Trump's post on Truth Social, they were cutting off direct talks when it came to the U.S. then we got this New York Times reporting indicating that even indirect talks were fully off. But then within the last. Axios is now reporting that some progress has been made. In the past 24 hours. They haven't confirmed that there's been any severing of ties when it comes to Iran speaking with the US but still their sourcing is saying that it appears like a, quote, long shot that a deal could come together by the president's deadline. And that leaves us a few options on where this could go, as you well know. One means we could see this escalation, which has prompted legal and humanitarian questions in some senses, which experts say will ultimately depend on the size and scope of what actually comes from it. The second is that we could see a cease fire. President Trump did outline yesterday what needs to be done, most notably the Strait of Hormuz has to happen. And then the third option is maybe we'll get a deferral of the deadline again. President Trump said yesterday that is highly unlikely. But at the same time, he also indicated in this post, quote, who knows what will happen, and said yesterday that he feels like Iran is negotiating in good faith.
- [04:02]
Main Interviewer/Anchor
Yeah, to your point, this president is no stranger to moving deadlines when it applies to a lot of things, but including this conflict. We've gone from 48 hours, that was two weeks ago, to five days, then extending it until Monday, April 6th. Now, here we are on Tuesday, April 7th. I guess it remains to be seen whether or not this deadline actually sticks. And we don't actually think we'll hear from President Trump publicly today before 8 o'. Clock. Right.
- [04:24]
Tyler Kendall
As of now, nothing on the public schedule. We'll be watching for his true social post. We did hear from his vice president, J.D. vance, speaking earlier today in Hungary, saying that he does feel confident that the US Will get some sort of response from Iran, but at this point isn't able to point to what that resolution will look like. As you well know, President Trump said yesterday that Iran's response today is going to dictate whether or not the US Is winding down or escalating this conflict. But we've already started to see some of the groundwork being laid today, reporting, of course, that President Trump has been given lists of targets that could meet. What you're going to hear a lot of when it comes to questions about targets, this dual use of if a infrastructure target is also used for military purposes like bridges, moving over weapons systems. So that's one, one part of it, but it's, it's definitely something that, that is evolving minute, minute by minute.
- [05:21]
Main Interviewer/Anchor
Well, and as it evolves, we actually are seeing some even Republican voices kind of pushing back on this notion of targeting civilian infrastructure. Yes, it's one thing to have the Marjorie Taylor Greene's of the world. She's no longer in office, she's a little bit more free to speak freely. But when you Republican Senator Ron Johnson of Wisconsin saying that he is hoping, hoping and praying that the President is just essentially this is just bluster that he doesn't want to see the targeting of civilian infrastructure, how should we consider the, the political pressure from inside even the President's own party? Tyler?
- [05:53]
Tyler Kendall
Right. That is a significant development considering that Ron Johnson is considered to be a strategic ally of President Trump's on Capitol Hill and really marks the first departure from a high ranking Republican so far when it comes to what was this latest escalation that we ultimate saw today. There's a few different things that could happen here. Of course, we're starting to hear a little bit more pressure from Republicans about the timeline of what the conflict could look like. Now Ron Johnson was responding to this specific threat. But as we talk about how the Pentagon wants additional funding, we got the president's budget request, 1.5 trillion, which doesn't include what we are expecting to be a $200 billion supplemental funding request to be sent over to Congress once the Department of Homeland Security is reopened. That's where you're starting to hear and see maybe that slight pushback occur, that maybe Congress wants to be able to formally authorize military action before they would pair that with an additional appropriations process. And I think that's going to be what to watch for next.
- [06:52]
Main Interviewer/Anchor
Of course, they're not even here. No, for another week. They're still on recess until the 14th. Bloomberg's Tyler Kendall, thank you as always for your reporting. And as Tyler told us, we did hear from the Vice President JD Vance about this earlier today as he was in Hungary on the trail basically with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban. This is what he said though, about progress when it comes to Iran.
- [07:11]
Rick Davis
We feel confident that we can get a response whether it's positive or negative. We're going to get a response from the Iranians by 8 o' clock tonight. I hope they make the right response because what we really want is we want a world where oil and gas is flowing freely where people can afford
- [07:27]
Host/Announcer
to heat their homes and cool their
- [07:29]
Rick Davis
homes, where people can afford to transport themselves to work.
- [07:31]
Host/Announcer
That's not going to happen if the
- [07:33]
Rick Davis
Iranians are engaged in acts of economic terrorism.
- [07:36]
Host/Announcer
So they've got to know we've got
- [07:38]
Rick Davis
tools in our toolkit that we so far haven't decided to use. The president, United States can decide to use them and he will decide to
- [07:45]
Host/Announcer
use them if the Iranians don't change
- [07:47]
Rick Davis
their course of conduct.
- [07:50]
Main Interviewer/Anchor
So will that decision be made to use the tools at the American military's disposal? Let's turn now to get some analysis or an opinion on that, at the very least. John Gavito is joining us from the Cohen Group, where she is senior adviser. She's forming also former acting principal deputy assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs under President Biden. Jen, welcome back to Bloomberg TV and Radio. When you see the words of the president written out on Truth Social this morning, the idea that a whole civilization, this is his words, will die tonight, how seriously do you take that threat?
- [08:26]
Jen Gavito
So I think at the end of the day, threats like that are just simply unhelpful. I certainly hope that the president of the United States, and I don't think he is threatening what that statement suggests. I think, you know, it's much more likely that we would see the targeting of the infrastructure targets like has been widely discussed. But these maximalist demands, frankly, from both sides simply move the parties further and further away from a negotiated solution. And I think what is true today has been true throughout this conflict, and that is that there is no military solution here. If we think that continuing to coerce the Iranians will lead to capitulation, I think we continue to misassess where that regime is. So deadlines, maximalist demands, I think are fundamentally very unhelpful at this stage.
- [09:21]
Main Interviewer/Anchor
Well, as you speak of the regime, Jen, obviously that first line of the president's true social post is the one that has captured a lot of attention today. But he also said in that same posting now that we have complete and total regime change where different, smarter and less radical, radicalized minds prevail. Maybe something revolutionary wonderful can happen. Who knows? He says, have we seen complete and total regime change?
- [09:45]
Jen Gavito
We absolutely have not. If anything, the new supreme leader and the new leadership of Iran is even more ideological and more hardlined than what we started this conflict with. And so again, I go back to I think that we are the administration is not understanding where the Iranian regime is and its resilience and ability to Withstand pressure. This regime is evil. And I think many of us share that opinion with the administration. They are not concerned about the well being of their citizens. And so if we think that they are going to capitulate based on threats against the Iranian people, I think that's again, fundamentally a misunderstanding. This regime is ideological and for it, in this moment, survival is the number one concern and survival does not come through through. Again, in their eyes, capitulation to US Demands. There has to be a negotiated solution. Whether that happens in the next 12 hours, the next 24 hours, or in the next two months, that is the only way that we see this. But no, regime change has not taken place.
- [10:58]
Main Interviewer/Anchor
Well, so let's dig in more to the potential negotiated solution. We have gotten to phrase it delicately, mixed messages, Jen. I also could say that I am just frankly very confused as to what exactly the status is of negotiations, as we're seeing conflicting reports as to whether or not Iran's even still at the proverbial negotiating table or at the very least participating in these messages being back and forth. You have the New York Times reporting suggesting that is not the case, that they have walked away. At the very same time the likes of Axios are saying some progress has been made in the last 24 hours. Typically, with your experience in diplomacy, when things are so hard to understand where exactly we stand, does that actually mean progress is being made or is that an indication of the absence of that?
- [11:45]
Jen Gavito
So that's a great question. And my suspicion is that actually progress is being made. That may be overly optimistic, but I think that what we are seeing is indication that there is some movement between the two sides. You talk about the proverbial negotiating table. I do not think there is a table that they are sitting at. This is primarily messages being passed back and forth. But I do think what we are seeing is the beginning stage of discussions that will eventually form the foundation to end this conflict. Again, though, at the moment, I think both parties have very maximalist demands. And so those two things can be true at the same time. There can be a willingness to talk or to consider positions and even to compromise eventually. But that compromise may not be enough in the short term.
- [12:38]
Main Interviewer/Anchor
Well, and we're talking about this, Jen, as if there really are just two sides here. But Israel has been a factor this entire time. It has been Israel and the United States acting in tandem, a joint effort. When it comes to the attacks on Iran, do they really have any role to play in diplomacy here? Does it matter what Israel would like to see? If Israel has maximalist demands of its own.
- [13:00]
Jen Gavito
So I think the role that Israel has to play here is one of a spoiler. Certainly, you know, as we've been talking about since before the conflict began, this for Prime Minister Netanyahu is a fight that he has been wanting to wage for two decades. And the Israeli government's objective in this will be to eliminate the ability of Iran to strike out against Israel. And if this conflict ends today, presumably by some agreement, and today, tomorrow, you know, whatever the timeframe is, but presumably by some agreement to get the Strait of Hormuz open. And I think it must be said that a month ago when this conflict began, the Strait of Hormuz was also open then. But that seems to be one of the key objectives of the administration now. So if the negotiated solution is that the Strait of Hormuz is open and global commerce can get back to normal and Iran has some assurance that this fight will not be taken to them again, that leaves big questions about the nuclear program in particular, specifically because we go back to this regime has not changed. And in fact, coming out of this conflict, it is my expectation that the new leadership of Iran will feel more motivated than they ever have before to pursue nuclear weapons. And so if that highly enriched uranium remains inside of Iran's borders and is not addressed through some negotiated solution, then for Israel that is going to be a very problematic outcome. And so, you know, we could see a scenario, and I think the Iranians will look at Gaza as an example on this. We could see a scenario in which the United States tries to find that off ramp and comes to some agreement. But for, for Israel, that doesn't necessarily mean that, that they stop trying to provoke further either executing or trying to provoke further conflict.
- [14:51]
Main Interviewer/Anchor
Well, your point on the nuclear program, Jen, is really important. Are you effectively saying that we can't, the US cannot both simultaneously say it has guaranteed Iran will never have a nuclear weapon and guarantee to Iran never attack again, at least so long as that enriched uranium remains in Iran's hands.
- [15:09]
Jen Gavito
Yeah. So I go back to the timelines that we're talking about today. 8:00 clock tonight, perhaps, you know, the President agreeing to extend it again in order to allow for the negotiations. If there is going to be a negotiated solution to this conflict, and again, eventually that's what it has to be. There is no military solution here. If there is to be a negotiated solution to this conflict, those macro questions are going to have to come into play. What are you going to do about the highly enriched uranium? What are you going to do about the knowledge that has been gained by the regime in the long term. And I think to address some of those questions, there are going to have to be compromises on the side of the United States as well. What are they willing to offer Iran in exchange for that, potentially in the way of, for example, sanctions relief? And so, you know, if we do see a deal in the near term, again, whether that is today, tomorrow, sometime next week, those questions are not going to be resolved, making it very, very likely that there is a return to conflict, you know, proverbial mowing of the grass, as many would call it, before too long. Something again, you know, we can't forget that we did this just last June. And so I do think that finding the space for a real diplomatic solution that addresses the wide range of legitimate concerns, concerns of the United States, of Israel, but also of Iran, is absolutely essential to a lasting peace.
- [16:36]
Main Interviewer/Anchor
But, Jen, and we just have 30 seconds left here, you don't think a solution that would require that much work can realistically be reached and finalized by 8pm tonight?
- [16:44]
Jen Gavito
Absolutely not. And that's where, again, these deadlines that the president continues to throw out are at the end of the day, I think counterproductive.
- [16:53]
Main Interviewer/Anchor
Hmm. Well, they may not stick. Or this one may not. It's been moved three times. Could he move at the 4th? A 4th before 8pm we'll stay tuned to find out. Jen, thank you so much for joining us here on BALANCE OF Power. Jen Gavito, former diplomat in the Biden administration, now senior adviser at the Cohen Group, here with us on Bloomberg TV and radio. And we'll have more analysis coming up with our political panel.
- [17:13]
Rick Davis
Stay with us. On BALANCE OF power. We'll have much more coming up after this.
- [17:20]
Host/Announcer
Support for the show comes from Public. Lately it feels like there are two types of investing platforms. Some are traditional brokerages that haven't changed much in decades and others feel less like investing and more like a game. Public is positioned differently. It's an investing platform for people who are serious about building their wealth on public. You can build a portfolio of stocks, options, bonds, crypto without all the bugs or the confetti. Retirement accounts. Yep. High yield cash. Yes, again, they even have direct indexing. Public has modern design, powerful tools and customer support that actually helps go to public.com market and earn an uncapped 1% bonus when you transfer your portfolio. That's public.com market ad paid for by Public Holdings Brokerage Services by public investing member FINRA, SIPC advisory services by public advisors SEC registered advisor crypto services by ZeroHash. All investing involves risk of loss. See complete disclosures@public.com disclosures.
- [18:19]
Podcast Narrator
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon and 5pm Eastern on Apple CarPlay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station. Just say Alexa.
- [18:36]
Main Interviewer/Anchor
Play Bloomberg 11:30 these deadline day markets, which right now seem like they aren't totally sure President Trump is going to follow through on what he's threatened with, which is to attack critical civilian infrastructure inside Iran if no deal with Iran is reached by 8:00pm Eastern Time tonight. Reminding you all of the words of President Trump himself that he posted on True Social earlier this morning. A whole civilization will die tonight, he says, never to be brought back again. I don't want that to happen, but it probably will. Probably is doing a lot of heavy lifting in that sentence. How probable is it that this will actually happen? As Axios is reporting that there has been some progress made in negotiations in the last 24 hours at the very same time that the New York Times reports Iran has walked away, is no longer negotiating around a ceasefire with the United States. It is very unclear what is happening here, not just on the Iranian side, but on the US Side as well. Even the White House Press Secretary Caroline Levitt can't tell us what may happen. She just told Fox News in an interview that only Trump knows where things stand on Iran. But does he actually know? I would remind you of this exchange in the briefing room at the White House yesterday, and we've heard a range
- [19:49]
Tyler Kendall
of those kind of messages. So are you.
- [19:51]
Main Interviewer/Anchor
So which is it? Are you winding this down?
- [19:54]
Tyler Kendall
Are you?
- [19:54]
Rick Davis
I can't tell you.
- [19:55]
Congressman Suha Subramunian
I don't know.
- [19:56]
Main Interviewer/Anchor
I can't. Depends what they do.
- [19:58]
Congressman Suha Subramunian
This is a critical period.
- [19:59]
Main Interviewer/Anchor
They have a period of, well, till
- [20:02]
Congressman Suha Subramunian
tomorrow at 8 o'.
- [20:03]
Podcast Narrator
Clock.
- [20:06]
Main Interviewer/Anchor
I can't tell you. I don't know. I doubt our political panel knows for sure either. But we appreciate their analysis on this all the same as we turn to them now. Rick Davis and Jeannie Shann Zaino are with us. Of course, Bloomberg Politics contributors Rick, a partner at Stone Court Capitol and Republican strategist Jeannie, a Democratic visiting fellow, a Democracy visiting fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School's Ash center and Democratic analyst. Welcome to you both. Rick, just how problematic is it for the Commander in Chief to be saying he doesn't know what's going to happen at the very start? Same time he is threatening to directly kill a whole civilization A whole civilization will die tonight.
- [20:46]
Rick Davis
Yeah, well, first of all, I think you got to set aside this whole, you know, killing an entire civilization. I mean, I don't know how much everybody has followed Donald Trump through his career, but hyperbole is his friend. And, you know, he uses words in a way that nobody else would ever think of using them, but they usually have a different definition to him than they do to the rest of us. So I'm going to set aside the fact that the President, on behalf of the American people, are going to commit genocide tonight at 8 o' clock and think more in terms of why we have confusion about what's going to happen tonight in general, and that is that it's very hard to talk to a bunch of Iranian officials who think they're going to get assassinated anytime. And they have a really good reason to believe that that because virtually all their friends have been killed by either the Israelis or the Americans over the course of the last four weeks. And so starting with that communication isn't as easy as it would normally be. You know, in a negotiation like this, if you believe the reports, somewhere in between, they seem to be on the verge of a deal to there's no negotiations is somewhere where we find ourselves between now and 8 o' clock tonight. It would not surprise me that the President doesn't declare victory and say that they've got a deal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz without that deal being completely cooked. But he keeps his finger off the trigger, he walks back some of this hot rhetoric that he's had, and he buys another day, maybe only 24 hours, to keep the heat on the Iranians to come up with a deal. I think if we find out that there's planning to be another negotiating session in person, you know, know, potentially, as reporting has indicated, Islamabad, then you've got a situation where you might be able to unravel some of the violence that's currently going on. That being said, attacks happened today by both the Israelis and the US Contingent. And Iran continues to target soft targets in the region to continue to keep the heat on everybody. So. So if anybody knows what's going to happen tonight, call Poly markets and place a bet, because this could be the big one.
- [22:59]
Main Interviewer/Anchor
Well, and Rick, your point is well taken, that you can't always take President Trump literally when it comes to his words. And yes, often hyperbole does play a role. But Jeannie, when you taken together, the statement of a whole civilization will die tonight after the president has directly said we will target civilian Infrastructure, power plants, potentially even water infrastructure, desalination plants. These are things that do have consequences to the more than 90 million people in Iran. Could we be looking at a president where even if it's not, you know, absolute mass destruction in terms of targeting civilians, it's still having serious humanitarian consequences if he decides to follow through with this?
- [23:37]
Podcast Narrator
Absolutely. If he decides to follow through with it. I mean, let's be clear on his language. He. We now are sitting here with the President of the United States waking up this morning and threatening genocide, threatening to destroy an entire civilization, whether he follows through with that or not. He has said that publicly. And that is just a reminder of the levels and depth to which the United States has sunk. Could you imagine any other president or leader from any other country, the worst totalitarian leaders that we can imagine, Those are the kinds of people who say that they are going to destroy an entire civilization and have a countdown to an 8 o' clock time frame? This is where we are in the United States. And what is equally distressing is that so few people, with a few exceptions, have stood up in. Who are people in power in the United States still in office, have stood up and condemned this. We have Ron Johnson who has said, I hope the President doesn't really mean this. We've had a few other people, but we've had some from the left, but very few people in his party and certainly very few people in the military or even in the media who have stood up and called this for what it is. It is a call to genocide. And again, we don't know. Apparently even the. The press secretary doesn't know if he means it or not. But that's almost beside the point right now. He said it. What I think this reflects in actuality is Donald Trump's desperation. He understands there are no good options for him or the United States in this. He understands not just the US Economy, the world economy is on the line. And in fact, I think his presidency is on the line. That is what we've seen. And he woke up Easter morning with that vulgar truth social. He's followed it up today with threats of genocide. These are all signs of a desperate person who understands very well he doesn't have good options. Options. He goes up this escalation ladder, it's not going to result in an open Strait of Hormuz. It will result in a lot of death and destruction and further economic distress in the United States and around the world. The president knows that, and that's what we're seeing. Could he walk Away from this. Absolutely. He has moved the goal goalpost in the last two weeks, Kelly, by mine count, at least five times. So he may do that, and I hope he does that, but it doesn't make any of what's happened in the last few hours any better.
- [26:16]
Main Interviewer/Anchor
Well, and that moving of the goalposts, Rick, is something you were speaking of, too, that you could see this plausibly being an outcome in which the President just extends the deadline once again. It would be the fourth time now. But at what point does that become too damaging to the United States credibility, to his own credibility, for him to continue doing so?
- [26:34]
Rick Davis
You know, I think it's all in context of, you know, how this war has been defined from day one. I mean, we had very loose objectives. Objectives, no real strategy going in. It was a war completely of our choice and Israel's, and yet we were, we didn't have really clearly defined objectives in, in the initial attack. And so the fact that it has now morphed into fighting over opening the Strait of Hormuz, which was never an issue to begin with, the Strait of Hormuz was wide open the day before we launched our attacks, and Israel joined us. And so, you know, these are all consequences of a war that started almost six weeks ago and are now redefining how we get out of this war. And I do think that it's very critical that whatever the President does, that he achieves the one objective that's now as a result of the war, and that is reopening the Strait of Hormuz and allowing the oil trade to begin again and to try and tamp down some of the concerns that people have about global recessions. This is a, this is a war that's not just affecting the American people, but virtually everyone around the globe, either economically or personally. So I really, I mean, it's really quite a rapid pace to think about where we were just a month and a half ago and where we are today. And to think that somehow the Iranians have a different interest than we do, and preserving life and limb and assets and property, I think, you know, betrays the idea that at some point all the carnage combined doesn't result in a positive outcome for either people. And that's when I think you've got a shot at getting a negotiation that satisfies some. I mean, all the various positions as of 8 o' clock tonight get washed away and we start anew. And the question is, is, are we starting anew with a cease fire or are we starting a new, you know, with a significantly upscaled war war tempo.
- [28:39]
Main Interviewer/Anchor
Well, and yeah, that question is one we're going to have to wait to see answered for another seven or so hours. But, Jeannie, the point Rick was just making on the economic consequences of this, not just here at home in the United States, but globally. The President has repeatedly argued that actually the economic, economic burden that needs to be borne isn't really the United States because we have our own energy, we can withstand this kind of energy shock coming from the Middle east, that it's really more Asia and Europe, NATO countries specifically, that have to be worried. And we heard him in that press conference yesterday, once again with some pretty strong language on NATO. He said, he said, bye, bye, Jeannie. And I wonder if the kind of geopolitical outcomes of this conflict we have to be considering is not just the fate of, of Iran and of the Middle east, but of the transatlantic alliance, too.
- [29:27]
Podcast Narrator
I think we do. The President has signaled this long before he entered this war. We entered this war. I think it has gotten worse since we entered. The economic impacts, though, that the President likes to say are not going to be felt here at home are already being felt. Rick just made a really important point. The Strait of Hormuz was open before this war began. There was no threat that it was going to be closed unless we attacked, and we attacked, and now it is closed. That has raised the prices of not just oil, fertilizer, food, the list goes on and on. And that is all being felt here at home. You know, our goods are transported on trucks that require diesel. Diesel has gone up dramatically. The price of gas, at least yesterday. Kelly, the last time I checked was average for 12. That's up from like 290 something about a month ago. So this is because we are in an international market. It doesn't matter how much we produce. Our oil prices and gas prices and the rest of our prices are still going up. So the President can pretend that he can just walk away from this and it will have little impact on us, but that is not true. Likewise, he can talk about moving away from NATO and actually try to do it, which he shouldn't do without because Congress has passed a law saying he can't. But if he tries to do that, that's another destructive element of this foreign policy. Because the United States needs allies. We don't have allies because we are nice and we like to be, you know, benefit other people. It's because it serves our interests and it long has. And the President walks away from that and that hurts all of us. So that's the position we're in. And the president continues to say things which have little, little semblance of of reality from any sort of theory of foreign policy we know of.
- [31:24]
Main Interviewer/Anchor
All right, Jeannie, Shan Zaino and Rick Davis, strong stuff today. We appreciate it.
- [31:28]
Rick Davis
Stay with us on Balance of Power. We'll have much more coming up after this.
- [31:35]
Host/Announcer
Support for the show comes from Public. Public is an investing platform that offers access to stocks, options, bonds and crypto. And they've also integrated AI with tools that can assist investors in building customized portfolios. One of these tools is called generated Assets. It allows you to turn your ideas into investable indexes. So let's say you're interested in something specific like biotech companies with high R and D spend, small cap stocks with improving operating margins or the S&P 500 minus high debt companies. Chances are there isn't an ETF that fits your exact criteria. But on Public you just type in a prompt and their AI screens thousands of stocks stocks and builds a one of a kind index. You can even back test it against the S&P 500. Then you can invest in a few clicks, go to public.com market and earn an uncapped 1% bonus when you transfer your portfolio. That's public.com market ad paid for by Public Holdings Brokerage Services by Public Investing Member FINRA SIPC Advisory Services by Public Advisors SEC Registered Advisor Crypto Services by ZeroHash. Sample prompts are for illustrative purposes only, not investment advice. All investing involves risk of loss. See complete disclosure@public.com disclosures.
- [32:48]
Podcast Narrator
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon and 5pm Eastern on Apple CarPlay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business app. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station. Just say Alexa play Bloomberg 11:30.
- [33:07]
Main Interviewer/Anchor
President Trump is making threats of his own on True Social ahead of this 8pm deadline headline writing. A whole civilization will die tonight, never to be brought back again, he says. I don't want that to happen, but it probably will. And this language is now calling for dozens of elected Democrats in both the House and the Senate to call for the 25th Amendment to be invoked. And we're joined by a Democratic representative now. Congressman suha Subramaniam, representing Virginia's 10th district, is here with us on Bloomberg TV and radio. Congressman, I appreciate your time. Would you join your colleagues in making this conversation call for the 25th amendment?
- [33:41]
Congressman Suha Subramunian
Yeah, I mean, the president right now is showing that he's not fit to serve in thisat this level. I mean, what you want from a president right now is someone who will show steady leadership during a time of war, that they will be reasoned in their actions, that they will work collaboratively with Congress to make sure that our troops are safe. And instead what you have is a President who's throwing out outrageous threats, threatening war crimes and legislating by truth social. And it is frightening people. I mean, I have so many people calling my office today just frightened that World War III is about to begin. And so this is not the type of leadership we need right now. The 25th Amendment needs to be instigated by the cabinet. But in the end, I mean, the President right now is just showing us that, you know, he is not the right person to be leading our country right now.
- [34:36]
Main Interviewer/Anchor
Well, and as you speak of war crimes, we should note that your ranking member on the Oversight Subcommittee on Military and Foreign Affairs. If the President were to actually follow through with what he's threatened, would you demand a congressional investigation into that?
- [34:48]
Congressman Suha Subramunian
Absolutely. Absolutely. He absolutely needs to be investigated. The decision makers and the people who executed it, everyone needs to be investigated. If they target civilians, remember, you know, we're stopping gotten any real proof that there was an imminent threat to our country. So this was a war of choice. And it's one thing to hit military targets and try to weaken their ballistic missile program or their nuclear program. It's another thing to deliberately hit civilians and civilian targets and say that and project that to the world. We lose our leadership in the world stage, we lose our moral high ground in the world stage. We're already losing on a lot of those things. And the President by saying these things, is just showing again that he's not fit to be leading us right now.
- [35:40]
Main Interviewer/Anchor
Well, of course, the President just last week requested of you and your colleagues approval of a one and a half trillion dollar defense budget. And that's before he even makes in the Pentagon formally makes a supplemental funding request of some $200 billion as we expect. Congressman, I wonder if, if you see this fight potentially over that supplemental funding in particular as being the best avenue if there is to be congressional pushback to the President's efforts. Because we all know the way that war powers resolutions votes have gone down thus far. But could supplemental funding be a different story?
- [36:15]
Congressman Suha Subramunian
First, I would say if we had another War Powers Resolution, I would expect some Republicans in the House to join join us. And for it to at least pass the House, the President may be able to veto it and stop it. But I think it's important to show that the House, including some Republicans, do not approve of this war at this point. Second is the president said that this war would only last four to six weeks and that, you know, we were already successful, it's already mission accomplished. So why does he need hundreds of billions of dollars more, trillions of dollars more? And in order to pay for this war, he wants to essentially steal the American people's health care, education, childcare, all these programs that help Americans and put America first. Instead, what he's doing is he's doing exactly what he said he wouldn't do the last several years, which is start another war and pay for it by taking from the American people. So he will not get a dime from me. And I'm sure many of my colleagues would join me in that.
- [37:14]
Main Interviewer/Anchor
Well, I guess we'll have to see when a vote on any kind of supplemental funding or another war powers resolution will reach the floor. As you and your colleagues do still remain in recess for the next week. And I wonder to Congressman, what you're expecting upon return from recess when it comes to funding for the Department of Homeland Security X ICE and cbp, is it your expectation that you will get the chance immediately to vote on the Senate passed bill? As we're seeing reports that the speaker of the House, Mike Johnson, wants to see more progress on reconciliation that would fund the other parts, CBP and I specifically first, what is your anticipation? What are you hearing from your leadership?
- [37:52]
Congressman Suha Subramunian
Well, we should have voted on the Senate plan last week and even the administration now is getting behind it. And so they should call us in today. We should vote on it today. And we will end the shutdown today if Mike Johnson chooses to do so. But House Republicans are the only thing standing in the way of ending this DHS shutdown. What I expect to happen is we will come back next week and we may need to take another week or two to figure out what House Republicans want to do to please the most extreme people in their caucus and get some funding that they apparently need for ICE. Even though it has billions of dollars already, $43 billion.
- [38:31]
Podcast Narrator
It can.
- [38:31]
Congressman Suha Subramunian
It's already funded for eight years now.
- [38:33]
Rick Davis
Right.
- [38:33]
Congressman Suha Subramunian
So it is really unfortunate that House Republicans have put us in this situation, but this should be over by now. And I hope it's over by next week.
- [38:44]
Main Interviewer/Anchor
But if and when it ends, when it is finally over, Congressman, has Democrats lost their opportunity to exercise any leverage over actually getting reforms to ICE and CBP?
- [38:55]
Congressman Suha Subramunian
Well, if they put ICE funding through the reconciliation process where they don't need 60 votes in the Senate. They are establishing a new precedent for putting funding bills through this reconciliation process to budget bills through the reconciliation process in a way that is unprecedented. And so I would love to see them come together with us and be collaborative. I believe that there are Republicans who believe in civil liberties and want reform size and don't want American citizens shot. But if that's not the case and they do go that route, they're creating a new precedent.
- [39:32]
Main Interviewer/Anchor
All right, Congressman, we appreciate you joining us. Democratic Congressman suha Subramunian, representing Virginia's 10th district here with us on Bloomberg TV and Radio, giving us a view from Capitol Hill on not just funding for the Department of Homeland Security, but, of course, the threats from President Trump on Iranian infrastructure, civilian infrastructure at that. If no deal is reached by 8:00pm Eastern Time tonight,
- [39:56]
Rick Davis
thanks for listening to the Balance of Power podcast. Make sure to subscribe if you haven't already, at Apple, Spotify or wherever you get your podcasts. And you can find us live every Weekday from Washington, D.C. at Noontime Eastern@Bloomberg.com.