Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon Eastern on Appocarplay and then Rouno with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
The first Democratic member of Congress calls for Joe Biden to drop out of the presidential race.
Welcome to the fastest show in politics.
As a representative from Texas pulls the ripcord. I'm Joe Matthew alongside Kaylee Lines in Washington, DC and Kaylee. This comes today as Joe Biden reports raising tens of millions of dollars after the debate.
That was said to be such a disaster.
Yeah, and the four days since the debate thirty eight million dollars raised. They had a record month of June with one hundred and twenty seven million dollars according to the campaign. And yet there are still calls within the Democratic Party for Biden to consider not being officially the Democratic nominee. One of those, as you mentioned, now, coming from Congressman Lloyd Doggett, who represents the congressional district that was once represented by Lyndon B.
Johnson. How about that?
And he says in this letter, under very different circumstances, he made the painful decision to withdraw. President Biden should do the same.
A native of Austin saying out loud what a lot of Democrats are saying quietly here. Joe Biden, of course, will be hosting veterans and their families on the south lawn of the White House on the fourth of July, which is a really wonderful event that takes place every year that now is typically geared toward veterans and Gold Star families, and it's a really wonderful thing if you've ever been in Washington, d C. On the fourth, we will hopefully transcend politics for a couple of hours.
Kayley, on what has been a divisive week.
Think of everything that we just added up here that we've learned in only the past couple of days, from the Supreme Court ruling on immunity, the sentencing New York being delayed, the great concern coming off last week's debate among Democrats for Joe Biden, only to be followed up with a chaser of one hundred and twenty seven million dollars in a fundraising hall. These are noisy times on the trail.
Indeed, it's a lot to parse through, and of course parsing it through in a holiday week, and a holiday specifically that is marking the United States declaring its independence from the tyrannical king. Oh true, and yet the Supreme Court this week, some might argue, gave king like powers to a democratically elected president at least presumptive immunity from anything prosecuting Official Act.
Coast is clear on a lot of things that we wouldn't have thought about before. We talked to Tim O'Brien from Bloomberg Opinion a little bit earlier on in the broadcast. Trump ruling invites presidents to commit crime, which is really how a lot of people are looking at this today. And this is going to play itself out on the
campaign trail. It's something that we're going to talk about Keilly with Congressman Seth Moulton, the Democrat from Massachusetts not only supporting Joe Biden, but has actually made a run for president himself. If you think back, he's taken a stab at this as well.
Well.
It's so much to consider as who who has run for president in the past and didn't get the nomination
as Joe Biden did in twenty twenty. And those who were instrumental in getting Joe Biden elected in the first go round, like say Congressman Jim Clyburn of South Carolina, who arguably is what ultimately put Joe Biden over the finish line with that victory in that state, if you start to see those people turner, at least more publicly, start to doubt him, I wonder if that's really the tell when we consider whether the pressure is going to go all the way there, so much so that Joe
Biden has no choice but to decide not to.
Be the nominee.
The congressman is with us now, Seth Moulton from the North shore of Boston in Massachusetts US. Great to see a congressman happy fourth in advance. I wonder what's going through your mind here and what's going through your phone. I bet it's been blowing up all weekend like a lot of Democratic lawmakers. We now have one of your colleagues from Texas, a Congressman Doggett, calling for Joe Biden.
To drop out of this race.
Is that a call based on what you're hearing that's about to get louder for the rest of us.
Well, I don't know if it's going to get louder or not. But look, I'm not going to sugarcoat anything. I think the debate was a disaster, and right now a lot of people have concerns about President Biden's age and his ability to go toe to toe with Donald Trump. That's the reality that we face. And of course, I deeply respect President Biden's love for our country. He's done amazing things for America, and he has a deeply abiding desire to continue serving. I have a lot of respect
for that. But I've also never been one to shy away from speaking the truth, and I think we ultimately have to do what's best for our country and our democracy here. I don't know what the right answer is. I don't have all the right answers, but I'm not gonna I'm not going to sugarcoat this.
The debate was bad, well, the debate, in your words, was bad. That was days ago, on Thursday evening, And potentially you could argue that the stakes of this election got ratcheted significantly higher by the Supreme Court decision yesterday Congressman in which they said that Donald Trump or any other president from here on out, does have presumptive immunity
from prosecution for official acts. Given the language we have seen from Donald Trump as a candidate about retribution, about being a dictator on day one, does that not make it more incumbent on President Biden to actually consider what Donald Trump could do now if he were to win a second term. Does that change the narrative even from Thursday to now?
Well, the stakes for this election are incredibly high, and you haven't even mentioned what I think is the greatest threat, which is the national security threats to our country if Trump is elected. Their threats to our democracy. There are threats to our very existence, we get into World War III. There are enormous threats to just individual rights. All the women around the country who are wondering what rights are Trump and the Republicans going to take away next? These
stakes are enormous. Every American should have those stakes in mind. But I don't think there's an American who has them more in mind than President Biden. And that's why this conversation that Democrats are having right now a tough conversation. The same conversation that President Biden is having with his family and his advisors is so important. It's an important conversation.
And some people will criticize Democrats for having this conversation, or for even maybe they'll criticize me for talking about having this conversation. But that's fundamentally what democracies are about. Right Republicans just cave and do whatever Donald Trump says. You know, look at how quickly the party caved to just making him a convicted criminal their nominee. We're not
doing that because we take democracy more seriously. We take the stakes of this election more seriously, and that's why we're having tough conversations right now about the best path forward.
Well, it's not lost on me, Congressman, that we were talking back in twenty nineteen about a new generation of leadership when you raised your hand to run for president. You've had this conversation inside the Democratic family here for quite a few years. Isn't that call for a new generation of leadership getting louder?
I certainly haven't diminished my call for it since I first ran for Congress back in twenty fourteen. I said we need a new generation of leaders in this country. We need a new generation to step up. And I think that's especially true in our party. If you look at our party, we have an enormously talented new generation of leaders, but they're not many of many of them not really empowered right now. And I think that's something that we need to do. I mean, Joe, let me
just acknowledge it. It's always an honor to find one of this small group of Americans who even remembers that I ran for president. So I'm flattered to bring that up.
I remember seeing you at Politics and Eggs. We can joke about it, Congressman, but is that still part.
Of your charge?
Absolutely?
Absolutely. I mean I've been in Congress for almost ten years and I'm still one of the youngest members of Congress. And so there are a lot of young Americans who don't feel like they're even represented by our representative democracy. Their views are not being represented in Congress, White House, and whatnot. This is work that we all have to engage in. And by the way, it's not just a
Democratic Party issue. Donald Trump's only two years younger than Joe Biden, if I have it right, So I mean this is, you know, this is an issue that I think politics in general in America has to wrestle with We need a new generation of leaders. We still do.
Well as we consider those leaders in all of the different facets of government, specifically the House of Representatives. Congressman, you are right now in the minority. The prevailing thinking, at least it was until Thursday, was that the Democrats stood a fairly good chance of flipping the House blue in November. Do you now have concerned that Joe Biden being at the top of the ticket hurts those odds.
Well, I've had concerns about the House for a while because I think the problem is that while insiders in politics, like the three of us on this conversation who follow this every day, we know how totally dysfunctional the Republican House has been. We know that it's almost inconceivable that these bozos could get re elected, the likes of Speaker Johnson, with his acolytes Marjorie Taylor Green and Lauren Bobert, I
mean all these, I mean, frankly nut cases. But I'm not sure that everybody is so tuned in to realize that the reason the House is dysfunctional is because of this extremist Republican leadership. And if you look at the simple baseline, how many safe seats do Republicans have versus how many safe seats do Democrats have In the House, Republicans are actually ahead. So the case I've been making all year is we need to pay attention to the House.
It's so it's getting lost because people are so focused on Biden versus Trump, and then they're focused on the Senate, which we've known for years would be a tough road for Democrats in twenty twenty four. And the worst case scenario is that we wake up the day after the election and we say, oh my god, we lost the White House, we lost the Senate, And if we had just paid a little attention to the House, we'd have
a backstop on democracy. But we didn't. So I've been leading my group Serve America that's helping to elect great leaders, great service veterans in key races across the country. I've been encouraging people to invest in Serve America because I think this is the best return on investment in democratic politics right now. I think it's incredibly important to focus on the House. We all know the stakes are high with the presidency. We all know the Senate, our Senate
majority is in peril. Let's not forget about the House, though. It could be the backstop on democracy that we need.
M Well, there's a lot here, a lot of cross currents and a lot of overlap and all of these races that we're talking about here, Congressman Seth Moulton, I feel like we're dancing around this a little bit here because everybody's trying to be polite. Should Joe Biden drop out of the presidential race or not?
I don't have the answer to that right now. I've had a lot of conversations about this candidly, and you know, there's a there's certainly a view that the chaos that would follow would would be worse than just having a nominee that we know and that can trust. And then of course there's the other view that the debate was a disaster and and we just need to move on.
I'm not sure exactly what the right answer is is yet here, but I can tell you we are having those serious conversations as any serious party should.
How does the Vice President Kamala Harris factor into those conversations? Is the thinking that she should be the nominee instead or that someone else entirely, who is unattached to this administration should be the one to take the helm if indeed Joe Biden makes the decision to exit.
It's a great question because that's a debate that's happening behind the scenes right now as well. If the President were to say he's not going to run, would automatically go to the vice president or would there be an open contest? This is tricky. I mean, I'm not even sure exactly what all the party rules are in terms
of shifting delegates around and whatnot. That's certainly not my area of expertise, but that's something that would have to be sore out because this really is an unprecedented situation. I can't think of a time when something like this happened before. You know, I'll tell you one of the considerations, just to lay all the cards on the table, is that there's been great concern that the Democratic Convention in
Chicago this year will be chaotic to begin with. There are a lot of protests planned, There are a lot of people who are upset with the president's policy around Israel and Gaza in particular, who probably want to disrupt the convention. And you know, some people are saying, do we want to disrupt the convention even more? I mean, these are real serious considerations and real debates that are happening right now amongst members of Congress and other leaders in the party.
As this debate takes place in the wake of the Supreme Court ruling yesterday, Congressman, there's a lot of speculation going on, and people are kind of letting their imaginations run wild with what a president is in fact allowed to do. As we wake up today in this new reality, what do you think how far are you allowing your imagination to run in a world now where president can effectively commit a crime as long as it's considered part of his official business.
We founded this country, our founding fathers wrote the Constitution to shed the shackles of a monarchy, to get away from a king. That's why my ancestors came here in the sixteen thirties, to get away from the King of England. And I think what the Supreme Court has done is essentially restoring a monarchy, restoring the power of a king to the president. And so I think, just at a very visceral level, this Supreme Court ruling is about as un American as you can get the founding fathers must
be rolling over in their graves. And I don't think we fully understand what the implications of this ruling could be for the future of our democracy, because you're right, I mean, I don't know where it stops. If he just chooses to assassinate a political rival, is he from that? Oh,
I'm sorry, it was an official act. If he just chooses to start a war ignoring the will of Congress, because it's written in the Constitution that Congress is supposed to have a check on that does he does he suddenly become immune because it's for you to official act. He could send thousands and thousands of Americans to their deaths and we just turn a blind eye because it's an official act. I mean, it seems legally absurd and
deeply deeply un Americans. So I'm I mean, I can't describe how concerned I am.
And it falls on the week of the fourth of July, of all things. Congressman, thank you so much for being with us on balance of power that is democratic Congressman Seth Moulton of Massachusetts, we appreciate your time.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power Podcast kench just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then royin Oto with the Bloomberg Business App. You can also live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just say Alexa Play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
I want to bring it to the North lawn of the White House today where there is some important business being had. We're talking about obviously a lot of politics, but let's deal with policy today at the White House. It's directed at severe weather, Kayley. President Biden giving remarks on extreme weather as we follow this Hurricane Beryl toward Jamaica and what could be a very destructive storm eventually
touching us here in the US. And I'm glad to say that we're joined by Almost Hochstein, Senior Advisor to the President on Energy and Investments, with us from a sunny and warm north lawn. Almost, welcome back to Bloomberg TV and Radio. It's great to see you.
Can we just.
Start with the matter at hand here, and the potential threat from this storm is the Strategic Petroleum Reserve for instance, safe and sound is our infrastructure protected along the Gulf coast.
Well, First, Joe and Kaylee, thank you for having me. It's good to be back here.
Yeah.
Look, this is exactly why.
We have planning all year long to make sure that we are ready for moments like this. We have a hurricane that is tragically affecting people on lives in the Caribbean, Mexico and could be coming towards Gulf of Mexico in the United States, and making sure that we have a response to it, both to support people and communities as well as making sure that we have the ability if we have to do something to address shortages and energy.
We're already prepared to do that, and so the President has ordered us a long time ago to make sure we are prepared, and I believe that we are. The spr has enough in it to address concerns of weather concerns or other geopolitical issues, and there are other eras and tools that we have at our disposal that we're
always willing to do. Look, just today, we're releasing a million barrels of gasoline from the Northeast Reserve into the market, which should help bring additional capacity into the market ahead of the storm and most importantly ahead of July fourth, when so many Americans get in their cars and RVs and are to travel across the country at record numbers.
Well, as we consider the SPR in the availability of the contents of it for emergencies, of course, it is not as full as it once was after it was tapped earlier in this administration, when we saw gas prices so high almost obviously, gas prices are not at those levels now. The average, according to Triple A is about three point fifty a gallon across the US. How high would gas prices need to get for the President to consider tapping the SPR again exactly for that purpose to get those prices down?
Well, I think that, as you mentioned, when the advent of the Russian War in Ukraine, and then as that war continued, we had soaring oil prices in the United States and around the world, and gas prices soared to five dollars a gallon, and that's when the president ordered. President Biden ordered that historic release from the SPR of one hundred and eighty million barrels over a period of
six months. Since then, we've seen two things happen. One, the private sector that was just really in coming out of a very bad era for COVID during COVID of production has gone to record production in the United States. We are producing more oil today in the United States than at any time any country has in history, and we are near those records for natural gas production as well, And so that's one thing that happened. We have more supply on the market today. The second is that we've
been repurchasing back oil into the Strategic Reserve. Roughly about forty million barrels have been purchased back into the reserve and replenished. And most as importantly, we canceled the congressional mandated sales out of the SPR that we're supposed to come into effect over the last several months.
So we're in good shape.
We have enough capacity in the SBR to address what we need to do. And no, it's not as full as it was two years ago, but it is a significant reserve that we still are able to tap. And I would say it's not about prices, it's about the overall environment of the market and do we need to put liquidity of oil into the market at any given moment, whether it's geopolitical pressures or weather or other issues that are affecting the US economy.
Almost I know your time is tight, but we have to ask you as well about the potential for shock based on geopolitics in the Middle East. I wonder you're concerned about ready supplies. You mentioned this release of a million barrels of gasoline from the Northeast gasoline supply reserve. But as our energy infrastructures the global market able to absorb, a new front in the war with.
Israel is real word.
To open a front to the north with Hesbalah, what would happen to the price of oil?
Well, first, I think we're trying to do a couple of things. One is to make sure try as hard as we can, the President spending normose amount of time every day. I'm trying to get us to a ceasefire that brings hostages home and practically ends the war in Gaza. Second, to keep the escalation that we have seen over the last several weeks on the border between on the Blue Line, the area between Israel and Lebanon. We saw this has
been going on for eight months. We saw the escalation really ramp up over the month of May and early June. We've seen that come down a bit, which is a good thing, and we have told both sides we're working with both sides I've spoken to them. I was in Lebanon and Israel last week, and we are going to try to continue to work as hard as we can to prevent a further escalation. That war is any kind
of escalation would have It's not just about markets. It would have significantification for thousands, hundreds of thousands, millions of lives, and we believe that it is possible to get to a resolution of that and to end that conflict so that Israelis can go back to their homes securely, that Lebanese can go back to their homes and farms, respectively on the Lib and East side, and that we can end this goal.
However, we are preparing.
For every scenario, and the President has been adamant that while we try to prevent war, we are prepared to handle the consequences, even the ones that will affect the economy. The reason the Northeast Reserve that you mentioned is important.
In the summer, we do import gasoline from the global market in the Northeast, so this does have a pretty significant impact on what we're trying to do and make sure that people's effects for their budgets as they travel in July fourth, that prices are as low as they can be.
All right, almost, thank you so much for joining us
today from the north lawn of the White House. That's almost Hakstein, Senior Advisor to the President for Energy and Investment, running through a few issues that President Biden, for all of the talk in recent days about his ability to serve as president of the United States through the remainder of this term, yet, let alone another four years, is still focused on policy, whether it be foreign policy in the Middle East or policy here at home as we
consider gas prices and the tool they may have taken on his popularity.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon Eastern on Apocarplay and then Proud Otto with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
As we carry on here on Balance of Power Live from Washington at the Bloomberg Bureau in downtown d C. I'm Joe Matthew here on Bloomberg Radio, on the satellite and on YouTube. With so many questions about what last week's debate actually means for this campaign and whether Joe Biden will end up in fact being the nominee, i'd say in Chicago and August. But of course Bloomberg is now reporting that the DNC wants to get this done
the middle of July. And maybe with news today that Donald Trump's sentencing in July is surely to be delayed, maybe this starts to make a little bit of sense.
But there is a new.
Poll out on the debate, well sort of at least the way people are feeling in the wake of the debate, and it's from the progressive group Our Revolution, surveyed by email. This is not a traditional poll, to be clear. Surveyedd supporters by email in the seventy two hours after the debate on Thursday, seventeen thousand respondents. As we read at Politico. The top line takeaway sixty seven percent of respondents think Joe Biden should suspend his campaign. Now, as soon as
you start thinking about that, look at the money. Remarkable turn here again with fundraising being announced in the last twenty four hours. They were hoping for a big one, and they got one. The Biden campaign raised one hundred and twenty seven million dollars in June. Now you see, Yeah, but the debate was just last Thursday. Fine, that includes thirty eight million dollars raised in the four days starting Thursday, the day.
Of the debate.
The overall number, by the way, an almost fifty percent increase from the previous month. So what the heck is going on?
Here?
We assemble our panel for their take. Rick Davis, of course, is with us Bloomberg Politics contributor and Republican strategist partner at Stone Court Capital, Joined today by Lincoln Mitchell, political analyst lecture at the School of International and Public Affairs at Columbia University. Great to have both of you, gentlemen with us. Lincoln, how do you rationalize one hundred and twenty seven million dollars for a candidate no one seems to want?
Well, the first thing I would say is that one thing you learn when you study polling is that when organizations tell you how big they're sample size is, that's a tell that means the methodology is terrible. So I wouldn't put too much stock in that our Revolution poll either way in email tools.
Okay, but there was also a CBS News poll over the weekend that I think had seventy two percent suggesting that Joe Biden should step down from it and that.
Data also includes Republicans and independents. Right, our revolution is only the left wing of the Democratic Party. But just to get to your question, what strikes me is that, first of all, you know, we all have cell phones, and we all know that when something, regardless of what party you are, when something good happens in Washington, your party asked you for money, and when something bad happens, your party asks you for money.
That's right.
My sense here is that Democratic donors, whether low or high dollar, saw that debate, which, let's be frank here, was a complete disaster for Joe Biden and said he needs all the help he can get. Right. No one who was watching and paying attention and going to give money to the Democratic candidate watched that debate and said, O, g Now I'll give money to Donald Trump because at
least he can finish his sentences. So in some sense, Biden's poor debate showing just revealed his desperation, and people who are legitimately want to do anything to stop Donald Trump said, well, you know, you've got to keep throwing money at this, So that doesn't altogether surprise me.
Rick, what's your take on the cash and if you're sitting across the street at Trump HQ. How do you interpret this surge thirty eight million dollars after what was said to be a disaster of a debate.
Yeah, look, I think there's a combination of what Lincoln just said, but also, I mean these things it's hard to attract attention of voters this early in the cycle. I keep reminding everybody summer. Number One, voters are out doing things that normal people do. They don't sit around like we do and watch debates. And that was indicated by the lackluster numbers of the tenants of the debate. And then two, it's early in the cycle. I mean
most people really focus in much later. So when you have an event that's either bad or good, it does tend to attract eyeball people. Soa wake up and say, hey, what's going on in that presidential campaign? And whether it's you know, a conviction in court or a disaster's debate performance, it is part of what starts to happen when it comes time to raise money. And these campaigns are very adept at playing off of that, Oh my god, we've
just had this disastrous to make performance. Please send us money. It's not their message, but it's it pretty.
Is subliminal, fascinating.
When you look at money on hand, Rick, the June fundraising total includes money raised directly by the campaign as well as the DNC again, and we also have two joint fundraising committees. The four groups collectively have two hundred and forty dollars cash on hand. That's up from two hundred and twelve at the end of May. To be clear, we don't have Donald Trumps numbers yet, but at last check,
he was at one hundred and sixteen million dollars. Rick, if you're making campaign plans here, you just got the sentencing pushed off. It looks like for Donald Trump, you're the Supreme Court ruling yesterday means these guys are Donald Trump's not going to be in court for the summer.
Here, How does Joe Biden use that money in a way that.
Counts well, He's already pretty well invested in media, much different than Donald Trump, who hasn't been spending much on broadcast at all, and so I think he's really bound to have to keep that up because even though he's spending a lot, he's not seeing much improvement in these state numbers where these polls are where these ads are
being played. So I think he's either got to find a new poll find a new ad maker, or get a lot tougher because his real objective right now is to put some hurt on Donald Trump, take the attention away from himself. He's got to use earned media to try and get back to status quo ante before that debate. But the paid media has got to go to take
down Donald Trump. And frankly, if he's got a quarter of a billion dollars in the bank, he better start using it in some new states too, because we see polling in places like New Hampshire and Virginia and Minnesota that looks like it's flipping away from Donald from Joe Biden, and he probably ought to be adding to his media buy to include those states.
What's your thought on that link And if you're sitting on a pile of cash like this, two hundred and forty million dollars in your Joe Biden, are you reformulating the message now to get these ads out to reflect what happened yesterday in the Supreme Court that democracy is on the line, that Donald Trump will change the country for the worse if he gets elected, or do you stay disciplined and keep beating the drum on the economy, on inflation, on abortion.
Well, obviously the Biden campaign has I would hope access to a really deep and good polling here. My sense for some time now is that the crisis of democracy, which I believe is absolutely profound. I mean, I think the court ruling yesterday really shows just that we are really on the precipice of something very terrible here. But in my view, in my sense, that's a donor class
concern within the Democratic Party coalition. It is something that people who have money and give money and our Democrats care about, But it's not something that those people that you need to mobilize to get to the polls as well as people you need to bring back to the party, as well as some of the loosive swing voters. They don't care about that. And I think Rick gets to
something very important here. The main issues, the main issue that is going this issue, this vote elections, to some extent, a battle between Joe Biden screaming democracies at stake here and Donald Trump screaming everything costs more, and that election everything costs more is likely to win. So for Biden, I think his only path to victory here is exactly
what Rick says. If most of the punitory, the thing you're supposed to say on shows like this is that Biden needs to talk about the issues and what he's done with the infrastructure, and then played alt the fact. What if he doesn't metaphorically speaking Donald Trump's head off, he loses. That's the mistake Hillary Clinton made in twenty sixteen. She and the people around her thought that everyone in America knew as much about Trump and hated him as much as she and the people around her did, and
they didn't. Biden has to remind people of how bad the Trump presidency was. Of what Donald Trump has said, you know the things that people like us who pay attention see that he truths on truth social I think that's the verb form I don't know exactly that he says in his rallies, even in the last twenty four hours,
and show that to the American people. If this becomes a referendum on Joe Biden's presidency, I think Biden probably loses, especially after what we've seen in recently last week the debate, where he really doesn't seem up to this. If this is a referendum on Donald Trump, his mental stability, his policies, his avarice. The Democrats have a chance. So I think you're down a little bit. You got to take Trump down and if they don't do that, they may lose this thing.
Wow, this is a fascinating conversation. This is why the campaigns love to listen and watch. So Rick, you agree, I'm guessing Lincoln says this. This ruling yesterday, the bag of worms, as Tim O'Brien called it, is a donor class concern.
Is that the takeaway?
Yeah, you never listen to donors when you're running a campaign. It's a disaster if you do. And so no offense to the donors. But what we need is your money, not your advice. And so yeah, I mean I think it's pretty plain what's happening here. Number one, the best strategy for the Democrats is to dump Biden and get a new candidate too. If you got to eat Biden,
then you better start tearing down Trump. Because the only way Biden wins this is if his fave on Paves are hired donald Trump's, and that's not the case right now. It may surprise and shock people that Donald Trump is more popular in America than Joe Biden is, and there's only one way to fix that. Going to get more popular, and he's not going to get it younger. So they
got to go after Trump. And the spectacular failure of this campaign is the fact that they hadn't done it yet, that they're still messing around with this idea that they've got something to sell with the American people. The vote'es in on that.
Do you still make good on a second debate with all that said, Lincoln, or do you keep him home in September.
I don't know that that decision will even come to Biden because I think Trump doesn't do the second debate. Why take the risk? Right, let's say early September. Mid September rolls around, Trump is leading by five or six points. And if you watch that debate, what gotten a lot of coverage here, of course, is just how out of it Joe Biden looked. But one thing that struck me, perhaps even more than that, was how much more kojent Donald Trump was compared to what we've seen from him
on the stump. And I think that took a lot out of him. And if you're a Trump advisor, two leagues, stent Trump listens to anybody, you don't want to roll the dice again. That So, if I'm Biden, if as Rick points out, Biden is still the nominee, I want that debate because at that point I'm losing by six
points and I have nothing to lose. If I'm Trump, I don't now if we have a different nominee, then of course you want that debate because any of the Democratic names that we're hearing would all destroy Donald Trump in a debate. So I would be surprised, regardless of who the Democratic nominee is, whether we have a second debate,
because I don't think Trump wants one. Now, Trump marquismo and bluster may get in the way here and he may insist on one, and that could be a big brank break for the Democrats, regardless of who the nominee is.
Fascinating, Rick, we only have a minute here.
You've long said you never let your candidate on a stage with Donald Trump. Do you think Trump shows up on stage for a second debate himself.
Well, you know his instinct is Lincoln says, is you know, nobody can beat me, and I'm really good at this, So you know, I'm sure Chris Losivita and the rest of the team would lay themselves across the railroad tracks to stop that train from going. But the bottom line is it may not even matter then. If the trajectory of this campaign's going, you know, they'll be clocking in at over three hundred and fifty electoral votes by then.
And so even a disastrous debate performance in September by Donald Trump, as long as he's opposing you know, the Biden candidacy probably is meaningless. So let's have a party. I mean, what's one more presidential debate? It can't get any worse for the.
Last one, Right, Let's have a party, says Rick Davis.
I love it.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Can just live weekdays at noon Eastern on Apple car Play and enroyd Otto with the Bloomberg Business App. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Here in Washington, myself and Joe Matthew have had our eyes on what was coming up in New York next week to be on July eleventh, the sentencing a former President Donald Trump, who of course has been convicted of thirty four fellon accounts of falsifying business records. Then the Supreme Court threw a bit of a wrench in that plan yesterday, ruling in part that Donald Trump has at least presumptive immunity from official acts taken while in office.
And now Trump and his defense team contend that that means the New York case should get thrown out.
Yeah, so cancel your plans for the eleventh. We will not be talking about a sentencing, will be packing our bags for the Republican National Convention. Yes, pretty remarkable as we bring in Elizabeth Widra this day after the Supreme Court ruled, and we're already feeling the ripple effects. As Kelly just said, legally and certainly politically, Elizabeth is Constitutional Accountability Center president and Supreme Court litigator, has been there
before and joins us once again. Now, Elizabeth, it's great to have you back here. A lot of folks are using their imaginations on what this means for the presidency more immediately, and I'd love for you to weigh in on that. As we talked this out here on Bloomberg TV and Radio. More immediately. We're seeing the impact of this ruling even on a state level case like this in New York. Do you think Donald Trump will be sentenced in New York before the election?
You know, this case honestly has in part been extraordinary for many reasons, but the delay that it has caused in the criminal cases against Donald Trump continues to have its effect. So with respect to his January sixth trial that this appeal came out of, that case obviously has been delayed for months and months and is unlikely to
go forward before the presidential election. And then as we're seeing in the sentencing in the New York state case, we're going to see a delay there as well, even after a jury of former President Trump's peers found him
guilty on thirty four felony counts. And that's because the Supreme Court's immunity ruling yesterday from this conservative supermajority didn't just grant really breathtaking, me sweeping absolute immunity for core official actions and then presumed immunity for official actions sort of within the outer perimeter of what could count as
an official action. They also said that if you are being prosecuted for private conduct for which you don't have immunity if there's evidence that's relevant to that private conduct. So this New York State fraud case is private conduct. If there's evidence that comes out of an official context, so like communicating with your aids, et cetera, that can't even be presented in the aid of those charges that can be brought even under this immunity ruling. So that
prevents certain evidence from being presented. And that's what Trump's motion in the New York courts will focus on. That without the evidence that relates to his official conduct, his conversations with aids, his communications with the public while he was in office, without that evidence, you can't support the criminal charges based on his private conduct. So the conservative Supreme Court majorities ruling on the immunity case is so
sweeping we're already seeing its effects. And as the dissentse noted, the potential dangers for our democracy are real and are frankly terrifying.
Well, and that's something we were speaking with Elizabeth Democratic Congressman Seth Moulton about earlier this hour. He described how his ancestors came to the colonies, originally to escape a tyrannical king. The British monarchy in that in some ways he saw the Supreme Court as taking a step back toward that direction. On this week in which we're celebrating the declaration of the independence from Great Britain. To what extent is that actually true and not hyperbole? Elizabeth? Has
this effectively made the president more like a king? Or is the Court reinforcing what was already constitutionally understood to be true?
So unfortunately, I don't think it's hyperbole.
You know.
We one of the kind of principles of the founding of our nation was that no one would be a king in this country. Even the most powerful executive elected officer, the President of the United States, would in many ways be as an equal with the people who elected them. And the idea that no one is above the law is so central to that idea of equal justice and equal citizenship and democracy that this ruling really works a shift in the very understanding of the office of the
presidency under the American Constitution. So before there were certainly some understandings of ways in which the president would not be the same as you know, you and me. Before the courts, there's generally an understanding that you couldn't criminally indict a sitting president, although you could they left the office.
You know, there were all these different ways in which the president's ability to act was protected, but never was there ever contemplated this absolute immunity in these core functions and the outer perimeter of official conduct. In fact, it was very clear at the time of the drafting of the Constitution that the framers of our Constitution were well aware of how to write in immunities when they wanted it.
They knew that some colonial era governors had some criminal immunity, and they specifically chose not to include that because they wanted the president to be like their fellow citizens, subject to American criminal laws if they violate the law, because they are a person just like the rest of us.
We don't have hereditary lines, we don't have you know, divine right of kings, and this ruling really upends that understanding, and it is very dangerous because, as you know, the saying goes, absolute power corrupts, and it's perhaps even more important for the president to be subject to criminal liability when they act with their utmost power, because that's when they can really abuse that power if they so choose and So what the court has done is really given
a dangerous blank check to future presidents. Well, and I guess the current president as well to presidents going forward from yesterday to really act with impunity. And you know that some of the not hyperbolic, unfortunately examples from the descents were okay. So it's a core executive function to be able to remove your the president. The president to be able to remove his attorney general. What if he decides to remove him by poisoning him to death, then
he can't be criminally prosecuted for that. That is just I'm crazy, not the technical legal term, but legally insupportable.
Well, it sounds like you're letting your imagination go there too. Elizabeth tim O'Brien ready for Bloomberg opinion that this ruling invites presidents to commit crimes. And with that in mind, what does the court think about this idea of sentencing a president even though it's a state court. If Donald Trump is sentenced and wins election, is he still going to be meeting with a probation officer while is at the White House or wearing an ankle bracelet.
Well, you know, the New York case is interesting because it is a state proceeding, and in our federalist system, we have different systems of justice for the federal criminal docket and the state dockets. So, you know, the January sixth case, it's very important that it tried to occur before the election because again it's a case brought by the DOJ, and so if Trump were elected, he could simply order his DOJ to drop the case against him.
The New York case is different because technically the president does not have authority over the New York state justice system. But you know, I think at the very least, the Conservative Supreme Court's immunity decision is going to delay and delay and delay that case to the point that he might not be sentenced before the presidential election. And then of course you have all these additional layers of how do you if Trump were to win the election, how
do you deal with with potential sense thing? We just have never been there before. It's unprecedented, like so many things we're talking about today.
Well, we focused so much of the conversation over the course of the last twenty four hours and change Elizabeth on what Donald Trump could do if he does indeed win in November. But we have a president in the meantime, and President Biden did weigh in on this decision from the Supreme Court yesterday. Just take a listen to what he said, and then I have a question for you.
I know, I will respect the limits of the presidential powers I have for three and a half years, but any president, including Donald Trump, will now be free to ignore the law. I concur with Justine Sodemeyer's descent today. She hears what she said. She said, in every use of a visual power, the president is now a king above the law. With fear for our democracy. I dissent, end of quote, sociald the American people dissent.
I dissent, Elizabeth. He began that sentence with I know, I will respect the limits of the presidential powers I have for three and a half years. But given what the court ruled yesterday, could Joe Biden theoretically act against Donald Trump as a political opponent without fear of prosecution if he was doing so in an official capacity? I mean, what power has this given him while he is still president at least for the next six months.
Yes, you know, I think if we're talking purely legally, based on the legal standard that was articulated by the majority of the Supreme Court in their decision. Yes, I do think he could take all sorts of actions against Donald Trump as a political rival. You know, one of the hypotheticals in the court was, could a president using his military or.
Official function or.
Team to assassinate a political rival? And I think they would be immune criminal prosecution. While does it seems for articulate those words, I think they would be immune from priminal prosecution based on the Conservative Supreme Court's ruling yesterday. Now, of course, President Biden says, I will respect the limits that we have understood to be on the president's power. But the whole point of drafting the Constitution of the way it was was an understanding that we were never
going to have a government of angels. We were going to have a government of human beings who are flawed, and we didn't want to depend on people being good, honest people and not being willing to act in their
own selfish best and and perhaps for evil purposes. And so the fact that the Supreme Court is hoping that I guess the American people will not elect someone who would act in that way to the presidency going forward, or that a person would themselves decide to hold back and not use the terrible authority that they've now been given by this Supreme Court ruling. That's just not why the Constitution was supposed to work. So, you know, this ruling is really very astorical, you know from the court
that cims to be bound constitutions text and history. The founders of the Constitution would be agast at this ruling, and it really has no basis other than in the Conservative supermajority's views about what a president needs in order to take, as they said, bold action.
But I would be far more.
Concerned about the structure of American democracy and the need to make sure that no.
One is above the law.
That Elizabeth in the ruling that we saw from the majority yesterday on the.
Court, Well, I'm glad we could spend some time talking about it. Elizabeth Wider has been great with us as long as this case has been rolling in its way. To have you back, President, Constitutional Accountability Center, Elizabeth Wider, thank you for the time here on Bloomberg TV and radio.
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, DC, at noontime Eastern at Bloomberg dot com