Now from our nation's capital. This is Floomberg sound On. The Justice Department has filed a motion in the Southern District of Florida to n SEO search warrant in light of the former president's public confirmation of the search, the surrounding circumstances, and the substantial public interest in this matter. Floomberg Sound On, Politics, Policy and Perspective from DC's top Names. We didn't go there to talk about China. We went there to praise Taiwan. When we take the House in two,
we investigate all of this. Bloomberg Sound On with Joe Matthew on Bloomberg Radio. What is in the search warrant? That is what all of Washington wants to know more, I would say all the nation wants to know, and we might know soon. The Justice Department has moved to unsealed parts of the search warrant for more lago and
what was taken. Attorney General Merritt Garland didn't give a lot of details today about what could be in the warrant, what they were looking for, but he said that it was a decision that the Department did not take lightly. I'm Emily Wilkins and again today for Joe Matthew, we have a jammed packed news show for you today. Well, it's really not often that the Attorney General holds a press conference, and when Merrick Arland spoke today, all of
Washington was listening. But in case you weren't, here's what Attorney General Merrick Garland said. I personally approved the decision to seek a search warrant in this matter. Second, the Department does not take such a decision lightly where possible in a standard practice to seek less intrusive means as an alternative to a search, and to narrowly scope any
search that is undertaken. Garland further addressed the criticisms of the department has been under taking this unprecedented step of searching, of executing a search warrant on a former president. Let me address recent unfounded attacks on the professionalism of the FBI and Justice Department agents and process secutors. I will not stand by silently when their integrity is unfairly attacked. The men and women of the FBI and the Justice
Department are dedicated, patriotic public servants. This is a developing story. There's still many unanswered questions, but here to address at least some of those questions. We welcome Jessica Roth, professor of law at the Cardoso School of Law and a former federal prosecutor in the United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York. Jessica, thank you so much for joining us today. I want to jump in just recapping what Attorney General Garland said. He did not
speak for long, he did not take questions. What was your takeaway of what he was trying to do today with this pressor. Yeah. I thought it was really important actually that he speake today, and I thought his remarks were entirely appropriate under the circumstances, including their brevity and the fact that they were prepared and that he did
not take questions. UM. Usually the Department of Justice doesn't comment on ongoing investigating age an application for a search warrant would not be unsealed, but in these unique circumstances, I think it's appropriate that the Department moved to unseal the application UM, and that he spoke to the public
to state that he was doing so. UH. The former president has confirmed publicly that a search was executed on his property UM, thus essentially eliminating one of the primary reasons why search warrants remain under seal at this juncture, which is to protect the privacy of those UM who
were searched UM. And then secondarily, there's just an enormous public interest in these events UM, in part because of the former president's statements UM announcing it and subsequent statement UM, and by the fact that he's the former president of
the United States. And so I think given those circumstances, it's appropriate to speak the unsealing so that the facts about the investigation UM, at least that can be released without violating or or compromising law enforcement interest in an ongoing investigation, so that that can be out in the public domain to try to at least meet some of the misinformation and misunderstanding that may be out there at
this point. Jessica, you're really making the case here that the reason that Attorney General Garland did what he did today was because this was in the interest of the public and in the interest of transparency. I'm wondering if you also feel like the political pressure he was underhead anything to do with Certainly you saw many lawmakers, many Republicans, really respond to the news of the search warrant by lobbying a lot of accusations against the FBI and the
Justice Department. I wouldn't characterize his remarks as responding to political pressure so much as responding to the information that was out in the public domain that was casting um aspersions on the integrity um of members of the FBI and the Department of Justice and and and Attorney General Garland spoke directly to that and defending at the professionalism
and integrity of those individuals, UM. But I think he came to the conclusion that it was untenable not to say something um in the face of such a public uproar, and when it was permissible under the circumstances that I described a moment ago, given the fact that the search was already public um, and that this was involving a former politician UM, and that there was such significant public interest in the matter, that in those circumstances it was
really incumbent upon him to have a press conference and make the brief statement that he did. What could we find out from the search warrant if it does get unsealed, Well, what we'll find out is first the nature of the investigation. I mean, we already know to some extent something about the nature that we know more today actually after the press conference and the UH the filing of the application
to unseal the search warrant than we did before. There had previously been reporting that this was at least in part, an national security investigation, based on the reporting about meetings between members of the Department of Justice is National Security Division and President former President Trump staff speaking materials that were at Mara Largo UH, following up on conversation UH in communications between the National Archives and former President Trump's
team about missing documents, and reporting that the National Archives had found class inline classify materials in documents that it had already recovered from Mara Lago. UM. So the fact that personnel high ranking personnel from the National Security Division were present um UH were signed off on the application to unseal suggests that this was in fact an investigation
within their per view. So I would say we learned that UM, but we will learn more when we see the search warrant application, because that will contain an affid david UM that sets forth the probable cause to believe that specific crimes had been at it and that evidence
of them would be found at Mara Lago. So it will also on the warrant itself give us likely the statutory provisions that are the subject of the investigation, and then essentially the text of the alpha David will tell us specific facts to the extent that they can be disclosed without having to be redacted to protect ongoing investigations and national security interests through what it is that this
investigation is about. Interesting, So it does sound like we could find out a good deal about what the Justice Department UH for their larger investigation that led to the search warrant. Now, the court has given Trump and his lawyers until August to respond to the DJ's request to make the documents public. Is there any chance that Trump
agrees to unseal the warrant? Well, if he were to be consistent with his public statements in the few days since the search was executed, then he ought to UH consent to their disclosure and and not oppose the motion
to unsteal. However, um, it may be that he and his team determined it's actually in their interest to leave it unclear in the public domain exactly what the crimes are that were the subject of the investigation, um, and even more importantly, what the specific facts are and the information in the possession of the FBI that permitted it do get the search warrant right, which requires a showing of probable cause to adjudge satisfaction that crimes have been
committed and that evidence of them will be found in the premises to be searched. So even though former President Trump has staying has been saying um that, um, it should all be released, um, he actually has had that search warrant and the return um the of the item um in his possession. He could have released it up
until this point. But if he may actually strategically benefit from the lack of specificity in the public domain about what the crimes were that were under investigation and even more importantly, what information already is in the possession of the FBI to suggest that those crimes had been committed and evidence of them would be on his premises. That's a really good point there, that you know, Trump can
release his paper at any time. We actually there is just a tweet from Congressman Jerry Noddler, chairman of the House Judiciary Committee, pointing that out that Trump could have released this information he's refused, and now that the Justice Department is now trying to to get this out into the daylight and into the public eye. Is there any way that UM, you know that that Santa seems now like if Trump doesn't go ahead and agree for it to be unsealed, what is that going to mean for
the investigation? I don't think it's going to mean anything for the investigation, which will unfold as it otherwise would have.
In any event, the agents and the prosecutors working with them are going to be going through the documents that were seized, assessing their evidentiary value, putting them together with the other evidence they already have UM, and deciding whether or not to pursue criminal charges or if if one of the primary interests is just simply making sure that they've collected UH information is important to national security, making sure that they have all of it, and then figuring
out if there's any measures that need to be taken to address UH any dangers or compromising of methods and sources and assets, etcetera. So they're all going to be doing the work I think that they would have been
doing anyway, but for today's UM events. UM. The court though, would have to decide whether or not to actually grant the motion to unseal in the face of opposition from former President Trump if in fact that's the position he takes, and that would be illegal analysis UM looking into factors including what are the remaining privacy interests of the former president or maybe any other people who might be the
subjects of the surach or a possible investigation. What remaining interests do they have that should be considered UM in in counterbalancing the public interest in s being the contents of the search warrant application. You know, obviously former President Trump he had the search warrant. UH. He's now having his tax returns released to a House committee. He was in front of the New York Attorney General the other day where he took the fifth in an investigation about
his real estate and his taxes. It just seems like Trump is having this pile up of action in legal cases against him. Is there any sort of way that he is able to to get out from this and to run for president again? That I can't speak to. I think that's really a political calculus more than a
legal one. UM. Although there are some possible charges UM that people have discussed is potentially coming out of UH, the investigation related to the search warrant that might complicate the ability of an individual charged or convicted of those crimes to rent for up. That's a whole constitutional debate also about that I could actually be constitutionally applied to somebody running for president, but certainly has a trope of legal issues. He's going to trope of legal issues. Jessica,
We're gonna have to leave it there. Jessica Roth, Professor of law at the Cordoso School of Law, Thank you so much for joining us. Coming up, we assemble the panel. This is Bloomberg. You're listening to Bloomberg Sound On on Bloomberg Radio. This is Emily Wilkins in Today again for Joe Matthew. Big news of the day, Justice Department is taking steps to unsealed parts of the search warrant on
former President Trump's home in mar Lago. The ball is now in Trump's court as to whether he gives permission for that warrant to be unsealed. He has until August to do that. And for the most in depth political analysis on this event, we go to the all star team of Genie Chienzano and Rick Davis. Guys, Huge, huge newsday. We just heard from Jessica Roth that if Trump wanted to have the search warrant out there, he could have
already released it. I mean, this is the guy who told everyone uh in a press release that he that the search warrant had happened to begin with, Jennie, Why do you think Trump hasn't released the search warrant himself already? Well, he's been wanting to control this narrative, and he did right up until this surprise news conference. And of course, and now you know, I think everybody has been saying,
and I agree with this assessment. You have Merrick Garland calling his bluff, saying, you've been controlling the narrative around this search, but now we're going to unseal the records that, as you just discussed, he could have released. And now he has put the lawyers for Trump in a really uncomfortable position. They either agree with the release he releases
them himself, or they fight it. And you can you imagine what kind of argument they would make after all this rhetoric, to say, don't unseal these records for the public. So the Justice Department really really calling his bluff. And you know, as you read through the document they filed for the stealing, they make it clear we didn't discuss this publicly, the subject did, and now we want these released because it's in the public interest. Got some political
jiu jitsu going on here. Uh. You know, Garland, he kept some things. He kept the the pressor short, but he also made sure in it to address the criticism that the FBI has received. You've seen lawmakers coming out in recent days calling for an investigation into the FBI, to the fund the FBI, questioning the partisanship of all of this. Let's listen to what Garland had to say in response to all that. Let me address recent unfounded attacks on the professionalism of the FBI and Justice Department
agents and prosecutors. I will not stand by silently when their integrity is unfairly attacked. The men and women of the FBI and the Justice Department are dedicated, patriotic public servants. Rick. Is this presser and and this particular part of the pressor enough to kind of uh and some of the criticism about the FBI kind of set the record straight
and move the needle at all with Republicans. Yeah, I think I think it It did quite a bit of good in that regard because it was the first time that we've seen Garland actually get up and defending agency and and and I do agree with Jennie. He gave a great Texas two step, putting Trump on the defensive by saying, well, we've made a motion to put this thing out in the public domain, and all he's got to do is agree to it, and the judge has
to agree to it also. But the other thing that was going around on Capitol Hill today was a lot of calls by consultants talking to their their members saying, hey, um, what if it is bad? What if this national security investigation is ugly? And you guys are out there defending Trump on this um sooner or later, the truth is going to come out on what it is this investigation was looking into one way or another, and you don't
want to be on the wrong side of that. And so I think there is going to be a backlash where people are gonna say, you know, we gotta start thinking about some of the rhetoric we're putting out there, because dog piling on the FBI, dog piling on d o J at a time when it actually maybe something that that that is pretty significant, could backfire on all
of us. So I think some of the more thoughtful members are gonna take a step back and start looking at this and saying it's going to be a long term discussion, and we we ought to wait and see what comes out. And you know, Rick, I absolutely hear you on sort of the thought that the rhetoric around the FBI's search of maral Lago might wind up being a bit toned down based on what we saw today.
But I'm also just wondering if this is going to represent a breaking part with Trump and with many lawmakers in Congress. I mean, to defend someone who is constantly being investigated, having their home searched by the FBI. Are we at a point where enough is enough? Uh? You know, every time we think that, Emily, we're wrong. Uh. This
is a really cow towing party to Donald Trump. He does sometimes the most outrageous things that you would think would make him, uh, you know, kryptonite to the party, and yet UM party leaders UM tend to gravitate back to him simply because he holds a lot of power within the party rank and file that they need in
order to execute their jobs. So it's it's it's an ugly situation where I'm you know, I've always been a bit of a optimist for the Republican Party, but I must say this is a great example where Trump could take down the whole house if uh, if, if our leaders continue to glom on and just think about the the optics where we're attacking the FBI after having just attacked the left for defunding the police. I mean, you know, it was really outrageous to a conservative, uh commentators sounding
like the squad today. So so, Rick, this is interesting. Then you you don't think that you know, Trump's chances of being president, nothing's going to be hampered by all of this. He still has the political power that he always does. You know, Look, I think you chip away. I mean, as you pointed out in an earlier conversation with Jessica, he's got a lot of legal problems. This
is not this is one of them. And and so I do believe at some point you take on so much negativity, so much weight, that even if you could get your party's nomination, you can't remember he had his party's nomination in and didn't win. So he's got to actually do better than he did last time around. And right now, I don't see that as being a possibility. Yeah, very interesting and unprecedented time in politics. I'm sure we'll hear more of this story up next, we'll be speaking
with Congresswoman Susan del Bennet. This is Bloomberg broadcasting line from our new Sins Capital Bloomberg to New York Bloomberg eleven Frio to Boston, Bloomberg one of six, one does San Francisco, Bloomberg nine sixty to the Country Serious x M General one nine and around the globe the Bloomberg Business app and Bloomberg Radio dot Com. This is Bloomberg
Sound On with Joe Matthew. It began as a six trillion package of policies championed by Democrats, and it is ending as a four dred thirty seven billion dollar package with just healthcare, taxes and climate. House Democrats vote tomorrow on that reconciliation legislation, that inflation reduction acts, that successor to build back better. It's expected to pass, but will it change Democrats fate in November. Will be speaking with one important member who's going to be voting on it tomorrow.
In just a minute. Will We are joined now by Congresswoman Susan del bene She's a Democrat from Washington, but she is also the chair of the New Democratic Coalition. If you're not a policy wonk, you might not have heard of this caucus, but it is a powerful block of almost a hundred lawmakers within the House Democratic Caucus. This means that Chairwoman Del Benny has really got her pulse on what members are thinking, what is happening in the House. Congressman, thank you so much for joining us
on this heavy newsday. I know we got to get to the big vote that's coming tomorrow, but before we get there, I need to get your reaction to the news that the Attorney General is asking to unseal the search warrant from our lago. Does the public need to see this warrant? And is it going to be an issue if Trump doesn't consent to it being unsealed. Um, you know, I don't have any more information. I think the the Attorney General made it clear that he thought
this could be unsealed and made that request. So I think now we wait to see, UM what will happen there and if that information will be out clearly uh, President Trump also has uh that and could release that information. So UM, we'll see if that information comes out soon, just so people are aware of what's happening. I mean, do you think it's important for people to know what
the FBI's reason for having that search for it was? Well, I think UM the Attorney General Garland made it clear UM that this was something he signed off on, and UM and also talked about the important work that the FBI and Department of Justice are doing. So they are, they're continuing to move forward, and clearly if the if the information is unsealed, that will provide greater clarity in
terms of the type of information they're looking for. So UM, I don't know more though than anyone else does at this point, but well, Cogress and I definitely want to take some time and talk about the vote tomorrow on the Inflation Reduction Act, that big package of spending bills. There's a lot that is in here. Talk to me a little bit about how you'll be speaking to your voters back home in Washington State about what's in this bill, how are you going to sell it? Well, this is
really an incredibly important piece of legislation. UM. From the start of budget reconciliation negotiations last year, UM our coalition, the New Dems push for a final bill that would focus on doing a few things well, UM, making sure that we look at lowering energy and healthcare costs and
tackling climate change, and the Inflation Reduction Act does that. UM. As a coalition, we've endorsed the legislation UM and have strong support and I think folks at home know how important it is that we continue the Affordable Care Act premium subsidies that have helped keep healthcare prices low, UM, enabling Medicare to negotiate lower prescription drug prices, this has been a top priority for seniors for years. And boosting
clean energy production. UM. These are all things the Inflation Reducted and Actual will do that are really going to help our economy, help families save money, UM, ensure cleaner air and water for future generations. Huge priorities and UM and again another historic piece of legislation that we're passing this Congress carcusson. Obviously, there's a lot in here, but there are also are many things that aren't getting done. I know that you yourself pushed for the child tax
credit to be included. That's not here. I mean, this was talked about so much for months and months and months. Is it going to hurt Democrats to have to go back to their constituents and said, hey, we said that we were going to try and get you this, but it didn't happen. Sorry. Well, Um, first, I think we've done an incredible amount um with infrastructure legislation, that Chips and Science Act that just passed, obviously lead this bill,
the Inflation Reduction Act. Um. These have been historic pieces of legislation and incredible accomplishment, especially in a divided Congress and with small majorities. The President and Congress have accomplished a lot um. I'm going to continue to pass, to work hard to pass um legislation like the expanded child tax credit. This is still an important priority of mind, an important priority for new Dems, UM and members of
Congress on both sides of the aisle. So we may not have everything in this particular bill, but we have huge winds and wins for our communities, and we'll keep working on the next piece of legislation. To be clear, no one really thought that, um. You know, most folks weren't assuming we'd get a reconciliation bill done, and and we're getting that done. So we'll keep working on other issues. Going forward. UM, this isn't the last bill we're gonna do.
Speaking of other issues going forward, there was initially some discussion about whether a package of public safety bills was going to be voted on by the House. This include several bills that would help send funding to police departments in sort of smaller cities of rural areas. And I know that it was something that a lot of Democrats wanted to move so they could go home and tell their constituents, Hey, I am supporting the police. Look at
this thing I just did. Does this make it a little bit harder for Democrats to not have a vote on that package of bills tomorrow. UM, we're continuing to work on that legislation. On last month, leaders of the new Democrat Coalition, UM, we endorsed the slate of seven bills that would help prevent crime and protect our communities and invest key resources and reforms UM in support and
and helping our communities and law enforcement. UM. So we're going to continue to work on These bills are really in line with President Biden's Safer America Plan which he released at the end of last month. So there's ongoing work there. UM. And you know, normally we wouldn't be in session right now, so this is an opportunity. You know, we'll have an opportunity to um move legislation in September. Well,
how important are these bills to actually get done? I mean, how much of an issue do you think crime is going to be when it comes to the November election. Well, um, you know, we have continued to make investments in our communities, so this would be additional work on top of that. You know, House Democrats have already acted on in the American Rescue Plan. We had more than ten billion dollars to help local communities higher police and keep him on the job. Um. We had we we secured more than
a hundred million and community project funding for public safety agencies. Um. We passed the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act to take action to prevent gun violence. So we've done a lot and there's more that we can continue to do. And those talks are taken place so we can move forward on the other piece of legislations that have been proposed. Definitely
be keeping an eye on those come September. Carson del Bennet also wanted to ask uh you a little bit about the trip that you took recently with how Speaker Nancy Pelosi. You were a part of a small group that accompanied her on her trip to Asia, including that really historical stop in Taiwan. Can you just sort of discuss a little bit what that was like to land there with the Speaker and to be speaking with the officials, as there were lots of concerns about how China would
respond well. This trip really underscored UM America's commitment to building stronger economic security and democratic ties with the Indo Pacific region. UM. We had planned to do this trip earlier, and the Speaker had gotten covid um in April, so we UM postponed it and we're able to do the trip now. The Taiwan part of the trip really showed that the U s stands with the people of Taiwan. I was there as the vice chair of the Ways and Means Committee. We have jurisdiction over trade policy in
the House and UM. All these countries are important economic partners to our communities and to the United States, and so UM it was an important trip. When we landed, there were thousands of people on the tree in the streets greeting us, even though it was about midnight. UM. People were very excited that we made the trip and
UM that we came to meet. UM. It was an important sign of support for the people of Taiwan certainly, and I know that Speaker Pelosi has talked about why this was needed right now at the same point, I know you know, this was a trip that was coming at a very sensitive time in the relationship between the US and China. And today, Thalmerce Secretary Gina Romundo, she came on Bloomberg TV and told Dave with Weston that Pelosi's trip to Taiwan, your trip as well, has made
geopolitics with China particularly complicated. A lot was a risk with this trip. What was gained well, first of all, UM, China can't tell members of Congress where we can travel. UM. They have you know, I think if their job, if their goal is to change the status quo in Taiwan, that goes directly against UM what the United States c and for. We stand with the people of Taiwan, and we stand for the status quo which allows us to UM continue to to meet and work with Taiwan and
their vibrant democracy. UM, and they are economic partners for us. We just passed the Chips and Science legislation. And clearly Taiwan UM businesses have been leaders in manufacture of semiconductors. So, UM, we're going to continue to work with Taiwan. We are not going to allow China to decide who gets to to travel there, who doesn't get to travel there. Um. They may want to change the status quo, we want to keep it the way it is and continue to
support the people of Taiwan. And UM and so I think it was an important trip and an important UM part of showing our support for the people of Taiwan. I also want to ask you a little bit about the mid terms now Washington State. Uh, they had their elections two weeks ago on August two. UM. And I know that obviously you're a Democrat. You're working to make
sure that Democrats win in November. But I wanted to ask you a little bit about some of the Republicans who have lost or are in danger of losing, because I know that you you like to work across the island a bipartisan manner. Um. You like to try and find Republicans who are willing to work with Democrats. Your fellow Washington State lawmaker Jamie Harry Butler lost her primary to uh. Well, obviously Washington's got a special system, but she didn't make the top two spots someone who was
endorsed by Trump. Did. You also saw Peter Meyer in Michigan. I'll lose his primary, and next week you have Liz Cheney and I think a pole came out today that showed her about thirty points behind. Are you concerned about the fact that some of these Republicans who have been willing to stand up to Trump, willing to vote for his impeachment, are now going to be leading Congress next year? Well, we have a strong Democrats running. I know, I'm Washington State.
We have Marie Perez Um running in the third congressional district, which is the seat that Jamie Horr Butler has held. Um. I think we have a great opportunity there. So it's important these are This election is incredibly important. It's about the long term direction of our country, supporting our democracy, supporting voting rights, supporting women's reproductive rights, making sure we
are showing how governance can work. UM, work that we've been doing right now with the legislation we've passed so UM, we're gonna keep making sure we make that case to the voters across the country. And these districts are not districts that have been represented by UM Trump Republicans UM, and I think they don't want to be represented by Republicans who are far to the right and aren't standing up for our democracy. So we will make that case.
And we have strong candidates in these races, and I think we have a great opportunity there, So you're not worried at all that some of these strong Republicans, strong Trump Republican candidates are going to win in November. I think Americans want common sense leaders who are working on
kitchen table issues. That's what New Dems are doing, That's what our candidates are fighting for, and that's the case we need to make to the American people UM so that they were getting out that vote and that will help us maintain the majority. Congressman Congressman Susan delban A, chair of the new New UM Coalition, thank you so much for taking the time and being on with us today. Really a pleasure chatting with you. Absolutely take care, Thank
you so much. Well, with that, we are going to go ahead and reassemble the panel with Jennie Sheen and Zano and Rick Davis. Uh, guys, I kind of want to jump right back on to the big vote tomorrow coming on Biden's policy package. Is it going to be a problem, Genie that Democrats touted so many things like pre kindergarten, like the child tax credit and down they're not getting it done. I don't think so. And I think you know what the congresswoman just spoke about is
really important. Democrats are showing that they can make Washington work, and this is something I think you know, you and I have talked about this, Emily. I have been a skeptic. So the idea that they are passing this bill, it's certainly not as big as the Democrats wanted initially, but you know what, when these elections are fought out in purple states, they're getting really popular policies passed, including critical
issues of climate and health. And they are also getting a lot of other bills done, the Packed Act, the Chips Act that you were just talking about. So they have made Washington work, and I think in purple districts, the fact that they are doing it and it's not as big as they initially wanted is actually a selling point. And if they talk about those kitchen table issues from climate but importantly healthcare, that's going to be a boon
for them in these mid terms. They're not going to take the House, but they're not going to do nearly as badly as some some of us may have predicted
six months ago. You know, I was talking with actually someone today about this vote, and they told me that they think it's actually going to be a little bit boring, which is kind of wild given how much hype there was around the Senate vote, given how long we've been talking about Democrats trying to get something done with reconciliation, Rick, what are you going to be watching for with this vote tomorrow? What can it actually tell us about how
Congress is currently working? You know, I don't think we're gonna see like Republicans getting in there and taking credit for having passed it, you know, so it'll be a party line vote likely, And and I think that the Democrats have a tendency to talk about the things is genius thing that aren't in the bill, and what they ought to really be doing is taking credit for doing something that's relatively important here. Uh, it's a huge package,
and and even yesterday. I mean, you know, Schumer's comments were, well, I still want to go back and get that thirty five dollar cap on insulin. I mean, like, you just passed the eight hundred billion dollar bill and you're talking about the one thing you didn't get done. So like, I think they need to focus running out of time. Elections are only a couple of months away, and they have a lot to talk about. They've had an amazing
legislative agenda and this is the capstone of it. And if they spend all their time talking about in Congress movement del Benny did a little of this, the other things they want to do. The plate is full, go out to dinner, enjoy yourself. This is something you can take home to your constituents and really get get excited about. But if they don't pay attention to their accomplishments, nobody else will either. It's so true, Rick, I mean, we don't have a lot of time left in terms of
legislative days Congress. They're not going to be in the rest of August, they're not going to be in October. They really I mean the House in particular, the one that that's really in danger of flipping They've just got September, and they still have to pass a lot of other pieces of bills during that time, including legislation to fund the government. Jennie, you noted you're you're still skeptical that that Democrats have any hope of holding the House even
if they pass this legislation. So is passing this bill going to do anything? How does it move the needle? You know, I am a skeptic that they will take the House, although I will tell you I I was just listening to somebody like James Carville, for instance, who is saying, you know, all these Democrats who are saying it's hopeless, there's still a shot. Now. I don't know if he's just saying that to spark people to the polls. But you know, I am still skeptic. But I do
think this bill is critically important. If you just look at what they're talking about, the reduction of emissions close to what the President wanted by you know, the ability to cap out of pocket prescription drugs, medicare negotiating drug prices, the corporate minimum tax. Those are big, big deals, and so I do think it moves the needle. And again I agree with Rick they've got to focus on what people care about. The President has to focus on inflation.
The gas numbers are good for him. He's got to keep focusing on it. And Democrats have to go home and sell what they've done, which is shocking too many of us. They've made Washington work and that should be their message. And they should also say, look at the extreme as the Republicans are putting that are winning these these primaries, Let's not go back to crazy town. Let's keep the normalcy that we have. That's their shot, and it's a long shot, but it's something they can run on.
I mean, Genie, how key is it for them to sure that they've got their messaging down on this? I'm thinking, particularly because a lot of these provisions are not going to go into effect for a while. It's not like, you know, we're gonna wake up the day after this
has passed and suddenly prescription drug prices are lower. How how do Democrats really make sure that everyone knows what they're doing in d C. Yeah, that that's always the difficulty, because these will wave in slowly, certainly not what eighty nine days to the mid terms. We're not going to see them wave in before then, but I think they've got to be clear on what they've done and the fact that they shocked all of us, including everybody in the press, that they were able to do this and
it was things. These are things that are incredibly popular two people across the board, not just two Democrats. So if they can stick with that message of making Washington work and living up to their promises, it's a good day for the Democrats. And then otherwise what it seemed to be a fairly bleak mid term year for them. So we've talked a little bit about the House, We've talked a little bit about the mid terms, We've talked a little bit about Trump. Let's bring them all together here.
Congresswomen Liz Cheney the most interesting House primary of this entire election cycle, maybe even like the most interesting primary. That said, it's not even going to be close. She's very far behind in the polls right now, but she is out with a new ad making her final pitch to voters, and we've got a clip of it here. America cannot remain free if we abandon the truth. The lie that the presidential election was stolen is insidious. It
prays on those who love their country. It is a door Donald Trump opened to manipulate Americans to abandon their principles. Rick Dennie, I know that that all three of us have watched a ton of political ads. This does not sound like almost any other political ad that I've heard of. It's devoid of issues, it's avoid of what she's done. It is really kind of just focused on this one point, Rick,
what is Liz trying to do here? Well, I think you've hit on the key thing, Emily, and that is that she has not been running for re election since Donald Trump endorsed Harriet Hageman. She's been running to take down Donald Trump. Her campaign is not about what she's going to accomplish for the state or the people of of Wyoming. It's about what she's trying to do to keep Donald Trump from ever becoming president of the United States again. And her closing argument hits that exactly where
she needed to be. So, you know, as we look back in time, we're not gonna see anybody doing analysis of her campaign and say, well, she missed this opportunity to talk about this issue in her home state. She's making a calculation that the only thing I want to accomplish in my career is to ensure that Donald Trump is not president, and I don't think her being a
representative changes any of that. In other words, she'll sit out her term, She'll continue to be co chair of the January six Commission, and then her new mission uh post of Congress is going to be to ensure that Donald Trump never occupies the Oval office again. Rick, do you have any sense to how that would actually look, because there are certainly plenty of people who are trying to make it their mission to ensure that that Trump never holds office again. What what does Cheney have that
would actually make that possible? Well, to some degree, Trump has created a bit of a martyrdom for Cheney. You know, he's made it his cost celebt to ensure that she doesn't get reelected, and and that has actually annured some benefit to her and that she has been elevated in that debate. So maybe she takes that debate all the way to the presidential campaign if Donald Trump runs for office,
maybe she does too. She certainly has a national following that could help sustain the funding for a campaign like that, and I think they would probably be able to sell pay per view tickets if she could ever get on a debate stage with Donald Trump. Jennie, what do you think about Liz Cheney trying to make this a bigger thing? Is this something where she's going to wind up getting support not only from Republican but from Democrats. I think
she will. I think the challenges there's not enough Democrats to pull her over to a winning side. But you know, she is playing the long game here. She is decided, and she did this a long time ago that, unlike so many Republicans in the House, her interest is not necessarily in winning, although I'm sure she would like to
retain her seat. It is in doing what she describes as right, and that is facing off with Donald Trump and saying what you tried to do vis a vis the build up to January six and after it is unconscionable, and as a Republican, she's not going to put up with it. And that's a very hard stand for her to make. We saw a loser leadership post will likely lose her house. See if you listen to the latest
Pole polls, she's twenty two points behind Um. But she's decided, She's playing the long game, and you know, I reflect back on her speech not that long ago at the Reagan Library, and it sounded to me like she was very much a candidate for the presidency or thinking about it. Can she win as another question, but I think we're hearing some of those tones and what she has to say. And you know, this ad, along with the ad by her father not that long ago, they've been you know,
critically important in terms of making that case. You know, we the Jenney primary is going to be very very interesting, but we do have another race that's a lot of people are going to be watching on and that is the one up in Alaska. Um, it's the field has now gone down to three candidates, one of which is uh, Sarah Palin uh Rick Davis. What's your takeaway from this? What does it mean that you know, Sarah Palin was able to advance, uh to sort of this final round
And what kind of momentum is she caring right now? Yeah, this is such a screwy election in in Alaska. It's the final round for the special election and then she'll be a part of a package of another forty candidates running for the end of the election term. So uh, this is the first go around. This is actually definitive. If she wins this election next week, she would she would become a congresswoman. And uh for all of you know,
two months. So uh, it's it's got some bite to it. Uh. And and look, I mean, she was first in the polling. But the question is, did everybody who ever wanted to vote for her for this race already cast their ballot? In other words, is there enough opposition to rally around the other candidates to uh, to get ahead of her? And my guess is they've consulted the field. She's in for a run. But I never count out Sarah Palin in Alaska. Do not count out Congresswoman Sarah Palin. Rick, Genie,
thank you so much for taking your time today to chat. Uh. We'll have another episode here tomorrow. In the meantime, if you want to re listen, we've got the sound on podcast. I'm Emilie Wilkins. This is Bloomberg