Sound On: DOJ Opposes Affidavit Release, Taiwan (Radio)

on Bloomberg Radio. Well, I've got a number of updates for you regarding the legal pressure rising around former President Donald Trump. Is a few stories crossing today, big news for Rudy Giuliani, Senator Lindsay Graham. But this just crossed

the Bloomberg terminal right before we started this show. The Justice Department opposes the release of the affidavit in the Trump search, in the search of the mara A Lago, a state down in Florida that has significant implications, as we see, not only media but obviously lawmakers want information on what was found, what were what they were searching for, uh and everything that happened at mara A Lago. On the show, I'm Jack Fitzpatrick standing in today for Joe Matthew.

We're gonna have Congressman Raja Christian Chrishna Morthy come on and talk to us. He's a member of the Intelligence Committee in the House. Very key person in these conversations. John Barrett, Law, professor from St. John's University, is going to help us sift through the legal implications of everything in the news today. And of course we've got Bloomberg Politics contributors Rick Davis and Genie she and Zano. Big news day, We've got a case of the Mondays if

that means a ton of news. Uh, First we have to get to this headline on the Bloomberg terminal that the just Just Department opposes the release of the affidavit in the search of Mara Lago. Let's go to our Bloomberg Politics contributors Rick Davis and Jennie she and Zano to start the show. Uh, guys, I'm curious what your initial reaction is, Rick, Do we know yet why oppose it? This was something Uh that there's a request from the

media to get more information about this. What do we know now about why the Justice Department would oppose the release of that affidavit. Well, I think the information that's incorporated in the affidavit is uh much more to um

what is uh the sources of the investigation. Uh, you could extrapolate pretty easily as to who they're talking to and what they're uh saying, and and and and as we know, for instance, you know, one of the things that have been speculated within Trump organization it self is, you know, do we have a mole? Who's the mole who's been telling them what's going on inside of mar Lago?

And so there there might be information incorporated in those documents that would lead the Trump people to to to maybe potentially identify someone who they worry is cooperating with the authorities. UM. And it also pretends to the larger investigation.

I mean right now, we don't know actually if there is a potential charge against the present maybe that the d o J was satisfied to get the documents back and underlock and key by the federal government, but it may be that this is part of a larger investigation and other issues. The affidavit may actually indicate that, which would then uh to potentially uh impact the investigation itself. So Jennie, I Walk us through here. Uh as Rick just touched on the possibility that this may speak to

the breadth of the investigation. What we had heard about the Mara Lago raid was that this was part of an attempt to find possible violations of the Espionage Act, among other allegations. Uh you had heard according to the documents that came out, some of some of those documents were marked with the highest level of secrecy, the Top

Secret Sensitive Compartmented Information classification. If they are concerned about UM showing their hand the Justice Department, what does this tell us about the breadth of the investigation that they are continuing, Jennie, You know, I don't think it's a

surprise that the Department opposes releasing this AFFID David. You know, the release of the search warrant and the receipt, those were things that Donald Trump and his lawyers had access to, and they do give us important information, as we saw

late last week. But to unread, unleashed, or release rather the AFFID David that accompanied it, these were things that Trump and his lawyers do not have access to, and they would be highly unusual for a federal judge to sign off on something like that because it would show us information that that may reveal things like sources, It may reveal the extent of an ongoing investigation, It may reveal,

you know, top secret security information. These are things, again that a judge had to sign off on, but to release them to the press and release them publicly highly unusual in a case like this. I don't you know, I would just be cautioning against reading something into the fact that the Department is opposing this. To me, it is standard practice in an investigation like this for them

to oppose the release of any of these documents. And if we go back to what Marrick Garland said late last week, he said the search warrant and the receipt, they don't usually request that those being sealed, but given it was a former president president and the amount of public interest, they asked for that to be unsealed. This is a completely different ball game. And I'm not surprised

that they have said that they won't take this step. Genie, So it sounds like you aren't necessarily thinking this is good news for former President Trump, then no, I don't think we can read into this either good or bad news for former President Trump. So much of this remains things that we are speculating about but don't actually know. To start off with, we don't know who the focus of this investigation is. We don't know, for instance, if

the Department is even going to pursue legal charges. They could very well have taken those eleven boxes and they could say we've gotten back what the what the government, what the National Archives needed. We're not going to pursue this any further. So I wouldn't you know, begin to

speculate on what this says about where he is legally. Um. You know, the one piece of news that we got out today in addition to this breaking news on this was the fact that the one of Trump's attorneys did apparently sign a declaration that nothing else was being held at Marrow Lago that the government was asking for. That presents a risk for the person who signs it, potentially, you know, maybe for Trump himself if he lied to

the attorney. But you know, again, these are things I don't think we can extrapolate much further without hearing from the Justice Department as to who is targeted and what indeed any charges might be, if any. Now, just for a little more context, I'm reading the initial uh coverage of this on the Washington Post that says media outlets have asked the judge to unseal this document, which would offer more detail about the FBI's decision to make this

search of Mara Lago. Obviously, aside from members of the media, there's a lot of interest in getting more detail on what they found and the reasoning for it. Uh, there's been a request from members of the Senate Intelligence Committee asking for the documents they found. Rick. Does this have any implications for congressional oversight or does this appear to be limited to not putting this kind of document out to the broader public. Yeah, I don't think the Hill

can stay out of a good controversy like this. I mean, in fact, you know, I would say, just from a political perspective, I thought the Democrats stepped all over the d o J today. I'm mean, you know the fact that Adam Schiff and Carol Maloney, you know, co head of the Intelligence Committee in the House. Um, you know, they sent a letter to uh, the National Intelligence Director saying that you know, they wanna they want to investigate

what kind of damage might have been done. Well, you know, if they just stayed quiet, the only story would have been out there, you know, is the one we're talking about. And you know, they they they, they seem to always

want to get into the narrative. So yes, I think you're We're gonna just see all kinds of people getting involved in this, not just media outlets asking for more information, which is their job, but to Congress wondering what kind of oversight, uh they need to be putting on these agencies whose job it is is to protect these secrets, and they didn't do a very good job of protecting them if they've been sitting down to mar A Lago

for over a year. Right. So we're gonna come back to some of these issues, especially because later on in the show, we're gonna have John Barrett, a law for law professor at St. John's University, help us walk through the occations of all of this. But I also want to touch on another major story today, uh the pushback from China. Further pushback from China, UH to another congressional delegation visiting Taiwan, China has conducted more military activity around Taiwan.

UH following another visit. This is not Speaker Pelosi's visit, but another Congressional delegation visit to Taiwan led by Senator Ed Markey UH. And now we're bringing on Congressman Raja Krishna Morthy, Democrat from Illinois to walk us through the implications. Congressman, he joined Speaker Pelosi on her last trip. Congressman, thank you so much for joining us. Hey, thanks so much

for having me. So big question on my mind as we see China's military conducting patrols around Taiwan UH in response to this latest congressional delegation visit to Taiwan UH is what is the correct response, if any, from the US in this situation. I think we should continue to approach the situation calmly. We should reiterate our support of the One China policy, comments stability across the Taiwan's straight and we want Taiwan and the People's Republic of China

to resolve their differences peacefully. We also have an obligation under the Taiwan relations back to help support the defense of Taiwan against any aggression. And so I think this delegation, like other delegations, is just a normal part of our relationship and necessary for carrying out our legal responsibility. And when you mentioned our responsibilities the US's aid to Taiwan in the context of defense, should we be looking for

further actions? Is the ratcheting up of tensions on China's part something that merits a response, whether in UH spending bills, the Defense Authorization Bill, How does that have an effect, especially in that what you mentioned about our defense support for Taiwan, Well, I think that we have to continue

to evaluate what are friends needs are in Taiwan. UH. They need to defend themselves, and so to the extent that they are reorienting their focus on a on a constant basis with regard to the threats that they face, and they need our further assistance, then we need to furnish that. All that being said, we wish for peace and stability in the region. We want Taiwan and the

People's Republic of China to resolve their differences peacefully. But if the cost of avoiding these types of provocations by the PRC is seeding control of Taiwan, are seeding control of our travel schedules in Congress, I don't think that's a price that we will pay now. I know President Biden has said the military didn't necessarily think Speaker Pelosi's visit was a good idea. Does the left hand not know what the right hand is doing here? In terms

of the US government's ability to manage this? Have lawmakers

in any way undermined the administration's position? Well, I think that UH, as you know, the executive branch and the legislative branch are separate but equal branches of government, and quite frankly, the legislative branch is called upon to authorize funding for, for instance, the defense of Taiwan, as well as other programs related to Taiwan, And so I think that having a first hand account of how the money that we've already appropriated has been spent, as well as

what the needs are of our friends going forward, is really important. And I think that, you know, congressional visits are just a normal part of UH relationships between friends. How speaking of sort of taking the temperature of of US policies, visiting to determine what policies should change or not. How how does all of this play into the considerations

of potentially lifting tariffs on China. Well, I think that's a separate issue in the sense that UM, we constantly want to resolve our differences with other countries with regard to trade, to the event that the PRC continues to use forced labor or to use um weagers whom they put into concentration camps to produce goods that are sold in the United States, or that they dump goods at below costs to destroy our industries here, um and and

they haven't ceased doing it. That's that's going to continue to be an impediment for lowering tariffs, um and. So I think that's just separate issue from Taiwan altogether. Okay, a little more directly on Taiwan. I know Taiwanese officials spoke supportively of the Chips Semiconductor bill that that has made it through both chambers. How how does that legislation factor into the congressional relationship with Taiwan? For example? Does does that interest in Taiwan in that bill make it

any more important to strengthen ties with Taiwan? Oh? Absolutely, um. That particular bill, which became a law has excited a lot of our friends and partners and allies in the region, whether it's Japan, Korea, Taiwan, uh Singapore, Malaysia, and so they're all looking to see how can they manufacture more

semi conductor chips in the United States. How can they potentially move production of some of those chips which might might happen even in the PRC, to the US, which they of you as a more stable environment for doing business and so um part of our visit centered on basically putting on our sales caps and trying to get them get our partners to invest more in the US.

I'm pleased to say that the Taiwanese are going to invest twenty billion dollars in setting up manufacturing facilities for chips in the US, and we're looking for more right now, I want to ask a little broadly, just to put all of this in context. There have been past congressional delegation visits. Their lawmakers went just last summer. I know, uh China previously did not react nearly as forcefully in the past as they did when Speaker Pelosi and you

and other lawmakers went. What is your explanation for the ratcheting up of tensions why now? I think a large part of this has to do with the internal domestic pressures that Chairman she is facing because of a botched response to COVID Nineteam. There's been a tremendous economic slowdown in China, and as a consequence, I think that they're using our visit or they used our visit as a pretext for deflecting attention from their domestic pressures and so UM.

I continue to submit that they were going to use whatever visit was happening around the time that they needed such a pretext for conducting those drills and conducting those live fire exercises. But I think, as I said before, those types of provocations are rather reckless because miscalculation can happen and um, and then things can kind of escalate beyond their control. Well, in with that in mind, are there off roads that the US can offer China to

to I guess, release some of the pressure. If if the Chinese government is doing this almost as a distraction from domestic issues, does that give the US any options? I think that we should absolutely hold out the olive branch, even at the same time that we we say that these provocations UM are reckless and we aid Taiwan in its self defense. The olive branch has to be cooperation on any number of common global challenges, whether it's climate

change or even the economic uplift of people. You know, throughout the world. We are in a fraud time. We need the best minds, the best UM technologies, UM, and we need to harness the talents of people worldwide to

tackle these challenges. And in fact, in light of the Inflation Reduction Act, which we passed and it's going to be signed into loss shortly, we in the United States have taken a major that toward investing in fighting climate change, and I think that hopefully is an ice breaker for uh, you know, restarting conversations with the PRC and others. Congressman, real quick before you go, since you're on the Intelligence Committee.

When we see in the news that some of the the documents retrieved from our lago by the FBI that were held by former President Trump were marked top secret, sensitive compartment to information, Uh, can you put that in context for us? What? What? How? How serious does that sound to you? It's very serious. The most precious, the most vital, the most exquisite intelligence in our possession is

usually marked T S, S T I UM. And I think that just so you're listeners understand, you know, we as members of the Intelligence Committee view these types of documents every day. But we do so in a bunker underneath the capital, with people watching us over our shoulders, with armed guards standing outside the room, and they take an inventory of all the documents that they showed us, so literally they check off each document that they hand

to us, and they check off each document return. These documents can be anything from blueprints of weapons systems to important intelligence we've gathered on foreign leaders, to information about threats that are gathering on the horizon for which we have to prepare. Um, so this is extremely important information, right,

Thank you. Congressman. That's Congressman Raja Krishna, or the Democrat from Illinois on some of the big news of the day on on former President Trump's legal issues as well as on the attentions with China over Taiwan, which is an issue I want to ask the panel about. Let's bring back Bloomberg Politics contributors Rick Davis and Jennie she and Zano Guys. I thought there were some interesting points

by the congressman there. Rick, do you agree or disagree with the assessment that a lot of this tension, the supposedly over visits by members of Congress to Taiwan, is actually a cover by the Chinese government to distract from

domestic struggles in China. What do you make of that? Yeah, I think we have to be cautious with Representative Christo Morth these comments there, because it's not like if COVID goes away and the economy starts to recover that somehow we're going to return to some kind of old normal. With the PRC. They have been making very very strong threats to the United States and our allies long before COVID started. It's been a new normal for them to actually be more competitive UH in in the region and

around the world against US interests. And they've formed these coalitions with Russia not to find a way to expand their economy and cure COVID, but to create UH security regimes in opposition to our interests around the world. So I think we should not underestimate the ambitions of the communist Chinese UH to keep us out of their backyard

and thwart our abilities in our own hemisphere. So I do think that's a somewhat dangerous approach to take with him, because this is not a casual thing that she is under these stresses because of domestic problems. He has those, no doubt about it, But I don't think they weigh into his considerations of hegeonomy in the region. So then, Rick, what do you make of the Congressman's mention of olive branches, especially working with them on climate policy. Is that a

legitimate option? Do we have many olive branches in the US to to reach out to China with I think this is the sophistication of state craft that the United States has been good at in the past and needs to be better at in the future, and that is to engage on things we can engage on and create UH conversations around issues. Hopefully climate would be one of them where we are not in conflict, but that not

to diminish the impact that we have. Is the greatest country for good in the world to try and put pressure on them for things like human rights and economic abuses around the world. So I do believe that it's smart to keep those UH conversations open, but we cannot look the other way when China transgresses. So, Jennie, you heard the Congressman say that China isn't going to be put in front of the in charge of the congressional

UH travel schedule. I want to ask you, though, is there any sense in which lawmakers are if not grandstanding, then in any way undermining the administration's position. Because there is a bit of a division even among Democrats on whether these uh these trips are a good idea, you know, there is and and it's such an important question because even with Nancy Loci's trip, the question was not whether she had the right to go. She had an invitation,

she had an absolute right to go. From my mind, the question was strategic what was she going to get out of that visit? And I would ask the same question about these lawmakers, and not personally, of course, I mean vis A vis the United States policy visa VI China and Taiwan. This is a very precarious point and moment in US China relations. We all know that, not to mention what is going on in Ukraine, and so you know, I do think there is a real question

to be asked about these visits. What is the benefit of them to the United States when it comes to our relationships with China? And this is a very precarious time in China, you know, looking at some of the data that Bloomberg was just releasing this morning, youth unemployment climbing to almost twenty percent. You were seeing protests around the country. She wanted to go into this meeting in this fall with you know, some kind of of calm. He's not going to get that. And let's not forget

he wants to take Taiwan. He's promised to. So it puts us in a position of having to deal with that reality, right, Rick Davis, Genie Sheenzano, thank you for responding to the breaking news today. We'll talk a little later. Coming up, We're gonna talk to John Barrett, a law professor at St. John's University, over all the legal issues

we've discussed today. I'm Jack Fitzpatrick. This is Bloomberg broadcasting live from our nation's capital, Bloomberg to New York, Bloomberg eleven, Frio to Boston, Bloomberg What All six one to 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. We've got a lot to sort through regarding the rejection or or the Justice departments seeking to reject requests to release the affidavit behind the search of Mara A. Lago. We have to learn quite a bit more about the UH, the legislation around that. The UH. The UH with Senator Paul aims to undo a number of questions now coming up for John Barrett, law professor at St. John's University. Espionage Act is the phrase I

was looking for. I have a lot of questions on that, on affidavit's on search warrants, UH and more for John Barrett, law professor at St. John's University, who I think can explain some of these key issues now. The first one, the big news UH that just came out late this afternoon, is on the Justice Department asking a judge to keep sealed the affidavit that underpinned the FBI search of Mara Lago. Professor. Thank you for joining us. I'm curious, just right off

the at how significant you think that position is. This is a major development or is this standard that the Justice Department does not want that affidavit to get out. I think it's very standard. It's the investigative detail underneath the request for the warrant, so it's basically the case of probable cause that the government made to the magistrate

Judge who then issued warrant. It's the details of what surveillance information, what informant information, what prior course and dealings led the government to believe that there were classified documents in mar Laga. And that's all highly confidential and actively part of an investigation. It also, in this case is likely to be highly classified. It's details of what classified documents are believed to be. There would be my guests and you and you just can't put that out in

the public domain. So the media asked the court to disclose it. The Justice Department, not surprisingly no, we opposed that request. So let's talk about the parts of this developing story that are less standard. Uh One, the search of maral Lago, and as we understand, this was part of an attempt to find possible violations of the Espionage Act. Another key detail that has come out is that some of the documents found were marked with the highest level

of secrecy top secret Sensitive Compartmented Information SCI clearance. Based on those two data points, how serious is that they're what they're looking for? What what can we tell based on those two points of information that we have at this point? Well, the Espionage Act contains many different provisions, so This is actually not a case about espionage. I

believe it's not a case accusing someone of being a spy. UM. It is a place a case of highly classified information that belongs to the government that was in private hands, the hands of the former president in it and especially up at the code word level top secret SCI information. These are secrets at the disclosure of which would cause

exceptionally grave damage to the country. People who have had these kinds of clearances as I have, know that this information is extremely sensitive and so it does not belong outside of authorized hands. And that's why the government UM is investigating how it comes to be in moral lago

and in the meantime recovered it. How easy would it be to violate the Espionage Act, not through malice, not through attempting to violate it and trying to sneak documents out of the White House, but through uh laziness in how you take care of documents or something along those lines. How easy would it be for a former president to accidentally violate that law. I can't speculate about a person who you know is a sleepwalker or does things with ice.

Those but generally highly classified top secret SPI documents come with cover sheets, come with page markings, come with lots of red strips and discernible labels. Um, you don't accidentally put it in your pocket or put it in a packing box. Uh. And so it is at least gross carelessness, but may be intentional. However it comes to be out

of government control. It's gravely serious. And that's why the government took this action to ask for its return and then to inspect that everything had been returned, and then got a representation, reportedly from a Trump lawyer that everything had been returned, and then I'm sure got some kind

of confidential informant report. No, actually, there's more stuff. And that led to the affid davit, which was the request to the judge, which led the judge to issue the search warrant, which indeed found top secret sue by Information in mar Lago. What would the tell us a little bit about the process of declassifying these materials, because there's been some attempt by Trump and people around him to say that he had a standing order to declassify materials

that he he took out with him. Is it possible at all? Is is it in any way feasible that some of these could have been declassified or even started the process of declassification, but still have been marked top secret Or is there really no confusion there about that.

I think that's not a credible explanation. The classification system is an exercise of presidential power by presidents from Reagan forward including Trump, and Trump did not rescind the executive order that sets up the classified information system for Executive Branch information. So without formally rescinding that executive order, he can't on a kind of verbal basis, create some standing order. Plus classified information belongs to the executive Branch, which is

headed by O. Bien. So whatever Mr Trump, while president might have wished or thought or considered doing, he lost all power to do that when he became the former president, and the classification system top secret SCI is today's executive branch system. That is the Biden administration. Right now on Congress, I know Senator Rand Paul just raised this. He wants the Espionage Act repealed. There have been criticisms of the breadth of the wording of that law and how it

pertains to documents relating to national defense. In your opinion, is that law written excessively broadly or what can you tell us about things that may be covered under that law that people might not necessarily nuclear codes. Right. Well, that category of information, national defense information, is classified by statute by the Espionage Act, and it includes the most secret military dimensions of our nuclear defense posture for instance. Um, So to sort of a O, this should all be

in the clear. We shouldn't have classification. I think is naive and not a serious position. Um. Could the statute be perhaps updated, perhaps amended. That's a different question, but it protects very vital information. All right, John Barrett, Law, professor at St. John's University, thank you so much for walking us through that. We'll have to talk about other legal issues regarding Rudy Giuliani and Lindsay Graham. Coming up next with Rick Davis and Jennie she in Zano. I'm

Jack Fitzpatrick. This is Bloomberg. You're listening to Bloomberg Sound On on Bloomberg Radio. The big breaking news late this afternoon, the Department of Justice opposes releasing the affidavit behind their search of Mara Lago, the Florida resident of former President Donald Trump. That is not the only news we've had

today though, on legal issues surrounding the former President. Aside from that and the conversation we had with John Barrett earlier at St. John's University about the Espionage Act, there is the Georgia criminal case regarding potential election fraud UH in the attempts to overturn that state's results in the presidential race. Two points for you. One, Senator Lindsey Graham was ordered today by a federal judge to comply with a subpoena and testify in that case before a grand

jury in Georgia. This would be focused on Senator Graham's call to the Secretary of State in Georgia, Brad Raffensburger, after the election. Raffensburger has said he felt Graham was urging him to find a way to throw out legitimately cast mail in ballots. Second, Rudy Giuliani, former President Donald Trump's lawyer, is a target, not just a witness, but a target in the Georgia criminal investigation UH. He was informed, his legal team was informed of that today. He is

scheduled to testify Wednesday. His lawyer has said Giuliani is going to claim attorney client privilege on anything relating to his conversations with Trump, and of course after Giuliani had a heart procedure, there was some debate as to whether he would be able to go down to Georgia to testify in that case. Here is what the judge, Fulton County Judge Robert McBurney said about Giuliani's requests to not testify, which were rejected. The medical professional said that Mr Giuliani

is not cleared for air travel. A rum gentleman drove all over the country and his big bus from stadium to stadium. So one thing we need to explore, um is whether Mr Juliani could get here without jeopardizing his recovery and his health on train, on a bus or uber or whatever it would be. Um. The focus seems to have been he's got to be on a plane in New York. Is not close to Atlanta, but it's

not traveling from Fairbanks. So yes. John Madden, the former football coach and announcer, wrote, all over the country in a bus. I feel like we had a missed opportunity for a John McCain reference. So I've got to go to Rick Davis on our bloom Bird Politics panel. Rick uh speaking of people who have traveled extensively by bus, we know now Giuliani is going to be testifying in this criminal case. How how do things look for him,

especially in light of the news today. How significant it is is it that he's informed he's not just a witness, This is not just an interview. He is a target in that case. Yeah. I mean, obviously, when you are told you're target, it means something in the investigation suggests you may have uh violated the law, committed a crime. Uh. This is this is a really significant development for for Rudy Giuliani. It means that he may have criminal exposure

in the Fulton County case. And and when you are designated as a target, you really don't have much of an option. I mean, you know, you've got your doctor saying you can't fly. And I think it was well within the rights of the Fulton County District Attorney's office to say, then hop a train, grab a bus, get an uber. You're not the first guy who has to travel aways to to testify. They're taking this very seriously. They're not likely to delay times running out for all

these cases. Uh, And so I'm not surprised that they took a hard line stance. So obviously we are interested in the legal repercussions in this criminal case. Uh, in the Espionage Act issues, which is a separate case. But also there's been all of this work in Congress in the January six UH Select Committee, Genie, when you see the at Rudy Giuliani is going to have to testify in this criminal case. Uh. And and Senator Lindsey Graham is too about his call with Brad Rathfensburger, the Secretary

of State. Does this clue lawmakers? And should should we assume that this will give the January six committee more to do as more information comes out in other cases? Yeah, as you're talking, Jack, I'm trying to figure out how much an uber from New York City to Georgia costs, because I guess the former mayor will be in one headata out there. Um. You know, look at Rudy Giuliani. He did what he said about sixty five thousand underage voters, felons,

and eight hundred dead people voted in Georgia. All of those claims have been debunked. Today we find out through his attorney that he is now a target of this investigation. And the real issue I think here putting aside Rudy Giuliani, and he is facing some serious legal jeopardy potentially in this is what is this portend for the former president?

And you have many lawyers saying there's very difficult to, you know, imagine that his attorney, Juliani is a target of the d A in this investigation and Trump is not. So I think once again we see that Donald Trump at the center of an investigation in which he is not only a player or a witness or something along those lines, but potentially a target. And the ramifications are

very serious. And of course, as you talk about January six, you know they are coming back, They're still interviewing, there will be coming back in the fall. We imagine that they become maybe coming back with their with their co chair Liz Cheney, no longer going to be sitting in the House if the polls are right, come next year, and very much focused on doing what they can in the next few months if potentially Republicans take over Congress

to get their report out. You couple that with what's going on in New York and of course the FBI, FBI rate and Mara Lago, and these are really serious legal problems for the former president. Well, Jennie, you mentioned Liz Cheney, and tomorrow is a Tuesday, so we have got to at least check in on the elections coming up.

That is the Wyoming House primary, the Republican primary. Congresswoman Liz Cheney obviously a key role on the January six Committee, one of only two Republicans on it, faces Harriet Hageman, who is Trump's chosen Republican candidate in that race. Uh. And as Jennie said, if the polls are right, Uh, she Congresswoman Cheney is uh is well behind Hagman. Rick, especially as uh someone who has worked in Republican campaign politics. I mean, does Cheney have a chance or is she?

Does she at this point know that she is about to lose her primary? Yeah? I think that there's been an expectation on uh, Liz Cheney's part that she wasn't going to run her primary to be re elect did, but she was gonna make a statement. And and when you look at the advertising that she's done, it doesn't

even mention her opponent Hagaman. It mentions Donald Trump. Uh. And when you see her speeches and her public appearances, Uh, she talks about the need to cleanse our democracy and keep Donald Trump from ever becoming president again, and doesn't talk about what those issues are that are relevant to the people of Wyoming. And so she's made a choice a long time ago not to pursue the local agenda politically, but to pursue a national one and insomuch as letting

the chips fall where they may. Uh. That's where she is going into tomorrow's election significantly and underdog. She'll probably overperform a little bit by Democrats voting in a Republican primary to support her, but outside of a negligible increase in her ballot, she's she's certainly, by all the polls I've seen, likely to lose a landslide. We also want

to touch on the Pennsylvania Senate race. We know who the candidates are there, the republic and his moment Oz doctor Oz from tv UH, and the Democrat is John Fetterman, the Lieutenant governor. I want to play you the beginning of an ad that Oz put online. I saw it on his Twitter account. Uh. This seemed to be the kind of thing you might expect from a superpack that a candidate himself wouldn't necessarily want to affiliate himself with his is quite the attack on John Fetterman, who had

a stroke earlier this year. Here's the beginning of that, uh that ad by moment Oz. Now that John Fetterman claims to be recovering, let's pull back his foodie and examine what's in his head. Looks like he has him screws, liss, what's this Feederman wants to release one third of all prisoners. That's crazy. So he goes through a number of policy disagreements following up on the implication that Fetterman has not actually recovered and in the words of that add has

some screws loose or is crazy? Genie, I'm I'm I'm wondering if that is a winning ad. What do you make of that? You know, I'm not sure that it's winning. Um. You know Fetterman, as you mentioned just back on the campaign trail, UM, he was talking in Eerie over the weekend on his return about his health scare and that is certainly a concern. I mean, he's got to be healthy for the rest of this campaign, and he's got

to show that what happened three months ago he has recovered. Um. But you look at the polls, real clear has him up nine points. And I would just note we're hearing today that the National Republican Senatorial Committee canceled ten million dollars worth of advertising this fall, including in Pennsylvania. So

that bodes very very badly for somebody like Oz. It's still going to be a tight race, but these polls and the fundraising numbers and the n RSC canceling that that can be a really bad sign from mement Oz as he seeks to take a seat that, you know, retain a Republican seat that, um, you know, they really could have retained maybe if Trump hadn't gotten in on this endorsement. Right before we close lightning round, Rick Davis, do you think we're gonna be talking about Congresswoman Sarah Palin?

Very well could wake up Wednesday morning after the special election in Alaska with Sarah Palin as a congressman and very well could have her finishing third. So um, we're gonna wait and see. Unfortunately, the way they ballot, we're gonna have to wait a while to find out could take a well with the ranked choice voting in Alaska. A lot to look forward to. Thanks again to Congressman Raja Krishnamurthy and John Barrett at St. John's University, as well as Rick Davis and Jeannie she and Zano. I'm

Jack Fitzpatrick. This is Bloomberg.