Sound On: Mark Esper on Tumultuous Trump Tenure

He essentially said that he was worried about the pro life movement. This is a tougher pick for him. Bloomberg Sound On with Joe Matthew on Bloomberg Radio. Welcome to the Fastest Hour in Politics, a special edition today for sound On, as we speak with former Secretary of Defense Mark Esper, hired and fired by Donald Trump, and soon here we'll be talking with him about his new book.

We'll talk about his experience running the Pentagon during the Ump era, his decision to protect the country from within rather than speak out, and his eventual firing via Twitter. An extended conversation coming up with a former secretary. Later, we're joined by Bloomberg's Eric Larson to bring you inside his conversation with Donald Trump about the lawyer who's bringing

a more aggressive defense for the former president. And we'll have analysis today from Bloomberg Politics contributor Jeanie Schanzano will talk as well with Bloomberg National Security correspondent Dan Flatley. It was July inside the Oval Office. The US Senate had just confirmed the new Secretary of Defense, Mark Esper vote of eight. President Trump brought the fanfare, set up a podium right next to his desk in the Oval to speak. He even had Supreme Court Justice Alito on

hand for the swearing in. The President spoke to the reporters, the family members of Mark Asper in the room. Here's what it sounded like. There's no one more qualified to lead the Department of Defense. Instant Mark Asper, a West Point graduate, great student. Actually. Secretary Asper served our military for twenty one years, including in the Gulf War. He also advanced US national security and government and in private sector, most recently as Secretary of the Army, where he played

a critical role training and equipping our armed forces. That's where I got to know Mark. And there was nobody that did a better job than Mark. And there's nobody that loves it more than mark and thank you very much. Sounds pretty good. Secretary Asper would be fired the following year. The former Army secretary says he started writing his book almost immediately afterwards. It is called a Sacred Oath, Memoirs of a Secretary of Defense during Extraordinary Times, and it's

already been quite controversial. The secretary describes harrowing moments from his time in the White House, his decision to protect the nation from the president from inside the administration rather than blow the whistle publicly, and Secretary Aspert joins us now on Bloomberg. Secretary, welcome back to the program. It's great to have you. Congratulations on your book. You've had to answer some critics who question your decision to remain

part of the administration. What would have happened if you did speak up? Well, thanks Joe first of all for having me on and giving it having a chance to

talk about my book and my experiences. And you know, let me take back to the opening scene there where you describe the President and his description to me as as secretary, and you noted that I was sworn in by Justice Alito and the reason being, and it gets to the kind of the heart of the matter here is when you swear in the Secretary of Defense, in particular, you want to be clearly American people that you're swearing an oath to the Constitution and not to the president.

That's why the president does not swear in the Secretary of Defense. And that gets to the you know, the story of my book and the title, and that is a sacred oath because the oath is to the Constitution, not uh, to a president, not to a party, and not to a philosophy. And that was what governed my

thinking throughout my tenure. And it gets to this on of key point where you're asking, uh, you know why I just decided to stay, particularly after June one, And it's actually quite simple, although I wrestled with it a great deal. I I talked about it with my wife, consulted previous sect deaths from both parties, even the late General Colin Pound to a person, they recommended I stay because at the end of the day, I thought, Uh, my higher duty was to the country and staying to

do two things. Want to advanced some important things we were doing at the Pentagon in terms of modernizing the military, shoring up friends and allies, improving cyber capabilities and so on, but at the same time being able to be within the within the administration pushback on bad ideas being promoted

by those around the president and others. And that became kind of my what I was trying to achieve in those final five or six months of offices to get d o D, get the country to election without any doo D politicization or involvement in our election. You decided to write a book, why not speak out when you left? Well, you know, of course I spoke out with my fellow secretaries. It depends on January three. We wrote it expressing our concern and of course, you know, look at that time

the election was over. I was fired Joe on November nine. The American people decided they wanted a different president, and uh, it was settled, right, And so what I quickly did was put pen to paper because I wanted to tell the story sooner rather later. And of course I finished I think the first draft in April May and submitted to the d D. And it took nine ten months. Eventually had a SUDDO D to release it, all of it, And so that was a whole other process in and

of itself. But here we are, I'm gonna ask you about that in a minute. You suggested the Book of the Secretary that that you never heard of your replacement, Christopher Miller. Was he the kind of person you were afraid might take the helm if you were removed? Well, I think I only met him wants in a situation room, shook his hand, But I really don't know him, and I don't know you know, you know, you can judge for yourself the performance of the team that was that

he came in with and was put around him. And we saw within days of my firing, and the President was calling people in asking should we attack Iran and do this and that? And disappointingly, I think, as as others have reported, he supported an attack in Iran, and fortunately others pushed back on that. Uh. And then we have everything else that led up to January six, so that you know, part of my concern was that they would they the president would install Ubal loyalists who would

take the country in a bad direction. And the institution of the Defense Department itself as well. Yeah, and he did. You mentioned you had to sue the Department of Defense over the redactions that the d O D made in the book. What parts of the book did they want

to classify or had they classified? Mark? Well, the first go around, it was you know, words, sentences, paragraphs from over fifty pages, and notably it's the one story I tell about the president's interest in attacking or shooting missiles into Mexico. And look, none of this was classified. And I still either is some redactive stuff, Still it's classified that that I kept in the book only to make

the point. But nonetheless, none of this was classified. It was all about things being politically embarrassing or uncomfortable for uh for others, and I thought, no, that's wrong. We should tell the American people the full history so they understand what was happening. The missiles in Mexico, or just just one story. You describe a president uh W who seemed dangerously ignorant when it came to military matters, the suggesting sending missiles to bomb cartels in Mexico, the wondering

if China had a hurricane gun shooting at protesters. Secretary, how long were you on the job before you realized he was serious about some of these ideas? Well, Look, not not all presidents come into office understanding the military. I you gotta accept that to begin with. And the problem was he surrounded himself by people of who didn't understand either, who would put you know, crazy ideas in

front of him. And so part of my job is Secretary of Defense and other cabinet members, is to you know, work for the president kind of educating about the military and if as people come up with ideas, that is, to either support them, expand on them, push back, whatever the case may be. Look on this idea that he had about Mexico. The President was genuinely sincere about wanting to deal with drugs in the streets of America. I mean, we all get that, right, we all know people who

are affected by it. But that's not the way to do it. There are other ways to do it. And I kind of proposed alternatives or told him might come back and work with others on some ideas. And that's that's my job. But you know, you constantly there it seemed there were people proposing ideas like this. I mentioned, you know, Stephen Miller wanted to send a quarter million troops to the border to deal with alleged caravans coming north.

It was just ideas like that that I felt that if I wasn't there and an uber loyalist was in my position, if I had left early, if I if I resigned on a spot or spoken up and was fired as I probably probably should have been, that there wouldn't have been somebody there to push back on these bad ideas and kind of keep things on the rails.

And that was my simple logic. Were you compelled to hand some of this over to the press while it was happening to neutralize the situation through the media, you know, you know, I didn't feel I was never comfortable with leaking stuff like that, So I never leaked classifying information or stuff like that. Uh. You know, people believe that's the way to do it, but I just kind of

wasn't my style. We're talking with former Defense Secretary Mark Esper about his new book, Sacred Oath on Bloomberg Sound On. Two days after you were confirmed by the Senate, President Trump held his phone call with Ukrainian President Zelenski, the call that, of course, was the center of an impeachment trial. It is now well known that he withheld military funding from Ukraine. And it's something you describe arguing about you

convinced him secretary to provide that money. No, I don't think I did, as much as I tried, and John Bolton tried, and Mike Pompeio, the Secretary State, we tried individually together to kind of get him to release it. It wasn't until this the whole story about the phone

call came out in the press. Uh that Uh. I think it was September so that I learned all about this, and I I think he just relented on his own given, given what was revealed, and so I like to claim credit for it, But I was just one of a few people pushing hard to get this release because we

saw the importance to this young democracy. We saw how important was to signal to the Russians that we were serious about helping the Ukrainians out Look, the president does des our credit for releasing lethal aid to the Ukrainians the Javelin missiles. To his predecessor had not done that. So um uh, you know again, good and bad in all of this, did he make Ukraine less secure? Though in that period of time, I don't think so. I others have asked me this question. I don't think it

had really had a material impact. A few months of delay were can pushed it out pretty quickly. And and of course now that's three years ago, so I don't think it had a material impact in terms of the Ukrainians having that that system at the time. Former President Trump has said many times the Vladimir Putin would never have invaded Ukraine if if Trump had stayed in office. He says they even talked about that matter, specifically that

Putin brought that to him. Were you were ever aware of conversations like no, not at all, uh, not at all. And and I think his you know, his assertion that wouldn't have happened is just an unknown. Who knows what Putin would have done and why. Only Vladimir Putin knows why, why he started it and why it continues it and it's been just a strategic failure for him in so many ways. Bloomberg spoke just last week of Fiona Hill told Bloomberg that she thinks Putin would have invaded Ukraine

if the election had been overturned. In other words, if Mike Pence had not certified the win for Joe Biden, Donald Trump somehow stayed in office, that he would have just moved across the border. Do you agree with that take? I don't know. I mean, it's hard to it's who knows. Thank goodness, Um, you know, Vice President Pence did his duty and did the right thing. And we are where we are with regard to you know, seeing the peaceful transfer of power after legitimate election. So what are your

thoughts on Ukraine right now? We've talked about this about a month or so ago. It was it was a pretty different scenario. Now, are you of the mind that Ukraine can win this war? Yes? And I think they are winning. And I think the Ukrainian people has showed showed a great courage and what it means to fight for your country, uh, to show leadership under fire, and they you know, for a country that's what a quarter of the size of Russia, It's military is the tenth

the size of Russia. They have really beaten them back in numerous areas and and you know, so much talk about Russia in this space too would consolidated down Bass. Doesn't appear that they're able to do that either. So I think, you know, the Russians failed to live up to our expectations in terms of their military prowess, and the Ukrainians really surprised us in terms of their capability, and uh, look we we uh d d I made it a priority that we prepared to fight the Chinese

first and the Russian second. It's it's was something we never wanted to do. But the Ukrainians and now are fighting that fight, and I think we should continue to support them. I'm sure you saw Turkey today's signaling that that they do not support expanding NATO to include Sweden and Finland. Uh you've got experience with the Turks, uh kicked out of the F thirty five program, if I can use that language. And an interesting role that that Urduwan is playing right now is is he angling for

something or is this a deal breaker? I don't know. I didn't see that news. I'm curious now as to what they said and how they framed it. But look, I think we should keep NATO expansion open. If a country wants to join, and if they are net positive to NATO, then we should admit them. And I think in this case it wouldn't be a net positive. If Sweden and Finland joined, it would give us greater military capability. It would show up the northeast flank of the Alliance.

They're too strong democracies, they're willing to spend money. We should let them in, and we should do it sooner rather than later, because we all see it the threat that Russia brings to its neighbors. What are your thoughts on Vladimir Putin? Right now? People are questioning his mental capacity and it's very clear that he doesn't have an exit strategy. Is he Is he more dangerous the more he's painted in a corner. I think generally people are

more dangerous the more they're painted in the corner. He's painted himself from the corner though in this case, And look, everybody wants to try and say they're people are mentally unstable and they do things that we don't expect or desire. Who knows right, But clearly he has painted himself in the corner. It's been a strategic failure from day one.

Not only did he manage way back in February to push Ukraine closer into our arms, but ended up bringing more NATO troops to his borders and and the unifying NATO also, And now he's facing the prospect of too traditionally neutral country Sweden and Finland possibly joining the alliance. So look at it continues to be a strategic failure. And if you look at what's happening on the ground now and don Bass, it is a tactical failure as well.

The weaknesses of the Russian army, the military have really been exposed here. Incredible. Secretary. You mentioned June one, and you've expressed regrets for what happened that day. I think you felt like, if I'm reading the book correctly and hearing the stories that you've told, once you realize what was going on, it was too late, what would you

do differently if you could relive that experience. Well, I wouldn't have walked across the park on June one, and I would have told Milly to General Milly to stay away as well. But would you be we made what's that? Would you have been fired for that? Uh? Maybe? I don't know. You know, we didn't know what was going on because I right in the book, you know, I got a phone call around six twenty that day to

turn around. The President wanted an update at the at the White House and uh on the events for the evening. We get there and we learned that there is no update. The President wants us to go walk across the park to see damage. And Uh. Again, if I hindsight being could I've refused and been fired maybe, you know, part of the tough job with the secretary offenses. On one hand, you have to remain a political for the institution, but on the other hand, you're a political appointee, and so

these areas get gray. But I think clearly in this case, it was a mistake to be there, uh, particularly after law enforcement just pushed people peacefully protesting out of the park. And uh. And I certainly would have told General Milly to stay away. His instincts were, you know, would have been spot on as well. And I know he regrets the moment it too. And and look, we we came

clean with it. I sent a memo out the next day, within twenty four hours, expressing to all D O D the importance of us remaining a political uh, the importance that we provide support the civilian authorities. But on the other hand, we have to respect Americans right to express themselves and to assemble peacefully, particularly in light of what happened with the tragic murder of George Floyd. So um, you know, we did our best to kind of reconcile and and and kind of own up and take responsibility

for it. And then I became committed of course from there on with the four nos and making sure that I did even better in terms of keeping D O D out of politics. Secretary Espert, It's entirely likely that Donald Trump will run for president again. Entirely likely he will be the Republican nominee. Ino with this book that you have written, the picture you've painted, the stories that you're telling here, do you believe that Donald Trump is

unfit to run for office again? Will you campaign against him? Well, look, I don't. You framed it as it's entirely likely. Don't accept that it's likely that he will run. I hope that he doesn't run. And and why is that? Because I think you know, candidates for elected office, the highest office in the land, but any office that matter, have to meet some criteria. For me, you have to put country overseelf number one. Number two, you have to have

integrity and some core principles that guide you. And number three, you've got to be willing to reach across the aisle, work with others from the other party and unite people. And look, Donald Trump just doesn't meet the mark for me in those those areas, and and that's why I can't support it. Would you actively then work against the candidacy if there was one, Well, I don't know what

that means, actively work against the candidates. I'm not you know, political person by nature to understood, just in terms of writing columns, maybe even doing a campaign event. We'll see. I mean, look, I'm hoping there's a new generation of I believe there's a new generation of Republicans out there who will who will campaign. I hope they'll run, uh in twenty four that will see that right after the

mid terms. But I hope that they will carry on a Republican banner and push those same core policies frantically that Donald Trump did. Look to his credit, Donald Trump pushed traditional Republican policies. He made progress on many of them, whether it's lower taxes, the regulation, smaller governor government, building a wall, rebuilding the military, conservative judges on the bench, you name it. He made progress. Too often, though he went too far on some of these things, and and

too often the language was course and divisive. We need Republican leaders in this next election who will not only advance the same policy objectives, but do so in a way that is more inclusive, that will grow the Republican base that can win elections. Look, you can't really advance your policies if you can't win to win elections, and last time around, we lost the White House, we lost the Senate, we lost the House, and we cannot afford

do that again. He was their former Defense Secretary, Mark Esper the book Sacred Oath, Memoirs of a Secretary of Defense during Extraordinary Time. Secretary, thank you for your time and answering my questions. She has Bloomberg Sound on. I'm Joe Matthew, and Washington want to assemble the panel very quickly on this because we need feedback from Genie and from Dan Bloomberg. Politics contributor Jeanie Chanzano joined today along

with Dan Flatley, Bloomberg National Security correspondent Genie. The big question here, and I tried to get to this right at the top, was was whether the you know, the sacred oath that he talks about kept him on the job and why he didn't speak out earlier. He has been criticized for this. Was his answer satisfactory? You know, I think that's the big question here. It was fascinating to listen to him talk about that and the fact that Aldo swore him in for that reason right where

you started. And that's the difficulty in the United States. We have civilian control of the military. You try to keep the separation between politics and the military. But as his book and your interview just underscored, very very difficult line to walk. I think his answer is not going to fulfill, you know, satisfy everyone, but it is an answer he did the best could and he was fired by tweet at a very peculiar not peculiar, a very difficult time with a president who did not want to

leave office. He sure was interesting to read Secretary Asper's story about being fired. He actually did get a heads up. He got a phone call from Mark Meadows telling him that he was not loyal enough that the president was going to fire him. The tweet, the infamous tweet went out about a minute after they hung up the phones.

Should Mark Esper have spoken out that day? Dan, you know, I think that you know what you've heard from Espers, and you've heard from a number of Trump administration officials, particularly those who are in the Pentagon, like Jim Madison others. Is a lot of anguish over where the line too, uh, their duty to the country ended, and where their their

line to the duty to to the president. At the time Donald Trump began, everyone told him to stay then yeah, yeah, I mean I think that uh, And this is this is the dilemma that a lot of these folks found themselves in. Do you do greater damage by speaking out immediately? Um?

And I think you know what what what reflects some of you know, poorly on him in some quarters or some some critics I've raised, which raised at the beginning of the interview, is you know, now you can say, well, you're only talking about this because you want to sell books or something like that. But I do think that, you know, when you're talking about sensitive areas where military

strike strikes could be carried out or things of that nature. Um, there's a lot of care that you might take with something like that, that that that may not come into play with some other political considerations. So it's hard to know unless you're really in that position. But I think you know, Secretary as per former Secretary Esper was wrestling with a lot of those as some other defense officials

in the Trump and Trump years did as well. You can hear it in his voice absolutely as he as he makes the case for this and and describes wrestling with the genie. The stories, though, are really something bombing cartels in Mexico, sending missiles over the border, uh, the hurricane gun with China. The secretary was trying to go a little bit easy, saying, look, you know, you get

this job as president. You may not be a big military mind the first couple of days on the job, but this was his last year, and some of these are are unbelievable without corroboration, they're they're absolutely stunning, and I think he takes great pains to sort of give President Trump for President Trump, every benefit of the doubt and praise him for certain things. The one that really stuck with me was the one about Stephen Miller, the

President's close aid. Yeah, and and also the head of Bagdaddy dipping it in pigs blood and parading it around with to warn other terrorists. You know, Miller has flatly denied that, but it is a stunning revelation, absolutely incredible.

I appreciate your insights. Jeannie Shenzano and Dan Flatley with us for an instant reaction to our conversation with former Defense Secretary Mark Esper, a conversation you will not hear anywhere else today on the radio, I might add, we'll check markets traffic for you as we try to get home here on a Friday, coming up here on sound On, and then we'll talk more about Donald Trump with Eric Larson.

He interviewed him about his new lawyer. It's next. This is Bloomberg broadcasting live from our nation's capital, Bloomberg to New York, Bloomberg eleven, Frio to Boston, Bloomberg one oh 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 Fastest Hour in Politics with the headline Trump's lawyer leads counter attack from

her five attorney firm. Bloomberg's Eric Larson writing about Elena Habba, who has taken over some of Donald Trump's highest priority legal fights. Eric spoke with the former president about it, and he speaks with us next. Over the past year, she's taken over some of Donald Trump's highest priority legal fights, including challenges to the New York Attorney General's probe of his businesses and his defense in a fraud suit brought

by his niece. Talking about someone you may have never heard of, Felina Habba, thirty eight years old, the subject of a great column written by Eric Larson here at Bloomberg. You can find it on the terminal right now. As he writes in the subhead, Habba is spearheading the former president's aggressive legal tactics. Former President Trump talked about those

aggressive tactics with Eric here. He is, I wanted to get more aggressive because, frankly, you know, I said back here and let people take shots, and I did nothing wrong, And no, I wanted to get more aggressive, and I will be getting more aggressive. Eric Larson joins us, Now, what does he mean by that, Eric, what's coming next? Well, you know, he wouldn't exactly say what was coming next, but I respect we might be finding out soon. But but clearly he has been going after his enemies in

recent months. You know, not only has this new lawyer, Elena Hobbat, taken over his defense in cases that had already been filed and has been dragging on for a while.

She's also filed three pretty big new lawsuits on his behalf, one against the New York Attorney General, Leticia James, trying to halt her investigation into his company, another suit filed against his niece Mary Trump, who, as you mentioned, had sued him earlier, filing a hundred million dollar lawsuits against her and The New York Times because she was a source for a big award winning piece about his finances.

And then another suit against Hillary Clinton filed a few months ago down in Florida over a big alleged conspiracy to undermine his presidency with the Russia claims. So she's really gone on the offense. How important is it to have this new law lawyer on hand versus Trump telling his legalty what to do. Uh, you know, I feel like it. It doesn't feel like it was a decision

that was made very lightly. You know. I interviewed them both, as you said, and it sounded like, um, his existing lawyers, he had plenty, but but they didn't seem to be carrying out or they maybe they weren't as excited about his legal strategy. Get so, um, you know, they in the cases that he had already been defending himself. Man, he also went on the attack in those ones. You know, he was tired of these cases dragging on. In his view,

they should have been dealt with. Um. So he threatened counterclaims, for example, against two women who had accused him of sexual assault and then sued him for defamation. Um when he denied it. You know, they he's threatened claims against them. UM. So she says that she's just an aggressive an attorney, that they talked about it, and she was willing to start these new fights. You write about how she was hired. Abba came into Trump orbit after becoming a member of

his golf club, Bedminster, New Jersey. The former president says, I met her at the club. I said, what do you do? She said, Well, other people at the club knew her, and they say she's an excellent attorney, which she is. I gave her a couple of cases to handle. She did a good job. This is how the former president of the United States hires his his new legal counsel. Yeah, you know, and frankly, it really wasn't too surprising once I found that out, because when you think about Trump,

he is the guy who, you know, liked loyalty. He likes people who like him. He likes people who liked his brand. You know, where else are you going to find the true Trump believers than at his club, people who are already I guess you could say vetted and they're wealthy, and there are people who like him. Um,

he likes that. So as he said, and that she said she had represented some other members at this club and they had recommended her to him, because of course, you know, he's always on the lookout for legal work. I think that some people must be aware of that. So went from there. Which are these cases are the most urgent as he prepares to decide whether to run for office? Here is that the New York Attorney General's investigation. Yeah, you took the words out out of announced, hands down.

There's so much at stake, um in this investigation, and it is wrapping up. They were just in court today in federal court in Albany, that's where his lawsuit is filed. Haba was in court arguing there against the Attorney General's motion to dismiss that case. UM. But the underlying investigation is ongoing. UM. It could lead to a lawsuit being filed against the Trump organization or Trump himself or Don Jr. Eric Trump and Balka Trump and Vanka Trump. They're all

involved in the business. And it's been uh, you know, subpoena in this in this investigation. UM, and it alleged you know, if they do allege something, it would have to do probably with asset valuations. The Attorney General has said that the probe is already uncovered a significant it in that the company has used misleading asset valuations for years to get better terms on insurance and loans and

even taxes. Uh. So it potentially could be a big lawsuit that could drag on certainly um into potentially depending on that's the point. So this could hang over a potential presidential race. This would be brought up in every debate and you know, every interview exactly. And he's already laying the groundwork, and so is his lawyer, Lena Habba, you know, to basically excused, um accused Uh the Attorney

General and any judge involved a bias against him. UM. Should anything not go his way, UM, they will just say that it's more of a witch hunt, UM as more of the same. That's that's what they already do so you know, in a sense, this lawsuit that she filed on his behalf is is creating potential um uh, not evidence, but giving them talking points for if this doesn't go his way. How come he didn't go to marrow lago? Eric, what happened? What's the what's the phone

call about? Well, my my invitation was lost in the mail, Like me, I understand, it's very nice this time of year, Eric Larson, great work. Thanks for coming to talk to me about it, and thanks for bringing us the sound of Donald Trump. Indeed, Trump's lawyer leads counter attack from

her five attorney firm. As the headline, you can read about it on the terminal Elena Hobbs, Eric writes, he I guess he well, he interviewed her at her better house keeps a frame news article on a wall of her well appointed five bedroom mansion in New Jersey with a distinctive signature scrolled across it with yes sharpie Elena. Great job, the former president wrote on this November one story.

It was a news story about a lawsuit that was brought to him by one time apprentice contest and who accused him of sexual assault, then suit him for defamation when he called her a liar. It's an interesting world we live in, and we'll talk about it with the panel as we bring in Genie Chanzano solo panel here on sound On. Next we'll check markets and traffic for you as well. Aren't Joe Matthew? This is Bloomberg. You're listening to Bloomberg You sound On with Joe Matthew on

Bloomberg Radio. Could there be an upset in Pennsylvania? It's starting to look like it here as we prepare for next Tuesday's Republican Senate primary in the state in which Donald Trump is of course endorsed. Dr Oz that got all the talk right at Oz versus McCormick will make way for Kathy Barnett, giving the front runners a run for their money. Here, thanks for being with us on the Friday edition of Sound On't Joe Matthew in Washington

and joined by Bloomberg Politics contributor Genie Shenzano. Genie, this is a remarkable story. Doctor Roz of course already famous. He's got a lot of name recognition. David McCormick got a lot of money, have spent millions twelve million dollars for Dr Oz almost as much for David McCormick. Barnett has spent a hundred and thirty seven thousand dollars on TV.

And as I look at the Real Clear UH poll of polls here in this particular race, and they're in there within one point of each she's now in second place here, it's Dr Oz twenty three, Barnett twenty one, McCormick twenty what's going on in Pennsylvania? It is stunning. I was looking at the same Real Clear Politics polling average. You look at Barnett's numbers April third, she's polling around seven percent today, As you mentioned, she has surpassed McCormick

with all his money. She is within a margin of era of Oz and she's at about twenty one two percent. It is a remarkable trajectory. I think part of what has happened here is that Oz and Cormick have been so busy shooting at each other, and Kathy Barnett has been out there now she has said many things that people find objectionable. Um, he is a MAGA candidate. Right, to be clear, she's not endorsed by Trump, but she's she's in the in the vein. She may be more

Maga than Donald Trump. To be honest, she is, you know, she and she has, let's face it, set a lot of things that people may find objectionable, but that play to this primary audience in the Republican primary in Pennsylvania. And so what you know, the problem for the Republicans, of course, is they're concerned she may not be a great general party candidate general election candidate, but she is

really really strong. And so while McCormick and Oz have been shooting at each other, she herself has shot up, as you mentioned, and not spent a lot of money, which is absolutely stunning Donald Trump. Out of the statements yesterday, it says Kathy Barnett will never be able to win the general electorate against the radical left Democrats. She has many things in her past which have not been properly explained.

Or what if she's able to do so, she will have a wonderful future in the Republican Party and I will be behind her all the way. He goes on to say Dr ros is the only one will be able to easily defeat the craze lunatic Democrat in Pennsylvania. I'm assuming he means the Lieutenant governor Fetterman. Uh, that's a quite a backhanded compliment, isn't it. It is? And you know what's so stunning about that is that's exactly what people said about Donald Trump before he won in

two sixteen, the same thing. He can never win. He says outlandish things. He has no political experience. But you know one thing that Kathy Barnett has going for her, in addition to other things, is she has quite a remarkable story. And that story, that personal story, has been resonating with Republican primary goers on the ground. She has made flubs, as I said, she has said things that people find objectionable, and yet her star, the more they

listen to her, continues to rise. She is more maga than Donald Trump in some ways, and it is resonating with people born of any eleven year old mother. She calls herself a product of rape in a campaign that has seen abortion creep up as a major issue here, of course, at following the league from the Supreme Court, a lot of questions as well about whether mement Oz is actually pro life right. Jennie, We've heard a lot about this. They had a debate recently. It was next

to our media. I want to hear from both oz Uh and McCormick. Here's Dr Oz first President Trump endorsed being quite clearly, and the first point he made about why I'm a conservative America, first Republican, he said that I am pro life and I am pro life. Okay, so he's explicit about that. McCormick says, not so much.

Here he is responding, Memon has flip flopped on every major issue, and you can go to his own comments May one, two thousand and nineteen, and interviewed at the Breakfast Club, he essentially said that he was worried about the pro life movement um that was creating fights. He was worried about states putting in place pro pro life legislation. And is this a conversation that's just sucking up oxygen here in a Republican primary, genie, or or will it

helped decide the outcome? You know, it feels like McCormick really believes that you listen to these ads, that that that inconsistency on Oz's part is going to hurt him in the election. But again, just look back at Donald Trump. He was pro choice, he was pro life, he had been you know, in various positions, not to mention he had been a Democrat, an independent Republican. It didn't matter.

And so I'm not so certain that this idea of you know, flip flopping inconsistency is going to resonate with voters on the ground. And you know, as you look at the Democrats, it's so fascinating what Fetterman has done is he stopped really talking about issues. He's, you know, a left wing sort of guy, he's a you know, progressive in some ways, but he started talking about the fact what I'm a fighter. I will fight for you each and every day. It's that kind of talk that's

resonating with voters on both sides, not issue consistency. And so I'm not sure this is gonna matter or that much we've had, uh, you know, this weekly storyline going Genie about whether the Trump brand is still intact, his endorsements matter. He had his first loss, of course, uh in this latest go around, but he's had a pretty good record so far. I think we have to admit he ran the table, uh two weeks ago Ohio, Indiana,

who had some trouble in Nebraska. Are we gonna keep doing this every week or are we gonna look at kind of the primary season as a whole before we judge Donald Trump. I think we'll look at it as a weekly blow by blow, and then at the end we will look at it overall. But I don't think anybody can turn a blind eye to the fact. Just listen to this show that you've done today. Donald Trump remains a critically something. We've talked about him for the

entire hour, even as we changed topics. Absolutely, and can you imagine another former president who lost the White House if he could command this much attention. Donald Trump isn't paying for this attention. He's getting free media attention. So he is a force to be reckoned with and certain when it comes to Republican primary races. You know he'll lose some, he'll win some, but nobody can say he's

not important. And I go back, he has raised more money than the Republican Party itself except two days in the last six months of twenty one. That's a remarkable statement right there. It is. But that that brings me back to this Barnet Bank account, a hundred thirty seven thousand dollars. This is a state with two major media markets, Pennsylvania.

It's it's it's an expensive proposition running for Senate or for any statewide, uh, you know, elected office here and it's it's proving again that this has a lot more to do with things than money, Genie, it does, you know, I I go back to, you know, the race between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump. You know, as a political scientist, we would always say money is the deciding factor. You have more money, you know, nine times out of ten, you will win. I'm not so sure that is the

case anymore. Sure money matters, but there are so many avenues now for candidates if they can say out rageous things to get attention via social media, which costs them very very little. Any time with Jennie Chanzano, of course, Bloomberg Politics contributor, as we wind it down here a bit here of course, on a Friday, as we all try to get home together in one piece, Genie. Was the last day on the job for Jens Saki, the White House Press Secretary. We knew it was coming, she

announced this weeks ago. In fact, is Karine Sean Pierre takes uh takes the podium if you will, in the briefing room. So today was the last go around, and she had to you know, to to her credit, a lot of people to thank and a lot of people were there to thank her. This is just a taste of what it was like today in the White House briefing room. And she brought this to a close. You know, this is my last briefing and it is Brian um. And I wanted to start with a series of thank yous.

Um uh. I promised myself, I wasn't gonna get emotional. Okay, um um thank you. I want to say thank you to the President and the First Lady, and then thanked everyone else she ever met. It was kind of an Oscars type of thing. Even had her husband in the room. A lot of warm feelings on the way out here. And she talked about her first meeting for this job, Genie with with the President and the First Lady, and

they talked about restoring civility to the White House briefing room. Now, this came off obviously a very difficult end of the Trump administration, when there were no briefings going on and the media, news media that had been demonized as the enemy of the American people. Did she succeed in doing that? You know, I think all in all, she did. I mean, she even got praise from her nemesis in in in the Room, Peter Doocey of FOXNE who described her as

very effective. And you know, I sort of say that tongue in cheek because they had a you know, sort of a love hate relationship, if you will, in there. But I do think she did. You know, just if you look at the number of you know, she she was committed. When she came in, she said to holding these press briefings daily and gaggles when they couldn't be in the room, and she did that. Somebody by account said of the days over the last sixteen months, sixteen

months rather she held briefings. I mean, that's quite a remarkable change from what we saw in the Trump White House. They said at that the total Trump White House. And if all four years, two hundred and five briefings, she held two twenty four already. So she she did it. She did it that way. And I think, you know, she also had a really strong background as she came in, and she was able to parlay that into you know,

she she was no pushover. Obviously she was. She's a tough, tough woman, but she was also able to be effective in terms of knowing what reporters needed by way of information. That's true. I mean, look, her time spent at the State Department obviously informed her for a critical period in American history. Uh. I wonder your thoughts on her replacement, Karine Jean Pierre. This is one of the most difficult

jobs in the world. It's one of you know, frequently known as the second hardest job in Washington, right after being president. Uh. You typically don't last too long here. What's the job? What's the goal for Kareine junk here? Yeah, we call her KJP now Joe, just just to be clear. She's got it. She's gonna got it, get the president through this mid term. I think, first of all, and I think she'll do a great job. She comes with an enormous experience. Of course, that's a lot to ask.

Can you imagine being tasked with that job. I'd rather stay here, talk to Jeanie Tanzano, Bloomberg Politics contributor, and all the other smart folks I get to spend time with here every day. I'll meet you back here Monday. Thanks to Mark Esper for joining us on the fastest hour in Politics.