Sound On: Powell's Tough Talk, Unsealed Trump Affidavit

And I think the talking talk is part of monetary poem. So we're gonna do a close approach to the moon will only be about sixty miles from the surface. Bloomberg Sound On with Joe Matthew on Bloomberg Radio. The Mara Lago affidavit shows highly classified documents were in the house and led to the search. Welcome to the fastest hour in politics. With more than thirty pages to comb through here, most of them with redactions, will the release cause even

more confusion? We're joined by an expert to day, former federal prosecutor Michael Zelden with his insights. J Powell drops the hammer in Jackson Hole. But does he mean what he says? We'll read between the lines coming up with Bloomberg's Joe Wisenthal later on this hour, and we'll talk about it all with the panel Bloomberg Politics contributor and Republican strategist Rick Davis today joined by Democratic strategist Max Burns,

founder of Third Degree Strategies. So we have the affid David total of thirty eight pages, most of them redacted. Uh And when I say redacted, you know, a lot of the full page just you know, black lines. Uh So, Yeah, leaves a lot to the imagination. But it's clear the former president had some of the most classified defense and intelligence material, some intercepted foreign communications intelligence gathered by American

spies sitting in boxes at Mara A Lago. The special agent who wrote the report his name per name redacted, describes an investigation prompted by the discovery of hundreds of pages of classified documents in fifteen boxes recovered by the National Archives earlier in the year, twenty five of them labeled top secret. It shows the Archives and federal agents repeatedly asking for documents to be returned. This went on

for months. The former president reacts on his social media site today, calling it a total public relations subterfuge and well, I guess he made similar comments before the release on Lou Dobbs podcasting. He's got a podcast, don't you. Here's Donald Trump talking to Lou Dobbs. They could have come in and they could have talked to us, and they could have taken whatever they needed, but instead they rated it.

They took my passports, they took things that they should have never taken with uh that are privileged and it's a disgrace to our country. Let's talk more about what we've learned today with Michael zelda In, former federal prosecutor and former Special Counselor Robert Mueller while at the Justice Department. It's been a great asset to this program helping us

understand all of this so far. Michael, welcome back. What did you see today in this albeit heavily redacted release that that might have changed your view of the case. The thing that struck me was the very first sentence of the affidavit where it says the government is conducting, meaning it's ongoing, a criminal investigation concerning the improper removal and storage of classified information in unauthorized spaces, as well as the unlawful concealment or removal of government records, those

records containing highly classified documents. So there is an ongoing criminal investigation into the removal and concealment of these documents, and that the identities of the persons who may have removed or retained these documents is what's under under review. So what I learned principally is that this is not solely focused on Donald Trump, if at all, but rather all his minions, all the people who were responsible for

the removal of and concealment of these documents. So this could be a much broader investigation, which means if Donald Trump is a subject, then there are many many more people who could have exposure who may in turn be willing to cooperate. This is partly then why if if if we can go down that road a little bit further, then I'm assuming you you would think that's why they

got the surveillance tapes from our alago. They were subpoenaed the video surveillance back in June to see who was coming and going from these areas where these boxes restored, exactly because they have an investigation here that also contains a thread of obstruction, So they want to know who may have not only obtained, retained sealed, but then obstructed the investigation. And those video tapes of who moved things around would put potentially knowledge of their existence in there heads.

And so when, for example, a lawyer for Trump writes a letter to the Justice Department in saying there are no more classified documents here and that turns out not to be true, if that person was seen on the video in and around those documents that had classification markings on them, well that's telling evidence of a false statement.

This could be damaging just a Trump's legal team if if no one else right, I mean, if based on statements like that, and the letter that was attached to this affidavit from Donald Trump's lawyer telling the Justice am to be careful essentially not to play with politics, this could be damaging to their careers. Absolutely, And we see

this over and over in the January sixth investigation. For example, who are the people that are under the microscope of the Justice Department but to Justice Department attorneys who have theoretically promising careers ahead of them. But Jeffrey Clark and the other fellow whose name I'm forgetting at the moment are both subjects of the inquiry. One of them is said to be cooperating, but they're not. Only is their life in freedom at stake, but their livelihood is that state.

And so when that's the case, they become rich targets for cooperation. So sixty seven documents marked as confidential. This is in the fifteen boxes taken in January. Sixty seven documents confidential, marked as secret, twenty five labeled top secret. And there are a number of different designations here, including some that apparently had intelligence from foreign eavesdropping. We heard earlier reports that they were so called nuclear documents. Could

these also include those? If there were nuclear documents. The one thing that's important that under the Atomic Energy Act I think fifty four and the president does not have unilateral authority to declassify. So any claim that he's making that these documents were declassified, there's no evidence that he did declassify them. But assuming that evidence has found, if it relates to any of these nuclear programs, then he

lacks the legal authority to declassify them. And so if he possessed them, they exist in their classified state, and retaining classified documents and an unsecure location violates these statutes. So we saw individuals who have been prosecuted for this over and over um and getting on the low end betray us getting two years probation and a hundred thousand dollar fine for improper retention, to Chinese scientists getting nine

years in prison for the illegal and improper retention. The affidavit reads, there is probable cause to believe that documents containing Class of five National Defense Information d n I and presidential records remain at the premises. This, of course, again was making the case for the search. This is what they were looking for when we consider national defense information that in itself being in an insecure location at a resort UH that is hosting foreign dignitaries presents a

very uh dangerous situation exactly. And that's why I think you see the espionage statute being used. That one section of the espionage Statute that was referenced in the affidavit and the search warrant is that which requires only gross negligence in the handling of these NBI documents. They don't have to be classified, they can be just national security related documents. And if you are grossly negligent in the

way you handled them, you violate this statute. And it appears from what's in the public record already that there was some gross negligence in the handling of these records. And so again I say, whomever touched these documents has potential liability for violating the statutes that are in question here. And to your point, that may not be someone named

Donald Trump. We understand and I'm really trying to see this from both sides here, uh that that a lot of these documents were just kind of randomly thrown in boxes with unrelated items. Is there a chance Donald Trump had no idea that any of this was at Marlago. That would be a defense that if I were his attorney, I would want to raise, which was which is to say, look for better or for worse. My client believed that he was going to remain president for a second term,

and he held that belief until the last minute. When that belief was not realized, they quickly packed up the boxes and fled, you know, sort of like the movie Home Alone, where the alarms go off late and they pack up hurriedly and left the kid behind. And so maybe that's the sense that I raised that this was not intentional. It was perhaps negligent, but not intention Failure to respond over months in returning this becomes its own problem.

This is why we have an active criminal investigation right exactly. And if you look at the timeline here, what you see in the FFI davit is they start talking with him soon after he moves the documents on January the twentieth fifteen. Boxes are retrieved on the eighteenth of January. They request records in May, and they go down and visit in June. This this basically lasted the year exactly. It's a it's a long time, and it's a very

solicitous um. Justice Department and National Archives in their dealings with Trump sort of called this a arraid. Is is really not accurate. They had a discussion that ultimately in the end, d o J says, look, you have these documents, they're not in a secure location, they contain the highest level of classification, and we just got to come again. We're sorry enough talk for us to protect the national security, and we're gonna go get them. So Michael's Eldon, was

it worth releasing this despite all the redactions? I think so. I think that it's worth it from the standpoint of understanding that this was not just sort of a spur of the moment. Let's go down there in search a former president's house and see how that turns out. But rather, this was the end the game of a year plus long negotiation for documents that were highly classified, in which

threatened in theory national security. Appreciate the insights as always now that we've had a couple of hours to digest it. Great insights from Michael Zelden, former federal prosecutor, former special counsel to Robert Mueller while at the Department of Justice. We turned this to the panel next and the political side of all of this. Was it worth that or did it just confuse the matter even more? Rick Davis is coming up with US joint today by Max Burns

of third degree on Joe Matthew. This is Bloomberg. You're listening to Bloomberg Sound On with Joe Matthew on Bloomberg Radio. The headline on the terminal Trump stash at Mara a Lago included highly classified documents. Indeed, the image inside this story says a lot with pages upon pages of black boxes. Yes, heavily were adapted. What did I have before? The thirty two pages with these items had at least some redactions? And and a lot of them were just the full page,

just just big black page. Uh. I'm Joe, Matthew and Washington on what has been quite a day with the affidavits. The redacted affidavit unsealed in somewhat awkward fashion, didn't come out early. Right at noon, these sealed documents hit the Trump docket and a lot of reporters had to call to get him to actually unseal the thing. It was after long afternoon by the time we actually saw them.

Let's assemble the panel. Rick Davis is here, of course, Republican strategist Bloomberg Politics contributor, joined today by Democratic strategist Max Burne's founder of Third Degree Strategies. Max is great to have you back, Rick. We've been talking about this for days, looking forward to it. What was the item in this paperwork that raised a rib brow? What made

this a bigger story? You know, I I agree with what Michael's Eldon just told you earlier in the program, and that was, uh, the realization that this concealment and removal of these highly secret documents, you know, all kinds of different things that risk the nation security um may have been perpetrated by just more than Donald Trump. Right,

We've all been laser focused on Donald Trump. But now we realize there are a lot of hands in those boxes, and and the idea that, um, you know, they had people coming and going, and that it wasn't the requests that they had, uh to put a lock on the door of the storage shelter, was to actually secure the documents, which is a big difference. And so, uh, it all leads to this sort of interesting obstruction issue, right, like why did it take over a year to have this resolved?

And so to me, that was the fascinating twist of this. And so what I'm looking at is the next step is how many of the staff and lawyers are going to be hiring lawyers to represent themselves. That's for sure. We could be talking about a lot of people here, uh, Max. And and it may not even include Donald Trump. I mean it's hard to imagine. Obviously he was the president and this is his home, but but a lot of people could have been enriched by the information in those boxes.

Give us a sense of that, Yeah, I think that's absolutely right. And what we've seen from this affidavit, what we have been able to see is a lot of boilerplate. But it does show you that there was probable cause to believe that Donald Trump was not just collecting these documents and failing to return them, but actively obstructing justice in the process. And I think regardless of how much of this is redacted, it was good to get it out.

There should be that expectation of transparency. And I don't imagine Donald Trump thinking there was anything in here that was going to go well for him. If anything, it just raises the temperature of how far advanced this investigation is and how extreme we had to to act as a government to get these documents back. Well, look, this could be precedent setting rick. Was it worth it from from that standpoint here to to search a former president's home?

Does this? Does this redacted document have the value to make all of this happen? Really make releasing this worthwhile? Well? I think as far as understanding what they were looking for and what they probably got, sure, right, I mean, we can't let these kinds of things lay around there. The regime, the laws that govern our handling of you know, secret matters like this, these kind of you and I don't necessarily sophisticated, Um, we don't need to know about it.

But the reality is that a search of a former president's home is unprecedented, and in this case, especially considering that the Justice Department already had an active investigation into his conduct around January six. Now you know, we learned that there's an active investigation around these documents and his handling of them. I think it the more we talk about it, the more we have a public conversation about it,

the better off we are. And the fact that there were so many lawmakers, including the former president himself, asking for more information from these affidavits, yeah, I hope they're happy, because from what I can tell, only thing that is done is given us a little bit more information about the sensitive nature of these documents. And I can't believe any right minded person is going to not be scratching your head going why in the world would he have

these things? Well that yet, that fair enough, Max, though, the the redactions have already given Donald Trump, you know, an area to exploit here as we see him posting on social media, nothing mentioned not nuclear, so those reports were obviously not true. He called it a total public relations subterfuge by the FBI and the d o J, fulfilling uh, you know that whole narrative, he says, we

gave them much. Can he use the redactions max to create more confusion around this, if not kind of exploit that to to raise more money and make himself look

more like a victim. Yeah. Absolutely, But I think the challenge for Donald Trump right now is that, however he plays this as a public relations uh extra size, there is still this very real legal investigation happening, and he's not going to be able to spin his way out of that because the relevant law enforcement agencies know what's behind those rid actions and it was obviously enough to

cause great alarm in Justice Department. I think to your point, there are many people who are going to be involved in this. The d o J is looking not just into Trump's role, but into individuals who they allege were potentially moving documents true to potentially evade them being seized. So this is definitely a play with many actors who are now at risk. You do wonder you know how many weddings have taken place within proximity of these documents? Rick? Yeah,

I mean, look, this is a beach club. I mean people go there to play golf, they have dinner, you know, they're wandering around. But like if anybody wants to penetrate that that community, it doesn't seem to be very difficult. Rick Davis and Max Burns are panel today. They're back with more after we talked to Joe wisen Fal. Yeah, the stalwart is coming in on this big Jackson Hole. J Powell day, did he mean what he said? We'll

talk to Joe next. This is Bloomberg. J Powell hit Jackson Hole today with a point to prove and it only took about eight minutes. As you've been hearing the speech, of course live today on Bloomberg, Powell warning investors that higher interest rates are gonna be here for some time and it may not be fun here. He is While higher interest rates, slower growth, and software labor market conditions will bring down inflation, they will also bring some pain

to households and businesses feeling the pain. Now with Joe Wisenthal, the co host of Bloomberg's Odd Lots podcast, is with us. Say Joe, welcome back. Thank you for having always a pleasure here as we try to get to the heart of the matter and what the chair was was really trying to say it. It reminds me of the old Tony soprano line that you know, you want to get

people's attention, you want to be the boss. The first thing you do is you walk into a room, you pick the biggest guy, and you punch him in the face. Did j Pal do that today? You know? What I think was striking on that in that respect was how short his speech was. Right, he walked in and he walked out. He wanted a mic drop. He wanted a mic drop. And you know, when I read the speech for the first the first time, it's like, Okay, there isn't like that much new in here. You know, we

know that they take inflation very seriously. We know why they take inflation seriously and why it's important for them. But it's interesting it was like not much else that he didn't talk about, you know, what they had accomplished over the last two and a half years, or uh, you know, the low unemployment rate very much. He's like, we're here to take care of inflation and we're gonna do it, and that's all I want to say today.

And so I think that, you know, at first, when I read this speech, I was like, you know, like there's not like a ton new here, and I think if you just look at the words, there's not but it's almost you know, it's a cliche, but it's like what he didn't say. He just didn't feel like talking about anything else. He's there to do the job of quashica inflation via the rate, via the tools that they have, and that's higher rates. So it's his job quashing inflation

but also quashing sentiment on Wall Street. I mean, this was sort of the signal to investors lately, you know, J Pali shows up and says, no, I'm serious. That's part of the issue, which is that you know, the FED, as it's said before, works through financial conditions. So it's not just like the rate goes higher and then you know everyone's borrowing costs go up, and then you know it's like, no, it's like hitting hitting the stock market,

hitting the bond market is how the FED works. And if the stock market is too buoyant, if the bond market is too buoyant, then arguably financial conditions don't tighten and they don't really get the anti inflation punch that they're looking for. So to some extent, I think you're right. I think it's a message to the markets. It's like he wanted them. He kind of wants them to go down,

and he's wanted that for a while. Imagine all the folks who traveled out there are many of them, of course with Bloomberg, you know, eight minutes into this thing, but that's what all the wind up was for. You know, there's other central bankers there, some people presenting speeches. Is in some research. There was a lot of anticipation for

this speech. Though. My god, So you know, I follow you on Twitter and I'm always compelled when when you take the contrarian view on these things, and I'm just curious how you're feeling about the FED at this point. When the idea here is if we believe the FED, if we believe the administration that you know, it's the pandemic, it's supply chains, it's other global factors. And by the way, we can't control energy prices or food, so why are we exactly hiking interest rates to prove that we can

go into a recession? Kind of And there was a really interesting line that Paul said, He's like, looked, there are multiple causes of this inflation. There's high demand and there's also curtailed supply. Right, there's it's both, it's a it's a mix of things. That also you could throw energy into the mix. But then you said, we still have a job to do and we have one tool,

and that's the curtailed demand. So the point is that you could say that there's a multiple multiplicity of factors driving inflation, but as Paul made it clear, that doesn't absolve the FED of its job to push inflation. And even though demand is only part of the story, that's the level that they control and so that's what they're going to try to depress. So this is sledgehammer, not scalpel. The FED doesn't. Yeah, I mean, I think the FED would love to have a scalpel. The FED would love

to have nonmonetary tools. And I think, you know, I don't know, you know, the FED would love to not crash the job market, but the FED has the tool it has. You don't think j Pal is just talking tough, then you think that he's planning to use that sledgehammer. I mean, look, keep you I think talking tough is part of the tool, and it would be the goal is to not have to, uh you sort of hope to cool things. And maybe he looks at the stock

market today, it's like, yeah, that that helps. But I think the talking tough is part of monetary policy, and it has been for a long time, ever since, you know, for over a decade, talk has been action. It's not that they're distinct, separate things. What they say gets priced in right away. If you look at short term rates, they're higher today even though no for policy action was taken. So talking tough is sort of acting tough. Maybe that's

a scalpel, not that I think about it. Yeah, I mean, look, you know, the federal wants to have you know, the federally is one tool, and so it wants to be savvy. But arguably that the you know, it feels like it got burned last year with the transitory talk. It feels like it's been behind the curve and that you know each time, you know, the fetishike several times this year, but there's always maybe been a little bit of hope that it's like, Okay, it's getting close to pivot, whatever

that means. And I think at this point, you know, they're they're out of scalpels. Talk about pivot. What do they say when all the journalists and everyone else leaves Jackson Hole is like, boy, okay, so I think they bought it, but you know we're ready to start pulling back the minute we start seeing this job market weekend. Yeah, I mean that is the question. And you know we do have a job's report a week from today, and

so it's easy to talk about pain. It's easy to say, look, our focus is inflation, but unemployment that's low level fifty years. It hasn't picked up at all. And in fact, this week we got initial jobless claim and they actually take back down they had been going up. And so the labor market remains by the by the standards it uses, by the by the measures the FED looks at extremely

tight and robust. And so it would be it will be interesting, it would be interesting and worrisome if we really started to see clear evidence of recession, right, clear evidence of unemployment picking up and a sustand way, and then we actually have that puzzle. It's like, okay, what do we do now? Or how is the FED can navigate here? Especially if inflation remained solidly above trend. So

was that whole summer rally thing the head fake? I don't know, I mean, if I if I knew, I wish I knew, but you know, the FED is not done with its job. And I did think it was interesting. I noted this two weeks ago. That's like, all it took was about a month worth of rallies and suddenly the memes docks started coming back. Amc was back in the news, bed Bath and Got Beyond was back of the news, and Adam Newman got three million dollars launch a new real estate startup. So it's like the old,

the old animal spirit. Yes, come on, guys, like all right, Like, I guess we gotta have to do this the hard way because you guys didn't get the message the first time. So here we go, slamming on the brakes again. I always love to spending time with Joe Bill, the stalwarts and co host of the Odd Lots podcast. It's great to have you back. Joe coming and we'll reassemble the panel next. Rick Davis with his take on what we

heard today. He was here with Max Burns, Democratic Strategists, as we look forward as well to the mid term elections coming up and the messaging we heard last night and today from President Joe Biden that MAGA is semi fascist and it's only August. I'm Joe Matthew. This is Bloomberg.

You're listening to Bloomberg sound On on Bloomberg Radio. We've been hearing for months and months that inflation will be the number one issue on the campaign trail deciding the mid term elections in November, and hearing from j Powell today and by the way, looking at the White House statement on the inflation data out this morning, it just gives you a sense of the huge urgency behind beating

this thing called inflation. The messaging though coming from the President is pushing back pretty hard on the Republican Party, not even with that particular issue. Let's reassemble the panel. Rick Davis is back with us, Max Burn's democratic strategist, founder of Third Degree Strategies Rick, of course, Bloomberg Politics contributor and Republican strategist. Max. Did you hear Joe Biden

at the fundraiser last night? He went up the road to Rockville, actually did a fundraiser on the way in Bethesda, went up to Rockville to raise some money and gave us a real view of what we were in for here. Or uh, listened to Joe Biden at the rally in Rockville, Maga. Republics don't have a clue about the power of women. Let me tell you something. They are about to find out. M referring, of course, to the Roe v. Wade decision

the Supreme Court. This came only an hour or two though, after he walked into a tent at a fundraiser in Bethesda, Max and he referred to to ultra maga as he likes to call it, as something that is approaching semi fascism. It is only August here, What are we gonna be talking about in October? Well, I think this shows you that there has been a big boost to not just

the White House morale, but to Democrat morale in general. Uh, since this summer of bipartisan victories, the polling coming out showing that post dobbs On post in this post row America, that voters are very energized by that and actually are going up to vote. So there is a swagger I think in Joe Biden's step that has not been there. The White House is also getting a little bit uh sassy or on Twitter and calling out Marjorie Taylor's green

is very trumpy. Actually to see that calling out Marjorie Taylor Green for loans she had forgiven after criticizing the student loan But but, but, Max, maybe I should rephrase the question, why not take credit for all that stuff? Instead of calling, uh, your opponent a fascist? Well, I

think that he is. And I think that we've seen in elections here in New York just recently with Pat Ryan, that they were very Democrats are now very strongly owning not just the abortion issue but their effectiveness in Congress, and that voters are starting to respond to that. I think because it's not done as as self consciously as Trump.

We're not sending out checks with Joe Biden's signature on them. Uh, that people are arguing he's not promoting this, But the White House has planned a very robust sort of barnstorming him paying summer to sell not just that but the student debt relief and all these other victories to voters. And that's where Biden is best. So that's I think where he wants to be. Remember the deplorables, Rick, Uh, is that the fascists this time? You know? I think

that uh, he he used against him. As my point, yeah, he does stand the risk of, you know, being too far out there. I honestly don't see the need for it right now when he's got his own agenda to talk about. I mean, obviously you want to contrast with your opponent out there, but the reality is he's he's got a pretty positive summer and he wants to talk about that. Um. But the reality too is he's got work to be done on the economy, and we're just talking about what the FEDS doing to try and help

with inflation. But you know, while his overall job approval numbers have gone up, he's still in the basement on the economy and inflation. I mean, you know, fifteen points in his own party lower than his job approval and in his own party amongst Democrats. So, um, I'm not sure it's time to pivot engage um with with Trump. And and by the way, I'm not sure even engaging on the MAGA issue, right that's really talking about Donald

Trump is just coach right of course. And and so if if he's already tied up with Justice Department investigations January six Commission, I mean, like there are a lot of things driving negative messages about Donald Trump. Why don't

you focus on Republicans? Because the reality is Trump's not on anybody's ballot this time around, and these senators and these House members are and I just think he's, you know, shooting above everybody's head right now if this is the way he's going to approach contrast, Max, do you believe the approval numbers that you see upper thirties, low forties, depending on the week, and does this need to be

a positive campaign for Democrats? I do believe the polls, but I think that this is just evidence that polls are very fickle and that news, you know, can very quickly change the conversation pretty consistent though, yeah it had, but these these most recent polls that are showing him forty five are reassuring, but not something to bank your mid term strategy on. So I will disagree with Rick on one point is I think it is impossible to talk about the GOP now without talking about Donald Trump.

He is undeniably the party leader and in control of that machine, and so talking about what's going on and the damage Republicans are are at risk of causing if they win Congress back is not a conversation you have without talking about Donald Trump. Spending time with Max Burns and Rick Davis our panel today. If there's something positive happening in the government, and you listen to this program at least from time to time, you know, I frequently point to the space program. It's just one of the

things that we tend to do pretty well. And now that we're actually getting it back together and getting a human space flight program back together without using the Russians, there's a lot of exciting stuff happening. It doesn't always include Elon Musk. Granted he's he's moved us very far ahead here in a very short period of time. But it's the government's opportunity to stand up on mon Day at last. This is what we're fifty decades or fifty years,

I should say, five decades after uh landing on the Moon. Here, NASA is going to launch its most powerful rocket ever on Monday. If you've heard about this thing, it is huge, and it's gonna go up from Pad thirty nine B, the iconic launch pad at the Kennedy Space Center on Monday morning. This is not the trip to the Moon, but a test flight for what will be a a manned mission to the Moon in a couple of years.

Here's Bill Nelson, former Senator now Director of NASA. We have one rocket and one spacecraft that is now in the barn, in the stable that's ready to launch astronauts. Uh. And that is the rocket s l S and the spacecraft Orion spacecraft Orion. Uh. The rockets in the barn, and says Director Nelson. The headline on the terminal NASA Boeing target February Tree for Crude star Liner mission. Rick.

There was a time when we were arguing during the Obama administration, between Bush and Obama about whether it was even worth going back to the Moon. Is there is there a purpose beyond scientific exploration, knowing we've already gone back there and realizing it could be a way station for other missions, But in terms of national pride, in terms of projecting power, is it time to go back to the Moon. I'm a total buy in on the concept that we can be bigger than ourselves if we

shoot for the stars. And I think, you know, President Kennedy really was able to galvanize the country around this space program. And it's been a long time since we heard inspiring words about reaching for the stars. And I think this is a new cycle for NASA and another opportunity. And by the way, there are lots of reasons to be up there. I mean, there is there's arms race in space. Uh, there's no question that China is trying to get ahead of us, you know, in its technology

and space. We now rely on space for all our communications and our needs there. But they're also really important things to learn about, things like space, weather. What happens on the Sun affects everything we do on Earth, and so science evolves on this. Uh, our knowledge will expand. And the fact that we can create an outpost on the Moon to help learn from that, I think is spectacular. So is there a way for the administration to harness that?

I mean, if this I can tell you right now, if Donald Trump were in the White House, you know, he'd have Trump painted on the side of the sucker. How how does Joe Biden harness the positivity from the mission? I think that Joe Biden needs to embrace it and

and call it his own. Uh. I think the idea that we're talking about this armatist program and all the incredible footage we saw this giant, you know, rocket that's larger higher than the Statue of Liberty, and and how powerful it is without the present having his own emperor monter on. It's just a missed opportunity, and instead he's over in Maryland talking about maga is just like, I just feel bad. I I was so excited yesterday. I watched arm again last night just to get in a

space mode. So how does he get to it? Max? I'm looking at a picture of this thing, and it really it's incredibly impressive. As they're hauling it out to the pad, it does look like a skyscraper. They're sending Kamala Harris down. Should Joe Biden go? I think when this gets closer, as it starts to develop, you will you will certainly see that. I mean, I love that it looks like a Saturn five rocket. I do think that this is an opportunity independent of politics to bring

people together. I mean, nothing unifies the country like the thought that our best days are ahead of us and then we're still capable of doing incredible, difficult, big things like this. I'm sure that he will have have some comment I just as has been a constant critique of mine. I wish that he would just be more public and more in the community about these things and willing to explain to people why it matters so much, because this is every president loves to say, We're going to the moon,

and now we have the chance to really do it. Well, it's I mean, my gosh, it's just part of the lexicon. Moonshot, it has its own meaning. Now they used it for the cancer program and the Obama administration. Rick should he be going down on Monday? You know? Look, I mean there's always the threat that something goes wrong, and it looks like the presidence presence there might have forced people to make decisions to do something that otherwise they wouldn't do.

So it's not it's not a free shot. It's not easy. But I do think that that that as a president of the United States and frankly the leader of the free world, embracing this kind of uh technology and and our leadership in it is really important. And I would certainly be a voice inside the White House saying, hey, you know, we've got to be on top of this.

I've long said it's going to feel real different to people who don't seem to care at all about the space program now when they see a Chinese flag on the moon. But that's a conversation for another day. Great talk with Rick Davis, and thanks to Max Burns for coming back in to be part of our panel on the Fastest Hour in Politics. My god, it's already over. If you showed up late, subscribe to the podcast. That launch, by the way, could be as early as eight thirty.

That's when the window opens Monday. You know we're gonna bring it to you here on Bloomberg. See you back here Monday on sound On. I'm Joe Matthew. This he is Bloomberg.