Sound On: Stubborn Inflation, Jan. 6 Panel Subpoenas Trump

answer your question. Bloomberg Sound On with Joe Matthew on Bloomberg Radio, the last CPI before the mid terms. Welcome to the fastest hour in politics, as inflation continues to defy gravity and the Feds. Will bring you the view directly from the White House in a conversation with Presidential advisor Gene Sperling, from economist Douglas Holtzken, and from Bloomberg's own Tom Keene, who was spending this week at the I m F. Later, the January six Committee holds its

final hearing. It just ended votes to subpoena Donald Trump.

While they're at it, we'll hear from Rebecca roy Fee of New York Law School, former Assistant District Attorney for New York County, and analysis from our panel Bloomberg Politics contributor, Democratic analyst Gene Chanzano, Republicans strategist Lisa Miller of Cogent Strategies, former Comms director at the r n C for the White House putting the full court press on today's inflation report, knowing that Wall Street does not represent the American household

when it comes to this story. That remarkable reversal doesn't exactly reflect the conversation inside the Beltway or at the kitchen table. President Biden spoke about it at an event on his infrastructure plans today in l A. Americans are squeezed by the cost of theity. It's been true for years, and folks don't need to be a report to tell them there'll be a squeeze. Fighting this battle every day is a key reason why I ran for President nits Sace.

But the report was there, whether they needed to see it or not. It reflects what's happening now. The snapshot in time with four weeks to go to the mid terms and the White House trying to put a good spin on this as we bring in. Jeane Spurling White House American Rescue Plan of Coordinator is the senior advisor to the President former director of the National Economic Council.

Gene Welcome back to Bloomberg. Thanks for having enough. There was a sense of helplessness when the CPI hit this morning, and obviously Wall Street has gone in another direction here, and I know the White House has also seen some incremental improvement. Brian Deese was speaking to that earlier on Bloomberg. But the Fed clearly has not yet had a major impact on inflation. What is it about this trend that

that continues to defy predictions? Well, I would be a little more positive than than what you described, because I mean, let's just look, first of all, at the third quarter of the last three months. It has been two percent annualized the last in the third quarter. That's compared to eleven per sent uh in the second quarter. Now, a lot of that is obviously been energy car energy prices going down, but we've also seen used cars prices going down other things, and I think there is some reason

to be optimistic about the path forward. I mean, one half of the increasing core inflation really was from shelter rent um but we've seen private sector UH indicators Apartment dot Com case Shiller have both suggested home prices and new leases uh you know, came down in August. Now, I understand there's a lag before that goes into the official CPI, but it does suggest there's some more positive signs there. The job opening data with one point one

million less job openings is certainly showing some cooling. The supply chain index that the Fed publishes is back to twenty February levels, and I've just read so much recently, including from JP Morrigan about seven hundred and thirty two billion inventory for people of predicting aggressive discounting, aggressive online discounting during the Christmas season. So you know, yes, you would have liked to see uh some of that show

up in the core inflation today, and it didn't. But I still think there is some you know, real solid evidence of that that things will move in the right direction. And obviously headlines down from nine one to eight to UH since June, but of course nobody thinks Nobody, including this White House, thinks that's fast enough, even if it is directionally. Yeah, we've had some big, great hikes here, and it looks like they're going to be more big

hikes coming. So it's clearly going to take a long time to get this down to where you want it, and and voters are asking how long is it possible to answer that? I think that, Um, you know, I've never tried to play forecast or um you know, and you know, give a precise date or a precise number, I will, But I do feel comfortable saying that many of the top forecasters are predicting that things will look uh,

you know, significantly better next year. And again, um uh you know, there have been times where I wouldn't have felt this comfortable saying that there were indicators like the job opening or the record inventory or the projections of discounting. So when you say significantly better next year, does that mean that you do you don't see it a recession

in our future? Or do you mean that specific to prices? Gene, I see that I see the prices seemed headed in the right direction in terms of you know, will we will we actually have a downturn? Um, you know, we still see a lot of signs of resilience in the US economy. I think the fact that we've had a recovery that not only has had record job growth and and and so many people working, but so much less scarring that we went through after the Great Recession with

laundrom unemployment and seventeen percent youth unemployment. So I think you're still seeing that people, are you know that that whether it's state, local governments, businesses and you know, households, you're seeing a degree of resilience that gives us more confidence that we are better positioned than almost any country to be able to take some of the discomfort from higher UH interest rates UH, but and still make that transitions to stable UH economic growth with lower prices, but

without having to give up all of the historic gains that we have made in the labor market. Well maybe that answers my next question. But you know this job market is it's it's a curse and a blessing, right

are you? Are you concerned more now that beating inflation will require damaging the job market, as Elizabeth Warren has warned about, Well, again, I think we you know, we are we are still hopeful, and we think there are are good reasons to suggest that, um, that we can make this transition UM without the type of you know, hard landing that that that you do see, you know,

some people, uh you know warn about you know for us. Uh, you know, even when you look at some of the FED numbers on the jobs markets, you still see the possibility of you know, whether you want to call the soft landing or just a transition to a period of more stable growth, uh and more stable and lower prices going forward. And you know, I understand the fact that some people's you know, what they can see as a blessing can seem uh you know different to so I'm

worried about inflation. But I think when you're looking at can you again bring down inflation and with without avoiding the kind of hard downturn. You know, the fact that that so many people are working, the fact that's so many people, according to major banks still have checking accounts that look more flush than they did, uh you know when the pandemic started. Those all suggest that we may

be well positioned without that type of downturn. I consider like the state local level, when I was National Economic Advisor, in contraction at the state local level was a major issue, subtracting from growth, detracting from jobs. Because of the American Rescue plans, those a lot of those states and cities and counties now are still addressing real issues from the pandemic. They're not doing layoff. Those are all to meet things that showed that the policies we've put forward have created

a degree of resilience in our economy. And and um, uh that that I think does again give us optimism that we are better position than our our fellow advanced countries to make this transition without giving up uh, the major gains in the job market. Do you clearly have an optimistic view? I guess I'd ask you lastly, how worried you are about about winter? How worried our listeners should be about the winter heating season, gene spirling, whether they use heating oil in the northeast or natural gas

somewhere else. Well, um, you know that that is a really good question. I mean, one of the things we were proud about what the American Rescue Plan was that we did have historic increase several billion dollars, unprecedented for lie heap or low income housing energy assistance. And I think that uh, you know, as um Congress comes back, you know that's one of that's an issue that is is worth worth looking at. But um, I heard a

little bit right. I uh uh, you know, I try not to either make uh pretend to be a precise economic forecaster or or the weather man. At this point, well j. Powell uses the word pain though we list we have to keep our eye on and as you say, you know can there can be very different impacts in different parts of the country depending on the source of heating. Jeene Spirling, I'm glad you gave us some time today, White House American Rescue Plan Coordinator and Senior Advisor to

the President with us on CPI. DA Jane Spirling, thanks as always for talking to Bloomberg. Oh, thank you for having me. And as always we add another voice for a different perspective, and we're glad to be joined by Douglas Holtz Eakan of the American Action Forum, the president and former council if he cannomic advisor's chief economist, he knows where gene spoiling is coming from, and he certainly knows where the CPI is coming from. Although Douglas, welcome back.

I don't know if if you can justify where the number is coming from, can you believe how how stubborn this has been considering the magnitude of the rate hikes we've seen so far. Yes, I think this is not very surprising. First of all, remember that regardless of your preferred measure of inflation, it's still higher than is the funds rate. So we have negative real interest rates and

we aren't even close to neutral. So while we know the sassan last month last year with his foot on the gas, it has certainly taken its foot on off the gas, but it hasn't tapped the break yet. So once we get you know, real rates up in the positive territory and and we're in a restrictive posture, we'll see how much that brings down inflation. The other reason I'm not surprised is mechanically that all roads lead to

shelter inflation. Uh In the CPI, shelter is a third of of the c g I is a third of the typical family budget, and it has none of these things people like to point fingers out. There's no supply chains, there's no Saudias, there's no no big companies. The apartments are here, the houses are here. Shelter inflation has risen every month since January. It is yet to show any times that peaking year over your inflation one up from five seven to six two to six six and the

most recent report. And until you get shelter inflation under you can't have success on the c p I. So this just six. Everything halts to be zero to get to two. I mean, that's not gonna happen. So this is a tough spot for this White House dog. You know that. Uh, when when we step back and look at what they're actually looking, I know it's their job to be optimistic. You have to talk up the economy,

that's the deal when you're part of the administration. But pointing to the job market as a source of strength, uh, without also acknowledging the trouble that it's bringing. And I know that this is always a popular viewpoint, but that wage inflation is a persistent issue and that they may have to actually harm the job market to get this job done will create a very difficult narrative for the

White House next year. They're also pointing to lower gas prices, and Douglas, we have every reason to believe that oil and gas are going up. You mentioned the Saudias. This is gonna be a tough winter. Absolutely, there's no question of it. So so is it smart for them to be speaking optimistically about this stuff? Where does the White House need a new narrative? I think they needed a narrative. I mean they have not had a decent narrative on

inflation yet. Their narrative has been uh, corporate creed, as if the arab of corporate benevolence had somehow ended. Um. They said it's supply chains. Um. Well, uh, you know, as I said, shelter inflation, there's no supply chains there. Uh, it's it's the Saudias and gas prices. But we we were going to tap this strategic control reserve. They they've

gone to a million stories. None of them addressed the basic problem, which is they made a big policy error with over stamulus in the economy, fiscal and monetary last year. And we're reaping the results. And here's the truth. And and and you said it really well, the hot labor market and the high inflation or flip sides of the same coin. You can't have one without the other. They

come together. And if you want to deal with the inflation, you're gonna see some relatively bad news in the lay market. There's no way around that. And and so what I try to remind people is when you're thinking about the White House said, whoever you're pointing fingers out at the moment, remember that once you make the mistake of letting inflation get entrenched, you have no good choices. Either live with the inflation or you deal with what you have to do to get rid of it. Both are really bad

in the stories. Are we there though? Is it I? Is it entrenched in your view? Yes, we saw that. We saw the things that UM caused this set to to actually do a big U turn and aggressively take on inflation. We saw inflation expectations go from well contained and not to go from three percent so well over uh seven in one year out and then the three and five were moving up and and that was the

hallmark of the last air of great inflation. You know, the seventies and eighties, people expected double digit inflation, and so they've built into their wage request double digit inflation. And when they write writing supply contracts, they counted on it. And so you build that kind of cost increase into the business structures, it's self fulfilling. You get inflation, and that means the FED after done being whether they're done uh you know at the beginning of next year, halfway through,

they're going to have to keep it there. That's that seems to be the part that the market is confused about, right looking for a pivot. Just because you're done hiking doesn't mean you have to start cutting. I really don't understand the confusion. I think Chairman Powell has been blunt and clearness these has said this will take a long time. It will take up to three years to get back to two percent. There will have to be a persistent

period of restrictive monetary policy. That's that's that says, keep it up there. You're not cutting. There's no no question about that. He's been honest that there will be paying for American businesses and households. They've stopped using the phrase soft landing. I mean, I don't know what's left to figure out here. Boy, I'm glad you could be with us today. We're praying for a soft landing, but I guess it would be uh, it would take a little bit of magic to pull it off at this point.

Douglas whole Teak in American Action Forum President, former Council of Economic Advisors chief economist with us on the fastest hour in politics, and the hits just keep on coming. Here. You know who's in town right now to cover the I m F with which just yesterday, as you heard on this program cut It's forecast for global growth is Bloomberg's own Tom Keene. He's getting a very unique view of what's happening at the I m F and with us here now in the Washington d C Bureau. T K,

Welcome back to d C. Wonderful to be here. I think this is great to see you. I'm staying up late watching Padres Dodgers. It's difficult, and you've got the surveillance call in the morning. The surveillance nap must mean more than ever, so it does, and it's an uncertain times. So frankly, you're watching the Bloomberg on your iPhones saying, okay, is the world gonna blow up? And the answers we made it through another day? Well, I saw your promo.

There's a Bloomberg apparently in the White House. There's probably one over at the I m F. Actually, there's probably a bunch of met the I m F. The White House is perplexed this morning, but so is the market, and so are you. How has none of this action by J. Powell had any impact on anything it had.

That's a really important question. And the mathiness of it is we knew it wouldn't have an impact that you've had on Gene Sperling, who's wonderful policy expert on fiscal policy, like Douglas Holtz Egan across the political divide shows that the common ground of Democrats and Republicans and economics is they really know the FED early in a cycle doesn't get much done. We've moved from ultra accommodative to accommodative

and now maybe is where the heavy lifting starts. But then history repeats with a front loaded action that drives the economy into a recession. Right, It's like everybody, all the naysayers are being proven right, Yeah they are. It's been a it's been a victory for the gloom crew the last number of days. But I'd really take issue with economic slowdown is only because of the FED. There's a number of other things going on and some of

them downplayed at these meetings of the World Bank. In the i m F, for example, I would suggest the COVID challenge of China has a far greater weight on global demand, on the price of oil than anybody can imagine. One of my key questions that hasn't been answered yet is where would oil be if China was open for business?

And the answers would be a lot higher. How palpable is the fear when you walk through the tangible Joe, you and I were younger, the red socks used to win, and when the last time it was wasn't it wasn't that long ago, but actually it was oh eight oh nine. Yes, it's it's it's the same tension, but it's different. The major talking point for your audience, I would say is the experts here off the mic are not looking at

eight o nine. They're back four decades, They're back five decades and trying to analyze this original pandemic war in Ukraine moment that we're in. The summary of it is is Crystallina Gordy gave it said today the managing director of the I m F. And she gets her hands out and there's these moving parts to the plumbing of

the system. Their focus, which is unfamiliar to Americans, is to keep the liquidity in the system, particularly in the United Kingdom, and that's really the point focus right now at these meetings. You use the word original with someone who has such a keen sense of history, I guess pun intended. What makes this original? It makes it original because there was a medical crisis. I laughed at my grandmother.

I'd be down on Cape cod overlook a Nauset beach with a beverage of her choice in her hand, and after the third beverage, Graham a keen would talk about eight, which is much worse than this, and we laugh at her. And now we're not laughing. We had a pandemic and the foundational issue of where we are right now as we're still coming out of this, this pandemic in many form. So I would call that the original moment still is the medicine of the moment. What was that turn around

today on Wall Street? Don't tell John Pharaoh. I asked you what made the Taos swing a thousand points? I think just a lot of gloom and so are the algorithms running. But you know, here's what you do. Here's here's the secret, folks, and it's it's nothing original. Your glue to your Bloomberg terminal on the iPhone and you've got all these data points and you can find a few of them that then link into whatever the news

of the moment is from our headline service. And the news of the moment was a sigh of relief over what was happening in the United Kingdom. As I was speaking to the managing director behind us through the glass of the I m F studio was a Chancellor of the Chequer speaking to the BBC. This is what it's come to. The British is what the the British. There's a sigh of relief that the Chancellor would blink on his original fiscal policy and that reverse. I would suggest

that was the catalyst that reversed the market. I hope you'll be here more often in the new year. We'll have to you know, in Washington. The next time the Red Sox win, I'll be here. I'll meet you for a drink. If you see us at the St Regis later, send around over we might need it. Let's assemble the panel now, let's layer on two more voices, with Bloomberg Politics contributor and Democratic analyst Genie Chanzano joined today by Lisa Caboosa Miller back with us for the first time,

and a bit from Coch strategies. Former calms director of the r n C, Lisa, it's great to have. You're gonna start with you here is this is this fulfilling what Republicans have been saying about Democrats for the last six months. Well, Joe, I think that the recent polling shows that inflation and the economy still are reigning supreme over every other issue for Republicans and for voters in general.

And when asked, all voters polled have said that of them trust Republicans over Democrats on on the economy and certainly on inflation. So to me, that means that we are coming into a very very strong headwind for Democrats into the midterm elections. Genie, what do you do if you're Joe Biden? You deferred to the Fed. You thought they were going to fix it. It It went from transitory, then they told you it wasn't. Now the rate hikes followed by rate hikes and more on the way don't

seem to be making a dent. Well, I think he should join you and Tom Keane for that sift drink at the St Regis and start from there. It's the only real answer. I think it's the only answer, you know, I go back to Gerald Ford with his wind button whip inflation now and people describe that, including Alan Greenspan, as incredibly stupid, and it may have been, but it shows you just how desperate presidents are, whether Republicans or Democrats,

when they are looking at these headwinds. I mean, I keep this running list, and we talk about this all the time. I am f JP, Morgan, Bank of America, Larry Summers. I mean, you can go down the list, the PPI, the CPI, all the numbers are looking at It's October, it's Halloween sign you gotta get out you're really scary costume, because this is what it's looking like. And you know we're talking twenty six days to the mid term. But don't forget Larry Summer is talking about

a recession. Most people talking about a recession next year. That marches you right into the presidential election cycle. This is bad news for the Democrats, bad news for the president. And to Lisa's point, the poll numbers underscore this, and the American public has got to be saying, why do we need experts? We told you we felt like it wasn't a recession. Technically we may not be yet, but that's how it feels, and that's the problem the president has.

He's got to deal with how people feel, not what the experts say is the reality, Lisa. The Republicans have to worry about this slapping back on a on a GOP that takes the majority in the House. If we if we think that all these rate hikes are going to lead to a recession next year, well, I think that they still have a long list of of items that they want to take up right away as soon

as they take back the House. And one of them, Joe to your listeners, is one that I think that is especially concerning, and that's the fact that they have said that they are separating from Corporate America. They have taken this into their sites. They're looking at E s G is an issue that is a concern to them, and they're going to get active, are gonna get busy, and they're going to start to point fingers and they're certainly not going to take the blame. They're going to

point the pictures at the party. Lisa Kabousa Miller Jeanie Schanzano returned to January six next on the Fastest Hour in Politics, I'm Joe Matthew, this is Bloomberg Chairman. I

request to recorded vote. Recorded vote is requested. The clerk will call the role Miss Cheney Hi, Miss Cheney I, Miss Lorn, Miss Laughran I. Mr Chef HI, Mr Chef I, Mr Aguilar Hi, Mr Aguilar I, Mrs Murphy, Mrs Murphy I, Mr Raskin HI, Mr Raskin I, Mrs Luria, Mrs Lauria, Mr Kensinger Kinsinger, Mr Kensinger, Mr Chairman Hi, Mr Chairman I. The clerk will report the vote, Mr Chairman. On this vote, there are nine eyes. Zero knows the resolution agreed to

and that was it. The finish of the January six committee. Today. It's last scheduled hearing and that's the last one we expect voting, as you've heard, unanimously to compel testimony and documents from Yes, Donald J. Trump. Is that really gonna happen? There was some new evidence today, some new commentary we haven't heard yet, excerpts from testimony, none of it live. Each member of the panel took time to take part in this exercise today. Typically we've only heard from a

few in each hearing. We heard from all nine today and we're joined now once again by Rebecca Royfe, who was with us earlier in this whole process and back today to talk to us on Bloomberg. Joseph Solomon, Distinguished Professor of Law at New York Law School, former Assistant District Attorney for New York County, is great to have you back here, Rebecca. Let's start with the matter at hand, and that's the vote to compel to subpoena Donald Trump to testify. We don't think that is going to happen

after Republicans take the majority, do we. I don't think it's going to happen anyway. The subpoena will go out, and he will disregard that subpoena, even if it were um to go out before the change in administration or sorry, rather the change in makeup of the House of Representatives. So you know, I think this was more a symbolic act than it was an act designed to actually obtain his testimony or documents from him. If Democrats somehow keep

the House in this committee remains a going concern. Is that a different story? I really don't think it is. I mean, I think he's going to resist that subpoena, and we've seen before that, you know, then Congress can perhaps refer this to the entire House, and then if the House remain and Democratic, they could perhaps make a referral to the Department of Justice. But I really don't think imagine the Department of Justice would pursue contempt of

Congress case against the former president. We heard some pretty interesting and in many cases, very compelling moments from that day. There was new security footage, or it wasn't even security footage. There was new cell phone footage of the Democratic leadership, Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer making frantic phone calls from

their secure locations. We also heard from Adam Kinzinger, who brought us to a moment that I don't think anyone knew about until today, at least that when Donald Trump essentially knew he was leaving the White House, he made a very specific order. Listen to Adam Kinzinger, knowing he was leaving office, he acted immediately and signed this order on November eleven, which would have required the immediate withdrawal of troops from Somalia and Afghanistan, all to be complete

before the Biden inauguration on January twenty. That is remarkable and could get buried in so much of the other material that we heard about today, but remarkable as well to hear the reaction from General Keith Kellogg, who made his feelings clear on the matter, proceeded to tell the po and proceeded to tell but Gregor that if I ever saw anything like that, UM, I would do shut

the physical, would do something physical. Is this just kind of fulfilling the narrative you're or filling in the narrative about what happened that day, Rebecca, Or are there legal implications to this type of testimony? Well, I mean, I think it's filling in the narrative in an important way

that does have legal implications. I mean, in part, it's part of a longer piece of testimony that came from various different sources that the president himself UM privately and to his closet advisors, admit that he had lost the election. He was acting like a UM president who was about to leave office in a number of ways, including that shocking one, and that you know that is inconsistent with what he was saying to the American public and what

he was insisting on in these various different ways. And so that is crucial evidence of what his state of mind was he certainly Um does not does not seem that he himself believed that the election was stolen if. During this time he had essentially acted as if and said as much as his as the d loss, but he was still fighting to hold onto power. Emails the Secret Service received this is the day before and day after Christmas said protesters were quote armed and ready unquote

their plan quote is to literally kill people. There were tips as well the Proud Boys planned to march armed to the Capitol. Have they succeeded in connecting the dots? I mean, you know, I think that that's part of why it was so significant to subpoena the former president, because they have gotten those dots so close together, and yet there are some lines that remained to be drawn.

And what the indication was at the end of that hearing was that the only person Um who could or people who could uh connect those dots have either pled the fifth or are Donald Trump. And so without the testimony of those people, we are left to infer what

actually happened. And I think you know that it was no accident that right before they took that vote they had video footage of all of those who were so close to the presidents leading the Fifth in response to questions because what they were leaving their viewers with was with sense that, you know, why would they plead the fifth about these final last conversations with the president if

there was nothing there? And his lap to say, you know, you're the only person who can controversy for this clear assumption that ought to be made from the evidence that we've heard. And I don't think he'll do it, but I think that was, you know, the gauntlet that was laid one man who made great use of the Fifth Roger Stone, Listen, violence on January six was justified on the advice of counsel, I respectfully declined to answer your

question on the basis of the Fifth Amendments videotape. Did you have any role in planning for the violence on January six? Once again, I will assert my Fifth Amendment right to decline to answer your question. Roger Stone got a presidential pardon, Rebecca, what's his future look like legally? Well, you know, I again, I don't know. You know, the presidential pardon um certainly provides him with a kind of

shield against many consequences that that might happen. I certainly he could still face um repercussions in the state if he if he is liable in any state for criminal activity. But um, you know, I it certainly remains to be seen. I have to ask you. It's it's somewhat unrelated. But I don't always have Rebecca roy Fee on the phone.

The Supreme Court today handing Donald Trump a loss has happened the same day as this hearing in his fight over records from maral Lago, the documents case, refusing to intervene and reinstate the Special master's authority to review some classified documents. Uh. Does that give the Department of Justice the upper hand to start moving forward with its case or has it been doing so behind the scenes this whole time? Yes, I mean I think it has been

doing so. It has been proceeding. Nobody expected that the Supreme Court would take up that case. It was decided and well argued and well reasoned in the Eleventh Circuit, and it seemed, um, you know, quite a stretch that um, the former president would think that the Supreme Court would take up this case. But um, you know, I know he believed in some sense that the Supreme Court justice of whom he appointed owe him something that that's not the way the judiciary works, and I really doubt that

they feel that way. As far as the d o J goes with the January sixth committee, I know it there's been confusion about whether they would make a criminal referral, but we now know the d o J is well underway with its own case. Did the committee help the d o J in its investigation or was this truly a political exercise or an exercise for the sake of history? So you know, I I imagine that Merrick Garland was certainly paying attention to these hearings but said that the

investigation was well underway. It was underway, we now know, from before the January six hearings even commenced. So you know, I don't think that there's any reason to think or assume that Merrick Garland is taking his cue from the hearings or from Congress, and as well he shouldn't. I think it's a that is a separate investigation that's proceeding in its own um pace and and and not influenced in any way by the January six here, So you know, no,

I I don't. I don't think so. Rebecca Roy for you. Great to have you from New York Law School, former assistant d A New York County. It's great to have you back on Bloomberg as we try to get our hands around everything that we saw and heard today in this hearing. Of course, well I'm always watching, so you

don't have to. And the moment that I described, see this aid I guess took this film this video on a cell phone walking backwards looking at Chuck Schumer Nancy Pelosi plowed through the hall with their security into the undisclosed location and they started making frantic phone calls, in this case to the Secretary of Defense inside the building. I'm gonna call up the Secretary of Deal. We have some senators who were still in their hideaways. They need

massive personnel. Now, can you get the Maryland National Guard to come to I have something to say, Mr Secretary of in the same Washington d C. Right now, and see what other outbreach he has. Other voice departments mentioned whether this leads to any sort of criminal prosecution. Chilling to know what actually happened that day. Thanks for joining us on the fastest hour in politics. I don't know how we fit it all in today, but we will.

So what was new? What did we learn? Number one, and this is all played out for you in a very nice piece by Laura Davison and mart Niquette on the Bloomberg Takeaways today and one the committee still investigating. We know that we got the vote to subpoena Donald Trump. By the way, a final report has not come out yet. That's likely to happen after the mid terms. To Donald Trump knew he lost the election and fought the results anyway,

that was made clear repeatedly during Zoe Lofgren's period here. Uh, having spoken with everyone who was around him that day, the congressional leaders made frantic phone calls. I just played that for you, a series of shaky videos showing Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer and by the way, Mitch McConnell there too, getting updates from their staffs about the damage occurring to the building and what was going on outside. Here's another

taste of that. They're breaking windows and going in uh obviously rent sacking our offices and all the rest of that. That's nothing. The concerned we have about personal safety. Personal safety is to just transcend everything. But the fact is, on any given day, they're breaking the law in many different ways, and quite frankly, much of it at the

instigation of the President of the United States. And now if he could could at least somebody, why don't you get the president to tell them to leave the capital? Mr Attorney General, in your law enforcement responsibility a public statement they should all leave. On the phone with the then acting Attorney General, Adam shift California of course on the committee says they received almost one million emails, now, recordings,

and other electronic records from the Secret Service. They're still reviewing them, but as I mentioned, some of them are remarkable. The plan is literally to kill people, they said, referring to tips at the Proud Boys planned to march armed to the Capitol. Number five is that the President sought a last ditch effort for an Afghanistan withdrawal. That was pretty remarkable. As I played for you earlier from Adam Kinzinger, that was something we did not know about, including the

reaction from the National Security Advisor to Mike Pence. General Keith Kell obviously is about to get physical. To keep it from happening. Mark Millie, the Chair of the Joint chiefs of Staff, essentially had to stand in the way of this order to withdraw immediately withdraw troops from Afghanistan and Somalia. There was so much we we didn't know, and likely we still don't know. Let's reassemble the panel.

Genie Chanzano, Democratic analyst, and of course Bloomberg Paul Tis contributor, is here, joined today by Lisa Kamusa Miller back with us, former calms director from the Republican National Committee, a public affairs strategist. It's great to have you both with us here. Genie, another remarkable exercise today. It's very difficult to tell if this is going to lead to anything. Was there enough new information to justify the hearing? You know, I think

there was. I was a little bit pessimistic going into this, wondering how they were going to do this. They had the delay because of the storm. We knew there would be no live witnesses. But I think they did give us and you just reiterated a laundry list of new information. I mean, I have to say, the the order for the withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan and Somalia is absolutely chilling. I think this committee all along has done a brilliant

job using video documentary evidence of that kind. And the video from Fort McNair showing the bipartisan group you know, Chuck Schumer, Nancy Plosa, but also publican governors, Mike Pence and others, shot by Alexandra Pelosi, the Speaker's daughter, who's also a documentarian, is absolutely stunning and and there's about

forty minutes of it, we understand. And you put that in contrast with what was happening at the White House, which as far as we can trail, the President was sitting in an office flipping through his phone doing nothing. That also was very chilling. So I thought they had a lot of new information, whether it amounts to anything or not. They had the dramatic finish of the symbolic act. I agree with your guest of the subpoena of Donald Trump.

It was a remarkable hearing, uh that may be seen a show business at the end there, Lisa, I realized. But this revelation, specifically that the President in fact signed orders that were not carried out to to have a an immediate withdrawal of forces from Afghanistan and Somalia, does that damage Republicans argument that Joe Biden botched the withdrawal. Oh, I don't know. It might be too little, too late. I mean, I think that the damage has been done to the president um as it relates to how that

that withdrawal was man managed. But Joe, I mean, I think the thing that we have to take away from all of this is that Donald Trump continues to be a gigantic distraction to action in Washington, d C. Action, How do you mean action in all forces? There are so many other things that need to be addressed, and here we are investigating the former president for his actions and his role in January six. He's not only that, but he's also overlaying all of that into the midterm

elections while he's still playing the celebrity apprentice. Leaders like Mitch McConnell and uh IN leader McCarthy are trying to win back the majority and that's in both houses. So what do you do you feel like this was a distraction for Republicans? Then? Was this then? Uh? Not worth the time? It's absolutely a distraction, and it's and it's

unfair because this is the former president. This is the most any former president has ever uh interfered or not interfered, but have been involved in the mid term election because Trump is he's identifying candidates and he's speaking into candidatesas also being investigated by former by members on the Hill. So it's unfair of Trump, is what you're saying. Yeah, absolutely unfair of Trump, because the party itself is ready.

They're ready to move forward. They're ready to move ahead, and they're ready to get some things done for the American people. How does you know Kevin McCarthy, who you referenced reconcile his evolution on this, I mean the tape on him, uh, you know, saying he was going to call Donald Trump. He did call Donald Trump. He went from one extreme to the other. And the famous picture now of him at maral Lago with with Donald Trump has angered a lot of people. But he clearly thought

that he could not get the majority without Donald Trump. Lisa, don't you agree? Yes? I do. And I think that this his role in in the leadership in the House is even more complicated than it was previously with Speaker Baynor and with Speaker Ryan. I mean, they had the Tea Party to contend with. McCarthy has a much much bigger obstacles to get past, and so he's had to start a figure out how to remedy and bring together this this this caucus that is just completely broken in half.

So what's going to be the takeaway on this genie? Republicans have been clearly using Donald Trump in many cases to win primaries and set up a majority in the House. Here in some cases those have not been the establishment candidates, but Donald Trump has been pretty good for a lot of these uh candidates, whether they be for House or Senate. I guess it's gonna take some time for this to settle out as to what was what was the most effective move for Republicans to take power. And that's not

to be confused with with what is the most principled move? Yeah, I mean another complication here is President Trump. Former President Trump is not only a former president, he is also likely the leading candidate for the Republican nomination for the presidency in four He also has played a more active role, to your point, in getting candidates on the ballot for the House and the Senate, and let's not forget first

state and local races than any former president has. So he's very much a leader, the leader of this party. And if the Republicans lose a state like Georgia, for instance, and potentially lose the Senate. That'll be once again at Donald Trump's hands, which is why Democrats want to talk

about Donald Trump as much as they can. It's effective for them, but it's not effective obviously for Republicans in the general in some of these states where it's going to come down to winning these suburbs and particularly amongst these women. So it's a very complicated position to be in. And I think one thing that Liz Cheney said today that we should underscore is she said, this is about accountability. If he is not held accountable, it is likely to

happen again. And as we look at the polls, this is exactly what many voters are telling us. For the first time, we're seeing democracy on the ballot in a midterm election in a way we haven't seen it in the modern era. Lisa. We know that there are big plans for Republicans if they do take the majority of assuming this happens in the House, with a series of investigations that are planned, they're going to immediately dissolve this j you are a six committee, and then start, you know,

as they say, investigating the investigators. Will that be a distraction as well, or is that work that needs to happen in your view, Well, I think that I think it's a distraction, Joe. I mean, honestly, I know that they wanted to get back at all of the attacks that have come their way. But the truth of it is is that the issues are so big right now.

I mean, you've talked about it all through the hour, Inflation in the economy, gas places, these are issues that voters are going to the polls about and if the Republicans are smart, they will take on that kind of work. But they will also charge forward with some very smart policy decisions, because otherwise they've only got two years to defend their own positioning when we get back to the polls in for the presidential and twenty four. I think

what was Kevin McCarthy says on day one? The first thing he was going to do is fire the seven thousand h I R S agents, not of course that they all haven't been hired. But is that the type of messaging that we should expect or or is that productive work? But it sure feels like that's the kind of messaging that's coming through because I think that he knows that there is a whole wave of candidates that are coming in that are unlike any kind of candida

that we've seen prior in the House. That are active, they are angry, they are not necessarily as connected to corporate America and the pocketbook issues as they have in the past. They're coming in with an agenda to break things up and change the world. And that's going to make it very difficult for Leada McCarthy to keep that whole conference together in a way that can be productive.

So what do they do with the rest of their time? Then, Jennie, they release a final report I understand that will follow the mid terms. Does that does that even see the light of day? You know, we will see that final report. We have no you know, it's it's difficult to predict what impact that will have. I think on history. Will have a real big impact. That will take some time. But let's not forget. If the GOP does take over the House, all of the evidence that the committee collected

goes into their hands. So a big question coming out of today was why subpoena Trump and not Pence? Because those are the number one and two people involved in this. Pence's life was under threat more than anybody else's. And yet they decide to subpoena Rump and not Pence. I myself have a question about that, as do many people. But some people are saying one of the reasons not to do it was had they done that and had Pennce spoken, all of that evidence would go to the

GOP if and when they take over. So that is a big consideration in a committee hearing like this, and so that's something they're going to have to you know, depends on who takes over the House obviously, but this is where this information will go right to the GOP.

And should the d o J take action on any of this, they will have, you know, at least that evidence collected in all of those interviews to know what to say and what not to say to the d o J. It's really interesting point lia Mike Pence said, you know, he would consider it, and he would testify. I think we all know that he likes to follow

the rules. Uh. I just wonder, you know, in our remaining moments, how you see his station in life at this point, what what is his political career if there is one uh promising him following this January six committee, Following my goodness, the drama that unfolded on January six, and and just the vitriol that so many Trump supporters have for him. Well, he is a very principled legislator

and very very principled human being. And so I do think that if you were to ask Mike Pence today, I think he sees this as a path forward for himself to potentially be a candidate in the future. Now, whether or not that is real and and realistic is beyond sort of my world. I know Genie probably has a perspective on that as it relates to history, But overall, I think that he would be very very hard for me to figure out how he would have a path

forward to twenty four. But he's certainly making moves that make it look like he is interested. Well, we all know that he is. Jennie, he got She's you know, he's doing the Iowa State Fair and doing politics and eggs and the rest of it. But is that just a recovery tour or is that an actual move to run for office again? You know, I think he has a real interest in running again. Whether he does or

not is going to depend. But I think historically Liz Cheney would tell him put the best interest of the country and democracy ahead of your own political interest, and I think he should do that. Genie Chanteyo, Lisa Kumuso Miller, what a great conversation. You will not hear balanced analysis like this anywhere else. That's why you're here. And if you showed up late, subscribe to the podcast. I'm Joe Matthew. This is Bloomberg