You're listening to the Bloomberg Sound on podcast. Catch us live weekdays at one Eastern on Bloomberg dot com, the iHeartRadio app and the Bloomberg Business app, or listening on demand wherever you get your podcasts.
I'm June Grosso in New York with Wendy Benjaminson in DC, sitting in for Joe Matthew. Former President Donald Trump took the witness stand today in the case where his business empire is at stake, and he repeatedly sparred with the judge. At one point, Judge Arthur Angeron asked Trump's attorneys, can't
you control your client? And it seemed to only get worse from there, Wendy, he once again held a little mini press conference before he started his testimony, talked about everything from the new poll out to of course, this being an unfair prosecution. And I have to say it sounded a lot like that in the courtroom.
It did.
It absolutely sounded like that in the courtroom. He was giving campaign speeches. He was talking about how the judges unfair to him and has always been unfair to him, and all the sort of airing of grievances that we know and love from Donald Trump, and the judge was really it seemed to me like on the edge of his patients, where he was actually threatening to dismiss Trump as a witness and then issue a negative inference. And I'm not a lawyer. We'll have to ask our guests
about that. But that doesn't sound good. It sounds like it means the testimony went south.
Well, you know, the judge has been at the edge of his patients for almost the entire trial, certainly was last week with some of the gag orders. And we will bring in our guest, Jim Zyron. He's a former assistant United States Attorney for the Southern District. Host of conversations with Jim Zyron on PBS. So, Jim, I want to just tell you one exchange here. Trump says, I'm sure the judge will rule against me, as he always does, and the judge responds, you can attack me, but answer
the question. And that was went downhill from there. What's happening? I mean, does it matter the judge I think knew what was going to happen here?
Well, of course it matters. Trump has not conducted himself the way a defendant should conduct himself or a witness should conduct himself in a case before the court. He doesn't have to respect the judge, but he has to respect what the judge represents, which is the rule of law. And that's what's wrong with Trump and trump Ism. That is undermining our justice system. And for him to take the stand and issue this kind of rant, which is
not responsive to questions. First place, it hurts his case because the judge can draw inferences based on the nature of his statements and his refusal to answer questions. And secondly, it's improper. It shows no respect for our justice system or the rule of law, and that's a very serious problem.
Well, Jim, I've got two questions for you. One is here Wendy here in Washington. The one please explain to us what a negative inference means when he threatened to throw Trump off this Dand but also you quoted a judge in your op ed in The Hill newspaper recently saying that no defendant would be able to get away with some of the things that Trump has said. And Trump complains that everyone's being extra hard on him because
he's Trump. Do you think he's actually getting an easier time than Joe Blow from Queen's would get if he were sitting in the defend witness chair today.
I think Joe blow from Queen's or you arrived from whatever burrow we come from. A witness has to have respect for the court and respect for the process. And the judge is the boss in that room, not Donald Trump, not anyone else. If he has some disagreement with the judge's rulings, the remedy is to take an appeal. But the remedy is not to go into these political rants, which he's been doing.
Yeah, but he gets away with it. And this is a judge trial. There's no jury there watching what's happening. This A lot of this is for the reporters who are in the courtroom. And he gets away with it. I mean, let's face it, it's already an upheel battle for him in this trial. The judge is already found fraud here, so it's a question of damages. And you know how much his testimony really weighs in. I'm not sure.
Well that's right, and he is going about this in a way that is highly improper. I think if for anyone else, the judge wouldn't find him in contempt. And I think if it goes any further, the judge needn't clappingm and irons and send them to Rikers Island. The judge will say, the next time you go into one of these rants, it's going to cost you a million dollars. The second time, it's going to cost you five million dollars. And you do it again, it's ten million dollars. You'll
see how fast he shuts up. Yeah, but actually he has the money in any event, Do you, Jim.
Do you really think that the judge so far has fined him five thousand and then ten thousand. I mean, how high can you go up on the next one?
Well, that's chicken feed. But I'll bet Trump isn't paying for it anyway. I'll bet it's being paid out of some political pack, some donor who thought donating the money for political purposes, not for fines.
Well, and that, actually, Jim, is an excellent point about the political nature of this. I mean, Trump doesn't care if it costs him a million dollars of his legal defense fund, you know, as long as he can make the political points.
Because June's right, there's no jury in the room.
But we're all reading stories about it we're all glued to, you know, watching him with his little gaggles in the courthouse. And these are as much campaign stops as there would be, you know, standing in front of the butter cow and at the Iowa State Fair.
So I how much.
And the justice system deal with the political sort of pontificating in the political circus that's going to go on, not only in this trial, but in the four criminal trials to come.
Well, the justice system, the justice system has to be malleable and has to adapt itself to the situation. George Washington would never have found himself in this situation. And we haven't had a president of the United States in all our history who has been charged with ninety one felonies in four indictments in four different courts to state to federal and the justice system, the justice system will just have to learn to cope with it. And they will cope with it.
Don't you think that it'll be different when he's at a trial where there's a jury, that the judge will be more careful there to make sure that this doesn't happen if he takes the stand, even I mean, this is aal so he had to take the stand when called by the attorney the Attorney General's office. But in a criminal case, he may not take the stand, and I think that the judges will be stricter when there's a jury there.
I think the judges will be stricter. And you know, in mafia cases we've had unruly defendants who have made comments when they did not take the stand, and the judge actually gagged them in front of the jury. And so this precedent not only for gag order, but for gagging him so they can't interrupt the proceedings. He has to have respect for the proceeding.
And while that's true, I think they also need to politically for themselves, for Letitia James, for any of the elected officials there, need to show a little bit of deference to a former president, don't they, even if he's not popular in New York City?
They would, Well, he's a private citizen like any of us. The office he once held demands very high respect. He's not comported himself in a way that goes with the word respect. I mean, he's been rational. He's engaged in these harangues against the court personnel, against prosecutors, all to serve his own political ends. And the Justice Assistant will reach a point where it won't tolerate it well.
And I wanted to ask you about something just a little bit different, the collision between the political calendar and the trial calendar. Eileen Cannon down in Florida on the Document's case, which actually seems to be the clearest of all the cases, she's now sounding amenable to maybe delaying the trial beyond May, maybe even giving in to Trump's request that it'd be after the election. What would be your take on how that would work and how would
it change the case legally? If he were tried after the election and won.
Well, assuming he won the election, all these cases would disappear because he would either pardon himself, which means the end of all the federal cases, or he would direct his attorney general, since he's already said that if he gets in he's going to have a politicized Justice Department, and he'll direct his attorney general to drop the cases, and they'll drop the cases. So that's what he's banking on.
This New York civil case is one of the most threatening cases because it may strip him of his net worth and prevent him from conducting business in the state. Of New York.
Well, let me ask you this about the other cases. Is that why it's important that the Georgia case go forward, because that would be a state conviction and he couldn't pardon himself from that.
He could not pardon himself either from the Georgia case or from Alvin Bragg's Stormy Daniel's case in New York.
Those I was aboarding that one on purpose, the weakest of the case.
Those, I don't know that it's the weakest. The false statements are very clear. The question is going to be enhanced into a felony, and I think you can, but that is the weakness. However, it's true we can't pardon those offenses. But there's no way that a local prosecutor is going to bring to trial a sitting president or even the president elect. It's just not going to happen.
There is some room, though, because the trial that was supposed to go forward a couple of weeks ago they all set, they all pled out on that. So now there's some room in that calendar perhaps to bring the case earlier.
There is, but no trial date has been set, and I think if a trial date is set, you're going to have other defendants who will plead guilty, and the defendants will remain are going to be Trump, Giuliani, Mark Meadows, maybe one to others. Will be a very manageable trial, and it can certainly occur before the election. The real problem is that if he's convicted of all these indictments, he's still qualified to be the president of the United States.
Why because the framers of our Constitution never dreamed that there would be a president or a candidate for president like Donald Trump. Lawless, contemptuous, disrespectful of the rule of law. He is a rogue candidate. He would be a rogue president. He said if he gets in, he's going to terminate the Constitution to stay in office. He said, he's going to weaponize the Justice Department to get at as political enemies.
We've never had that before. And our Constitution, which was framed in seventeen eighty nine and the amendments in seventeen ninety one, are just not geared to deal with it. The one hope of disqualifying him unless the Republican Party wake up and decides not to nominate him. Though in hope of disqualifying him, as the case in Colorado and Minnesota where voters have brought cases as they haven't actually twenty one jurisdictions to disqualify them.
But those cases are real uphill battles. There are so many different issues there that the plaintiffs have to win in order to win those cases. Do you really see those cases as stopping him from being on the ballot.
I see those cases as going to the Supreme Court, because if just one state holds that he's disqualified, the Supreme Court is going to have to make a decision as to whether Section three of the fourteenth Amendment of the Constitution disqualifies Donald Trump, and they don't have to find that he physically engaged in the insurrection by force. The history of the Fourteenth Amendment shows that people have
been disqualified based on speech. The simple statement that he plans to terminate the Constitution if he gets in office in order to stay in office violates Article two of the Constitution and violates Section three of the fourteenth Amendment. I don't think it's an uphill case because there are a lot of issues that have been read.
The weight of authority says it's an uphill case. I mean, there hasn't been a case at that level, at the appellate level at all. It's an open question, an open constitutional question that the Supreme Court, as you say, will have to decide that's true.
It's an open constitutional question. Is it's an open constitutional question as to whether he has blanket immunity and from crime for everything he did in office he claims he does. The Supreme Court has never passed on that. But it would seem to me that the logic of the constitution is that he does not have blanket immunity.
So jim switching to another untested le legal practice, or at least novel legal practice. We got a whole bucket full of them today. Is John Eastman going on sixty minutes last night. He is a defendant in the election case, and he went on sixty minutes and laid out a whole defense for himself, you know, opened himself up to all sorts of questions about how, you know, the things that he did legally for Donald Trump to try to overturn the twenty twenty election work perfectly within his rights.
And he went on and on in the sort of defense.
If you were his defense attorney, would you have advised him to go on sixty minutes while under indictment and awaiting trial.
Absolutely not. And it's hard to imagine a defense attorney whoever would have advised him to go on to if you don't want your clients speaking until the time comes for him to take the standard trial. If he does take the standard trial, Eastman himself is a seasoned lawyer. Why he went on television and made these statements, It's incomprehensible. It's just like Trump, who goes on television and incriminates himself.
Well, we'll find out more. I'm sure about that, Thanks so much. That's Jim Zarren, former Assistant US Attorney for the Southern District of New York. Coming up, we're going to be talking about voters in the five battleground states preferring Trump to Biden. This is Bloomberg.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Sound on podcast. Catch the program live weekdays at one Eastern on Bloomberg Radio, the tune in app, Bloomberg dot Com, and the Bloomberg Business App. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just say Alexa play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
Hello, I'm June Brosso in New York with Wendy Benjaminson in DC sitting in for Joe Matthew. Voters in five battleground states favored Donald Trump over President Joe Biden. That's according to a New York Times Siena College poll voters in the battleground states, and they trusted Trump over Biden on the economy, foreign policy, and immigration. Joining us now
are Bloomberg Politics contributors Jeanie shan Zano and Rick Davis. Genie, is it too soon for the Biden administration to worry about these or is it time to worry?
It is time to worry. And I am a worrier by nature, June, So I say that with all due respect. You know, this is very very similar actually to what we found with the Bloomberg pole that came out a few weeks ago. So there is, you know, really not much distance between these two poles, both looking at the battleground states, and Biden has a real challenge on his hands. To only be up within a margin of ERA plus two in Wisconsin doesn't bode well. That said, you know,
he has long had a struggle with critical constituencies. Young people who I talk to all the time, African Americans now the Arab of population in the United States, so there are signs that he has trouble.
That said, I.
Take a little bit exception to how this has been portrayed as Trump versus Biden, only because Trump hasn't been in the news that much as it pertains to the election. His focus has been on his legal challenges and whining and complaining about his treatment in the court system. That's pretty much what he's been on air talking about. And I have to say many people agree with him on
those things. And so I think once people start to listen to your previous guests and others the things he is saying openly about how he is going to if he has ever reelected, use the federal government's power to seek revenge and retribution, they may have a slightly different view, at least enough of them in these battleground states to make a difference. But that, by the way, is not a heck of a way for an incumbent president to run, but it may at this point be his best hope.
Well, I want to come in here in hello Jennie, and I wanted to ask you specifically about the democratic numbers.
Then we can go back to Trump like.
But the the numbers on Biden have been consistently across the New York Times, and thank you for mentioning it. The Bloomberg News Morning Consult boll of last week, which showed similar in these swing states, like we know Trump's gonna I mean, Biden's gonna win California. We know Trump's probably gonna win Texas and places like that. In these swing states that will drive the election. Biden is not
doing well. And as you said, he's not doing well among young voters who we counted on last time, among African American voters who we counted on last time, among Latino voters. It's that they're you know, all over the map. So Democrats have a tendency to stick with the horse that they expected to win two years ago. And is there any point at which the Democrats and I think I know the answer to this, are gonna say, you know, this guy's just not gonna win. We're gonna give the
country back to Donald Trump. Maybe we should look at some of these others, or is it just too darn l.
You know, we have heard that, I mean, we heard David Axelrod come out over the weekend. We've heard Dean Phillips, We've heard others. I think the reality is timing and otherwise. Joe Biden is the nominee unless he chooses to withdraw his name and allow the field to open up. And there's several reasons for that. The primary, you know, the
filing deadlines. The other reality, though, is that other Democrats, you know, Andy Basheer should he win tomorrow, Josh Shapiro, Gavin Newsom, Gretchen Whim or other potential people who might run, Kamala Harris, nobody wants to be responsible for pushing Joe Biden aside and allowing Donald Trump a space and an
entry to walk in. So so many factors couple, you know, together means that unless Biden withdraws or God forbid, something happens, illness or otherwise, he will be the nominee and Democrats will rally to him. The question is, I think, do they stay home in a general if he's the not because they're just you know, not excited or enthusiastic, or do they come out and you know, the reality also
of American politics is unfortunate. I think this race will be decided by one hundred thousand people plus or minus in five or six states. Quite frankly, the rest of us don't matter that much, and that's no way to run a democratic election. But that's the way we do it here.
Rick.
Do you think all this angst by the Democrats over whether someone should step in for Biden, whether there should be you know, a different nominee, is that hurting Biden's numbers too?
Probably not. I mean it doesn't get enough circulation June to you know, have like rank and file voters being able to respond to these kinds of things.
Doing me then, because I've heard so much about it already, Well, you got to get out of the Upper west side.
I mean that's the first upperside.
But that's okayside.
I'm sorry, but anyway, Yeah, no, I think it says it's what's really bother him are the fact that one they got to see through the filter of his age, right, And we know a lot of Democrats are very concerned about an eighty year old president, eighty one year old presidential candidate, an eighty two year old president, right. I mean, like these are the things that are sort of first, second, and third on their lists. And then they get to
the economy and Democrats aren't happy with the economy. I mean, these numbers in the Times Santa pul reflective of the
Bloomberg a Morning Console poll. I mean, almost half of black voters, normally a core constituency of the Democrat Party are are rating the president is wanting on economic issues over that with people under thirty, as Genie was talking about, you know, and so like, these are sort of core Democratic constituencies that have a beef with the president one on his age and then two on his performance in office on the economy. Anything after that is just sort
of you know, small ball in politics. Because sure, I mean, you know, he's got the back of the party on abortion, but less than ten percent of the voters in these swing states think abortion is the number one issue. So he just doesn't have the right deck of cards. The guy needs a new deck of cards.
So Rick, going back to Donald Trump for just a minute. One of the interesting points in that New York Times Sienna College poll was that Trump's indictments and his trials aren't turning off Republicans and the independence who might support him, but a conviction would A conviction would make at least six percent of those voters decide they better vote for Biden because Trump would be a convicted fella and that might.
Be enough to swing the election.
But you know, one, I guess I'm sort of proud of voters who believe in innocent until proven guilty. But do you really think you know that that is finally, after all this time, the tipping point and Trump's enduring popularity.
Yeah, I wouldn't even say after all this time when, because the reality is the people who will flip on a conviction into the Democratic column are independent voters, mostly women who were originally Biden voters. I mean, like, the reason Biden's not winning in these states is because independent voters have basically gravitated to Donald Trump. And they're not permanent Trump voters. These aren't like the rural white males without a college education who make under fifty thousand dollars
a year. They're not going anywhere for Donald Trump conviction or otherwise. But what could happen is that if these trials go poorly, certainly independent women, especially in the experbs and suburbs, could decide. You know what, I'm not happy with Biden. I'm not happy with inflation. I'm not happy with the current economy, which is why I'm sitting on the Republican ballot right now. But like I cannot, I can not afford to give my vote to a person
as a convivicted felon. So I mean, these are the horrific situations for the president to be in because he's now relying on the justice the system to win a presidential race. I mean, June, I'm glad you're here on the show today because only you could explain to us what the real risks are inherent in that strategy.
Jeanie, I want to ask one question about how the issue of abortion is going to play into the presidential race. Do you think it will affect the presidential race.
We're going to get a preview of that tomorrow night in places like Virginia, Ohio, you know, some other states. Six states have gone pro abortion rights since the Dobbs decision. And I think tomorrow is going to be a test. Do voters, particularly Democrats, put aside their lack of enthusiasm for Biden, their frustration with the economy and go out and say abortion is important enough that we will get out and vote Democratic because they've promised to protect it.
Another thing to watch, I would say is Governor Youngkin's message in Virginia. He's got a really different and interesting message on abortion than many Republicans who are defensive. He's gone a little bit on the offense. So if that pleas may help Republicans. But answer your question, yes, I think it is critical to watch abortion.
In the poll.
It was the one area where Joe Biden was doing better than Donald Trump when it came to an issue.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Sound on podcast. Catch us live weekdays at one Eastern on Bloomberg dot Com, the iHeartRadio app, and the Bloomberg Business App, or listening on demand wherever you get your podcasts.
Welcome to the second hour of the Fastest Show in Politics. I'm Kayleie Liones with Wendy Benjaminsin. Today we're in the driver's seat while Joe Matthew takes a day off, and with every new week brings us closer and closer to a deadline in Congress. November seventeenth, the six now, so that's eleven days by my account. Days seems like it might be enough time to get things done, but I'm not really clear on what exactly it is they're going to try to get done by then to keep the
government funded. So maybe it's not that much time.
Well, I think you have a lot more faith than perhaps I do right now in the state of Congress's ability to get anything done. How long did it take them just to get a speaker in the House, that's true, So they have eleven days. They are not anywhere close to agreeing on whether the israelid should be tied to spending cuts, whether the Ukraine age should be tied to Israel, whether any of it should be tied to the US
Mexico border security funding. I mean, there's very little agreement here except some general notion that, yeah, we ought to give Israel some money right.
Now, right, And it's unclear exactly how they do that that the Senate can agree to in the first place, because the Senate wants to tie Israel with other things that it doesn't seem like the new speaker, Mike Johnson is super interested in tying it too.
So it becomes a.
Question not just of storting things out internally in the House of Representatives, which as the past speaker proved time and again, is very hard to do, it's then reconciling it with the other Chamber and making it something that President Biden will sign when it comes across his desk.
That's right, and there will have to be some real jiu jitsu going on for this to happen by November seventeen. But then, of course they all want to get out of town for Thanksgiving, as all of us do. So what's what's gonna how long this is gonna last, or what's gonna happen?
I don't know.
Mike Johnson does seem to make some noises suggesting he's interested in a continuing resolution, so maybe maybe there will be one that they can work out.
We'll have to say.
The question is will it be clean? Will it come with spending cuts that might might be not super appetizing to Democrats in the other chamber? Or could we see a ladder continuing resolution? Even though none of us really know.
What that means.
Has anyone sworned out the definition?
Not a single person. Maybe mcmilvany can do it.
Okay, well, let's ask him. Mickmilvany is with us now. We always appreciate him joining us on Monday. So he's a man of many titles, as we always tell you. Former Acting White House Chief of Staff under the Trump administration, former OMB director and of course founder of the House Freedom Caucus as a former congressman from South Carolina. That good to see you. We always appreciate your time. How do you think this shakes out? What do you think
happens to keep the government funded? And can you please tell me what a laddered CR is?
I think so, hello, okay, clearly run Joe off, which I approve of. So that's fine. The what I this is, what I'm hearing is that there is some support for a semi clean, clean continuing resolution. This is coming from even from some of the Republican Conservatives who would never have voted for that under Kevin McCarthy, but think they might be able to do it under Mike Johnson. The words I keep hearing are what we trust Mike Moore, et cetera, et cetera. He's new on the job, et cetera.
So we'll come in some slack. So there are some discussions about a CR that would take you through either the end of the year or early into next. That laddered concept is interesting and as best I can tell, or's best anybody seems to be able to tell, Is it instead of doing a CR for the whole government, you would do a CR and try and slice it up into pieces that align with the twelve spending bills.
So there would be a CR for Defense, a CR for HHS, a CR for State Department operations, a CR for the VA, that type of thing, And that way, if they did pass one or two or more of the appropriations bills in that period of time, that would sort of then drop into the spot created by that piece of the laddered CR. Does that make any sense at all? Now that I try to say it out loud for the first.
Time, I think so.
But I'm squinting.
Well, yeah, I am too, And I really feel bad for the folks over at the Office of Management and Budget. It would have to administer a ladder.
People.
I'm sure they are.
But let's talk about Let's say that Mike Johnson has the magic potion and he gets a CR that Biden's signs, and everything's hockey dory. It goes till January fifteenth, the day of the Iowa Caucuses, or it goes until April after Super Tuesday, when pretty much the nominees are set. How that deep into an election year can they solve a spending issue.
Wendy, I don't think. I don't think the dates of the various political events factor in as much as that trigger date for the Massy Amendment that was made part of the debt ceiling deal. And as I sit here and talk to you, I can't remember what the date was, but it's sometime in the first quarter of next year that there's an automatic across the board spending cut. I
think it's one percent. If there's a CR on that particular date, that changes the analysis because there's going to be a lot of Republican conservatives who would love to see that triggered because they get the automatic one percent spending cut, and there's a lot of Republican sort of centrists, especially the appropriators, who don't want to see that. So that's that next sort of inflection point that might drive
a wedge between various wings of the Republican park. I don't think you see that with a with a CR that goes to the end of the calendar year. I don't think it goes if it goes to January fifteenth.
But you start talking in you know, March April next year, then you talk about that automatic cut, which is going to be a real, real spot of friction between the two folks, much more so than whether or not Donald Trump is the nominee, because he's going to be the nominee, and everybody's acting in Washington like he's going to be the nominee already.
Well to that point, Mick, as we're preparing for a Republican debate on Wednesday, another primary debate, the third in which the former president and front runner will not be in attendance. But it comes at a time where it feels like Nikki Haley actually has momentum in a quasi sustainable right She, of course Harold's Harold's from your South Carolina. Do you think she stands any real chance of challenging your former boss?
You know, right now she's the most likely. But keep in mind, she's done great the last month or so month or six weeks, She's done really, really well. She's doubled her polling across you know, across the board. She's in the low single low double digits. I think you were from seven to fourteen in Iowa, but please allow that to sink in. She doubled from seven to fourteen.
Donald Trump is still in the low fifties. And more importantly, I think if you watch the dynamics, she's taken the support away from Ron DeSantis, not away from Donald Trump. This is not a pay three places kind of horse race. It's not win place for show. If you're not first, your last. So Nicki does have momentum, she does seem to be the ascendant primary challenger, but she's still forty
five to fifty points behind Donald Trump. That's a huge number, and in any other ordinary year we would be talking about it just because Donald Trump is so far out in front. But we need something to talk about because he's not engaging in the race, at least in the head on yet.
Well, let's talk about that the poles. The debate is Wednesday night.
Nicki Haley may have another chance to talk about foreign policy.
And it seems that she may be able to be a senate there.
What about if Donald Trump is actually convicted in any of these trials He The New York Times Sienna College poll said that six percent of voters would switch off Donald Trump if he were actually ever a convicted felon.
Is that the window.
That a Nikki Haley or Iron Desantas could slip into.
You know, maybe you know, as soon as you say yes, you really, you know, you become yet another person who has predicted Donald Trump inevitable fall from grace and it's never happened. So I think that the track record would suggest that, no, it doesn't hurt him if he's actually convicted, at least in a Republican primary. I think if your point, Wendy is that it looks like it might cost him in a general, and that might cost him the ability
to win. Because six percentage points in a Republican primary is nothing. He still wins easily. Six percentage points in a national election can be a big difference, depending upon where those votes fall state by state. But let's make the case. Okay, if he's convicted, now Nikki Haley and DeSantis can say, well, look, he's convicted, he'll never win a general, that this is the time you need to abandon him and come over and vote for me. To
DeSantis or Nicki Haley or Tim Scott or whatever. Maybe you know, I just think Trump has just done such a masterful job of making himself out to be a victim. You talked a bit a little bit about that on your intro, that these criminal investigations, and this civil investigation in New York that's going on today is actually helping him financially, excuse me, politically. He has successfully made himself
out to be the victim of a weaponized government. That's a message that's resonating with people well beyond whatever I expected. He's doing better now with the minority communities, the African American community, the Hispanic community than he was doing six months ago. And I think it's that victimization thing that he's been able to sell. So again, the man has more than nine lives, and I'm not going to be quick to predict his end this point.
Well, and Mick, I'm not sure you're exactly wrong about what you first said about it helping him financially, because he has been able to fundraise off of that, and arguably a lot of that's going right to those legal bills, as we've seen him in court now, and he's going to spend a lot more time in quart, or at least his lawyers will over the course of the next year. As we talk though about the former president and all
the investigations and charges that he is facing. To bring this back to Congress, there's of course a separate investigation happening into President Biden in the House an impeachment in quiry. Do you think that that could be damaging for Republicans in twenty twenty four if they go ahead with it. Mike Johnson has said he doesn't want to predetermine any outcome, but it does seem like generally he's supportive. And we all saw last week when there was a bunch of
Republican members on Sean Hannity's show. Everybody put their hand up when they said, yeah, we think we're going to impeach Biden.
Yeah, I could see it both ways. Let me make the case real quickly for both sides of that equation. It's bad for Republicans. It's bad for Republicans because people are tired of this. They now perceive impeachments to be political show trials. You know, Donald Trump had two, could have had seven. If he gets elected again, he's going
to have fifty. Right. It's become a running joke with some voters, and if the Republicans run the risk of alienating those folks who would typically be swing voters, that could hurt them. The flip side is could it hurt Biden? I think it could hurt Biden in this way. If there's evidence these two checks don't help Biden, and what it does, combined with his entire experience with his son Hunter,
is part of his sales pitch. Part of what he was offering in twenty twenty was vote for normalcy, bring back you know, normal government, Bring back a president who looks like a president, not like a clown. Bring back somebody who's got some stability in his life. Vote for me. And if his son is running around and this money comes back to him in some fashion, it sounds like he might have already made some mistakes about you know, where's the money, Show me the money, or I had
a Chinese firewall up between me and my son. Those seem to be breaking down screen. Voters might look at this and go, everybody's corrupt. You know, there are no normal people in politics anymore. And that sense of dejection, I think hurts Joe Biden more than it does Donald Trump.
So let's go back to this debate on Wednesday night for just a minute. Meg, You know, why are we listening If everyone is so certain as you are in the Republican Party that Donald Trump is the nominee.
Why are we doing this?
And why has the RNC agreed to four more debates with the not Trump candidates.
Yeah, the couple different answers because a couple of different constituencies in the answer. Keep in mind that the crowd did get dramatically smaller. The audience got smaller from the first one to the second one, so more and more American people are asking the same question. Still, this is Republican primary, and the RNC is sort of doing what it knows how to do, which is it's a primary season.
We have to have debates. If we don't have debates, it looks like we're favoring Trump, and we can't do that. Even though he's the you know, the the the former president, he's not an incumbent. So we're trying to play it straight down the middle with all of these folks. And there's legitimate candidate's I mean, Ron de Santis is a
legitimate presidential Canada. Everybody up there, well, I mean Larry Elder wasn't, but I mean most of everybody who's going to be on the stage on Wednesday night is a legitimate presidential contender, and the RNC has got to treat it that way. There's also a good bit of money to be made here. I think the parties make a good bit of dough off off of the debates, from the sponsorships and so forth. So there's there is a money making operation. But at the end of the day,
it's what they do. It's what they're set up to do. It's like, look, there's seven people or whatever it is now running for president. Here they are. Go take a look at them. We'll put them in front of you on national television. Lets you decide. It's what they're supposed to do. It's Trump that's actually, you know, thrown this into into chaos, which is nothing new by not showing up. I don't blame it for not showing up. I think
it's the right decision in the primary. I think it may come back to haunt him when Joe Biden, assuming Biden's the Democrat nominee, has the ability then with good reason to say, oh, Donald, you didn't debate in the primary, I'm not debating you in the general. And Trump would be desperate for a debate headhead against Bide, and Bide would be desperate for an excuse not to do one. And I think Trump may have given him that excuse. So look, we'll go through the motion. We'll do it.
It might be good entertainment, certainly, it's help NICKI Haley in the past. It might help her again. I might have somebody else. Never know.
All right, well, we'll all look forward to Wednesday, but we always look forward to Monday when Mick mulvaney joins us. Thank you very much as always, of course, former O and B director, former congressman from South Carolina, Freedom Cock is co founder and former acting chief of staff to former President Donald Trump. A lot of formers, but we love actively talking with Mick.
Thanks for listening to the Sound On podcast.
Make sure to subscribe if you haven't already, at Apple, Spotify, and anywhere else you get your podcasts, and you can find us live every weekday from Washington, d C. At one pm Eastern Time at Bloomberg dot com.