Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon Eastern on Apple CarPlay and then drout Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
Taking a look at the markets and specifically what's happening in oil markets today. In the aftermath of President Biden's comments to the press pool, when asked if there were discussions of Israel hitting Iran oil infrastructure and facilities, he said that that was being discussed, then trailed off Joe
and ended with anyway and moved on. So, I guess it's a question not only if these discussions are happening, if this is what is likely ultimately to happen in terms of Israel's response to Aron strike from earlier this week, but also if this was ever meant to be made public.
Correct remembering yesterday the stark response to the idea of attacking Ron's nuclear facilities, the answer is no was the direct quote. We didn't have definitiveness like that today, And of course the president's words can move markets. We're seeing that happen in real time, as we just heard from
Charlie in the crude oil markets. But do you wonder the motivations here whether he was trying to act as a deterrent or something, because obviously this bounces back on the American consumer eventually.
Yeah.
Well, and at a time where the American consumer already might be about to be affected with higher prices for goods because of an ongoing doc worker strike in which he is supporting the union. It is a variety of factors coming together here when it is crunch time for voter decision making before this election, and it's not necessarily in favor of this administration. Of course, Kamala Harris a part of that.
All this was just.
Over a month to the election. Nick Wattams is with us right now at the table here in Washington. He runs our national security coverage in Washington. Nick, I wonder your thoughts on this whether the President kind of knew where he was going with that when you consider the idea of you know, taking out I'm looking at some of the graphics on the terminal here, the carg Island terminal, for instance, would impact twenty eight million barrels. Wouldn't that be destructive? To the American consumer.
I yes, I this is another one of these situations where you know, the President has been relatively buttoned up in the last several weeks as the White House has looked to put a lot of the focus on Kamala Harris as she continues the campaign. Now he's out a bit more, and you have another Bidenism type of situation. I mean, as you mentioned, there is the contrast between the question of would you attack, would you permit an attack on the nuclear facilities?
No?
But it's so hard to tell because this is one of the situations where a reporter says, hey, would you countenance an attack on Israeli oil facilities? And he says, we're discussing that, Well, what are we discussing range of targets the possibility of an attack? I mean, listen, what we do know is behind the scenes, the US is
really working hard to shape the Israeli response. They believe an Israeli response is necessary after that Iranian missile barrage on Tuesday, but they don't want it to turn into something even bigger. And as you mentioned, an attack on oil infrastructure would be very damaging. So I mean, I'm sure President is right, they are discussing this, This is all they're talking about right now in the National Security Council, but really difficult to divine too much from that one common.
Yeah, well, I'm sure what they don't want to see happen is for Iran, if its own energy infrastructure is attack to say, all right, straight up, her moves, consider it closed. No energy is coming out of the Gulf, and that has obviously global implications. It's not just us consumers that have to be concerned here. If we could go back to the nuclear question though, which was a definitive no, many people are asking why that is. I
was fielding some of these questions myself. Why not just get rid of the nuclear sites, go after that capacity, then you don't have to worry about it. What's the answer to that question.
Well, I mean, for one thing, Iran says it is not developing a nuclear weapon. It says that its nuclear program is civil as civilian in purpose. So there's that. The other issue is that to Iran has spent the last many years hardening its nuclear facilities. I mean these are deep underground, heavily fortified. We don't know where all
these facilities are. Obviously intelligence would have some indication, but to just fully cripple Iran's nuclear program would be a massive, massive undertaking and would require a sustained level of military campaigning that is more than just a one off thing.
I mean that more than just Israel potentially, would that require the US.
I mean, it's difficult to even go there. I mean, I don't think the US would be involved, really wants to get its own jets and military forces involved, but I mean just taking out Iran's I mean, that would be as escalatory as it gets. And so I mean the question is again energy infrastructure. It's pretty darn escalatory. I mean, but this is really one of the crown jewels for Iran. It's something they've been working on for years. They've dedicated untold resources to it, and it would really
strike at the heart of the regime. So that's going to be a decision.
Does this have to be a bunker buster though, or some massive military attack? We remember, of course, the cyber attack right that Israel successfully conducted against those Iranian centrifuges that actually set the program back. Can't we be more nuanced?
Well, I mean, so this is a big question because there's a lot that Israel and the US can do to Iran that no one would ever know about, I mean a cyber attack, something else along those lines, and could have devastating consequences. But the problem is when you get into a situation where Iran launches two hundred ballistic missiles at Israel, Israel has to then do something that shows, you know, we've got to use the language you want re established to terrence and the signal whatever it is.
So they're going to have to do something that's very public this time. And I think that's really the question they're trying to weigh right now.
All right, Bloomberg's Nick Wadams, is that a busy week leading our national security coverage. Thank you so much for joining us here on Bloomberg TV and Radio. And of course it's been a busy week as well for President Biden as he has been dealing with this, talking with the national security team, the G seven, we understand, also trying to do his job as the President of the United States and in some ways consoler in chief as he surveys disaster zones here in the US.
YEP.
Back in the field again today, a touchdown in Tallahassee at the beginning of our last hour, Kayley, of course, Kamala Harris surveying the damage. Donald Trump says he's going to wait till next week to go to North Carolina because he doesn't want to interfere the rescue efforts, remembering he was in Georgia.
On Monday, and of course Joe Biden was in North Carolina yesterday's viewing things from the air in the instruction and specifically the western part of the state, and our next guest has seen that up close and personal as well. Republican Congressman Greg Murphy of North Carolina is with us. Congressman, thank you for being here. Of course, your district is actually on the East Coast and areas that are frequently affected by hurricanes, like the outer banks of North Carolina.
But I know you were there in Asheville yesterday. Can you just tell us, sir, what you saw and how far we have to go in understanding the true toll of this particular disaster.
This is so much different from the hurricanes and the damage that we've experienced out here on the coast because while we can park water and it takes a while for the water to dissipate in the mountains. It's an entirely different issue because fifty acres of land out here is flat, fifty acres of land in the mountains gives you a V shape. The water comes down very very quickly and with great velocity, comes and pushes things through. So while we have damage that's sustained, theirs is immediate.
And you know from the you see one side of a mountain okay, other side where there's landslide and literally houses, businesses, anything that was anywhere near a creek or a ravine are gone. They're gone near flush down the stream Lake Lure. About a third of the lake is filled with debris. So they're going to be three stages. One is life and limb trying to rescue people literally save their lives.
Now.
Two is going to be stabilization, make sure people get food, electricity, et cetera. And then the rebuild. The rebuild will take many, many years to put western North Carolina back together like it was before.
Well, we certainly believe that with the images that we've been seeing for our viewers on Bloomberg TV. We're showing images of that lake right now. Congressman, it's absolutely shocking to see the video coming out on the daily here. We all have friends, of course who live in the Ashville area, but we're not able to communicate with them for the most part. Some of them started raising hands
a couple of days ago. I heard from another today says, I'm very happy to report that we are alive and well. And it's just remarkable to think of folks living in a world where they're cut off from the rest of the world. Sometimes they have the opportunity to catch a Wi Fi signal. Most of the time they don't, though, And I wonder about the immediate effort here to bring people back in touch with the world and bring them
clean water. What are the next couple of weeks going to look like in that effort.
Yeah, I mean you bring up a good point, Joe. It's clean water.
That's what people need immediately, things for that, as well as their medicines if people run out of those. So I mean, the word has been out to go out and look for your neighbor. You know, some folks live miles apart, or they live, you know, over on the other side of the hill.
Go and check on your neighbor.
And then we're hearing trickling reports coming in and I think we will for the next week plus or so of people saying hey, I'm okay. The real sadness is going to be when we don't hear from people for
an extended period of time. Sadly enough, I got asked today about body bags and some of the other things that we really don't want to talk about, but will at some point have to talk about because with again the velocity of this storm coming down in ravines like it did, people had no time whatsoever to get out.
You don't plan, you can't plan for this event the way it is, and so it's going to be a multifaceted recovery of life limb and hopefully we find as many people alive and good health as possible.
Well, we're all hoping for that, Congressman. And when we get to that next stage of recovery of rebuilding, it's going to come at a cost. I think we all know that cost could potentially be incredibly high. So what is the role of your Chamber of the House of Representatives of Congress here to make sure those costs that need is met. What are you hoping to hear from the House Speaker who has suggested Congress may need not come back before the election as scheduled.
Yeah, so, I mean, Kaylee, there's money already allotted for FEMA, there's already allotted for the rescue efforts now, and for housing and these type of things. The rebuilding effort really is not going to be anything that's going to do immediate. Again, you know, I talked about the three different phases we have to make sure people are okay. Sadly enough, you know, we've spent I don't know, hundreds of billions of dollars on individuals who've come in the country illegally over the
last three and a half years. Wouldn't be great to have that money to actually be able to spend on our own people. That money is gone. It's not worth really even trying to chase it. But it just shows you the dichotomy of planning and trying to care for the American people. We will as a country take care of western North Carolina, the same thing in Georgia, the same thing in Florida. It's going to take a while, and it's going to take a lot of money.
To that end.
Kamala Harris in Georgia yesterday announcing the federal government will cover one hundred percent of the cost of debri removal and emergency protective measures for three months to help the state recover. When you consider numbers like that, whether it's Georgia, the Carolina's Florida, is will that require an additional supplemental emergency funding or can that all be covered by what the government? By what FEMA has.
Now, Yeah, I'm not sure she has the authority to say that, but regardless, Joe, North Carolina does an excellent and has done an excellent job in the state legislature putting away money Rainy Day funds five maybe close to six billion dollars to take care of incidents that happened like this in North Carolina. How that money gets apportioned, clean up, debris removal, et cetera, et cetera, all goes to you know, who's in charge of the disaster control per se. It's going to take a lot of money,
and it's going to take a lot of resources. You know, people are out with chainsaws. You hear those things going crazy.
You've got to make sure that, you know, God forbid a surgeon. We see a lot of.
Those accidents, but it's going to take a while just to get people access for transportation.
That's first.
That's first to being able to get out, get to their get gas, get healthcare, et cetera, get food. But in the long term, there's going to be a lot of things that need to be done.
Well, as we consider what needs to be done in North Carolina, I'd like to report point to some reporting out of WRAL in Raleigh, who has reported that the Lieutenant Governor, who of course is the Republican candidate in the gubernatorial reef this cycle, Mark Robinson, was the only Council of State member not to vote on Cooper's request
this week to declare a state of emergency, according to records. This, of course, congressman, comes after allegations that Robinson posted a variety of messages on porn sites that many have found to be disqualifying. Is this someone who deserves to be governor of North Carolina as this recovery effort is probably still going to be underway.
Well, you know, Kaylee, I'm not sure what happened there. All it takes is a phone call when you get on Council of State to agree to something. I can't postulate as to why he didn't. I think everybody else did. I think that's just a responsibility of government. You know, it's going to be after the voters to decide whether he is or not. There are a lot of issues that people have with what's happened and how it's been
dealt with. But right now, the main cons my main concern is really taking care of the people of western North Carolina. The East has really come to their aid. You know, they've come to our aid so many times. We've seen truck after truck after truck supplies coming from the east going west. And so you know, the politics will take care of themselves, but people in need right now, whether Republican or Democrat, they're the ones that we need to take care of.
The not the party politics.
Well, we do appreciate the urgency of that matter, Congressman, which is why we're glad you could join us today and just have a minute left here. Are you getting what you need? Can we say to our audience from the federal government, from the administration right now and so you.
Know everybody wants it immediately and be if I've worked in disaster situations after Katrina, I went and worked after the terrible earthquake in Haiti, just as a physician back when before politics. People want things immediately, and we want to supply it immediately. But there is a way to do things and resources that can come. But please, I want folks to remember in their heart of hearts, don't forget this. In two weeks, it won't be as big
in flat the news. People will have such devastating needs for weeks, months and years to come. Please, in America, don't forget what has happened during this horrible hurricane.
Well, be sure to be reminding our audience of this. Congressman, come back and talk to us when you have another update on conditions in North Carolina. It's Greg Murphy, Republican from Carolina, North Carolina's third but of course it's the western part of the state. As Kayleie mentioned that we've got our eyes on and we'll have much more on this ask for money and the need for resources in the affected states.
I'm Joe Matthew.
This is Bloomberg. You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Can just live weekdays at noon Eastern on Apple CarPlay and then Roudoo with 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.
It's only the third of October, which is incredible to believe. Of course, just in the first few days of October, we have gotten news today from President Biden that it is up for discussion whether Israel is going to strike Around's energy facilities, sending oil higher. As Charlie was just mentioning, we've also got, of course, a dock worker strike that is strangling ports along the East and Gulf Coast potentially could have implications for consumer prices in addition to higher
oil prices. What else, Joe, of course, a hurricane we were just speaking about with the congressman from North Carolina. And then yesterday evening a new filing unsealed in the twenty twenty election subversion case against Donald Trump here in Washington.
Is that enough?
Am I missing any What?
Is it? The third of October?
Yes?
Okay, we're three days in.
Let's assemble the panel, because this is why we have a panel. Jeanie Shanzano is back with us today, Democratic analyst of course, Bloomberg politics contributor, political science professor at Iona University, and Lisa Camusso Miller, republican strategist, former r NC communications director and host of the Friday Reporter podcast. What do you think, Janie? We were asking until a couple of days ago, what would be the oct Hober's surprise?
Seems like we've got three already and we're only three days into the month. These are all stories that could potentially impact the outcome of this election.
Yeah, absolutely, And I was just listening to you guys, and it's exhausting to even listen to it.
And it's only the third.
So I guess we have to take bets on how many more October surprises we get. You know, I don't think we could take that many more, but I think we'll get them.
These stories too, unfortunately.
For the Harris campaign, are for the most part, not things that are going to necessarily assist them, And I think the biggest challenge for them right now from a campaign perspective is what's happening at the ports with that strike.
I think that can be really.
Damaging if it becomes an economic problem for the country.
Certainly will weigh down on the campaign.
Of course, you know, the question of what's going on in the Middle East perennially impacts negatively administrations, and she's tied to the administration.
And then of course the storm and.
Donald Trump just out today, even in the last few days, hitting the administration and Kamala Harris on the response to the storm, and in conservative media there is a lot of that. So all of this fodder for the campaign that they have to be a depth at addressing.
Well.
And as we consider what they're going to have to address here realistically at a time where we've seen Harris gaining ground in polls when it comes to the economy, Lisa, how easily can that be unwound if we suddenly see a spike in prices at the pump, if people can't are ordering ahead for Christmas or the holidays in early November and they can't get the goods they want, or it's going to take a long time to get them because no cargo ships can come into East coast ports,
just how quickly could minds change.
Here, Kayleie, I think that this is the one issue that they have got to be watching most closely because it most directly affects the voter, and so it most directly will affect how they feel about the way things are unfolding. As this administration winds down, but understanding that Kamala Harris is still very much tied to the administration,
so it's definitely of concern. The other thing to keep an eye on not only just the cost of goods and services, but if in fact things continue to get and stay and even elevate, maybe even in the Middle East. The cost of gas alone is one that very very much affects the way people vote when it comes to making decisions about politics.
Well, and so as we consider the foreign policy aspects of all of this genie, we've been talking about how Kamala Harris has made a big deal about being in the situation room as this has unfolded in the Middle East in recent days, when Iron was sending missiles Israel's way earlier this week. Do those domestic concerns outweigh the optics of being able to look like someone who could be commander in chief, be presidential as they're being vice presidential.
I just wonder if foreign policy can be still somewhat of an advantage for her and less foreign policy is causing problems for people at home.
It can, and one of the interesting things we've seen in some of the latest polls is that voters give her more credit than Donald Trump, even though he's a former president, for her ability to be presidential, if you will, And so those numbers have been positive for her. That said,
there's always a downside to these things. So should something happen speaking of an October surprise that weighs negatively on the administration in terms of handling what's going on in the Middle East, or if we've switched to the other hot war in Ukraine and Russia, that could of course drag down the ticket as well. And one of the knocks on Kamala Harris and quite frankly Tim Waltz is that they don't have a good deal of foreign policy experience.
You know, this was something Barack Obama famously tried to get ahead of with his choice of Joe Biden as his running mate of Kamala went in another direction with Tim Walton. That makes sense, but when foreign policy starts to rise as an issue in voter's minds, that can weigh down. So these are things they really have to be thinking about as they move forward. But this is the you know, there's a plus side to being an
office and in the administration. These are some of the concerns that can weigh down on you.
Well, that's absolutely right. And so Lisa, is this the moment where Kamala Harris needs to start separating herself from Joe Biden on some of these issues or is she handcuffed to this administration for the next five weeks.
I mean, there's no question about it. She's handcuffed, There's no doubt about that. But yes, I think she can show some some light between herself and perhaps the way Joe Biden perceives these issues. The other thing too to consider he is that historically Republicans have voted more favorably towards Republicans. They definitely elected to elect Republicans at times
of international distress, as we're seeing right now. And so that's another consideration and why she really needs to show some strong leadership and some strong voice and some strong
points of view in this area. Otherwise people are going to regardless of whether or not she and Donald Trump both only have four years of the same sort of experience as it relates to being president and vice president and dealing with foreign affairs, she will have to show leadership and have to show strength because otherwise people will say and ordinarily as history has shown, they will elect to put Republicans in charge because they feel as if that party is more well positioned in order to be
as strong for the country.
As we consider the state of the race here more broadly, of course, Kamala Harris is in Wisconsin today or she will be later on this afternoon with an interesting campaignmate, if you will, at her side, and former Republican Congresswoman Liz Cheney, the daughter of or Vice President Liz Cheney, who as early or as recently as twenty twenty before the actual election took place, was referring to Kamala Harris as a radical liberal who would raise taxes, takeaway guns,
and health insurance. I'm reading directly from an ex post of hers. It was Twitter. Then she says we won't give her the chance, and now she's trying to tell voters in Wisconsin and elsewhere with her endorsement, they should give Kamala Harris the chance. Lisa, is that going to pass the smell test to voters who are undecided who Kamala Harris maybe trying to draw inside with the likes of Liz Cheney.
I think so.
I mean, you know, Kaylee, I think your point is good, and that is that previously Liz Chaney had very strong opinions about Kamala Harris. But I think what we do know to be true is that Liz Chaney very much also has some strong opinions about Donald Trump, and her point of view is that Donald Trump is not only the right candidate or excuse me, the wrong candidate for the White House, he is one that would take the
country in the absolute wrong direction. So I think that the voters will see this perhaps as an opportunity for the parties to come together and for there to be some agreement from unlikely partners that were previously definitely not in the same position as it relates to what's best for the country.
It's certainly going to be the image of the day in politics here, Genie. The optics are fascinating, but what are voters supposed to think? Just to add on to Kayley's question, when you consider the major issues, I realize that they both can't stand Donald Trump and think that he's a danger to democracy. But think about the economy, inflation, the border, abortion. Liz Cheney wouldn't support any of Kamala Harris's positions on these issues, but she's asking voters to choose her anyway.
Yeah, I mean she's asking them to put I'm sure we will hear the phrase put country over party, put country over issues, put country over in democracy over everything else.
That's what we're going to be hearing.
And by the way, we're hearing that Democrats are going to have Republican surrogates on the campaign trail for.
The next four days.
And this is not without consequence because you do have some Democrats who are opposed to this strategy. They say Democrats should be doubling down on the base, not reaching out. But Wisconsin, this fifty to fifty state, Democrats have decided that in this case it makes sense because this will work in a state like Wisconsin. So it is very very targeted, but quite opposite of what we see on the Republican side. Donald Trump doesn't like to reach out
a lot. He likes to double down on the base, and Democrats are doing something opposite.
And while I say.
That, I should just say we did see a little reaching out because Milania Trump is out supporting their right to choose, and Donald Trump is talking to women, so a little bit of reaching out, but usually he is doubling down on his base.
Well, and we saw a little bit of that present on the vice presidential debate, state, didn't we, Lisa, when jd Vance openly admitted that voters don't trust Republicans on the issue of abortion and they need to do better on that. Are we about to see a real difference in their rhetoric around the reproductive rights issue in these final weeks?
Well, yeah, it sure feels that way, Kayleie. I mean, the rhetoric alone on that issue has definitely shifted. And it's got to be because they know that the campaign knows that unless they soften their point of view and soften the words that they're using in this space, they are going to lose those swing voters who are not with them, and so they've got to figure out a balance, and that certainly was very much present on Tuesday night during the vice presidential debate.
All Right, Lisa Camusa Miller and Jeanie Shanzeno our wonderful political panel on this Thursday, Thank you both so much for joining me. And of course it will be just after the late edition of Balance of Power, Joe, that we'll see Kamala Harris and Liz Cheney campaigning together in the town, of course, where the Republican Party became.
That's right, the republic Party.
The optics are curious in this case. We'll see how powerful they are in the outcome.
Here.
You also wonder how some Republican voters might react to this talk about never Trumper's and so forth. John Bolton on CNN earlier says he's not writing in Dick Cheney any longer for president because he endorsed Kamala Harris. He is now considering writing in Ronald Reagan.
It's still not voting for Donald.
That's correct, exactly.
Okay, we'll have much more head here on a Balance of Power as we look to the swing state of Georgia. Andre Gillespie of Emory University will join us next here on Bloomberg.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Emocarplay and then Rouno with the Bloomberg Business app. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
If you're on the fastest show in politics. Thank you for joining us on the Thursday edition of Balance of Power Line. I've been Washington with our eyes today on Florida. President Biden has just touched down following an aerial tour of storm damage. Of course, coming off of Hurricane Helene. Marine one was in the air for about forty five minutes, according to the press pool, as the President had an opportunity to see some of the damage at least from above,
exactly as he did yesterday in the Carolinas. If we have a chance to see what the President is up to right now, part of this trip brings him to Florida for a briefing. He's hearing from authorities, state officials who are dealing with this. If you're with us on Bloomberg TV or on YouTube, you see that map with officials pointing to the Big bend of Florida, where Speaker Mike Johnson is also touring today. Kaylee lines, the implications
here for the campaign are great. We saw Kamala Harris also touring areas in Georgia just yesterday, yep.
And Georgia is where President Biden is also going to be today. We saw Donald Trump in Georgia early this week. He did get there days before the incumbent president and vice president did to survey the damage. But it does raise a lot of questions the timing of this. Obviously, the humanitarian aspect and the trying the attempts to save lives in places like North Carolina where there are still
many people unaccounted for, is everyone's priority. But this event will have consequence as well beyond that, and of course, considering it's timing so close to an election, we do have to consider those as well.
Absolutely. Donald Trump put up a message earlier, by the way, and I don't know if he's trying to comment on the activities that are happening right now. He says, we'll be going to North Carolina next week, date to be determined, because I don't want to do anything that's going to interrupt their rescue efforts. Again, knowing he was in Georgia earlier this week. That's specifically why Joe Biden's been doing these aerial.
Tours right well, and Donald Trump had criticized this administration for not going to these effected areas sooner.
It's a little bit confusing.
I don't know.
Ivanka Trump, by the way, was in western North Carolina, the real heart of the damage, yes, and he congratulates her for doing a great job on that. So the politics are alive and well here in the storm zone.
Absolutely, and not just in terms of how it may affect voter sentiment, but that is important, but also how it could impact people's ability to go out and vote at all. If we're talking about roadways that have been destroyed, hard to get, for example, absentee ballots, two people, get them out, get people to polling stations, given the length of time it could take for everything to be normalized here.
So that's where we begin our conversation with Andre Gillespie, who of course is with EMMRA University in Georgia, where she is Associate professor of Political Science. Andre, thanks so much for being here. We hope you and yours are well and we're safe. While Hurricane Helene was carving its path of destruction, which obviously was quite significant, how do you ultimately see this impacting the election in a state like Georgia, which is a critical battleground.
Well, thank you.
So it will affect people differently depending on the extent of the damage. So people who were critically and adversely affected by the storm are probably not thinking about turning out to vote. They're worried about other things. They're trying to find their loved ones. They're trying to rebuild their lives. The local elections officials in these areas are going to try to do their level best to make sure that people have access to voting facilities, that they have access
to absentee ballots. But we do understand if people are focused on other things. The tragedy here and which I don't think will happen, would be if you can't hold an election in certain parts of the United States because of the storm, and if we look back to other natural disasters like Hurricane Sandy, Hurricane Katrina, we do know that election officials do figure out ways to make sure that everybody who wants to have access to the ballot
will have access to the ballot. So I'm confident that you know that this will be taken care of as a result of that. The larger question is the optics, and so I think the things that you were mentioning before that actually address issues related to you know, empathy and how presidential candidates show up in an area is
something that's very important. There are logistical reasons why a sitting president and vice president may delay their entry into a region to have a photo op after a natural disaster, because they have larger security details, and that was the stated reason why President Biden delayed going into the damage zone, because he didn't want to be a distraction and actually take away from people being able to engage in search
and rescue. That didn't stop Donald Trump from levying the criticism, though, as somebody who's been president before, this may be something that he is quite familiar with. But by landing the punch, by sort of trying to set the optical tone, he was trying to say that the Democrats Kamala Harris included, are not empathetic, that they don't care about people like you, And so by showing up first, he's trying to stake
a particular claim that he cares about voters. I think it becomes a question of whether or not that resonates. And I think for you know, voters who are inclined to support him, they're going to be inclined to agree with this message. I think the bigger people are the low propensity voters, the people who don't always pay attention to politics. Do they understand kind of the art of the spin here, and would they actually be more susceptible to those types of claims.
All great questions, I don't and is it more than just a photo op. I mean, there are some folks who say that people impacted by a disaster like this actually take heart and seeing political leaders come by their pay attention, maybe deliver some promises for help, or is it just a self serving trip to get elected.
Empathy matters. That reflects on the president's character, and that certainly is going to reflect on whether or not a person wants to vote for somebody to be president of the United States. And so somebody who appears to be uncaring or unfeeling is somebody who is not necessarily going to be moved by any material aid. So it's really important. And so there was no question that the presidential candidates were going to show up in the disaster zone at
some point. The thing that we're arguing about here with respect to the optics is the timing of it. And so it could actually be quite empathetic and actually quelle quite selfless to wait to show up in an area if your presence would be a distraction from the very real and necessary efforts that need to be made to try to find people alive. But that won't necessarily stop
your opponents from trying to spend. Then there's the material aspect of it, and so disaster declarations are important, and so there have been empirical studies that look at disaster declarations and how that relates to vote choice in subsequent elections. And so if a president declares an area a disaster area, that does actually have a positive impact on support for that party, you know, us in you know, the election that's immediately after, particularly for disasters that take place right
before a presidential election. And so there was no question in my mind that Joe Biden was going to declare the areas affected by Hurricane Helene natural disasters, not just because they are clearly natural disasters, but because he's not going to do anything to try to jeopardize his vice president's chances of being able to succeed him as president.
Obviously, Andra this storm is just one of the things that have hit the news wires and physically hit the country, of course, in the last week, as we consider other news stories here the dock workers strike, what's going on in the Middle East, and also what dropped yesterday one hundred and sixty five page filing by Special Counsel Jack Smith, and the election subversion case here in Washington around the twenty twenty election, in the events of January sixth of
twenty twenty one, but it goes into detail with what Donald Trump was doing in each of the individual battleground states, including Georgia, where of course, he was also indicted in a racketeering case related to his efforts to overturn the results in that state. Knowing that trial is not going to go forward before this election is over, it's unclear, frankly,
if it ever will. Does a filing like this reignite in the minds of some Georgia voters happened in their state what he argued happened in their state that did not in twenty twenty and potentially have the power to change minds.
Well, it certainly raises it to the top of the news cycle, because this is something that had fallen off the radar. But just because it's risen to the top of the news cycle doesn't necessarily mean that it's changing
people's minds about what they think. I think people's opinions about the January sixth trial in federal court and the Georgia election interference case are probably pretty hardwired and baked into the cake but this brings us up as a reminder, and there are voters in Georgia who do actually care
about the health of democratic institutions. A recent poll by the Atlanta Journal Constitution that was released in September indicated that questions about democracy were among the top issues that voters stated as their important reasons for voting in this election,
second only to questions about inflation. So democracy actually beats it's a statistical tie, but in terms of absolute numbers, it actually beat sort of questions about the economy, you know, if we take if we disaggregate them as the AJC did from inflation. So these are issues that are important. This is certainly something that that people who are supportive of Vice President Harris could point to as saying this is a reason to participate in this election and a
reason to vote democratic. So I expect that people will be doing this. But I think for the most part, people's opinions about whether or not they think the prosecution is justified or whether they think this is a politically motivated which hunt we're baked into the cake A long time ago.
Well, Professor the AJAC has another story today about Republicans in Georgia who want to vote for Kamala Harris, and I wonder your thought on this. We're talking about the former Lieutenant Governor Jeff Duncan, not a surprise. Former Congressman Joe Walsh of Illinois, not a surprise. If we're dealing with people Republicans tend to see or call rhinos for lack of a better term, do they help the unlock Republican votes for the Democrat I.
Don't think they're trying to unlock the Maga wing of the Republican Party in Georgia. You know, you might call it the Marjorie Taylor Green wing of the party. Like those folks are unpersuadable. They are micro targeting a specific subset of Georgia voters. So in the twenty twenty election, more people cast a ballot for David Kemp and the David Kemp John Ossoff Senate race than they did for
Donald Trump in the presidential race. They're looking at the people who cast ballots for Brian Kemp but then couldn't vote for herschel Walker in both the general and the runoff election. And what they're looking for is a really small margin. To remember, Georgia's margin in twenty twenty was less than twelve thousand votes. They are looking at the seventy seven thousand people who voted for Nicki Hayley in
the primaries. Only about twenty thousand of them are people who had voted Democratic in the twenty twenty presidential primary.
So they think that there may be this available pool of more than fifty five thousand voters who could be persuaded to vote for Harris or to skip the presidential race in to vote down ballot, and that might be the margin between winning or losing a state where we expect that the margins are going to be small, whether it's twelve thousand or one hundred and fifty thousand votes, those votes could matter, and they actually dovetail with Harris's
national strategy. I mean, there's a Republicans for Kamala group, there's an Evangelicals for Kamala group that's focusing on white evangelicals, the group that's overwhelmingly Republican amongst evangelical Christians. So you know this, you know is trying to leave no stone on turn and to find every possible vote that could help.
Finally, Andre we did get some separate news out of Georgia today the state's Attorney general asking the Supreme Court to reinstate the restrictive six week abortion ban that of course was struck down by a judge in Fulton County just earlier this week, which would make it go back up to twenty two weeks, through which the procedure would be allowed to what extent If this is indeed reput into place, this six week ban, will that change voter behavior? As this is happening so close to election day?
So, you know, I think that for voters for whom abortion is an issue, this is still going to be an issue because it's tied to a larger national issue about the overturning of Roe versus Weight in the Supreme Court and about electing judges who you know might be
sensitive to abortion rights. It's not surprising that Attorney General Chris Carr would actually try to stop this, And it should be noted that the same judge overturned the ban earlier and is now trying to make a state constitutional argument, and so that sort of, you know, is precipitating Attorney
General cars filing in this case. And so you know, I expect that this is going to go on appeal, and I think most people are probably braced for the fact that Judge mcburney's decision could easily be overturned on appeal.
Professor, it's great to have you back, Andre Gillespie, Professor of political Science at Emory University.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast Just Live weekdays at noon Eastern on Applecarplay and then Ronoo with the Bloomberg Business ad. You can also listen live on Amazon Alexa from our flagship New York station, Just Say Alexa Play Bloomberg eleven thirty.
I wanted to take a deeper dive on what we learned in this brief. It's one hundred and sixty five pages.
I don't know if you had a chance to curl up with it last night, but there are actually elements that are new here to the story in the days leading up to January sixth, and what happened inside the White House on that day, the former president's conversations with his advisors, in many cases acknowledging the fact that some of the ideas being floated here about fake electors and you know, space lasers getting into voting machines, and some
of this was crazy, as he made clear. But the point of it again is to get to the personal motivation and skirt the Supreme Court ruling on presidential immunity. So for help on this, we needed to talk to Robert mcwurder. I'll tell you what, it's been a long time since we've talked to Robert mcwader, criminal and constitutional law attorney who was a daily feature on this program when Donald Trump was in court every day. Robert, I started thinking the other day, I hope somebody sues someone
so I can talk to mister mcwerder. It's great to see you. Welcome back here. We are you know this case as well as anybody, having spent a lot of time talking about it. When we thought there might be a trial before the election. We should remind our viewers and listeners there's not going to be one. But this does give us a sense, doesn't it about how Jack Smith would try to prosecute this case.
Oh? Yes, Jack Smith is a good lawyer. He lays out his case very well, and as you said, there's facts that we haven't heard, and we can also glean it's somewhat speculation, but you can kind of tell who the people are who are turning around a pointing the finger back at Donald Trump.
What jumps out to you here that would actually make a difference in court. He's actually gone back to the drawing board to make it clear that Donald Trump was being motivated personally here. He funded, specifically the January sixth speech on the Ellipse, funded and organized by private individuals. Donald Trump promoted it on his campaign account. The speech delivered, it says, was a campaign rally. Is that what matters?
Oh?
Yes, because these conversations with specific staffers show Donald Trump's mental intent. There's a lot of actions you can do that could be subject to multiple interpretations. But if you have somebody who says, oh, yeah, he said I'm going in that bank to robit, for instance, well that establishes that there's intent to rob a bank. Donald Trump very clearly says, in front of staffers who are now turning against him and family members that he's doing this. He
knew perfectly well he lost. He still knows he lost in twenty twenty, but he's doing it just to keep fighting and helping his own interests at the expense of American Democa, showing.
In trial that Donald Trump and his allies often made up statistics that were cut from whole cloth. As a quote from the report here alleging thirty six thousand non citizens cast ballots in Arizona, changing it to a few hundred thousand, eventually revising it back to forty or fifty thousand, then to thirty two thousand, and backup to the original thirty six thousand. Instances like this bring up the credibility issue. Obviously, does it matter in court? Oh?
Yes, most certainly does. And it's interesting how those numbers fluctuate based on what Donald Trump thinks he needs to change the result in a given election. Oh, we don't need a full forty thousand. Let's just go with thirty six. It's just stuff made out of whole cloth. You know, what's going on here is just fascinating. Jack Smith filed this motion. Usually what happens in a criminal case, execution presents the indictment. These are the charges, and then the
defense files motions. Jack Smith decided to file the motion kind of preemptively because the US Supreme Court said the president has immunity for official official acts, but did not define what is an official act. So Jack Smith came in and said, look, these are not official acts, and therefore they are subject to prosecution. And I'll go a bit further. He had a real clever kind of answer to how you decide in this context. We've all heard
of the Hatch Act. The Hatch Act says that while you're a public official on the public dying, you can't be campaigned. So what people do in campaigns and public offices they put on their campaign hat, which is pride a time, and then they put on their government hat, which is subject to the Hatch Act, which means they can't campaign for a candidate. Now, the problem has always
been the blurring of those two, but those are the standards, right. Well, what Jack Smith has done is said, look, the standard for den what's an official act. You can use the Hatch Act as an example. So whenever these people are running around not doing their official government business, but are doing things to perpetuate their candidate, Donald Trump, this is clearly not an official act of the president. And what he's basically done is given the Supreme Court a benchmark
for deciding these issues. Whether this Supreme Court will take it or not as an open question, but he's given to judge this benchmark, and that I find a legal very interesting legal move which gives a standard well, and I do not think Trump will do very well under that standard.
I think it's fascinating as a person who asks politicians elected officials questions for a living and frequently has the Hatch Act cited back to me for where they cannot answer that question. But I'm going to add another layer to this, getting to what you're talking about here, the events of what happened, the events of January fourth, twenty twenty one. This is two days before, of course, the
attack on the Capitol. In the rally that we're talking about here, a meeting that Donald Trump held with his legal representatives, he asked pat Sippolini to leave the room, right, so the official government lawyer to leave the room so he could stay talking with John Eastman. Sippolini would not discuss that moment when he was asked about it by Congress. But it gets to the heart of this matter, doesn't it.
Well, Yeah, because Sippolini says, look, I've still got my Hatch Act on my hat. In other words, he's saying, look, I can't do this government. I'm gonna leave. Then he's left with Eastman, who clearly is just working for Donald Trump in the campaign, and those conversations are in should in no way be protected by presidential IMMUNI. Look, there's a little gray here here, and I'll give you a
historic example. During the late eighteen hundreds, after the Civil War, Ulysses Grant was very concerned with the way the Khlukuks Klan was suppressing the Black vote and murdering people in the South, and he had official conversations under his duties of the fourteenth and fifteenth Amendments to suppress that, to stop that. He was stopping essentially the voter fraud and
manipulation that was perpetuated by the Klan. Now that is clearly an official act in the subject of voter registration, etc. That is an official act of the President Donald Trump. Unlike President Grant, Donald Trump is not doing that. In fact, he's doing the exact opposite. He's just doing it to
perpetuate himself. Now, Ulysses Grant would have received a benefit as a Republican supporting the black vote at that time, because the Black vote were overwhelming the support of Republican Presidents Abraham Lincoln and Ulysses brand But that was an official act. What Donald Trump did is clearly different, and that's somehow historically how you can tell the distinction on this of what our presidents should or should not do.
Got it.
This is why we call Robert macwerder because he boils it down in such an effective way. Criminal and constitutional law attorney Robert is great to see you stay close with us as we learn more about where this is heading. Yeah, producer James says, it's time for the Hatch Act hats to get on the BOP website. We'll work on it right here on Bloomberg. Thanks for listening to the Balance
of Power podcast. Make sure to subscribe if you haven't already, at Apple, Spotify, or wherever you get your podcasts, and you can find us live every weekday from Washington, DC at noontime Eastern at Bloomberg dot com.