Bloomberg Audio Studios, podcasts, radio news. You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon and five pm Eastern on Apple, Cocklay and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
The White House Press Secretary Caroline Lovitt, she said she saw the reporting from moritters around a March first deadline, the idea that this would be bumped back. She says it is false that she was just with the President in the Oval Office and can confirm that tomorrow, the February first deadline that President Trump put into place with a statement several weeks ago continues. So I guess that's where we stand at this moment. We could hear from
Donald Trump himself on this later today. He is expected to be signing executive orders this afternoon, and we'll be traveling from Joint Bass Andrews down to Florida and mar A Lago, another opportunity for him to potentially address the cameras.
Yeah, this is all anecdotal.
We have no paper on this and there's nothing official, so we're just trying to follow the verbal cues here from the Press Secretary and reporting that's coming out of the White House. If we can bring in our panel here, Rick Davis and Genie Shanzano or with us Bloomberg Politics contributors. Rick is of course our Republican strategist partner at Stone Court Capital, and Genie is our Democratic analyst and political
science professor at Iona University. Genie, once it's official here, I guess we'll assume that this is going to be the case. Canada, Mexico twenty five percent, China ten percent. There's been talk of off ramps already. Is this just the opening salvo here? And these could be pulled back if certain conditions are met, or this is the new reality for these three countries.
You know, I don't think we know yet. And I thought it was fascinating your conversation with the representative because what she said speaks to this directly. She said he should come to Congress on such sweeping tariffs, just as he should have come to Congress on freezing federal grants and loans. And this is something that Donald Trump and Russell Vote have talked about. Russell Vote said Donald Trump
will make impoundment great again. They are trying to ensure that the power of the purse, given an Article one to Congress, moves to the executive branch, and they are trying to do that and trying to challenge the Impoundment Act and so be sweeping tariffs which may go into
effect tomorrow, may go into effect in a month. It sounds like this Press secretor is saying tomorrow and this federal freeze is setting up not just a fight with countries and an impact on our economy directly, but also a fight between the executive branch and potentially Congress when they wake up and realize that the president is trying to get enormous executive power by taking over the power of the purse since seventeen eighty nine in the hands
of Congress. But that's what they promised in Project twenty five, that's what russ Vote has talked about, and that's what the President has done in his first two weeks. And he's continuing down that.
Road well, and the briefing is continuing as well at the White House. Genie, we're still hearing from Caroline Levitt on these tariffs. She does reiterate they are incoming tomorrow on Canada, citing reasons for that as being both Canada and Mexico have allowed an unprecedented invasion of a legal fentanyl that is killing American citizens and allowing legal immigrants
into the country. I guess the question here, Rick, is if these tariffs are intended to create a behavioral change to make something different be happening at the northern and southern borders. Do we have an idea of what the metrics are around that what the administration is going to decide is good progress for these things to potentially be lifted.
Yeah.
I think it's pretty subjective, right. I mean, if they see progress that governments are taking, not necessarily on you know, sort of quantity, but even you know, measures that these governments might put in place sequent to the tariffs, then maybe they see the behavioral change being enough to be able to relax these tariffs. Original reporting was we might
see these tariffs going to effect March first. We would have had twenty eight days to actually see what kind of response the governments in Mexico and Canada would produce, and maybe that would be part of the negotiation and say, well, you're trying the best you can, maybe reduce the tariffs
in half. I mean, like, it just seems to me that if these are going into effect tomorrow, you know, it puts these both these countries in a significant defensive crouch and they'll have to wonder do we meet these tariffs with retaliation of our own? Do we take the suggestion that we actually implement more drastic efforts around the stent, the stop of fentanyl and immigration. I would mention that immigration statistics are significant lower than they've been for nearly
half a decade right now. So what's as you say, Kaylee, what's the metric that you're going to judge progress from? And typically we'd have people from the administration out briefing on this, so everybody could be prepared for whatever the president announces, but not in this White House. We're going to hear it first from the President, probably through a tweet and echoed then throughout his administration.
Genie does the implementation of tariffs, is getting some details on this finally actually inform or even accelerate the debate around taxes. This is the other component, of course, that lawmakers have been dealing with here. How you balance tax cuts with potential revenue from tariffs? Could this actually help to accelerate the debate on Capitol Hill.
It certainly could. I mean, I think I would say we have to take a wait and see approach on if it does. And I think part of our problem here is that we simply have not gotten a lot of direction from the White House. To Rick's point as to what this is going to look like. What we can rely on is what Donald Trump did in his
first term when he imposed much more targeted tariffs. The impact on the US economy was dramatic in terms of factory jobs, in terms of real median household income, and that's what economists have been responded to, but responding to rather, you know, I don't think anyone disagrees with Donald Trump that tariffs in a targeted manner can be used to ensure that there is equanimity in terms of trade, that we have a ability to compete fairly with other countries
in the world. But we have so little information on this at this point to go on beyond the fact we were told that tariffs are his favorite word and that he intends to go a whole hog, if you will, in implementing them, and in an economy this strong, that is a concerning way forward. And so we don't know what happens in the future, but in the past, the targeted tariffs had a real impact on people's lives, and the American public paid for those, including farmers in the Midwest.
Well, and we're seeing just news around Terris having a real impact in financial markets today. What was dollar weakness is turning into a little bit more dollar strength. You're seeing movement in the Mexican peso and the looney, the Canadian dollar. You're seeing oil coming off the lows as well. We're only down about a tenth of a percent here, because that's a big factor in this equation with Canada,
specifically Rick. The vast majority of heavy crude imports that the United States brings into the country come from Canada, and that's not easily replaceable unless you want to turn to Venezuela, which obviously has its own complications. And Donald Trump suggested at the White House yesterday that a lot of his decision making on whether there would be, say,
an exemption for oil, will depend on price. How price reactive do we think a president who in his first turn cared very much about what the stock market was doing, for example, do you think Trump will be around these policies, whether it's oil prices or the things genies referring to prices at the grocery store, things Americans will see, Okay.
Lee, I mean, we heard a lot about the price of eggs all during this campaign, but since they've skyrocketed almost doubled in price since the president came into office, we haven't heard Donald Trump talk much about his interest in egg prices. So look, everything is transactional. I mean, one thing we know from the first term of Donald Trump is he is a transactional president. When he sets out these kinds of tariffs there to elicit a response,
it's a deal. And if that deal includes, you know, watching the price of gasoline at the pump to determine whether or not he creates an exemption for Canadian crew coming into the United States outside the tariff regime, then those are the kinds of things that he's simply.
Going to do.
We should expect that. I mean, I would remind people that Canada put tariffs on there our own crude coming into the United States last year. That hurt some of the producers who take Canadian crude and refine it. So this little tit for tat crude war has been going on for some time, and I wouldn't be surprised if it doesn't get caught up in this terraf regame itself.
The Press Secretary has been talking about the conditions here and the causes for these tariffs, Genie pointing to fentanyl as a primary cause when it comes to Canada, for instance, Mexico has its own obviously situation when it comes to fentanyl, but also illegal immigration. I just wonder, if we're looking at these two countries differently, is there something Canada can do on fentanyl that, for instance, wouldn't trigger a pullback of tariffs in Mexico.
You know, I think there probably is. And you know, fentanyl is something that people on all sides of the aisle, and rightly so, have been terribly concerned about. President is absolutely right to focus on that and if he can use targeted tariffs to improve the situation, that is important. But the problem is, you know, perhaps those conversations are going forward and they're not being reported at this point. The problem is what we're hearing about are really really
massive tariffs against our neighbors. And you know, just to use an example, Donald Trump has talked about the fact that he is concerned that China is in the Panama Canal and people have pushed back on that. Well, what we do know is that China is making inroads with our allies in this part of the hemisphere where the United States reigns and should reign supreme. We have to be very careful long term about doing things to disrupt our relationships with our allies. And so, yes, we do
need to get a handle on fetanol. He's right on that. But do you need to take a hammer or is there sort of a chisel. I don't even know if that's the right metaphor guys, or a way to approach it that gets you where you want to be with fentanyl, but doesn't long term destroy our relationships with our allies and in the wash impact our economy unnecessarily, which doesn't help any of us.
All Right, Jeanie Shanzano and Rick Davis, our signature political panel, helping us out on this Friday as we grapple with the breaking news from the White House. Thank you so much again. The White House Press Secretary Caroline Lovitt confirming that it is tomorrow, February first, the President intends to put in place twenty five percent tariffs.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon and five pm Eastern on Apple Cocklay and Android Auto 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.
Where we need to get something more official than just the words of the press secretary. But that's what we have to go on right now, and we may well even more. Donald Trump's going to be signing some executive orders and we'll be keeping our eyes on the president round three o'clock, i think, is what the plan was at this point. Knowing as well, about forty five minutes from now he's set to be meeting with Jensen Wong,
the CEO of Nvidia. Will there be news on export controls on this same day that we hear about tariffs, Will of course let you know if that's the case. That's why we have multiple editions of Balance and Power. We need more than one at this point. It's a great pleasure to bring in Dan Briget. What a perfect time to have the former Energy secretary from of course the first Trump administration as we watch crude oil turn positive here with what appears to be an exemption. We'll
let you know if that is made official. But Secretary, it's good to see you and thanks for joining us here at the table today. How are you looking at this as tariffs are detailed now with your eye on the energy space.
Well, I think it's going to be important to see the impact obviously on an individual company. So as we look at the earnings reports today and we watch what the CEOs are talking about, we'll have to evaluate what is exactly done by the White House and then what will be the exact impact on our company's producers here in the United States. But when we think about tariffs, so I think the simplistic economic analysis has been a tariff as attacks attacks is usually paid by the consumer,
so prices will go up. It's not quite that simple in this case with Canada. We do import about four million barrels per day from Canada of heavy crude, and many of our refiners in the West and the Midwest are dependent upon that crude. But when you think about tariffs and who ultimately pays, it really boils down to who has options, who has optionality, and then the United
States for refiners, it is possible. I'm not suggesting it's easy, but it is possible for refiners to retool their facilities to do sweet crude rather than heavy sour that comes out of Canada. If you think, if you put yourself in the shoes of Canada, how many markets do you have for your crude oil? It's very difficult to get that oil to the coast, so Asia and Europe become
difficult customers. It raises their costs as well. So it looks like on the surface, we may have more options than they have for the product itself, which means that they would low or their prices to maintain access to the US market. So the notion that tariffs by definition mean higher prices not always the case in economics. And I think, as I watch the President, as I look at his words and I look at his actions, he's a very shrewd negotiator, I think.
He knows this well.
So when we consider optionality here in this suggestion that you can retool your refining capacity for different products, how long would that process actually take? Because if we're saying this goes into effect tomorrow, suddenly you're cut off of that heavy crud that's not instantly replaceable. What is the immediate impact on pricing?
It's difficult. I mean, you're right that the timetable does matter. So in the short run you may see some increase in prices, but in the long run, infrastructure gets built, production continues as it does today, and prices ultimately come down. The question is who pays the tariff, And I think that's what we need to focus on over the course of the next couple weeks and months, as the President determines how to negotiate with Canada, not really over the
price of oil. I mean, we have to remember what this is really about. It's about a border, and it's about another product called fentanyl, and that's really what the President's interests are here, I suspect, so we have to keep in mind what this ultimate negotiation is about.
I still go back to the original question about incentivizing producers.
When prices are falling.
The whole drill, baby, drill construct is you just keep producing more. Prices, according to the President, could fall by half and then inflation as a whole drops around it. But if you're exon, if you're pioneer, if you're marathon, how does that work for you.
Well, you know, demand drives pricing, I mean free markets. This is again you know economics one oh one in some respect. So that's going to determine the ultimate price of oil.
Even as supplies ballooning under that.
Even as supplies ballooning. So what's happening is, you know what has happened over the last few years is our production has gone up, which you would think would reduce prices for consumers. You're eliminating a scarcity in the marketplace. But if you look at prices for retail products like DA solar gasoline, over the course of the last few years, i've actually gone up. So why would production go up
and the prices go up? And the reasoning for that, I think is because we've made that production more expensive. We've made it harder to drill here, We've made it harder through litigation in some cases, through regulation in other cases. If the President is correct, what he's going to do is to start to reduce some of that, reduce the regulatory burden that is now borne by consumers, so you
can have increased production but also lower prices. That's his goal, and I think you can do both in this environment.
But isn't that they're a factor here that has nothing to do with the US, really, and that's Opek when we consider ultimately supply and demand dynamics. They've been keeping quotas and caps on their production. We've heard the President in the last week on multiple occasions say he's going to be asking favors of Opek essentially when it comes to that production. Do you have any reason to believe that they would oblige.
I can't speak for OPEK, and I don't can the president.
I think Opek speaks for OPEK, but I do think that. Look, Peck's a big player in the marketplace, and as I mentioned earlier in the US, in free market economies, demand actually sets the price demand in production. Opex a little different in that they are a cartel and they can snap their fingers and set the price, or they can
set a production number. They are important players in the marketplace, but that being said, they do have to drive their own economies and they're heavily dependent upon the price of oil. So we'll see what happens over the course of the next few weeks.
How long will it take to feel the impact of lifting the ban on LERG exports.
I think it's going to be fairly immediate. I would imagine the US Department of Energy will probably start approving some of the pending applications for export authorization very very quickly. And I know that there are several projects that were somewhat halted by this pause, and I think you'll see them speed up construction really quickly. So my expectation would be within the next year or two you'll start to see again this rise in the exports.
Of luc building those pipelines in that time.
Yes, And that's what's really the critical factor here. It's getting the product to market. As we just talked about, we know how to produce oil here in the United States, we know how to produce gas. We can make electrons to drive data centers and everything else. Our challenge in this country has been getting that product to the actual market, putting the electricity to the load through transmission and distribution, and getting those gas molecules to the open ocean building pipelines.
Well, so when we consider it this kind of wider energy picture, obviously we all had a bit of a reset perhaps or there was a reset in the markets on Monday because of deep seek about what kind of energy capacity may actually be needed to fuel artificial intelligence, whether or not it's less than expected. Have you retooled
your thinking around that at all? Are you expecting that there still is going to be an incredibly pointed increase in demand due to all of these data centers and the facilitation of this technology.
Yeah, the demand's coming.
With or without AI. We are without deep sea Yeah.
Yeah, with or without deep SEEK, and with or without AI, we are short on electrons here in the United States. We simply do not generate enough to meet the current demand. So as we think about this, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, for instance, put out a report that I think it's twenty thirty maybe it's a little earlier than that. We may be about twenty five to thirty gigawatts short on electricity today. That's without AI, that's without all of these
announcements that were just made. If that is true, we have to put that in scale. New York City on an average day uses about six gigawatts, So we're talking about four to five New York City sized grids that we have to build between now and twenty thirty five years away. That demand is coming, whether we want it or not.
Well, I'm guessing you're not building any new nuke plants in that period of time, even if that is a long term solution.
So the answer is gas, right.
The ANSWER's natural gas.
That's correct.
I mean the short run, the answer is going to be natural gas. It's going to be all forms of energy, to be honest. We need more renewable power, we need more natural gas, we need more nuclear we need every form of generation that we currently know how to do because we need those electrons. But in the long run, it's going to be newer technologies, small modular advanced reactors, perhaps even fusion energy at some point in our lifetimes.
Well, and as we consider this whole equation, it's all going to be inherited by Chris Wright. Presumably he's pasted some hurdles in the Senate. He could be confirmed to be the new Secretary of Energy, your old job within the day or the days to come. What would your advice be to him on navigating the environment we are currently And obviously he's very familiar with the energy industry.
He's very familiar and this is not going to be new to him. And that's why I think he's such an incredible choice. To be the next secretary of the seventeenth US Secretary of Energy. Chris has got a great background graduated from MIT. He knows a lot about nuclear power. He served on the board with Sam Altman at Oaklow, which is a small modular reactor or an advanced reactor company based out West. He's also got an incredible history in the oil and gas industry as well as how
many people know this in the wind industry. So he knows a lot about energy production and I'm excited about his leadership with that department. It's a fantastic place.
Debria just dropped fusion on us. In our lifetimes? Is that in our lifetimes?
I hope?
Are you being serious? Or this is blue skytime?
Then it's a little bit of blue sky, But I do happens? I mean, you just think about the possibilities, think about the impact of that. You know, we just talked about several forms of energy, oil, natural gas, wind production. If we can bring the Sun to Earth, and that's what fusion energy is. Yeah, we've made all of that obsolete, all of it obsolete.
Can you get that done in the next four years?
I'll try.
All right.
We appreciate you joining us here in our GC studio. Dan Briette, the former US Secretary of Energy during the first Trump administration, now president and CEO of the Edison Electric Institute.
You're listening to the Bloomberg Balance of Power podcast. Catch us live weekdays at noon and five pm. E's durn on Apple, Cockley and Android Auto with the Bloomberg Business App. Listen on demand wherever you get your podcasts, or watch us live on YouTube.
It's a cloudy, foggy, rainy day here at Washington.
I went back over the Wilson Bridge this morning and I could see the boats out in the Potomac as they continue a very, very.
Difficult job trying to find.
Of people on the American Airlines jet that crashed into a black Hawk helicopter just hundreds of feet off the ground on final approach two nights ago. We're going to talk in a moment with a real expert on this, and I'm really glad to say that doctor Allen Deal is going to be with us, the former NTSB investigator.
A lot of us old enough to remember thought of the Air Florida crash from the early nineteen eighties when this happened in the Potomac Alan Deal was an investigator assigned to that crash and is going to be with us in just a couple of moments. We do have news on the investigation, as you've been hearing on Bloomberg,
a couple of very important headlines. Number One, the altitude of that helicopter, the Blackhawk helicopter, is in question at this point, having apparently, and you heard this from the President and the Defense Secretary themselves, was likely flying higher than it should have been at this point. The UH sixty Blackhawk helicopter was using what's known as helicopter Route four.
And we have another important update here as well. That low Altitude Corridor has been closed off now according to the FAA, and that is where we start our reporting with Bloomberg's Tyler Kendall, who is now on day two at Reagan National Airport.
Tyler, what do you have, well, Joe absolutely critical the NTS speed confirming that they have received the so called black boxes, the data recording devices from the commercial flight That is going to be pivotal in their investigation to get that hard data, particularly concerning the speed, the velocity, also the elevation of the aircraft at the point of the collision. As you mentioned, the elevation really coming to
focus in this investigation. We know that around DCA there is a hard ceiling of about two hundred feet for helicopters that are operating in the area. According to flight tracking statistics that Bloomberg News is citing, it appears that the collision happened at about three hundred and fifty feet,
so that would be above that ceiling. As you mentioned, that is a point that President Trump posted about on truth Social earlier today and was originally floated by Defense Secretary Pete Heigseth yesterday saying that it appeared to be some sort of elevation issue. Now, for the Pentagon's part, they say that they are conducting their own investigation into this. Remember, the Pentagon says that this was a routine training mission
and they are not sure at this moment exactly went wrong. Now, an Army official brief reporters yesterday saying that these were experienced pilots to Joe. Apparently, the lead pilot had about one thousand hours of flight training under his belt. That is considered to be significant considering that helicopters often aren't in the air for too long. Normally about two hours at MAX.
Fascinating, Tyler, I mentioned this corridor that the helicopters have been using. It seems the FAA has closed that off. Now, what do you know about that? What can you tell us anything else about the recovery effort on this second day?
Right, So that is suspended now indefinitely as the FAA works alongside other federal agencies, including the end TSB on this investigation. Now, the chief of DC Fire says that divers in the Potomac River have accessed all the areas accessible to them. That means that we are now moving into a second phase of the recovery effort. We are expecting divers to start removing courts of the plane today in a bid to try to recover additional bodies. As
we've been reporting here on Bloomberg. Sadly, we are not expecting any survivors from this Joe. As we know, there were sixty four passengers on that commercial American Airliners aircraft and three US service members who are on the US Army Blackhawk helicopter.
Thank you so much, Tyler.
We'll get back with Tyler Kendall in the second hour of Balance of Powers. She continues her reporting from Reagan National Airport there in Terminal two with traffic getting back
to normal. Of course, this day after Doctor Allen Deal, as I mentioned, former air safety investigator with the NTSB, has actually been there at times like these and the daunting task of rebuilding what happened and trying to answer so many tough questions with so of course much pressure, and in very difficult conditions at this point in an icy Potomac River, Doctor Deale, I appreciate your time today.
I know you've been in high demand these last couple of hours, and it's great to have you with us here on Bloomberg. I just want to start wide open your thoughts right now. So much has been said from the investigators yesterday to politicians in Washington. There's a lot of armchair quarterbacking going on. What should we be focused on at this point in this investigation.
Yeah, there's an awful lot of investigation to be done. As far as I know, they haven't read the Army black Box. They have a combined reportedly have a combined voice and data recorder on the Blackhawk, and that's probably going to be the most critical piece of evidence. If the speculation about the l tude deviations and the misidentifying for apps of the American Airlines airliner for another airplane in the area. All that should be answered by the
black box aboard the black Hall helicopter. I don't know that they actually I think I've read that they have that in their possession. I don't think they've read it yet. The other issue is going to be whether or not they were actually on the so called night vision goggles. Those can be difficult to use. I'm not a helicopter pilot. I've flown fixed wings out of that airport, and I've flown in helicopters with night vision goggles, and they're designed
for tactical use. You're trying to find enemies that are hiding from you, But using them in a urban environment, if you will, might not be the best idea. But again, this is these are things to be investigated right now. All we can do is speculate. I guess about where this investorstigation might go. But of course the NTSB is going to look at every aspect of the people, the machines, and the environment.
Well, I know there's a lot of speculation going on right now, which is not always the friend of the investigator. Uh, doctor, can you tell me the process once you get these black boxes out of the water, what happens to them?
How are they treated? And where do they go?
Well, there's an NTSB lab actually a data recorder and voice recorder lab about a mile from the accident site in this case, and I believe they'll also be able to read the military recorder, which is a much newer device than than the American airlines uh uh aircraft had. But they they first of all, they download the data.
Use may uh yeah, and uh.
Then they when it comes to the voice recorder, they of course, you you want people that.
Knew the deceased to be in the room. Uh.
There's really not a lot of question as to who's speaking, but you want people that knew those people to be present. So they'll listen to the voice recorder with people that are familiar with the individuals, and that will be that'll take some time because they want to get the transcript absolutely correct and everybody's got to agree that's actually the words that were said. This is why the NTSB takes its time releasing this information. The data recorder, of course,
is all electronic. It's probably going to take days to get make sure that it's correct. And of course we've got two vehicles here, the helicopter and the airliner. Again, a lot of the elbow work in the NTSB lab, like I said, which is a mile from the accident site.
Fascinating if I'm understanding you correctly. Though, the voice recorder, knowing that they were about three four hundred feet off the ground and this was very very quick in the way that it happened, the voice recorder is what's going to probably provide more insight than the data.
Is that fair to say?
Yeah, what I've said in my books is that the data recorder normally tells you what happened. Listening to the voice recorder this, you know, even things like the voice inflections UH give you a lot of information about what might have been going on in the in the heads and minds of the of the pilots. I'm an aviation psychologist, things like speaking mannerisms, and of course as you as we get excited, our voice goes up and pitched. So those are the kind of very subtle clues that the
investigators will be listening to. And of course the other thing they'll do, particularly with the helicopter UH, is to create an out of cockpit view.
It's called an ocometric.
Study, but so you know from each pilot's viewpoint if this American airliner was obstructed by structure like the door frames and so on. So again, i'll lot of forensic work needs to be done, and the NTSB is going to be very very careful and very meticulous about examining things like this out of cockpit view, voice inflections, and of course obviously the electronic data provided by the recorders
and the radar. So this has all got to be correlated and validated before they're going to make any pronouncements. So I can speculate, you know, as long as your listeners know that this is the only speculation. But the process is very arduous and very demanding, and it is a team process. The Army will be there, the air Traffic controller unions, the pilot unions, everybody works together on this.
Even though the NTSB is leading the investigation, there's a lot of they call them parties to the investigation and they all get to review the data and make sure it is as advertised.
Doctor, I've only got about a minute left that I want to have to cut you off. But I've never talked to an aviation psychologist before. Would wearing night vision goggles while flying a Blackhawk helicopter increase the stress load on the pilot.
Particularly in this environment.
Yes, well that gets right to it.
Zero field of view and.
Debt perception is always not always the greatest. So now remember that pilot, she's going for her annual check ride, which requires her to demonstrate competence in NBG night vision goggles. So it may will be that they were forced to use those devices to complete her annual check ride.
I don't know. Of course, the instructor I was more experienced.
He may have been the one on the radio that said we see the American Airline. All of that's got to be correlated. Yes, NBGS our challenge, Thank.
Thank you doctor you got to come back Alan deal former NTSB. We bring it right to the source here on Balance of Power. 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 Noontimeeastern at Bloomberg dot com.