Surveillance: Solving The Nuclear Problem With Adm. Stavridis

is the big decision this morning? When the United States Ambassador Lightheiser testifies to a House panel, the fetes J Pal testifies to a House panel, and at the very same time, the president's former lawyer Michael Cohen testifies before a House panel. To help answer that question here in New York, Todd, Mariano, you raised a group US director and shiphap jellin news credit suite, head of FX, and a macro trading strategy. So what do you do at

ten am? Todd? You've got those three screens? Which one are you watching? First of all, I try to watch all three at once, But failing that endeavor, I have to go with Lightheiser first and catching up with the other two in full later. What do you think should have I think from a pure entertainment perspective, I'd watch Coming, but I'd have to agree with Todd from a professional perspective,

lighthiser comes. Yeah, it's funny that for the substance the focus, I think for many people, Tom Keane is going to be on Ambassador Lightheiser, But the distraction and the fireworks and the theater is coming from comedy. For those on radio, you just see the body language in Hannoy And as a beginning statement, it's totally different than Singapore. There at the Metropole Hotel Shob You've you've been there, John, Have you been to the metropolit Annoy? I've never been, But

it's beautifully restored. It's elegant. You can buy fancy watches, you can have day what what was it, wago beef? They don't serve that on McDonald's. But the whole thing and the answer is that's a different president than what we saw in Singapore. Do you think today's events a whang on him? Somewhere? Absolutely saw it with the tweets this morning, I mean the tweets this morning, the eclectic

sense of them. Todd was it was extraordinary where he is distracted by domestic issues, not that he's the first president to ever have that. He can't not be distracted by what's going on. It's it's too important to his presidency. Um, you know, certainly with with what's going on in the in the House, just in the oversight and reform let alone, you know, the various other investigations, the drip drip drip

of of what comes out every day. Even his harshest critics give the President Shahab massive cred for trying to jump start a medieval kingdom towards some form of model of Asian capitalism. The President mentioned that in his comments, he's he's tremendous, I believe is the word he was.

I'm paraphrasing their folks. Can he be optimistic about any sense of North Vietnam becoming like Laos Well, I think I think, having actually visited d M the DMZ some years ago and seeing that even then there were factories across the border that we're producing products for South Korea and others, the potential is clearly there, and even some of the infrastructure is already there. Uh. And with relations between South Korea and North Korea improving as well constantly, UM,

we do have symplomas of hope here. But I think ultimately though It's not so much about what Trump thinks about all of this. It's the North Korea's domestic internal political structure that's very hard to read from from where I sit. For anyone waking up on Wall Street this morning, this isn't even on the radar? Is it todd? The

situation in Hannoy? Is it? Is there something you're even paying attention to, Probably pay more attention tomorrow to uh, you know, actual outcomes the press conference last time and sing poor we had President Trump mentioned a couple of things during the press conference that weren't in the joint statement UM, but markets in general from a macro perspective, or as Schab was saying earlier, going to look at

this from an as an up or down vote. You know, do we have a higher geopolitical risk premium um, you know, or a or a lower one or staying the same The nuance is harder at a price. And also, as you said at the top of this program, you're focus today will actually be on whatever Ambassador lighthiser has to say in front of the House panel. I just wanted to what degree the story playing out in Hannay actually folds into the trade story and China being the important

piece in both. What are your thoughts on that side. Yeah, well, you know, the the chart that that Tom put up on TV earlier today is is interesting. It gets that it gets that okay more than more than okay. As as usual, Ferro didn't want me to use that chart. Explain, you don't because your focus on radios into the shot.

Come on charts on radio here it is nominal GDP per capita the growth rate of the Asian nations back and Todd is is we just to quickly summarize China and Vietnam on fire, Cambodia a little less allows worse than that trailing. Yeah, this is uh, this is what I think the North Korean's what would ideally like to achieve. Of course, for for China, it's an economic opportunity as well. And what what we see across that whole region now

is is competition. You know, not only over you know, just economic models and influence things like that, but you know, but certainly over technology too. So you know, China's approach here has been to um, you know, play this a little more quietly, stay behind the scenes, while uh, while the US is really out in front kind of you know, driving this semmetery with with Kim Jong Un. For them, it's a it's a longer term game. I think of

economic competition. I spend a couple of it's talking about what you want to focus on a little bit later this morning, which is the hearing with Lightheiser on trait specifically, what are the missing pieces that you want some color on. I would say, UM first and foremost U S M c A. It's it's something where lawmakers have been trying to get a little bit more color from Lightheiser. Where do we um, you know, where do we stand on some of the procedural steps. UM, very importantly, where is

Mexico with their labor law? And UM. You know, certainly the stealing aluminum terroffs that are still in place on Canada and Mexico ought to be lifted, you know, especially for some Republican lawmakers, you know, to give their blessing to this agreement. So some additional you know, detail from Lightheiser would would really be interesting for me, Jahab what

are you looking for? But I think one of the debates in the market has been about the extent to which this apparent divide between UH some of the hardliners on China on the trade issue and light highs and might be seen as one of them, and Trump himself who's looking for a deal. Some senses as to how protracted that conflict could be if there is one, um and is it bad enough to potentially derail the talks and stop the market getting to it where it wants

to with respect to this issue. Um. I don't imagine that we'll see that today, but of course if if it comes out looking negative on that front, then there could be a bit of an upset for the market

on that. And I think it's good John that you bring up the China trade talks because the fact is the vast majority of Americans are completely distracted by this other stuff, and yet these are going to be substantial discussions from the Primarily the distraction will be Michael coming today, I would say, given the last twelve hours for those waking up across America right now, just the last twelve hours of the the I guess the leak of is it it too uh? Leaked to The New York Times.

Of course, on the language of Mr Cohen alone brings that a new level of acuity planning to tell the committee about alleged mistates by film of box. They're going to have how many hours of this liked it today? Well, three days or two days, whatever it is. But well, of course what we're seeing now across all of news is of course these images from Hanoi as well. I think we have to leave it there, gentlemen in the

news logest extraordinary. I'm going to stick with us. It's a little bit later on this actually talk about markets and in the financial markets at the back of the events in Pakistan and India right in the last couple of days, especial thanks to Todd Marianna, thank you you write A group's US director John extraordinary to see just the immediacy in the last sixty minutes of the headlines on Indian Pakistan, the econ Market Times of India says,

let better sense prevail. We're willing to talk, says Mr Khan of Pakistan's that's sort of the legist nugget promise to Imran Khan is trying to make this settled down a little bit after the events of the last the last couple of days or so, the biggest escalation, I have to say in decades, India saying that an Air

Force pilot was missing. After Pakistan said it has shot down to Indian fighter jets, relations between what many people consider to be arch rivals have just worsened amid the possibility potentially, of course, there is always the risk of full blown war. I want to bring in from New Delhi Ian Marlow Bloomberg, South Asia Government reporter, Ian, some fantastic reporting from the team and yourself over the last

couple of days. Can you get us up to speed and where we are now, where we have been and where this is going. Yeah, at the moment, we're all still in a little bit of shock from the speed at which events have moved here. Earlier today two jets um Pakistan announced that they had shot down two jets, and then India came out and confirmed that a pilot, one of their Indian Air Force pilots was was in Pakistani custody um or at least that he was missing,

missing an action. Um So, at the moment, we're all waiting to see how India responds to the developments of today. Um what pakistanalogies are two down Indian Air Force fighters And as a lot of other commentators have said, this is some of the most severe as military escalation we've seen in decades UM and UH some say dating back fifty years to the nineteen seventy one Indo Pakistani War.

So Prime Minister Imran Khan Ian saying that he only took action after a ascertaining damage was done by Indian's attack on Tuesday, he called for dialogue. Essentially, he said better sense should prevail, we should sit down and talk. What is the Indian response. There hasn't been a solid

Indian response to Prime Minister Khan's comments so far. UM. It would be useful to to note that over the past um year, Khan has made various gestures to India indicating that he would be happy to have some kind of peace talks with with India. But India always sort of goes back to their default position, which is that they say Pakistan sponsors terrorists UH and trains them and they strike inside India, and that they do that as a way to avoid a sort of direct military confrontation.

So India says, we will not talk, and there's no point in talking unless you stop that and acknowledge that, and so at at the same time, con you know, can't come out and acknowledge that because of domestic politics and other things in India, that's what the U. S And other countries think is happening UH, and India is probably unlikely to to engage in any widespread or or sort of meaningful talks with with Pakistan at the moment.

The one thing we're sort of looking at is whether there could be any sort of restricted talks in terms of getting this UH pilot back UM. And that's something that at the moment isn't quite clear because India hasn't made their made their stance known. I And as you say, it's been surprising because it's happened so quickly, the events of the last day or so. They feel somewhat clumsy the way all of this is played out in the last several hours. Your thoughts on that, Yeah, absolutely, it's

been It's been pretty remarkable to UM. Each day there's something dramatically different, UM and each each side UM is claiming remarkably different set of facts here. On Monday, India said they bombed a terrorist camp and killed three people. Pack stance that nothing was hit at all, There was just some damage on a sort of hillside somewhere in the in the mountains. UM, and today we have you know, two jets, one jet, two pilots captured, one pilot captured.

No one is quite sure who to believe at the moment um, it's quite clear that these are you know, very kind of diametrically opposed positions, and it's very very sort of weighted in terms of what people are allowed to say in the record. UM. You know, for example, straight whether yeah, there's twenty two major languages in India by one count all that you decide is the expert here and within those languages is an election for Mr Modi. And within the linkage of language to culture is religion.

Give our viewers worldwide, our listeners rather worldwide a sense of the religion debate in India. Now after these hostilities, yeah, I mean so Kashmir is obviously a Muslim majority state, and so after the terrorist attack of earlier this month on February fourteenth, that killed forty Indian paramilitary troops, there was a strong reaction um inside UH India towards UM

Kashmiris and Kashmiri businesses. You had some hotels in parts of the sort of the sort of Hindu majority states, UM saying we don't want Kashmiri's coming to our hotels. You had a a state governor who was appointed by the ruling party urging a boycott of Kashmir so saying Indians shouldn't go there for tourism, you shouldn't frequent Kashmiri businesses. And I mean obviously most most Kashmiris are Muslim And this is very waited kind of fraud language coming ahead

of an election. And and the U S government you know, has warned in the past that as elections approach in India, UM, there could be religious clashes and that's something that a lot of analysts are are waiting to see. Um. No one you know has expected, um a sort of India Pakistan confrontation has the election and obviously, um, you know,

Pakistan does play up every once in a while. The treatment of of Muslims in India and always great to get your thoughts and inside from from the team fantastic Bloomberg South Asia Government reported Carol Rick Odonna, where us a Bloomberg Economics. He and tim O Haiti have published on all things Pole. But first let's go to Janna Smilek, who is in the trenches of looking question to question Jenna, is the chairman gonna have to face today political questions

from a Democratic House? Is there going to be a much more political chit chat than what we witnessed yesterday? You know, it's an interesting question. We did see some political chit chat yesterday. You know, there were questions about the fact that, you know, Donald Trump. Actually Jenny Ellen's comments from earlier this week that Donald Trump really is doing got raised. I think you could definitely see more of that. You're also likely to see Powell kind of

dem and choose not here. I know that, okay, but let's cut to the theater. Let's cut to the theater with the news law John Farrell says, what's a trade representative testimony? Not this song and dance? Okay? Sell me on why I need to watch Powell? Is he going to answer any questions from from democratic socialists? I mean, let's cut to the chase. Is he going to have

to bounce off socialism today? It's an interesting question. He certainly pushed back heavily on this idea that death that don't matter in a country that is the reserve currency. Yes r and I thought that his pushback on that was really full throated, certainly more definitive than I would have expected from Chair Power. I think. Also it's going to be really interesting to watch to see if he

gets asked more about the SIDS current rethink. You know, they are considering prentically going to some sort of average inflation targeting or price level targeting regime rather than the symmetric regime that they're right now. And he got asked about that yesterday. This is a big deal for the FED, this this whole year long process symmetric symmetric teacher. Yeahs interesting. Is he going to be asked about the collapse of Duke? I mean, what do you think? I mean, one can

only hope. Okay, Gina smile like a chapel hill. Thank you so much for joining us. And there's a drinking game over the over the last twenty four hours and into today as well. Do you want to know what the buzzword is? Do it for the second day of the testimony is not due. It's not my lane. Oh, it's not my line. When Chamon Pal says it's not my lane, that's when you have a shot. And I imagine you'll be getting a lot more drunk today than

you've got yes, I would think so as well. Carl rickodon Here, why don't you bring in Mr Rickodna, who knows the multiple lanes of the American economy. Boom Bag Economics chief US economist Carlie says that a lot doesn't he. I don't think it's fair when you are at the controls of the largest economy in the world and the FED chair is like it or not to say that's not in my lane. Everything pretty much falls under your But he still says it, right, Yeah, he can say

that they can. The FED can deny they're responsible for participation trends and productivity growth and all those good things. Uh, they have to be held accountable lot. To some extent, the Chairman's had some difficulty with communication over the last year or so. Some sounded pretty good, pretty good day going into the second day. Is that why we watch this still? Just in case? Is it that? Just in case?

It is interesting? Absolutely, and so ordinarily the prepared testimony that the speech he reads that the that the onset is identical on day two. It doesn't have to be identical. So if there is a misstatement or a big market move on day one, they can tweak the language. There wasn't a big market move yesterday, So I don't expect that.

I want to framework to be your Bloomberg intelligence in Bloomberg economics work, which is you have certainly your job is not to predict what the Fed will do, but you have stated very coherently, here's why we're going to see a rate rise or even two of them. That's the backdrop of all this chit chat, isn't it is? He's never been as far away from the markets as he is right now. Absolutely, I think the Fed has

been rattled. Uh, they've lost a little bit of their confidence after what happened in Q four and the less, you don't raise rates when equities are already down about twelve percent going into the meeting unless you really want to create a foul mood. And so they did that. They made that communications blunder, and they had to backtrack. As a result, they're now less confident that they have the tea leaves right in the economy. And so I think we're now looking at a more reactionary FED in

twenty nineteen compared to eighteen. And that reactionary behavior means that as we get more inflation heading into mid year, they're gonna reverse course on a bad day. Where's the inflation? Just because the inflation inflation for the last eight years doesn't mean they'll be wrong in twenty nineteen. Here's where the inflation is. It's in goods, it's in services, it's in wages. Inflation is up forty BIPs over the course

of the last year. That acceleration is going to extend into nineteen as the economy continues to operate above trend dangerous words and economics, this time is different. What is different in twenty nineteen. We've gone through full employment and we're starting to see changes the voice. The voice changes. He knows what's coming. Is that you should see him. He can bring a bar to a complete halt. On Newtonian I've decided that I prefer timohitie, Why don't you

step in here and look alone? Rick Odonna fired up inflation second half of the year. Okay, so the feed sits there, inflation starts creeping a little bit higher. Then all the duom crew come out and say, twenties coming, it's not going to be pretty. Why do they hike

into that? Sure, they hike into that because they simply won't have the tolerance to sit on their hands as they reassess economic conditions at mid year and realize, Okay, we had a bit of a soft patch towards the end of eighteen and the first part of nine team, we had an earnings recession, possibly not an outright recession, and earnings recession that has subsequently passed, and we have

an economy operating above trend. We have inflation above their target, and we have wage pressures at the highest at the fastest pace of the cycle, and we're seeing evidence that those wage pressures are indeed passing through into consumer prices. And they realize a setting of zero on real interest rates is not What about the argument the inflation is on the shelf for so long that we need to

let an overshoot take place for a little while. Well, this site is happening very pumpluent, something Gina highlighted and something they're considering. Do you simply reset the clock every year on January one and say, let's aim for two percent this year, or do you say we need to make up for lost time? Really important, and this is the at the FED, and they're not clear on what the answer what is the history, What is the history of the quote overshoot unquote? Can they can they establish

a policy to overshoot two percent? It's not in their DNA, it's not in their history. It's not in history. It's not in their DNA. If we're looking at me, absolutely asymmetric by definition, and you can see that in inflation expectations. Right as soon as we're overshooting their two percent target, they're gonna panic and start pushing more heavily on the intrket. How many basis points does a tenure pop um? Given the asymmetric nature, nature, the lack of history, we get

the rick of Donna world. What's it gonna do to my portfolio on my yield market? Sure well, it's gonna push yield back up to the levels I think that's a fair assessment. Or even more, as we return to what yields looked like in the latter half of last year, those are still pretty low yields. The real yield will be the unreal yield because real yields will disappear. Can bring an important point. The FED is gonna let the market lead the way on this. If FED doesn't want

to job own the market into rate hikes. If Fed's gonna sit back and say patient, patient, patient until the market is crying for rate hikes, and then jed to oblige you touched on something important. Car. Just to wrap this conversation up, real rates at the Federal Reserve, we are barely real. We are essentially at zero. Sensitive are they to that the economy has never slowed or gone into recession with rates as low as they are right now? Yet yet people think we might have gone through neutral

with the rate where it is right now. And then July, when we're next talking about the semianual testimony of the FED chair on Capitol Hill, will reassess and say we weren't at neutral and the economy is still growing above trend. You've gotta be proud. Did you see how Pharaoh jumped right there to elasticities and FED dynamics. You're going to

test those elasticities. Donna very Um, Crystal very Newton about the second half of this year in ran the minute at the at the Tower, I wanted to have a good discussion now with where we are in two thousand nineteen and maybe project to the future of our fractious international relations in the Pacifics, and you can, of course do that with James Travitas, formerly with Tough University, now

the Carlisle Group and noted author. But I think I need to step back, as I have the last few days, Admiral, in trying to bring a little history into what is west of the Red River, what is near the wonderful like of the restored sword in Hanoi, and discussions of a prison and discussions of a hotel where the President eight and just left moments ago. But let me begin with your Hanoi of seventy two, when you wandered out to San Diego on the US Jewett. What was Vietnam

like when you first put out the sea. What a wonderful question, Tom. The war was on the down slope. You'll recall we had withdrawn almost all of the U. S troops at that point. We were continuing to fund the South Vietnamese security forces. They were holding their own against the viet Cong. And then, unfortunately, before I even left the Naval Academy UH by seventy five, we cut off that funding. Saigon fell now a toki Min city helicopters lifting off the rooftop from the Embassy's not a

good outcome. Flash forward, now these forty plus years, we're in a positive relationship with Vietnam. I never could have imagined that back in the nineteenth seven. What should those older think, who remember the name Alvarez and remember the name Thompson, our two longest POWs, how should they interpret where we are in two thousand nineteen. I have spoken to many of the POWs over the years, including to the most famous of them, Senator John McCain, who spent

seven years in the Hanoi Hilton. I had visited his cell in the Hanoi Hilton, the Prison Hilton, and uh, they will tell you universally the POWs that they are happy to see a reduction intentions between the United States and Vietnam. Um. They have risen above the pain in the anguish they went through, and we had to salute

every single one. How do you, as a former admiral and retired with a great distinction, and as an author, how do you interpret the President's tweet this morning going after the Senator from Connecticut, who I believe was a Marine reservist, and with the various deferments and and and all that, how do you interpret that tweet? This morning, Admiral Um, I'm disheartened by it. I think this is a Senator Bluementhal who's not only a Marine Corps veteran, h he has a son who's a seal and another

son who's a Marine Corps officer. Um, he's someone Blumenthal who cares deeply about the country. What I hate to see going both ways, Tom, is this ad hominum attitude of personal attack. We've got big policy issues we have to solve as a nation. Let's rise above the horrible tweets and the name calling in the insults. Let's get after what we have to get done, to include solving this challenge with North Korea. Give us an update on where we should be with a DMZ in North Korea

in two years or in five years. I'd say, in the most optimistic case, in two years we will have obtained an inventory of North Korean nuclear weapons. I think in five years we may be able to put in place an international observation regime around those nuclear weapons. But Tom, I'll tell you the bad news is, I think the chances of Kim john On actually giving up those weapons completely are roughly the same as the chances of the

Mexicans paying for the wall. I'd say they approach negative infinity. So we've got to be mindful of how we can contain his nuclear capability. Uh, the President's dealing with a very tricky, very lethal foe in these negotiations. I wish him well, but I'm very concerned. I've been surprised and well if you're just joining us. James trevidis with us with a Carlisle group, and we're thrilled that he could be with us on this historic to day. The President

meeting again with Mr Kim of North Korea. They have just had dinner at the Metropole in North Korea and the President has left all twenty minutes ago or so from that dinner in the late night of Hannoi, Vietnam. Almos Trevidez. There is Busan naval base, which I believe is the follow on South Korean naval based to JENNI explain our support of South Korea and what South Korea

needs to see from this summit. I'm glad you bring that up, Tom, because we spend way too much time yelling at the North Koreans and not enough time talking to the South Koreans who understand the North Koreans in three dimensional ways that we will never completely get. So you mentioned Bussan, the naval base in the South. It's emblematic of this deep military and intelligence and cyber relationship

we have with South Korea. What the South Koreans want to see is war avoidance, but they also want to see continued deterrence of Kim's not only his nuclear force tom but his conventional forces. He is one of the largest standing armies in the world. He has extensive stocks of chemical and biological weapons. If we do solve the nuclear problem, the South Koreans want us there to continue

to deter those conventional forces. Whether Democrat or Republican, How do we affect a policy or initiate a policy with North Korea given what is clear documented human rights abused, as you mentioned chemical weapons just as one idea, but I mean some of the reports I've seen, which I would suggest folks are documented ore outright labor camps which are literally out of the fiction of Game of Thrones, except it's not Hollywood or or London based fiction. It's real.

How do we affect a policy with a nation like that, or a regime I should say like that you know. Henry Kissinger said to me once, Tom that every time we solve a problem, we are presented with a key to a door through which lies the next problem. And if we can solve the nuclear problem, I would argue that door that we're going to open is going to have to leave us ultimately to further sanctions on North Korea for running these labor camps. And I would direct

your readers. You and I always talk about books. I would direct your readers to a National Book Award winner, The Orphan Master's Son by Steve Johnson, which is a searing portrait of this utopian society. Which door does China want opened? And by Beijing? And I don't mean the fixation I have on Shanghai or Hong Kong or that, but the northeast China and that river across the North Korea. Which uh door does China want opened? On? Off this summit.

I'll tell you the one that don't want opened is they don't want a war on the Korean peninsula because that would open the door to millions of refugees flowing into China. Okay, so there's twenty that there's twenty five million admiral in North Korea. How many of those millions would would drift over into China off of twenty three or million, five, five to seven million, And so China

has skinned in the game here. And I would argue the Korean Peninsula is a problem we can solve with China because to get to Kim, all roads to pun Yang in the end top be to Beijing. We've got to get China in the game. Four party talks are the way to go. Let's get out of this one on one between the President and Chairman Kim James Travitas, thank you so much. I am so choked up emotionally that I'm gonna have to have you bring in our

next esteem guest. Folks, it's impossible to believe this. It's sort of like the end of Raiders Have Lost Arc where they take the Ark into the Pentagon and it's you know wherever they are in the warehouse. If I take the Ark into the warehouse and it's lost there somewhere out there on the Bloomberg terminal is the audio of my first time I was ever on Bloomberg Radio.

I have that audio. We need to get it. I was the sweat, I was so nervous and shaking as I was grilled and they say grilled by our next guest, and she was a saint to let me get through exactly by lengthy interview of two minutes seconds. Well, that would be the one June Grosso. June is co host of Bloomberg Politics, Policy, Power and Law, and that's every day at twelve Eastern in uh in the East shop. I haven't eight years, I know, it just comes by my desk. And so June, we're looking here at this

on the our monitor here in Michael Cohen. The folks in conquissrgating seat and getting ready for this. So this Michael Cohen hearing that is coming up the testimony, What do you expect to really here today? May I first paraphrase Betty Davis who said, fasten your seatbelts. It's going to be a bumpy ride today. There's a lot of

uncertainty here, Isn't there there is? But if you know, I'd read his statement, his opening statement, and that's just the opening salvo, and he starts out saying that President Trump is a racist, a comment of cheat, and then he goes into specific instances and specific incidents that we have been talking about for perhaps two years back it up. Is it loyally? It's not. It's it's not loyally, except that there is a part where he backs up what

he says some of what he says with evidence. And you know, we've talked about this before, but it's very important because they're going to attack him as and he admits he's a liar. He's a convicted liar. Okay, But June, you know you're too young to remember the John Dene moment. I you know, remember the John Dee moment. I'm looking at the cameras right now. This is a huge, huge turnout for this hearing. Are we going to have a John Dene moment like in Watergate of lore? It might

be close to a John Dene moment? Remember something, John Dene, his testimony became so riveting and so important because it was then backed up by the tapes, the tapes, the Nixon tapes. In this instance, you're not likely going to have that. You may have some canceled not only that, you have canceled checks, you have financial records that he

sent to Deutsche Banks. So you do have. And that's why I say it is loyally in part because he does have the backup, and I think that you're going to hear things that people have said and we're suspected, and he's going to say they're true. For example, you're going to hear about the hush money payments to Stormy Daniels. That's the canceled check. Yes, Um, I'll explain that you

after after the show. Okay, Um, the hush mon payments to Stormy damimals that he knew about the release of the hacked wiki leaks and things that Michael Cohen heard, things that he saw, And I think his testimony also has a sort of um literary side to it. I mean, he's he has certain things that he says that that you will appreciate. He said, uh that Donald Trump is a man who ran for office to make his brand great, not to make our country great. So there are little

things sprinkled in there that you'll ensure. You think there's a smoking gun that will come out today. I think that when it won't be so much of smoking gun. We know the smoking gun now because we've seen his testimony. That's a smoking gun. But things that we have been questioning for years. Taxes, you know, all the financial statements, the dealings with Russia. This is the man who did

all that, who was his personal attorney, his fixer. So yeah, I think they're gonna be some moments where there might be bombshell moments and it and it depends on what they ask. What is his approach here so he does not jeopardize his future with other prosecutions, other legal events. I don't think he is. I don't think he's considering that. I think he's going all out for it. He's facing prison. He's not a jail yet. He's going to be in jail for three years, and um no, there's this is

the thing. In order for him to reduce that prison Tom, you have to have a prosecutor come forward and say to a judge, Judge, I want you to reconsider this because the Southern District prosecutors are not happy with him because he lied to them to start out with. Mueller has already really dealt with him. So the question is who would do that? So he is going to go all out here. I can't imagine him holding anything back except for what Muller has said. He can't because I

have legal representation today. Or is he just showing up as a guy on his way to prison. He does have legal representation. However, I think that it's going to be mostly you're going to hear people object and that, you know, in other ways, you can't say that because we have this smaller investigation going on, that will be the only thing that stops him. And let's just say one thing, because the Republicans are going to attack him

as a liar. But I just want to remind everyone that in courtrooms across the country today, they're going to be people who are the prime witnesses for the prosecution, who have lied, who have cheated, who have stolen, and they'll be believed by juries because they'll have corroboration. Important so aside, and you bring up the good point, which is this, obviously this is not a jury trial, and

it's more about public relations and getting information out there. Arguably, But if if I'm a Republican senator on this community today, what's my most effective way to challenge the testimony of Michael Cohen. You're a convicted liar. You lied before, Why should we believe you now? Why aren't you lying now? Different? Because he'll give a piece of evidence, right, he will. For some of this he can't get evidence for all

of this, and even some of the evidence. You know, I can imagine, and you know what is very I've struck me this morning. Some of the ramblings of Rudy Giuliani makes sense. Now. Remember when he remember when he described he kept backing, backing up about the Stormy Daniels hush payments, and finally he said, well, we really will

have a talk after promise. Yeah, that's okay, No, but he will say he said, all of a sudden he came out with this, Well, there were payments that came into the into his lawyer's office, and his lawyer then and now we see why there's a canceled check. Yeah. So it's thank you so much, pleasure, appreciate, and I am willing to borrow over that tape I have of you. It's out there, folks, it's it's out there, and soon

they'll be testimony in front Congress. Wonderful always to have June Grass with us with her patients a few years ago. So thanks for listening to the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast. Subscribe and listen to interviews on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, or whichever podcast platform you prefer. I'm on Twitter at Tom Keene before the podcast. You can always catch us worldwide. I'm Bloomberg Radio.